shorter and healy make ECT sound so attractive I'll be

surprised if it doesn't become the next recreational fad...

in fact reading the article makes me feel sure they must

be using it on a regular basis themselves: when in fact one

use of it by them would have changed the article dramatically

Willy, I believe you are thinking with yours. If ECT was not mostly successful it would no longer be around, like the Edsel. In the 1980's orthopedic surgeons injected herniated discs with a papaya extract to shrink the disc, when is the last time you heard anyone having that done? Any medical procedure is consumer and success driven.

Not every bypass is successful-even top notch heart surgeons lose patients-

If one type of blood pressure med worked for all, we we only need one, not scores-

Asprin even in the correct dose kills some people every year.

Society wants to believe "One size fits all" Hell that doesn't even work with T-shirts!

Get real-istic!

******************************­*********
myfranz wrote the following post at 01/08/2008 12:26 PM:

Willy, I believe you are thinking with yours. If ECT was not mostly successful it would no longer be around, like the Edsel.

******************************­*********

Leaving aside the fact that someone with something valid to say doesn't start off their diatribe with an ad hominen, the problem with analogies, especially analogies taken from an entirely different sphere of life, is that, well, they are what they are: analogies. And, when you have to resort to analogies to 'prove your point', you are admitting that you don't have anything of value to say in support of your point of view.

The only test of whether ECT "works" is whether the patients are cured. And by "cured", I mean that they became fully sane, fully functioning, fully alive individuals. People who could use all of their faculties, live healthy, happy and self-determined lives. You know, human beings who have ALL of their emotions in tact, and can be happy, or sad, or angry or bored or antagonistic or depressed, according to how life strikes them.

But, no one has ever claimed that ECT does THAT. All they claim, at most, is that after the living daylights have been knocked out of you, you are "calmer". In other words, ECT is used to make troubled people into docile, controllable, animals that can be herded around with little trouble. People who have lost their ability to react emotionally (or not, as THEY please) to what they find in life.

In other words, ECT doesn't work.

And, the fact that it is "still around" only goes to prove that some people never learn, and in fact, some people actively intend to affirmatively harm others whom they have not been able to control otherwise.

ECT is a desperate admission that psychiatry hasn't got the slightest idea of how to cure mental problems.

Sir, your statement that "Psychiatry doesnt have a clue..." is peurile and does not support a rational point. To claim that ECT turns people into "people who have lost the ability to react emotionally" is ignorant at best. Yes, there is some post-seizure confusion and memory loss (and that is almost always temporary/minimal), but this is somewhat similar to post anesthesia recovery. ECT is never ordered lightly, and only after careful consideration of risk vs benefit analysis, ie, after several failed medication and/or therapy trials. I'm curious to know what PROVEN (scientifically peer reviewed) alternatives you would offer to deal with these potentially life threatening conditions. Depression is set to become the #1 cause of loss of productivity in most of the world, and completed suicide is present in 10-20% of individuals with severe depression and/or Bipolar d/o. I'll check back for your response.

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.

re-reading my post I noticed several grammatical errors.... the phone kept ringing while I was writing, my apologies....

line 6 should read "...is that it makes you calmer"

further down should read "...But the true standard of whether a treatment works, is whether that treatment's benefits....."

sorry.