mental illness

Choose Constructive Emotions (And don’t forget your greatest asset) (3)

Approaching Shadow, 1954 by Chinese photographer Fan-Ho born in Shanghai, in 1931.

“Don’t be so negative! Think positive!”

— positive thinking evangelist


Reading time: 15-18 mins

How many times have you heard the above smiley command from people who have joined the positive psychology bandwagon? Apart from being a tad self-righteous the proclamation might also mask the person’s inability to process the negative realities of this world.

This “pursuit of happiness” tightly bound with numerous affirmations and fixated beliefs intent on to forcing happiness into being doesn’t deliver. If we do not achieve those heights of impossible joy then we sow the seeds of re-occurring resentment.

As we have explored, positive thinking is an important part of self-betterment, but it is literally only half the equation. There’s a huge caveat that goes unnoticed in the drive to cultivate a better outlook and a happier life. Deny the vital role of negative emotions in this process and and we court serious trouble.

In fact, this blind spot is probably one of the primary reasons for many of our global woes and needs to be fully understood before we immerse ourselves in the positive thinking belief system.

Success in cultivating positive emotions lies in the nature of the methods we use to attain them as much as it does the reasons we embark on such a discipline. If the methods and reasons are faulty, then success may be fleeting and come at a cost.

But “the optimism of the action is better than the pessimism of the thought” right?

No. Not always. In fact hardly ever.  If the pessimism of the thought is grounded in the reality of what is, then you can guarantee that the “optimism” and good intentions of the “action” will inevitably create more chaos than order.

As Barbara Ehrenreich described in characteristically blunt terms:

Americans have long prided themselves on being positive and optimistic — traits that reached a manic zenith in the early years of this millennium. Iraq would be a cakewalk! The Dow would reach 36,000! Housing prices could never decline! Optimism was not only patriotic but was also a Christian virtue, or so we learned from the proliferating preachers of the “prosperity gospel,” whose God wants to “prosper” you. In 2006, the runaway bestseller “The Secret” promised that you could have anything you wanted, anything at all, simply by using your mental powers to “attract” it. The poor listened to upbeat preachers like Joel Osteen and took out subprime mortgages. The rich paid for seminars led by motivational speakers like Tony Robbins and repackaged those mortgages into securities sold around the world. [1]

This distinctly American obsession with positive thinking tied to a delusional neo-liberal brand of capitalism means “to get what you want” in as little time as possible and with minimum effort; a lifestyle which has permeated virtually every social and cultural domain.

(more…)

Advertisements

Heal Your Past (3)

“Wisdom is nothing more than healed pain.”

— Robert Gary Lee


Reading time: 20 mins

Before any kind of deeper transformation can take place we have to address the past and any “blockages” to growth which may be holding us back. Those of us who have trauma or childhood adversity does not mean we haven’t been successful in life or made our mark in the world. We all cope in a multitude of different ways. But our personal lives are often entirely separate to our business interests. We might be a corporate leviathan, where success hides our shadow selves and the hidden trauma that rises to the surface in relationships and family life. Or conversely, family and relationships take precedent and fulfilment in our careers eludes us.

Whatever the variables, the only measure of value derives from how well we have been able to transmute our hidden shadows; that which has been adapted to the demands of daily life and often purposely buried or “forgotten.” Anyone who sincerely wishes to grow their conscience cannot leave the past unknown. It has a direct relationship to how well we cope with the uncertainty and unpredictability that hails from the future. By releasing our past demons we are slowly able to fully inhabit the present. This eventually allows us to face the future which unfolds from that new presence.

Healing means the incremental release of new energy that was previously used to service a false self. Such a persona exists through a normalised habit of shoring up the perceived breaches in our many defence mechanisms. That’s the nature of a self built from survival. It’s not the real self thus has no authentic foundations. And as anyone who has done any refurbishment on a house without having the right knowledge, you can go through money like water down a drain, until you are forced to take out a huge loan from people and situations who have that requisite money (energy). It’s much like being held hostage by a debt we could never repay without conscious attention to the roots of that pain. As each year goes by the interest on that debt increases until we will be forced to address it anyway. You become bankrupt and homeless.

Healing Developmental Trauma

One of the most effective methods of restoring a healthy mind-body connection away from trauma and childhood adversity is the NeuroAffective Relational Model ™ (NARM) a new form of somatically-sourced, multidisciplinary psychotherapy that synthesizes the latest peer-reviewed research and practice in the fields of mind and body healing.  While placing importance on the clear understanding of past events it’s focus is on how best we can attune to the present moment and facilitate our capacity to connect to that which naturally heals. This brings us back from feedback loop of disregulation to a process of conscious self-regulation. The latter means listening to our mind and body so that we can have healthy stress instead of stress that harms us. (Again, healthy stress isn’t the issue, it’s our reaction to it. And when we are overloaded with stress that crystallizes into trauma revisited over years, then this is obviously something far different. Habitual reaction to pain can completely deform the mind/body connection leading to chronic disregulation.

(more…)

Heal Your Past (2)

“Not every story has a happy ending, … but the discoveries of science, the teachings of the heart, and the revelations of the soul all assure us that no human being is ever beyond redemption. The possibility of renewal exists so long as life exists. How to support that possibility in others and in ourselves is the ultimate question.”

Gabor Maté, In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters with Addiction


Reading time: 15 mins

The Body as Barometer of Psychological states

If you are one of those who wish to reduce the amount of baggage your are carrying around then we have to address the feelings which have been locked away for so long. You had your reasons no doubt. We all have to function in life: get through college/university; work nights; support our partner, and/or children and innumerable pressures and responsibilities. Eventually suppressed memories, if allowed to languish in the unconscious, cause all kinds of havoc over time. The only route to expression these shadows are permitted is through a slow titration of toxic influence which affects the mind causing psychological problems such as anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder or dissociative disorders. However, it is the body which accumulates this psychic toxicity over many years and which manifests as specific auto-immune diseases. This is logical and common sense.

As physician and author Dr. Gabor Maté tells us: “If emotional patterns are a response to the psychological and social environment, disease in an individual always tells us about the multigenerational family of origin and the broader culture in which that person’s life unfolds.” Which is why it is so important to discover not only your possible genetic heritage but what bio-psychosocial predispositions have been passed down the line prior to your own childhood. How have the psychic echos from your ancestors and your own suppressed negative emotions melded to form who you are today?

“The effects of trauma become multigenerational through repeated psychological dysfunctions. The new science of epigenetics is identifying the mechanisms that even affect gene functioning. The children of Holocaust survivors, for example, have altered genetic mechanisms leading to abnormal stress hormone levels. Animal studies are showing that the physiological effects of trauma can be passed on even to the third generation.” [1]

Maté explains further:

“The pathway from stressful emotions, often unconscious, to physical disease was often driven home to me as a family physician and palliative care practitioner, although nothing in my medical education even remotely hinted at such links. People I saw with chronic disease of all kinds—from malignancies or autoimmune conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis or ulcerative colitis to persistent skin conditions such as eczema and psoriasis, and neurological disorders like Lou Gehrig’s Disease (ALS), multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s, and even dementia—were characterized by certain unmistakable emotional life patterns. Among these was the chronic repression of so-called negative emotions, especially of healthy anger, … an overriding sense of duty, role, and responsibility; an undue concern for the emotional needs of others while ignoring one’s own; and, finally, a core belief—again, often unconscious—that one is responsible for how other people feel and that one must never disappoint others. The expression “the good die young” has—sadly—more validity than we sometimes appreciate.” [2]

Since the brain is directly connected to the immune system it makes logical sense to posit that there is an intimate relationship to the correct functioning of both. And since negative thoughts and emotions represent a different energetic frequency than more positive ones, they can naturally begin to affect whatever area of the body – such toxic memories stored. Repressed emotions over the long-term have a deleterious effect on the body’s organs, hormonal apparatus and nervous and immune systems. Deep-seated anger, shame, fear and the constant flood of stress chemicals can literally cause chronic or acute illness as a result of the immune system breaking down. This is when emotional shadows break free and express their toxicity in the body, rather than being safely exorcised through therapy. This is particularly true for all manner of addictions, which helps to calm the horrible truth in the short-term but makes things much worse as denied emotions are replaced with self-medication through substance abuse or toxic relationships.

