Dr. Daniel Carlat’s book, “Unhinged: The Trouble With Psychiatry; A Doctor’s Revelation about a Profession in Crisis” is a gutsy introspection – the kind that may not make Carlat many friends in his profession but should win him the admiration of readers, consumers and patients.
I first became aware of Carlat when he published the tell-all “Dr. Drug Rep” piece in the New York Times about his experiences going on the road for a drug company talking about its antidepressant.
His Carlat Psychiatry Blog has become a clearinghouse of criticism of psychiatry with a goal of, as his tagline states, “promoting honesty in medical education.”
So Unhinged was the frosting. It’s well written – truly a hard-to-put-down book.
It ‘s painfully honest:
“I have no idea how Lexapro works to relieve depression, nor does any other psychiatrist…while Lexapro increases levels of serotonin in the nerve synapses, there is no direct evidence that depression is a disorder of reduced serotonin. The term ‘chemical imbalance’ is commonly used by laypeople as a shorthand explanation for mental illness. It is a convenient myth because it destigmatizes their condition – I the problem is a chemical imbalance, it is not their fault. Psychiatrists go along with this shorthand, because it gives us something to say when patients ask us questions about pathophysiology, After all, no doctor wants to admit ignorance about the very problems he or she is trained to manage.”
It’s educational:
“Because diagnosis in psychiatry is more art than science, the field is vulnerable to ‘disease mongering,’ the expansion of disease definitions in order to pump the market for medication treatment.
…
…newer drugs for schizophrenia, depression and bipolar disorder are generally no more effective than the older drugs they have largely replaced.”
Its insights are revealing:
Carlat asks, “How did you decide, for example, on five criteria as being your minimum threshold for depression?”
Dr.Robert Spitzer, one-time editor of the Diagnostic & Statistical Manual – the “bible of psychiatry” answers: “Because four just seemed like not enough. And six seemed like too much.”
If I go on much longer, I’ll excerpt the entire book. Read it yourself. And/or listen to Carlat on a recent NPR Fresh Air.
Comments (4)
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Ken Leebow
July 20, 2010 at 1:36 pmThanks for this information – very enlightening. Another sad story behind the world of meds was recently discussed on NPR – How a bone disease grew to fit the prescription: http://bit.ly/cqgOdX
These are great lessons on buyer beware.
Thanks,
Ken Leebow
Paul Scott
July 21, 2010 at 10:54 amMaybe his book will be the catalyst that causes NPR to abandon the hostile, mocking approach towards the efficacy problems with SSRI’s and the flawed Chemical Imbalance position that it showed in the discredited Infinite Mind program.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like