Talk:Major depressive disorder

External link to video

On 27 October after proposing it on this talk page here, I inserted a large button under the infobox linking to a 10 minute video about depression. On 11 January, Doc James deleted it. I've learned a bit about MOS since then and am amazed it lasted that long. However, I believe the rationale outlined in the above wikilinked proposal, and the discussion behind it here, justify its inclusion on this article as an external link, so have added it to Major depressive disorder#External links. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 13:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Society and culture (relevant quote)

Hello everyone.

Upon reading the "society and culture" section, a quotation by Charles-Valentin Alkan came back to mind. Probably it is not relevant enough to be included in the article but I am re-transcribing it here just for the sake of it. May it serves to inspire one on the subject. It goes as follows:

"I’m becoming daily more and more misanthropic and misogynous: nothing worthwhile, good or useful to do; no one to devote myself to. My situation makes me horridly sad and wretched. Even musical production has lost its attraction for me for I can’t see the point or goal."

Twipley (talk) 18:19, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

The use of the Van Gogh picture to create an image of depression

Hello, I think the current picture painted by Vincent Van Gogh should not be up. Van Gogh did suffer from depression, but the thing is he killed himself in the end with a gun. I know when I was depressed and saw this painting on wikipedia, the image stuck to me and I thought of it if I ever got down.

But the fact that Vincent Van Gogh committed suicide in the end should mean that it should not remain up, IMO. The painting is a portait of depression, and what happened in the end to the painter is not very good. Anyone else agree?--Dcfb111 (talk) 18:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that the image should not be there because it might lead readers to think that depression is harmful? Looie496 (talk) 23:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

No. He is saying since the man who painted this portrait committed suicide that it gives a pessimistic outlook on recovery from depression. In wiki language, he believes too much WP:UNDUEWEIGHT is being given to the suicidal outcome of depression which is not the most common outcome. I disagree though that too much weight is given because most readers will not be familiar with the painting or the artists suicide. I am open though to suggestions of other possible images.AerobicFox (talk) 03:42, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I also believe it's inappropriate. You wouldn't see that painting on a textbook or (dare I say) encyclopedia giving a description of depression. 216.252.86.130 (talk) 07:06, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Depression (mood) is illustrated by Albrecht Dürer's engraving Melencolia I. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 17:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I like the image and thing we should keep it. It illustrates the issue well. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:59, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

This article has been difficult to illustrate. The painting has been discussed elsewhere as portraying a depressed person. I think it adds more to the article than detracts. Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:45, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

I disagree that it would not be used on a textbook. Psychology textbooks, including Abnormal Psychology textbooks, which discuss depression often use various art images on their covers and in their articles. Annaskyfox (talk) 23:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with AerobicFox that the majority of readers will be oblivious to the artist's suicide. I find that the illustration is appropriate and prefer it to Dürer's Melencolia I, though I would also be open to other possibilities. --Tea with toast _(talk) 00:42, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Treatment Discussion

It would be beneficial to discuss the controversy surrounding treatment of MDD, and come to a consensus on the most unbiased way to present current research. The current wording on the article sounds as if antidepressants offer no benefit at all. Even Kirsch admits that antidepressants are better than not receiving treatment, regardless of whether or not they separate from placebo.

Also, there is no mention of the critiques of the current research. i know that there was a panel of researchers who wrote a response to Kirsch's paper from '98, but I didn't see that anywhere in the Wiki article. I'm not sure if that should be placed in this article per se, but it could be useful to highlight that these findings are controversial, and be very clear about what the findings actually say. --Smister (talk) 08:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

New meta-analysis

I stumbled across this and think it should go in the article.[1]. Since omega 3 oils are apparently effective against depression, I assume if folk agree it should be added to the article that it should go in the antidepressant section or should there be a seperate section? Literaturegeek | T@1k? 13:29, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

We have to be very careful how we present this. The article does not imply, nor is would it be proper, to imply that these oils are, by themselves, effective in treating all depressions, serious depressions etc. Furthermore, the article clearly stated that Omega 3 oils weren't useful, but only fractions, probably EPA. We do not want people running down to their local GNC and think they're going to treat their depression. It's not going to happen, especially at the doses that may be required. Oh, and of course, there's conflicting publications. In fact, I can find a lot of trials that completely dispute any effect at all for EPA or other fractions of Omega-3 or its fractions. But there is one critical point....why would these oils have an effect based on what we know about what causes depression? Without a knowledge of the causal pathway, we cannot even begin to accept this study as supportive of something here. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 09:10, 12 December 2011 (UTC)