For years, stopping antidepressants was considered a relatively minor medical event—just a temporary adjustment phase. Official guidelines, particularly in the UK and the US, once described withdrawal symptoms as “brief and mild.” But now, emerging research is painting a very different picture—one that could affect millions of long-term users.

Recent findings suggest that withdrawing from antidepressants, especially after prolonged use, can trigger severe and long-lasting symptoms, sometimes lasting months or even years. Despite mounting evidence, some recent reviews—funded in part by pharmaceutical ties—continue to rely on outdated, short-term studies that don’t reflect the real-world experiences of long-term patients.

The modern class of antidepressants—SSRIs and SNRIs—were introduced in the 1980s and ’90s. When regulatory guidelines were first drafted, they leaned heavily on industry-funded clinical trials, where participants had taken the medications for only 8 to 12 weeks.

Because withdrawal symptoms in those short-term trials were limited and often transient, major healthcare bodies like NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the UK) assumed the same would hold true for all patients.

That assumption, however, ignored the experiences of millions of people who were on antidepressants for much longer periods.

A comprehensive new study of NHS patients in the UK has shed light on the scale and severity of antidepressant withdrawal. The findings reveal that patients who had been on antidepressants for more than two years were ten times more likely to experience withdrawal symptoms compared to those who had taken the medication for less than six months. Moreover, the likelihood of experiencing severe symptoms increased fivefold in long-term users. Perhaps most strikingly, symptoms that lasted for three months or more were found to be 18 times more common among those who had used antidepressants for extended periods.

In contrast, those who took antidepressants for six months or less mostly experienced mild and short-lived symptoms. Around 75% reported mild or no withdrawal, and only one in four had difficulty stopping but for long-term users, it’s a different story altogether. Two-thirds reported moderate to severe withdrawal symptoms, and nearly a third had symptoms that persisted for over three months.

In some cases, withdrawal effects were so debilitating that patients sought emergency care.

Against this backdrop, a newly published review in JAMA Psychiatry is drawing criticism. The review—which includes authors with known financial ties to pharmaceutical companies—relied on 11 short-term studies, most involving people who took antidepressants for 8 to 12 weeks. Only one study included participants on the medication for more than six months.

Not surprisingly, the review concluded that withdrawal symptoms from antidepressants are not clinically significant. It even went so far as to suggest the symptoms might be caused by the “nocebo effect”—the idea that negative expectations can create physical symptoms.

But experts argue that this reasoning is flawed and potentially harmful. The review failed to account for long-term users, excluded several studies with high withdrawal rates, and assumed that common symptoms like dizziness or fatigue are indistinguishable from genuine withdrawal effects.

Another glaring issue? The authors treated withdrawal symptoms reported by people stopping a placebo as equivalent to those reported by people stopping real antidepressants—despite clear evidence that the intensity, duration, and impact of symptoms differ significantly between the two. According to recent investigations:

• In England, 2 million people have been taking antidepressants for over five years.
• In the United States, that number is at least 25 million.

That’s tens of millions of people whose withdrawal experiences are underrepresented in medical literature and underserved by health systems.

To use an analogy, relying on eight-week antidepressant studies to predict withdrawal is like testing car safety at 5 km/h, when most people drive at 60 km/h. It simply doesn’t capture the full risk.

Is Antidepressant Withdrawal A Real Thing?

Yes, antidepressant withdrawal is real—especially if you stop the medication abruptly after taking it for more than four to six weeks. These symptoms, also known as antidepressant discontinuation syndrome, can last for several weeks and vary depending on the type of antidepressant.

Importantly, experiencing withdrawal doesn’t mean you’re addicted. Addiction involves compulsive use, cravings, and harmful consequences—none of which apply to antidepressants.

To avoid uncomfortable withdrawal effects, always consult your doctor before stopping. Most healthcare providers recommend gradually tapering the dose over weeks or months to help your body adjust. In some cases, a temporary switch to another medication might be advised to ease the transition.

If you're switching to a new antidepressant, your doctor may overlap medications to prevent withdrawal symptoms.

