Can anyone say, “It’s generic now.”
In fact, there were already three negative studies about Lamictal as an antidepressant published: the same three that said it wasn’t an antimanic either, but only good for the “prophylaxis of mood states,” which is like the rock that keeps tigers away.
The fact that his academic colleague called it an antidepressant means, simply, that he’s an idiot. No, no, no, I’m not being disrespectful, I mean it completely seriously. He’s an academic. He’s supposed to know what the (only) three studies say, especially since he’s teaching it to other people; and he’s apparently prescribing this thing thinking that it is an antidepressant based on nothing at all. Ok, maybe not nothing: based on the word of mouth from other people who didn’t read the same three articles.
Does Ghaemi think that the unveiling of negative studies is going to change the behavior of a person who is making it up as he goes along anyway? It doesn’t stop astrologers, does it? (read the whole post here)
Much more info: Lamictal Redux