Talk:Daniel Amen

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Daniel Amen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140201195139/http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/01/04/3694993/desolation-of-smaug-guidebook.html to http://www.fresnobee.com/2014/01/04/3694993/desolation-of-smaug-guidebook.html#storylink=cpy

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Balance tag

Hello, I came across this page, and can't help but notice most of the page consists of criticism of Amen's practice. Criticism is great, but if not balanced by alternative perspectives, easily runs afoul of WP:Balance, WP:BLP, and WP:Neutral point of view. I assume the argument (to my reverter) is that the page is "fair and balanced" because most academics seem to criticize his practices - although to point at the blatantly obvious, if he is "the most popular psychiatrist in America," clearly there are noteworthy voices supporting his practices. Just glancing through the big Washington Post article, I can see that there are several quotes supporting Amen that have been left out, in what looks to be a glaring case of WP:Cherrypicking POVs. Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Balance mandates at least mentioning those viewpoints, or risk a BLP violation. I won't go so far as to say this page is a WP:Coatrack for anti-SPECT/alternative medicine viewpoints, but it is definitely veering that direction. I am leaving the tag up at least until I have the proper time to check for opposing views, or until consensus is met here that the problem is fixed. Thanks! Looks like a lot of activity on this page, so I'm happy to see I likely won't be working alone. Note the balance tag can also be removed if one of these criteria is met: Template:Unbalanced#When_to_remove. Earflaps (talk) 19:33, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

You should consult the talk page archive. The fringe views about SPECT are properly contextualized by reliable sources. Insisting on a tag while you carry out personal research is a kind of WP:OWNBEHAVIOR. Alexbrn (talk) 20:36, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

I have no doubt the page is currently unbalanced, even though more research still needs to be done. Simply put, even if Amen's views/practices are total baloney, articles in publications such as the Washington Post spend significant time explaining them, and explaining their popularity, making it very clear they are not "fringe" in any way. Among the different explanations the articles go into are the scans having a placebo effect, and I argue until information such as this makes it on the page, the noteworthy POVs are unbalanced and the cherrypicking is egregious. Thank you for contributing to the discussion, I look forward to having somone to bounce ideas off of. :) Earflaps (talk) 21:36, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Amen is a pusher of woo and that is what he is famous for. You need to actually read WP:NPOV - we don't repeat woo uncritically. Your tags are invalid as you are seeking false equivalence. Jytdog (talk) 22:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Reading that guideline, no-one here is claiming that we need to present Amen's/his supporters' claims "as if they were of equal validity" with other academic opinions. Lobotomy and trepanning are also "woo," as you put it, but as they were immensely popular and influential, the topics still dutifully repeat all relevant popular theories about the practice, and explain why they were popular using reliable sources. Attribution simply needs to be kept clear as day, so readers can come to their own conclusions about whether the practice is "good" or "bad." Also, GEVAL isn't the only guideline that applies here. BLP reads "Articles should document in a non-partisan manner what reliable secondary sources have published about the subjects, and in some circumstances what the subjects have published about themselves." This, I would hope obviously, includes actually describing Amen's practices in detail (and his motivations), instead of simply asserting twenty times that they are "unproven." Earflaps (talk) 23:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

So get off your ass and propose well-sourced content you think is neutral. Jytdog (talk) 23:22, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Why don't you try being nice. There's no timeline on Wikipedia, and I get the impression if I posted sloppy material pre-emptively, I'd get my head bitten off. Earflaps (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Why don't you try doing something productive instead of tagging and hand-waving on the Talk page. I am happy to consider content proposals. I'll reply again after you make some, and not before. Jytdog (talk) 23:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Are you for real? You can wait a few days, the page won't implode in the meantime. I swear, sometimes I feel like I'm the only person in the whole of Wikipedia who has read WP:Civility. Earflaps (talk) 23:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello Earflaps. How nice to see you on this page. Roxy the dog. bark 23:44, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Why thank you! :b Earflaps (talk) 23:59, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

It is a pleasure. But did you read my edsum? Roxy the dog. bark 00:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Page protected

Regardless of the presence or absence of a tag, the page won't implode if no one can disrupt it either. Page protected for 1 week. Longer if disruption resumes after protection lifts without resolution on this page. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:53, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Anachronist. So Earflaps if you want to propose content, am all ears. as it were. indeed, no rush. Jytdog (talk) 07:57, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

On the Salon article

Someone(s) has done a nice job making sure tabloids and blogs don't make it on the page - the big exception looks to be an editorial in Salon, a liberal tabloid. Normally I would remove Salon or any tabloid without hesitation, but hesitated this time per WP:BIASED and WP:NEWSORG, the latter of which reads "Editorial commentary, analysis and opinion pieces, whether written by the editors of the publication (editorials) or outside authors (op-eds) are reliable primary sources for statements attributed to that editor or author, but are rarely reliable for statements of fact." So I might argue if the columnist Robert_A._Burton is a published authority on Amen's practices (which at first glance he seems to be), the article still could have value as an expert opinion, even without solid editorial oversight. I'm just not familiar enough with Burton or his work to feel comfortable making a call on that, to gauge if his repute would outweight how sensational the website is. Thoughts? Earflaps (talk) 09:53, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Salon is not an inherently problematic source, as has been discussed before at WP:RS/N. Robert A. Burton is a neurologist and skeptic, and useful for WP:PARITY. I don't see anything sourced to this source which is problematic. Alexbrn (talk) 10:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I also don't see a problem. We can't say that a particular site is an RS or not RS, it depends on what is being cited to the article. I've re-checked the article and what is cited to the source it is only used to either report indisputable facts e.g. "Amen's websites market vitamin supplements and a branded range of other dietary supplements." or clearly states the authors opinions "neurologist Robert A. Burton criticized PBS for the airing of these programs". If we were using the headline, that would obviously be a problem, but we aren't. We can tone down a sensationalist source and get good information from it. SmartSE (talk) 10:45, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Cool. I have no problem using biased sources in some cases, just have to be careful with attribution. The article has a good overview of the field of criticism. Earflaps (talk) 11:16, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it was biased, other than in line with science and reality. But then Wikipedia proudly has that same bias too. Alexbrn (talk) 12:12, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I would agree a reputable skeptic's voice tends to be useful for parity, particularly when they are in expert in the field independently - I more meant that Salon is uncurably biased in favor of scandals and hit-grabbing headlines :b Earflaps (talk) 13:14, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

