You must log in or register to comment.

fotogneric OP t1_ivp93p6 wrote

"The researchers used an assessment measure to rate the severity of symptoms of anxiety across all of the disorders on a scale of 1 to 7 (with 7 being severe anxiety).
Participants in the MBSR program experienced an average 1.35-point reduction in their anxiety symptoms, while patients who had been assigned to the antidepressant experienced a 1.43-point average reduction. Though the antidepressant reduction was slightly higher, it was not statistically significant.
The average scores of both groups dropped from about 4.5 to 3.1, which translates to a significant 30% or so drop in the severity of peoples’ anxiety."


msmurdock t1_ivrcnf4 wrote

The study used a total of 276 patients...which basically means nothing.

It used one drug, Lexapro, for anxiety... It's an SSRI, which is effective for some, but not even close to most folks with anxiety disorders.

And they gave the Lexapro folks no support other than the drug. Even though it's meant to be used alongside therapy.

So. The headline actually should be: Tiny study suggests this particular MBSR program we are not sharing with you is equally as effective as trying a single med with no therapy on anxiety."



dadaesque t1_ivrn9xa wrote

What are you on about?

How did you get that 276 is “tiny” for an RCT? Unless you’re expecting a very small effect (in which case you probably aren’t bothering with an RCT) ~200 certainly isn’t tiny.

And what do you want them to do, test it against every single drug that is used for anxiety? That would mean dozens of comparison groups, which would necessitate thousands if not tens of thousand of participants and would basically guarantee some significant effect somewhere. Lexapro is a first line treatment for anxiety which makes it a reasonable choice as a comparison group, which was offered without therapy since that would have been a confound.

MBSR is a standardized protocol that is widely used in therapy and research and can go look up yourself.

The headline is perfectly fine.


Karma_collection_bin t1_iy2642k wrote

Yes and there is literally at least one well-respected completely free MBSR course online!

(I have no affiliation and do plan to do this one once I am done working my way through Healthy Minds Innovations app's full guided meditation program - also free & actually well done, zero adverts - not MBSR though, though skills and effects would overlap, I'd imagine).


Feralpudel t1_ivrq1wf wrote

I’ll quibble some but then add another concern.

That’s not a small sample size for an RCT. And the main problem with small sample size is power—i.e., you run the risk of finding no significant difference between groups when in fact one exists.

As for the choice of Lexapro for the control arm, I understand there’s a long tradition among pharma companies for choosing a weak sister drug at the lowest credible dose for the comparison arm.

Of course there’s also a long tradition of antidepressants being no better than placebo in trials. That’s partly because they tend to be inconsistently effective treatments, but also because there is usually a large placebo effect in trials of antidepressant drugs as well.

So that makes me think it would have been useful to have a placebo arm as well as a drug arm, to try and measure the true placebo effect. Otherwise I’m unconvinced that we weren’t just seeing all placebo effect in both arms. That said, a 30 percent improvement is a pretty large effect size.

I’d be interested in whether the study reported any adverse effects in the MM arm. There is increasing awareness of the risk of serious adverse effects of meditation in some subjects. Although serious effects (e.g., psychotic breaks) have tended to occur in intense retreat settings, they’ve also been reported for one of the more tradition-based non-dual apps (Waking Up). (I use and recommend the app; arguably it has caused some of the same issues as real meditation because it IS real meditation.)

One can tell a story that anxious persons might be at higher risk of adverse events while meditating.


Gmork14 t1_ixzppkx wrote

I definitely had some negative reactions when I was learning to meditate. Panic attacks, specifically.

Not knowing any better I pushed through and kept practicing. Eventually learned to sit with it and it got better. But it was a rough start, and I wonder sometimes if I’m not noticing more subtle ill affects.


StreetCornerApparel t1_iy0s4ik wrote

Anxiety is one of those things where sometimes being present with yourself isn’t easy, at least at first.

When I first started meditating I felt similar panic reactions, but when I kept going I found peace in being alone with myself for those moments, and my general anxiety levels dropped off majorly. I was having two to five panic attacks a day prior to meditation, and now have maybe 1, and sometimes none. I think massage helped a ton too though.


Karma_collection_bin t1_iy277s6 wrote

>Otherwise I’m unconvinced that we weren’t just seeing all placebo effect in both arms. That said, a 30 percent improvement is a pretty large effect size.

