Scott: A comment on your criteria of whether ECT "works". The 100% standard of "happy, healthy, and self-determined lives", is not a real useful one when evaluating any treatment. You are correct when you assert that no one claims ECT achieves that, but you are incorrect that all "they" claim is that is makes you calmer. The reality is any medical treatment will produce a range of responses, and psychiatric treatments are often less precise than others because of our admittedly limited understanding of the brain. BUT, the TRUE standard of whether a treatment's benefits (on a statistical basis), exceed the known drawbacks, and that the risks involved are reasonable given the benefits. For example, my dad had his hip replaced recently. He got a bad infection as a result (risk), and now his range of motion is permanently limited (drawback), but on the plus side, before the surgery he could barely walk, now he averages 2 miles a day (benefit). ECT is no different. Although some people do, in fact, go on to that 'perfect live' you describe after treament. Many more continue to struggle with issues of depression, or other problems, but statistically they do so to a much lesser extent than before treatment. And yes, many experience some memory loss as a result of it. On the other hand, there are thousands of people who report it has literally 'saved their life'. Responses to ECT treatment vary tremendously, which is makes statistical studies all the more important. And using the "significant improvment" standard, ECT is far and away the most effective treatment for certain mental illnesses. That benefit of course is balanced with the reality that it comes with significant drawbacks, and risks.