New source

This piece by Richard Bernstein and published in August has more on his PBS shows and on his concussion work with NFL. SmartSE (talk) 10:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for this. Earflaps (talk) 13:11, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

December update from Earflaps

Hope everyone is having a good weekend. Here's what I'm planning on posting after some feedback/adjustments (will paste the draft in a collapsible window soon, just need to do another round or so of copyediting). A few notes:

1. Ordinarily I'd post a full BLP update in stages to make my thought process easier to follow - I didn't do that in this case, though, so don't hesitate to ask if you see changes that don't make immediate sense. I should be able to answer with the proper amount of attention tomorrow, or at least Monday.
2. I've removed the external links section - one of the links was dead, and the other I needed to use inline to help back a WaPost statement, so I didn't feel there was enough left to warrant one per WP:External links. That said, I'm not against someone adding back in a better version.
3. For balancing a page with a lot of content to juggle, I always refer to Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons#Balance and also WP:BALASP (latter reads "Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements... Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public.") For balance I've brought in what other reliable sources I could find and went in depth into the Telegraph and WaPost articles, as well as the other articles that were listed on the page. I also usually balance for "quantity of text" at the end partly by paraphrasing wordier direct quotes. I haven't done that on this page, excluding a few of the very rambling ones, because the page already had a proclivity for full quotes and I figured that might be an intentional choice per WP:EDITCONSENSUS (possibly to ensure meaning isn't lost, or attribution isn't overly simplified by "combining" several similar critical voices). As a result the "reception of SPECT" section is in my opinion overlarge in comparison to the rest of the page, but I don't think that is a problem that couldn't be solved at some point with a WP:Split, maybe to a SPECT or Amen Clinics section. Earflaps (talk) 23:31, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Some more notes:

1. I removed http://www.skepdic.com/skeptimedia/skeptimedia30.html and https://www.certificationmatters.org/is-your-doctor-board-certified/search-now.aspx for being unreliable - I would also like to remove the Daily Beast article per the publication being a scandal/scoop mag with an irresponsible gonzo bent, but for now just marked it unreliable with a tag.
2. I havent added in the new Observer article (simply forgot earlier), but going through it a second time, I'd say it basically covers the same terrain as the other opinion pieces. It does have a good focus on the PBS angle, if someone wanted to add that in. Or maybe don't put it inline so it can be used in a new external links section? Either way, the journalist looks reputable if not a medical expert, and the Observer is in my mind as fine to use as The Telegraph. Earflaps (talk) 09:24, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
3. One more note/question - any opinion on whether the Burton Salon article be marked with an 'unreliable source' tag per the publication being a tabloid? My inclination is actually to remove the tag per the discussion earlier, but even though the consensus is that Burton is reliable, I do always feel icky leaving tabloids unbranded in some way. Earflaps (talk) 09:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Extended content

