I'm looking to for a psychiatrist to defend this 'medication'.
Let's start with the summary from a 2013 review:
Results here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haloperidol
Study Here:
https://www.cochrane.org/CD003082/SCHIZ_haloperidol-versus-placebo-for-schizophrenia
>No marked global improvement: RR:.67 (0.58 to 0.78)
>Adverse effects – movement disorders:RR 5.48 (2.68 to 11.22)
Another study on the incidence of sexual dysfunction.
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3623530/#:~:text=From%20evidence%20of%20a%20large,which%20is%20composed%20of%205
>From evidence of a large prospective cohort study, 71.1% of men and women taking haloperidol over 12 months complained of sexual dysfunction
That's just the beginning of side effects. There are many, many more, and they are relatively common.
How can this be justified as medicine? It has a greater chance of causing multiple life altering afflictions than it does of treating the actual symptoms, and that's assuming that the symptoms are present and not simply because the psychiatrist is lying because she dislikes the patient.
When a drug has a greater chance of causing adverse effects than actually treating what it is given for, then it is not medicine. Please, I'm looking for a psychiatrist to justify this, because some posters have tried to, in passing, justify it before, but I have a greater body of data now showing just how demented psychiatry really is.
Let's start with the summary from a 2013 review:
Results here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haloperidol
Study Here:
https://www.cochrane.org/CD003082/SCHIZ_haloperidol-versus-placebo-for-schizophrenia
>No marked global improvement: RR:.67 (0.58 to 0.78)
>Adverse effects – movement disorders:RR 5.48 (2.68 to 11.22)
Another study on the incidence of sexual dysfunction.
>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3623530/#:~:text=From%20evidence%20of%20a%20large,which%20is%20composed%20of%205
>From evidence of a large prospective cohort study, 71.1% of men and women taking haloperidol over 12 months complained of sexual dysfunction
That's just the beginning of side effects. There are many, many more, and they are relatively common.
How can this be justified as medicine? It has a greater chance of causing multiple life altering afflictions than it does of treating the actual symptoms, and that's assuming that the symptoms are present and not simply because the psychiatrist is lying because she dislikes the patient.
When a drug has a greater chance of causing adverse effects than actually treating what it is given for, then it is not medicine. Please, I'm looking for a psychiatrist to justify this, because some posters have tried to, in passing, justify it before, but I have a greater body of data now showing just how demented psychiatry really is.
