My experienced side effect from Side Effects: Developed fear of psychiatry and publication bias

clinical drug testing

Our seminar recently watched the movie “Side Effects” (FINALLY!) I did not see the trailer beforehand nor read a synopsis of it, so I had no idea what to expect. If you have not seen the movie yet, be forewarned that it is a psychological thriller and this post may contain spoilers. Anyways, I enjoyed the movie, but it left me quite scared of three particular things: 1) humans in general, 2) humans especially when they are lying, and 3) being a psychiatrist.

The movie convinced me that psychiatry is not going to be in my future. How or why, you ask? Well, one of the main characters of the movies was diagnosed with depression, and Jude Law’s character was a psychiatrist that prescribed the patient to take an antidepressant. The medication had a “side effect” that resulted in the patient murdering her husband. This roused the question of who to hold responsible for this occurrence: The patient for her faulty biology or the psychiatrist for prescribing the medication that elicited the deadly side effect? This is what scared me, that Jude Law’s character could be to blame because he was the psychiatrist that prescribed the medication. I cannot imagine being in his shoes, being responsible for a side effect.

Then again, what if a psychiatrist was not aware of the risk of a side effect that is as extreme as the one in the movie? Due to publication bias, doctors do not always have the full picture of the effects of the medication they prescribe. Many drugs seem effective because the literature contains an overwhelming representation of articles on the positive findings. For example, Reboxetin is an antidepressant that underwent seven trials of testing to compare it to a placebo. One trial yielded positive results, and it was published. However, the 6 other trials demonstrated negative findings and those did not make it through publication. What does this say about drug safety and integrity? How are doctors expected to perform their duties at an optimal level without the appropriate information? A number of psychiatrists like Jude Law’s character probably prescribe medication on a daily basis that have side effects that they do not know exist because of publication bias. Would these psychiatrists still be considered as being at fault for the result of the side effect?

As of the moment, I find it frightening that knowledge is being withheld from us. Journals, pharmaceutical companies, PR companies, and et cetera need to consider the ethical issues of publication bias. Nevertheless, I am glad that there is an increased awareness of this occurrence and that efforts are being made to fix it. Hopefully the reports on findings from drug trials improve, but don’t expect me to change my mind about psychiatry. I am fairly set on going into experimental psychology instead and making sure that I provide the world with non-misleading data!

If you are interested in hearing more about publication bias, watch the TEDTalk by Ben Goldacre titled What doctors don’t know about the drugs they prescribe

About these ads

4 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Ellie
    May 10, 2013 @ 09:32:06

    Wow. I was not aware of publication bias. That is CRAZY! This is when a companies desire to make a profit gets in the way of true healthcare. It seems entirely unethical. I wonder why the FDA or another governing agent has not brought an end to publication bias.

    Reply

  2. Melissa
    May 13, 2013 @ 08:33:57

    Love that TEDTalk. Goldacre has books too! Bad Science and Bad Pharma. Good summer reads :).

    Reply

  3. Shelley
    May 13, 2013 @ 11:19:45

    This is publication bias is a crazy thing to consider, and the ethics are definitely sticky, especially if psychiatrists aren’t getting the full information about a drug’s potential side effects. The post mentioned efforts are being made to fix this–what specifically is being done? And should it be ethical to prescribe drugs until this information is made public?

    Reply

  4. Ariel Batallan
    May 16, 2013 @ 20:04:53

    I agree with you whole heartedly, and I believe that you bring up a valid point in regards to the pharmaceutical companies and the relationships between the patients, psychiatrists, and the companies. One putting the strain or bribing one, the companies on the psychiatrists, and the psychiatrists taking advantage of the trust that the patients have in them to propagate the prescription of medications just because they cost more. At the same time the psychiatrists may also feel the pressure from particular patients’ parents, since the patients themselves are not old enough to make their own decisions, who feel that placing the child on the latest medications to place an easy fix on a problem that may have other solutions to solve them and without little regard to consider the long lasting side effects that may occur from this new drug only to reap the short term benefits to make their live “easier.”

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 591 other followers

%d bloggers like this: