“uncritical partisan narrative”

In a previous post I shared this paper:
The declarations of interest were given as follows:

I have written the following open letter to the lead author:

Sent: 22 May 2019
Subject: Re: Antidepressants, withdrawal, and addiction; where are we now?

Good morning Sameer,
I have read through this paper that you have co-authored. I am sorry to say that I consider it to be lacking in terms of considerations of science, philosophy, ethics and responsibility. I shall do a short critique on it and then return to other more helpful avenues.

Your co-authored paper concludes: “What would seem most appropriate for those concerned with policy is to consider balanced scientific evidence, and potential intervention, for those people who may experience longer-term withdrawal problems, rather than accepting uncritically a partisan narrative.” However the article used most of its word content to say that there is very limited reliable scientific evidence. Given that four of the co-authors have made their careers in this area, and been handsomely paid for doing so by industry, it would be just as reasonable to suggest that the “uncritical partisan narrative” may relate to the hidden influence of commercial interests.

Kind wishes

Further details relating to four of the authors can be accessed as below (please just click on the image):

Given in alphabetical order [please note it is impossible to determine how much these academics have received from industry over their careers but it is reasonable to conclude that the overall sum will be most significant]





One Reply to ““uncritical partisan narrative””

  1. Well done, Peter.
    Did you see that David Nutt was one of the talking heads on the BBC TV program last night concerning the depression of Alastair Campbell?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.