Coincidence a fine thing

February, 8, 2012 | 4 Comments

Comments

  1. A few additional points: patients who are suicidal before treatment are generally excluded from anti-depressant drug trials, so emerging suicidality in a an RTC might be somewhat more likely to indicate a drug effect than a reflection of the underlying pathology. What that means for the data, one can only guess. Second, the Ham D and the Beck are in my opinion worthless measures for a study, because they don’t address the level of persistance and pervasiveness of the depressive symptoms. Without follow-up questions, there is no way to know if the patient really understands what the question is trying to get at. Not to mention that with contract research organizations there are financial incentives for both the doctor and the patient to exaggerate initial symptomatology, meaning you’re getting a garbage in – garbage out phenomenon.

  2. Significant i and ii by 1Boring Old Man provide another great analysis of the problems with Dr Gibbons’ methods and conclusions. This is significant all right; the research of people like Dr Gibbons is how doctors all over America remain complacent about misleading parents about the safety and value of certain drugs. I wish I had access to these insights in time to save my son, who committed suicide because of a drug he would have been much better off without. I had questioned his doctor and was told things that I now know were completely wrong. The challenge is how to get parents tuned in to these messages before disaster strikes.

Leave a Reply