(more…)

Why Young Lives are Losing Meaning and Purpose I

By M.K. Styllinski

“Young adults are facing more stressful conditions than older generations, such as an increasingly competitive labor market, rising costs of housing, an increase in higher education costs, and issues of self-identity and confidence driven by more widespread use of social media.”

— Morag Henderson, sociologist at University College London


Reading time: (25-30 mins)

The crisis of meaning and purpose is something many of us are grappling with today. Girls and boys and young adults in particular are not succeeding in this battle. The path which defines our lives up to middle and retirement age is for the majority, mostly a constellation of conditioned responses encouraged by Official Culture. It replaces true meaning with a role that serves the technosphere as opposed to our true calling. Not always, but all too frequently. Then we are back to that existential crisis of youth where something deep inside knows that to find true creative balance takes a life time of struggle against forces that oppose any kind of spiritual liberation. Unless that is, we have the support to explore the transformation that comes knocking at the door of consciousness at various stages of our lives. To even have the awareness to heed that call requires a very different society than we have now.

Life is extremely complicated for young people these days, whether they are in Western, Asian, African or Middle Eastern societies. The predisposition of tyranny from our hierarchical institutions and social systems means that such a danger will always be there, even when there is momentum toward autopoietic * social innovations. The imbalance inherent within state authority and the unceasing drive of so many to live outside it’s influence is growing. This is a welcome reaction against the finite and unsustainable nature of cartel capitalism and rampant state-sponsored crimes against humanity. But we haven’t yet found that crucial tension, that balance that provides a psychological inoculation against psychopathic infiltration which so often turns civilisations into crucibles of centralised control.

The corruption of hierarchical power always weakens the structure to the point of catastrophic failure. And there are always young folks who act as literal and symbolic precursors to that descent, usually by embodying those ills and thereby showing us what long term or immediate future lies ahead. Each epoch manifests that see-saw between managed chaos and mass creativity which eventually bursts forth in destructive ways, sweeping away everything that went before.  Children and young adults are the tuning fork of future generations in this regard. Nonetheless, there is has been a very wide historical berth when it comes to defining how our youth interact with the world. The older generations have a distinct challenge to make sure our younger generations are correctly tuned to that which offers hope, spiritual strength and resilience to face what is certain to be an unpredictable and challenging future.

But let’s rewind for a moment…

Take Medieval England for example. During that time the majority of medieval people were young with far fewer older people with around thirty-five to forty percent under fifteen years old. There was a distinct and recognised period where the early formative years were largely employed for utilitarian ends. If there were not distinct roles then the family didn’t survive. As a result, the Church law and common law regarded children as equal to adults in many ways. Parenting was just as important and often imbued with strict moral and community-based values inspired by the Church and folklore. Though play was a vital part of growing up and of far greater importance than today, if a child was unprepared for the realities of what was a rather brutal world, it meant that the longevity of the family would be weakened as would the life of the child. Conscientiousness in one’s work had to be learned early on as it was quite often a life and death situation. [1]

The ubiquity of young folks meant there were major social differences in every community and sphere of activity. A feudal hierarchy of industry meant clearly defined roles with a narrow band of what could constitute freedom from our perspective today. It also meant that on average, there was seventeen years’ less experience of life to draw on and very few elders and betters that children had to go to for advice. This high proportion of young people experienced a violent, feudal world which saw hand-to-hand combat; brutality passing for entertainment; state sanctioned slavery and appalling daily health hazards – including periodic visitations of the plague – as the backdrop to their lives. Medieval boys for example, had what amounts to a man’s job from the age of seven and could have his wee hand chopped off if he decided to pinch some fruit from a market stall. If he graduated to a more audacious deed like stealing a hairpin or a Lord’s hat, he could be hanged by his doubtless scrawny neck. Boys could legally marry at aged fourteen and were considered ready to fight in the King’s army. Those born into the nobleman’s life or royalty had material comforts but a different level of responsibility. For example, Prince Edward, at just sixteen years old was in command of whole battalion.

Not a lot of leeway for a “safe space” in that milieu.

(more…)

Police State Amerika III: “Non-Lethal” Tasers

  “In a police state, there is no need for judges, juries or courts of law, because the police act as judge, jury and law, and their version of justice is one-sided, delivered at the end of a gun, taser or riot stick,”

– attorney and author John W. Whitehead


As a back up to the riot police’s favourite tactic of pepper spraying you in the face, the so-called “non-lethal weapon” of choice marketed for more than 11,000 law enforcement agencies – is the taser. Under the umbrella term for Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs) this electro-shock gun with targeting laser has the capacity to inflict up to 50,000 volt by firing two small darts attached to wires. With a maximum reach of 35ft, it paralyses the central nervous system and can be used to “incapacitate” any unsuspecting driver, homeowner, pedestrian or protestor. 

Although marketed by Taser manufacturers as a much safer choice to presumably gunning down the public (which still occurs with greater and greater frequency) the net result of this mass deployment has been the replacement of due caution and sensible policing with a policy of tasing first and asking questions later. More worryingly still, Amnesty International found that unarmed suspects bore the brunt of tasers, with 36% of individuals tased merely for the crime of “verbal non-compliance.” Where the officers’ lives might be in danger from a deadly assault the average was only 3% of cases. [1] Even though you are well within your rights not to give your name or identity if you are lawfully going about your business, the nature of policing is breaking with tradition in alarming ways. 

    Occupy-Pepper-Spray_Webf-116x91

Alongside the taser, pepper spray is the preferred choice at peaceful protests: “Former campus officer John Pike, the “Pepper Spray Cop,” received $8,000 more in workers’ compensation pay than peaceful protesters he sprayed.” Source: ‘Occupy Victims Burned By Settlement For Pepper-Spray Cop’ By Katie Rucke, Mint Press News.

Since over 500 people have died in taser-related incidents since 2001 and others having suffered serious injuries, it suggests that tasers are very far from “non-lethal”. [2] A large proportion of cases also involve those with health problems already present, thus exacerbated the likelihood of injury or death. A 2008 study by UCSF and cited in the Journal of American Cardiology found: “… a sixfold increase in sudden deaths during the first year of taser use – amounting to nearly 6 deaths per 100,000 arrests.” [3]

hc-ed-police-taser-stun-gun-deaths-call-for-more-controls-20150311Taser companies pay lip-service to the safety that is said to be built in to the guns. There is indeed a button on all models which, when lightly pressed gives a five second burst ostensibly designed to limit excessive use. However, this “tool” is being routinely abused. It has been shown that it’s far more expedient in the minds of some police to hold down that button and deliver the maximum burst. Yet, because the signs of abuse are difficult to locate it raises serious questions not only of basic human rights but police accountability. Even more troubling is the decision by Taser International to market the sale of modified tasers to the general public.

