General

Random entry RSS

  • Posted in:

    Counselling Often Beats Pills

    [October 2011] Irish doctors over-prescribe anti-depressants, writes Éibhir Mulqueen One of Ireland’s most recognisable actor exports, Gabriel Byrne, is now famous in the US for a role whose function has just registered in his home country. For the last three years, Byrne has played Dr Paul Weston, a well-to-do psychotherapist in New York featured in intense, often harrowing, half-hour programmes in the HBO hit-TV series In Treatment. His Irish-American character reads the Irish Times and drinks Barry’s Tea, and Dr Weston has his own ‘miserable Irish Catholic childhood’ to reveal, as the series unfolds. Back home, as a nation, we have made little of psychotherapy, a form of treatment that is, according to Byrne himself, not so different from confession – a search for reassurance. Psychotherapy can be defined as the relief of distress by a therapist trained in a particular method. A more well-known cultural reference for Irish audiences is Dr Melfi from the Sopranos whose treatment of Tony formed the basis for the series’ plot. With the changes in community structures, the alienation that seems to come with the modern condition, and the disappearance of confession, there is plenty of scope for some kind of ‘reassurance’ to be re-introduced in Irish life. As in the rest of the western world, even where counselling and different forms of psychotherapy are accepted, the gap is being filled by pills. How big is this gap, this space where people get dragged down by their unhappiness, where they are unhappy but don’t know why? The World Health Organisation says that one in four people in the world will be affected by mental or  neurological disorders at some point. Such a high figure is contested but there are even greater claims being made: in September the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology stated that more than a third of Europe’s population suffers from a mental disorder annually, with conditions including insomnia and dementia. A 2005 survey in the US found an estimated lifetime rate of 51% for a mental illness and one in New Zealand claimed more than 50% of people had suffered from an anxiety disorder at least once by the age of 32. Such figures have led to accusations of the medicalisation of normality and what Lisa Appignanesi, author of Mad, Bad and Sad, has called “the imperialising tendency of the mental health sector”. The issue can become self-perpetuating. If you are primed to think an unhappiness problem is a mental issue, you will present yourself to a GP with it. The phenomenon has been a boon to pharmaceutical companies, which stand accused of finding new conditions, like social phobias and post-traumatic stress disorder, for which their products can be prescribed. Glaxosmithkline states its anti-depressant, Seroxat, is also a treatment for “anxiety disorders” in adults. According to Irish-born psychiatrist, David Healy, professor of Psychological Medicine at Cardiff University and author of such books as the Antidepressant Era, there has been a subtle change in the use of terms for what he believes are new, fashionable treatments. The term ‘anxiety disorder’ implies a condition whose treatment is more about drugs, whereas what are also called phobias imply a behaviour that can be treated by therapy, he contends. Depression was all but unknown half a century ago, Prof Healy has pointed out, and “the idea that there might be a depression that drugs could treat had in one sense to be invented as had the idea of an anti-depressant”. According to support group Aware, 400,000 people in Ireland experience depression at any one time. But the Lundbeck Mental Health Barometer 2011 puts the figure much lower, saying the condition is “experienced by four percent of the population (180,000) directly at some stage”. Meeting the undoubted demand are Seroxat and Prozac, drugs which replaced Valium in the nineties as preferred anti-depressants, and which are part of a new generation of medication known as SSRIs (selected serotonin re-uptake inhibitors). Prescribed for depression, they have also been dogged by controversy since they were first stocked in pharmacies. After raising concerns about the links between Prozac and increased suicide risk, Prof Healy eventually earned himself a New York Times profile as a maverick campaigner against his profession’s overselling of drugs, as he sees it. One drug company described the intrusion as “the Healy problem”. However, a long, international campaign on the possible dangers of taking SSRIs has resulted in wider recognition of their limitations. In 2006, the Irish Medicines Board updated anti-depressant product information, warning of the possible increase in suicidal thoughts during treatment, especially among children and young adults. Prof Healy also warns that so-called “direct-to-consumer advertising” by pharmaceutical companies has given the patient the message that the pill is the solution. “In the face of company marketing, and with the advent of the Internet, clinical judgment has been eroded. Patients going on the internet or faced with drug company materials now all too easily find that they meet criteria for a disorder and there is often nothing or no-one to tell them this is not equivalent to having the disorder,” Healy states. This phenomenon became marked in the UK where it was discovered in a Norwich Union Healthcare survey which questioned 250 GPs and 1,300 parents about teenage mental health. A third of parents surveyed were pressurising GPs to prescribe Prozac for their children  even if they were just unhappy, while 60% said they had to prescribe such drugs because local services were so poor. In Ireland local services, such as traditionally existed, are being pulled back in the face of economic recession, leaving GPs with few options and built-in patient expectations that a pill should be prescribed. Prescribing psychiatric drugs for want of an alternative was recognised by the Joint Committee on Health and Children in 2006: “the patient presenting with symptoms expects some tangible form of treatment and the practitioner feels under pressure to respond… It is in the absence of a full range of counselling and psychotherapy services that many medicines, intended for

