Posted by zeugma on August 29, 2004, at 19:09:39
In reply to Re: permanent damages by antidepressants ?, posted by linkadge on August 29, 2004, at 18:47:00
> I agree, this type of literature is very irresponsable.
>
> THe reason for this is the following: the people who are going to be *most* susceptable to fully buying into breggin's claims are the people who are the most seriously depressed.
>
> Breggin is *trying* to adress the people who are using AD's for cosmetic reasons, but these are the people who most quickly shrug off the claims made by breggin. The people to whom this information is most detremental are the people who need the treatment the most.
>
> It was very stupid of him to write the book. Clearly he knew that jumping on the bandwagon of sensationalist antipharmacology literature during these times would be sure to cash him into a bestseller postition.
>
> Linkadge
Actually, Breggin opposes the use of all psychotropic medication, and his opposition antedates the widespread use of Prozac etc.I also think peter Kramer has done even more damage than Breggin, because breggin is obviously a quack, while Kramer is typical of the average psychiatrist in the U.S. Kramer talks about how when he would prescibe meds for his depressed patients, he had to listen to their complaints about being constipated, dry mouth, and so on, and of course the patients needed to be monitored for signs of suicidality because the pills were fatal in overdose. kramer was euphoric that he could dole out drugs that his patients didn't complain about, and their nonlethality made virtually every mental health professional in the U.S. complacent about handing out medication. The quality of care declined as SSRI prescriptions multiplied. Creating the perfect situation for Breggin to move in.
-z
poster:zeugma
thread:383758
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20040825/msgs/383818.html