Booster Shots

Oddities, musings and some news from the world of health.

| Main |

For kids, older antipsychotic drug may be better

11:49 AM, September 15, 2008

NewkidsIn the world of mental health, newer drugs are often considered to be more effective than their older counterparts. When it comes to antipsychotic medication given to children, however, that might not be the case.

Researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill have found that the old standby molindone is as effective as olanzapine and risperidone in treating children and teenagers with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. Currently, those latter two medications, known as second-generation drugs, are given to most children.

In studying the impact of the three (randomly assigned) drugs on 119 study participants ages 8 to 19, the researchers found no significant differences in response rates or symptom reduction. In the eight-week study period, 50% of those given molindone responded to the drug, compared with 34% for olanzapine and 46% for risperidone.

The newer drugs, however, were linked to significantly more weight gain.

"Medications make a vast difference in peoples' lives, but we need better treatment options," lead author Dr. Lin Sikich said in a news release.

The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry notes: "Schizophrenia is a life-long disease that can be controlled, but not cured." It lists the symptoms as they may appear in children, pointing out that they may differ from symptoms in adults, and adds information on medications for children.

The study was published today in the American Journal of Psychiatry.

-- Tami Dennis

Photo credit: Boris Yaro / Los Angeles Times

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c630a53ef010534ac144d970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that referenceFor kids, older antipsychotic drug may be better :

Comments

Lilly Zyprexa ' Chemical Straitjacket' Use by Children.

Zyprexa,as well as the other atypical antipsychotics, are being prescribed for children, even though this is an unapproved, off-label use. Eli Lilly has been charged in allegedly pushing the drug for children in more than one state.

Recently a parent wrote to us about her two sons. She received pressure to place them on ADHD drugs as early as Head Start. Over the years, they were on a cocktail of various psychotropic drugs. At one time, they were place on Zyprexa and according to the mother more than doubled their body weight.

A report by Dr. Cooper at Vanderbilt University states that 2.5 million children are now taking atypical antipsychotics. Over half are being given them for Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Perhaps it is statistics like these that caused the FDA to finally require warnings on the labels of the ADHD drugs.

The use of atypical antipsychotics for children should be banned.

St. Petersburg Times Reports on Zyprexa A risky drug may get wider marketThe FDA may approve Zyprexa for kids, despite its significant side effects in adult use. By ROBERT FARLEY, Times Staff ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuK1t474ei4

Daniel Haszard Zyprexa patient who got diabetes from it.

http://www.zyprexa-victims.com





In the world of "mental" health, newer drugs are often considered to be more effective than their older counterparts.

I am puzzled by your modifier, "mental," Is there purpose to it?

Other studies have pointed out that drugs used to treat physical health conditions are not always better than their newer, more heavily marketed counterparts. This study -- and the general topic -- pertains to mental health.

"Schizophrenia is a life-long disease that can be controlled, but not cured."

This seems to apply to a number of conditions, such as bipolar disorder, that are defined by the profession itself. The problem with some of these definitions is that they are self-fulfilling and circular. If schizophrenia is defined as being incurable, then no one will look for a cure. Since the condition is defined by behavior, then - once a diagnosis is applied - all behavior is seen as symptomatic of the condition.

DL Rosenhan's classic study, "On Being Sane In Insane Places" shows exactly how this works. Experienced doctors could not tell when people exhibiting symptoms of schizophrenia - and then labeled as such - returned to normal behavior.

One of the problems with modern pharmacological research would seem to be that it is considered unethical to conduct studies on healthy people. That is, once one has been diagnosed as being mentally ill, *all abnormal behavior* is still attributed to the illness.

But how can one be sure that the medications themselves are not contributing, unless studies have been done on people without any previous history of illness?

Perhaps the psychiatrists of this world could start taking the medications they prescribe and have others observe their behavior, especially after they change medications or stop abruptly.

Post a comment
If you are under 13 years of age you may read this message board, but you may not participate.
Here are the full legal terms you agree to by using this comment form.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until they've been approved.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In





ADVERTISEMENT


Our Bloggers
Tami Dennis, who takes the word "skeptic" to previously uncharted territory, is the Times' Health and Science editor. She's adamant that pitches promoting awareness days, weeks or months are, by their nature, non-stories. And, because she's an adult, she refuses to use words like "veggies," "tummy" and "yummy."
Rosie Mestel, deputy Health and Science editor, studied genetics before abandoning flies, fungi and DNA for health/medical writing. Her hero is the biologist Ernst Haeckel, whose jellyfish paintings inspired snazzy chandeliers. Her favorite toast-spread is Marmite, a British delicacy made of yeast extract. Her least-favorite word is "millenniums."
Melissa Healy is a staff writer for the Health section reporting from Washington D.C. Healy's a veteran of The Times' National staff, having covered the Pentagon, Congress, poverty and social welfare, the environment, and the White House before shifting to Health in 2003. She writes frequently about mental health and human behavior, about federal health policy, prescription medication and ethics in medicine. More wonk than wellness freak, Healy chooses to believe in the health benefits of coffee and wine, and considers water a better work-out medium than beverage.
Karen Kaplan covers genetics, stem cells and cloning. She and colleague Thomas H. Maugh II comprise about 25% of the unofficial MIT-Alumni-in-Journalism Club, and she is proud to have taken more math (5) than English (0) courses in college. Her contributions to Booster Shots will, she hopes, appear more frequently than postings to her mommy blog.
Thomas H. Maugh II has been a science and medical writer at the Times for 23 years. Before that, he was on the staff of the journal Science for 13 years. He has bachelor's degrees in English and chemistry from MIT and a doctorate in chemistry from UC Santa Barbara.
After a brief stint as a sports writer, Shari Roan turned to health journalism and has covered the topic for The Times for 18 years. She is the author of three books and the mother of two daughters, both teenagers who refer to her as a "health freak." She likes to jog, watch baseball and is very happy that dark chocolate contains some health benefit.
Jeannine Stein writes about fitness, sports medicine and obesity for the Health section. She’s a gym rat from way back and never met an elliptical trainer she didn’t like. Well, maybe one or two. She tempers exercise with a steady diet of reality television because she believes it’s all about balance.