15% of girls in the US take antidepressant meds

[st_99]

i was looking at the data released by the CDC and am kind of shocked.

its even worse as women get older (23% percent of women aged 40–59 take antidepressants) thats almost 1 in 4! holy cow!

so if you take into account girls that wont take them because maybe they have no insurance or are afraid of the stigma or just dont go to the doctor, it seems to be that a lot more females think they are 'depressed' than the data shows.

So what i'm getting at is, maybe guys that are always ranting about how crazy chicks are and they just dont get why the act so weird are in fact vindicated because the numbers say guys aren't making this sh!t up.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db76.htm

 

[Bible_Belt]

An ex of mine just got married, but will probably never have kids, because she can't get off Paxil. And don't forget all of the people abusing pain pills, xanax, and whatever else the doctor will give them. We have a culture of state-sponsored drug dealing.

 

[Boilermaker]

An ex of mine just got married, but will probably never have kids, because she can't get off Paxil.

post deleted by author because it was a bad one.

 

[Bible_Belt]

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=57323

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that early research studies with the drug Paxil (paroxetine) suggest that taking the drug during the first three months of pregnancy may increase a woman's risk of having a baby with birth defects, particularly heart defects.

 

[Boilermaker]

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=57323

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently announced that early research studies with the drug Paxil (paroxetine) suggest that taking the drug during the first three months of pregnancy may increase a woman's risk of having a baby with birth defects, particularly heart defects.

Oh, she will have healthy kids, don't you worry about that.

She'll switch to something else, in a week if necessary that is.

 

[Boilermaker]

With all of the prescription psychiatric drugs being consumed, it shocks me how society wants to blame guns anytime a wacko goes out and shoots up a place.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...drugs-and-violence-review-fda-data-finds-link

It's clear there is a connection between crazy and violence.

Maybe prescription psychiatric drugs are the reason there are so few wackos that go out and shoot up a kindergarden when there are so many guns around, don't you think?

Prescription psych drugs that help millions and millions, versus, guns.

I can see how Paxil helps a manic-depressive function normally,

how does having an assault rifle in your dresser help anyone?

 

[Boilermaker]

The world population a century ago was around 1 billion people. The number of guns and the relative number of psychopaths were relatively low also.

We saw very well in Waco, Texas that assault rifles cannot be used for defending oneself against an overzealous government because if you shoot them with rifles, they bring Tanks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege

What feature is so dangerous? Well, you can't kill 30 kids with a .45 within an hour. Why would a civilian need a Marine rifle? Even hunting has its rules of engagement. Real hunters don't use dynamite to hunt duck.

Linking psychiatric prescription drugs to guns with a feeble study while turning a blind eye to the enormous benefits they have brought into public health is ....

I don't know how to put it really.

 

[sarcastic sam]

OP, are you sure it was 15% and not 50%??

 

[AW1983]

We saw very well in Waco, Texas that assault rifles cannot be used for defending oneself against an overzealous government because if you shoot them with rifles, they bring Tanks!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_siege

Weak argument man. That was a band of fanatics with very small numbers. Now, if everyone who owns a firearms in the US decides they've had enough? I think the 270,000,000 civilian guns in the US vs. whatever the military has is a bit more of an even match. Which was the whole point of the 2nd Amendment.

Well, you can't kill 30 kids with a .45 within an hour.

Yes you could. Legal assault rifles are semi-automatic, same as a .45.

 

[betheman]

a lot of these medications prescribed are for mood disorders/emotional disregulation. is it any wonder a lot of women are on them?
they will continue to use them and that will only increase. men use them as well of course but women are more likely to be prescribed them.
most women are never happy, they need a fix, something...a huge **** to ram her, babies, money somethign new, something different...when they can have it, they get depressed.

there is a far more serious side to depression of course, true clinical depression which is an absolute killer and slayer of lives

 

[goundra]

you don't use the assault rifle to fight directly, it just covers your ass while youdo the things that collapse the economy. then starvation, dehydration, fires, disease and infighting do the killing (of the 10's of millions that have to be killed in order to make any difference, that is.

. A very few hundred men could do it, and they would rarely need any sort of gun. Just poison, fire, the knowledge of how to sink ships and derail trains, make and deploy caltrops to flatten tires on all the 18 wheeler trucks, etc. So then the question becomes, do we still have 400 men with balls in the US? Personally, I doubt it.

there are just 2-3 million autorifles in civilian hands, unless you count the .22lrs, and then the figure is 10 million or so. Most rifles are single shots or slow, bolt action repeaters, with 5 rd magazines. Most of our 1/4 billion guns are handguns, many of them cheap pcs of crap in .25 or .32, worthless for fighting on any real scale, but useful for scaring off punks who only have bare hands, knives or clubs.

You can kill 30 people, cramped in a tight area, in a few seconds, with pipe bombs that you can easily conceal on your ankles. Just use a sledge hammer to mash the pipes to a flat oval, that's all. Weld the "cap" on one end prior to "squishing the metal, and after filling the pipe with the explosive, use pins thru holes drilled in the metal, and epoxy to seal the other cap on the pipe. Simple.

even simpler, and easier to kill far more, is insecticide in the cafeteria prep room. Be glad these nutjobs are using guns. they get CAUGHT/KILLED. if they knew anything about how to fight EFFICIENTLY, they'd get away, to do it again and again.

