Therese Borchard over at Beyond Blue wrote about the disconcerting “either/or” artificial dichotomy that some researchers and doctors set up about treatments for mental conditions such as depression. Medications for depression are either evil and the root cause of all of society’s problems, or they are saviors and rescue people from a lifetime of suffering. Depression is either a problem with living and one’s life, or it’s a biological disease we simply don’t yet understand.
Psychiatrist James Gordon is the subject of the ire, because he’s promoting his new book over in a Newsweek interview suggesting that alternative treatment methods are the preferred treatment approach for mild to moderate (e.g., most people’s) depression. And that antidepressants should only used as a last resort — “There are better ways to do that than taking drugs, which have side effects and don’t address the underlying message that depression is bringing — that our lives are out of balance and significant change is necessary.”
Uh-huh. Yeah, right…
One would assume that before one suggests changing all of the best-evidence clinical guidelines for treatment of the most common mental illness, one might have a couple of meta-analyses or some large-scale clinical trials conducted with adults that show the effectiveness of the treatment program one is recommending.
Alas, Gordon’s research relies on a single published study on 139 war-ravaged teens, and another study “coming out soon.” And while I agree that many of the individual techniques might, individually, have research backing for specific areas, one might be a little more conservative in one’s opinion before suggesting medications are over-prescribed and everyone should just try his New and Improved treatment program. But you can see Gordon is more of a marketer than a researcher by this statement alone:
Individually, these techniques work at least as well as antidepressants for people with mild to moderate depression. Together they are likely to be far more effective.
Sorry, that’s not how research works. You can’t just throw together five of your favorite techniques and assume they will have some sort of magical power of multiplication to become ever more effective just by being combined.
Well, you can, of course, but you shouldn’t then make such pronouncements in national publications without actually having any relevant research data to back you up.
And what’s this misinformation still being regurgitated, and apparently, agreed with by a psychiatrist (who should know better)?
Newsweek: But people with depression do have imbalances in levels of neurotransmitters.
James Gordon: Some people do, I wouldn’t deny that. What I’m saying is that there are many ways to address those changes that do less harm and may be more productive in the long run because they give people the sense of control that comes from helping themselves.
Well, I would deny it only because science has already shown this theory to be incorrect and a useless simplification of brain processes. That Gordon doesn’t know this is telling.
But anyways, back to the point. There is no single method or single magical approach that is going to work for everyone. Cognitive behavioral therapy is not some cure-all panacea, and neither is Zoloft. And while Gordon’s approach may very well effective for some, it probably will not work for a significant portion of people. Why? Because no treatment in the history of depression treatments has ever found to be effective for everyone. None.
Depression is complicated and complex, just like the humans who experience it. It, like us, does not live in a world of black and white dichotomies. It is messy, it often has no reason, and it doesn’t always like to wake up in the morning. If not caused by some underlying biological condition, it definitely has a measurable effect on our brains. And what works for one person’s depression may have no effect on another’s. This is the nature of depression, like most mental illnesses, and has always been.
Dichotomies might be nice to sell a book or one’s new treatment approach, but it has little basis in reality — the data from the research and the front-line clinicians and people who experience these concerns.
We agree with Borchard — depression is very real and not only do drugs help many with depression, they have proven to be a lifeline for some. And while not an ideal treatment, they are one of the tools we have in our treatment arsenal and should not be demonized (or idealized).
Read the full entry: Don’t Get Stuck on “Unstuck”: Depression Is Real, and Drugs Help Me
9 comments
For me- the support you can find online is great, blogs, such as this one, and many forums you can find on the subject.
I don’t keep a blog myself, yet, but I read a lot of them.
My favorite one is
http://anxiousangst.blogspot.com/
I am shocked that a national publication of Newsweek’s stature would allow such blatant self-promotion without presenting the other side of the story as Dr.Grohol does here. This is the kind of press that prompts idiots like Tom Cruise to assert that if we were “strong” we wouldn’t need antidepressant medication, when we know that this isn’t the case.
Wendy Aron, author of Hide Seek: How I Laughed at Depression, Conquered My Fears and Found Happiness.
http://www.wendyaron.com
Really now. There is only one real treatment for depression. Remove as much of the patients money, or his insurance company proxy, as possible and then show them the door.
The only sure thing about depression treatment is that you will pay in advance or be denied treatment.
“Dichotomies might be nice to sell a book or one’s new treatment approach, but it has little basis in reality — the data from the research and the front-line clinicians and people who experience these concerns.
We agree with Borchard — depression is very real and not only do drugs help many with depression, they have proven to be a lifeline for some”
So, where is the data showing the effectivness of antidepressants? The statistics I have seen on the NIMH website show a 50% effectiveness for 50% of the symptoms. It is even less for complete remittance.
The Star D study showed a 33% effectiveness rate.
I am not exactly quoting Scientology sites.
And why is positive reality from people in psych meds taken as fact while negative reality is used to demonize people such as “they are playing a dangerous game.”?
Regarding the chemical imbalance theory, you might want to look at this site by Jeffrey Leo and Jonathan Lacosse in which they do a great job of refuting it in my opinion.:
http://chemicalimbalance.org/?p=6
By the way, I post as one who is tapering off of all psych meds due to horrific side effects. I am doing better than ever in spite of dealing with employment issues and the death of my mother.
Due to the spellbinding effects of these meds, I could have sworn they were helping me and so did my psychiatrist. It was only when I started tapering that I realized how wrong I was. They had literally destroyed my life as I didn’t care about anything. If that is your idea of effective treatment, then I say, “NO THANK YOU”.
Anyway, before you start condemning someone for not having studies behind what he is advocating, you need to look at your own theories first.
I take meds for depression, but not antidepressants, because I have nasty side effects to them. It took years to find a psychiatrist who diagnosed me with Bipolar Disorder as opposed to Multiple Personality Disorder. (Prozac is not good for me. Neither was the satanic ritual abuse witch hunt of the nineties.)
My oldest daughter cannot take antidepressants, either, although she was placed on an SSRI more than once–with manic results–before understanding finally caught up to our brains–and a medical professional finally caught up to her father.
This is enough for me to believe in the “individual treatment” theory: treat the individual, help the individual. Don’t destroy the individual with One-Size-Fits-All thinking. If someone does better with alternative treatments, great. If someone does well with Prozac, great. If someone gets better with a medication cocktail, great.
And, to the insurance companies and the doctors, if someone needs the more radical treatments–electronic stimulation of the brain, a drug that can relieve the suicidal situation in 24 hours, etc–let them try it.
I can honestly say that I have tried almost all types of antidepressents with little success. I also see a psychiatrists twice a month for the past two years. I am not sure if this is working either. Does anyone out there have some different ideas of dealing with depression and is this a life long thing we have to live with. At this stage I am very disappointed that I am going no where fast. Linda