David's Inferno (24 page)

We are overmedicating our children and it's going to have catastrophic results
.

Throughout history, cultures have tried all sorts of ways to “deal with” kids—from potentially catastrophic tribal rituals to potentially catastrophic 16-hour work days to potentially catastrophic medications to potentially catastrophic denial. Children are always pushing the envelope of consciousness. That's their job! How we encourage and guide that energy is the most critical creative challenge faced by parents, society, and humanity at large. But, most of all, it's a challenge for every child. And nothing is going to stop a child from pushing his or her personal envelope.

The body has its own wisdom and can, ultimately, heal itself
.

In many cases, that's true. In many cases, it's a judgment call. In all cases, it depends on the person, the illness or injury, and many other factors.

It's important to treat the whole person, not just the symptoms
.

You mean you're going to treat all ±trillion of my cells all at once? Cool.

Antidepressants are actually placebos
.

Great! Where can I buy more?

Incidences of mental illness have actually increased since antidepressants were invented
.

This is an interesting argument popularized by a recent book called
Anatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America
. And Robert Whitaker, the author, does an excellent job of making his case, based on one way of evaluating clinical-trial and epidemiological data. But who
knows whether the relationship between diseases, drugs, environment, and culture is co-dependent, independent, or coincident? My guess would be all three. Certainly, most people would agree that societal and environmental stresses have increased
significantly
since antidepressants were invented.

Many people have serious objections to the way pharmaceutical companies do business. They refer to them collectively as “Big Pharma,” and say all they care about is making money. But consider this:

Hundreds of thousands of people work for pharmaceutical companies. Undoubtedly, some of them just want to sell as many of their drugs to as many people as possible. They might as well be selling widgets. But most of them would sincerely like to help cure what ails us. Plus, they have bills to pay and kids to put through college. So they hope their drugs prove more effective than other treatments—whether traditional or complementary. They enthusiastically advertise any scientific or anecdotal report that says so. To medical professionals as well as individuals.

By the same token, hundreds of thousands of people work in the egg industry. Undoubtedly, some of them just want to sell as many eggs as possible. They might as well be selling potato chips. But most of them really think eggs should be part of our diet. Plus, they also have bills to pay and kids to put through college. So they hope their eggs prove to be as good a source of protein as any other food. They enthusiastically advertise any scientific or anecdotal report that says so. To professional nutritionists as well as individuals.

Ditto for people at companies who manufacture nutritional supplements, gluten-free products and (shocking as it may seem) even the family growing organic vegetables down the road. Undoubtedly, some of them just want to sell as many pills, and rice cakes, and organic carrots as possible. They might as well be selling, well, prescription drugs! But most of them really want us to
feel good. Plus, they also have bills to pay and kids to put through college. So they hope their products make us feel better than the competition's and even taste better! They enthusiastically advertise any scientific or anecdotal report that says so. To professionals in complementary therapies as well as to individuals.

Ditto for people working at manufacturers of cars, computers, beer, and so on. Some might as well be selling snake oil. But most of them sincerely want you to enjoy life more, and believe their products might help you do that. They advertise to that effect.

Same with books. Undoubtedly, some writers just want to sell as many of their books as possible. They'd say anything as long someone paid them to say it. But, like most authors, I really hope my book helps you understand more, and/or feel better, and/or just pass a few pleasant hours. Plus, while our daughter graduated from college years ago, we still have bills to pay. So I hope this book does as good a job of talking about mental illness as other similar books … if not better. I will enthusiastically put any reviews that say so in the next edition!

There's a word for this vast conspiracy. It's called capitalism. Whenever two or more people are gathered in its name, some people feel better, others feel worse. Some make money, others lose money. Some feel manipulated, others feel empowered.

I have no opinion about capitalism. I do know that no one has ever put a gun to my head and made me take a drug; eat an egg; swallow a multivitamin; bite into an organic carrot; or buy a computer, car, or six-pack of beer.

There's certainly nothing wrong with letting people know your feelings and opinions about the motives and behavior of pharmaceutical companies, egg producers, organic gardeners, computer makers, and authors of books on mental illness. In fact, let's get as many perspectives on the table as possible.

But do we really have to demonize each other so much in the process?

Many people also have serious objections to relying on alternative medicine to treat depression. And yet again, for each objection there is a balancing point of view:

It's hard to design reliable clinical trials for supplements—particularly because the purity of nutritional supplements and amino acids can't be guaranteed
.

