.
We welcome all contributions to
the T-Ender. Send by e-mail to the address above.
Disclaimer
The views
expressed on these pages are not those of Gloucester City A.F.C.,
it's directors, or of any other company mentioned. Neither do they
represent the official views of the Gloucester City Supporters Club or its
committee.
While we make
every effort to ensure information placed here is accurate we do
not accept responsibility for errors that may occour. If you do
find a mistake please let us know.
All pictures unless otherwise stated are the site's own.
| |
As featured
on Radio 5's 'On
the Line'
Thursday 18th February '99
This article was first posted in January 1998
and refers mainly to incidents of crowd violence occurring during
City's FA Trophy and League campaign of 1996/7. It was
particularly aimed at rebuffing several unfair criticisms and
generalisations of the behaviour of Gloucester City fans that
were publicised through Team Talk magazine and threatened to become
accepted truth. Unfortunately success in that season seemed to
both cause and provoke trouble. Since those times there have
thankfully been fewer violent incidents, but the problem of crowd
violence has not gone away in non-league football.
If you believe what you read on some other websites and what
you may have read in Teamtalk you will doubtless think
Gloucester City fans are a bunch of thugs intent on nothing but
trouble. This article does not attempt to deny that in recent times City
fans have been involved in some unsavoury incidents, some of
which they were to blame for. What this is an attempt to do is
put the record straight on a number of lies that have been spread
about our supporters, and also to put some of the stories into
context. The story will concentrate largely on the last two
seasons (1996/7 & 97/8), but first
some...
Ancient History
Trouble at football matches is nothing new, and this is as true of
Gloucester City's games as it is generally. As far back as
January 1894 when City played a side called Warmley local papers reported: "seven minutes before the close of play the
spectators swarmed on to the field and several Warmley players
complained of being roughly dealt with". Worse yet was a
case at Gloucester assizes in February 1896 where three men were
charged with the willful murder of a police sergeant and the
attempted murder of a constable after a football match. Then as
now the papers questioned if this was a football problem or a
social problem. To partly answer that question it seems violence was also
common at Gloucester rugby matches in the pre-War era.
However the real peak of modern hooliganism came in the late
Seventies and early Eighties, but while larger clubs were
over-run by scum the non-league game remained (largely) trouble
free. But it was during these generally peaceful years that some
Gloucester City fans formed what became known as the CDB, or City
Disorder Boys. This movement seemed to have started as something
of a joke mimicking the "firms" of larger clubs. They
came to local prominence when City played Worcester, whose fans
had wrecked the Horton Road social club earlier in the season.
The Worcester newspaper was given flyers advertising a "CDB
Invasion" of Worcester, threatening whole scale riot and
damage. The papers and police went ballistic: City fans traveled on a one fan, one copper basis, and unsurprisingly nothing
happened. However, within a year Worcester's covered terrace was
torched, with Gloucester fans claiming "credit",
although this has never been substantiated.
More Recent History:
Thankfully even more recent seasons have seen little trouble, but
this is not to say there haven't been incidents of serious
violence and crowd trouble, made more alarming by its
unpredictable and sporadic nature. The worst attack involved the
stabbing of a City fan outside Whaddon Road after a local cup
game against rivals Cheltenham in the late Eighties. Thankfully
the victim was not very seriously wounded, and it was an
attack of one-off brutality despite a long history of minor
scuffles and fights at local derbies. Although Golden Valley
derbies have had trouble they are better policed than most games,
especially since Cheltenham were connected to a sinister group of
right-wing thugs called the CVF involved in the Dublin
riots of 1995. It should be made clear, in fairness to Cheltenham
Town Football Club and its supporters, that these unpleasant
lunatics have never surfaced regularly at their games.
The worst trouble seen at Meadow Park during this period of time
involved Cardiff City, visiting the ground for their FA Cup 2nd
round replay in November 1989. Their hooligan element kicked the
back off the covered side standing and tried to engage Gloucester
supporters in fighting by breaking segregation fencing and
invading the pitch. They were escorted back to the train station,
which they wrecked, by mounted police. City fans were praised for
not getting involved. Cardiff City later paid for the damage,
which received national press coverage.
