Excited Delirium: Falsifiability, Causality, and the Importance of Advocacy.

The article "Excited Delirium: Falsifiability, Causality, and the Importance of Advocacy" responds to commentaries on the topic of excited delirium by Kathryn Petrozzo and Paul B. Lieberman. Petrozzo challenges the assertion that excited delirium is non-falsifiable, arguing that it is a result of crafting incorrect causal narratives. However, the authors argue that the current construction of excited delirium allows for multiple causal factors and lacks falsifiability. They also discuss the importance of falsifiability as a signifier of pseudoscience and the need for research that could discredit excited delirium. Lieberman's commentary focuses on the role of psychiatrists in addressing excited delirium, particularly in relation to the use of restraint during police interactions. The authors agree that psychiatrists can contribute to conflict avoidance and humane treatment by advocating for nonviolent de-escalation techniques. They also highlight the need for psychiatry to engage with public discourse and dispel the myth of excited delirium as a neuropsychiatric condition. The article concludes by emphasizing the moral imperative to save innocent lives and the importance of speaking out against pseudoscience. [Extracted from the article]