‘The rules of science’

How many of us, like Dr Jauhar, are today guided by “the rules of science”?

This short film is based on an edit of this interview and debate, aired on ‘All in the Mind’, Radio 4, on Tuesday 27 November 2018. The other participant was Professor John Read:

Psychiatrists of my generation were all “educated” about the “chemical imbalance theory” of depression. This was the universal message sold through the pharma-sponsored “Defeat Depression Campaign”. This was presented as a “rule of science” and we were taught that it applied to all!

Today, Dr Jauhar is rightly arguing that Good Medical Practice should be about the individual, and not based on “ideology”.

The most obvious question to ask is why the profession of Psychiatry has NOT looked at prescribing in this individualised way? The opportunity has been there for many decades now.

Today, in Scotland, almost 1 in 5 of our population are taking an antidepressant, often long-term or indefinitely. Yet this long term prescribing has a very poor evidence base.

Meantime, the paid opinion leaders who control the narrative, are currently spending academic and clinical time, looking for novel psychiatric drugs including antidepressants.

Dr Jauhar is a Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London (KCL). This College is one of several UK institutions that offer “strategic partnerships with industry” and provides a research environment for paid opinion leaders. I called this post “the rules of science” as Dr Jauhar used this term in this interview. This term has also been used in criticism of the methodology used by those studying the issue of antidepressant withdrawal. It is enormously disappointing that influential institutions such as KCL appear to prioritise research into new psychiatric drugs at the expense of any meaningful study of the potential for adverse effects of existing medications. Perhaps this is an example of another “rule of science” namely that research agendas are led by industry?

One Reply to “‘The rules of science’”

  1. If you can’t extrapolate ‘those numbers’ to the general population (according to Sameer Jauhar) then what number can you extrapolate as a true percentage of those who will have a severe withdrawal reaction? Even if it’s 1%, or .5% – that’s a huge number of people when millions world-wide are on these drugs. Therefore, it’s likely that a lot of the ‘general population’ worldwide are going to have severe withdrawals! If it’s 1% of 10 million – that’s 100,000 people! How many people suffering severe withdrawals globally are enough to make Sameer more concerned with their harrowing plight than he is about critiquing the studies that highlight the numbers of their plight?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s