I mean, it could be both, right? e.g. maybe it's 5 or 10% placebo & then the rest is the drug or MBSR. And the cool thing is that people "in real life" can of course do both drug & MBSR.


I wonder also if these tools would have greater effect together simply the sum (adding the % decreases together)?


[deleted] t1_ivp9es3 wrote



bekilledoff t1_ivpaikv wrote

the value in studies like this is establishing empirical data for the clinical efficacy for the newer treatment. the antidepressants were already proven to be effective, and mindfulness as a treatment modality is relatively new in Western mental health care.

some people are allergic to certain drugs. some people need medication and can't practice mindfulness skills.

it's good that both treatment options are effective


[deleted] t1_ivpanor wrote



continentalgrip t1_ivpeojz wrote

"Thus, we had data on unpublished trials as well as published trials. This turned out to be very important. Almost half of the clinical trials sponsored by the drug companies have not been published (Melander, Ahlqvist-Rastad, Meijer, & Beermann, 2003; Turner, Matthews, Linardatos, Tell, & Rosenthal, 2008). The results of the unpublished trials were known only to the drug companies and the FDA, and most of them failed to find a significant benefit of drug over placebo. A second advantage of the FDA trials in the FDA dataset is that they all used the same primary measure of depression – the Hamilton depression scale (HAM-D). That made it easy to understand the clinical significance of the drug-placebo differences. Finally, the data in the FDA files were the basis upon which the medications were approved. In that sense they have a privileged status. If there is anything wrong with those trials, the medications should not have been approved in the first place.

In the data sent to us by the FDA, only 43% of the trials showed a statistically significant benefit of drug over placebo. The remaining 57% were failed or negative trials. Similar results have been reported in other meta-analyses (Turner et al., 2008), including one conducted by the FDA on the clinical trials of all antidepressants that it had approved between 1983 and 2008 (Khin, Chen, Yang, Yang, & Laughren, 2011). The results of our analysis indicated that the placebo response was 82% of the response to these antidepressants. Subsequently, my colleagues and I replicated our meta-analysis on a larger number of trials that had been submitted to the FDA (Kirsch et al., 2008). With this expanded data set, we found once again that 82% of the drug response was duplicated by placebo.

More important, in both analyses, the mean difference between drug and placebo was less than two points on the HAM-D. The HAM-D is a 17-item scale on which people can score from 0 to 53 points, depending on how depressed they are. A six-point difference can be obtained just by changes in sleep patterns, with no change in any other symptom of depression. So the 1.8 difference that we found between drug and placebo was very small indeed – small enough to be clinically insignificant.


neuro__atypical t1_ivpil5o wrote

SSRIs are "effective," in the clinical statistical use of the term. But the effect size and success rate is very small compared to other drugs. They're pretty crappy.


neuro__atypical t1_ivpt4j7 wrote

SSRIs' slight advantage over placebo could also be explained by their downstream effects on BDNF. Not everyone is responsive to BDNF/neurogenesis as a treatment for depression though, and the effects on BDNF are extremely weak compared to other neurogenesis-promoting drugs.


continentalgrip t1_ivpubg5 wrote

The link it kind of looks like you didn't read? indicates they are not clinically effective.


neuro__atypical t1_ivpy51l wrote

Sorry, I seem to have mixed up clinical and statistical significance. I was trying to respond to this part of your link:

> Even the small statistical difference between antidepressants and placebos may be an enhanced placebo effect, due to the fact that most patients and doctors in clinical trials successfully break blind.

Saying that it could be better explained by SSRIs' small but very real effect on BDNF (agents which promote BDNF to a much higher degree show actual clinically significant improvements in rats, e.g. Semax) than a hypothetical "enhanced placebo effect."


continentalgrip t1_ivq6vgm wrote

I have worked last ten years as a clinical trials study coordinator. Some patients start taking study drug and immediately have obvious side effects making it trivially obvious they're not on placebo. So I definitely believe in enhanced placebo. Additionally I have given the HAMD to many patients over extended periods and have seen scores go up and down ten points easily. 1.8 points is really not much.


roguemidwife t1_ivr6s31 wrote

I want to know more about the standardized mindfulness program.


dadaesque t1_ivsy4nh wrote

They used mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR). It’s an 8 week protocol that has you doing about 30 to 45 minutes of some kind of mindfulness practice each day, and has a full day session towards the end of the program. It’s been around since the 80s and if you have a large medical center, mental health center or Buddhist organization near you it’s quite possible they have a course, and I’m sure they have some online as well.


silashoulder t1_ivt1xox wrote

I took mindfulness classes, and it think it’s a mistake to frame the practice as >“30-45 minutes a day.”

