Yes, it is. It allows psychiatrists to give the impression that they're really up to something, and that what they're up to is very scientific . . . and requires a lot of thinking . . . and has a lot to do with high-falutin' chemistry.

It shows how they fine tune a person's treatment. And it leads the gullible patient into thinking, "Wow, I must really be under control now. Look how many drugs are addressing my symptoms."

You're lucky to find one drug that really helps, and one or two might. By the time they have you on 4 or 5 drugs, I believe it's a bunch of baloney.

So many people are put on small doses of things like clonidine and propranolol that have virtually no psychotropic effect. Replace them with placebos and no one would know the difference. But it is reassuring to hear the pdoc say, "Well, I'm going to add this because it will help you blah, blah, blah." Power of suggestion then kicks in.

Why do you think that the illicit drug trade is such a booming industry? Because they're peddling the stuff that will really change how you feel. Of course, that change comes at a high price - long term.

A couple of mg of Klonopin or or Risperdal changes nothing. I've taken almost everything out there. Most of it does nothing much, or nothing good. The argument runs that different people react differently. I no longer buy that. Human beings aren't quite that individually differentiated. Everyone who drinks enough ETOH gets drunk. Everyone who smokes enough weed gets stoned. Everyone who takes just about any illicit drug reacts in a predictable way . . . which is why people buy the stuff. But pdocs prescribe all these magic substances that affect different people in vastly different ways. Yeah, because people differ in their degree of credulity - their ability to buy B S.