logo
FDA panel on the use of antidepressants during pregnancy is alarming experts

FDA panel on the use of antidepressants during pregnancy is alarming experts

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is turning its attention to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, a class of antidepressant drugs long criticized by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
On Monday morning, the FDA hosted a 10-person expert panel on the use during pregnancy of SSRIs, which include medications like fluoxetine (Prozac), sertraline (Zoloft) and citalopram (Celexa), among others.
Nine of the panel's 10 members were researchers, doctors or psychologists who have previously questioned the safety of SSRIs publicly or spoken out against antidepressant use in general.
Over the course of the discussion, several panel members cited studies that lacked appropriate controls, physicians not involved with the panel said. In other words, there was no way to be certain on the basis of the studies whether the observed health problems were caused by SSRIs, the underlying mood disorder or some other factor.
Other participants described study findings inaccurately or incompletely, said outside experts. For example, few panelists considered the risks of SSRI use relative to the risks associated with untreated depression, which also contributes to poor outcomes for children and mothers. In the U.S., suicide is a leading cause of maternal death in the first year of a baby's life.
An FDA spokesperson said the panel was part of the agency's 'broader efforts to apply rigorous, evidence-based standards to ingredient safety and modernize regulatory oversight' and did not respond to further queries about the agency's potential next steps.
But healthcare professionals expressed concern that the panel could ultimately prevent women from getting the care they need.
'I was surprised and disappointed by the amount of misinformation that was presented,' said Dr. Katie Unverferth, a reproductive psychiatrist and medical director of UCLA's Maternal Mental Health Program.
'When we look at the body of data ... we find that there are no consistent associations [of] SSRIs with cardiac defects, pulmonary hypertension or neurodevelopmental issues in offspring,' she said, naming some of the harms panelists attributed to the drugs. 'This misinformation just creates intrusive thoughts. It's not helpful.'
The panel included just one specialist in maternal mood disorders — Dr. Kay Roussos-Ross, an obstetrician-gynecologist and director of the Perinatal Mood Disorders Program at the University of Florida College of Medicine — who argued that SSRIs are for most patients a safe treatment option for serious mental health disorders in pregnancy.
'Mental health disorders are no different than medical disorders,' said Roussos-Ross.
'I want to stress that treating mental illness in pregnancy is not a luxury. It's a necessity,' she said. 'We're not asking [pregnant] women to not take their anti-hypertensives and risk death to them or their baby. We're not asking women to stop their diabetes medications. We should not be withholding SSRIs as a possible treatment for women who need it.'
The FDA did not respond to questions about how experts were selected for the panel. Participant Dr. Josef Witt-Doerring runs a private clinic that helps patients wean off psychiatric medication. Another panelist, Dr. Roger McFillin, is a prolific podcaster and a skeptic of germ theory, the belief — widely held as a fundamental truth in medicine since the 19th century — that infectious diseases are caused by microorganisms.
Panelist Dr. David Healy, a psychiatrist from Wales, made a number of confounding and misleading statements, insisting that 'mothers who are taking SSRIs in pregnancy have a 10-fold greater risk of having a baby with fetal alcohol syndrome' (that figure describes the subject population of a single 2011 study, not the general public). Healy also stated that 'any drug that causes birth defects will cause autism spectrum disorder also,' a claim that has no basis in any scientific research.
Dr. David Urato, chief of maternal and fetal medicine at MetroWest Medical Center in Framingham, Mass., was the only panelist besides Roussos-Ross who cares directly for pregnant patients. He spoke forcefully on the potential harms the drugs pose to developing babies.
'Never before in human history have we chemically altered babies like this,' he said during the discussion. 'There is now more than enough evidence to support strong warnings from the FDA about how drugs disrupt fetal development and impact the moms.'
Roussos-Ross argued that the increased risk of birth defects for babies exposed to SSRIs in pregnancy was statistically insignificant, and that children of mothers with untreated depression were more likely to have later behavioral problems than those of mothers who took medication for the disease.
'Having that [medication] not be available to women who need it would really be detrimental,' she said.
At this, panel moderator Tracy Beth Høeg — a sports medicine doctor who is now a senior advisor for clinical sciences at the FDA — said, 'I'm going to do something unconventional. I'm sorry to play favorites, but Dr. Urato, I want you to weigh in now.'
In response, Urato questioned the idea that depression can be alleviated with antidepressant medication at all.
'This idea about depression — [that it] can cause harm and therefore we treat [it] with these chemicals, and by getting the treatment we see improved outcomes — this is something we all would want. It's wishful thinking,' he said. 'But it's not actually what the data shows.'
It was not clear to which data he was referring. In 2019, the most recent year for which data are available, one in every eight U.S. adults had a prescription for antidepressant medication. While the drugs don't work for all people with major depression, analyses of multiple studies have consistently found them to be significantly better than placebos at alleviating illness symptoms.
The drugs have been a target of Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again movement, along with vaccines and food dyes. In his confirmation hearings and on podcast appearances, Kennedy has claimed — inaccurately — that the drugs are both linked to school shootings and harder to quit than heroin. There is no evidence for either claim.
In February, President Trump placed Kennedy at the helm of the Make America Healthy Again Commission, a group tasked with, among other things, evaluating 'the prevalence of and threat posed by the prescription of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, stimulants, and weight-loss drugs.'
Healthcare professionals expressed frustration with the FDA's approach.
'There is already so much shame and stigma that surrounds these illnesses. There is also a lot of shame and stigma around taking medication during pregnancy or the postpartum period,' said Paige Bellenbaum, a perinatal mental health therapist and adjunct professor of social work at Hunter College. 'We are taking a giant step backwards in so many ways. This will reinstill the fear that was there to begin with [and] will ultimately result in the loss of life.'
Alexandre Bonnin, an associate professor of pathology at USC, has studied the effects of prenatal SSRI exposure on the developing fetal brain for years.
The most recent large studies in the field haven't found a statistically significant association between SSRIs and fetal harm, he said. 'Our finding, at least at the basic science level, suggests that the use of SSRIs in pregnancy can be beneficial if the mom is under major stress, anxiety or depression, because the maternal stress actually itself has many negative effects on fetal brain development,' he said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Coke with cane sugar may not be that big of a MAHA victory
Coke with cane sugar may not be that big of a MAHA victory

