Summary Of The Mega-Marketing Of Depression In Japan

Consciousness is awareness of one’s thoughts and emotions, as well as perception of one’s surroundings and the world. People from different nations have distinct consciousness of various subject matters including politics, medicine, and social conscience. These differences are healthy, and they constitute an integral part of human nature. Nevertheless, Watters’ “The Mega-Marketing of Depression in Japan” is an example of instances when differences in consciousness can raise a flag. In Watters’ story, while the Western conception of depression is a severe feeling of sadness and anxiety, many Japanese perceive depression as a simple disease that does not require much attention, which could lead to further health complications.

People from different

cultures differ in their way of thinking and can have a different outlook on the same issue. An example is how the Japanese culture perceives depression differently and less alertly than its American counterpart. As Dr. Kirmayer said, the Japanese culture and the Western culture only differed in how each described and understood the meaning of depression, which he defined as a mental state and a set of behaviors that relate to a loss of connectedness to others or a decline in social status or personal motivation” (Watters 517). Moreover, this different perception of depression is reflected in the Japanese language. For instance, several Japanese phrases were translated to “depression” in English, but did not imply the same meaning. Typus melancholicus refer to the personality of those who are “serious, diligent, and thoughtful and expressed concern about the welfare of other individuals and the society as a whole” (Watters 520). These people felt severe sadness only when cultural disturbances harmed the welfare of others. Another phrase, Yuutsu, was used to represent grief and a general gloominess of the body and spirit. A young Japanese researcher, Tanaka-Matsumi asked a group of Japanese to say words they would connect with yuutsu and a group of Americans to say words they would connect with depression. The Americans used words related to internal emotions while the Japanese went outward and used words related to the physical world and the general atmosphere. Tanaka-Matsumi argued that “these were not simply linguistic differences but cultural variations in the subjective meanings and experience of depression” (Watters 522). Distinct cultures may not only perceive things differently, but may also feel and interpret them differently. What is considered painful in one place may not be considered so in another. In addition, some cultures may distinguish the self from the individual mind, while others may associate this self to social and environmental contexts.
It may become necessary sometimes to alter a person’s consciousness in order to direct him/her down the right path and keep him/her from making regrettable decisions, especially in the case of self-harm. Individuals may often unknowingly harm themselves due to lack of knowledge or resistance to getting rid of bad habits and unhealthy traditions. In other words, they resist change. In such cases, it is the moral and ethical obligation of several professions in the society, such as pharmacy, to prevent individual and collective self-harm through the employment of ethical means and methods that are not intended to maximize monetary gain or self-interest. Furthermore, before attempting to reshape the social perception vis-à-vis a certain issue, lots of investigation and research have to be conducted in order to determine the main causes and reasons that had led to the genesis of a popularly held social perception or belief. This approach, in turn, will facilitate the problem solving process, because it would allow the treatment of the symptoms and a shift from a treatment approach to a preventative approach. An example of a company that followed this approach is The GlaxoSmithKline drug companies in Japan, which began their attempt to alter the Japanese view of depression by holding conferences with scholars such as Dr. Kirmayer in order to learn “how cultures shape the illness experience” (Watters 515). It was concluded during these conferences that one of the factors that have led to the Japanese interpretation of depression is the drug companies’ lack of responsibility and concern about the dangerous nature of the disease As one drug executive put it, “there is no sense of urgency about patient need in Japan” (Watters 524). In other words, drug companies in this case have played a role in shaping the consciousness of the Japanese population.
As one of their roles, some drug companies attempt to change the citizens’ consciousness of a certain medicine in order to sell it, by advertising that medicine in magazines and other media platforms.

In Japan, drug makers published advertisements in newspapers to “alter the environment in which anti-depressant drugs are or may be used…and promote the idea of depression as a common ailment” (Watters 524). As depression has been believed to be incurable, drug makers argued that this disease was equivalent to a cold of the soul or kokoro no kaze. They also published articles in magazines and included statistics showing how many Japanese suffered from depression. The articles asserted that depression has been ubiquitous just like colds. Sometimes, a medical company may extremely underestimate the effects of a disease that the population would think it does not require medication. This approach, in turn, leads to questioning the legitimacy of their actions and the real motives behind their advertisements. Companies must be aware of what and how they communicate to people, because by frequently exposing the public to a certain idea or concept, it becomes unconsciously ingrained in the public subconscious. The public perception of depression in Japan has led to severe consequences, including an increasing suicide rates, “lost man-hours and decreased productivity” (Watters 526). As suicide rates increased, drug makers embraced a difference approach, modified their advertisements,

and published studies that showed the connection between depression and suicide, in order to spread the message that “without medical attention…the cold of the soul could kill you” (Watters 526). This, in turn, is a clear evidence that an institution can shape the consciousness of an entire society, and make the same population perceive the same issue from a different angle.
Although drug companies may have the obligation and duty to correct and change misconceptions about disease and healthcare, they do not have the right to control people’s minds or perception if the products they are selling are not valid or effective.

Drugs must be researched and tried clinically before being made available to the public. The GlaxoSmithKline drug makers claimed that depression was caused by low levels of serotonin in the brain and that SSRIs restore the balance of the brain chemistry. Furthermore, GlaxoSmithKline sponsored professional medical researchers and psychiatrists to research the effects of SSRIs, and rewarded researchers who found positive results, which is considered unethical and immoral in the world of pharmaceutics and medical research. As most findings proved SSRIs effective, GlaxoSmithKline executives viewed themselves as fighters of depression. However, Professor Applebaum from the University of Wisconsin states that these companies seemed to “believe their products were effective and they were baffled that anyone should question their value” (Watters 528). Nevertheless, the GlaxoSmithKline, after years of advertising depression medication, found out that no scientific evidence proved the link between depression and serotonin depletion, or the role of SSRIs in balancing the brain’s chemistry. Scientists found that SSRIs actually reshape the brain’s chemistry, which leads to the conclusion that these anti-depressant drugs should have not

been advertised in the first place. In the 1950s, scientist Ashcroft related depression to serotonin deficiency, but his idea was disproved by rigorous studies that were done more sensitively. The American Psychiatric Press Textbook of Clinical Psychiatry argued that “additional experience has not confirmed the monoamine depletion hypothesis” (Watters 529). The idea that SSRIs balance serotonin levels is an unsubstantiated theory. In other words, this hypothesis is “more of a culturally shared story than a scientific fact” (waters 529). This further proves that Watters’ case of the GlaxoSmithKline companies is an example of inappropriate altering of the Japanese minds. Companies may not alter people’s consciousness with no guarantee of the people’s benefit. The safety of the population comes before marketing and economy.
Whether it is permissible to shape the consciousness of a person or group of people depends on the purposes behind such a process. One may change a person’s knowledge and awareness of his/her surroundings if the goal is to convince him/her to make the right decision for his/her welfare. Nevertheless, a company may not change people’s consciousness only for the sake of marketing or making more profit or increasing man-hours. The GlaxoSmithKline drug companies, although failed to sell their products, were actually trying to treat the Japanese people from depression by convincing them to take their medication. Consciousness may not only be changed by pharmaceutical companies, but also by other businesses such as retail stores, which can society’s perception of fashion and physical appearance. In general, with the contemporary revolution in information technology, it is becoming easier than ever to alter the consciousness of the masses