Since withdrawal can mimic a relapse of depression, it's essential to stay in close contact with your healthcare provider. If symptoms of depression return, your doctor may suggest restarting treatment or exploring alternative therapies.

Always follow a medical plan when discontinuing antidepressants—never stop them on your own.

What Withdrawal Feels Like?

Withdrawal symptoms can vary, but often include:

• Dizziness or “brain zaps”
• Nausea
• Headaches
• Anxiety and panic
• Mood swings
• Insomnia
• Irritability
• Sensory disturbances (like sensitivity to light or sound)

For some, these symptoms are manageable. But for others—especially those stopping medication after years of use—they can be overwhelming and life-altering.

Withdrawal from antidepressants is real, and it’s often far more difficult than current medical literature suggests—especially for long-term users. Reviews that lean on short-term, pharmaceutical-funded data do little to help the millions of people struggling silently.

Mental health treatment should never be a one-way street. People deserve a clear roadmap for both starting and stopping antidepressants safely, compassionately, and with evidence-based support.

Breast cancer treatment has evolved significantly over the past few decades, moving from radical removal approaches to more personalized and tissue-preserving techniques. Today, surgeons no longer view breast conservation surgery (BCS) and mastectomy as competing options, but as equally effective strategies chosen based on individual patient needs.

With the growing availability of reconstructive surgery in Kolkata, patients now also have better cosmetic and psychological outcomes regardless of the surgical path they choose.

Understanding The Two Surgical Options

When faced with a breast cancer diagnosis, understanding the available surgical options is crucial for making an informed decision. Each approach is designed to effectively treat the disease while considering the patient’s long-term health, comfort, and quality of life.

What Is Breast Conservation Surgery (BCS)?

Breast conservation surgery, or lumpectomy or partial mastectomy, is a procedure that involves the removal of the tumor and a small amount of surrounding healthy tissue while preserving most of the breast.

The main objective is to remove cancer without altering the natural shape and appearance of the breast. Radiation therapy is usually administered after surgery to kill any remaining cancer cells and minimize the chances of recurrence.

What Is A Mastectomy?

Mastectomy is the removal of the whole breast tissue, and in other cases, the lymph nodes and skin around the breast. It can be done on either breast or both breasts based on the type of cancer and risk factors.

After a mastectomy, patients can choose to have breast reconstruction with the help of modern surgical procedures, such as those provided in reconstructive surgery in Kolkata, which can help to restore the shape and symmetry of the breast.

Major Differences Between BCS And Mastectomy

The basic distinction is the degree of tissue excision. BCS leaves the majority of the breast, but a mastectomy takes away all of it.

Notably, several studies indicate that both methods have equal chances of survival in the long term in early-stage breast cancer.

Eligibility Criteria: Who Can Opt For What?

Not every patient is suited for the same surgical approach, as the choice largely depends on individual clinical factors. Tumor size, stage, location, and overall health all play a crucial role in determining eligibility. Understanding who can opt for which procedure helps ensure both effective treatment and optimal long-term outcomes.

Candidates for Breast Conservation Surgery

BCS is usually prescribed to patients with:

• Stage I or II breast cancer
• Tumors smaller than 5 cm
• One tumor in one area
• No radiation therapy contraindications
• Some cases do not have high-risk genetic mutations like BRCA

It might not apply to patients who have more than one tumor in other parts of the breast or those with advanced disease.

Candidates for Mastectomy

Mastectomy may be suggested when:

• The tumor is huge in comparison with the size of the breast
• It has several tumors in various quadrants
• Cancer is metastatic (Stage III or IV)
• The genetic risk of recurrence is high in the patient
• Radiation therapy is not an option or choice

Moreover, other patients might opt to undergo mastectomy to have a sense of security or to alleviate the fear of recurrence.

Advancements In Breast Surgery

The current surgical advances have greatly enhanced the results, particularly in patients who want to preserve their breasts.

Oncoplastic Surgery

Among the most remarkable developments is the oncoplastic breast surgery that involves the use of both cancer resection and plastic surgery. This enables the surgeons to excise bigger tumors without altering the shape and symmetry of the breast.