The Hill

time2 hours ago

  • The Hill

Coke with cane sugar may not be that big of a MAHA victory

Coca-Cola is going to offer a cane sugar version of its signature beverage, rather than one sweetened with corn syrup. Major segments of the food industry, including General Mills and Heinz, have pledged to remove certain colored dyes from their products. The fast-food chain Steak 'n Shake is making french fries in beef tallow rather than vegetable oil. Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has claimed them all as significant victories for his 'make America healthy again' (MAHA) movement as part of its quest to reform the U.S. food supply. 'Froot Loops is finally following its nose — toward common sense,' Kennedy said on social platform X after cereal-maker WK Kellogg Co. agreed to remove synthetic dyes from its cereal by 2027. 'I urge more companies to step up and join the movement to Make America Healthy Again.' But nutrition and food policy experts say the moves are a far cry from actually making America healthier. While they praised the administration and MAHA for drawing attention to what they said is a broken food system, the victories touted thus far have been largely symbolic and rely on the goodwill of an industry that is eager to appear helpful to avoid strict government regulation. 'I think if we're really curious about improving public health, some of the small health initiatives, like … replacing high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar, are really not where the administration should be channeling their efforts and leveraging the power that they do have,' said Priya Fielding-Singh, director of policy and programs at the George Washington University Global Food Institute. 'I think they should be focusing their efforts on initiatives that actually address the root of the problem, which is essentially a food system that promotes excess sugar, salt and fat,' Fielding-Singh said. Health officials and GOP lawmakers have taken to conservative media in recent weeks to tout the commitments from food and beverage companies to remove synthetic dyes. According to the HHS, nearly 35 percent of the industry has made such a commitment. But there's been no force behind the companies' actions, which experts said is an issue. 'Simply switching from synthetic to natural colors will not make these products less likely to cause obesity,' said Jerold Mande, a former senior official during three administrations at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Department of Agriculture and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Barry Popkin, a nutrition professor at the University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, said Kennedy could make a major statement by banning all colors and dyes. It wouldn't directly make Americans healthy, but it would go a long way toward making ultra-processed food look less appealing. 'All this voluntary stuff only goes so far. It really does minimal impact,' Popkin said. 'Unless he goes to the FDA and has the FDA change a regulation … there's nothing.' Kennedy has also singled out the use of high-fructose corn syrup as a major contributor to diabetes and obesity. He has previously called it 'poison,' an epithet he repeated in late April when talking about sugar. When Steak 'n Shake said earlier this month it was going to sell Coca-Cola with real cane sugar, Kennedy praised the move. 'MAHA is winning,' Kennedy posted on X. But experts said there's no substantial difference in the benefits of using cane sugar as a substitute for high-fructose corn syrup. 'At the end of the day, a Coke is still a can of Coke. It's not a fruit or a vegetable, right? And so if you're not shifting consumption away from these higher calorie, lower nutrient processed foods, toward nutrient dense, health promoting foods, then you're not actually going to be shifting the health of Americans in the right direction,' Fielding-Singh said. But if Kennedy thinks sugar is poison, 'they're both sugar and would both be poison, in his words,' said Mande, who is now CEO of Nourish Science. Health officials argue industry cooperation is key to the MAHA agenda. 'Working with industry is the best place to start. And we believe in industry to do the right thing when called upon,' Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Marty Makary and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz wrote in a joint op-ed in The Wall Street Journal. 'Our agencies are in a strong position to show Americans which companies are doing the right thing when it comes to popular reforms. By the time we're done, we will have built new relationships and be better positioned to hold them accountable,' Makary and Oz wrote. Yet there is plenty the agency can, and should do, that industry has pushed back against. Aviva Musicus, science director of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, said MAHA is wasting its political capital. 'It's striking that we haven't seen the administration use policy to improve the food system. It's solely relying on voluntary industry commitments that we've seen repeatedly fail in the past,' Musicus said. 'In pushing the food industry to change, Trump and RFK Jr. have a chance to live up to their promises to fight chronic disease. Coca-Cola is at the table, but they're wasting the opportunity to actually improve health. The administration should focus on less sugar, not different sugar,' Musicus added. Popkin said he would like to see warning labels on ultra-processed foods high in sodium, added sugar and saturated fat. Kennedy 'hasn't tackled ultra-processed food yet. That'll be where he could make an impact on health in the U.S. and all the non-communicable diseases, including obesity. But he hasn't gone there yet,' Popkin said. The coming months will reveal more on the MAHA movement's plans to change how Americans eat. New dietary guidelines will be released 'in the next several months,' Kennedy said recently. In addition, a second MAHA report focused on policy recommendations is expected in August. 'We have to be considering that there could be real potential down the road,' Popkin said. 'But [there's been] nothing yet. That document will tell us if there ever be.'

