Posted by zeugma on February 11, 2006, at 14:23:06
In reply to two other factors?, posted by pseudoname on February 11, 2006, at 13:36:48
cited in the article.
That study is now generally acknowledged to have used a dose of phenelzine that was inadequate (45 mg/day). Healy, in "The Antidepressant Era", cites this as the study which defined 'typical' depression as that which responds to TCA's, because MAOI's were 'shown' to be placebos. Hence the strange terminology imposed on the DSM in which 'atypical' depression is probably actually typical, if we take 'typical' to refer to commonest subtype. Now we have 'atypical' antipsychotics that appear to be typically applied to everything, including subtypes of bipolarity earlier generations of psychiatrists would doubtless have called anxiety disorders because they responded to benzodiazepines.
it's very easy to be impressed by studies, whether positive or negative. Too easy, I think.
-z
poster:zeugma
thread:608339
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060205/msgs/608668.html