This has increased the eligibility of BCS so that more women can avoid mastectomy and still have safe control of cancer.

Improved Imaging and Targeting

Modern imaging techniques have assisted surgeons in accurately identifying tumors so that they can be fully removed without damaging normal tissue. This enhances cosmetic outcomes as well as oncological safety.

Advanced Reconstruction Methods

The emergence of reconstructive surgery in Kolkata has given patients who have undergone mastectomy the opportunity to have an immediate or delayed reconstruction with the help of implants or autologous tissue.

Reconstruction has been brought to improve psychological well-being, body image, and quality of life.

Influencing Factors of Surgical Decision-Making

The decision to use BCS or mastectomy is not only a medical choice, but a very personal one, which depends on several factors:

1. Cancer Stage and Tumor Characteristics

The main determinants include tumor size, location, and spread. BCS is more appropriate in early-stage cancers, whereas mastectomy is usually necessary in advanced cases.

2. Survival and Recurrence Outcomes

It has always been demonstrated that the survival rates are the same with BCS (including radiation) and mastectomy in the case of early-stage cancers. Nevertheless, BCS can be slightly more likely to recur locally, which can be treated.

3. Patient Preference

A major role is played by emotional and psychological factors. There are those patients who want to keep their breasts, and others opt to undergo a mastectomy to have peace of mind. Studies show fear of recurrence is a major driver for choosing mastectomy.

4. Access to Radiation Therapy

Since BCS requires post-operative radiation, access to treatment facilities can influence the decision. Patients without easy access may opt for a mastectomy.

5. Cosmetic and Quality-of-Life Concerns

BCS tends to provide superior cosmetic results and satisfaction. Nevertheless, the modern methods of reconstruction have also helped to enhance the results of mastectomy patients considerably.

What Do Surgeons Recommend Today?

Modern breast surgeons support a multidisciplinary patient-centered approach. Instead of prescribing a single solution, they consider:

• Clinical (tumor size, stage, genetics)
• Access to care and patient lifestyle
• Motivational preparedness and individual interests

Surgeons are increasingly preferring breast conservation surgery in most of the early-stage cases because of its good results and quality-of-life advantages. Nevertheless, mastectomy is necessary in more complicated or risky cases.

Conclusion

The debate between breast conservation surgery and mastectomy is no longer about which is superior, but about which is most appropriate for the individual patient. Oncoplastic techniques and reconstructive surgery in Kolkata have advanced, and patients now have a choice of safer, more personalized, and cosmetically satisfying options.

Heart failure has quietly emerged as one of India’s most serious and underestimated health challenges, driven by a rise in hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and delayed diagnosis of heart disease.

Due to a shortage of donor organs and a long waiting period before receiving the right treatment, end-stage heart failure patients in India faced a lot of difficulties a few years ago.

Today, advancements in heart transplant techniques are changing the situation from what was once an untreatable condition to a second chance at life.

Data from the National Organ and Tissue Transplant Organization (NOTTO) shows a significant year-on-year rise in heart transplants, with 253 transplants done in 2024, showcasing improved organ donation awareness, better coordination between hospitals, and stronger transplant networks.

What was once considered the only option is now emerging as a life-saving solution, offering patients not just a second chance but a return to a more meaningful and active life.

Why Are Heart Transplants Needed?

A heart transplant offers hope and gives a second life to patients whose hearts no longer support the body even after the best available medical aid.

Although it is never performed instantly, it becomes necessary whenever conditions of the heart result in end-stage heart failure, where the pumping function of the heart is compromised.

Also read: Harish Rana’s Family Donated His Heart Valves And Corneas After His Death From Passive Euthanasia

When medications and modern technologies cannot supply an adequate amount of blood and oxygen to the organs, patients experience extreme breathlessness, fluid buildup, fatigue, and repeated hospitalizations, making even simple activities like walking, eating, or lying flat exhausting.

As the flow of blood continues to deteriorate, failure is also expected in other vital organs such as the kidneys and liver. It is at this point that the transplantation of the donor heart is considered the only treatment option to ensure that the blood flow is normalized.

How Heart Transplantation Transforms Life?

