|
| |||||||
ReviewsTVPanorama: "The Secrets of Seroxat"Rating: BBC 1, 13 October at 10 15 pm The postmodern media critic Jean Baudrillard once asserted
that the Gulf war did not happen, and was only a televised simulation
of a war. By the end of Panorama's "The Secrets of Seroxat"
my own grip on reality, never particularly strong, was
faltering. This mental fragility disappointed me because I know
quite a lot about selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors
(SSRIs), having prescribed them, done research on them, and
taken them. It may have been the nature of Panorama's
"secrets" that undermined me. For example, the Shorter
Oxford Textbook of Psychiatry notes both the key issues
raised in the programme, namely that SSRIs, particularly
paroxetine (Seroxat), can cause unpleasant withdrawal symptoms
and that early in SSRI treatment restlessness and agitation
might increase the risk of suicidal behaviour. Despite this it seems likely that clinicians and patients aren't
sufficiently aware of these problems. Panorama featured the
video diary of Helen Kelsall, which gave a superb account of
how hard it can be for some people to stop SSRI treatment.
However, far darker things were in store and at the centre of
the programme was the kind of horrifying tragedy that
depression can visit on its victims and their families. After
being on paroxetine for two days retired American oilman Donald
Shell shot and killed three members of his family (including
his 9 month old granddaughter) before taking his own life.
Such disasters have happened before SSRI treatment and will
occur after SSRIs have left the scene. However, the family
blamed the paroxetine and sued. Tragedies like this have multiple causes and it is impossible to know
for sure to what extent paroxetine might have played a role.
However, Panorama staged its documentary as a thriller
with David Healy as hero, a kind of psychiatric Philip Marlowe,
walking the mean streets down which a man must go. Healy,
reader in psychological medicine at the University of Wales
College of Medicine, was interviewed under true film
noir conditions; half his face was in darkness while the
rest was lit like a Rembrandt. Later we saw him driving alone,
grim jawed and dauntless, through a dark winding tunnel to the
Harlow headquarters of GlaxoSmithKline, a soulless Lubyanka
overhung with swirling banks of cloud. Healy's quest "bordering
on the impossible" was to identify crucial documents in a
sealed warehouse packed with a quarter of a million pieces of
paper. These documents, which held the closely guarded secret
that SSRIs can cause adverse effects in healthy volunteers,
could win the case for the Shell family. Healy eventually
arrived in a dark cavern, lined with boxes. Suddenly, there was
light. The rest was history and six million dollars to the
plaintiff.
Of course, if there are heroes there must be villains and drug
companies rival clearing banks and Saddam Hussein in public
affection. Unfortunately for the company spokesmen, in the
hyper-reality of television, choreographed anecdote will beat
evidence based medicine every time. In the face of human misery
and disaster, attempts to put depression, its treatment, and
the risk of suicide in a statistical context only make you
appear heartless and evasive. Why are we sometimes slow to recognise drug problems and share our
knowledge with colleagues and patients? Better information
systems and the internet will help, but drug companies have two
difficult missions: they must discover new, safe medical
treatments and at the same time maximise profits for
shareholders. These goals don't have to be incompatible because
knowing about the possible problems of medications increases
the likelihood that we will use them safely and well. However,
company representatives can find it difficult to acknowledge
weaknesses in their products. Perhaps the industry needs a new
kind of marketing culture for a more informed and
sceptical public. Another factor peculiarly relevant to psychiatry is the stigma and
misunderstanding that surround the illnesses and their
treatment. For example, the narrator in the Panorama
programme repeatedly referred to SSRIs as "happy pills," a term
which trivialises depression and insults people taking
medication. Now, who were the good guys again?
Footnotes PJC has received fees for lecturing and advising a number of drug companies that market antidepressant drugs including SSRIs. P
J Cowen University of Oxford phil.cowen{at}psychiatry.oxford.ac.uk
© BMJ 2002 Rapid Responses:Read all Rapid Responses
|
Home | Help | Search | Archive | Feedback | Table of Contents |