Maybe we should list the tea party as terrorists. - Page 17

Maybe the cause is in the water;Fish on Prozac Prove Anxious, Antisocial, Aggressive
New research has found that the pharmaceuticals, which are frequently showing up in U.S. streams, can alter genes responsible for building fish brains and controlling their behavior
By Brian Bienkowski and Environmental Health News | June 12, 2013
••
When fish swim in waters tainted with antidepressant drugs, they become anxious, anti-social and sometimes even homicidal.

New research has found that the pharmaceuticals, which are frequently showing up in U.S. streams, can alter genes responsible for building fish brains and controlling their behavior.

Antidepressants are the most commonly prescribed medications in the United States; about 250 million prescriptions are filled every year. And they also are the highest-documented drugs contaminating waterways, which has experts worried about fish. Traces of the drugs typically get into streams when people excrete them, then sewage treatment plants discharge the effluent.

Exposure to fluoxetine, known by the trade name Prozac, had a bizarre effect on male fathead minnows, according to new, unpublished research by scientists at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

Male minnows exposed to a small dose of the drug in laboratories ignored females. They spent more time under a tile, so their reproduction decreased and they took more time capturing prey, according to Rebecca Klaper, a professor of freshwater sciences who spoke about her findings at a Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry conference last fall. Klaper said the doses of Prozac added to the fishes’ water were “very low concentrations,” 1 part per billion, which is found in some wastewater discharged into streams.

When the dose was increased, but still at levels found in some wastewater, females produced fewer eggs and males became aggressive, killing females in some cases, Klaper said at the conference.

The drugs seem to cause these behavioral problems by scrambling how genes in the fish brains are expressed, or turned on and off. The minnows were exposed when they were a couple of months old and still developing.

There appeared to be architectural changes to the young minnows’ brains, Klaper said at the toxicology conference. Growth of the axons, which are long nerve fibers that transmit information to the body, was disrupted.

The new findings build on Klaper’s previous research, which tested minnows with the gene changes to see how well they avoided predators. They swam longer distances and made more directional changes, which suggests that the drugs induced anxiety.

The drugs used in the study were among the most common in sewage: Prozac, Effexor and Tegretol. The researchers tested each drug alone and in combination.

“At high doses we expect brain changes,” Klaper said. “But we saw the gene expression changes and then behavioral changes at doses that we consider environmentally relevant.”

However, there is too little evidence to know whether pharmaceuticals are having any impacts on fish populations in the wild, said Bryan Brooks, an environmental science professor at Baylor University who has extensively studied pharmaceuticals in streams and fish.

Any changes in reproduction, eating and avoiding prey can have devastating impacts for fish populations, Klaper said.

The most vulnerable fish populations are those downstream of sewage treatment plants, where prescription drugs consistently show up in higher levels than in other waterways. It’s only within the past decade that technology has allowed plants to test for the chemicals in their wastewater and in waters downstream, though most still don’t, said Steve Carr, supervisor of the chemistry research group at the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts.

One of the antidepressants tested in the fish – Tegretol – comes into the treatment plants and goes out at near constant levels, said Eric Nelson, a senior chemist with the Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts.

That means the county’s treatment technology does not seem to have any effect on the drug. It comes in and leaves in a very tight range, about 150 to 400 parts per trillion, Nelson said.

Nelson said the two other drugs tested on the fish – Prozac and Effexor  –  are discharged in effluent at even lower levels: between about 20 and 30 parts per trillion. In comparison, the levels that altered behavior of the lab fish were 50 times higher.
When monitoring an Iowa and a Colorado stream, the U.S. Geological Survey found most drugs at levels similar to Los Angeles County’s. However, these low levels could still find their way into fish brains, according to their 2010 study.

Researchers found elevated levels of pharmaceuticals in the stream water two to six miles from the sewage treatment plants. But the chemicals at the highest levels in the water were not the ones most prevalent in the fish brains.

“The fish downstream of the wastewater treatment had elevated concentrations of two antidepressants … Zoloft and Prozac,” said Edward Furlong, a research chemist at the U.S. Geological Survey based in Boulder, Colo. “And these were relatively low in water compared to others.”

