>Not ethically, no -- not possible. Prospective double-blind studies are virtually unheard of in psychology because of ethical issues. Why do you believe this

>Not ethically, no -- not possible. Prospective double-blind studies are virtually unheard of in psychology because of ethical issues. Why do you believe this to be the only valid form of scientific study? Do you hold all disciplines to this standard? >Yes, true, which is why, in a scientific sense, we don't know anything about these topics. We know that certain assessments reliably indicate the presence of depression. We know certain conditions reliably induce depression. We know certain therapies reliably relieve depression. We know certain risk factors lead to greater likelihood of depression. >For example, it has recently been determined by way of a meta-analysis that the many antidepressant studies, taken as a whole, contradict each other, and the conclusion is that antidepressants don't work. >In layman's language, "there is no scientific evidence to support the conclusion that antidepressants actually do anything." Can you explain to me how science can decide one way or another on matters concerning depression if such things are inscrutable to the scientific method?