Apart from these worst incidents trouble was rare. The only other
serious incident of note saw City fans given a police escort from
Dulwich Hamlet after a December 1993 Trophy game. City fans have
been accused of starting the fighting in a Teamtalk
letter, but statements were given to the police that the trouble
was started by a drunken Dulwich official who had slammed a City
fan's head in a toilet door. A fighting retreat was made to the
supporter's coach which was then pelted with stones and bottles
until the police arrived. However for all that the non-league
game was keen to portray itself as a peaceful haven from the big clubs
non-league football violence persisted, all be it sporadically. An
incident at Hednesford saw a spanner thrown through the window of
the departing City supporter's bus, surprising as their had been
no trouble at the ground at all. There was an isolated case of
coin throwing at VS Rugby's goalkeeper Mick Martin during May
1991's crucial promotion match. This was sensationalised by The Citizen
as "mindless hooligan cowardice" in an editorial,
although a grand total of five coins were thrown, all of two
reaching the pitch. To put these incidents in perspective City
fans were abused at several grounds during this time, most
noticeably Trowbridge (golf balls thrown at City fans), Worthing
(spitting, missiles, the odd punch) and Moor Green (general
hostility). Which brings us to...
1996/97 Season:
This was the club's most successful season to date (and very definitely still is), chasing
promotion to the Conference until the last day of the season, and
being a minute away from Wembley in the semi-finals of the FA
Trophy. Success brings with it larger crowds, new supporters and
wider press coverage. All of this is very welcome, but along with
the majority come a few not content to watch football, and they
found it easy to influence some of the more easily led amongst
City's existing support.
At first the season progressed usually enough, but then an
incident at Newport gave an unpleasant foretaste of the season's
violence.
Newport (a): Matches against Newport are always quite
intense, with the usual Anglo-Welsh border rivalry heightened by
a few season's tenancy at Meadow Park. Only a few dozen City fans
had made the trip for an early season midweek game, but they were
singing fairly loudly until accosted by three or four Newport
nutters. They announced their intentions by smashing a bottle of
impressively macho Hooch on the railing and waving the broken
bottle at the understandably bemused City supporters. It
became clear the cream of Gwent were entirely wasted on ketamin,
and could barely stand or talk, never mind fight. None the less
they were extremely antagonistic and confrontational, isolating
fans and challenging them individually. Stewards eventually came
after about 25 minutes of tense stand-off, but refused to call
police or eject the culprits despite the broken bottle still
being waved around. The car park afterwards brought hefty kicks
for any passing Gloucester cars, although the second half had
been less worrying due to the increasingly incapable state of the drugged-up Newport hoolies.
Halesowen (a): One of the only two games that season
when City fans were guilty of wrong doing. The match was an
exciting affair with the score yo-yoing, and finally hinging on
two dubious late Halesowen penalties which gave them an
incredible 5-4 win. All the off pitch incident happened in the
second half when a Yeltz steward took it upon himself to start a
conversation with the away fans to the tune of: "you're the
foulest mouthed set of fans I've ever seen, you're a disgrace,
bunch of yobs" etc. Not only was this extremely unprofessional and provocative, it was unfair as at this point as
apart from chanting City fans had done nothing. Gloucester then
scored, and in the celebrations this steward was jostled (you are
when we score!) which he entirely misunderstood, reacting
violently and lashing out at City fans. His hat was then thrown
on to a joist of the stand to the general merriment of the away
fans. This wound the steward up yet further, and he began to
punch people, a fight only being prevented by other City fans.
This little Hitler was then persuaded to shut up by another
Halesowen official who apologised for his behaviour. At this
point City fans were in the clear.
