High Percentages Of Depression Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

According to widely reported community-based research, almost half the U.S. population suffers from depression. But research by two sociologists indicates that percentage is greatly exaggerated or is a misrepresentation. …

There are a number of reasons that these high rates are perpetuated. One is that political support is more likely for an agency devoted to preventing and treating a widespread disease such as the National Institute of Mental Health. Another reason is that pharmaceutical companies capitalize on these survey findings to broaden their markets. The explosive growth in sales of antidepressants may indicate its effectiveness. Lastly, advocacy groups lay claim to the prevalence of mental disorders. They equate the millions of people that surveys identify with disorders with the serious mental disorders in order to reduce the social distance between the mentally disordered and others, thereby lowering the stigma. This may only hinder the truly disabled by shifting resources from where it is truly needed.
------
Widely reported by the news media. But use a little logic. Community-based research is forced to ask people standardized questions and draw conclusions from their responses. If those questions were adequate to diagnose mental illness, the questions would be used for diagnosis in mental health practices. All of the people involved in this community-based research know that the questions would be inadequate for diagnosis in a clinical setting.

I applaud these sociologists for their reasonable analysis and for their frank appraisal of the underlying financial incentives. I would add one more item. These reports are widely covered by the news media. There is no hard-hitting reporter to ask penetrating questions like:

“These surveys were diagnosing people for depression. Are these the same diagnostic methods used in clinical practice? And those people that you diagnosed as depressed – did you advise them that they needed to seek treatment?”

Reporting on medical studies is close to the perfect stream for the media. The lab issues a press release, already written for the public. It is available on the web and probably by RSS feed. Editing is mostly cut, copy and paste. No fact-checking needed because research has its own fact-checking. Just put on an alarmist headline and run it. Put some medical ads nearby to complete the perfect stream (of income).

There you have it. Incentive analysis for the production and distribution of new or huge medical problems. I find the situation depressing. Last December, I dealt with another bout of news depression. That came from another news disease: a report in the New York Times about Internet Addiction and prospective cures. My proposed cure is described here: How we are curing our news addiction

As to depression, my suggestion for people who don’t feel that they need clinical treatment is: Pick one thing that makes you unhappy. Do something to make it better. If you need help on that, see Problem Solving.

And if anyone gives you a survey asking how depressed you are, tell them your charge for answering surveys is $100/hour. You will either keep them from leeching your time or get $100. Either way, you probably won’t feel depressed for a while.