​ ​ Daniel Amen Born Daniel Gregory Amen 1954 (age 69–70) Encino, Los Angeles Nationality American Alma mater Vanguard University of Southern California Oral Roberts University School of Medicine (M.D., 1982), Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Tripler Army Medical Center. Occupation(s) Psychiatrist, psychiatric researcher, medical researcher, author, lecturer, professor Known for Amen's Classification Website amenclinics.com Daniel Gregory Amen (born 1954) is an American psychiatrist, clinical neuroscientists, brain imaging expert, and brain disorder specialist known for founding the Amen Clinics in the United States. Dubbed "the most popular psychiatrist in America" in 2012 by The Washington Post, through his clinics Amen offers medical services to people who have issues and disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and depression. Amen is know for using single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) as a diagnostic tool to assist in the identification psychiatric and neurological issues, a practice that has been highly controversial in the medical field, with detractors alleging his interpretations are based on unproven claims. Amen has defended his practices in the media and in peer-reviewed papers, arguing in 2012 that "it will soon be malpractice to not use imaging in complicated cases." Among other topics, Amen has done studies on brain injuries affecting professional athletes, and he is a post-concussion consultant for the National Football League. According to Psychology Today, Amen Clinics has "the world's largest database of functional brain scans related to psychiatric medicine" and neuropsychiatry. As of 2016 he had nine bestsellers on the New York Times bestsellers list, including Change Your Brain, Change Your Life, Magnificent Mind At Any Age, Change Your Brain, Change Your Body, and The Amen Solution. He had also written, produced, and hosted eleven televsion shows which have aired on PBS and other channels. In 2005 Amen received the Distinguished Fellow Award of the American Psychiatric Association. Early life and education Daniel Gregory Amen was born in Encino, California, in 1954. His family had been immigrants from Lebanon, and Amen was raised in a Catholic household along with his six siblings. His father was a grocer who worked his way out of poverty, eventually becaming chairman of Unified Grocers. After high school Amen joined the United States Army, spending around three years in West Germany mostly working as an X-ray technician. He received his undergraduate degree in biology from Southern California College in 1978, before the school was renamed Vanguard University. Moving to Tulsa, Oklahoma, Amen then earned a doctorate from Oral Roberts University School of Medicine in 1982. According to Amen, he put his plans of being a pediatrician aside after "falling in love" with psychiatry, stating "If I’m a surgeon and I take out a kidney, I helped that person for one instance. But if I help you optimize your mind, I’m helping you to be a better mom, and that has potential to help a family for generations." After earning his doctorate he re-enlisted in the Army, achieving the rank of Major as an army physician. Amen did his general psychiatric training at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., and his child and adolescent psychiatry training at Tripler Army Medical Center in Honolulu. Amen became double board certified by the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology in general psychiatry and child and adolescent psychiatry in the 1980s. He also had several papers published in peer-reviewed journals in the 1980s, including the American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, the American Journal of Psychotherapy, Resident and Staff Physician, General Hospital Psychiatry, and Military Medicine. Career in business and academia Early practices and research (1980s-90s) Amen finished his military obligations in the late 1980s and took a job at Solano Park Hospital in Fairfield, California. He also started his own practice, running a "small-town clinic" in Fairfield while writing books in his spare time. The first of his Amen Clinics opened in 1989 in California with Amen as medical director and CEO. The company would come to operate several psychiatric practices, "a line of nutritional supplements, book publishing, DVD sales, and television and speaking engagements." In 1991 Amen attended a seminar on SPECT imaging, stating the ability to see bloodflow in the brain "totally changed everything" for him. In the early 1990s he recollects being further inspired by SPECT's possibilities when he first used a scan on a patient. The patient, who had been diagnosed with ADD and was recently suicidal, "showed a precipitous drop in activity in her prefrontal cortex, the brain’s decision-making center, when she tried to concentrate." The patient wept upon realizing her issues were "biological, not moral," accepted a diagnosis, and took her medications. Recollects Amen, "I thought, ‘Whoa. Pictures matter. You get great compliance.'" The The Telegraph reports that despite his excitement discovering SPECT in 1991, "when he gave a lecture on the topic, it caused such uproar that he shied away from talking about it [for several years]." Amen subsequently fulfilled 200 hours of training to obtain his radioactive materials license from the Institute of Nuclear Medicine Education. He then carried out the required 1,000 hours of clinical supervision in reading SPECT scans to do them himself. In 1995 he became more focused on SPECT after a scan revealed a dangerous cyst in his nephew's brain, located in a lobe associated with violent behavior. He stated that "once we removed the cyst, the [violent] behaviour stopped... modern psychiatry would have just thrown them on the trash." Later Amen stated at a seminar that "I realized there are a lot of kids ... who we as a profession throw away. We send them off to residential treatment, and when we don’t fix them, they end up in jail or they end up on the street, and that is criminal when we have tools that can help them today." He described the instance with his nephew as turning him into a "zealot" for SPECT scanning. Amen published around 15 professional papers in the 1990s, many of which focused on his work with SPECT. Publications included Ann Clin Psychiatry, Advance for Radiological Professionals, Diagnostic Imaging, the Journal of American Academic Adolescent Psychiatry, the Journal of Neurotherapy, the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, Primary Psychiatry, and the Journal of American Academic Child Adolescent Psychiatry. Focus on SPECT scanning (2000-2009) With Amen Clinics, Amen prescribes both medication and non-medicative courses of treatment for patients, depending on the case. He also performs before-and-after single-photon emission computed tomography, or SPECT scans, with the intent of assessing how well treatment is working by assessing blood flow to parts of the brain. SPECT is commonly used to detect problems such as tumors, "strokes, epilepsy, trauma, some types of dementia and heavy drug use," and in neurology "is mainly used to research broad outlines of brain function in groups of patients." Amen uses the scans for other purposes as well, such as assessing psychological conditions by attempting to compare the activity of a person's brain to a known healthy model. The clinics also use QEEG and other laboratory studies as diagnostic tools to detect issues such as "attentional problems, anxiety issues, mood problems, autism, obsessive compulsive disorder, addictions, obesity, memory, learning and behavioral problems." In 2001, he published a paper on "brain SPECT imaging in the assessment and treatment of aggressive behavior" in volume six of Molecular