Heart transplant is not just a surgical replacement of a failing organ, but a complete life restoration for patients with end-stage heart failure.

Its benefits include:

• Normalizes Heart Functioning: A healthy donor heart can immediately restore normal and effective blood flow. This will reduce weakness and fatigue that makes carrying out everyday tasks rather difficult.
• Enhances Survival Rates: Patients diagnosed with end-stage heart failure can only experience the best post-transplant survival outcomes when they undergo the transplant procedure as compared to other medical treatments.
• Enhances Quality of Life: The patients are able to attain independence once again as they are able to walk, sleep, travel, and socialize with their families and friends.
• Prevents Frequent Hospitalization: The successful transplant procedure prevents constant hospitalization, especially in cases with deteriorating heart failure, infections, and organ dysfunction.
• Protects Other Vital Organs: By restoring adequate blood flow, heart transplantation helps reverse damage to the kidneys, liver, and lungs caused by prolonged heart failure
• Permits Return to Normal Roles and Responsibilities: Patients regain their ability to work, take care of others, and carry out their daily responsibilities, which helps their emotional well-being.

Scottish Olympic legend Liz McColgan has warned athletes to wear sun protection during their training hours to protect their skin from “lasting consequences”.

Liz McColgan shared the health warning to athletes after undergoing surgery to remove lesions on her face.

The Olympic silver medalist from Dundee shared post-surgery photographs on the social media platform Instagram and lamented that, as a young runner, she never focused on wearing sun protection.

Avoiding sun cream because she felt it made her "sweat more" was her “ignorance”, said the 61-year-old former athlete.

“As a young athlete, I trained and raced in all weathers. Sun protection was never something I gave much thought to. In fact, I avoided it. I didn’t like the feeling of creams on my skin - I thought they made me sweat more, so I convinced myself I was better off without them. Looking back, that was ignorance,” Liz McColgan said.

“Recently, I had to undergo surgery to remove two lesions on my face. It was a stark reminder that the choices we make early on - especially the ones we dismiss as unimportant - can have lasting consequences,” she added.

Liz McColgan noted that athletes keep all their focus on "performance - mileage, sessions, recovery, nutrition”, but simple things like protecting their skin are often ignored.

“Yet it’s just as much a part of our overall health and wellbeing as any training session,” she said.

Sharing the health message to both young and old athletes, McColgan said, “Take sun protection seriously. Whether you’re training, racing, or even just spending time outdoors, protecting your skin matters.”

McColgan won a silver medal in the same event at the 1988 Olympic Games in Seoul. In 1991, she went on to win the 10,000m World Championships title in Tokyo.

Also read:5 Simple Do's And Don'ts For Healthy Skin

Why Sunscreen Is Essential

Using sunscreen protects the skin from harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation, which causes

• skin cancer,
• premature aging,
• painful sunburns.

Should Sunscreen Be Used Indoors Too?

Sunscreen is meant to be part of a daily skincare routine. But most people reach for sunscreen when heading to the beach or stepping out for a long day in the sun.

According to dermatologists, sunlight can still reach you indoors.

Dr Khushboo Jha, Chief Dermatologist Consultant at Metro Hospital, explains that sunlight entering through windows can still affect the skin.

“While standard window glass blocks most UVB rays, which cause sunburn, UVA rays can still pass through. These rays penetrate deeper into the skin and are linked to long-term concerns such as premature aging, uneven pigmentation, and loss of skin elasticity,” she said.

These UVA rays are often overlooked because they do not cause immediate redness or burning like UVB rays. However, over time, they can lead to visible signs of skin aging and pigmentation.

Also read: Why Should You Must Apply Sunscreen Inside A Plane?

A Practical Approach To Daily Skincare

Dermatologists suggest viewing sunscreen as a preventive skincare habit rather than a rigid rule.

Dr Jha recommends incorporating sunscreen into your morning routine, particularly if your day includes stepping outdoors or spending time in naturally lit environments.

In simple terms, if daylight reaches your workspace or you plan to go outside later in the day, applying sunscreen in the morning is a small step that can help protect your skin over time.