I wasn't aware that the serotonin hypothesis was "fraudulent," nor can I find credible evidence of this on Google. Instead, it seems that the scientific process

I wasn't aware that the serotonin hypothesis was "fraudulent," nor can I find credible evidence of this on Google. Instead, it seems that the scientific process worked as intended. A reasonable hypothesis was initially proposed, then opposing evidence accumulated over time. This seems moreso an issue with the pharmaceutical industry. For example: "In 2005, two academics published a piece of research in which they compared the information on pharmaceutical websites with the pronouncements of certain researchers, and found a ‘disconnect’ between the marketing and the experts’ views." - https://joannamoncrieff.com/2022/07/24/how-to-take-the-news-that-depression-has-not-been-shown-to-be-caused-by-a-chemical-imbalance/ https://joannamoncrieff.com/2022/07/24/how-to-take-the-news-...