Which is more accurate in conveying the notion that a bit of research may have a contrary (though possibly worthwhile) view from a team (no matter how 'offical') on the value (or not) of depression medication?:
Effectiveness of antidepressant drugs questioned
Antidepressant drugs don't work – official study
Anti-depressants 'of little use'
Prozac, used by 40m people, does not work say scientists
New anti-depressants 'little effect'
What is wrong with our news media? I have 'contributed' to the BBC, who at least allow the possibility:
'IF' what I read is borne out, this is indeed of serious concern, but is the headline and how this news has been portrayed fair and accurate in conveying the notion that 'a' bit of research may have 'a' contrary (though possibly worthwhile) view from 'a' team (no matter how 'offical') on the value (or not) of depression medication?
Are the entire prescribing medical profession fools or charlatans then? If so, I want my £100kpa back.
So whatever you do read, on anything substantive remember: read long, read broad and don't read anything into anything until you think you might have gained all the relevant facts, and as good a cross-section of opinion as you can to arrive at a well-informed one of your own.
Live by the headlines, links and summaries served up to 'help' us in this time-poor infromation age we live in, and you may get what you deserve.
*With apologies to The Verve
No comments:
Post a Comment