Okay, you make some valid points, I'll give you that.

a) I don't know enough about how doctors make their decisions, but I am assuming many other variables such as funding, insurance, etc also come into treatment decisions. Possibly to a greater degree than advertising ... one would hope, anyway :>

b) In response to your second point, while methodologically you are correct re double blind, I suppose I was more meaning that surely decisions are made more on a triangulation base ... qual and quant research studies, observation ... etc

c) I gathered psisci was also critiquing the research ...

d) Just calling it how I see it ... I am making the assumption that what you do is primarily academic. Apologies if I am incorrect.

e) But it seems you are questioning his judgement. You essentially say he's making his decisions based on potentially incorrect information. I would just have thought that someone so well versed in psychopharmacology would have also considered the issues you are raising in this thread, and be basing his drug decisions on his own conclusions.

But far be it from me to assume ...