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Nama: Forgiving big developers; ignoring other distressed borrowers

    Illustration: Phil Connors. [Archive, October 2011] Gary Fitzgerald on how and why the public interest has been hijacked. From 1995 until 2007 Ireland experienced one of the largest asset-price bubbles in the history of the world. We are now living with the fallout: negative equity and huge personal indebtedness. Recently there have been growing calls for a personal-debt forgiveness-scheme. However, the decisions taken by the Irish State in response to the end of the property bubble make it very unlikely that any such scheme will be implemented. When the bubble burst in 2007, the first part of the Irish economic system to feel the pressure was the banks. Almost every bank in the State had loaned large sums of money to developers, secured on land. As long as land kept going up in value then everything was fine. But once the inevitable happened and land fell in value almost every Irish bank either became insolvent or flirted with insolvency. The government’s response was to save the banks at all costs. It may be that this was as a result of an order from the European Central Bank (ECB), but the decision was taken by the government. The bank guarantee of 2008 turned private banking debt into public debt. It tied the banks and the State together. Following quickly after the guarantee came the National Assets Management Agency (NAMA). NAMA was to take distressed property loans of the major developers off the banks’ balance books at a discount and work those loans out over time. For example, let’s suppose that Mr Builder owed Bank of Ireland €100 million. NAMA bought that loan from the bank at a discount of 70% – and then stepped in to the shoes of the bank. The bank got €30 million in cash and had to make provision for €70 million in bad debts. NAMA was then supposed to recover as much of the €100 million as possible from the developer. The impression was given in 2009 that NAMA would be aggressive in pursuing this money. But now NAMA acknowledges that it will only look for the discounted value of the loan. In other words it has finally, in the teeth of earlier protestations from Brian Lenihan, become clear that Mr Builder has had his €100 million loan reduced to €30 million. Why then can a similar scheme not be put in place for people with smaller debts to the bank? If some of the richest citizens in the State can have taxpayers’ money used to reduce their debt, why not the ordinary citizen? The answer is simple, because the State cannot afford to do both. Back in 2008 and 2009 it was clear that the banks faced two problems. The first was bad debts on loans to developers. As a result NAMA bought €72 billion worth of loans for €30 billion. The banks booked a €42 billion loss and many had to be recapitalised by the taxpayer as a result. The second was bad debts on loans to ordinary borrowers. According to the Central Bank personal debt in Ireland is over €390 billion, of which mortgages account for just over €109 billion. Both of these problems were clearly identified by the banks, politicians and the media. Yet the government chose to save the banks and developers at enormous cost. Now even if there was a political will to introduce a personal-debt forgiveness-scheme, the money is not there to do it. Once the banks start writing down personal debt to any significant level, they become insolvent again. This would require a further injection of capital by the State, resulting in higher taxes and cuts in public expenditure. With the State on the brink of insolvency itself, it is simply not in a position to do this. Is there another way that the State can assist those in debt? Debt can be eliminated in one of three ways. Either it can be forgiven, or it can be paid back, or inflation can reduce the real cost of the debt. Since we are members of the Euro, we don’t have the economic tools available to control our inflation rate. In any case government policy is to drive costs and prices down to make Ireland more competitive. This “internal devaluation” will worsen the problem of personal indebtedness, making it harder for those struggling to pay down debts incurred during the boom. Neither the banks nor the State can afford debt-forgiveness. Government policy is to deflate the economy and individual borrowers can’t repay the debt. What then does the future hold? What are the consequences of the State’s decision to protect the banks and developers and ignore the plight of the ordinary citizen? There is no simple answer to this, but it is clear that the future is bleak. Without personal debt-forgiveness there will be a large section of society who will feel betrayed by the State, who will have no incentive to participate in the State and who will have no economic future in the State. This may lead to a level of social disunity that Western Europe has not witnessed since the late 1920s. The acts of the Fianna Fail/Green coalition and now the Fine Gael/Labour coalition are nothing more than a betrayal of the ordinary citizen and the consequences could be terrible.

