A couple of weeks ago, the phone rang at 9:30 in the
evening. The caller advised Echo Germanica: "CBC is airing a report about
the drug Prozac on Prime Time News, right now. Please, tape it!"
We jammed the tape into the video recorder, turned the TV
set on and hit the recording button. The recording starts out with the voice
of a woman: "...the glittering myth of Prozac as *panacea is a long way from
its medical specifications for depression. Prozac’s become a 90’s urban
legend. Actually, no one knows if it does anything at all to people..."
(*panacea: a remedy for all diseases or ills; cure-all /
Worldbook Dictionary)
The woman’s tone of voice was typical of a news reporter:
sweet and cheerful. For the uninformed viewer, this report about the
psychiatric drug Prozac, manufactured by Eli Lilly and Co., must have been
confusing. For the informed viewer, the report was shocking - a slap in the
face - as it could easily be interpreted as an endorsement of the drugging
of a nation with a psychiatric drug of the worst kind.
Still Echo Germanica was surprised when during the
following days readers approached us and wanted to know: "What is your
opinion about the Prozac report?" Only when full page articles about Prozac
appeared in major Canadian newspapers without ever touching on the known
facts about this more than controversial psychiatric drug, did we decide
that we’d better inform our readers.
What are the known data about Prozac? As an answer we
bring you some excerpts from an American magazine called FREEDOM, famous for
its diligent research:
"...documents obtained under the Freedom of Information
Act reveal that both Eli Lilly and Co., manufacturer of Prozac, and
officials of the FDA (American Food and Drug Administration) were aware that
at least 27 deaths (during clinical trials) had been linked to Prozac’s use
before the drug was released."
Why did the FDA release Prozac onto the market despite
this evidence and contrary to its own practice with other substances, to
which deaths are linked? ("The FDA recalled L-tryptophan [a naturally
occurring substance in many foods] in November 1989 following two deaths
linked to the substance...the deaths were due to contaminated materials
present in a particular batch of L-tryptophan...the FDA still bans L-tryptophan
four years after the recall.")
The answer could be found in a video showing the hearing
of the FDA’s Psychopharmacologic Drugs Advisory Committee: the panel was
stacked with psychiatrist David Dunner and colleagues (psychiatrists are
bound to profit through drugs like Prozac); no documented evidence of
adverse effects of Prozac was allowed to be presented at the hearing.
Further:
"At least five out of 10 of the members on the FDA’s
P.D.A. Committee...had conflicts of interest based on business dealings or
other ongoing relations with manufacturers of antidepressant drugs."
"Research has brought to light that Lilly (Eli Lilly and
Co.) has showered some $1.4 million on (David) Dunner since 1982."
What has come to light about the Eli Lilly and Co. drug,
Prozac, since the FDA released it late 1987?
"...a powerful, mind-altering chemical has been liberally
dispensed for nearly six years, triggering the highest number of adverse
reaction for any prescription drug."
"Based on documents obtained by FREEDOM under the Freedom
of Information Act, as of September 16, 1993: 28,623 reports of adverse
reactions to Prozac had been received by the FDA. These included such
effects as delirium, hallucinations, convulsions, violent hostility,
aggression, psychosis, 1,885 suicide attempts and 1,734 deaths - 1,089 by
suicide."
"FDA Commissioner David Kessler noted: ‘Although the FDA
receives many adverse event reports, these probably represent only a
fraction of the serious adverse events encountered by providers... Only
about one percent of serious events are reported to the FDA, according to
one study.’ By his own math (David Kessler’s), there could be 2,860,000
adverse reactions to Prozac in just 5 1/2 years, and 170,000 deaths."
A further list of side effects reported by Prozac users
taken from various medical publications include: "heart attack, impotence,
hair loss, cataracts, hepatitis...convulsions, coma,
migraine...deafness...ulcers...inability to control bowel movements...eye
bleeding, spitting...and vomiting blood"; "...seizure shortly after
initiation of [Prozac] therapy." An article in ‘Science’ of July 1992
stated, "As if cancer patients don’t already have enough to worry about, a
new animal study conducted by a team of Canadian researchers has raised a
disturbing possibility. The study...shows that two widely used
antidepressants, Elavil...and Prozac, act as ‘tumour promoters’ in rats and
mice. That means that the drugs...accelerate the growth of existing tumours
in those animals."
One report of many:
"On the morning of November 6, 1991, 61-year-old Barbara
Mortenson greeted San Francisco police officers at her home in a
blood-soaked night-gown. Dried blood covered her face. Pieces of raw flesh
lay behind her on the carpet.
She had just cannibalized her 87-year-old mother with at
least 20 bites on her face and arms. At several places, her mother’s arm had
been chewed to the bone." She had "...been taking Prozac for the last two
weeks." quot;
And the stories go on, and on, and on. In view of all this
sickening evidence, which is public record and has been known to Echo
Germanica for years, we ask, why does the CBC compare Prozac to a panacea?
Why is Prozac cheerfully called by the CBC "a 90’s urban legend", when the
evidence presents it as a 90’s horror story? Why would the CBC say about
Prozac: "Actually, no one knows if it does anything at all to people..."?
Why did the CBC promote reports by drug users about "positive" effects of
Prozac? Was the report in fact a promotion of Prozac, which is manufactured
by Eli Lilly and Co., whose shares had been on a down spin? Is the CBC at
all concerned about the welfare of the Canadian people?
These are the lingering questions. Do the same questions
apply to the rest of the Canadian main media with their wishy-washy reports
about the most dangerous drug known in recent medical history? The question
that should have been addressed in all those reports is: "Why are we still
talking about Prozac? Shouldn’t it have been banned long ago from any
market, never mind if Canadian or American?"
Should we end off in paraphrasing Clint Eastwood: "You
want to play Russian Roulette? Go ahead, take some Prozac!"? We better not!
Echo Germanica hopes that the word "Prozac" will soon be a
thing of the past. As a matter of fact, the case of Prozac might and should
be used to wipe all other psychiatric drugs off the market. All these drugs
could be replaced by proper nutrition. This has been proven again and again.
And especially our seniors would not fall victim to the
untold misery as they are kept under the influence of such drugs. Off
course, for their own good!
Rolf Rentmeister