Skip to main content

The Environmental Trade-offs of Increased Antidepressant Use

     I came across an interesting sentiment the other day. In response to the generational expression  “kids have it so easy nowadays” someone replied “that’s the point”. The point of progressing is to make life easier for the next generation. While today’s kids don’t have to walk uphill both ways to get to school, they face their own unique obstacles with the constant pressures from social media and threat of school shootings. The 2021 State Of Mental Health In America survey reports that youth depression is worsening. Statistics show that this disproportionately affects youths who identify as more than one race. However, some statistical growth can be attributed to an increase in diagnoses as the stigma of mental health has changed and more people seek treatment. Along with better access to therapy, access to a variety of antidepressants has increased as well. The CDC reports that from 1999 to 2014 antidepressant use has increased by almost 65% with one in eight Americans over 12 haven taken antidepressants between 2011 and 2014. While this can be considered an improvement in mental health treatment in response to increased rates of depression, ecotoxicologists are becoming aware of the negative environmental effects attributed to an increase in antidepressant use. 

Scientific American reports that only half of pharmaceuticals are removed during the wastewater treatment process. Wastewater facilities that receive industrial waste from pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities can have 10 to 10,000 times higher concentrations than those that don’t. NHS data suggests an enormous increase in prescribed antidepressants from 36 million in 2008 to 70.9 million prescriptions in 2018.  

There are 7 classes of antidepressants that use a similar mode of action: increasing neurotransmission of serotonin, norepinephrine and/or dopamine by blocking reuptake pumps. The most commonly prescribed antidepressants fall into the category of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI’s) including Prozac (Fluoxetine), Lexapro (Escitalopram) and Celexa (Citalopram).

The role antidepressants play in regulating hormone uptake has led some scientists to classify them as endocrine disruptors in non-target organisms. For some crustaceans, serotonin and other monoamines can play a role in color change as well as behavior: two essential functions used by juvenile shore crabs, Carcinus maenas, to escape predators. Crabs that were exposed to sub-lethal doses of antidepressants showed a lower capacity to respond to darker backgrounds as well as increased locomotion. Behavioral changes not only affect the individual but can also be detrimental at the population level and even result in trophic cascades. The wide range of roles that monoamines play in different organisms allows antidepressants to disrupt endocrine function in a variety of ways, making outcomes of contamination harder to predict. Complicating matters, organisms are rarely exposed to one type of medication let alone one type of contaminant. Combinations of pharmaceuticals as well as other contaminants can have unknown effects on behavior in a wide range of species. A combination of low doses of the antidepressant Fluoxetine and the fungicide Prochloraz were shown to alter feeding and swimming velocity in the freshwater shredder, Gammarus pulex

Behavioral changes in non-target species as a result of antidepressant medication exposure show the tradeoffs of using antidepressants to treat the rising rates of depression. The wide range of functions monoamines can play in different species makes it hard to predict responses to exposure and further trophic cascade effects. It is clear that pharmaceuticals will continue to play a role in shifting populations, dynamics and food sources until we are able to more efficiently remove pharmaceuticals in the environment.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Wasp, a Caterpillar, and a Changing Climate

       Host-parasitoid interactions conjure up rather graphic images of a hoard of small wasps boring through the soft tissue of an unassuming caterpillar. That poor caterpillar. Since I first became aware of this gory dynamic relationship, I always sided with the caterpillar. However, my new-found enthrallment with beneficial insect performing biological control has fostered a new perspective.  The host-parasitoid relationship between the caterpillar and wasp maintains ecological balance. Now, we see climate change can completely throw this delicate system out of whack.      In a recent 2021 paper, Moore et al explore the impacts of fluctuating high temperatures on the development of both the lepidopteran larval host Manduca sexta and the parasitoid wasp Cotesia congregata . A previous study with this same host-parasitoid system had found that parasitoids had reduce survival while hosts underwent accelerated growth under constant elevated temper...

A discussion of compensatory growth and how it could play a role in captive rearing strategies

One aspect of plasticity that interests me is the idea of compensatory growth (CG). CG is when limitation in resources restricts something like a tadpole from growing at an early stage, but then later, a release in that restriction results in an accelerated growth rate above the average in a population. Observationally, this may just look like less fit tadpoles. Bigger is always better, right?   Maybe not. Consider an extreme example, where a large spider has caught two types of prey on its web, a fruit fly, and a housefly. Now suppose the spider can only pick one prey (perhaps they're only loosely caught on the web and there's a short window of opportunity). Which will the large spider most likely go for? It will probably choose the larger housefly.  Similarly, think of two tadpoles. This time they're the same species, but one is larger than the other. A giant ambushing Anax larva also lives in this pond and it's hungry. But it will give away its position when it attac...