Fred A. Baughman, Jr., MD

Neurology & Pediatric Neurology

1303 Hidden Mountain Drive

El Cajon, CA 92019

fredbaughmanmd@cox.net

 

May 22, 2003

 

Daniel R Weinberger, MD, Chief of the Clinical Brain Disorders Branch               National Institute of Mental Health

10 Center Drive

Room 4S235

MSC 1379

Bethesda, MD

20892

 

 Re: “Imaging for psychiatric disorders is done mainly for research, not clinical purposes”-- Daniel R Weinberger, MD, Chief of the Clinical Brain Disorders Branch , NIMH—Neurology Today, June, 2002.

 

Dear Dr. Weinberger,

 

In Neuroimaging Advances Offer New Data on Stroke Detection and the Genetics of Mental Illness,  in Neurology Today, June, 2002, p 26-28, author, Gail McBride quoted you: 

 

“At this time, the only clinical reason to do a neuroimaging study in psychiatry is to rule out a neurological disease masquerading as a psychiatric illness.”

 

She went on:

 

Dr. Weinberger explained that neuroimaging in the form of MRI, fMRI, and PET has demonstrated that most major psychiatric diseases—depressive disorders and schizophrenia, for example—are associated with “subtle but objectively characterizable changes” in brain structure and function.  “These changes do not establish the diagnosis but do demonstrate the involvement of the brain in these disorders,” he said.

 

What you said, in essence, was that the psychiatric conditions/disorders to which you referred were diseases/abnormalities of the brain—neurological diseases.  Nowhere in the article by McBride were there citations to proofs in the peer-reviewed literature regarding any specific psychiatric conditions or diagnoses.  For that reason I wrote to Neurology Today:

 

Dr. Weinberger must submit for publication in Neurology Today, references to the proof that “neuroimaging in the form of MRI, fMRI, and PET has demonstrated that most major psychiatric disease—depressive disorders and schizophrenia, for example—are associated with “subtle but objectively characterizable changes” in brain structure and function.”  If he is unable to present proof of the “subtle but objectively characterizable changes” in these psychiatric conditions, the editors of should say so and print a retraction.

 

To this date, neither you or they—the editors of Neurology Today (a publication of the American Academy of Neurology) -- have done so.  If you cannot; if there is no proof of   “subtle but objectively characterizable changes” in these psychiatric conditions making them actual brain/neurological diseases, this must be confessed forthrightly, for the public is routinely told by most in organized medicine, that they are.

 

I await your reply.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

/s/

 

Fred A. Baughman Jr., MD 

 

PS: As an aside, you are Chief of the Clinical Brain Disorders Branch of the NIMH, I wonder if you have trained in neurology or in any neurological subspecialty, such as neuropathology.

 

 

CC

Lewis P. Rowland, Editor                                                                    

Neurology Today                                                           

710 W. 168th Street

Neurological Institute NI-14

New York, NY 10032-2603

NeuroToday@LWW.com

 

CC  

Sandra F. Olson, MD, President

American Academy of Neurology

1080 Montreal Ave.

St. Paul, MN

55116