Dr James Davies (PhD) 💭 Profile picture
Jul 5 7 tweets 2 min read Read on X
Heads up, everyone! Something big is coming next week. It concerns psychiatry's blockbuster drug - the antidepressant. This thread breaks down what’s about to happen, why it matters & what’s at stake 👇
1. Next week a major study will be published by some of the biggest names in drug-company-funded psychiatry; many with track records of minimising antidepressant withdrawal. It’s expected to downplay withdrawal, based on flawed, mostly short-term studies - many pharma-funded.
2. The Science Media Centre (which also receives pharma funding) will host a closed-door press briefing next Tuesday, to promote the paper; inviting top UK health journalists. Who's on the panel? Mostly industry-linked experts who are expected to agree with or praise the paper.
3. By Thursday, the UK media will be saturated with that praise, running headlines downplaying antidepressant withdrawal: e.g. 'Antidepressant withdrawal - not a big deal'. The flaws in the study? Rarely mentioned. The financial conflicts of interest? Almost never disclosed.
4. Then, in the days that follow, comes a familiar cycle: independent experts, researchers & lived experience voices will scramble to respond; highlighting the flaws & conflicts the media were not made fully privy to or overlooked. But by then, the story will have taken hold.
5. The media will move on. But the headlines will stick. And the public is left misinformed, again, while recalcitrant policy makers will cite this study for years to justify doing nothing to reduce harms. This isn’t a one-off. It’s a pattern; we've seen it play out for years.
6. In the end, I hope I am wrong about the study. I’ve not seen it in full whole yet. But based on previous experience, I'm sure it will play out as above, given the people and instutions involved and their track record....

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Dr James Davies (PhD) 💭

Dr James Davies (PhD) 💭 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @JDaviesPhD

Jun 28
A thread 🧵 showing why people are rightly angry about the corruption between psychiatry & pharma.

It concerns the psychiatrist, Joseph Biederman, & the 'Harvard Scandal', which helped fuel a highly damaging wave of antipsychotic drugging in children.

Here's what happened 👇
2/ Joseph Biederman was a world-renowned child psychiatrist at Harvard; one of the brightest lights of his profession. He played a leading role in popularising so-called ‘bipolar disorder’ in young children & in promoting the use of antipsychotic drugs to ‘treat’ them.
3/ However in 2008, a US Senate investigation, led by Senator Chuck Grassley, revealed that Biederman had failed to disclose over $1.6 million in personal payments from pharmaceutical companies. Among them, was the drug company J & J, which makes the antipsychotic, Risperdal.
Read 6 tweets
Jun 19
🧵Awais Aftab’s recent post on “over-diagnosis” doesn’t merely defend the diagnostic status quo; it goes a step further by portraying the DSM as “rather conservative” & suggesting it may fall short precisely because it excludes too much suffering from its ideological grasp....1/5
...This framing reinforces the idea that all suffering requires a psychiatric meaning & that diagnostic inflation is a clincial good. It downplays the fact that previous diagnositc inflation has less improved clinical outcomes than pharma/psychiatric power & profits....2/5
...and that such inflation as enabled the spread of a damaging ideology that has systematically pathologised, individualised, decollectivised, depoliticised & commodified distress - great for the neoliberal economy, as I argue in my book, but not so much for the rest of us... 3/5
Read 6 tweets
Jun 13
A 🧵thread on why claiming 'psychiatry is just like any other medical specialty' glosses over major differences. It’s a convenient slogan; not an honest comparison. Here's why 👇
1/ Most medical diagnoses are based on objective tests (bloods, imaging, urine tests etc), while psychiatry predominantly relies on subjective interpretation of behaviour & self-reports alone, which are then matched to ‘categories’ of distress, created by committee consensus....
2/ Psychiatry involves coercion, forced medication & court-mandated treatment. These powers don’t exist in the same way in other medical fields, making psychiatry more vulnerable to perpetuating abuse, particularly against marginalised & less powerful groups...
Read 9 tweets
May 25
I recently watched the BBC documentary "Change Your Mind, Change Your Life" (it films therapists in action), & found many aspects of it frankly disturbing. Within minutes of meeting clients, therapists were making sweeping claims about their client's underlying psychology...1/7
...as if they had some kind of mystic second-sight. Their rapid-fire 'insights' were followed by simplistic, take-home exercises offered as quick fixes & giving the impression that healing is a kind of formula to be rapidly appllied rather than process to be lived. 2/7
What stuck hard was the lack of humility with which these 'insights' were delivered. E.G. one therapist by session 3 had assumed such power in the relationship & in authoritatively defining a client’s inner world that the client became overwhelmed & experienced a panic attack 3/7
Read 7 tweets
May 16
A defence mechanism I regularly encounter in the therapeutic space (but which's entirely under-theorised) is what I would term 'internalisation bias', wherein somone persistently attributes all difficulties, failures & negative experiences to a perceived internal flaw, defect...
...disorder or inadequacy, regardless of external contrary evidence. This defence oversimplifies causality by shielding the person from confronting a complex, chaotic or threatening external reality: 'It must be my fault' replaces enqiry into systemic, institutional etc causes...
....resulting in external conditions being exonerated or dismissed as irrelevant or secondary. Internalisation bias is not merely intrapsychic - it is regularly socially & systematically reinforced - e.g. neoliberal ideology frames success as entirely individual terms....
Read 5 tweets
Mar 22
🧵Why is mental health disability rising? Here are key reasons rarely discussed in mainstream media:

1️/ For decades we've neglected tackling the social determinants of societal distress, relying instead on medicalisation as a superficial ‘fix’ for downstream harms. This has...
...led to worsening outcomes as primary causes are left intact.
2/ Instead of addressing social harms, we've pathologised them. This has turned victims of enduring unjust policy into chronic patients, fuelling long-term prescriptions & treatment-induced iatrogenic disability.
3/ The dominance of a failing medical model has led to underinvestment in more effective psychosocial alternatives, community-based supports, financial assistance, and relational care – resources that seek to uproot rather than anaesthetise suffering.
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(