“Potential biomarker that could predict”? – caveats about psychiatric brain imaging

1
59

HealthNewsReview.org hosts a guest article from Susan Molchan, who takes issue with a recent New York Times blog post where Dr. Richard Friedman describes a “potential biomarker in the brain that would help psychiatrists direct depressed patients towards treatment to which they would more likely respond.” As she critically takes the claim apart, Molchan draws on connected criticisms from 1 Boring Old Man and Allen Frances, and revisits the “black stain” history of Charles Nemeroff.

“Potential biomarker that could predict”? – caveats about psychiatric brain imaging & blogging about it (HealthNewsReview.org, January 20, 2015)

Support MIA

MIA relies on the support of its readers to exist. Please consider a donation to help us provide news, essays, podcasts and continuing education courses that explore alternatives to the current paradigm of psychiatric care. Your tax-deductible donation will help build a community devoted to creating such change.

$
Select Payment Method
Personal Info

Credit Card Info
This is a secure SSL encrypted payment.

Billing Details

Donation Total: $20 One Time

1 COMMENT

  1. “potential biomarker in the brain that would help psychiatrists direct depressed patients towards treatment to which they would more likely respond.”
    The facepalm reading this statement caused almost gave me a whole-face bruise. Even if there were “biomarkers in the brain” (LOL) for so-called “psychiatric illnesses” (ROFL) I wonder how that should guide the “treatment”. This is gibberish.

LEAVE A REPLY