My psychologist tells me that in his profession there is a significant gulf emerging between the ones who feel the prescribing is justified, and the ones (like him) with significant concerns:
1. they prescribe both boosters, and inhibitors, to treat the same symptoms. This suggests the aetiology of disease here, is not well defined by a single behaviour because the same symptom (depression, anxiety) is responsive in some people to suppressing of a chemical imbalance, and in others to boosting it.
2. the drugs were tested inadequately across race, age, weight, sex.
3. the drugs appear to be best applied for as brief time as possible but are routinely being prescribed for extended periods, and demand de-habituation and great care with withdrawal
4. almost all successful uses of the drugs are accompanied by CBT and like processes.
1. they prescribe both boosters, and inhibitors, to treat the same symptoms. This suggests the aetiology of disease here, is not well defined by a single behaviour because the same symptom (depression, anxiety) is responsive in some people to suppressing of a chemical imbalance, and in others to boosting it.
2. the drugs were tested inadequately across race, age, weight, sex.
3. the drugs appear to be best applied for as brief time as possible but are routinely being prescribed for extended periods, and demand de-habituation and great care with withdrawal
4. almost all successful uses of the drugs are accompanied by CBT and like processes.