The full debate can now be viewed here:
4 Responses to Video of Maudsley Debate on psychiatric drug harm
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
-
The Maudesley Debate: More harm than good. | Chy Sawel -
05/08/2015
[…] Watch the video here: […]
The full debate can now be viewed here:
[…] Watch the video here: […]
The quality of the uploaded video appears to be very poor, and often stops, despite having fully loaded. Is there another source available that works correctly?
I attended the Maudsley Debate and struggle to describe it as ‘enjoyable’ given the enormity of the stake, so instead, describe it as excellent, interesting and disappointing.
Excellent that it took place at all, and excellent that the panel was articulate and (mostly) clear in their opinions.
Interesting that strength of opinion had prompted several people to travel a long way to attend, and interesting that the motion was so strongly supported and also so emotive for so many, clearly demonstrated by the inexorable tendency for question askers to use the opportunity to voice opinion.
And disappointing that it appears to have been a missed opportunity, when the main hall and an overspill room sold out in 2 days, suggesting a bigger venue might have been considered, and the question and answer session lasted only 32 minutes when there were enough people with burning questions to keep questions burning for 2 days.
Food for thought for a future event, surely.
I give Professor Young due respect for facing what he presumably anticipated would be an audience bordering on the hostile, and commend him for an eloquent start, at least. But a significant and fundamental question arose during the debate that remains unanswered (yes, my arm was raised, unsuccessfully):
Around 6 minutes into the Q&A session, Professor Young stated admirably, reassuringly, and very clearly, “I spend much of my time taking people OFF medication”, and I would hope this statement was true, rather than simply an attempt to ingratiate himself with the audience. In which case, given that Professor Young opposed the motion ‘This house believes that the long-term use of psychiatric medications is causing more harm than good’, and therefore appears to hold the view that the benefits of long-term use of psychiatric medications outweigh the disadvantages, why is he spending much of his time taking people off these medications ?
Dear CEPUK folks
Thanks SO much to Peter Gotzsche and Sami Timimi for doing their best to engage using data and science with an opposition who relied on the assertion of authority (Allan Young) or personal anecdote of ONE case (John Crace). Thanks for publicising the issues, and doing your best. If there was useful focus on the facts (not just lithium and “MHRA is okay”) Young and Crace’s flimsy argument would be better exposed.
AND the video skips terribly – is there a clean MP3 to hear somewhere?
With gratitude – Rob Purssey, psychiatrist and ACT therapist