Here's a link to an article published today in several newspapers: https://www.pressreader.com/canada/edmonton-journal/20170111/281818578519567 "New U of T (Toronto, Canada) grant backs studies in 'anti-psychiatry' Field 'does not stand up to scrutiny' " Professor Bonnie Burstow, considered to have radical ideas, has convinced the University of Toronto to back a scholarship for studies in "antipsychiatry". She states: "Psychiatry's tenets and claims do not stand up to scrutiny. . . . I am saying these are not diseases . . . There is not a single proof of a single chemical imbalance of a single so-called mental illness." Here's where Shorter comes in. He is reported as having said that such statements are simply "absurd", that thousands of scientific studies, now incorporating sophisticated imaging of the brain - bolster the idea that biology is behind many psychological conditions and that various treatments do, in fact, work. "This is a case where academic freedom should be quashed." Could this be interpreted to mean that Shorter is starting to change his views? I have to admit the article left me scratching my head regarding Shorter's position, in the context of what we've heard from him in the past.