Even if the levels released into streams seem low, they are constant, which is problematic, Brooks said.

“The drugs may not be classically persistent like PCBs,” Brooks said. “But they’re pseudo-persistent. The [continuous] exposure of organisms in a stream is equivalent to a chemical that is persistent.”

Some drugs bioaccumulate, or build up, in rainbow trout, according to Brooks’ research. Also, rainbow trout exposed to sewage effluent have pharmaceuticals in their blood at levels as high as those that affect the brains of people, according to research in Sweden.

Brooks said the likelihood of bioaccumulation for pharmaceuticals is high. “People have to take these drugs for weeks before they start having effects. They slowly bioaccumulate in your system,” which suggests bioaccumulation potential in fish, too, Brooks said.

Changes to the brain can affect all kinds of things in fish, Klaper said. And since humans have a similar brain gene structure, the findings raise questions about whether traces of these drugs in drinking water might harm human health.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers pharmaceuticals an “emerging concern,” and has concluded that the chemicals may pose risks to wildlife and humans. There are currently no federal regulations of the compounds in waste or drinking water. However, 12 pharmaceuticals are currently on the EPA’s Contaminant Candidate List, which are chemicals that may require regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Studies have consistently found prescription drugs in drinking water at parts-per-trillion levels. U.S. Geological Survey scientists sampled 74 waterways used for drinking water in 25 states in 2008 and found 53 had one or more of the three dozen pharmaceuticals they were testing for in their water. Forty percent of the pharmaceuticals were found at one or more of the sites.

Fifty-four active pharmaceutical ingredients and 10 metabolites have been detected in treated U.S. drinking water, according to a 2010 EPA review.

Studies of children exposed in the womb to antidepressants taken by their mothers show effects on their motor development and a higher risk of some birth defects.

But health officials say the levels found in some drinking water are too low to cause harm.

According to a 2012 World Health Organization report, the “trace quantities of pharmaceuticals in drinking water are very unlikely to pose risks to human health.” The report said that the amount found in drinking water is usually 1,000 times lower than doses expected to have an effect on a person.

But Klaper said that in light of the gene changes in fish brains, officials may need to rethink what is considered safe.

“Fish do not metabolize drugs like we do,” Klaper said. “Even if environmental doses aren’t thought to be much for a human, fish could still have significant accumulation, and, it appears, changes in their brain’s gene expression.”

Maybe just maybe we need to QUIT blaming everything else in the world and stand up and blame what is really going on. I read today that 77% of all violent deaths were at the hands of someone holding a gun. This does not even take into account all the supposed accidents. 77%, so citing knives as an example is pathetic and a cop out and to lay the blame on drugs is disgusting as many many many people have been helped by these drugs and plenty of other drugs. It is the blame game pure and simple and if those playing it can't see it that is squarely on their shoulders.

 

"Numbers don't lie -- the vast majority of homicides involved guns.

Solve the gun problem and you save lives. It's pretty simple.

Of course, the gun crowd that fears any common-sense solutions as a gateway to an outright ban doesn't deal in logic.

Instead, they seek to spread blame elsewhere."

Here's another good article gives history of psych drugs...money is the motive behind them...
Your question was WHY are there more mass killings in the USA than anywhere else. Psych drugs, since the late eighties and the people on them have fried brains. The guns are only one method of murder, not the cause.

"America's Most Popular Mind Medicines"

http://www.forbes.com/2010/09/16/prozac-xanax-valium-business-healthcare-psychiatric-drugs.html

Here's some time bits as to the reason psych drugs are taking a toll on lives in USA....
http://mentalhealthdaily.com/2014/08/12/top-selling-psychiatric-drugs-united-states-july-2013-june-2014/