It seems we can seek to ban e-cigarettes but having a taser in your handbag is apparently fine.

When reviewing the following cases where the public have obviously been victimised by the police, it is very hard not to come away thinking that many officers are itching to use their tasers at every opportunity – usually against the most vulnerable – rather than actually do their job properly. Moreover, when circumstances point to excessive use of tasers, even in cases of death, police officers are very rarely prosecuted or disciplined repeating the same pattern of closed ranks in law enforcement as a whole. In exactly the same vein as no-knock raids, it matters little whether you are elderly, mentally impaired, pregnant or a child – the taser appears to be a reflex-response from a culture saturated in fear. Or else, it is simply a whole lot of fun for your resident psychopathic policeman who appears to use it as cat would its prey before killing it. And as the ACLU like to remind us when engaging in a tense police intimidation:

“You have the right to refuse to consent to a search of yourself, your car or your home. – If you are not under arrest, you have the right to calmly leave.” [4]

Sadly, knowing your rights is no protection against some police officers.

In March 2015, Connecticut police were once again in the headlines when two of their officers from Branford County shot David Werblow with a taser for refusing to leave his car. Consistent with taser-related deaths where individuals have mental disability or addiction problems (or both) Werblow was not actively resisting arrest. Yet, he was tased anyway. According to the local Hartford Courant quoting the police report: “A Branford Police Officer successfully deployed his department issued TASER to gain control of Werblow,” … “Officers were able to remove Werblow from the vehicle and place him in handcuffs.” [5]

Gaining control of individuals, regardless of their civil liberties or constitutional rights appears to be the overriding priority in these cases, where the police officers’ willfulness determines the outcome of such cases. Since officers are the ones with tasers and firearms we know how the statistical pattern will likely play out.

mn_bart07_ph3_ta_0499627869_par.jpgBack in 2011, cases like these went through the roof, with the elderly and mentally ill as victims of hyper-aggressive policing. Take two separate incidents in different states: one suffering from dementia and another from Alzhiemer’s disease.

Albert Flowers, then 66 years old, was involved in a dispute. Police officer Derek Middendorf from Melbourne, Florida had been called to the scene primed with information that Flowers had in his possession a small pocket-knife and was in an angry state of mind. When the officer arrived, Flowers slowly approached him and when a few feet away the burly Middendorf suddenly ran towards him delivering a full kick to the old man’s chest causing him to fly backwards collapsing on the ground – as one might expect.  If that wasn’t enough, the policeman pounced on Flowers punching him repeatedly about the head with the old man weakly trying to defend himself. Turning him onto his stomach the officer continued to rain down blows on his head and abdomen. With Flowers still lying face down in the road and Middendorf straddling his back, a second officer approached from the nearby police cruiser and proceeded to taser the old man in the face.

Officer Middendorf had disabled the in-car dash cam before exiting his vehicle so it was clear what he had in mind and did not want it recorded. The information was nonetheless extracted from the hard drive. According to the police report “Flowers walked towards him in an aggressive manner” and that he “refused to stop at a safe distance.” This was the initial reason for arresting Flowers and charging him with assault on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest.

Middendorf received a reprimand and all charges were dropped against Albert Flowers while was in hospital recovering from his injuries. [6]

albert flowers

Stills taken from the in-car dash cam video | Melbourne police Officer Derek Middendorf kicks Albert Flowers in the chest then repeatedly punches him in the head, chest and stomach while straddling his body. Flowers is then tasered in the face.

The next senior citizen to become victim of police aggression was 67 year-old Alzheimer’s patient Dolores Seyfried and her husband David. In a bizarre interpretation of the code to “serve and protect”, City of Lewisville Police Department, Dallas physically and emotionally abused the couple in a fashion astonishing for its brutality.

On May 29th 2013, Dolores Seyfried had become agitated with her husband David and held a 4-5 five-inch letter opener in her hand. The Dallas Alzheimer’s Association was contacted by Mr. Seyfriend and in a response that mirrored the kind of reflex action of the CPS, promptly called the police without his consent. The couple were in the backyard to their house when police officers George Reed and Sgt. Courtney Letalien arrived. Instead of maintaining a sensitive distance and allowing David the time to calm his wife down – something he had no doubt done many times before –  Letalien  immediately tried to remove David from the vicinity.  He repeatedly tried to explain to the officers that he could defuse the situation and calm her down, but the policemen had other ideas. It was clear from lawsuit reports that Mr. Seyfried was being maneuvered to the front of the house so that he did not witness the forced disarming and subjugation of his wife.

As David was attempting to reason with Letalien it was then that he heard Officer Reed firing his taser at Dolores. As she remained standing he then shot at her three times with an orange non-lethal shotgun, which uses rubber bullets. Now on the ground, officer Reed attempted to cuff Mrs. Seyfried, stepping on her wrist to do so, breaking it in two places. Just for good measure he tased her a second time, imagining she was resisting arrest. Dolores also received a wound to her head which required seventeen stitches. As if this weren’t enough, ignoring Mr. Seyfried’s protests, the police then conducted a warrantless search of their premises violating their Fourth Amendment rights. The final insult was to come, however.

According to Dallas Courthouse News:

“While David continued to shout his disapproval at the officers, he was told that they ‘saved his ass today,'” the complaint states. Reed then called the Dallas Alzheimer’s Association and reported that David could not take care of Delores, David says. “This action was unnecessary and … it was done with actual malice,” David says. [7]

David Seyfried sought “punitive damages for excessive force and wrongful search and seizure.” At the time of writing it is not known if he was successful in that claim.

Police_issue_X26_TASER-white© infrakshun

As we saw in the last post, being elderly or having a neurological disorder is no protection against some members of the police force. It would seem more psychopathic-minded individuals gain intense satisfaction from torturing the vulnerable. All too frequently their masks slip to reveal their true nature. Using a taser on someone who is African-American, hand and ankle-cuffed and who is mentally ill was obviously a lot of fun for Chicago jailers. It also led to the death of Philip Coleman.

A University of Chicago graduate and masters graduate of UIC, Coleman had never been in trouble and was a model citizen. On December 12, 2012, all that changed and he suffered a nervous breakdown, striking his mother and exhibiting symptoms of delusion. When police arrived it was obvious that Coleman was not in control of his senses, uttering nonsense, bleeding from his mouth and generally showing signs of distress. His father, Percy Coleman, wanted to see his son taken to hospital immediately. Jail was not the place for him. The police disagreed, stating: “We do not do hospitals, we do jail.”  [8] All he could do was to try and mitigate the end result by attempting to calm down both the police and his son. According to a WYWLAS Radio network the situation became more volatile as Coleman become more incoherent and unstable: 

An officer pulled his gun and “I got in front of my son and said ‘You are not going to shoot him,’” Coleman said. “I told him, ‘How are you going to give him orders when he don’t understand?’”

He said he calmed his son down, but then an officer shouted at his son, agitating him. Coleman said he rushed his son and took him down and got a neighbor to sit on Philip so they could hold him down until police handcuffed him. [9]

It was when Coleman was in jail that the torture started. He was awoken at night and deliberately tased. In the morning as he was transferred to County Hospital he was again tased and once more on arrival at the hospital. In fact, according to CBS Chicago News, Coleman was tased 16 times in 22 hours. [10]

A police station video allegedly shows six officers entered Coleman’s cell as he lay sleeping and used a TASER on him three times after they told him to stand up. Attorney Ed Fox filed a lawsuit for the Coleman family and is fighting to get the video released. He says after the TASER was used on Coleman the officers reacted. “Some of them were laughing,” Fox says. “He was treated like an animal.” [11]

His father, former Chicago Housing Authority police chief Percy Coleman filed suit against the police in December 2012, the results of which are still pending.