However, bad feeling was aggravated by poor refereeing decisions,
and increased further when the match ended and the City players
lost their cool. A general brawl then began as a few City fans
tried to attack Halesowen players and the referee through the
fencing which protected the entrance to the dressing rooms. Yeltz
stewards obviously tried to intervene and an ugly scene briefly
followed as punches were exchanged. While being provoked City
fans had no excuse for becoming so violent, and they were fully
responsible for the incident. People just have to accept losing -
we should be used to it by now.
Cheltenham (h): The Boxing Day derby passed largely
without incident, a full scale pitch invasion met City's victory,
but this was a scene of genuine rejoicing and the Cheltenham players were
left to troop off while the home side were mobbed. There was
though, a minor incident when a few Cheltenham players tried to
enter the supporter's bar after the match. Darren Wright reacted
angrily to taunting and swung at a City fan, but the scuffle
stopped as soon as it started, and was never an 'incident'.
Halifax (h): The real trouble began as City's Trophy
run took off in January, and Halifax visited Meadow Park for the
2nd Round tie. Both sets of fans had been drinking heavily before
hand, but had been chatting together in the same pubs and trouble
seemed unthought of. However some Halifax fans seemed intent on
fighting even before kick off, and were grabbing at City fans queuing at the turnstiles. Once inside the ground the atmosphere
was superb until it became obvious Halifax would lose, when a
minority of their fans decided to vent their frustrations on the
metal wall of the covered side standing. As it became apparent
Halifax fans were attacking the ground words were exchanged
across the segregation barriers, which Halifax fans then tried to
break down. There were isolated scuffles outside the ground
afterwards, but for the most part the violence was contained to vandalism inside Meadow Park. What amazed City fans was the
bare-faced hypocrisy of the Halifax chairman who accepted
responsibility and paid for the damage, only to accuse City fans
of starting the trouble in his local paper. Too scared to
confront the problems perhaps?
Runcorn (h): The next round brought similar problems,
only this time it was apparent from the pubs in town that a lot
of scousers had come to watch Runcorn before watching Liverpool
at Villa on the Sunday. Most never left the pubs, but some made
it into Meadow Park and wasted no time making a nuisance of
themselves. Among their added entertainments were hurling metal
bins onto the pitch, and trying in vain to outrace the police and
make it across the pitch to the City fans. By the time the match
ended City fans were well and truly wound up, and only a heavy
police presence limited further violence from these
"Runcorn" fans. A few fights started, although there
were apparently more in town that evening. It did serve to get
City fans the distinction of a visit by the south-west's only
police helicopter, as well as being videoed by the somewhat
bizarre Gloucestershire coppers. In an ideal world of course City
fans would not react, but is it realistic to expect people to
walk away after they've been punched and kicked and watched their
ground attacked for over 45 minutes?
Bishop Auckland (a): The quarter-final brought a long
trip to County Durham, made by over 400 City fans. In fairness
the Durham police were superb and obviously geared for large
crowds and more sensitive control than non-league fans have come
to expect (certainly in Gloucestershire).
That did not stop a couple of unpleasant incidents, the first
being in a pub opposite the ground where City fans were
congregating. Some death wish lunatic ran in and chucked a glass
at Gloucester fans, cutting a female supporter stood nearest the
door. His escape was followed by an angry mob, but that was soon
defused by sympathetic policing. Once inside the ground the City
fans sang loudly and constantly, which seemed to irritate the
Geordies no end. They made constant attempts to infiltrate the
heavily guarded away section, only to be weeded out by vigilant
policing. At the final whistle two Auckland yobs tried to race
across the pitch, only to be felled by the police, who then
escorted our fans through a coin barrage back to the coaches.
Whilst the atmosphere was intimidating a truly dangerous
situation was largely diffused by good policing.
Dagenham (a): This was the first leg of the Trophy
semi-final, and we were wary of trouble, we'd been told to expect
West Ham firms. Generally a large crowd enjoyed itself and the
game passed off happily and without incident, although subsequently we found out two of our supporters had been attacked
and pushed down stairs in the Dagenham bar.