Psychiatry. That year he also published a paper titled "Why don’t psychiatrists look at the brain: the case for the greater use of SPECT imaging in neuropsychiatry" in Neuropsychiatry Reviews. Around 2002, he published in his book Healing Anxiety and Depression that with SPECT, "we could change brain patterns, see it on a follow-up scan, optimize brain function, and subsequently help people heal from the inside out.” He operated two clinics in California as of 2008, one in Washington State, and one in Virginia, with all clinics cumulatively doing 400 to 500 SPECT scans a month. After expanding, Amen Clinics, Inc. (ACI) operated clinics in Newport Beach and Fairfield, Reston, Virginia, and Tacoma, Washington as of 2009. As of 2009, Amen had scanned 50,000 people at what Anan Chatterjee estimated was at a cost $170 million, with Psychology Today calling it "the world's largest database of functional brain scans related to psychiatric medicine." Amen also remained an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry and human behavior at the University of California, Irvine School of Medicine. Expansion (2010-2012) Also in 2011, Amen published the results of a "double blind, placebo controlled study" in Advances in Mind Body Medicine on the "use of brain-directed nutrients (BDNs) and lifestyle interventions" to heal brain trauma. The study concluded that "three supplements: fish oil; a high-potency, multiple vitamin/mineral supplement; and a brainenhancement supplement" resulted in "improvements in brain blood flow, memory, reasoning, information processing accuracy, and mood." As of 2012, his website also contained "diet plans, lifestyle changes, support groups, supplements and DVDs." Amen's four clinics employed around 100 people including 16 psychiatrists, with total gross profits in 2011 equaling $20 million. Combined, the clinics saw around 1,200 patients per month. Also in 2012 he asserted that he had "taught himself — by scanning 45,000 people a total of 70,000 times — to apply SPECT, alongside clinical evaluations, as a diagnostic tool in 90 percent of his patients." A full initial session at one of Amen's clinics, with two scans involved, cost about $3,500. Continuing to research SPECT, in 2012 he published a study concluding that "although his patients had tried multiple doctors and medications before coming to Amen, 77 percent improved across all measures with his SPECT-enhanced treatment." The Washington Post described this as "remarkable success in such a difficult patient population." He also worked as an assistant clinical professor of psychiatry and human behavior in the University of California, Irvine, College of Medicine. Work for athletes (2007-2015) As early as 2007, one of Amen's clinics provided brain scans for current and former National Football League players, scanning for and treating sports-related issues such as concussions. In 2009 the Retired NFL Players Association requested he examine the effects of football on brain health. The results were published in March 2011 in the Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, with the conclusion that "football is one of the worst sports for the health of your brain." With Amen as lead researcher, it was the largest brain imaging study on active and retired football players in the NFL. Relates Amen, "as a group their brain function and memory scores were terrible. Yet on our brain healthy program, which included strategies to avoid bad and do good things for their brains, plus a group of brain healthy supplements, including NeuroVite Plus, a brain directed multiple vitamin, high dose fish oil... and Brain and Memory Power Boost, a supplement I designed to enhance brain blood flow and neurotransmitters, 70% of players demonstrated improved memory scores." He also described a case where a player who changed his memory percentile from 5th to 53rd after undergoing the program. Beyond his research of groups, Amen has also had various high-profile athletes as patients. Among others, Amen made the initial diagnosis of brain damage in NFL kicker Tom Dempsey. During medical examinations and scans, Amen found three holes in Dempsey's brain, along with other damage. He has also provided diagnosis and therapy for hockey player Paul Kariya, related to his concussion issues; after "five months of hyperbaric chambers and other workout regimens, Kariya jumped from the 20th to the 80th percentile in brain function." As the damage remained, however, Amen advised Kariya to retire as a professional, which he did in 2011. In December 2015, Forbes wrote that Amen had "treated hundreds of retired NFL players with a combination of a brain SPECT followed by supplements and hyperbaric oxygen." Recent years (2013-present) Amen is the founder of BrainMD, a nutraceutical company with a branded range of other dietary supplements promoted for their health benefits. According to the company, Amen first began focusing on nutraceuticals and natural supplements early in his career "because he was often horrified to see the effects some psychiatric medications had on the brain." In 2014 he had a paper on blood flow in the brain accepted by the Society of Nuclear Medicine Meeting. The following year, he published a paper on neuroimaging among military veterans in Brain Imaging and Behavior and PLOS One. The paper focused on the usage of SPECT to distinguish between posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and traumatic brain injury (TBI). It was later listed as one of the top 100 stories in science for 2015 by Discover Magazine. In December 2015 he joined Healthy Directions, a "direct-to-consumer nutritional supplement retailer and wholly-owned subsidiary of Helen of Troy Limited." Amen has authored or co-authored 60 professional articles and seven book chapters as of 2016, publishing papers in various academic journals such as the Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, the American Journal of Psychiatry, Journal of Neurotrauma, and the Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences among others. Appearances as a speaker include the National Security Agency (NSA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), Harvard’s Learning and the Brain Conference, the Department of the Interior, and various state supreme courts. As of 2016, Amen Clinics has "the world’s largest database of functional brain scans relating to behavior," totalling 115,000 scans with patients from 111 countries. Amen Clinics currently operates six locations, including Costa Mesa, Walnut Creek, Bellevue, Washington, Atlanta, Georgia, and New York City. He now serves as chairman of Amen Clinics, and is no longer active as CEO or medical director. Career in media First articles and Change Your Brain (1980s-1999) Amen co-wrote a chapter on neuroimaging in the Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry, and has published a number of peer-reviewed papers since the 1980s. According to Amen, he realized he could "have an impact far, far beyond my office" through writing in 1989, when Parade Magazine published his article "How to Get Out of Your Own Way." The article led to around 10,000 letters from readers, and an appearance on CNN. Amen subsequently published several dozen books, many through his own MindWorks Press publishing imprint. One of his first, Two Minutes a Day to a Lifetime of Love, came out through St. Martin's Paperbacks in 1996, while Mind Coach: How to Teach Children & Teenagers to Think Positive & Feel Good was published in 1997. Amen's book Change Your Brain, Change Your Life was published in 1999 through Turtleback Books. The book's popularity spiked after the The Today Show featured it on January 14, 1999, with several reprintings subsequently ordered. Publishers Weekly noted that "Amen's rather technical look at how the systems in the