Response to: Stimulating dangerous argument?

Abstract

Recent issues of the journal have contained an interesting, and we suspect somewhat entertaining, series of debate articles focused on the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) treatment for depression. Unfortunately, we are not sure if these have really advanced understanding of the field adequately. In the most recent follow-up article, ‘Stimulating dangerous argument?’ (we are not sure what is dangerous about this debate), Professor Malhi and colleagues (2019) have continued the debate but really failed to address the vast majority of factual or content issues that were raised by both of us in our responses that preceded this. Instead, they appear to have really focused on two points that we would like to address in turn: