Industry

Researchers from the Universities of Stanford and Edinburgh found, in a comparison of 1,174 primary outcomes from 82 meta-anlyses of biological and behavioral research,...

The Today Show chose to air a segment on ECT, and only interview people who were happy with their experiences — one of whom is a famous author, which gives his testimony more weight. We all know that many people are happy with their ECT experiences. That's why most of us are not asking for a ban on ECT — just for the opportunity for truly informed consent so that people can accurately weigh the potential benefits along with the serious risk of adverse effects.

A paper in the Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy chronicles the history of MiA blogger Gretchen LeFever Watson's effort to improve ADHD treatment in southeastern...

An anti-anti-stigma campaign The whole anti-stigma campaign is something of a joke. Google the word “stigma,” see for yourself. Mental health labels are inherently stigmatizing,...

A study in BMC Psychiatry explores a range of perspectives on the value of neuroimaging studies for disorders of mental health. The study concludes...

Pfizer is in the final stages of settling 660 lawsuits filed between 2009 and 2012 by people who complained of of psychological problems, including...

In a 5-4 vote, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Monday that drug makers cannot be sued under state law for adverse reactions to...

As the number of SSRI birth defect lawsuits climbs to the point that hundreds are being consolidated in a massive class action in the...

The Food and Drug Administration is investigating the deaths of two individuals who died three to four days after injections of "an appropriate dose"...

The Restoring Invisible and Abandoned Trials (RIAT) proposal, backed by the British Medical Journal and PLoS ONE last week, calls for the "responsible publication and...

Researchers from London, Sydney and Stanford examine the literature related to the expanded expenditure on healthcare-related drugs and devices over the last 15 years,...

In the film Avatar scientists are keen to exploit the moon planet Pandora, which is inhabited by 10-foot-tall blue humanoids called Na'vi. To do so they create Na'vi human hybrids called “Avatars” which are controlled from afar by genetically matched humans. When the scientists decide to destroy the eco-system of the planet to gain access to valuable minerals, war breaks out between the humans and the Na'vi. At this point the main character, Jake, who operates an Avatar, has to choose whose side he is on. Eventually Jake's life is saved and transformed by the Tree of Souls, which the humans are trying to destroy. Why are Avatars in the news again? The latest innovation from psychiatric research is using computer generated avatars to help people who hear aggressive voices.

The decision by the Institute of Psychiatry, Britain's leading centre for psychiatric research, to invite disgraced Professor Charles Nemeroff to speak at the inaugural lecture of the Institute's new Centre for Affective Disorders has caused a great deal of controversy, news that was recently featured on Mad in America. In the latest development members of the Critical Psychiatry Network in UK have written an open letter to Professor Pariantes, the Director of the new Centre for Affective Disorders, requesting that he cancel Nemeroff's invitation.

It has been a good time to bury controversy. With all eyes on Washington and the fallout from the publication of DSM-5, over here in England the Institute of Psychiatry has been discretely sending out invitations to a lecture. This is not a public lecture; it is by invitation only. And who is the esteemed guest? None other than Professor Charles Nemeroff M.D., Ph.D.

Jeffrey Lieberman, incoming president of the APA, responds to criticism of the DSM and psychiatry, saying "it’s important to understand the difference between thoughtful,...

People in roles of power in the mental health system often don’t realize how much complicity they have in actually creating the symptoms they claim are biologically-based in individuals with psychiatric labels.

The Economist, in its upcoming edition, says of the DSM "No other major branch of medicine has such a single text, with so much...

I think it’s helpful to see the psychiatric/pharmaceutical complex as being somewhat analogous to one of those large inflatable giants that you sometimes see hovering over car lot sales. Sure, it looks big and powerful, and it really is so long as “we the people” buy its propaganda and its drugs and continue feeding it billions of dollars and continue “bowing down” to its “almighty wisdom.” But its entire foundation consists of a model that simply doesn’t fit the research evidence at all, and quite frankly is propped up by many outright lies.

I believe the video ‘Voices Matter’ has, quite apart from capturing the spirit of the Hearing Voices movement, filmed the first signs, the first moments of professional interest, hinting at the dangers that inevitably are present when a movement threatens the established order of things.

MIA blogger (and lawyer) Jim Gottstein presented a 20-minute Oral Argument in ex rel Watson v. King-Vassel in front of the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago last Thursday. "The technical issue on appeal is a lawyer nerd question about whether expert testimony is required," said Gottstein, "but I like to think it contains a succinct and clear explanation of why even though a doctor can prescribe a drug for anything, if they prescribe one off-label to a child they are causing a False Claim (committing Medicaid Fraud) unless the use has support in at least one of the specified drug references called Compendia."

The norm in science is that there is free access to the data underpinning experiments. If free access is denied; it’s not science. In the case of branded pharmaceuticals, we do not even know what trials have been done. What is put in the public domain is not data. The selected highlights of a football game and the comments of the pundits afterwards don't change the score. The selected highlights of pharma studies and the comments of pundits routinely change the score.

Legislation in the U.K. that empowers psychiatrists to impose treatment  on patients has lost the support of one of its key advocates. "The evidence is...

Some psychiatric drugs are extraordinarily effective, for instance benzodiazepines for catatonia or SSRIs for premature ejaculation. These treatments are so effective that controlled trials are an irrelevance. Every trial conducted would show a positive result. The point here is not that it is impossible for a treatment to achieve effectiveness but rather that controlled trials have little useful to contribute to the issue of effectiveness. Randomized placebo controlled trials have not shown any drug within the mental health domain is effective. If a treatment were effective virtually every RCT undertaken would show a positive result.

British researchers find that a 10% increase in pain medication resulted in a dramatic reduction in the use of antipsychotic and other medications. “When...

The New York Times on Obama's $235 million initiative: "Mental health unites lawmakers Republican and Democrat, urban and rural, even those with safe seats...