The FDA must crack down on dangerous knockoff weight-loss drugs
The FDA must crack down on dangerous knockoff weight-loss drugs

The Hill

time2 hours ago

  • The Hill

The FDA must crack down on dangerous knockoff weight-loss drugs

For the first time, there is real hope in the fight against obesity. New data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Center for Health Statistics shows that adult obesity rates in the U.S. may finally be flatlining after annual increases since at least 2011. Obesity has long been understood to be the second leading cause of preventable death in America. Neither negative cultural attitudes about weight nor government messaging campaigns about diets have helped curb it. Yet like most insurmountable problems, we are innovating our way out of it. Experts believe a significant part of recent progress is due to powerful new medications such as Ozempic and Mounjaro, known as GLP-1 drugs. But just as these drugs are changing lives, a dangerous shadow market is growing alongside them. Compounded versions, which are copies of the original drugs made in smaller pharmacies, are flooding websites, med spas and clinics. These versions are often cheaper and easier to get than the real thing. They are also frequently untested, poorly regulated and, in many cases, illegal. The FDA has received more than 500 reports of serious side effects tied to compounded semaglutide and tirzepatide, the active ingredients in Ozempic and Mounjaro. Some patients have landed in the hospital after taking the wrong dose. That is not surprising when you consider that many of these vials come without proper labels or instructions. In 2023 alone, poison control centers received nearly 3,000 semaglutide-related calls, a huge jump from previous years. Many of those cases involved compounded or mislabeled versions of the medication. There are also serious concerns about what is actually in these products. The FDA has warned that some pharmacies are using different chemical forms of semaglutide, called salt forms, that are not approved for use and may not be safe. In April 2025, the agency seized counterfeit Ozempic from the U.S. supply chain after discovering that some vials contained the wrong ingredients or were contaminated with dangerous bacteria. These are not technical violations. They are real risks to people's health. During earlier shortages, compounding was allowed under special circumstances. But those shortages have ended, and the FDA has ordered most pharmacies to stop making these versions. Despite that, many continue to operate in legal gray zones or offer these drugs online. The harm does not stop with safety concerns. This trend also threatens future breakthroughs in obesity care. Companies like Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly spent years and billions of dollars to develop these treatments. Now, they and others are working on new and even more effective drugs. When unapproved copies flood the market, it becomes harder to fund innovation. If investors cannot count on fair returns, the next generation of such medications may not make it out of the lab. Perhaps the biggest risk is to public trust. When someone has a bad experience with a fake or contaminated version, they may begin to doubt all weight loss innovations. That fear can ripple through the health system, making insurers and doctors more hesitant to support treatments that are helping with the genuine public health emergency of obesity. None of this means that compounding should disappear. It has a place when patients have specific medical needs that cannot be met by the approved versions, such as allergies or special dosing requirements. But what is happening now is not about rare exceptions. The FDA should continue cracking down on compounders that use unapproved ingredients or sell mislabeled products disguised as 'research chemicals.' At the same time, insurers and lawmakers need to make the real thing more affordable by removing middlemen such as pharmacy benefit managers. No one should have to choose between risking their health and going broke. We are finally making progress against a disease that affects nearly half the country and has stumped policymakers and advocates for decades. But progress is fragile. Unregulated versions of GLP-1s cannot be allowed to dominate the market. We risk undoing the progress reported by the CDC in the fight against obesity, and if we get this right, the trend could be reversed. That means longer lives for more people, lived in dignity and to the fullest.

