AccessMyLibrary provides FREE access to over 30 million articles from top publications available through your library.
Create a link to this page
Copy and paste this link tag into your Web page or blog:
To the Editors:
I don't usually respond to reviews, but there were so many inaccuracies and misrepresentations of my book in Theodore Dalrymple's piece ("Forced smiles" September 2006) that I feel compelled to do so.
He says that I am unaware of the real breakthrough signified by the creation of antidepressants like Prozac: their safety. But I emphasize this point--how people sometimes died from taking the older antidepressants--in the very paragraph that heralds Prozac's over-prescription by primary care doctors.
He says I am unaware of the placebo action of antidepressants. On the contrary, I am quite aware, which is why I devote an entire chapter to how the placebo effect can induce artificial happiness, even alluding to the specific placebo properties of antidepressants.
He implies that I agree with Peter Kramer that doctors are closing in on the neurochemical secret behind happiness, only, unlike Kramer, I am horrified by their impending discovery. He is wrong. What horrifies me is that great numbers of people actually think doctors have achieved such a breakthrough, and they use this false belief to justify medicating unhappiness. As I emphasize in the book, the story of Artificial Happiness is not one of science--the science is so primitive as to be almost laughable--but ideology.
He criticizes me for not making a distinction between artificial and real happiness. But I do. My investigation proceeds from the average person's view that real happiness arises when life is going along as a person hopes; artificial happiness, induced by medicine, lets a person feels happy no matter how life is going. This is not rocket science, nor should it be. Mr. Dalrymple calls for a deeper investigation into the ...
Source: HighBeam Research, Medic alert.(Letters)(Letter to the editor)