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    Constantin Gurdgiev: our celtic unicorn economy

    Competitiveness, fiscal austerity, skilled labour, capital investment, resilience: all myths. The key, under-recognised factor is private debt Irish elites, to the right, left and centre of the political spectrum, are completely dependant on the kindness of foreigners. Approval of ‘our European partners’, ‘foreign analysts’ or ‘leading international academics’ and editorial praise from foreign publications are sought as the signs of modernisation of the state, and progress. The latest instalment in this Irish version of Stockholm Syndrome is the idea that Ireland is a European poster boy for austerity-to-growth theory. In the real world, Ireland is witnessing neither a return to economically (forget environmentally or socially) sustainable growth, nor the real structural fiscal adjustments on the scale needed to achieve public-sector sustainability. Instead, it is an economy slumped at the bottom of the Great Recession with superficial signs of viability provided by the multinationals. Our austerity drive has been nothing more than the ages-old redistribution of pain – the policy of robbing productive Paul to pay largely-unproductive John, an approach that is more economically internecine than any real contraction in public expenditure can ever be. The latest headline figures for economic growth, referring to Q2 2011 are less than convincing of the case that Ireland’s economy is back on a growth path. Using current market prices, Irish GDP has shrunk, in H1 2011, by 0.84% on 2010 figures; Similarly, GNP has fallen 1.76%. Compared to the first half of 2005 we are now 2.3% worse off in terms of nominal GDP and 8.63% worse off in terms of nominal GNP. Looking at the underlying components of economic activity, year on year, H1 2011 saw a 5.83% increase in exports and a 2.78% increase in corporate profits expatriated abroad. Compared to H1 2005 the same two figures were 27.23% and 33.58%. This really means that the historically-unprecedented rise in exports has done its job of providing at least some growth momentum, but this growth momentum has been erased by the comprehensive collapse of the domestic economy, as well as by the boom in the expatriation of profits by foreign firms. Almost 4 years into the crisis, Ireland Inc is comatose, while Ireland, as MNC, is powering ahead. Preliminary Q2 inflation-adjusted GDP growth of 2.3% conceals a number of worrisome facts. Firstly, the largest sector of the economy in terms of both contribution to GDP (41% of total economic activity) and employment (over 60% of the workforce) – Services – continues to contract, posting annual inflation-adjusted rate of growth of -0.7% and a quarterly drop of -1.3%. The second-largest sector – Industry – accounting for 21% of economic activity in the country and only around 15% of employment grew by 7.5% year on year in Q2 2011. However, this growth was concentrated in one sub-sector – pharmaceutical and chemicals. Incidentally, the latest trade statistics show that this sub-sector accounts for 90% of our entire national trade surplus – a number so staggeringly high, that we might just rename Ireland Inc, with its inflated economic ego, Viagra Inc. Irish growth figures through Q2 2011 show the pattern of an economy consuming itself from inside. Personal consumption is down 1.3% year on year, and gross domestic capital formation has fallen 17.1%. The only two categories of economic activity up are the value of physical stocks of goods, and net exports. Domestic deflation and exchange-rate movements, not more output or higher value added, are driving the inflation-adjusted growth figures cited as the evidence of Ireland’s ‘recovery’. Similarly, contrary to the assertions made by Irish officials, the unprecedented boom in exports is not being driven by gains in competitiveness or by smart policies. Instead, it is driven by tax arbitrage. The result is amplified recession of the real domestic economy, manifest as follows: The official unemployment rate is now anchored at 14.2-14.3% (compared with 4.2-4.4% pre-crisis) and conceals youth unemployment running at over 46% for 19 years old and younger, and almost 34% for 20-24 years old, as well as a shrinking labour force, rampant emigration and growing state ‘training’ schemes generating no real uptake in jobs. The widening gap between GDP and GNP, currently at a historical high of 20.4%, accounted for by transfers of profits abroad by the multinationals. The extreme dependance of Irish economic activity on pharmaceutical exports that will be subject to severe pressures in months to come, as blockbuster drugs produced in Ireland come off patent, resulting in a rush to book profits by the MNCs today, but threatening a collapse in activity in 2012-2013. Combined public and private investment in the economy today no longer covers depreciation and amortisation of the capital stock accumulated during the Celtic Tiger years. The recent gains in competitiveness and cost-of-business reductions, so often cited as the ‘success story’ for Ireland, are mythology. Firstly, compared to other euro countries, measured by the harmonised competitiveness indicators (HCIs) which are referenced to the unit labour cost, Ireland remains the worst performing core euro-area country. Despite having improved in this metric by 19% relative to the peak, Ireland’s HCI remain 17% less competitive than the euro-area average and 35% behind Germany. Secondly, many of the gains in competitiveness to-date were not driven by growth in productivity, but by wholesale destruction of two labour-intensive sectors of the Irish economy: retail and construction. Thirdly, the Irish economy has not been sensitive to competitiveness metrics since at least 2000-2001. Much of the economic growth that we witnessed over the last 20 years was driven by transfer pricing by multinational exporters, or the 1998-2001 dot.com or the 2002-2007 property, bubbles. Tax arbitrage and cheap credit were the core ingredients of our past ‘successes’ – not a vaunted smart workforce or great entrepreneurial prowess. This explains why Irish unit labour cost-based HCIs were worse than the euro area average in every year after 1996, And why they were the absolute worst of all core euro area countries from 2004 to 2007. All this while the economy was booming. This also explains why the

    Loading

    Read more

  • Posted in:

    audio http://www.irishtimes.com/audio/2011/10/lmfm.mp3

    Loading

    Read more