brain affect behavior and how to tailor diet to regulate them apparently struck a nerve with readers who love a 'scientific' hook." It reached the New York Times best seller list after selling tens of thousands of copies in the first year. According to Amen, the book's publication doubled the business of his clinics. It again would return to various bestsellers lists in 2008, when a television show of the same name aired on PBS. Focus on mental disorders (2004-2007) In 2004 he co-authored Healing Anxiety and Depression with Lisa C. Routh. Also that year he co-authored Preventing Alzheimer's, where he wrote that "contrary to popular belief, with current medical and scientific knowledge, the onset of Alzheimer's Disease can be delayed by six years. Amen also asserted that with SPECT he could identify "early stage Alzheimer's Disease up to four years before the first symptoms appear," when used in combination with clinical judgement and memory testing. In his 2006 book Making a Good Brain Great: The Amen Clinic Program for Achieving and Sustaining Optimal Mental Performance, he provided his analysis and recommendations for brain improvement purported to enhance a person's overall happiness and ability. For example, he suggested that hobbies which challenge the brain are important to ensuring a happy life, as he believes they force the brain to learn and evolve over time. Author Davi Thornton characterized the book as consisting of "commonplace recommendations for self-improvement." First PBS airings (2008-2011) As of 2008, Amen had appeared as a medical expert on TV news and talk shows such as CNN, Fox News, and the Today show. Amen by that time had also produced television programs about his theories. One of them, Change Your Brain, Change Your Life, was based on his prior book of the same name from around a decade prior, and was a self-produced show "composed of tips to improve one’s health based on his research." Explains the Washington Post, "it was picked up by a company that distributes content for independent PBS stations to air during fundraising drives. Callers who made pledges got a selection of Amen’s books and materials." It initially aired in New Jersey, before spreading to other local stations in the United States. Change Your Brain, Change Your Life, was aired by PBS affiliates 1,300 times in 2008. Explains the Washington Post, "a lot of what Amen touts on these shows — exercise; eat your vegetables; watch your weight; get a good night’s sleep; take your vitamins; don’t drink, smoke, do drugs or run into things with your head — is so old-fashioned it might well be attributed to John Kellogg, the nation’s first healthy-living guru more than a century ago." Critics of Amen's practices have described these programs as infomercials for Amen's clinics. The airings of Amen's content was criticized by authors such as Harriet A. Hall and Robert A. Burton, and Stanford neurologist Michael Greicius criticized PBS for providing "a stamp of scientific validity to work which has no scientific validity." When questioned around 2008 by critics, PBS asserted they had found no "reason for alarm" with the show, and that a local PBS affiliate, not PBS itself, had vetted the infomercials according to their own editorial guidelines. His first show on PBS was followed by Magnificent Mind at Any Age with Dr. Daniel Amen and Your Brain in Love, and by August 2012 he had six shows overall in syndication for fundraising drives. They had aired around 50,000 times, and generated around $40 million for PBS stations. In August 2012, the Washington Post reported that "these shows...are now a staple of PBS fundraising. Amen’s latest effort, Use Your Brain to Change Your Age, has aired 2,300 times on PBS outlets so far this year, his logs show." Also by that time, Maryland Public Television had aired Amen's shows "252 times, drawing about $400,000 in donations," and WETA had "aired his most recent show six times in June, raising $68,000." Healing the Hardware of the Soul (2008-2009) Healing the Hardware of the Soul, written by Amen in 2008, was reviewed in the American Journal of Psychiatry by Andrew Leuchter. "Dr. Amen makes a good case for the use of brain imaging to explain and medicalize mental disorders," Leuchter said. "However, the reader who has any degree of familiarity with mental illness and brain science is left unconvinced that his [Amen's] highly commercialized use of scanning is justified." Leuchter concluded that Amen "has not subjected his treatment approaches to the level of systematic scientific scrutiny expected for scientifically based medical practice." In 2009, Amen published Healing ADD: The Breakthrough Program That Allows You to See and Heal the Six Types of Attention Deficit Disorder through Putnam Adult. Also around that time he published Magnificent Mind at Any Age: Natural Ways to Unleash Your Brain's Maximum Potential, and Unchain Your Brain. In his 2009 book The Brain in Love, Amen described the brain activity that occurs during chanting meditation as similar to those which take place during the feeling of love and sexual activity. After publishing End Emotional Overeating NOW and The Amen Solution: The Brain Healthy Way to Get Thinner, Smarter, Happier in 2011, by 2012 he had published over two dozen books, with several of them hitting various bestseller lists. Five had been New York Times bestsellers, while by August 2012, he had sold around 1 million copies of his books overall. The Daniel Plan (2012-2013) In 2013 Amen co-authored the book The Daniel Plan: 40 Days to a Healthier Life, with pastor Rick Warren on "how to lead a healthy life." An attendee of Warren's Saddleback Church, Amen, Mark Hyman, and Mehmet Oz were recruited by Warren to help devise the book's program for adoption by his network of Saddleback churches. According to Janice Norris, "The Daniel Plan is ... more than a diet. It is a lifestyle program based on Biblical principles and five essential components: food, fitness, focus, faith, and friends." Amen attending a church rally with 3,000 people to talk about the plan, and discussed it on The View and NPR. The book was further featured on CNN and FoxNews.com, and received the Christian Book of the Year Award in 2015. Recent speaking, shows, and books (2011-2016) He has given two TEDx talks, one in 2011 and one in 2013. Amen was the author of more than 30 books by 2013. That year he released Unleash the Power of the Female Brain: Supercharging Yours for Better Health, Energy, Mood, Focus, and Sex, followed by Use Your Brain to Change Your Age: Secrets to Look, Feel and Think Younger Every Day. Recent publications include the children's book What I Learned from a Penguin in 2015 and The Brain Warrior's Way in 2016. In the latter, written along with his wife, Publishers Weekly writes that "the Amens propose ways to improve focus, sharpen memory, stabilize mood, and more. An accompanying cookbook publishes the same day." As of 2016 he had nine bestsellers on the New York Times list, including Change Your Brain, Change Your Life, Magnificent Mind At Any Age, Change Your Brain, Change Your Body, and The Amen Solution. He had also written, produced, and hosted ten televsion shows, which have raised around $52 million dollars for public television. Personal appearances that point included The Dr. Oz Show, The Truth About Drinking, The Crash Reel, and After the Last Round. His most recent program, airing on channels such as KPBS in 2016, is titled On The Psychiatrist’s Couch With Dr. Daniel Amen, M.D. Accolades Amen has received a number of awards in his career, related both to education and academia. In 1985 he was named a Ginsburg Fellow in the Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry. Also that year he received the General William C. Menninger Memorial Award, and in 1987 he received