It’s more like: >constant upkeep and periodic check-ins with oneself, that amounts to a collective 30-45 minutes in a day.

A straight 45 minutes of “quiet time” isn’t going to have the same effect as a complete overhaul of your focus. Fortunately, complete overhauls are easier.


dadaesque t1_ivu28in wrote

The MBSR protocol has you do a daily practice of a (usually) 45 minute session of some kind. This is similar to mindfulness training in Buddhist settings where formal meditation periods are typically at least 30 minutes, which is supposed to be in addition to taking a more mindful approach to everything outside of the dedicated practice period.


silashoulder t1_ivu5rd3 wrote

My concern is that, by scheduling specific meditations, patients might run the risk of compartmentalizing their tools. That’s not to imply that a patient would only be able to practice mindfulness at a predetermined part of the day, but I’d push for further investigation into what the best immersion techniques are.

I also suspect that the timeline parallels the Buddhist practice you mentioned, purely out of tradition, which medical scientists have been guilty of before. (For example, it’s perfectly safe to take antibiotics and have a glass of wine. There’s some evidence that Prohibition was partly motivated by doctor’s’ recommendations against drinking alcohol to reduce the risk of “being fun enough at parties to have sex with,” thereby spreading STIs, particularly among the military ranks.)

(Edit: see also, Why Fitbits Are Set at 10,000 Steps.)


dadaesque t1_ivulggz wrote

MBSR was indeed based on Buddhist practices. The point of the dedicated sessions is that it helps you build some capacity for mindfulness that you can bring with you to other situations, not that you simply do it and be done with it. That’s also the point of the the full day session of n the program. In addition, they have to have some, specific, defined benchmark in order to study “mindfulness” vs a known intervention. They can’t just get 100 people and tell them to go out and “do mindfulness”.


MephIol t1_ixzzm41 wrote

It’s continuous and mindfulness extends. The program teaches many forms as well. Watch a video on it and see for yourself! There’s a TED talk from one of the founders of MBCT.

Additionally, communities of mindfulness exist that help for social dimensions such that I would love to see long term research of the social implications of meditators with anxiety or depress


Karma_collection_bin t1_iy27w9r wrote

>scheduling specific meditations, patients might run the risk of compartmentalizing their tools.

That would depend on the content of the program, knowledge imparted, etc, would it not? etc


E.g. In my guided meditation app, they almost always end with something along the lines of "and as you go about your day, check-in with yourself, set an intention for your day, spend time in between activities or during them to do X mindfulness-practice" etc etc.


And honestly I think that's very different than something else that people would typically glaze over. Because it's something that's said during a mindfulness session, in which the 'patient' is engaged, paying attention generally. And honestly if they are always glazing over that part, then I don't believe they would even be actually making the effort to even start sessions daily.


Edit: I'll also say that with this practice, you're actually training the ability to bring awareness to your thoughts. That's something that affects your day, regardless.


Significant-Hope-108 t1_ixysc53 wrote

MBSR is 30-45 minutes of practice in one session daily. Its a standardized program.

Your comment is absolutely incorrect.


roguemidwife t1_ivukzhd wrote

Are there free programs? I only found one from UMass and it was ~$178


dadaesque t1_ivumhhu wrote

Buddhist centers often have options for those who have trouble paying, and mental health providers sometimes will offer a sliding scale. Insurance might cover it if it’s through a health provider. But they are fairly intensive 8 week programs, and instructors have to go through a standard training and certification program, so it’s quite an investment to run them, and I don’t know that you’d be able to find one completely for free, though there might be a recorded or self paced version you can access.


Significant-Hope-108 t1_ixysvxx wrote

UMass is a quality program. Honestly though, you could get the MBSR workbook off amazon and work through it.

The teacher in an MBSR course really just hold’s space for the group discussions. Most of the work is done via meditation practice.

So, combining the workbook with a daily practice could still be helpful. You would just miss out on the group discussion portion of the class.

Some people get a lot of value out of group discussions, so I do not want to diminish that. If you can afford the full live class, I highly recommend it. If you cannot, the workbook and a meditation app would mostly suffice.