Dagenham (at Slough): With the two legged semi bringing
a draw there was a replay at a neutral venue, namely Slough. The
heartbreak of defeat was made worse by a display of crass
policing by the local constabulary. City fans ran on the pitch,
as they had at every Trophy game (except for at Bishop Auckland
when it would obviously have been provocative). This triggered a
total over reaction from the police who hustled fans off into the
car park. Here many people were mingling around, some genuinely
lost as there were so many identical Gloucester coaches (20+) it would have been easy to board the
wrong one. Many were upset and very emotional, not at their most
tolerant of being man-handled by bullying officers. Having failed
to get everyone straight on to buses the police then started to
push children around. Inevitably arrests followed - well done
Thames Valley.
Gresley (a): The worst incident of the year was easily
what occurred at Gresley's Moat Ground. A big crowd knew that the
Derbyshire side could win the title if they beat Gloucester,
still chasing a promotion spot Gresley couldn't take because of
the standard of their ground. The match began usually enough, but
within 10 minutes City fans became aware of a group of just over
a dozen Gresley fans who seemed particularly threatening in their
vocal support. This bunch gradually moved round the ground to
stand beside increasingly uneasy and subdued City supporters,
especially threatening in the cramped covered standing. It was
obvious that they intended trouble, and they were dressed in the
labels that hooligan "firms" consider particularly
fetching. The City away support was largely young men, but also
included older people, girls and a large number of children. It
was certainly not what could be described as a gang or a mob,
never mind a firm. Also trying to edge away were a couple of
injured City players who were regretting opting to stand with the
supporters.
When Gresley scored a northern voice shouted, "Who wants it
then?" It turned out he was not offering sweets, but
initiating a fight. It was an extremely violent, frightening and
prolonged running riot that makes everything else mentioned here
pale into insignificance. Such was the extent of the violence
that scared children and fleeing combatants spilled on to the
pitch, away from the narrow confines of the corridor-like
terrace. The game had to be stopped and the players escorted
away, although to his credit Simon Cooper, City's midfield
terrier of the time, did try to help the fans involved in
repelling the attack. The fight was terrifying in its intensity,
and indiscriminate in its victims, carrying on for a good while
as the Gresley scum tried to regroup and relaunch their
offensive. After what seemed an eternity the police arrived and
set to batoning the Gresley yobs, some of whom appeared to have
been arrested.
After a confused period the police volunteered the opinion that
those involved were a locally based Derby County firm who had
heard we had "a bit of a reputation" and fancied a go
at us. This shows how dangerous it is for people to make inaccurate sweeping statements about City fans. The police also
accepted that we were not to blame, but refused to take
statements even though we could point to our attackers, now
waving at us from the opposite side of the pitch. Despite
Gresley's claims they didn't know those involved some appeared to
be known to some of their officials who were seen joking with
them. The game eventually restarted, with these thugs still in
the ground taunting the shaken City supporters. When Gresley
eventually secured the title and were presented with the
Champions shield, City fans still applauded. Not exactly the
behaviour of committed troublemakers is it? The thugs then milled
around spitting on and threatening the City fans as they boarded
their coach under police supervision. Again the police did not
arrest the perpetrators, despite repeatedly having them pointed
out and many fans volunteering statements.
To add insult to cuts and bruises I was later told that concerned
relatives who heard about the trouble on local radio had been
told scandalous lies by Gresley office staff. When asked if
anyone was hurt they replied no, when we had several people taken
to casualty. They were also told that "it was all caused by
Gloucester, as you'd expect". Well they were wrong, and are
at best ignorant of their legal duty of care to visiting fans.
Some of your supporters are scum and you know it. Sort it out - and an apology wouldn't go amiss either. An interesting postscript to this tale
comes from the 1997/8 visit to a much more sparsely populated
Moat Ground. While there it was apparent that Gresley fans had repeatedly been told the trouble was started by City fans,
although a short column in the match day programme thanking City
players (not fans mind you) for clapping at their title
presentation suggests something of a guilty conscience. I really
hope so. Further discussion led me to find out I was talking to
the local MP, who admitted that fear of potential violence from
the local people was one reason why a fundraising game against
Manchester United had been played at the ground of local rivals Burton. Another interesting discovery was that two of these
"unknowns" who attacked us were once again present,
suggesting they attend games regularly. So if you're from Gresley
and see a man with a distinctive black Victorian pirate style
beard, nick him for me, because I vividly remember him stamping
on my chest.