Philip-Coleman

Philip Coleman giving a presentation during his university days Source: Youtube CBS News

The cases just keep coming in, all of which follow the same pattern of total disregard, even contempt for human life and sensibility:

  • A family who sought help for their son Michael who was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia called the police. Officers tased the young man until the battery was drained and when the victim tried to escape they shot at him repeatedly until dead. “My son did not deserve 11 shots to his head, and we have to find out from the media how many times he was shot in that bathroom. … All that we’re asking is that someone recognizes what we recognize. That was brutality at its finest in that bathroom that day,” -mother, Kimberly Blair-Olaniyi.”  [12]
  • Electric shocks and clubs were used by a group of six policemen on an unarmed, homeless man leading to his death. Kelly Thomas was known to the area and diagnosed as schizophrenic. He was not prone to violence. “See my fists, they’re going to f*** you up,” said one of the officers sliding his hands into rubber gloves.” The last words of Thomas before lapsing into a coma and later death were: ‘Please sir,’ ‘I’m  sorry,’ ‘I can’t breathe.’” The police officers responsible  walked free.  [13]
  • 44 year old Michael Angel Ruizd had climbed onto the roof of his apartment and was behaving erratically. When Phoenix police arrived he was tased several times on the roof before consenting to come down. After giving himself up, he dropped down to the balcony and was immediately placed in a choke-hold by an officer who was then joined by others. With no aggression shown by Michael and with no history of violence he was tased once again while still in a choke-hold as they descended the adjoining staircase. By the time they got to the ground, he was dead. “Witnesses say they could audibly hear the lifeless man’s skull thumping across the staircase.”   [14]
  • Police tased and arrested father Ryan Miller who was trying to save his 3-year-old son, Riley from a house fire. A city police officer stunned Riley’s stepfather Ryan Miller with a Taser gun three times as he tried to enter the burning house. “He tried to get back in the house to get the baby,” … “They took my son to jail because he tried to save his son.”- Gandmother Lori Miller  […] “It’s just heartless. How could they be so heartless?” … “And while they all just stood around and waited for the fire department, what kind of police officer wouldn’t try and save a three year old burning in a house?” – Emily Miller, sister-in-law. [15]
  • A 10-year-old boy who only weighed 42 kg was tased by police at a day care centre by two Indiana policeman because he was “out of control.”  [16]

stungun1Still from Prime News


“What this means is that all of us need to be very afraid now,” “Its carte blanche for police officers everywhere to kill us, beat us, whatever they want. It has been proven right here today that they’ll get away with it.”

Ron Thomas, father of Kelly Thomas beaten and tased to death by LAPD police officers.


In one sense, the  problem is not so much the tool itself, though there are plenty of arguments to suggest that its use is inappropriate. Rather, it is a large proportion of police officers themselves who pose a threat to the public. The irony is that your local cop has pledged an oath to serve the public yet the National Safety Council tells us you are 9 times more likely to die at the hands of a US law enforcement then any terrorist – with or without a taser. [17] Another statistic underscores the growing realisation that we have more to fear from law enforcement then any terrorist or criminal as more than 5,000 American citizens have been killed by police since 9/11. [18]  What’s the argument? Guns are not the problem it’s the mind behind the weapon. The same could undoubtedly be said about both the militarisation of police forces. With pathological individuals gravitating toward avenues which provide an opportunity to act as state enforcers they are liable to turn a baby’s rattle into a lethal weapon, let alone a taser.

The situation is no better in Europe, in particular the United Kingdom. Benevolence shone through the UK courts in 2007 when legislation permitted tasers to be against the under 18’s. Statistics from 2011show that 323 victims of tasers for that year equates to one child a day tased by police, some as young as 11 years-old. [19] As we have seen, this pales in comparison to the US, where age at both ends of the spectrum is no protection against state control.  Conforming to police officers’ requests, unreasonable or not, is the primary objective as befitting the emergence of Pathocracy. Civilian rights are simply not relevant.

Conformity is the prime directive. 


Notes

[1] ‘Amnesty International Urges Stricter Limits on Police Taser Use as U.S. Death Toll Reaches 500’ by Suzanne Trimel, February 15, 2012. | http://www.amnestyusa.org/
[2] Quoted at: ‘You’re More Likely to Die from Brain-Eating Parasites, Alcoholism, Obesity, Medical Errors, Risky Sexual Behavior or Just About Anything OTHER THAN Terrorism,’April 28, 2013 by WashingtonsBlog.
[3]Ibid.
[4] ‘Know Your Rights: What To Do If You’re Stopped By Police, Immigration Agents or the FBI’ https://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform-immigrants-rights-racial-justice/know-your-rights-what-do-if-you
[5] ‘Unarmed Man Dies After Being Shot With Taser By Branford Police’  By Gregory B. Hladky Hartford Courant, March 16 2015.
[6] ‘VIDEO: Charges dropped against Melbourne man seen beaten by officer’ By Britt Kennerly, FLORIDA TODAY, Jan. 18, 2012.
[7] ‘Cops Accused of Overkill on Sick Woman’ By CAMERON LANGFORD Courthouse News, September 2013.
[8] ‘We Don’t Do Hospitals,’ Police Allegedly Told Philip Coleman’s Dad’ By Wendell Hutson DNAInfo, December 18, 2012.
[9] ‘Father Seeks Justice For Death of Son’ WLAS January 10 2013 at: www.mywlas.com/
[10] ‘2 Investigators: Cops Used TASER Several Times On Mentally Ill Man, Family Says’ CBS News, Chicago Dave Savini May 16, 2014.
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘VIDEO: Family Releases Video of Man Being Killed by Fort Bend Officer’  By Jay Syrmopoulos benswann.com May 10, 2014.
[13] ‘Ex-Fullerton Officers Found Not Guilty In Beating Death Of Kelly Thomas’ CBS News, Los Angeles, January 13, 2014.
[14] ‘Man dies after being taken into custody in Phoenix’ abc15.com, Aug 20, 2013.
[15] ‘Family: Louisiana Police stun father as son died in house fire’ by Kris Wernowsky, KHQA November 1st, 2013.
[16] ‘Cops Taser 10 year-old boy at day-Care Centre’ www.thefreethoughtproject.com/
[17] op.cit Washington’s Blog.
[18] ‘US Police Have Killed Over 5,000 Civilians Since 9/11’ By Katie Rucke  Mint Press News, November 6, 2013.http://www.mintpressnews.com/
[19] ‘UK Police Taser One Child Per Day’ Concern as new information reveals tasers used on as young as 11By Sav D’Souza, International Business Times, October 26, 2013.

The Sex Establishment V: “Normaphiliacs” and Freudian Slips

“This condition had no name, under the pen of Freud it would become the Oedipus complex and create a universal pathology for the sole purpose that he could be less alone [with his creation].” […] Here is the key to the Freudian epistemology: the extrapolation of a universal theory from a personal adventure.”

