advertisement
Question
Posted by: James | 2010/07/15

The Internet

Dear Cybershrick. Do you use the internet to get information on medications or do you yourself study these drugs. The reason I ask is that most of your answers seem to come straight from unreliable rescourses. One of the reasons I only ask my pdychiatrist. I never use the internet for drug info anymore, why do you?

Not what you were looking for? Try searching again, or ask your own question
Our expert says:
Expert ImageCyberShrink

I am wondering on what basis you think ANY of the information I comment on comes " straight from unreliable rescourses." And, I'm really pleased you trust and apparently have a really good relationship with your psychiatrist.

Very often a doctor / shrink bases their opinions on what drug company sales reps tell them, and the carefully selected reprinted articles the rep may give them. That can, obviously, give them a biased view of a drug, as such material is caefully selected by a company to show their product in the best possible light.

It is extremely, very, vanishingly extremely indeed, unlikely that every shrink personally conducts actual research into any, let alone all, of the drugs he or she prescribes - it would be impossible for them to do so.

Some have taken part in one or two drug trials - but generally these would be funded by a drug company with a specific agenda.

Essentially, ANY competent doctor will have to base their opinion on different drugs on several sources, as I do. One will be their personal clinical experience with the patients they have treated and the drugs they have prescribed. As hardly any shrink sees every variety of psych problem in their personal practice, and they could no competently try out every available drug on their patients, such experience is necessarily limited to the sort of problems and people they see, and the handful of drugs they usually use.

Then they will base their opinion on the research and other expert opinions they read about in professional medical journals, like I do - but again, they can't possibly have the time to read every journal that exists.

Then in this day an age, they SHOULD use the internet. The internet, surely, contains a very large quantity of rubbish and of weaselly biased and sometimes daft materials. But it also contains a great deal of highly reliable an responsible material summarizing and linking to available proper research.

A properly trained and qualified doctor or psychologist already knows enough to recognize reliable sources of information from unreliable, and will check more than one source on different points.

Where once a doc in practice might own one or two major textbooks in their speciality, and we would consult those, a growing problem is that such books are not only very expensive, but ALWAYS, inevitably, significantly out of date by the time they are published, let alone by the date the doc looks into them. THis is where the internet makes a major contribution, as it can provide far more up-to-date news on drugs and other treatments than can ever appear in books or even journals.

It can, for instance, report in summary or in detail on new research findings reported at international conferences which may be relevant today, but may not appear in the journals ( if they ever do ) until a year or two later, and will only be reflected in books even later than that.

I am astonished at your wild assertion that "most of your answers seem to come straight from unreliable rescourses ", and at your odd assumption that on the other hand very opinion your own psychiatrist provides is excusively from the most reliable resources on earth, and that he/she never reads anything on the internet.

Maybe it'd be easier to take your concerns seriously if you could reply. fairly briefly, but quoting maybe 2 or 3 examples of comments you consider came from highly unreliable resources.


The information provided does not constitute a diagnosis of your condition. You should consult a medical practitioner or other appropriate health care professional for a physical exmanication, diagnosis and formal advice. Health24 and the expert accept no responsibility or liability for any damage or personal harm you may suffer resulting from making use of this content.

4
Our users say:
Posted by: Silver | 2010/07/16

ViVa Cybershrink

Reply to Silver
Posted by: anon | 2010/07/15

you must be kidding me.
wow.

Reply to anon
Posted by: Red | 2010/07/15

Go Cybershrink! You tell him.

Reply to Red
Posted by: cybershrink | 2010/07/15

I am wondering on what basis you think ANY of the information I comment on comes " straight from unreliable rescourses." And, I'm really pleased you trust and apparently have a really good relationship with your psychiatrist.

Very often a doctor / shrink bases their opinions on what drug company sales reps tell them, and the carefully selected reprinted articles the rep may give them. That can, obviously, give them a biased view of a drug, as such material is caefully selected by a company to show their product in the best possible light.

It is extremely, very, vanishingly extremely indeed, unlikely that every shrink personally conducts actual research into any, let alone all, of the drugs he or she prescribes - it would be impossible for them to do so.

Some have taken part in one or two drug trials - but generally these would be funded by a drug company with a specific agenda.

Essentially, ANY competent doctor will have to base their opinion on different drugs on several sources, as I do. One will be their personal clinical experience with the patients they have treated and the drugs they have prescribed. As hardly any shrink sees every variety of psych problem in their personal practice, and they could no competently try out every available drug on their patients, such experience is necessarily limited to the sort of problems and people they see, and the handful of drugs they usually use.

Then they will base their opinion on the research and other expert opinions they read about in professional medical journals, like I do - but again, they can't possibly have the time to read every journal that exists.

Then in this day an age, they SHOULD use the internet. The internet, surely, contains a very large quantity of rubbish and of weaselly biased and sometimes daft materials. But it also contains a great deal of highly reliable an responsible material summarizing and linking to available proper research.

A properly trained and qualified doctor or psychologist already knows enough to recognize reliable sources of information from unreliable, and will check more than one source on different points.

Where once a doc in practice might own one or two major textbooks in their speciality, and we would consult those, a growing problem is that such books are not only very expensive, but ALWAYS, inevitably, significantly out of date by the time they are published, let alone by the date the doc looks into them. THis is where the internet makes a major contribution, as it can provide far more up-to-date news on drugs and other treatments than can ever appear in books or even journals.

It can, for instance, report in summary or in detail on new research findings reported at international conferences which may be relevant today, but may not appear in the journals ( if they ever do ) until a year or two later, and will only be reflected in books even later than that.

I am astonished at your wild assertion that "most of your answers seem to come straight from unreliable rescourses ", and at your odd assumption that on the other hand very opinion your own psychiatrist provides is excusively from the most reliable resources on earth, and that he/she never reads anything on the internet.

Maybe it'd be easier to take your concerns seriously if you could reply. fairly briefly, but quoting maybe 2 or 3 examples of comments you consider came from highly unreliable resources.


Reply to cybershrink

Have your say

Thanks for commenting! Your comment will appear on the site shortly.
Thanks for commenting! Your comment will appear on the site shortly.
advertisement