I am 40-50 lbs over having a good figure and of those 10-15 are due to a month-long treatment with Zyprexa - treatment that was discontinued due to this weight gain. I am back on weight-neutral Geodon, just on a higher dose, and it works. The rest of the pounds is due to inactivity and overeating. So I do not really have an excuse in the form of "I am on medication", but that gain over a short period of time was pretty spectacular. No wonder I saw people who were wider at midsection than they were tall when I was an inpatient. I felt really sorry for them. And Zyprexa is such a benign drug, otherwise, and, my then doctor told me, many of her patients do NOT get fat on it, it is just a matter of bad luck (but statistical figures show more bad luck than good luck).

What exactly is happening? I do not know whether to believe the theory "calories in, calories out" - a science journalist Gary Taubes says he disproves it; I will read his books as soon as they are available at my library - he is popular. It seems that the deal with many psychiatric medications by itself disproves the theory of "calories in, calories out" - I cannot imagine that people on these medications get SO much more ravenous as to cause this drastic weight increase by "calories in" alone. Some, to be sure, but I was not eating non-stop on Zyprexa. Something else must be at play.

At the same time, I recently became afraid of turning into a diabetic, started swimming, started counting calories, and already lost 5 lbs this way. So "calories in, calories out" does work?

If some antipsychotics are better than others in this respect (I think that Geodon is the best and Zyprexa is the worst), why cannot scientists determine what it is that makes a drug weight-neutral and come up with an optimal drug? Like a modernized Haldol - why is it not possible?

Sorry this is not a very cogent post, but I am sure the questions are clear enough.