1

A couple of weeks ago, this article was published on Nature

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-022-01661-0

I am just a layman when it comes to this subject and it is therefore difficult for me to evaluate or value this paper, but as far as I understand it, if it is (reasonably) correct, it is quite revolutionizing, which of course one should be sceptically about. Besides, I found it through an Facebook ad by an organization related to the Scientologists.

Is this article credible? Is it "good science" methodwise etc? Are the people behind it well-reputed or known "quacks"? Are the results robust?

Improve this question
7
  • 1
    This seems a bit beyond skeptics.SE and gets into scientific debate. Nature is without a doubt a reputable publication. Personally, I think they use serotonin concentration as a bit of a straw man target, as plenty of people who still think serotonin is very important in depression do not think anything as simplistic as low serotonin concentration = depression. Location, timing, and concentration are all important for neurotransmitters. But... I could write a great SE answer with references to say all that, and it doesn't have the clout of a Nature paper.
    – Bryan Krause
    Aug 20, 2022 at 20:36
  • 1
    I haven't followed the latest research (the paper you link to is just a review), but this was more or less asked here before. skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/40309/… Also the journal that published that 2022 review is Molecular Psychiatry, which is generally more on the chemical side of explanations for mental illnesses, IIRC.
    – Fizz
    Aug 20, 2022 at 21:15
  • 2
    Does this answer your question? Is depression caused by chemical imbalances?
    – Arnon Weinberg
    Aug 21, 2022 at 4:55
  • 2
    Most comments deleted. No more pseudo-answers in the comments. No more poor justifications of pseudo-answers by claiming that other people have done it. (If you think a comment is inappropriate, flag it.)
    – Oddthinking ♦
    Aug 22, 2022 at 3:16
  • 3
    This question might be more appropriate for the Medical Sciences SE, since it's asking about current research, which I believe Skeptics is ill equipped to handle. I do not know that site though, so I'm not entirely sure.
    – jaskij
    Aug 22, 2022 at 10:54

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .