There was a pretty astonishing if deadpan interview on Fresh Air recently with a psychiatrist who, although more orthodox than Whitaker, has published a book qu

There was a pretty astonishing if deadpan interview on Fresh Air recently with a psychiatrist who, although more orthodox than Whitaker, has published a book questioning the overreliance of psychiatry on drugs. (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128107547 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1281075...) Among other things I didn't know, he recounted how many of the leading articles on antidepressant efficacy were in fact written by advertising companies (yes, you read that right). The pharmaceutical companies would then pay famous psychiatrists to use their names as the authors of the already-written piece. These studies were published in all the leading journals (New England, etc.). The interviewer asked this guy what consequences there had been for the psychiatrists who had been bought off in this way. He said there had been none. He also said (no surprises here) that he and other psychiatrists routinely tell their patients the chemical imbalance theory despite knowing that there is no evidence for it, on the grounds that people want a little "knowledge" about how the drugs they're being prescribed.