Credit where credit’s due: Nadine’s right on this one

I’m no fan of the Hon. Member for Mid Beds, but, credit where credit’s due, I wholly agree with her on the question asked by Andrew Marr of the PM.

Attacking the man in such a personal way, and not at all professionally, took journalism to a new low and eroded what respect is left within society for politicians. It moved us one step further along the road of a society concerned more with image and gossip than substance and fact. It was a very significant and sad moment.

Do go and read the full post. When you’re done reading that, read this excellent post from Graeme Archer on the same subject over at CentreRight. It’s just a shame that the comments on that piece aren’t as well considered.

It’s one thing for guttersnipes like Paul Staines and the bloggertarians to harp on about the subject of Brown’s mental health; quite another for a reputable journalist to ask a question based on nothing more than innuendo.

I wrote about this subject earlier this month.

xD.

UPDATE 1400 – it would appear that the blogger who originated this story admits that he has no evidence (C4 news).

UPDATE 1815 – please see Tim Ireland’s comment below. Dorries is a hypocrite; even when she’s right, she’s wrong.

Depression, Brown and Staines

Paul ‘Guido Fawkes’ Staines says that Gordon Brown may be taking an anti-depressant of the MAOI class; apparently the story is doing the rounds of the Westminster village. The article goes to show what a little shit Paul Staines is.

Begin brief rant

Mental illness is not a lot of fun. It’s also poorly understood by a lot of people. Staines has decided to make taking medication for depression be ‘pill-popping’ and to make the pills seem riven with side-effects. This pisses me off mightily, mostly because when I was first prescribed an anti-depressant, it scared the hell out of me and I wandered around with it in my pocket for three days before plucking up the courage to take the damn thing. Instead of ignoring what is by any standards a non-story, Staines uses it as a convenient stick with which to beat a political opponent, irrespective of its veracity or the broader effects of his way of discussing mental illness.

End brief rant

Firstly the science.

According to Dr Staines, MAOIs

are very rarely prescribed since the arrival of Prozac derivatives, used only sparingly when dealing with severely depressed patients.

ORLY?

newer MAOIs such as selegiline and moclobemide provide a safer alternative and are now sometimes used as first-line therapy

Thankyou, twelve seconds on Wikipedia. I’m not going to prescription advice from Staines. He’s not a doctor and doesn’t know what he’s talking about. I’ll check in the BNF when I’m back at home.

Secondly, the history.

When Kjell Magne Bondevik was suffering a depressive episode, he took three weeks leave to recuperate. Norway did not fall apart. Anne Enger Lahnstein became acting PM while he was away, and then everything went back to normal with perhaps a slightly better understanding of depression. There is a former PM of the UK who also suffered from depressive episodes – one Winston Churchill. The memo appears not to have reached Staines – depression can be managed effectively. Having depression doesn’t mean you can’t do your job.

Thirdly, the morality.

He has the audacity to use his ‘Is Brown Bonkers?’ image. Depression is an evil disease, but to describe someone suffering from it as ‘bonkers’ is not just crude, it’s flat wrong and makes life just a little bit harder for sufferers. Staines describes Brown’s use of antidepressants as ‘alleged’. It’s not a crime.

I was under the impression that private health matters generally stayed private. Funnily enough, I don’t consider Paul Staines innuendo enough of a reason to change that. If Brown is suffering from depression, I hope he improves soon. I hope no-one gives Staines the time of day when he tries to portray Brown as dangerously unstable.

xD.

Update 1655: Penny Red weighs in.