MephIol t1_ixzzujt wrote

While I feel you, I also pay 150/hour of therapy so these program costs are relatively cheap for the benefits. Well, extremely cheap. The accountability and feedback from trained experts is worth a ton of value


turbulent_toast_ t1_iy03cbq wrote

You can read the text Full Catastrophe Living which discusses the development and use of this type of program and then you can follow it through each week.


Significant-Hope-108 t1_ixyrvkx wrote

Its MBSR. Its offered many places online via an 8-week course. UMass and Brown have quality offerings.


Dalmah t1_ivphykl wrote

What about both in conjunction?


[deleted] t1_ivpkuev wrote



Dalmah t1_ivpl519 wrote

The title indicates that they both are individually equally effective as the other at around 30% IMO


-newlife t1_ivplz7f wrote

Reading the article then re-reading the title didn’t clear that up for me.


Dalmah t1_ivpm6xu wrote

Saying "both are effective at around 30%" does mean that the combined pair totals 30%, it's that both individually are around 30%, making them equally effective.


Smokron85 t1_ivrbpdc wrote

I still really don't understand what "mindfulness" really even is.


kellyk99 t1_ivrfvnd wrote

Mindfulness is basically like living in the moment. Intentional thinking and non-judgemental thinking.

In someone that is anxious let's say they are constantly thinking ahead/forward

"Omg I was so awkward today in class I'm such an idiot" ruminating on those thoughts is what anxious people do a lot

Or the opposite. "Omg no one at work likes me they think I'm an idiot and I don't wanna go back tomorrow, what will they think of me" thinking only ahead and worrying about what could happen.

Mindfulness exercises focus a lot on bodily sensations and observing breathing, thoughts and emotions to bring someone out of that peripheral thinking

(I'm a psychiatric nurse)


Leemage t1_ivs5mm0 wrote

I feel like if I was capable of doing that, then I wouldn’t have anxiety. Medication was the thing that allowed me to finally practice mindfulness.


montegue144 t1_ivsakxx wrote

I am similar and I think some people just need both.

Everyone's different <3

Be proud you got there! I'm still working on it myself.


Leemage t1_ivtec09 wrote

I hope you get there too! It’s amazing to me how much better I function.


Tyken12 t1_ivsfkg8 wrote

Ah no wonder i'm such a mess with my adhd, GAD, and depression


psyche77 t1_ivrfj9j wrote

Here's a start.

>You have questions about mindfulness and meditation. Mindful has the answers.


BlackViperMWG t1_ivskxs4 wrote

I am unable to meditate. My ADHD-I and GAD and depressive mind just can't really focus or turn off the rest.


MegaChip97 t1_ixyi2vl wrote

> I am unable to meditate. My ADHD-I and GAD and depressive mind just can't really focus or turn off the rest.

Thats a false thinking. The "goal" of mindfulness training is not turning your mind off or focussing. It's like saying because you cannot lift lots of weights weightlifting is nothing for you.

Mindfulness is a metacognitive training. You train your metacognitive ability, e.g. noticing your cognitions, through doing exactly that. Meditation is boring. Your mind wanders off. You try to notice that and come back to your breathing. Again and again and again. Just like lifting weights is lifting them again and again and again.

A "still" mind is often a side effect of that, but it is not what you must achieve while meditating for it to be effective :)


BlackViperMWG t1_ixyrso3 wrote

Honestly it still sounds the same.


MegaChip97 t1_ixys10p wrote

Your mind having a hard time focussing is not a problem because the goal is not to have a focussed/clear mind. The goal is the training and that happens through losing focus and then coming back to the present moment. That just means your training is more intense. You not being able to focus is not a failure


BlackViperMWG t1_ixz14eb wrote

But what is the goal in that case?


MegaChip97 t1_ixz21s0 wrote

Improving your ability to notice your own thoughts, feelings and emotions, and coming back to the present moment when you are not there.


stillnessismedicine t1_ivuth7y wrote

I hear you...I think a lot of people have misconceptions about what meditation is. Meditation is not sitting there in stillness feeling at peace. If we could just will ourselves to do that, none of us would have any problems. Meditation is turning your awareness inward and noticing what is there without judgement. Paired with deep breathing, it is a deeply therapeutic practice that cultivates self-awareness and self-compassion and with time with regular practice will lead to a greater sense of mindfulness and calm. Meditating is not easy, particularly when it is new for you and you have a lot of energy in your body or thoughts racing through your mind. Start with very short meditations. Do 1 min. And then 2. And then 5. Slowly build your ability to sit over time. It's kinda like working out, you can't expect to jump in and be in shape. You have to put some work in first. Anyway, I hope this is helpful, and hope you find what you need whatever that may be.


