significantly higher, outlandishly higher than the figures in the PDR.
I used ProQuest to search for the article in the Library. I used "akathisia" as the key word search. This was the first article that came up in the search that was available in full text. The data says what it says. You are welcome to track down the article and read it for yourself.
I can hear the bleating now, "Those are drug company numbers." Yes, with the imprimatur of the FDA whose standards you find golden when you want to use them.
You said it, not me. I was just reporting the facts, based on the evidence in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. I don't trust the FDA either. The consultants mostly all have ties to pharmaceutical companies. See, for example,
this video clip.
It appears that there is an entire Scientology influenced community like yourself in academia who grind out worthless commentary primarily as political propaganda.
This is all ad hominem and irrelevant to the facts. Even if there was a vast Scientology conspiracy in academia -- a statement which is so funny, it made my day -- the facts would remain the same.
But since you are trying to question my motivatation, I will humor your ad hominem for the moment: I don't think I've ever MET a Scientologist, let alone am I influenced by them. I'm a Roman Catholic. I see Scientologists as a cult group. If anything, their endorsement of a view repels me from accepting it. If my view dovetails with the views of the Scientologists, it is a coincidence that, if anything, validates the argument. Finally, I don't even know--and do not care to know--what Scientology has to say about psychiatry, and I suspect their views are quite different than mine on a number of levels. So, if you persist in this line of argument, it seems to me a desparate attempt to undermine my credibility rather than a rational attempt to dispute the facts I have presented.
desparate attempt to undermine my credibility you do more than enough to undermine you own credibilty, including posting this schlock article, then putting out an unsolicited ping to have every one come running. When obvious lies are pointed out to you in the article, you disavow what you post as being of great urgency to read. I'd suggest a change in you tag-line " I just post 'em , I don't read 'em."