Horrific and Deadly Effects of Antidepressants

Once you see what else these drugs are doing, you’ll never look at depression “treatment” the same way again.

The following information is based on a report originally published by A Midwestern Doctor. Key details have been streamlined and editorialized for clarity and impact. Read the original report here.

Did you know that SSRI antidepressants INCREASE suicidal thoughts by 255%?

A clinical trial on healthy volunteers found that 2 out of 20 became suicidal after taking Zoloft.

One was literally on her way to kill herself when a timely phone call saved her life.

But it’s not just suicidal thoughts that make antidepressants dangerous.

And once you see what else these drugs are doing, you’ll never look at depression “treatment” the same way again.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors—or SSRIs—are one of the most harmful medicines prescribed today.

And that’s saying a lot because the market is FULL of harmful medicines.

What’s so bad about these antidepressants?

First of all, their use is widespread and frequently unjustifiable.

They promise to be a magical solution to depression and anxiety, but it’s quite the opposite.

In fact, they can cause side effects far worse than what they claim to treat.

SSRIs don’t just dull your emotions, and they don’t alter your brain chemistry for the better.

They literally reprogram your brain.

Between 40% and 60% of users report emotional numbness. Not just negative emotions—all emotions.

Joy, pain, motivation—all of it completely flatlined.

Some describe it as “life without color” or a “zombie-like” existence.

Sure, maybe you don’t feel depressed anymore. But you don’t feel anything at all.

That sounds… terrible.

Depression can be serious, but should we accept emotionless zombies as the alternative?

If you want to dig even deeper into the dark side of antidepressants and why they’re so harmful, check out @Midwesterndoc’s comprehensive report on the subject. And be sure to share this with anyone you know who may be considering starting an SSRI.

And it’s not just becoming an emotionless zombie you have to worry about. The emotional shutdown can lead to something that is much worse than depression and anxiety.

Psychotic violence.

I don’t mean just a little anger here and there.

SSRIs are causing people to commit suicide—and yes, even horrific mass shootings.

And guess what? The FDA knew about it.

Prozac triggers hallucinations, mania, and violence, and the FDA has known all along.

Even animals become aggressive on SSRIs.

But instead of going back to the drawing board, the FDA approved it anyway.

After nine years on the market, 39,000 people reported major psychiatric events. And those are only the people who reported it…

Really makes you question FDA approval, doesn’t it?

Did you know most of the mass shooters we hear about in the news were often on SSRIs?

It’s true.

And the media even reported on it. But then, they stopped.

That’s weird.

So why are we “not allowed” to talk about SSRIs and violence anymore?

It’s pretty simple.

It would blow the lid off one of the most dangerous pharmaceutical cover-ups in modern history.

It would expose the truth that Big Pharma knowingly released drugs that could make people snap and kill other people.

And they just kept selling them anyway.

But the psychotic violence caused by SSRIs is only the tip of the iceberg.

Obviously, not everyone taking these drugs becomes a mass shooter. But that doesn’t mean the other side effects are any less terrible for those who experience them.

SSRIs truly warp your mind, body, and emotions. And sometimes it is irreversible.

The numbers are truly chilling:
→ A 255% increase in suicidal thoughts
→ 30% of SSRI users develop Bipolar disorder
→ 59% suffer long-term sexual dysfunction

With many saying their libido never came back even after stopping the drug.

The science is clear. The harm caused by SSRIs greatly outweighs any benefits they provide.

Talk about depressing…

A 2020 study involving 20 healthy volunteers with zero history of depression or other mental illnesses had shocking results.

They were each given Zoloft.

TWO of them BECAME suicidal.

One of them was even on her way to kill herself when a divinely timed phone call interrupted her plans.

These two study participants were still affected several months later. They were actually questioning the stability of their personalities.

This doesn’t sound like a magic solution. This sounds like torture.

Speaking of stopping SSRIs—good luck!

They are highly addictive.

And it’s not just physical addiction. It’s neurological.

And because of what they do to the brain, it can take years to step down the dose and wean off of them. Years!