 

[Boilermaker]

Weak argument man. That was a band of fanatics with very small numbers.

Band of fanatics? They did nothing to anyone whatsoever besides living in that compound. They were religious, ignorant, had their guns but they didn't deserve to have tanks rammed up against their walls. But that's not the argument here. Danger claimed assault rifles are to defend against government. I gave you a real example of how going that route ends up. You might want to read that Wiki page and educate yourself about one of the most horrific state sponsored massacres in the history of US, and tell me what part of it you don't understand.

Yes you could. Legal assault rifles are semi-automatic, same as a .45.

So you are claiming you can do as much damage with a .45 as you would with an M4A1-Colt ? That's your argument? What one could, and what happens in reality are two different things. School shootouts are deadlier when assault rifles are used. I am not going to waste my time and make you a nice log of Newtown, Columbine, Virginia Tech, etc, because you very well know the answer already.

 

[Boilermaker]

most fun quote from the CDC report:

About one-third of persons with severe depressive symptoms take antidepressant medication.

what about the other two thirds!

The other two thirds go out and shoot kids before committing suicide. I have no doubt that guy who killed 30 children would have been stopped if he were on 30 mg/ Paxil a day, the month prior.

I am getting chills to see how some of you blame these killings to the only cure that could have helped these people ...

As somebody said, maybe the problem isn't guns, but buying assault rifles online definitely give these guys the convenient access to do and shoot people.

Not everybody has the training to manufacture hand-made explosives like the Oklahoma bomber ...

 

[goundra]

wtf makes you think guns are bought and sold online? they have to be sent thru a federally licensed gun dealer, you have to show ID and sign a form, and the Dealer has to call a Federal background check on you, before he can deliver the gun to you.

So, how many have to read a few books, before they can steal a truck full of oxygen and acetylene bottles, hmm? know what a VERY few "peircer" pipe bombs would do THEN, hmmm? And how hard is it to take rat poison or instecticide anywhere, hmm?

 

[goundra]

A trained man, with a revolver, can draw, get 9 hits on 9 targets, in 4 seconds, reload in 3 seconds, and get 9 more hits in another 3 seconds. I'll bet you a year's pay on that. Many .22 revolvers exist that hold 9 rds, smith and wesson makes one that holds 10, too. 8 shot 357 Mag revolvers exist, made by smith and by Taurus.

 

[Boilermaker]

So, how many have to read a few books, before they can steal a truck full of oxygen and acetylene bottles, hmm? know what a VERY few "peircer" pipe bombs would do THEN, hmmm? And how hard is it to take rat poison or instecticide anywhere, hmm?

All theoretical nice and cool examples. The real point is this though: I can recall 10-15 examples of shootings involving guns where complete civilians are murdered.

Can you show me mass murders with rat poison? One example? You may be a genius to think of that, and I am not saying it wouldn't work.
It just doesn't happen. It's not like people would turn to rat poison to kill others if guns weren't so easily available. Pipe bombs etc..., nice ideas, but can't be carried out by a 20-year old, heh? Trained men don't go out and storm schools. A trained man doesn't even need a gun to kill people. You can slash them with a sword and still be more effective.

 

[Scaramouche]

Dear St,
Depends what you call Girls....Interesting article on Psych.com,a reputable site that gives a lot of cause for thought....seems in the 40-60 age group of Caucasian Women 23% were on meds,but contra intuitively,only a fraction of that number were found in your Hispanic and Afro Americans,the lower socio economic group ....That would correlate pretty well with the numbers committed to the Feminist cause,maybe we should explore this line more?...
On the Assault rifles business,Boiler Maker is right,people on Meds generally don't need to express anger with such weapons...In this country we are not allowed handguns...we can have .22 Rim fires and Shot guns,bolt action centre fires if we can substantiate a need...I have a .243 for legitimate use,Hunting,killing Vermin......Semi Automatic centre fire rifles,have never been available to us any more than they were available to your founding Fathers....Whilst what you do in your Country is your business,having seen the horrific wounds such weapons make on real people,I shudder at the thought that anyone has access to such weapons here!

 

[BMX]

Life didn't turn out exactly how they imagined it would for these women.

 

[Scaramouche]

Dear Danger,
"Boiler Maker is right about what specifically"....Well looking at his posts on Assault Rifles,medication and Waco,one by one I find very little to argue with...He seems remarkably well informed....Heres one Post!
"Prescription psych drugs that help millions and millions, versus, guns.
I can see how Paxil helps a manic-depressive function normally,
how does having an assault rifle in your dresser help anyone?"...Whilst supporting your right to hold contrary viewpoints,his points seem quite sensible.

 

[Warrior74]

Boilermaker is right about what specifically?

Pistols, like non bolt-action rifles, are semi-automatic. You can fire them at a very similar rate of speed. As fast as you can pull the trigger until your ammo runs out.

One can kill quite a few people in short order with a pistol, just like they could with an AR-15.

The difference of course, is that one is called an "assault rifle" and is met with general confusion by the general public. Many think of an assault weapon as a submachine gun or a fully automatic weapon. These are already banned in the US. They are merely rifles without the bolt action. Or like a pistol with a long barrel.

This. The american people are uneducated so they go with the buzz words. You know, just like misogynist or racist. The actual meanings don't matter only the eeeeeeeemotion!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_weapon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Assault_Weapons_Ban