the Marie H. Eldridge Award for Research. In 1999, The Truth About Drinking, a show he was involved with, won an Emmy Award for Best Educational Television. He was given the 2002 Outstanding Young Professional Award by Vanguard University's alumni association, and in 2005 Amen received the Distinguished Fellow Award of the American Psychiatric Association. For his book Making a Good Brain Great, in 2006 he won an AudioFile Earphones Award. In 2012, he was given the NBJ Award for Business Achievement in the education category. In 2013, Sharecare named Amen the web’s most influential mental health expert and advocate, and Oral Roberts University awarded Amen a Lifetime Global Achievement Award in 2016. Reception of practices and ideas Amen's popularity, practices, and financial success have been discussed in the media. Author John Rosemond in 2008 wrote that Amen had become "a highly controversial figure in psychiatric circles - a visionary or shrewd self-promotor, depending on whom one asks." In 2012, The Washington Post Magazine ran a cover story titled "Daniel Amen is the most popular psychiatrist in America." The article concluded that "to most researchers and scientists, [his popularity is] a very bad thing," detailing a lack of acceptance among the scientific community for Amen's practices. In 2012, Amen defended his work by stating "there are 2,700 scientific articles on my website that show the underlying basis for our work [at Amen Clinics]. None of [the detractors] have called me and said, ‘You’ve got the world’s largest database of scans, what can I learn from you?’ Instead, they call me a snake oil salesman and a charlatan." Detractors have argued that Amen has a monetary conflict of interest due to his commercial success. Journalist Sanjiv Bhattacharya opined in 2013 that Amen was "the most controversial psychiatrist in America [who] may also be the most commercially successful," reporting that Amen's critics likened him "to a self-help guru rather than a scientist, on account of all the books, DVDs and nutritional supplements which he hawks so shamelessly on infomercials." Amen has argued his financial success goes hand in hand with controversy, as "one reason why [detractors] hate me is because I make money." He further noted that "our biggest referral sources are our patients. If I'm defrauding them how would I stay in business for decades?" The Washington Post in 2012 reported that there were no litigation records in California, Virginia, or Washington State against Amen, also noting that "the California Medical Board has no record of any substantiated claim [against him]." SPECT for psychiatric diagnosis Amen has for years used SPECT imaging in conjunction with other more traditional psychology practices to assess conditions and treatment for patients. According to Amen, one of the reasons his detractors criticize his work is "because no one likes to be told they’re wrong. And I’m going further. I’m saying 98 per cent of my colleagues are performing malpractice [by not using SPECT scans]." Related the Washington Post in 2012, "the brain activity he says he sees in these scans — areas of high and low activity — allows him to target those areas with specific treatments and medication, he says. Amen says this method has helped him identify new subtypes of anxiety, depression and attention deficit disorder, categories far more specific than even the forthcoming fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, the benchmark of the field." As of 2012, he asserted SPECT was useful as a diagnostic tool in 90 percent of his patients. According to American Psychiatric Association (APA) president Dilip V. Jeste, Amen's early work with SPECT was regarded by the [APA] as "progressive and promising in its time." However, the Washington Post explains that while "there was excitement about the possibilities of SPECT... within a few years, most clinicians and researchers realized SPECT’s limitations and moved on." Amen and a number of other American researchers, however, "remained entranced." In 2008, Tufts professor and author Daniel Carlat published an article on Amen's use of SPECT imaging. After visiting Amen's clinics, Carlat called Amen's interpretations of the scans "spectacularly meaningless." In defense, Amen asserted that "Carlat asked to be scanned for free, refused to completely fill out medical forms and misrepresented the nature of the article he was writing." In 2012, the Washington Post reported that major psychiatric and neuroscience associations and research centers saw Amen's use of SPECT as "no more than myth and poppycock, buffaloing an unsuspecting public," instead seeing SPECT useful only "in identifying strokes, brain injuries and the like. It is helpful in group studies, to say broad things about groups of patients, but not specific things about individual patients." The APA has published several reports concluding there is no strong evidence to support SPECT's usefulness identifying psychological problems, leading to accusations that there is a lack of peer-reviewed support for Amen's interpretation of SPECT scans. Questions have been raised about the ethics of selling SPECT scans on the basis of unproven claims, and whether diagnostic SPECT is "premature and unproven." According to Neuroethics in Practice in 2013, most patients do not realise that the Amen's use of SPECT scans is not backed by peer-reviewed research. The Washington Post quoted psychologist Irving Kirsch in 2012 stating that Amen's theories should "ethically be bound" to be backed by a peer-reviewed academic journal before implementation, or Amen risks being seen as a "snake oil salesman." In an article for the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Martha Farah in 2009 called Amen's use "profitable but unproven," criticizing SPECT scans for being expensive, not covered by insurance, and for exposing children and individuals to radiation. In 2013, John Seibyl of the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging stated that "SPECT is valuable for diagnosing neurological disorders like epilepsy, dementia and brain tumours, But not for psychiatric disorders like depression. There’s no debate here." Critics have also argued that a scan can miss major diagnostic clues such as chemical markers, making it limited as a diagnostic tool. Amen responded that "I’ve never said that you can make a blind diagnosis using SPECT scans alone. You have to talk to people. But scans add an important part of the evaluation puzzle." Others have supported Amen's use of SPECT, with David Smith of the Haight-Ashbury Free Medical Clinic stating that Amen's work with SPECT "has had a huge impact on the addiction field." Explains The Washington Post, "these supporters attribute the fierce criticism of Amen as the inevitable response to being a trailblazer in a staid profession." Amen has defended his practices from criticism as well, and around 2012, he published a study concluding that "although his patients had tried multiple doctors and medications before coming to Amen, 77 percent improved across all measures with his SPECT-enhanced treatment." The Washington Post described this as "remarkable success in such a difficult patient population." The article noted that it was possible that Amen is "20 years ahead of virtually the entire psychiatric field (he says about three dozen other clinics use SPECT scans, but few as profusely as he does), and the establishment has failed to recognize a historic breakthrough." In 2014 he stated that "what we do [with SPECT at Amen Clinics] is very controversial. Why? Because you have this whole field that’s not looking at the organ that it treats. Most people don’t like to be told what they’re doing is wrong and I don’t really like telling them that, but it’s the truth. When you don’t