Times: NHS plan to help millions stop using antidepressants and painkillers

I noticed that the UK college of psychiatrists tweeted about this, saying how every AD prescription must be a joint decision between physician and a patient who is well-informed of the evidence, risks and benefits of AD.

Now I'm not in the UK but medicine in Canada is largely the same. I was prescribed many, many antidepressants, antianxiolytics and other psychoactive drugs over the years. Only once by a psychiatrist. I was never once told any such thing. Not once. Not about side-effects. Or about their effectiveness. Or withdrawals. Or anything, really. Just the usual spiel about chemical imbalance, or something like that. Despite the common lie that the model was never really taken seriously. Which of course it was, and still is. We even moved from chemical imbalance to network imbalance. Something's out of balance, it's just not biological since it has to be psychosocial. Or something.

Of course people are free to research this themselves, to "do their own research" and bring their concerns to their physicians. Likely after having started. Only to be scolded not to read too much on the Internet. There is often strong pushback over anyone saying those things, which the professional associations somehow claim the patients should be warned about, but almost never are.

This is really a constant major issue in psychiatry: the huge difference between models and reality. Psychiatry makes sense in writing and in theory. Sometimes. In practice, though, it's too often reckless because by definition the patients' subjective experiences aren't trusted. Even though that's basically all they usually have to work with.
 
rvallee said:
Just the usual spiel about chemical imbalance
Click to expand...

I always thought that particular phrase was such a glaring lie, I couldn't understand how it lasted as long as it did? Does anybody, doctor or patient, still believe it?

If anyone was to use such a phrase with me now I would want to know which chemicals in my brain they actually measured, when they did it (the measuring) without telling me, and what the results were.
 
Antidepressant Manufacturers Claim Independent Evidence of Effectiveness But From NHS Talking Therapies A Deafening Silence

This evening at 8.0pm, Panorama on BBC 1, looks at the debacle of antidepressants, with a quarter of people on them for 5 years. But the antidepressant manufacturer’s protest that there is independent evidence of the effectiveness of their product. However NHS Talking Therapies has ducked under the radar: they make no claim to independent scrutiny, they are not subject to Care Quality Commission inspection and there is not a single publicly funded, independent study of their effectiveness. The cost to the taxpayer of NHS Talking Therapies is over a £1billion a year. My own study of 90 clients going through the Service was that only the tip of the iceberg recover Scott (2018) I brought this to the attention of the BBC some years ago, but instead they chose to listen to the power holders in NHS Talking Therapies predecessor IAPT.

Dr Mike Scott
Click to expand...
Antidepressant Manufacturers Claim Independent Evidence of Effectiveness But From NHS Talking Therapies A Deafening Silence - CBT Watch
 
Arnie Pye said:
I always thought that particular phrase was such a glaring lie, I couldn't understand how it lasted as long as it did? Does anybody, doctor or patient, still believe it?

If anyone was to use such a phrase with me now I would want to know which chemicals in my brain they actually measured, when they did it (the measuring) without telling me, and what the results were.
Click to expand...
Oh it never died. I recently saw an article about a new class of SSRIs. They're still very much in on the chemical imbalance, still desperately holding on to the serotonin thing. Depending on who asks, when you ask, who is in the room, and so on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom