{"id":12501,"date":"2011-08-25T22:32:55","date_gmt":"2011-08-26T02:32:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/?p=12501"},"modified":"2011-08-25T23:50:39","modified_gmt":"2011-08-26T03:50:39","slug":"3-when-nmany","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/1boringoldman.com\/index.php\/2011\/08\/25\/3-when-nmany\/","title":{"rendered":"3. when n=many<\/em>…"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n
\n
McGorry aborts teen drug trial<\/font><\/strong><\/u><\/a>
Sydney Morning Herald<\/font><\/strong>
by Jill Stark
August 21, 2011<\/div>\n

THE FORMER Australian of the year Patrick McGorry has aborted a controversial trial of anti-psychotic drugs on children as young as 15 who are ”at risk” of psychosis, amid complaints the study was unethical. The Sun-Herald<\/em> can reveal 13 international health experts lodged a formal complaint calling for the trial not to go ahead. They were concerned children who had not yet been diagnosed with a psychotic illness would be unnecessarily given drugs with potentially dangerous side effects.<\/sup><\/p>\n

Quetiapine, sold as Seroquel, has been linked to weight gain and its manufacturer AstraZeneca, which was to fund the trial, last month paid US$647 million [$622 million] to settle a lawsuit in the US, alleging there was insufficient warning the drug may cause diabetes. Professor McGorry, one of the Prime Minister’s key mental health advisers, planned the trial at Orygen Youth Health in Melbourne, listing it on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry last March. It was to investigate whether the drug would decrease or delay the risk of people aged between 15 and 40 with early signs of mental illness, developing a psychotic disorder such as schizophrenia.<\/sup><\/p>\n

Last month, psychiatrists, psychologists and researchers from Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Britain and the US lodged a complaint with the ethics committee of Melbourne Health, the umbrella service which includes Orygen. They argued there was little evidence the onset of psychosis can be prevented and it was potentially dangerous to use anti-psychotics on those who merely had risk factors such as a family history or deterioration in mental health, with evidence showing up to 80 per cent will never develop a disorder.<\/sup><\/p>\n

Professor McGorry insists the decision to scrap the trial was made in June and is unrelated to the complaint, which he said he was only alerted to just over a week ago. He said Orygen had to choose between the drug trial or pursuing another trial using fish oil – which had proven useful as an early intervention treatment for schizophrenia in a smaller study. It opted for fish oil because it had less potential for side effects. Melbourne Health’s research ethics committee will still consider the complaint in September.<\/sup><\/p>\n

The Sun-Herald<\/em> recently revealed a growing backlash against the government’s mental health reforms, with Professor McGorry’s peers claiming his youth early intervention model had been "massively oversold"…<\/sup><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\n
Seven Questions For Professor Patrick McGorry<\/font><\/strong><\/u><\/a>
Psychiatry cannot promise more than it can deliver<\/sup>
Psychology Today<\/font><\/strong>
by Allen Frances M.D.
August 18, 2011<\/div>\n

The great news is that Professor McGorry has recently renounced the relevance of psychosis risk syndrome in the current practice of clinical psychiatry. He has done so in two separate and dramatic ways: 1: by withdrawing his support for the inclusion of psychosis risk in DSM 5; and 2: by promising not to include it as a target in Australia’s massive new experiment in early intervention. Psychosis risk syndrome is an extremely promising topic for ongoing research, but it is not nearly ready for current clinical application and if introduced prematurely could cause disastrous unintended consequences…<\/sup><\/p>\n

But a dark cloud surrounds the silver lining of having one psychiatrist in a position of almost unopposed influence. Professor McGorry has developed the messianic blind spot that is so common in visionary prophets. His zeal has made him an unreliable evaluator of scientific evidence, allowing him to defend absolutely indefensible positions with the convincing, but inaccurate, force of a true believer…<\/sup><\/p>\n

Below are seven questions that beg for Dr McGorry’s immediate public response. No evasion or questioning of my motivation is called for- just straight answers to simple questions. It will be useful for Professor McGorry to respond for the record now, before Australia’s makes final the terms of its much needed and awaited investment in mental health.<\/sup><\/div>\n