Here are some customer reviews of
Mad In America: Bad Science, Bad Medicine, and The Enduring Mistreatment of the Mentally Ill
: A well written, extensively researched expose on what it means to be a psychiatric patient in America. From Bedlam, in the 1800s, to the psuedo-research being done by today's drug companies, this book provides its readers with solid informattion. There are consequences to "trusting" your psychiatric caregiver without first researching what's "out there." If you have ever taken, or think you might one day need help in adjusting your mental state with society's expectations, read this book first. It's the only way to make an informed decision; you'd be crazy not to!
In response to the esteemed Dr. Woo's review of October 1, 2003: you're full of crap. "Such naive arrogance, if I may phrase it this way, suggests that history and progress is irrelevant, unnecessary, and meaningless". It is Dr. Woo who is being arrogant. Whitaker relates the history of the treatment of the mentally ill in this country and shows that the medical community has used their bad science to experiment on, torture and permanently brain damage the mentally ill. To call this "progress" is to discount the millions of Americans who have been harmed by their "therapeutics." Of course, Dr. Woo failed to mention that he is/was a member of the Psychosis Research (i.e., experimentation) Group at the Massachusettes Mental Health Center, where they are studying the effects of typical and atypical drugs on schizophrenics. He is/was also a research associate at McLean Hospital's Program for Structural and Molecular Neuroscience. He received a grant in 2001 to research the "use microarray technique for gene expression on monozygotic twins and on neurons from biopsied nasal epithelium to compare individuals with schizophrenia and controls". Dr. Woo and medical researchers like him need to step out of their labs and learn the human side of schizophrenia and other mental illness. The mentally ill are not their guinea pigs.The harm they have done in the past and continue doing to this day is detailed in this remarkable book. Anyone who has a mental illness, knows someone with a mental illness, is a healthcare worker, or just believes in defending basic human rights should read this book. Hopefully it will change how society views the treatment of the mentally ill.
Read this book. Then read the reviews attacking it. Then consider this: A man has a broken leg, but he doesn't know it. It is painful and he can't walk. A doctor comes to his house and observes his pained expression. "You plainly have an endorphin deficiency." Here's some pain killers. The man takes them. He feels wonderful. The pain mostly goes away - except when he walks. But at least he can walk, if he does it very carefully. He sings the praises of his doctor. "Before he helped me I was in pain and couldn't even walk. Now look at me hobbling around." His friends and family remark on how much better he is doing. Eventually gangreen sets in and the leg has to be amputated. But the man still tells everyone what a great doctor he has found. "I may only have one leg now but I'll tell you: one leg is a lot better than being in pain and not being able to walk." His friends and family say he's pretty spry for a one-legged man. Eventually the pain killers start to take their toll on other body systems. The man grows progressively sicker but not a day goes by in which he doesn't thank his lucky starts for having found such a gifted doctor. He dies at age 40, never knowing how healthy he might have been. All the friends and relatives ask the doctor to speak at the funeral.
Based on the logic of this book, it's hard to imagine that Mr. Whitaker had ever used, say, diapers because he certainly would have known what the toilet was for as soon as he was born. Similarly, there would be no need for progress in Mr. Whitaker's life because he would have been born with the knowledge of everything. He would have known what a singularity is, how the brain works, and, perhaps, how to make a perfect Martini. Such naive arrogance, if I may phrase it this way, suggests that history and progress is irrelevant, unnecessary, and meaningless. The logic of this book, to any intelligent reader, is obviously absurd. In his logic, epilepsy, like schizophrenia, should not be an illness because people with this illness used to be treated with "cruelty": holes were drilled through the skulls of these people in order to release the evil spirits-as if he can decide, as a reporter, based on his own liking, what constitutes an illness. If and when Mr. Whitaker can appreciate the complexity of the human brain, he would, hopefully, be able to appreciate why progress in understanding the functions and dysfunction of this very organ has been slow. If he happens to follow the scientific literature, he should also know that progress made in recent years has been nothing less than astonishing. In sum, this book belongs to the propaganda category. As a reporter, the author's treatment and presentation of this subject is dangerously irresponsible.
Reading Robert Whitaker's "Mad in America" is like walking through the world of Alice in Wonderland. Mr. Whitaker's conclusions are bizarre distortions of reality and the exact opposite of the truth. The serious reader who wants to learn more about treatment options for schizophrenics won't find this polemical book helpful. The first half of "Mad in America" is an over-wrought retelling of an old story, the bizarre - and by today's standards cruel - treatment of the mentally ill down the ages. His history adds nothing new to our understanding of those times. Instead, these disturbing tales set the stage for the author's indictment of modern-day drug treatments for schizophrenia. By the time the average reader gets to the chapters that cover the mid-20th century and on, he or she is emotionally primed to believe the worst of psychiatry, which seems to be the ultimate aim of this manipulative book. The author writes that drug treatments for schizophrenia do not work and make patients sicker. This simply isn't true. Although there is no cure for schizophrenia, medications can successfully treat its harrowing symptoms. Study after study has shown that most schizophrenics who are treated with anti-psychotic drugs have their lives significantly improved. They experience fewer relapses and hospitalizations, shorter stays in hospital when they do relapse, and fewer delusions and hallucinations. The author says we are no better off in understanding and treating mental illness than we were in the 1700s. Again, this isn't true. Technological and scientific advances are allowing us to understand more about the structure and chemistry of the brain than ever before. The efficacy of drugs has grown over time. The overwhelming majority of people who take anti-psychotic medications suffer only small side effects, like changes in weight. How can the author, who spends the first part of the book describing scaldings and chair-spinning, seriously conclude that we are still in the medical dark ages when it comes to treating the mentally ill? Equally surprising is Mr. Whitaker's conclusion that schizophrenics in India and Nigeria do better than similar people in the United States and other developed countries because doctors in the developing world don't keep their patients on anti-psychotic medications. The author cites World Health Organization (WHO) studies. But those studies did not conclude that drugs had anything to do with people's long term health. In fact, scientists and researchers are still struggling to understand the WHO findings decades after they were first published. I have to conclude that the author fixed onto an idea - that drugs can't help the mentally ill - committed to writing a book about it and refused to let go of the idea, even when the facts got in the way of his original thesis. This book is way off the mark and not to be recommended.
|