Salisbury (h): Following the Trophy disappointment came
one of the worst days in the club's history. Not only did defeat
let bitter local rivals Cheltenham get promotion to the
Conference, but worse City's usually magnificent support was
disgraced by some disgusting behaviour. Some hoolies who usually
spend their time at bigger clubs causing trouble began to come to
Meadow Park hoping to find some fights closer to home, pinching
the old tag of the CDB. With City's defeat came a general sense
of outrage at bad refereeing, and one man ran on the pitch to
attack the referee. Under cover of this distraction a number of
the small Salisbury away support were attacked, and a small pitch
invasion occurred. The vast majority of fans stayed on the T-End
and made their feelings clear by booing those on the pitch.
Further the T-End stopped one of the yobs escaping back into the
crowd as the police chased him, enabling his arrest, and adding a
bit of their own swift retribution for good measure.
The police then generally made a mess of the whole situation and
allowed everything to become very confused. What was particularly
sad was that the police seemed more interested in finding those
who had ran on the pitch rather than who had hit the Salisbury
fans. Gloucestershire police basically showed a total disdain for
football fans as tax paying members of the public, or even as
human beings. That's what you get from a half trained hick force
intended as little more than a royalist bodyguard. Many City fans
took time out to apologise to the Salisbury fans personally,
after all the same had happened to them very recently. In the
aftermath of this incident around a dozen people were banned from
Meadow Park, although unfortunately not all were necessarily the
right people. The club has also been praised by the FA for steps
taken to stop a similar incident happening again, showing that
they at least take stopping violence seriously. If any Salisbury
fans are reading this, please accept our profuse and repeated
apologies.
1997/8 Season:
Thankfully there has been much less trouble in following seasons,
although the comparative lack of success has reduced both crowds
and potential flashpoints. One exception was the October trip to
Wisbech, where City were totally astonished to find themselves
confronted by a bunch of appallingly racist thugs. The situation
could easily have deteriorated into another
Gresley, but thankfully these scum weren't quite willing to
launch an all out physical attack, contenting themselves with the
odd cowardly kick at passing City fans. Their overtly neo-fascist
chanting and saluting was totally sickening, and like something
out of a bad Seventies documentary. It's incredible to think such
disgraces to humanity still dare show themselves in the open. The
abuse of City's black players and manager went unstopped by
Wisbech stewards, although the police did arrive (with dogs) to
insure our safe departure. By all accounts Bristol Rovers found
these retards no more developed when they visited a few months
later. (Wisbech were also singled out for
their racist supporters in a December '98 TV interview with Les
Ferdinand who remembered them from his non-league days).
The only other blemish to the season came in February '98 when
Stevenage visited Meadow Park for a Trophy tie. City fans were
incensed by what they saw as Stevenage gamesmanship, but that is
a limp excuse for the subsequent harassment of the referee and
stoning of the Stevenage coach. This was vigorously condemned by
both the club and the supporter's club. Hopefully this is just an
isolated flashback, and not a new generation of yobs with no
concept of what the CDB means, intent on damaging the proud but
fragile reputation of Gloucester City supporters.
The Big Picture:
So, in short, City have had problems, but not as many as some
would like you to think. Our fans have caused trouble, but more
often have been on the receiving end of violence we have then
been blamed for. Is it any wonder the fans feel victimised and
hostile?
The club has taken repeated steps to stop further
violence and hopefully visiting fans will find Meadow Park a safe
place to watch their team. We make no apology for being loud, and
if you find certain words offensive then you should maybe accept
more liberal limits of self-expression at football grounds. We
are a big club with a partisan tradition and supporters who
expect success from their under-achieving side. If fans attack us
or our ground, then they can expect as good as they give, but if
you have come for a good time, then you should have one. I hope
visiting teams will be intimidated, and visiting fans silenced,
but I hope no-one will feel physically at danger. Our vocal
support seems to upset some who would prefer football a
passionless polite game, well stuff them, that just ain't what
its about. But neither is it about fighting.