MephIol t1_iy00dht wrote

Hey I’m both as well - DSM 5 validated. When I’m consistent, it’s the best activity I’ve found to alleviate both, even over adderall. Exercise and meditation lead to consistent sleep and a very positive mindset.

No joke it changed my life twenty years ago from addiction and being kicked out of college. Very successful now all thanks to a Tibetan lama and a lot of regular mediation.

Read up if you don’t believe but it’s literally the best treatment for both of our conditions. CBT and DBT therapies are very similar but don’t achieve what mindfulness can. LMK what questions you have


yusquera t1_ivrd85y wrote

Im guessing it's the Buddhist practice of "just observing" which I believe is sitting meditation but ya I could be wrong and it is confusing.


[deleted] t1_ivry8fm wrote

I'm a citizen artist who specialized in improvisation.

I'd argue for an expanded definition of mindfulness that includes practices which enhance one's sense of "presence in the moment" like others have said. Some people call it creative flow. Others just call it plain 'ole flow. Athletes find it. Chefs find it. I'm sure many other professionals across fields find it. It can be found in good conversation or nature too.

In my world, presence/mindfulness means being able to appreciate the details in the moment of the world around me AND not losing my sense of self but maintaining it simultaneously. I didn't come by this through meditation, but through artmaking.

There are countless ways to cultivate one's ability to be present in the moment. :)


True-Canis-Majoris t1_ivshtxq wrote

I totally agree, making art is a form of meditation, getting in a flow state. Sometimes it is simply achievable by petting your dog/cat.


-downtone_ t1_ivs2dhn wrote

I'll give my interpretation. It's being aware of your emotions and understanding their origin. Which gives a pause of reaction in those moments. Gives time to put it through a logic filter and give a more reasoned response. Where without those mindful moments, you may respond in hair across ass mode or similar.


dadaesque t1_ivrpe8d wrote

There’s no single definition or conception of mindfulness. It’s meaning and use can vary pretty considerably, but the description from Mindful linked here is probably the most relevant to the study, as it’s from Jon Kabat-Zinn who developed the MBSR protocol and is largely responsible for bringing mindfulness practices into western medicine


[deleted] t1_ivphaye wrote



fotogneric OP t1_ivphzxv wrote

And in this case that "something" is kind of a lot: one 2.5 hour in-person class per week, a day-long retreat, and daily 45-minute home practice exercises. Still worth it in some case though I'm sure, especially considering the well-known side effects of antidepressants. I don't know whether mindfulness has any negative side effects, though I could imagine how it might be linked to rumination (me me me, my thoughts, my world, for an hour at a time).


Fit-Rest-973 t1_ivqoxrz wrote

I am a nurse, worked in psych for many years. When SSRIs were new, the recommended use was short term. Like, getting through the loss of a loved one, etc. Targeted time for using was 6 - 8 weeks. Then came health care for profit.


msmurdock t1_ivrndpv wrote

True, that's what was hoped when SSRIs were first introduced in 1987.

Then came much better research, trials, and a plethora of different medications as well as new science that allowed us the ability to study genetics and brain scans etc.

We have slightly more info 36 years later.


MegaChip97 t1_ixyi81m wrote

Yet we actually still don't really know how SSRI work, even though the name (and most prescribing psychiatrists) act differently.


evie_quoi t1_ivqy9ax wrote

I mean, we also have years of studies on them now and understand depression/anxiety differently


Fit-Rest-973 t1_ivr9dl6 wrote

It is criminal, the way these drugs are being shoved down the throats of the elderly. Yes, they're depressed. Because they are old, and are close to death


onwardtoaction t1_ivrj9n5 wrote

why is this criminal? there are generics available for every major SSRI and I bet profit margins are extremely thin. agree that the quality of life for much of the elderly is low, but if pills that have been shown to help end up helping, what is the harm?


Fit-Rest-973 t1_ivrjl0r wrote

For starters, they're ineffective. The last thing elderly people need is more toxins for their organs to filter


xPussyEaterPharmD t1_ivrprwt wrote

It seems you are inferring that the only reason patients take anti-depressants >8 weeks/chronically is because someone will profit. That is unequivocally false.

Antidepressant use shows sustained lower scores in clinical depressive scales validating its chronic mood enhancement overtime. Sure drug companies like to make profits from chronic meds, but they are only prescribed because there is a true benefit.

