The world of mass media is on the move, increasingly recognizing the role of mental disorders in influencing the lives of us all. In recent years, there has been a realization that it is the mass media that has the real task of disseminating medicaland scientific information to people with mental disorders. This is because the existence of doctors, psychologists and centers specializing in the treatment of anxiety disorders, for example, is not currently the domain of the medical population, which is not always in a position to give patients the right information on where to turn. A very great responsibility falls precisely on the mass media, but unfortunately, all too often the tendency to convey the information that attracts the public prevails, with a very visible but not very truthful association, rather than providing scientifically assessed and validated information, which may be less fascinating but is certainly more real and useful. When you write and discuss mental health, you are touching on a subject that is absolutely central to the wellbeing of millions of people, and for this reason the information must find its backbone in scientific truth and not in the opinions of individuals. The scientific method, despite all its limitations linked to the impossibility of being absolutely rigorous, is the only guarantor of the attempt to see the world not as it seems, but as it is, and therefore currently seems to be the only viable path to a true and objective view of the world and of the individual. Facts instead of words…...

Too often the word "expert" is casually bandied about. Take panic disorder, for example. If you read on the internet or in a newspaper that Dr. Pinco says a cure works, if you read a book that Dr. Pinco Pallo wrote, or if you read on a blog that Mr. Pallo was saved by a cure, it tells us nothing about the effectiveness of the cure. Why are these sources unreliable? The reason lies in the fact that no one checks the scientific validity of what is written, and anyone can decide to open a "World Panic Treatment Center" and write a book "Overcoming Panic with Pokemon", anyone. Is a degree in medicine or psychology a guarantee of quality and does it make one an expert in the treatment of panic? Obviously, it's not enough. The degree guarantees basic preparation in medicine and psychology, but nothing more. Let us think about whether a medical degree is enough to be an expert in cardiology

How can we recognize the authority of those who speak and those who write? Of course, the ability to view a CV would be ideal, but if that is not the case, there is the ability to evaluate what that person has accomplished scientifically. In fact, the worldwide database of scientific research on the Internet http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed is accessible to everyone (beware of homonyms! a psychiatry does not generally publish about surgery....)

It is sufficient to enter the name of a doctor to determine whether he has ever produced scientific studies of value. This is certainly one of the indications, but not the only one, of a psychiatrist's scientific value. By no means am I saying that someone who has no scientific value that can be highlighted in this global database is not a valuable doctor, psychiatrist or psychologist, but a past and a present dedicated to scientific research is certainly an indicator of quality. important, which above all gives us the guarantee of an effort to understand reality beyond personal opinion.