Multi-purpose approvals – Drugs that have been approved to treat more than one condition are the ones that tend to rake in the most money.  Take Abilify for example… it is approved to treat schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, and irritability.  This increases the potential customer-base.
Aggressive marketing – Drugs these days are subject to aggressive marketing.  Banners on the streets, advertisements online, and the worst culprit of them all, TV commercials.  The marketing makes the drug look like it will solve all problems.
Doctor incentives – Although you may not know it, some doctors are given incentives and/or “bonuses” to prescribe certain drugs over others.  If they fill a certain amount of prescriptions per month, they get a reward.
Public brainwashing – Eventually the general public becomes brainwashed by advertising, their doctor, and the fact that a drug is new and they think it’s going to be amazing.  This is why it’s so common for people to think that Abilify is an antidepressant rather than an antipsychotic.
High costs – Once there’s a market for these drugs, the companies can charge top dollar for their drugs.  As long as people keep paying for the drugs, the pharmaceutical companies are making bank.

Big pharma doesn't use guns to commit mass murder....the USA and new Zealand are the only two countries that permit direct to consumer advertising by drug companies.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/16/drug-companies-ads-dangers.aspx

Do Drug Ads on TV Really Impact Consumers?

If they didn't, the drug companies would have abandoned them long ago. They keep close tabs on what works and what doesn't when it comes to their advertising dollars (an amount that's roughly double what's spent on research and development). But if you're looking for more concrete data, the FDA conducted two consumer surveys of U.S. adults, asking them questions measuring the influence of DTC advertising on their attitudes toward prescription drugs, health-related behavior, and on aspects of the doctor-patient relationship.

The preliminary results were as follows:3

Among respondents who had seen a doctor with the past three months and remembered seeing an ad for a prescription drug, approximately 40-50 percent said that an advertisement for a prescription drug had caused them to seek more information, for example, about the drug and their health.
More than a quarter (27 percent) of survey respondents in the first survey and 18 percent in the second survey who had seen a doctor in the last three months said that an ad for a prescription drug had caused them to ask a doctor about a medical condition or illness that they had not talked to a doctor about before.
Approximately 7 percent of respondents said they visited their doctor because of something they read or saw, or because of an ad for a prescription drug.
Forty-two percent of respondents agreed strongly or somewhat agreed that DTC ads make it seem as though the drug will work for everyone.

http://www.cchrint.org/2012/07/20/the-aurora-colorado-tragedy-another-senseless-shooting-another-psychotropic-drug/

'The correlation between psychiatric drugs and acts of violence and homicide is well documented – both by international drug regulatory warnings and studies, as well as by hundreds of cases where high profile acts of violence/mass murder were committed by individuals under the influence of psychiatric drugs.'

I'm not real well versed in "tea party" policies, but I thought they were a political group promoting an agenda. Haven't heard they were committing mass murders.

'Off topic' has a way of going off topic. :-)

I get it only certain people can be off topic, in the OFF topic forum. I guess you would need to read to see so I will leave that up to you. What do mental health drugs have to do with the tea party and terror?

 

So the fundamental argument from the admin here is that because a guy endorsed or was sympathetic to a certain political group, the group itself is a terrorist organization.

Well, what is good for the goose must also be good for the gander, no?
Well it seems the gyre is widening. Crazy black guy shoots and kills two white people on live television while also filming the shooting himself and posting it to social media, along with sending out a manifesto.
The usual worthless media outlets (CNN, MSNBC, et al) are trying to smear the gun lobby with this story. I've already seen a dozen or so articles about how this is about guns, and another dozen stating this is about "violence against women." But this shooting incident is not about those things. This story is precisely about what this shooter stressed in his manifesto: it's about race. In a matter of months, we've witnessed two high-profile shootings that were explicit calls to incite a race war. Has that ever happened before? Are there any signs things will improve?

This incident deservedly rests at the feet of liberals. The dead churchgoers in Charleston and these two unfortunate souls are victims of multiculturalism. In fact, this black nutcase (who openly admits to working as a male prostitute) is the perfect embodiment of our current state of dysfunction and anomie. He is the poster boy for our progressive era: racially mixed, sexual depraved, rent-seeking, litigious, professional victim, overweight, atomized, narcissistic, and suicidal. He is the end result of every program formerly and currently endorsed by liberals. He was a model progressive to the very end.

With that being said, isn't it time now that we start listing progressive organizations as terrorists? Again, what's good for the goose must also be good for the gander.