"Myself, I don't want doctors first attempting to fool me with a placebo to see it that helps."

Yes, but the problem in the case of antidepressants is that the results are very clear that treatment provides strong undeniable relief for many. AND that this relief is the placebo effect.

Ethan suggests starting with lowered doses of an active ingredient ( with harmful side effects. ) Unless one is willing to reduce the ingredient to the point of homeopathy, there will always be some risk.

But if the choice is forego treatment or receive treatment, the results speak for themselves. Unfortunately the benefit/risk ratio leads to the conclusion that medicating with a placebo while telling folks that it's an antidepressant is the best route to go with.

Its either THAT, or remove most of them from the market until we can find something whose ingredients actually have an effect.

The one thing that's indefensible is continuing to treat with something we know does no better but whose risks are very real.

( Though sometimes something can become so entrenched as to be immune from removal despite the evidence being in. The D.A.R.E. program became hugely popular before the results of longterm studies were in. The studies finally showed that those in Drug Abuse Resistance Education were MORE likely to try drugs that their peers who had not taken the program. The D.A.R.E. program actually produced the effects that it was supposed to prevent. But getting rid of D.A.R.E. just because D.A.R.E. kids are more likely to use became political suicide because everyone believed in it enough to deny the results reported by its creators. )

Dante