No personal offence intended (truley) but I think you have watched "one flew over the coo coo's nest" one too many times. Contemporary ECT is not some archaic form of Frankenstein-like punishment, it's extremely regulated and considered a last resort for many who cope with an endless and insurmountable depressive state. This is 2012, not 1950. I encourage you to read about the contemporary applications of it in depression as a last resort and also to consider how it will continue to evolve (as all medical technologies have) int what will eventually be a precision tool.
It will eventually become totally obsolete, of course but consider how many fields have found application for electrical stimulation of the brain and consider that much of it began with ECT.
So, if by "indirectly analogous" you mean instead mean "in no direct way analogous at all"..then it's totally true. Otherwise it's just not and I am not saying that as an assault on your private right to believe what you like I am simply saying that it's not true.
As Nakamova said, there are costs to be weighed and I imagine these are largely to be assessed on a patient to patient basis, for some the cost may be too high and I don;t doubt that for others the procedure might be risky in ways that would be impossible to predict without superhuman foreknowledge of every last biological quirk that a patient might have, but this is no less a risk for any treatment which medical science has devised throughout history, it's far from being the exclusive property of Electroconvulsive therapy. A doctor is a doctor at the end of the day , that is a human being who seeks to understand the human condition and it's aliments which increasing accuracy for the purpose of healing and improving the quality of human life they aren't and shouldn't be expected to be prescient.
it's all become a bit of a tangent now, I merely intended to point out that there is a president for a connection between mood and epilepsy, that's all. I admit however ...I do love to debate