Withdrawal symptoms include things like:
– Brain zaps
– Panic attacks
– Suicidal spirals
– Derealization

And these symptoms can last weeks, months, or even years.

It’s not uncommon to fail and continue taking them because the withdrawal is just that bad.

A 2022 review found that 56% of users who tried to stop SSRIs experience withdrawal symptoms, and 46% describe it as severe.

Psychiatrists mislabel it as a “relapse” and prescribe even more drugs.

The system is set up to trap you. There’s no exit.

And the most vulnerable groups?

Pregnant women and children.

Despite strong evidence linking SSRIs to birth defects, premature birth, and newborn death, the FDA still endorses their use during pregnancy.

One study showed a six times higher risk of pulmonary hypertension in newborns.

Another study showed that SSRI babies lost height and weight in just 19 weeks.

This isn’t good.

SSRIs are being pushed on everyone. Especially vulnerable people like foster kids, parolees, prisoners, and elderly nursing home residents.

And in many of these cases, there is no real ability for them to say no.

That’s not mental health care. That’s drugging people.

The industry tells us SSRIs are “fixing a serotonin imbalance.”

But that’s a lie.

There’s no solid evidence that depression is caused by low serotonin.

So what’s the real mechanism at play here?

SSRIs alter brain wiring. And obviously not always in good ways.

SSRI users describe feeling like their “personality changed” after starting the drug.

The reports are endless and absolutely chilling.

Some were left numb for years. Others became aggressive, impulsive, or dissociated from reality.

Many say they don’t recognize who they became after taking SSRIs.

Excuse me… what?!

And of course, patients and their families are rarely warned about these effects.

Most say they were never told about the risks. There was no informed consent.

How can you not inform depressed people that their medication might make them suicidal? How is it even possible that we can be asking that question?

They experienced these things and talked to their doctors.

They were gaslit every step of the way.

If you or someone you love is taking SSRIs or is considering taking them, I urge you to read the full report from A Midwestern Doctor

How many more people have to suffer before this ends?

How many more people who reach out to their doctor because something is off and they’re looking for help are going to be hurt, sometimes permanently?

It’s time to expose the cover-up and end Big Pharma’s abuse and gaslighting once and for all.

RFK Jr. is right—this could finally be the turning point.

For 40 years, this tragedy was hidden behind slick ads and corrupted science.

But now it’s in the light and MAHA is ready to fight.

If you know anyone considering starting an SSRI, be sure to forward them this information. Because if you wait until after, it might be too late.

Share

Thanks for reading!

This information was based on a report originally published by A Midwestern Doctor. Key details were streamlined and editorialized for clarity and impact.

Read the original report here.

Related Topics:#RFKJr AMidwesternDoctor DepressionTreatment EffectsOfAntidepressants SSRIAntidepressants SuicidalThoughts TheVigilantFox

Up Next

A Perfect Storm of Corruption, Foreign Interference, and National Security Failures

Don't Miss

CSIS Warned Beijing Would Brand Conservatives as Trumpian. Now Carney’s Campaign Is Doing It.

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

GOP rep moves to shred PATRIOT Act, dismantle Deep State spy powers

Business / 1 hour ago

Real Challenges Await Carney

Alberta / 7 hours ago

Alberta Precipitation Update

Alberta

Alberta’s move to ‘activity-based funding’ will improve health care despite naysayer claims

Published on May 8, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Nadeem Esmail

After the Smith government recently announced its shift to a new approach for funding hospitals, known as “activity-based funding” (ABF), defenders of the status quo in Alberta were quick to argue ABF will not improve health care in the province. Their claims are simply incorrect. In reality, based on the experiences of other better-performing universal health-care systems, ABF will help reduce wait times for Alberta patients and provide better value-for-money for taxpayers.

First, it’s important to understand Alberta is not breaking new ground with this approach. Other developed countries shifted to the ABF model starting in the early 1990s.

Indeed, after years of paying their hospitals a lump-sum annual budget for surgical care (like Alberta currently), other countries with universal health care recognized this form of payment encouraged hospitals to deliver fewer services by turning each patient into a cost to be minimized. The shift to ABF, which compensates hospitals for the actual services they provide, flips the script—hospitals in these countries now see patients as a source of revenue.

