A couple of months ago, Dr. Jonathan Leo contacted me about an article he had published that asks a very important question on the relationship that we (including myself) have come to take for granted: chemical balance and depression.

The journal article is called, “The Media and the Chemical Imbalance Theory of Depression.” It is a follow up to another article published in an open source scientific journal (PLoS Medicine) about the serotonin theory of depression.

The following is an excerpt of my response to Dr. Leo about his article.

Dear Jonathan,

I’ve read your paper and find your premise intriguing. Even though I’ve been trained as a scientist and also have experienced depression as a patient, I can honestly say that I’ve never questioned the semantics used around depression, as your paper questions. (Before I continue, I’ll also declare a potential conflict of interest since I used to work in the pharma industry and currently provide consulting services to biopharma companies in the area of medical affairs.)

I’m saying this without citing any sources or references, but rather based on personal experience of having received both pharmacological agents and psychological (cognitive) intervention. While I do think there is some sort of a “chemical imbalance” that occurs in a condition such as depression, I don’t believe that serotonin alone (or even in conjunction with an array of neurotransmitters) can provide a simple enough answer to “cause” depression. …Thus your demand to distinguish between “causative” vs. “correlative” is extremely important to address.

I also believe that depression is not a chemical problem alone, nor is it a sociological problem alone (i.e. “lack of willpower” or “oversensitive individual”), but a complex condition that may very well include genetic predisposition, chemical pathways, sociological context, and a person’s emotional make-up (which obviously can hardly be adequately objectively quantified to be scientifically examined). It is unlike certain cancers where a genetic defect leading to lack of a tumor suppressor protein then leads an individual to develop a cancer.

One of the “benefits” of the unproven chemical imbalance hypothesis has been an encouragement of those to seek treatment who otherwise may never have sought help for depression. However, this also goes to the other extreme, to the point where doctors are too quick to prescribe an antidepressant because they wanted to see the next patient and make their per diem “patient quotas” and break even financially as practicing doctors. Hence the overprescribed society we live in today.

Dr. Leo is now working on a paper about ghost writing and has edited a book called, Rethinking ADHD

I’m interested to what you think about Dr. Leo’s research, and questioning the “chemical imbalance (causative) theory” of depression.

Originally published on February 2, 2008