The drugs don't workFollow

Indeed.

....and don't think it's not readily obvious who of you out there are not getting it enough or at all.

This is easily solved by a change in legislation. Besides the lobbying, campaign donations, and market stranglehold that pharmaceutical companies throw at politicians, I see no reason why this can't be changed with relative ease.


Profiteering is definitely a part of the problem, but mandating private research isn't the solution. First, force drug companies to divulge all research on their products. It doesn't make any sense that they should be able to withhold data that may or may not prove effectiveness.

Second, instead of mandating private research, give firms incentive to do it on their own, much like the US is subsidizing ethanol production (although there are unexpected externalities involved with that). Why not divert some tax dollars to subsidize research into "poor" diseases? They could even take the tax money from capital gains and call it an "equity redistribution" or some such.

Edited, Feb 27th 2008 1:35pm by Demea

Indeed. It might happen soonish in the UK, the media are making a bit of a fuss over the whole antidepressant/research hiding hoopla. But I'm not holding my breath.



I agree incentives would be great, if you can make it work within the market its even better. It's all a bit complicated by the fact that these companies are multinational, and that "poor" diseases affect mostly people in the third world. Though none of this is hugely problemtic, and it would be totally doable if there was the political will for it. It's quite obvious that the main problem is that poor and sick third world people don't hire very good lobbysits.

Besides the lobbying, campaign donations, and market stranglehold that pharmaceutical companies throw at politicians, I see no reason why this can't be changed with relative ease.

Besides gravity, I see no reason why I can't fly around by flapping may arms.

Treatment of straight-up clinical depression, most often that not, can be rectified through therapy alone.

Bullsh*t. This has never, ever, been the case. People with "straight up clinical depression" don't exist. I can only assume you mean Major Depressive Disorder, which in most cases, cannot be "rectified" with talk therapy. Studies show talk therapy to have the same efficacy as placebo for treating it, while other therapies do better.

Stop offering your credentials as welfare case worker or whatever completely unrelated job you do as a substitute for having any idea what you're talking about.



Edited, Feb 27th 2008 4:36pm by Smasharoo

Full disclosure of private testing results should help quite a bit on its own, provided that they currently hide a significant amount of information. Once the research goes public, you can be sure that civil action groups and media entities will dive right in to expose all the dirty little secrets, which will force firms to become more accountable lest they lose (more) credibility with the public.

Wow, okay. Where to start.

First of all, I am employed in an outpatient mental health clinic, providing counseling and case management for individuals with both mental health and substance abuse problems. That's my job description; I do this 40+ hours a week. So, nice assumption about me, but it didn't work.

There are many kinds of depression, and any foray into the DSM or ICD manual will tell you this. In the case of true Major Depressive Disorder, of which there are several subsets, you're right, talk therapy will not necessarily be the only effective course of treatment if it is a recurrent issue for that person. However, that is rare compared to individuals who are depressed more due to life stressors or negative events. This is called Major Depressive Episodes, of which an individual usually must experience two or more of to qualify for Major Depressive Disorder. Just to state pure numbers, it is estimated (although oftentimes depression is misdiagnosed) that about 20% of women and 10% of men will suffer a major depressive episode. That's a fairly significant, but believable number. Now, compare that to ~5% of women and between ~2% of men who are diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder- quite a difference between those who suffer from an episode of depression, and those who have it as a recurrent problem.

Major Depressive Episode also occurs much more frequently than MDD, from my experience; and although medication can help, it's not the only course of treatment, as this is not necessarily a chronic condition that warrants it...oftentimes simply discussing the underlying issue causing the episode (loss of job, family troubles, it can be a multitude of things) can assist the individual in coming to terms with what was bothering them, and help them to facilitate change within themselves. There are individuals I and others have seen who are able to overcome this type of depression from therapy and group therapy alone- and it's not just "talking about stuff". Cognitive-Behavioral and Motivational Enhancement Therapy, two very effective models of which I ascribe to, places the client in the driver's seat to decide what they want to...it's a very effective and empowering method for many people to help take control of their lives. When a counselor helps a client to feel as if despite what happens to them, they are still in control of how they react, how they behave, and whether or not they wish to change their behaviors- it's very, very helpful. I have seen it happen over, and over and over again. Research has shown that this can be just as effective as medication, even for severely depressed (i.e. MDD recurrent individuals).

Yes, some people whose depression is more severe will need to have medication in conjunction, some will not. However, as an example: if a woman goes to her doctor stating she's depressed because her husband lost his job, they're fighting, or maybe he is now having an affair and she's feeling worthless...in other words meeting all of the diagnostic criteria for a Major Depressive Episode...no, the correct course of action isn't to have her fill a Zoloft prescription on the spot per se; perhaps the answer is she simply needs to sort out the issue with a third party, especially if she does not have a history of depression.

However, my point, which was entirely misconstrued, was that there's this perception that a Major Depressive Episode= full-blown Major Depressive Disorder, and this is wrong. Most of the time, it's people reacting naturally to negative events in their lives.

Wow, okay. Where to start.

First of all, I am employed in an outpatient mental health clinic, providing counseling and case management for individuals with both mental health and substance abuse problems. That's my job description; I do this 40+ hours a week. So, nice assumption about me, but it didn't work.


True, you're likely even less qualified than I'd have thought.




Research has shown that this can be just as effective as medication, even for severely depressed (i.e. MDD recurrent individuals).


Really? Cite some. I won't hold my breath.



Edited, Feb 27th 2008 6:23pm by Smasharoo

No.

You're fUcking about on an message board.

If you were at work you'd be fighting off Mentals and curing them with your management theory

I never thought that somebody would come to these forums that could out-gbaji gbaji.

Congrats?

And, just like his posts, I'll now start to automatically skip over yours and read the relevant parts in other peoples' replies.

Edited, Feb 27th 2008 5:37pm by Demea

Hmm, an MSW degree usually means you're fairly qualified, but okay.

To asses the efficacy of drug therapy vs talk therapy in treating depression? Are you stealing crack from your patients?

A MSW degree usually means you're fairly qualified to do ******* SOCIAL WORK, which is a fine and noble endeavor in and of itself, but which has absolutely nothing to do with psychopharmacology. You're probably qualified to comment on behavioural development or systems theory or family family counseling, or in your case certainly the effectiveness of various rehabilitation programs, but when it comes to the efficacy of drug vs talk therapy for the clinical treatment of depression you're about as qualified as an elephant trainer. Although in fairness, the elephant trainer likely wouldn't assume he could make unfounded proclamations based on his unrelated job experience.

Do you know how unqualified psychiatrists are to talk about talk therapy? Trust me, they receive very little training and have very little experience. That's why most people work on teams. Chances are she works on interdisciplinary teams where she is one of the players who make decisions about treatment efficacy. To be effective in her role, she has to be knowledgeable about making that distinction. You might not agree with her POV but to maintain that she has no ability to form an educated opinion on one, especially in comparison with the rest of the board, is ridiculous.



I do tend to read about 20% of most posts over a paragraph. lol. Sorry.

Edited, Feb 27th 2008 6:48pm by Annabella