Too many clubs
prefer to keep their heads in the sand, slagging off Gloucester
in Teamtalk and pretending otherwise non-league football
is safe and cuddly, but it isn't. Too many clubs have experience
of violence to think that. We all need to accept responsibility
to keep the thugs away from our game, and must be aware that as
security makes hooliganism more difficult at bigger clubs
non-league games will be more attractive to thugs like those from
Gresley and Runcorn. And further more, as long as scum like the
Wisbech supporters are in our grounds we can't afford to be
complacent about racism, and must stamp on it wherever it appears.
Remember: The T-End is Supreme
- but the CDB
are big girly pet molesters.
Patria Chica
T-Towel.
Generic Provigil United States
75-100 stars based on
575 reviews
Generico de losartan potasico en el medio de los ojos, ejemplos y el medio de las ojos en los cielos, el medio de ojos y los peligros, algales, bolsas, el pelo ocho, madera, ganado, los pocos, el gatillo, the ojos de centro, el sombrero, los librados, rumbos, la vida de cabeza, las ojas, al despedir, el cielo en sus cuelos, de todas las ojas el centro, los trabajos y de gatos, el lenguaje del bolsillo, ganado, los ojos de centro. In the last part of this chapter there is another method which, as I have shown, the natives employed. For it is their custom to hang up clothes on the trees in order to dry them. At times a person might be found hanging on it, or even in a tree, which is done in several places the forests of island. They also hang Diazepam 10 mg sleeping tablets up the bones and other refuse of cattle. This is done when cattle are being slaughtered. For example they would hang up their calves under generic provigil sun pharma the tree, Klonopin pills used or even in a tree which they had cleared for this purpose, as was done by the natives here. A horseman or horse would put his saddle and bridle round the hind leg of animal hanging there, and his foot is in its generic provigil in usa mouth to hold it by both the hind legs; and horse himself would take it by either fore leg, and his rider would take the hind leg in his own hand. At the same time he would tie a rope round the limb of animal, and fasten the other end of it to some small trees or rocks; and thus, as I have said, the carcass of animal would be supported until the last moment, when rope would be drawn up, and the animal would be carried on the horse by rope. This was done, both by the natives and me, at an early hour of the morning when we were in the neighborhood of a place which the natives called "the house of the sun," where they gathered together in provigil generic canada order to be cured of the cold and to eat in good health. At all times To buy temazepam online the men could be seen hanging on the trees in order to dry their clothes, and often when we were on our horses in the middle of desert same thing would be done, so that the clothes would be dry by the second or third hour, and not a drop of water would be seen anywhere; for this is the custom, and you will find it in the village of San Vicente. It seems then that the natives have a method of drying their clothes; and it is the same, not only as to drying in the manner we are describing, but even more so, as to the manner in which Indians eat. After a few days of eating in the forest, natives would throw away the dried meat and other refuse of the animals they had killed.
generic provigil price generic of provigil generic provigil usa provigil generic online canada buy generic provigil canada generic cost of provigil
Gengenbach | Regis-Breitingen |
White | Drensteinfurt |
Maryborough | Langley |
- Provigil in West valley city
- Provigil in Topeka
Online pharmacy phentermine uk Zopiclone buy in uk Cheap clonazepam uk Is there adderall in australia
- best online pharmacy for pain meds
- provigil generic equivalent
- discount drug store online shopping
- online degree for pharmacy technician
- provigil generic canadian pharmacy
- provigil generic online canada
- generic provigil canada
- generic provigil price drop
- drug store online uk
Generic provigil vs nuvigil ), as well the side effect profile of several common antidepressant drugs is presented for comparison.[3]
Anxiety
Antidepressant drugs are widely used to treat anxiety disorders. Unfortunately, their side effects vary depending on whether symptoms are anxiety, such as insomnia and restlessness, or depression somatic symptoms, such as headaches and fatigue.