– Michel Onfray, Le crépuscule d’une idole – l’affabulation freudienne (Twilight of the Idol – The Freudian Fable) 


In the 21st century we have the results of various social engineering programmes made manifest. Alfred Kinsey managed to contribute to the gradual detachment of sex from love, and the fragmentation of family and community cohesion by placing the sexual act at top of the pleasure pyramid as an end in itself. As we saw in the previous post, the pathologising and mainstreaming of minority orientation and encouragement of greater and more extreme forms of unlimited sexual expression produced the prevalence of promiscuity and body-centric values which then became a dominant part of culture. This went beyond mere tolerance and acceptance of different forms of sexual identity and preference. It has led to acts of perversion as cool, anonymous sex as normal and sacred union based on love as old fashioned and silly.

That is not to say that we must all toe the line of heterosexual sex or that there is a right or wrong way to express ones sexuality. The key issue here is being true to yourself and whether or not sexuality and sex has been engineered in a certain direction and if it has benefited societies. If that is so, as I believe, then the choices presented to us as we are growing up are not choices at all, but a product of perception management. Are we getting closer to a greater understanding of not just our sexuality, but our place in the world or are we experiencing one expression of an endemic pathology that is tainting our sexual and emotional selves under cover of “normality”?

Are we roaming further and further away from our innate human potential while believing the opposite?

By delving into the reality of psychopathy within our socio-political institutions we might be able to find the answer.


  nrm_1415950011-fifty-shades-second-trailer

Screen shot from the film ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ (2013) based on the book of the same name which involves a young woman’s exploration into sexual practices involving bondage/discipline, dominance/submission, and sadism/masochism (BDSM). The book became a global best seller with 90 million sold worldwide by 2013.

Professor Amy Bonomi chairperson and professor in Michigan State University’s Department of Human Development and Family Studies conducted extensive studies which show that young adult women who read “Fifty Shades of Grey” are more likely than nonreaders to exhibit unhealthy behaviours. These include: eating disorders, binge drinking, having verbally abusive partners and a predeliction for multiple sexual partners. In other words, when films and books glorify and thereby normalise a narcissistic and/or psychopathic perception of reality, we can hardly be surprised that young people begin to exhibit stress and personality deformations. Or as Miriam Grossman M.D. observed: “There’s nothing grey about Fifty Shades of Grey. It’s all black.” 


The sexual revolution was in large part a triumph of emotional immaturity and anonymous sex with women and men reflecting a caricature of their gender roles: literal objects to use and consume as a true reflection of our consumer society. Sure, there was also genuine examples of a mystical liberation through sex to which our pagan ancestors connected. There is no doubt that nature and the body was synonymous with a spark of ecstasy, a way to commune with God which developed into the cults of Dionysus and Bacchus and other body-centric, sensual rituals. The body as a bio-chemical conduit for achieving altered states can give that mystical “high” in the same way that drugs can bypass the brain filters and introduce to dimensions beyond the five senses – even if for a moment. Sometimes that’s enough to initiate dramatic change. But it is a short cut to a spiritual union that usually requires years of self development and inner work. Which is why drugs and sex magick tend to backfire. So, too the fire of sexual revolution which liberated more than just blocked emotions and neuroses. Could it be that the pendulum was allowed to swing much to far in the other direction?

As discussed, rather than feminism increasing the freedom of women’s rights in the West, under the elite-sponsored role of sexual emancipation it may have led to less rights for women and less happiness. The sexual freedom that women have rightly struggled for has proved poisonous where the modern woman is either trying to emulate the model of the alpha male in the corporate world or being caught between the false liberation of sexual promiscuity. In between those two poles lies confusion and doubt for women exemplified in the rise in narcissism.

This Kinseyian form of pseudo-scientific justification for abuse seems to be alive and well in the form of the American Psychiatric Association and the psychoanalysis tradition. Back in 2003, The American Psychiatric Association Symposium Debated whether “Paedophilia, Gender-Identity Disorder, Sexual Sadism Should Remain Mental Illnesses.” Psychiatrist Charles Moser of San Francisco’s Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented a paper entitled, “DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal.” They argued that people whose sexual interests are atypical, culturally forbidden, or religiously prescribed should not, for those reasons, be labelled mentally ill. These included exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism, and sadomasochism which are to be viewed as simply another form of sexual expression. They were also calling for paedophilia to be removed from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Further, that all of us “normophilics” should allow paraphilias the freedom to be who they are and to remove the label of a mental illness forthwith. Though in the minority, a significant number of members agreed.

Another speaker at the same conference exclaimed: “Any sexual interest can be healthy and life-enhancing…” and “…that society should not discriminate against adults who are attracted to children…” noting that “many beloved authors and public figures throughout history have been high-functioning individuals who could actually be classified as paedophiles.” [1] This debate has continued to the present day.

Firstly, the emphasis is not to ostracise and place a judgment upon those of differing sexual preferences but to assist and heal if these extremes exhibit pathology that is negative to both the individual and the persons who do not harbour the same sexual preference. Healing the self by practicing bondage sado-masochism (BDSM) in the privacy of your own home is fine. Propagandising such a fetish and/or accepting predatory behaviour and sexual confusion as a template for society isn’t the way forward either. A sexual interest can indeed be “Healthy and life enhancing,” depending on which lens we have decided to view reality. Our focus can be tinkered with in order that it may flow in a direction not of our choosing, yet, we follow it by rote all the same.

51lec-Zn-jL-horz

Mainstreaming pathology: You can buy yourself a Black Padded PU Leather Hood “Gimp Mask” for Sensory Deprivation Bondage or be lead round the house on a lead if you so wish.

BDSM_collar_backBDSM dog collar (wikipedia)

It is not a case of whether or not society should be free to choose how to heal and release what we perceive to be natural sexual expressions, but to explore why it is that those sexual preferences have arisen in the first place and if the various factors involved are indeed natural rather than carefully conditioned.

Ethics and values appear to be shifting in favour of a voting consensus that removes mental disorders without any safety net concerning rehabilitation and treatment, which begs the question: from what basis are these disorders or genetic predispositions decreed normal? What appears to be happening here is a spin that suggests that if it is defined as ill or pathological it is outdated and anti-progressive. If it can all be seen as just another deviancy and thus normalised we can all go home and stop being so retrogressive. If it is not an illness but one symptom among many drawn from narcissism or psychopathy, then we have clear and present implications for the safety of our nation’s health, especially children. The legitimisation of psychopathology via the Sex Establishment is joining forces with the politicisation of values that is reshaping our culture.

Paedophilia has qualities that align itself not only towards pathological narcissism but elements of psychopathy. It is interesting that there are a growing number of “scientists” of the behaviourist and psychoanalysis schools that advocate a redefinition of paedophilia rather than a redefinition of causes which could direct resources towards the treatment and prevention of child abuse. This includes learning every possible method of pulling the wool over the eyes of the authorities be it psychiatrist, policeman or lawyer, making the whole question of science, law and sexual freedom an increasingly difficult equation to solve. For to do so, means that we must see the distortion and deformation of sexuality and the sexual predators that personify such a malaise. We must see this through entirely new eyes and as a web of relations intimately connected with psychopaths in power.

Paedophilia and related pathologies may well be a symptom of biological, environmental, and traumatic abuse. It may also be a choice. What is conspicuous by its absence in the above appeals for paedophile rights are the rights of children for whom we must, by virtue of our roles as guardians and protectors, take a positive discrimination in these matters regarding their welfare and safety. People with “sexually unusual” interests, said Charles Moser and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz “may in fact be quite happy and well-adjusted,” which is entirely beside the point. The paedophile’s victims may not be quite so happy and well-adjusted after he has molested them. It is these kinds of remarks that feed into the mainstreaming” of pathologies under the guise of normality which may progressively alter the landscape of mass sexuality and under specific directives – then we have a problem, a problem that is not even the fault of those exhibiting sexual pathologies or otherwise.