There are also variances in the molecular structure of generic drugs versus the original brand names. Some patients notice a significant difference in their effectiveness.

If you feel better from taking herbs or supplements, it's probably just a placebo effect
.

Same deal as with prescription drugs: if they work, all I want to know is, “where can I get more of them placebos?”

The idea that we have some kind of “energetic body” around our physical one is downright weird
.

I know, but it's sure a good explanation for all kinds of other “weird” stuff.

The very idea of Craniosacral therapy is preposterous. It's a biological impossibility
.

Ever had one? Maybe you'd be more open!

Homeopathic remedies are so diluted, there's no there there
.

Millions of people—and thousands of doctors—rely on them more than prescription drugs.

You believe in astrology? Are you crazy?

Well, I think we've established that fact. But, remember, it was an astrologer who gave me the most accurate timeline of how my breakdown would progress and, eventually, end.

Throughout history, there's an interesting kind of synergy between humans and their cures. I wouldn't be surprised if the notion of
treating depression by screwing around with neurotransmitters, receptors, and synapses is eventually considered as archaic as black bile and bloodletting. In the meantime, it seems that anything that proves helpful to anyone is worthy of our consideration and respect.

One clinical trial is a proof. Two clinical trials is half a proof. And three clinical trials are no proof at all. I'm paraphrasing one of the great philosophers of the twentieth century. Well, he was actually the beloved seventh generation Yankee who owned the orchards that surround my home. That's how he described managing the teenage boys he hired to pick apples: “One boy is a boy. Two boys is half a boy. And three boys is no boy at all.”

There are articles, dissertations, complex research reports, and entire books—all with countless caveats and footnotes—written about whether antidepressants work. We're not talking your basic incoherent academic dispute. This has turned into one giant medical cluster f—.

Many experts use clinical trials to prove convincingly that mind medications
are
effective. According to their studies, meds work about 60% the first time around, with the likelihood of success rising for those who can keep it together enough to try another one or two if necessary.

Others use clinical trials—and often the same ones!—to prove equally convincingly that clinical trials have proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that placebos work just as well as antidepressants.

Even more impressive, there's now some evidence that the exact same experiments, following exactly the same rules of scientific protocol, can yield significantly different results over time. Makes you want to take two aspirin and call Hippocrates in the morning.

Then there's the quantum issue. Oh yeah, the quantum issue. The one that says you can't ever really measure anything because the act of measuring changes the thing being measured. Can we just agree not to mention the quantum issue?

One thing everyone does seem to agree on—although some rather begrudgingly—is that the controversy primarily involves people with mild to moderate depression. Once they see you sobbing uncontrollably in the waiting room, they're usually willing to let you give drugs a try.

I accept that the occasional scientist will fiddle with results—consciously or subconsciously—based on who's paying for the research. More important, you don't have to be Einstein (or Heidegger to be imprecise) to realize that researchers' conclusions are inevitably influenced to some extent by their own assumptions and conventional wisdom.

William Blake, a guy who knew a thing or two about mental illness, wrote, “What is now proved was once only imagined.” I would add that what many now consider imaginary may one day be proved.

Academic disputes aside, there are several questions that every self-respecting gobbler of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and anti-all-kinds-of-other things will eventually wonder: Why are clinical studies such unreliable predictors of which treatment(s) will help me? Why can a drug/remedy that was perfectly effective for me for many years suddenly stop working? Why can it have an entirely different effect when I start taking it again after stopping for a while? Why should I worry about having an erection for four hours when I can barely get up in the morning?

They are excellent questions. And, since the scientific answers are all over the place, I'll stick with the philosophical and the commonsensical:

Humans evolve. All the time. Individually. And as a species. So does all of nature. So does the entire universe. Every “subject” in those clinical trials is a swirling mass of energies in constant flux, whose individual complexity can make a mockery of any particular data point.

As I've said, we admire the determined fight of someone with cancer who insists on breaking down doors to get into the latest clinical trial, even though the treatment could be more fatal than the disease. Why don't we equally admire people who will try an
antidepressant even if it hasn't been clinically proven and may also prove to be more fatal than the disease? Why don't we talk about how
they
, too, fought a courageous battle with their illness, and tried everything they could in an attempt to ward off an inevitability they felt they couldn't avoid?