Scott Alexander analyzes online drug ratings, finding patients prefer older antidepressants while doctors prefer newer ones, and explores potential explanations for this paradox. Longer summary

Scott Alexander analyzes patient ratings of antidepressants from online databases, finding that older drugs like MAOIs are rated higher than newer ones. He then compares this to doctor ratings, discovering a negative correlation between patient and doctor preferences. The post explores possible explanations for these paradoxical results, including confounding factors and the hypothesis that newer antidepressants may actually be less effective. Scott extends the analysis to other drug classes, finding the negative doctor-patient correlation holds broadly, while the preference for older drugs is specific to psychiatric medications. Shorter summary

Scott examines how rare but severe drug side effects often lead to underprescription compared to drugs with common but less severe side effects, potentially resulting in suboptimal patient care. Longer summary

This post discusses the issue of rare but severe side effects in psychiatric medications versus common but less severe side effects. Scott uses two main examples: nefazodone vs SSRIs for depression, and modafinil vs Adderall for stimulants. He argues that drugs with rare but spectacular side effects (like nefazodone and modafinil) are often underprescribed compared to drugs with more common but less severe side effects (like SSRIs and Adderall). The post explores the reasons for this, including doctors' risk aversion, lawsuit concerns, and media coverage of rare side effects. Scott suggests that this pattern may lead to suboptimal treatment choices for patients. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander reviews the psychiatric medication information site crazymeds.us, praising its quality but explaining why he can't recommend it to patients due to potential offense. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses the website crazymeds.us, praising its accurate, readable, and humorous descriptions of psychiatric medications. He compares it favorably to more official sources like drugs.com, which often provide overwhelming and unhelpful information. Despite its quality, Scott explains why he can't recommend it to patients, citing concerns about its potentially offensive name and content. He explores the concept of 'negative selection' in medicine and how it affects his decision-making. The post concludes by reflecting on the trade-offs between effectiveness and political correctness in medical communication. Shorter summary