We can regard all kinds of pathology and child trauma masquerading as healthy and well-adjusted living. This is not about making judgements about what is right or wrong in our sexuality but rather to question where we draw the line in favour of sexual expression that enriches society rather than infects it; where sexual boundaries are being pushed towards more and more extremes, rather than augmenting social relations.

Is the line between “healthy” and “damaged” becoming blurred here?

It is a contradiction that behind closed doors a select minority of paraphilics and a larger proportion of humanity seek to indulge their fantasies towards violence, fetishism, paedophilia, ritualistic sex and child molestation which may be indicative of a suppressed and learned behaviour caused by inverted and unresolved suffering. Meantime, an entirely different face is presented to the world at large. Genetics may play a significant role whereby traumas are imported down the generational line and impose “bombshells” on the next generation if no other role models exist. Yet what this means for society is the set up between the guardians of over-protection and the guardians of over-liberalisation with the resulting chaos created between the two, where opportunities for creative solutions are forever denied.

Noted luminaries were paedophiles or had paedophilic tendencies. There is certainly an historical basis in fact that much of the Establishment or “high functioning” individuals could be classed as paedophiles and/or child rapists. The nature of government, secret societies, occult fraternities, and religious institutions that offer protection of power and status as a class-based tradition may also offer a sanctuary for such people.

Is there a link that those with deviant sexual expressions gravitate towards that which can offer them cover?

This quote from The American Psychiatric Association sums up this conversive thinking in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: “302.71 Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder’: ‘The essential feature of this so-called condition is a deficiency or absence of sexual fantasies and desire for sexual activity (Criterion A). There is little motivation to seek stimuli and diminished frustration when deprived of the opportunity for sexual expression. The individual usually does not initiate sexual activity or may only engage in it reluctantly when it is initiated by the partner.” [2]

This illustrates the point and might be drawn directly from Kinseyian sexology. If you do not have sexual fantasies, a desire for sexual activity, little motivation to seek stimuli and little frustration when an opportunity for sexual expression comes your way, or even – horror of horrors – you have minimal interest in sex, then you are abnormal. You have a disorder. Notice too, that the idea of love being a factor in this purely mechanical equation is of little importance. If clinically, the activity or desire itself is no longer classified as a pathology “unless accompanied by distress or interference with normal functioning,” then what is known as zoophilia *can be considered no more functionally different from any other love/sex relationship. Even having sex with a deer can be considered fine and dandy in our paralogical reality as one Wisconsin man’s attorney claimed in his client’s defence that the:‘crimes against sexual morality’ statute prohibits sex with animals, but fails to mention carcasses … “The statute does not prohibit one from having sex with a carcass.” Getting this man off is not the issue but the social and developmental factors governing his desire to see a carcass as sexually fulfilling is obviously the real point of contention. [3]  Paralogical and paramoralistic arguments are employed to suggest that it is perfectly normal for human beings to use animals for sex – be it dog, horse or the neighbour’s parakeet – should the desire be strong enough.

These are extreme examples. Nonetheless, what does this mean for more down-to-earth issues of sexuality? The fusing of definitions of acceptable and pathological become habitual and thus the propensity for normalisation. The manual’s criterion for mental illness appears to be getting both ever more flexible and increasingly restrictive. With a suitably biased psychiatrist, the manual can be used as a way to give undue credence to almost any abnormality or disorder depending on the required outcome. As a tool for removing subversive persons for example, a method to which psychiatry has long since lent itself. For instance, there is still no diagnostic test for schizophrenia or any of the other three hundred so-called mental disorders listed in the current edition. A cursory look at the manual gives the impression that American psychiatry is sometimes a mix of culturally biased, reactive, class-driven moral judgements of what it considers to be abnormal behaviour.

Freud

Sigmund Freud

Sigmund Freud believed that any and all symptoms of perceived dysfunction or neuroses could be sourced from repressed memories, irrevocably tied to a repressed sexuality. Although Freud offered intellectual insights into our understanding of human sexuality, the final analysis reveals that his psychoanalysis was an indication of his own neurosis and sexual abuse which he was busy burying under a grandiose schema of rationalisation.

While casting out any possibility of incest as predatory, he rejected the body in favour of an acute form of biological asceticism; a kind of clinical denial that strangely lent itself to the exact kind of religious conservatism that he was trying to avoid. It may be true that his victims’ pleas for understanding were merely absorbed into his own fragmented, mechanical view of sexuality by turning them all into variations on the theme of Oedipus. His rejection of incest as abusive or traumatic fit perfectly with future psychiatry and Kinseyian programming.  Proven cases of recovered memories were simply ignored. Repressed and false memories can exist but the battle between both is currently being expressed through their respective extremes with money and psychopathy as the deciding factor.

Freud’s simplistic associations have allowed pathocratic principles to burrow deeper into human consciousness and to drop our crumbling defences against the psychopath still further.  Author George K. Simon, Jr., writes in his cautionary book: In Sheep’s Clothing: “The malignant impact of overgeneralizing Freud’s observations about a small group of overly inhibited individuals into a broad set of assumptions about the causes of psychological ill-health in everyone cannot be overstated.” Simon further suggests: “We need a completely different theoretical framework if we are to truly understand, deal with, and treat the kinds of people who fight too much as opposed to those who cower or “run” too much.” [4]

The whole basis upon which Freudian psychoanalytical movement rests is the wholly subjective notion that all psychological illness is rooted in repressed sexual impulses, unconscious incestuous fantasies, the spectre of death and the fear of castration, the latter of which appears to have their roots in the genital mutilation (circumcision) of the Old Testament.  Freudian psychoanalysis has given credence to the myth that girls secretly want to have sex with their fathers for example, which is crude, simplistic and on a par with the generalizations we can find in the Kinsey reports. In fact, if the denial of whatever sexual impulse is at work – whether depraved or perverted – then the basis for finding perversion distasteful must necessarily lie in one’s own unconscious desire for perverse practices. This is a both an intensely paralogical, materialist and nihilistic view of life that has no room for multiple psychotherapeutic dimensions of healing.

The psychoanalytical movement made claims that there’s was a new science when in fact it was nothing more than pseudo-science that developed a cult following. As Bob Altemeyer a Canadian professor of Psychology astutely sums up:  “One gets nowhere with a theory that can ‘predict’ whatever happened, after it happens. Having an answer for everything may make one a great used car salesman, but it rings the death knell for a theory in science. In science, the best explanations are nailed-down-testable.” [5]

814894886Freud: Father of the Cult of Psychoanalysis

While undoubtedly breaking new ground in tapping the unconscious fears that lie within the human psyche, these successes paled in comparison to the fear and loathing of both sexuality and the feminine that Freud seemed to set in motion. Freud’s own neuroses as well as the broader fears of the Jewish culture were injected into this new “science.”

Psychiatrist Hervey M. Cleckley illustrated the cult of psychoanalysis in this way:

Today celebrated psychiatric authors “plainly demonstrate” by methods widely proclaimed as scientific that the chief reason human beings came in time to wear clothing lies in the ever-present influence of a “castration fear” of which they all remain unconscious. Not for protection against the weather, primarily, we are told, or for purposes of adornment, did primitive men and women first don bearskin coats or grass skirts. According to high authority, the real motivation lies deeper, in a universal but unconscious terror felt by each male that a jealous father will amputate his penis. Concealing his genital organs with apparel offers him, it is claimed, a slight measure of protection from this inescapable anxiety. The female (unconsciously), believing herself already dismembered as a punishment for (unconscious) incestuous aims, hastens to cover her mutilation and veil her shame.

