>>>"It's insane to me that a group of educated and seemingly intelligent people seem to think they understand more about drug safety and prescribing than the FDA, researchers and physicians."
I'm currently on a psychiatrist prescribed drug which is illegal in Japan, which means I have to discontinue it before an upcoming trip. This is not a new drug, it's a generic.
So is it "insane that a group of educated and seemingly intelligent doctors" in the U.S. are prescribing this drug or "insane that a group of educated and seemingly intelligent doctors" at the Japanese equivilent to the FDA are not authorizing this drug?
I mean, it can't possibly be the case that neither group knows what it's doing, and that our scientific understanding of the brain is primitive, correct? One group has to be the insane one, right?
I think there’s a meaningful difference there. A disagreement between two highly qualified groups of doctors seems valid. A disagreement between a group of highly qualified doctors and someone who did some research on the internet does not.
"A disagreement between two highly qualified groups of doctors seems valid."
Well... if we're talking psychiatrists, they choose the thing they wanted to be highly qualified in. So, any potential "expert" that would disagree with their research methods was selected out so as to not become an expert in the first place.
I guess if I have a point it's that I don't think shouting "trust the science" or "trust the experts" and beating one's chest is contributing much to the conversation.
What's insane is that seemingly intelligent people with zero medical training or research experience somehow think they have the capability to determine drug safety or whether a disease exists and merits treatment with pharmacotherapy.
> So, any potential "expert" that would disagree with them was selected out so as to not become an expert in the first place.
Anyone with some form of training or practical experience in an academic biomedical field (clinical or research) and has knowledge of how to synthesize and analyze evidence in order to make logical arguments may be considered a relevant expert, this is a much larger group than psychiatrists and is how FDA committees are constructed.
Most notably this includes (and is not limited to) other physicians and providers, pharmacologists, pathologists, physiologists and epidemiologists.
> I guess if I have a point it's that I don't think shouting "trust the science" or "trust the experts" and beating one's chest is contributing much to the conversation.
One should absolutely "trust the experts" when it comes to determining safety of a therapeutic or definition of a disease. These are determined by scientific processes and debate based on evidence and not philosophical thoughts and feelings.
Given how complex modern life is one has to defer to experts and regulators on many things beyond medicine. Some other examples: motor vehicles, aviation, building codes, financial institutions and encryption.
> I'd also say that the more I've learned about psychiatry (including as a customer) the lower the opinion I have of it.
The limitations in psychiatric medicine and research are widely acknowledged and not a novel insight that the FDA and medical community are ignorant of as many commenters here seem to believe.
>The limitations in psychiatric medicine and research are widely acknowledged and not a novel insight that the FDA and medical community are ignorant of as many commenters here seem to believe.
One might expect someone who acknowledges the limits of psychiatry wouldn't be chest beating so aggressively about the greatness of the scientific process.
One might also expect a person concerned with mental health issues wouldn't throw around the term "insane" so casually.
>These are determined by scientific processes and debate based on evidence and not philosophical thoughts and feelings.
Who needs philosophy? Just have faith, am I right? That's what science is all about. What do we mean by science? Don't ask that kind of philosophical question. Just have faith.
I'm currently on a psychiatrist prescribed drug which is illegal in Japan, which means I have to discontinue it before an upcoming trip. This is not a new drug, it's a generic.
So is it "insane that a group of educated and seemingly intelligent doctors" in the U.S. are prescribing this drug or "insane that a group of educated and seemingly intelligent doctors" at the Japanese equivilent to the FDA are not authorizing this drug?
I mean, it can't possibly be the case that neither group knows what it's doing, and that our scientific understanding of the brain is primitive, correct? One group has to be the insane one, right?