look, you hurt people, you miss really important things." In 2011, neuroscientist Anjan Chatterjee argued in AJOB Neuroscience that Amen had "violate[d] the standard of care" by recommending SPECT scans to patients on his website where it seemed unwarranted, for example a couple with marital difficulties. According to The Telegraph, Amen argues SPECT can help with such issues as behavioral problems can "sometimes caused by the kind of neurological damage that SPECT can reveal, such as head trauma, toxic damage or even the early onset of Alzheimer’s." When confronted with the idea that SPECT scans might be effective at helping patients through the placebo effect, Amen responded that if that was the case, "if it’s helping the patient, I’m all for it." He further stated that "these people who accuse me of selling snake oil need to explain: when [your own outcomes in psychiatry] haven’t improved in 40 years, what’s the argument against more information?" In a 2012 speech at the American Psychiatric Association symposium, he stated that "it will soon be malpractice to not use imaging in complicated cases." Supplements and brain health Amen sells various supplements online. In 2010, Amen stated to CBS News that he recommended three typical items to patients: "a good multivitamin, because 91 percent of Americans do not have the minimum requirement of five servings of fruit and vegetables per day...I recommend all of my patients take Omega 3 fatty acid supplements because, when those levels are low, people are vulnerable to dementia, depression, even suicide....And everyone should get their Vitamin D level checked." In 2004 Amen co-authored Preventing Alzheimer's, where he wrote that "contrary to popular belief, with current medical and scientific knowledge, the onset of Alzheimer's disease can be delayed by six years," as well as the claim that "through prevention strategies," onset can be delayed so long that symptoms do not appear. He specifically recommends "mental and physical exercise, good nutrition, avoidance of excess alcohol, not smoking and stress reduction." Burton, for Salon, later wrote in 2008 that "all of these are modestly helpful in preventing general cognitive decline. But none of them has a specific anti-Alzheimer’s effect." Amen's book also recommend the item NeuroMemory, a combination of various herbal elements, and his own proprietary nutraceuticals. Burton criticized these vitamins for having use that was "hypothetically possible but as yet unproven." Authors such as Robert Burton have criticized Amen's supplement recommendations for having unproven benefits, and in a 2013 article for The Society for Science-Based Medicine's online publication, Harriet A. Hall wrote that Amen prescribes "inadequately tested natural remedies" and "irrational mixtures of nutritional diet supplements" as part of his treatment. Several years earlier, Amen had stated to CBS News that "some claim supplements don't work and there is no science behind them. That is not true. It is just important that you target them to your specific brain and your specific needs." According to an editorial in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2013, there is no widely accepted proven benefit from taking vitamin supplements, excluding for specific substance deficiencies. Also that year, Amen published a study in Advances in Mind Body Medicine concluding that "three supplements: fish oil; a high-potency, multiple vitamin/mineral supplement; and a brainenhancement supplement" given to NFL players resulted in "improvements in brain blood flow, memory, reasoning, information processing accuracy, and mood." Personal life Amen and his wife Tana live with their family in Newport Coast, California. Amen describes himself as an avid fan of table tennis. Publishing history Incomplete list of publishing credits for Daniel Amen Yr Release title Authors (publisher) ISBN 1992 Don't Shoot Yourself in the Foot Amen (Warner Books) ISBN 0446393738 1996 Two Minutes a Day to a Lifetime of Love Amen (St. Martin's Paperbacks) ISBN 978-0312958695 1997 Mind Coach: How to Teach Children & Teenagers to Think Positive & Feel Good Amen (Mindworks Press) ISBN 978-1886554078 1999 Change Your Brain, Change Your Life: The Breakthrough Program for Conquering Anxiety, Depression, Obsessiveness, Anger, and Impulsiveness Amen (Turtleback Books) ISBN 9780748114689 2000 New Skills for Frazzled Parents: The Instruction Manual That Should Have Come With Your Child Amen (Mindworks Press) ISBN 978-1886554023 2001 Images of Human Behavior: A Brain SPECT Atlas Amen (Mindworks Press) ISBN 978-1886554047 2002 Healing the Hardware of the Soul: Enhance Your Brain to Improve Your Work, Love, and Spiritual Life Amen (Atria Books) ISBN 978-1439100394 2004 Healing Anxiety and Depression Amen and Lisa C. Routh (Highbridge) ISBN 0425198448 2005 ADD in Intimate Relationships: A Comprehensive Guide for Couples Amen (Mindworks Press) ISBN 978-1886554191 2005 How to Get Out of Your Own Way: A Step-by-Step Guide for Identifying and Achieving Your Goals Amen (Mindworks Press) ISBN 978-1886554177 2005 The Secrets of Successful Students Amen (Mindworks Press) ISBN 978-1886554207 2005 Preventing Alzheimer's: Ways to Help Prevent, Delay, Detect, and Even Halt Alzheimer's Disease and Other Forms of Memory Loss Amen, William Rodman Shankle (TarcherPerigee) ISBN 978-0399531606 2006 Making a Good Brain Great: The Amen Clinic Program for Achieving and Sustaining Optimal Mental Performance Amen (Harmony) ISBN 9781400082094 2007 Sex on the Brain Amen (Harmony) ISBN 978-0307339072 2009 The Brain in Love: 12 Lessons to Enhance Your Love Life Amen (Three Rivers Press) ISBN 9780307587893 2009 Healing ADD: The Breakthrough Program That Allows You to See and Heal the Six Types of Attention Deficit Disorder Amen (Putnam Adult) ISBN 978-0399146442 2009 Magnificent Mind at Any Age: Natural Ways to Unleash Your Brain's Maximum Potential Amen (Piatkus Books) ISBN 9780307339102 2009 Unchain Your Brain Amen (MindWorks Press) ASIN B0047HSSD8 2010 Change Your Brain, Change Your Body: Use Your Brain to Get and Keep the Body You Have Always Wanted Amen (Brown Book Group) ISBN 9780748124046 2011 End Emotional Overeating NOW Amen, Larry Mornay (MindWorks Press) ISBN 978-1886554290 2011 The Amen Solution: The Brain Healthy Way to Get Thinner, Smarter, Happier Amen (Harmony) ISBN 9780307463616 2012 The Daniel Plan: 40 Days to a Healthier Life Amen, Mark Hyman, Mehmet Oz, Rick Warren (Zondervan) ISBN978-0310824459 2013 Unleash the Power of the Female Brain: Supercharging Yours for Better Health, Energy, Mood, Focus, and Sex Amen (Harmony) ISBN 978-0307888952 2013 Use Your Brain to Change Your Age: Secrets to Look, Feel and Think Younger Every Day Amen (Brown Book Group) ISBN 978-0749958237 2015 What I Learned from a Penguin Amen and Jesse Payne (Skyboat Media) ISBN 978-1481529617 2016 The Brain Warrior's Way Amen and Tana Amen (NAL) ISBN 978-1101988473 2016 The Brain Warrior's Way Cookbook Amen and Tana Amen (NAL) ISBN 978-1101988503 See also List of notable people from Encino, California List of notable alumni from Vanguard University List of notable alumni from Oral Roberts University List of chief executive officers References External links Amen Clinics brainMD.com Category:American health and wellness writers Category:American medical writers Category:American male writers Category:American psychiatrists Category:American self-help writers Category:Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder Category:People in alternative medicine Category:University of California, Irvine faculty Category:Oral Roberts University alumni Category:Living people Category:Vanguard University of Southern California alumni Category:American people of Lebanese descent Category:1954 births Category:People from Encino, Los Angeles