Much of the reasoning and investigation classed as dynamic depends upon verbal constructs which can be readily manipulated by the accepted rules to furnish a bogus proof for virtually any assumption the human imagination might contrive. […]From the standpoint of modern operational logic, a theory must be expressed in such a way that it may be proved. This is surely the case with the Freudian theory. On the other hand, from the standpoint of modern methodology, the evidence or experiment which is designed to prove the theory must he one which could have a possible negative outcome and so disprove the theory. At the present time, many of the concepts of psychoanalysis are undoubtedly developed in such a way that only proof and not disproof is possible …[6]

And it is this “bogus proof” and extreme subjectivity that gave the perfect cover for psychoanalysis to gain dominance in psychology, psychiatry and culture. It lent itself not only to misuse but acted as a gateway for any and all interpretations. Disagreements with Freud’s and his associates’ interpretations were summarily dismissed as products of “resistance.”  This was a word used by Freud to illustrate the reluctance patients showed in speaking of painful or humiliating experiences during the process of analysis. He believed this resistance: “… often utilized the mechanism of repression to remove or to withhold from consciousness impulses or memories which the patient found it particularly unpleasant to accept and admit as his own.” [7] Therefore, when the medical psychology community did not accept these chief concepts Freud put this down to the theory of resistance thereby placing constructive criticism into a box he could padlock at will.

In the early part of the twentieth until the post war period, psychoanalysis firmly stamped its mark on the subconscious of the West. Although the diversity of psychology, psychotherapy and alternative medicine has diluted Freud’s power the legacy of his influence lives on as it did most strongly in the 1950s.  As Cleckley outlines:

If a psychiatrist cannot accept as adequate the evidence Freud offers for his claim that at age four this patient was intensely motivated by a specific desire for his father to practice sodomy upon him, and was restrained in these inclinations by a fear of castration, he must be prepared to defend himself against the argument that similar (unconscious) desires and fears are determining factors in the dissident opinion. So, too, the critic who cannot accept the popular concept of universal bisexuality lays himself open to suspicions that an unrecognized homosexual tendency within himself, probably one of more than ordinary magnitude, is playing an important part in his alleged failure to accept evidence and react to it normally. [8]

Dr. Cleckley highlights the fact that Freud’s cherished beliefs do not necessarily equate with rigorous science. Politics and religion are bastions of such authoritarian, fear-based thinking that imposes the same fundamentalist beliefs upon others. Psychoanalysis is no different, which is why it has fallen out of favour in more recent times. The idea that those who disagree with the methods of the Freudian approach are somehow expressing resistance and respond: “…with unconscious longings to emulate the very thing being criticised is obviously a ridiculous simplification. The idea that the roots of all neuroses are from the repression of the procreative, biological sex impulse is equally fallacious.”

Perhaps the most revealing legacy of psychoanalysis is offered from author and consultant on abusive men and family issues, Lundy Bancroft.  He wrote about Freud’s discovery at the turn of the 19th Century, of just how many of his female patients revealed instances of incest by their fathers and brothers. Early in his career Freud came to the conclusion that child sexual abuse was a key issue in emotional illness in adult women which resulted in his famous paper: “The Aetiology of Hysteria.” He reminds us it was at this juncture that Freud, so keen to be accepted by his peers found himself ridiculed and rejected for proposing such a thing. How could it possibly be that pillars of society with unimpeacable reputations could be perpetrators of incest? It was unthinkable. The results of this shock to Freud’s intellectual pride and the consequences for the future of psychology were enormous:

Within a few years, Freud buckled under this heavy pressure and recanted his conclusions. In their place he proposed the “Oedipus complex,” which became the foundation of modern psychology. According to this theory any young girl actually desires sexual contact with her father, because she wants to compete with her mother to be the most special person in his life. Freud used this construct to conclude that the episodes of incestuous abuse his clients had revealed to him had never taken place; they were simply fantasies of events the women had wished for when they were children and that the women had come to believe were real. This construct started a hundred-year history in the mental health field of blaming victims for the abuse perpetrated on them and outright discrediting of women’s and children’s reports of mistreatment by men. Once abuse was denied in this way, the stage was set for some psychologists to take the view that any violent or sexually exploitative behaviors that couldn’t be denied—because they were simply too obvious—should be considered mutually caused. Psychological literature is thus full of descriptions of young children who “seduce” adults into sexual encounters and of women whose “provocative” behavior causes men to become violent or sexually assaultive toward them.”

Bancroft is under no illusions that the cultural influence of psychoanalysis remains strong and offers an anecdote from his experience to illustrate the point:

A psychologist who is currently one of the most influential professionals nationally in the field of custody disputes writes that women provoke men’s violence by “resisting their control” or by “attempting to leave.” She promotes the Oedipus complex theory, including the claim that girls wish for sexual contact with their fathers. In her writing she makes the observation that young girls are often involved in “mutually seductive” relationships with their violent fathers, and it is on the basis of such “research” that some courts have set their protocols. The Freudian legacy thus remains strong.”

We shortly discover just how strong this belief really is as we look further into the various expressions of abuse presently rising to surface within society.

 


* Zoophilia (from the Greek Zoon, “animal”, and Philia, “friendship or love”) is a paraphilia, defined as an affinity or sexual attraction by a human to non-human animals. Such individuals are called zoophiles. See Appendix 3 for further paraphilias.

