The One Click Group http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/THEONECLICKPROTEST/

The One Click Group
Health Advocacy

RSS Feed Follow OneClickGroup on Twitter

NEW
Dr Iain Stephenson
Found Guilty of Vaccine
Research Fraud
The One Click Group

NEW
Mobilising ME/CFS Charities
To Smash Flawed
PACE Trial Results
Lara, Health Advocate

NEW
UK Public Health
In Dire Straits
Dr Dick van Steenis MBBS

Lies Damned Lies
Swine Flu
Statistics Exposed
By Lara

Stunning
Vaccination Graphs
The Awful Stats In Action
Raymond Obomsawin Ph.D

Issues In Immunization
Theory And Practice
Raymond Obomsawin Ph.D

UPDATED
March 2010

One Click
Freedom
Of Information
UK Police Harassment
In The Internet Era

Barbara Loe Fisher
Interview
NVIC Conference
Style, Gonads
Brass Ovaries
By Jane Bryant

New Journalism
Challenging
Status Quo
By Jane Bryant
NVIC Conference
USA

How The
Judicial Review
Of The CFS/ME
NICE Guidelines
Was Lost
Jane Bryant
The One Click Group

The BMJ
Vaccines Propaganda
Professor
David Salisbury
And
Trimedia
Public Relations

David Southall
"A Very
Dangerous Doctor"
Panorama swims
with sharks
Lisa Blakemore Brown

Dr David Salisbury
Ooops!
Never Mind Me,
I'm Basil Fawlty!

ONE CLICK RESPONSE
David Salisbury
Vaccine Litigation

The Politics
And Commerce
Of Autism
By Lisa Blakemore Brown
Psychologist

Poling
Vaccine/Autism Case
Mitochondrial Disfunction
ME/CFS Patients

The Consensus Report
Family Law Reform

Canadian Definition of ME-CFS

The Weird World of Wikipedia
By Martin J. Walker

Click here to email us with any thoughts or opinions you wish to share about the website.

 

News Archives 5261-5280
Number Title Post Date
5261 Doctors must accept they're no longer gods 23/01/2012 16:50:43
5262 The Shaky Science of Shaken Baby Syndrome 23/01/2012 16:53:30
5263 Thousands of women at risk from 'silent Thalidomide' 23/01/2012 16:54:55
5264 Philosophical Exemption Under Attack in Vermont 23/01/2012 16:57:58
5265 UK Swine flu drug policy criticised by Birmingham doctors 23/01/2012 16:59:46
5266 Children damaged by GSK Swine Flu vaccine demand compensation for permanent harm 23/01/2012 17:01:11
5267 Roche's Tamiflu scandal questions the entire process of systematic review 23/01/2012 17:03:51
5268 Dr Iain Stephenson found guilty of vaccine research fraud 23/01/2012 17:07:53
5269 Polio Vaccines Now The #1 Cause of Polio Paralysis 23/01/2012 17:12:24
5270 Atos shits in the dark tests 26/01/2012 15:21:50
5271 Non-Consenting Drug Trial Adults 26/01/2012 15:31:08
5272 Psychiatry’s Grand Confession - Serotonin Fraud 26/01/2012 15:33:28
5273 Wakefield sues BMJ over MMR articles 26/01/2012 15:37:15
5274 Assange takes chat-show job with Kremlin funded Russian TV 26/01/2012 15:39:02
5275 Lawsuit claims Harvey Whittemore embezzled millions from former business partners 30/01/2012 15:23:29
5276 Occupy London protestors and media assaulted by bailiffs, Police fail to act and uphold duty of care 30/01/2012 15:27:52
5277 Activists join together to fight ConDem attacks on the disabled 30/01/2012 15:31:58
5278 UK Government adviser failed to declare work for insurance giant Unum 30/01/2012 15:39:12
5279 Bent Britain lobbying official turned down reform meetings 30/01/2012 15:41:01
5280 Police arrest Murdoch tabloid staff, raid offices 30/01/2012 15:43:29

[Previous] [Next]

Psychiatry’s Grand Confession - Serotonin Fraud
Share |

Psychiatry’s Grand Confession

Posted on by Jonathan Leo, Ph.D. / Jeffrey Lacasse, Ph.D.

The psychiatry profession has finally come clean and confessed on a national media outlet that there is no evidence to support the Serotonin Theory of Depression. Today, on NPR’s Morning Edition there is a segment about the chemical imbalance theory, and virtually all the psychiatrists who are interviewed acknowledge that the there was never any evidence in support of the idea that low serotonin causes depression. But then, amazingly, they go on to say that it is perfectly fine to tell patients that serotonin imbalance causes depression even though they know this isn’t the case.

Several years ago in PLoS Medicine we wrote a long piece about the serotonin theory and the disconnect between what research psychiatrists say in professional journals and textbooks and what the advertisements say. While the advertisements presented the theory as scientific fact, the scientific sources clearly did not. Given the enormous marketing programs that pushed this theory combined with the media’s lack of skepticism, we were sympathetic to the general public who could hardly be faulted for thinking that theory had some foundation in fact. Following the publication of our piece a reporter contacted us and suggested that we were attacking a well accepted theory. We pointed out to the reporter that we weren’t attacking a sacred cow but that instead we were pointing out the mainstream psychiatry didn’t even accept this theory. We urged the reporter to contact the FDA, NIMH, APA, etc and ask them about the science behind the advertisements. He did, and as expected, an expert from the FDA explained that the theory was really just a metaphor. The problem is that patients who heard their physician explain the serotonin theory thought they were hearing real science. They weren’t told it was a metaphor and hence thought it was a fact. When a doctor talks about high cholesterol, diabetes, or hypothyroidism, they are talking about scientific measurement, not a metaphor. How is a patient with high cholesterol and depression who listens to their doctor’s explanation of their conditions supposed to know when the doctor has moved from science to metaphor?

Several months ago Ronald Pies published an interesting article in Psychiatric Times entitled, “Psychiatry’s New Brain-Mind and the Legend of the Chemical Imbalance.” Pies, just like the experts on NPR, acknowledges that the Chemical Imbalance theory is not true. However, according to Pies, it was the pharmaceutical companies who espoused the theory, and not well-informed, practicing clinicians, because the psychiatry community has known all along that the theory is not true.

But if the Psychiatry Community knew all along that the theory was not true, then why did they not clarify this issue for the general public? Shouldn’t they have pointed out to the general public and patients that what the pharmaceutical companies were saying about psychological stress was not true? Why did the professional societies not publicly set the record straight?

There are many angry comments on the NPR website. These comments are interesting, because apparently many patients who were told that depression is caused by a chemical imbalance never understood that were hearing a metaphor and not science. Since the chemical imbalance theory is often presented as a rationale for taking SSRIs, such patients now understandably feel lied to by their clinicians.

Perhaps the most interesting part about the NPR piece is that the reporter seems to not understand that the idea of telling a falsehood to patients because you think it is good for them is a serious violation of informed consent. Shouldn’t the reporter have asked the obvious questions, such as:

1) Do you feel it is acceptable to present a scientific theory as fact even though you know it is false?
2) Is it okay for psychiatrists to tell patients stories about their conditions that psychiatrists know are false?
3) Is there not an ethical issue when a psychiatrist informs their patient that they have a serotonin imbalance, when the medical textbooks on the shelf clearly say this is a falsified theory?

In general, we are fans of NPR, but hopefully the next news outlet that covers this topic will be more investigative in their approach.

UK Web Hosting by 3DPixel.net Thu, January 26th, 2012. 03:33 pm