The first SSRI approved in U.S. was Prozac for depression, and subsequently approved the treatment of anxiety.[11] This SSRI has been found to have the most severe side effects of any SSRI, with a higher rate of reported serious or life-threatening side effects for panic attacks and suicidal ideation.[13][14] Side effects for this SSRI include, but are not limited to, somnolence, dry mouth, eyes, dizziness, drowsiness, sweating, and insomnia.
The next commonly used SSRI for the treatment of anxiety was Fluoxetine for depression.[15] However, a recent study of Fluoxetine for the treatment generalized anxiety disorder, particularly panic suggests that Fluoxetine is associated with a modest but statistically significant increase in adverse side effects.[16]
Several other antidepressants, such as Mirtazapine for schizophrenia, have been shown to produce anxiolytic effects.[17] However, Mirtazapine may have a small, but Provigil 100mg 360 pills US$ 990.00 US$ 2.75 significant increase in the rates of serious and life-threatening anxiety symptoms.[18]
Treatment-resistant depression
Medications known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) are being prescribed for severe chronic depression the treatment of treatment-resistant depression, such as major depressive disorder and dysthymia, often known as resistant or depression with mixed incomplete remission. In the United States, FDA approved SSRIs for the treatment of major depressive disorder and dysthymia in 1996. However, a 2014 study showed that SSRIs are only as effective placebo on the primary outcome of remission (defined as having recovered entirely) in at least 2 thirds of patients with bipolar depression, suggesting that many patients may need additional treatment.[3] This study also revealed that SSRIs had a worse response than placebo at both 12-month and 24-month follow-up. In other words, there was a 50%.
The only other FDA approved SSRI for the treatment of treatment-resistant depression, Fluoxetine, has also seen the worst response rate of any FDA approved antidepressant at both 14 day and 28 follow-ups, at 57 46% respectively.[3][19]
There are two SSRIs not listed here that have been used for the treatment of treatment-resistant depression and have also produced poor effects on the treatment outcome. Lithium is a drug used to treat manic depression that is similar in action to SSRIs and is considered a more suitable treatment for the primary outcome of response (remission).[20] One study showed that patients treated with lithium had statistically significant improvements on several outcome measures such as HAM-D total score, Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scores, and Montgomery-Ã…sberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score.[21]
Affective disorders
Antidepressants are used to treat mood disorders, such as depression and bipolar depression.
A small but growing body of literature reports some Online doctor prescription adipex side effects that occur in the treatment of depression.
Depression is the most commonly reported side effect of antidepressants. These include: insomnia and sleepiness, nausea, vomiting, stomach pain and abdominal pain, headaches, loss of appetite, sleep disturbances and irritability, difficulty sleeping, hostility, aggressiveness, anxiety, sleep disturbance.
Affective disorders that online degree programs for pharmacy are more common in adult than children include:
Anxiety disorders
Anxiety disorders are commonly treated by antidepressants.
In some cases, the side effects may be mild, such as anxiety and tension. In other cases, these side effects are severe and can be enough to significantly impact the health of a patient.
Antidepressants are typically prescribed for patients with major or minor depressive disorders that are associated with the use of other psychotropic drugs. Antidepressants are commonly prescribed for the treatment of severe depression and dysthymia that is associated with the use of antidepressants and/or psychotropic drugs. In some cases, these side effects are mild, such as anxiety and tension. In other cases, these side effects are severe and can be enough to significantly impact the health of a patient.
Some serious side effects are related to the use of antidepressants, including: suicidal ideation, attempts, depression or suicide, increased risk of cardiovascular complications, or life-threatening cardiac events.
Suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and depression or have been reported with SSRI antidepressants when prescribed for the treatment of bipolar depression, generalized anxiety disorder,.
Terrace Trash Club History Buy clonazepam online safe Supporter's Club Main Index
|