Once upon a time, our understanding of depression and its treatment was as vague as the concept of infinity to a kindergarten kid. Picture an explorer who stumbled upon a goldmine purely by accident. That's how the 'chemical imbalance' theory was discovered - our version of the goldmine in treating depression. Antidepressants came as knights in shining armor, battling depression by balancing these chemicals in the brain. But, just as every superhero movie has a plot twist, this theory was later challenged due to research artifacts like publication bias and an enhanced placebo effect.

Think about it as if you're looking at customer reviews of a product online, but only the 5-star reviews are visible. That's publication bias. And the enhanced placebo effect is akin to you feeling better after a doctor's visit even before the prescribed medicine starts working because you believe it will work. That's exactly what happened with the 'chemical imbalance' theory.

The new buzz in town is that antidepressants are indeed effective, but not like a one-size-fits-all t-shirt. They work in certain situations, particularly when severe symptoms of depression need to be alleviated quickly. But, like choosing the right video game to play, deciding on antidepressant treatment should be personalized, made on a case-to-case basis after weighing the pros and cons.