We welcome the comments by Drs Pierre et al. and Aftab regarding the Chicago Follow-up Study, especially in relation to our most recent publication in Psychological Medicine, 'Twenty-year effects of antipsychotics in schizophrenia and affective psychosis' (Harrow, Jobe, & Tong, 2021). By way of introduction we should provide some background regarding our study, which is a prospective naturalistic observational study of 20 years duration that includes six follow-up evaluations, having been funded almost continuously for over a 35 year period, 25 of those years by the National Institute of Mental Health, NIMH, in addition to 5 years of funding by the MacArthur Foundation and 4 years by the Center of Excellence in Mental Health. Our findings bring into question the current standard of practice that emphasizes long-term maintenance treatment with antipsychotic medication in patients with schizophrenia as the optimal strategy in all cases (American Psychiatric Association, 2020).First with reference to Dr Pierre et al.'s comments regarding the problem of reverse association, the proverbial chicken and egg question, we would point out that this kind of confound is difficult to control because the relevant variables are unanticipated and often discovered long after a study is completed (Carvalho et al., 2020;Marquis, Habicht, Lanata, Black, & Rasmussen, 1997). As a prospective long-term naturalistic study over 20 years, the Chicago Follow-up Study has made extraordinary efforts to sufficiently consider patients' heterogeneity and minimize biases.