Friday, April 17, 2009

David Healy: Marketing, Bipolar, and Biobabble

In an interview with Chrisopher Lane on Psychology Today's blog, David Healy covers the gamut, including the marketing techniques used to pimp Zyprexa, academic spokespersons/key opinion leaders, and bipolar diagnoses run amok. I've been a fan of Healy's work for a long time, but this interview in particular is captivating. Some will claim that Healy is a "bipolar denialist" -- he states that bipolar is overdiagnosed and that the disorder is entirely misunderstood. The fur will continue to fly on bipolarity for years to come, or at least until drug companies run out of products to push for as "mood stabilizers." In the interest of being fair and balanced, Nassir Ghaemi has a rebuttal to Healy's opinion that is also worth reading.

Though I'm tempted to provide a snippet here, I'll instead direct readers to the interview. After a very interesting interview with Philip Dawdy, and now one with David Healy (and other interesting posts), I am really glad the Psychology Today has Christopher Lane on board. I'm sure some people are not pleased with Lane interviewing two of the more prominent critics of modern psychiatry. Giving both of them an outlet to express their views at length runs the risk of Lane being labeled as a Scientologist, as "antipsychiatry," a pharmascold, and as a general rabble-rouser. Good for him. Nice to see that a fairly mainstream publication is willing to step outside the box.


Anonymous said...

I want a "pharmascold" t-shirt!

insider said...

Your wish is my command!

CL Psych said...


A said...

Dear Debunker:

I think Healy has some pertinent views and prospective to be considered and added to the mix or melting pot of psychiatry's monastical, and informational misdirection Cult.

Though I have found that many times {as with Healy, and his stance on ECT as a viable tool in the arsenal of this archaic treatment modality} the arguments really get lost and boondoggled in a philosophical debate of sorts.

When the real issue is that none of the treatments or so called fixes psychiatry has come up with as in the modern day illumination of Psycho-pseudo-science has worked with any long term positive outcome or results, and relative effectiveness.

When the arguments turn to debates of whether such labels as bipolar and other diagnostic labels are being used with proper discretion or prudence; we lose sight of the bigger picture that these created illnesses and the supposed fixes that go along with them are just human based observational industrialized manipulations for an end result of profiteering, greed mongering, and achieving a higher degree of social status and validity for this so called profession and industrial machine.

All the arguments I have read from the so called experts fail horribly at focusing the dehumanizing experience of those subjected persons to this modern day "progressionistic" market driven cult.

Once you devalued the lived experience of the maligned; you really have lost sight of the real problem or possible beneficial alternatives.

Anywise, just my opinion and take on this particular issue and topic.


Doug Bremner said...

Insider, you ignored my question about whatever happened to Pharma Giles? Can you make a t shirt that says "Pharma Giles Where Are You?" like the ones they used to have in the States called "DB Cooper Where are You" (a legendary plane hijacker who parachuted out of the back of a commercial airliner with his loot).

Anonymous said...

Christopher Lane is not smart enough to be a pharmascold. He should stick to crinoline petticoats and gaslights (both kinds), or whatever it is he has studied. He's out of his league. Pure spotlight-seeker.

CL Psych said...


And your comment is based on... what evidence? If you don't like Lane, that's fine, but a little supporting evidence would be helpful for your cause.