Posted by Bob on May 8, 2002, at 23:07:16
In reply to Re: Placebo news story, posted by noa on May 8, 2002, at 17:55:18
I think Noa has a good point here: that article, like so many other news articles these days, was written quite sensationally. They imply in the beginning that the "hundreds of millions of prescriptions and tens of billions of dollars in sales" was all for naught because we could have used sugar pills instead. Anyone taking a cursory glance at the article and/or not having given thought to these issues would come away thinking that ADs were bunk and if people just try harder they'll be fine. If one reads the article carefully, there is a LOT of vague, or missing information about how any of the studies were structured. IMHO, you can't draw specific conclusions until you know this. Let's try 6 month double blind studies with suicidal people who have HDRS scores in the 30s. I'd like to see if the placebo rates are as high then. If they are, then I'll eat crow.
It is extremely unfortunate for the treatment of mental illness, I believe, because it is one more example of veiled patient blaming (although unintentional, as usual). The way it has been presented in the media is sensational and will sway people's opinions easily. Chronically severe depressives, and TRD individuals will not be happy with sugar pills in the long run. The only good point I think the article makes is that we know next to nothing about what is occurring in the brain when someone is treated for depression. That is the understatement of the century. I think another statement should have been made: Most people outside the medical community understand very little about how drug studies are run and how much they're guided by money, politics, and the FDA.
poster:Bob
thread:105430
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020503/msgs/105676.html