Comments

Skepdic is fine, as is the Salon piece. OTOH is seems you are adding primary medical research which is definitely unreliable per WP:MEDRS, and generally this proposed version falls heavily afoul of WP:FRINGE. Alexbrn (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Could you point out which specific articles you don't like added? Amen's published papers are obviously relevant to his career, no matter how they are received by critics, and I notice prior editors have added in plenty of "standalone" studies to this article that aren't even related to Amen. I haven't removed those articles, to avoid causing unecessary drama, but would like to draw attention to, for example, the random study I found thrown in there on the efficacy of supplements overall (the study was not related to Amen specifically). I responded to that particular example with another singular study (Amen's), but frankly would rather remove both. I just don't want to remove one without the other.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Earflaps (talk • contribs)

As others have said it's quite difficult to work out quite what's proposed, but one example of an article not that I "don't like" (why say that?), but which obviously is unreliable per WP:MEDRS that you cote is PMID 23709409. Why cite unreliable sources? Alexbrn (talk) 17:20, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not going to comb through the new version to see what is different. That is not a reasonable thing to ask of other volunteers. Please identify the changes somehow. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 01:23, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

No offense, but if you aren't willing to take the time to go throught the changes directly and on your own prerogative, I doubt you're paying enough attention to the content anyways to give good feedback. Earflaps (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I agree that it is very difficult to see what has changed. It is apparent to me though that this version gives far to much credence to the wash po source, referencing it c. 70 times vs the current 10. Balance means representing all of the sources not using one, relatively unreliable and uncritical one in great detail. I also think that the structure of your version is a large section of positive content, followed by negative content, which I don't think is preferable compared to the integrated approach the current article uses. Your lead is a long way from summarising the available sources neutrally and presents Amen's views as though they are the norm, and only a few "detractors" oppose him whereas the psychological community is clear that his views are fringe ones that are not accepted. And what's with the book listing? We're not Amazon. SmartSE (talk) 09:26, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I understand no-one wants to make the page look like an ad for Amen. But criticizing a book listing? We are indeed not Amazon, but perhaps you could explain how the publishing history of a best-selling author isn't relevant? I avoided added a "filmography" since it would seem overly like a listing of infomercials and therefore blatantly promo-looking, but many of these books are New York Times bestsellers. I also disagree with the assertion that this draft involves a WP:POV fork, maybe that opinion could be explained better? "Reception" sections are perfectly fine in biographies per the guidelines laid out in WP:Controversy sections, so long as multiple POVs are threaded in fairly. Earflaps (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Unless there are sources which discuss the books in detail, it's undue to devote a large section of an article to listing all the books - we're not a directory. I did not say that it is a POVfork - I said that you have given undue weight to one source over the others that are available. Looking at it further, your cites to http://danielamenmd.com/about/ are also problematic - it's a primary source and you've used it repeatedly to reference "in year X Amen published paper Y in journal Z" - secondary sources take very little notice of his publication history and so the article should reflect that. SmartSE (talk) 18:20, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Daily Beast

The Daily Beast is currently used to cite the following statements:

"and a New York Times bestselling author" "Amen's popularity and financial success have been discussed in the media" "Five of his books have been New York Times bestsellers."

It has been tagged as unreliable by User:Earflaps. Can you please explain why it isn't a suitable source for these factual statements? Sourcing is not as simple as saying that a particular website is always or is never reliable, as we have already discussed about Salon. I see no problem with sourcing anything to the article to be honest, even if other articles would be unsuitable. SmartSE (talk) 18:34, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Citation style

The citation style for this article is settled, and should not be changed without prior consensus. See WP:CITEVAR. Alexbrn (talk) 18:50, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

I'm out

I'm very aware that when I engage on a controversial page, I may encounter pithy comments, contempt, insults, accusations of bias, and general unpleasantness - but it's a part of the trade I brace myself for. But I have a limit. Despite devoting a week of my free time writing a beautifully expansive, masterfully detailed and well-worded page for this community to play with, since posting it for feedback, I've faced aspersions on my neutrality from multiple people in this discussion (despite my first comment on this page making it clear I wasn't a COI shill), and have also had editors from this page go through my editing history to cast aspersions on my other projects as well. I perceive this as Wikihounding, and while I hope maybe some of the dozens of page watchers here will use some of the new content, it's become very clear to me that my opinions are not welcome here, to the point that friendly collaboration is not possible. Earflaps (talk) 22:53, 20 December 2016 (UTC)