Pepsi copies Coca-Cola to win back health-conscious consumers
Pepsi copies Coca-Cola to win back health-conscious consumers

Miami Herald

time3 hours ago

  • Miami Herald

Pepsi copies Coca-Cola to win back health-conscious consumers

Many Americans may not realize the importance of the gut microbiome, or the ecosystem of microbes that live in our intestines, and its impact on overall health. A 2023 Ipsos poll also revealed that many Americans have accepted to live with their digestive problems, with one in five saying they tried many things to resolve the issue, but haven't succeeded. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter About 18% of Americans confirm they have been diagnosed with hemorrhoids, and 15% say they have been diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). How is this possible? Food plays a significant role in our gut and overall health. However, it is not the only culprit for various illnesses, because poor nutrition is often associated with other less healthy behaviors. Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are leading sources of added sugars in the American diet, and frequent consumption is associated with weight gain, Type 2 diabetes, kidney diseases, obesity, gout, a type of arthritis and more. However, more frequent consumers of sugary drinks tend to be those who don't exercise regularly, eat fast food often, smoke, don't sleep enough, and do not consume enough fruit, reports the CDC. Over the last couple of years, healthier soda alternatives have grown in popularity, due to the newer generations' focus on healthier lifestyles and mindful eating. U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently started a major crackdown on various ingredients commonly found in food and beverages, with one of the goals being to eliminate synthetic dyes in food and drinks. Related: Scientists find massive anti-aging potential in magic mushrooms Kennedy Jr. also stressed that sodas are one of the biggest contributors to the poor health of many Americans. Under the White House's "Make America Healthy Again" initiative, pressure is mounting on soda giants to adapt their formulas. Just recently, it was announced that Coca-Cola might make a big change to its sodas- switching from high-fructose corn syrup to cane sugar. Earlier this year, Coca-Cola launched its own prebiotic soda under its juice brand Simply, and now its biggest rival, PepsiCo (PEP) , is making a similar move. More Retail: Target delights shoppers with savings event, 30% discountsUS government wants to make healthier eggs illegalPepsi issues stern message to employees after mass closures On July 21, the soda giant announced the launch of its Pepsi Prebiotic Cola with: 5 grams of cane sugar; Only 30 calories (a standard Pepsi serving contains about 150 calories);No artificial sweeteners; 3 grams of prebiotic fiber. Pepsi is launching prebiotic cola in two traditional flavors: Original Cola and Cherry Vanilla. Available in 12 oz. single cans for trial and 8-packs of 12 oz. cans, the new sodas will be available online this fall and at stores in early 2026. Pepsi Prebiotic Cola's launch comes a few months after the beverage titan announced the purchase of prebiotic soda brand Poppi for nearly $2 billion. Pepsi's move into a healthier beverages market was a way to win back customers. After all, according to a study by Harvard researchers, the number of young people who consumed at least one daily sugar-sweetened drink dropped to 61% from 80% between 2003 and 2016. Related: Target delights shoppers with savings event, 30% discounts Prebiotics are non-digestible, fermentable food ingredients that modify the composition or activity of gastrointestinal bacteria to benefit the host, according to the National Library of Medicine. Foods like cereals, breads, and snack foods have added prebiotics if you see on the food label some of the following terms: inulin, wheat dextrin, acacia gum, psyllium, polydextrose, GOS (galactooligosaccharides), FOS (fructooligosaccharides), and TOS (transgalactooligosaccharides). While prebiotic sodas can support your gut health, too much of it can cause gas, bloating, or diarrhea. Experts advise people who have gastrointestinal problems such as Crohn's or ulcerative colitis to avoid them. Samantha Nazareth, MD, board-certified gastroenterologist, told Woman's Health that prebiotic soda shouldn't replace plant-based foods like apples, garlic, artichokes, asparagus, and oats, which naturally contain gut-friendly fiber. The outlet consulted with experts to determine what health-conscious consumers should look for in prebiotic soda for the most benefits. They advised the following: Three grams of fiber per serving from ingredients like chicory root, inulin, and acacia fiberNo more than 10 grams of sugar Related: Veteran fund manager unveils eye-popping S&P 500 forecast The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store