Your comment is honestly pretty disappointing as you are a healthcare practitioner and are feeding into the stigma of mental health treatment


Fit-Rest-973 t1_ivrpvl7 wrote

Those who profit push the medication, whether it is effective or not


BizzyHaze t1_ivrzb0d wrote

Most SSRIs are available generic for very cheap, it's not a very profitable drug anymore for big pharma.


Fit-Rest-973 t1_ivrq23u wrote

Or, the corporations who profit have rules for doctors, as to what and what not to prescribe. Nobody prescribes therapy any more


BizzyHaze t1_ivrzgq6 wrote

Talk therapy is expensive. $200/hr in my city for doctoral level provider. SSRIs are $2/mo.


One-Gap-3915 t1_ivswuiv wrote

  • I live in a country with free universal healthcare and SSRIs are very widely used including for longer term treatment
  • SSRIs take time to start working, the first 6-8weeks would be adjusting to side effects and building up dose so idk how it would even work for a short term application. Aren’t you supposed to take SSRIs for a while and then once you’re stabilised and have done therapy etc you taper off.
  • We have way more data on SSRIs now. Despite the title of this post, SSRIs and therapy are more effective than either alone.

MrX101 t1_ivrazzm wrote

I mean its a tool like anything else, can be correctly or badly. Personally for me anti depressants were only thing that helped. Now on Strattera which is/was by far the best one I had.(and I tried about 9 or so different medications)

Though for specifically the elderly, I don't know people keep trying to keep old people to live longer, even if their quality of life is awful. Its just dumb.


Fit-Rest-973 t1_ivrb7hn wrote

I was on meds for ADHD. Wasn't diagnosed until I was 50. Thankfully outgrew the need for meds last year


MrX101 t1_ivukp2d wrote

which meds were you on?, out of curiosity.


Fit-Rest-973 t1_ivuszjn wrote

Lexapro, which I felt was helpful. For the time I needed it. Adderall, which was essential, for when I was working


Shadizar t1_ivs507w wrote

Are there examples of this standardized mindfulness program online?


RecordingFamous1099 t1_iw3eauo wrote

I think it's something that I respond very well to...until I enter times of stress. Then my anxiety peaks and I can't leave the house...and the depression follows. It is really hard to employ those techniques after a lifetime.


Tyken12 t1_ivsfijb wrote

too bad my anxiety and depression run at 130% capacity


QncyFie t1_iwrzq06 wrote

Some things just cannot be perceived in a positive way. Luckily things of that nature usually includes individuals who's opinions have as much worth as their semen.


AutoModerator t1_ivp8n7p wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are now allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will continue to be removed and our normal comment rules still apply to other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.


[deleted] t1_ivqmq34 wrote



continentalgrip t1_ivqoihn wrote


MrX101 t1_ivulpk2 wrote

this was absurdly interesting to read. Thank you for posting this. The part were people that didn't respond to placebo, and the meds were actually useful in those cases, was especially enjoyable.

Though personally I would have classified severe depression as, only for patients that would not respond to a placebo, and exercise and diet improvements. Aka literally nothing else works.

While obviously they still be in extreme mental disarray due to depression, even if they exercise/placebo/diet improves the situation, it indicates to me that there's an issue with how different people would classify "severe depression".


msmurdock t1_ivrbtpg wrote

Let's be very careful about calling this "science."

The entire group was 200 people. So basically nothing this study found was going to be statistically significant to begin with.

Then, they had one group take a single med (Lexapro), which works for some folks and not others and is not at all a front line med. That group did not get the mindfulness program or any additional therapy, despite the fact that even the most basic psych 101 course will teach you meds work best in conjunction with therapy.

This is basically garbage science...published on a site where the next recommended article wants to tell you about how angels will heal you better than any drug.


DespairOrNot t1_ivs8qva wrote

Escitalopram is absolutely a standard first line medication for anxiety and depression! Yes obviously they work best in conjunction with psychological therapy as you've said, but the drug they chose is very reasonable.


p3tr1t0 t1_ivrtegi wrote

Escitalopram is placebo. That thing is completely useless. All the studies showing its efficacy are fixed.


BizzyHaze t1_ivrzlnd wrote

Not saying you are wrong, but what's the evidence - we are, after all, on a science sub.


xder345 t1_ivs8ajt wrote

It’s worked wonders for mental health and is generally well tolerated. Boo.