Political activist and consumer advocate Ralph Nader discusses his latest book Only the Super Rich Can Save Us! Described as a work of imagination, but not of fiction, Nader’s newest book challenges our vision of the American dream. How does Nader’s provocative message resonate with American voters as an economic recession drags on? Recorded May 5, 2011
As a regular listener to your program, I appreciate the broad range of topics and thinkers that you to bring your far-flung listeners. Right now, however, I am listening to Steven Rose, introduced as a “Leading neuroscientist” and thinking a more accurate description would be “MISleading neuroscientist.”
I am gobsmacked by Rose’s lunatic-fringe, grandiose rantings. His topic is stated as “The Future of the Brain.” More appropriately, it should be “The English Spanish-Inquisition Comes to America.”
Rose might be learned in some narrow area of expertise, but he is alarmingly out of his depth on the topic of ADHD, coming from a country (UK) that is only now beginning to recognize and fully address ADHD, much to its citizens’ detriment. When I travel to speak in the UK, the audiences are so grateful to have the rare person understand their challenges and offer helpful strategies it is just heartbreaking.
Here is a sample of his antediluvian rhetoric, excerpted from the blog that repeats almost verbatim his talk to CF.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2003/may/08/lastword.neuroscience
*****Most notoriously, a disease called Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is supposed to affect up to 10% of young children (mainly boys). The “disorder” is characterised by poor school performance and an inability to concentrate in class, or to be controlled by parents. The “disorder” is supposed to be a consequence of disorderly brain function associated with another neurotransmitter, dopamine; the prescribed treatment is an amphetamine-like drug called Ritalin. There is an increasing world-wide epidemic of Ritalin use. Untreated children are said to be likely to be more at risk of becoming criminals, and there is an expanding literature on “the genetics of criminal and anti-social behaviour”. *******
This is such a mischaracterization of ADHD, its gender prevalence, and its treatment that, were it not so heinously wrong, would cause me to pity this poor deluded but very grandiose and attention-seeking man’s ignorance.
By Cambridge Forum providing Rose this platform, I fear you are collaborating in reversing the progress made by much smarter (and more compassionate) neuroscientists, who with great effort have dragged this country kicking and screaming into the 21st Century when it comes to understanding complex brain issues such as ADHD. In so doing, they have set a model for the rest of the world. And indeed, U.S. expertise is the envy of the world. Come to think of it, maybe that’s the problem: Rose is envious.
By giving Rose this bully pulpit (and I do mean, in Rose’s case, bully) Cambridge Forum has, however unwittingly, given legitimacy to the chorus of anti-psychiatry wingnuts, including the Scientologists and Tom Cruises of the world, who only add to the stigma and lack of help suffered by everyone affected by ADHD.
Generally, I am extremely “progressive” in my views and am a longtime public radio supporter. But I am constantly repulsed by the continuing anti-science, uncompassionate views propagated by public radio-related programs on psychiatric issues such as this.
I cannot imagine what is the problem other than public-radio programmers being ill-studied in the sciences. This seems to lead to poor judgment in the choice of experts showcased and quoted, always seemingly going for the “contrarian” angle – in this case, Rose’s contention that ADHD is an invention of Big Pharma.
I’m all for differing viewpoints but why not showcase a true luminary on brain research, such as neuroscientist and NIDA chief Nora Volkow or preeminent ADHD research scientist Russell Barkley? Why waste valuable air time on a luddite, marginal crank whose pomposity is matched only by his ignorance?
A non-ADHD example: Rose offers as proof of depression’s overdiagnosis the fact that the diagnosis rates have gone up since the 1950s. Huh? He fails to acknowledge that better diagnostics and treatment mean some people have overcome generational burdens of “melancholy,” irritability, addiction, and more. He also states that it couldn’t be diet that is making the difference, because eating habits haven’t change! I could go on. The man just doesn’t even make sense!
There is something wrong with a “leading neuroscientist” who would use a powerful forum to further marginalize people (including children) who deserve much better, including a smarter, more compassionate society and healthcare system. THAT would make for an interesting discussion.
Gina Pera, author
Is It You, Me, or Adult A.D.D.?