What
If the Drugs Don't Work?
by
Markie
Robson-Scott
The Independent
When my American
friend Bill, who'd been on SSRI antidepressants for 22 years (Prozac,
followed by Paxil, Lexapro, then Celexa), read a two-part article
by Dr Marcia Angell in The New York Review of Books recently
about the crisis in psychiatry and the inefficacy of antidepressants,
he stopped taking his meds (tapering off gradually, monitored by
his doctor). "The article brought on enough doubt to push me
over," he said. Since then, his moods have become more volatile
more anger, more emotion, such as crying at the end of the
last Harry Potter film (he's in his 50s). But he's got his libido
back after years of "muffled response" and that seems
a worthwhile trade-off.
Instead of
listening to Prozac, have we been listening to placebo all along?
Research repeatedly appears to show that: antidepressants are little
more than placebos, with very little therapeutic benefit but serious
side-effects (70 per cent of people on Celexa and Paxil report sexual
dysfunction, and in some, it carries on even when they stop taking
the pills). The theory of chemical imbalance as a cause of depression
is an unproven hypothesis; and doctors are prescribing the drugs
mainly because of the "juggernaut of pharmaceutical promotion",
as the US psychiatrist Dr Daniel Carlat calls it.
It's not surprising
there's a US media furore about 10 per cent of Americans
over the age of six take antidepressants. In the UK, prescriptions
for the drugs went up 43 per cent in the last four years to 23 million
a year.
Professor Irving
Kirsch, associate director of the programme in placebo studies at
Harvard Medical School and author of The
Emperor's New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth,
says the theory of chemical imbalance that there is not enough
serotonin, norepinephrine and/or dopamine in the brain synapses
of depressed people doesn't fit the data (lowering serotonin
levels in healthy patients has no impact on their moods). Chemical
imbalance is a myth, he says. It follows that the idea that "antidepressants
can cure depression chemically is simply wrong". His meta-analysis
of 38 clinical studies 40 per cent of which had been withheld
from publication because drug companies didn't like the results
involving more than 3,000 depressed patients, shows that
only 25 per cent of the benefit of antidepressant treatment was
due to the drugs and that 50 per cent was a placebo effect. "In
other words, the placebo effect was twice as large as the drug effect,"
though the placebo response was lower in the severely depressed.
This is not
quite as damning as it sounds: placebos are extraordinarily powerful
and can be "as strong as potent medications". Placebo
response is specific: placebo morphine eases pain, placebo antidepressants
relieve depression. It's a question of expectancy and conditioning:
if you expect to feel better, you will, even if you're getting negative
side effects, because side effects, Kirsch says, convince people
that they've been given a potent drug.
Psychotherapy
boosts the placebo effect and is "significantly more effective
than medication" for all levels of depression, he says. Antidepressants
should only be used "as a last resort and only for the most
severely depressed".
Of course,
not everyone agrees. Ian Anderson, Professor at psychiatry at the
University of Manchester, who is to debate whether "antidepressants
are useful in the treatment of depression" with Kirsch at a
conference in Turkey next month, thinks we're in danger of throwing
the baby out with the bathwater when we say antidepressants are
rubbish. Antidepressants are part of a doctor's toolbox, though
probably most useful for the most depressed; some people don't take
to talking therapies; it's not an either/or situation, he says.
Professor Allan
Young, chair of psychiatry at Imperial College London, agrees. "Depression
is such a huge category of illness there are multiple types,
and each type responds differently." Of course, the brain and
the body are inextricably linked, he says, and placebo effects are
greater in the less-severely ill.
Read
the rest of the article
October
26, 2011
Copyright
© 2011 The
Independent
|