In fact, in many universal health-care countries, these reforms began so long ago that some are now on their second or even third generation of ABF, incorporating further innovations to encourage an even greater focus on quality.

For example, in Sweden in the early 1990s, counties that embraced ABF enjoyed a potential cost savings of 13 per cent over non-reforming counties that stuck with budgets. In Stockholm, one study measured an 11 per cent increase in hospital activity overall alongside a 1 per cent decrease in costs following the introduction of ABF. Moreover, according to the study, ABF did not reduce access for older patients or patients with more complex conditions. In England, the shift to ABF in the early to mid-2000s helped increase hospital activity and reduce the cost of care per patient, also without negatively affecting quality of care.

Multi-national studies on the shift to ABF have repeatedly shown increases in the volume of care provided, reduced costs per admission, and (perhaps most importantly for Albertans) shorter wait times. Studies have also shown ABF may lead to improved quality and access to advanced medical technology for patients.

Clearly, the naysayers who claim that ABF is some sort of new or untested reform, or that Albertans are heading down an unknown path with unmanageable and unexpected risks, are at the very least uninformed.

And what of those theoretical drawbacks?

Some critics claim that ABF may encourage faster discharges of patients to reduce costs. But they fail to note this theoretical drawback also exists under the current system where discharging higher-cost patients earlier can reduce the drain on hospital budgets. And crucially, other countries have implemented policies to prevent these types of theoretical drawbacks under ABF, which can inform Alberta’s approach from the start.

Critics also argue that competition between private clinics, or even between clinics and hospitals, is somehow a bad thing. But all of the developed world’s top performing universal health-care systems, with the best outcomes and shortest wait times, include a blend of both public and private care. No one has done it with the naysayers’ fixation on government provision.

And finally, some critics claim that, under ABF, private clinics will simply focus on less-complex procedures for less-complex patients to achieve greater profit, leaving public hospitals to perform more complex and thus costly surgeries. But in fact, private clinics alleviate pressure on the public system, allowing hospitals to dedicate their sophisticated resources to complex cases. To be sure, the government must ensure that complex procedures—no matter where they are performed—must always receive appropriate levels of funding and similarly that less-complex procedures are also appropriately funded. But again, the vast and lengthy experience with ABF in other universal health-care countries can help inform Alberta’s approach, which could then serve as an example for other provinces.

Alberta’s health-care system simply does not deliver for patients, with its painfully long wait times and poor access to physicians and services—despite its massive price tag. With its planned shift to activity-based funding, the province has embarked on a path to better health care, despite any false claims from the naysayers. Now it’s crucial for the Smith government to learn from the experiences of others and get this critical reform right.

Nadeem Esmail

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute

Autism

NIH, CMS partner on autism research

Published on May 8, 2025

Todayville

From The Center Square

By Brett Rowland

Officials at the the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services announced a partnership Wednesday to research “root causes of autism spectrum disorder.”

As part of the project, NIH will build a real-world data platform enabling advanced research across claims data, electronic medical records and consumer wearables, according to the agencies.

“We’re using this partnership to uncover the root causes of autism and other chronic diseases,” said HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “We’re pulling back the curtain – with full transparency and accountability – to deliver the honest answers families have waited far too long to hear.”

CMS and NIH will start this partnership by establishing a data use agreement under CMS’ Research Data Disclosure Program focused on Medicare and Medicaid enrollees with a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder or ASD.

“This partnership is an important step in our commitment to unlocking the power of real-world data to inform public health decisions and improve lives,” NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya said. “Linking CMS claims data with a secure real-world NIH data platform, fully compliant with privacy and security laws, will unlock landmark research into the complex factors that drive autism and chronic disease – ultimately delivering superior health outcomes to the Americans we serve.”

Researchers will focus on autism diagnosis trends over time, health outcomes from specific medical and behavioral interventions, access to care and disparities by demographics and geography and the economic burden on families and healthcare systems, according to a news release.