Posted by linkadge on May 24, 2006, at 19:03:42
In reply to Re: Statistical question on SSRIs - ADDENDUM » linkadge, posted by Larry Hoover on May 23, 2006, at 18:05:30
I didn't dismis the study because I never said it was completely inacurate. I was simply implying that the study needs to evalutated under the correct pretenses.
>It is the only study there is, so far, that >looks at pre-treatment and post-treatment (by >modern antidepressants) suicidality in the >general population. Period. Full stop. All the >rest of the data is from clinical trials, or >anecdote/case reports.
I don't know what you are trying to say. Do you honestly think that this study is the one and only embodiment containing evidence on the subject of antidepressants and suicide? Like I said before, there are many ways to interprate the data.
>This is the first, and so far, only study to >attempt to answer the question of what happens >to real people (not clinical trial subjects, >who represent about 7% of the depressed >population), in a scientific way. That is all I >have ever been saying.
You can discover truths, and truths can exist outside the confines of a specific clinical trial. I never said we had the data (or that it was at all possible) to rigorously proove my conclusions. The highlights of the last decade of studies paints a perfectly clear picture to me, I am not suggesting that you must reach the same conclusion.
>I disagree with your scientific arguments, not >your hypothesis.
Thats the problem. You are not accepting my argument because it is not detailed according to your paramters. I on the other hand, have no desire, or need to proove my point in such a manner. I only intent to satisfy my self.
>It is unethical to conduct the studies that you >believe would prove your point.
Yet such studies are occuring as we speak.
Linkadge
poster:linkadge
thread:640557
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20060520/msgs/648024.html