Notes

[1] “Should These Conditions Be Normalized?” American Psychiatric Association Symposium Debates Whether Paedophilia, Gender-Identity Disorder, Sexual Sadism Should Remain Mental Illnesses By Linda Ames Nicolosi, http://www.narth.com/
[2] American Psychiatric Association’s DMH  (p. 496)
[3] ‘Sex With Dead Deer Not Illegal – Lawyer Argues’ The Register, November 11, 2006.
[4] In Sheep’s Clothing – Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People by George K. Simon, Jr. PhD. Published by AJ Christopher & Co. 2000.
[5] p.54.The Authoritarians by Bob Altemeyer, Associate Professor Department of Psychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada, 2006 by Bob Altemeyer
[6] op. cit. Cleckley (p.112)
[7] Ibid. (p.117)
[8] Ibid. (p.118 / p.99-100)
“Freud’s long report published under the title From the History of an Infantile Neurosis can, I believe, be taken as a typical example of this work. In it a dream recalled by the twenty-six-year-old patient as having occurred when he was four years of age is confidently interpreted. The chief conclusions reached about this patient appear to be based fundamentally on this interpretation. Freud reports the entire dream as follows:
‘I dreamt that it was night and that I was lying in my bed. (My bed stood with its foot towards the window; in front of the window there was a row of old walnut trees. I know it was winter when I had the dream, and night-time.) Suddenly the window opened of its own accord, and I was terrified to see that some white wolves were sitting on the big walnut tree in front of the window. There were six or seven of them. The wolves were quite white, and looked more like Foxes or sheep-dogs, for they had big tails like foxes and they had their ears pricked like dogs when they are attending to something. In a great terror, evidently of being eaten up by the wolves, I screamed and woke up…
’The only piece of action in the dream was the opening of the window; for the waives sat quite still and without any movement on the branches of the tree, to the right and left of the trunk, and looked at me. It seemed as though they had riveted their whole attention upon me,Freud draws from this dream a number of conclusions by interpreting its various items symbolically. From its association with a few fairy tales familiar to the patient in childhood and with some not particularly extraordinary early memories he devises an astonishing explanation of the patient’s illness. Freud confidently states that the dream reveals in considerable detail an experience the patient was subjected to approximately two and a half years earlier, when he was eighteen months old.
Fragment after fragment of the dream is used by Freud to derive proof that the infant at that time saw his parents while they were having sexual intercourse.He is quite confident that the dream reveals that the parents had intercourse three times in succession while the infant observed them and also that the a tergo position was chosen for their activities. He maintains also that the patient, at eighteen months of age, was so affected by this scene that he had a bowel movement as a pretext to make an outcry and interrupt the parents in their still enthusiastic love-making. In this interpretation the number of the wolves, which the patient recalled as being six or seven, is regarded as an effect of the dreamer’s unconscious processes to disguise what he had really seen—that is to say, the two parents.
The fact that the dream scene is quite stationary and the wolves make no movement is accepted as evidence (by reversal) for vigorous coital activity by the amorous couple.The appearance of keen attention noticeable in the dream-wolves who stood in the tree, according to Freud, indicates an intense and absorbing interest on the part of the infant in what he was watching. The fact that the four-year-old boy experienced fear of the wolves in his dream is said by Freud to represent a terror experienced earlier by the infant at the sight of his mother’s external genital organs when seen as an infant of eighteen months.
The interpreter assumes without question that this alleged sight contributed to the belief that the mother had been mutilated sexually. From these points Freud reaches the confident conclusion that when the boy at four years of age had the dream he was suffering from a profound dread of castration by his father. The fact that the wolves who appeared in the dream are remembered as having particularly long tails is considered sound evidence of an opposite state (taillessness) and hence a substantial confirmation of this disquieting dread.
This preoccupation is said by Freud to have been the chief deterrent to this four-year-old boy’s dominating impulse, assumed to be a specific and strong yearning for his father to carry out upon him sexual relations per anum. In the entire report no item of objective evidence is offered to support these conclusions. Freud appears, however, to be completely convinced that all this is correct and adequately established. In fact, he insists that his whole study of this case must be ‘all a piece of nonsense from start to finish, or everything took place just as I have described it above.’

[9] Bancroft, Lundy; Why Does He Do That?: Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men published by Berkley Books (2003) (kindle edition)

Big Pharma II

“‘It is scary how many similarities there are between this industry and the mob. The mob makes obscene amounts of money, as does this industry. The side effects of organized crime are killings and deaths, and the side effects are the same in this industry. The mob bribes politicians and others, and so does the drug industry…’”

– a Former Vice-President of Pfizer, from: Pulling Back the Curtain on the Organized Crime Ring That Is the Pharmaceutical Drug Cartel’


Deceit and bad science underpinning so much of pharmaceutical practice is not exceptional.

Take the case of, Dr. Scott Reuben, a researcher at Baystate Medical Centre in Massachusetts, who was found to have faked the data used in 21 “scientific” papers published in peer-reviewed medical journals from 1996 – 2008.  The journal Anesthesia & Analgesia retracted 10 studies authored by Dr. Reuben, and the journal Anesthesiology retracted further studies in 2009. What of the doctors? Most of them were psychiatrists whose judgments and business vectoring were largely tied to the drugs they prescribed. Yet the evidence they cited were from doctors like Reuben whose studies were drawn from his imagination.  [1]

While the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been found to be in bed with Big Pharma for some considerable time, the level of subterfuge and corporate terrorism is still reaching new heights.

In 2011 Harvard medical school psychologist Dr. Irving Kirsch blew the lid on yet more pharmaceutical skulduggery in his expose of the anti-depressants scam entitled: The Emperor’s New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth. Using the Freedom of Information Act, Kirsch was able to pore over forty-two previously classified and unpublished placebo-controlled clinical trials. What he found proved what many medical professionals had suspected: anti-depressants are at the very least, largely useless for moderately depressed patients.  The placebos used in the 42 studies cited proved to have an 82 percent efficacy rate – better than the drugs being tested.

Kirsch went public and was able to secure air-time on the CBS US investigative and consumer programme 60 minutes. Yet the most damning evidence was not revealed in the report. A UK commission banned anti-depressant use on mild to moderately depressed patients below the age of eighteen yet this was not included in the report or the catalogue of extremely negative side effects which characterises the history of anti-depressants and psychotropic drug use continually pushed by psychiatrists and their Big Pharma handlers. [2]

A 2011 report on anti-depressants also showed that those taking certain prescriptions could lose their sex drive. On top of this, many of the drugs induce anxiety and double the risk of suicide. If statistics are accurate and one in ten Americans take antidepressants then this has serious consequences for a significant proportion of the population. [3]

Practising psychiatrist Joanna Moncrieff is Senior Lecturer in the Department of Mental Health Sciences at University College London, and highly critical of the relationship between psychiatry and pharmaceutical companies and the political and commercial interests which surround the two.  Moncrieff argues that psychiatry is guilty of gross scientific misconduct a conclusion drawn from her decades of study of clinical trials. Her conclusion: “It is as if the psychiatric community cannot bear to acknowledge its own published findings…” And according to Moncrieff, these findings show that there is no objective, concrete evidence for the long-term effectiveness of anti-psychotic drugs and that the psychiatric establishment and Big Pharma lied about the damage antipsychotics cause. Or in Moncrieff’s words there is a danger that an: “epidemic of iatrogenic brain damage” will continue to exist if psychiatry and the pharmaceutical industry is not given a radical overhaul. [4]

With those taking anti-psychotic drugs 2.5 times more likely to die prematurely and 40 percent of people with psychosis on levels of anti-psychotics exceeding recommended limits which then cause heart attacks, it is unsurprising that the average of 40 deaths of patients in UK mental health wards is labelled “unexplained.”  Add to this other side effects of anti-psychotics such as metabolic impairment, increased risk of diabetes and the “zombie effect” it is little wonder the mental condition of the patient seldom reaches a state beyond a manageable stasis. [5]

j0398845

The FDA’s duplicity in this age-old racket has been a gradual one. They receive substantial payments from drug companies to approve the drugs but do not carry out the required trials or reports. They leave it to the pharmaceutical giants to do their own outsourced and biased research while they pocket a hefty profit. Big Pharma then cherry-picks the most positive results and publishes seemingly glowing reports that may still and often do harbour extremely negative side effects on top of a frequent non-existent efficacy.

It is only when we see that the fraud is a way of life in Big Pharma just as it is in the international banking industry that we realise that the structure and evolution of large corporations invite such pathology. As one journalist commented: “If it is not particularly innovative in discovering new drugs, it is highly innovative—and aggressive—in dreaming up ways to extend its monopoly rights.” [5] And keeping the medical treadmill rolling out the synthetic toxins means sweeping under the carpet 68 percent of all drug study data which indicate detrimental side effects. Studies are also cut short in favour of early positive results thereby overestimating and simplifying initial data which may contain contraindications. In fact, drug trails carried out by Big Pharma almost never fail. The success rate of drug studies has reached 85 percent according to the Annals of Internal Medicine which would be suspicious even without their long record of lying to the public.  [6]

The recent prosecutions of pharmaceutical companies are to be welcomed but the frameworks upon which these activities are based continue to exist. Therefore, it is of little comfort to the poor and the middle classes who are still desperately reliant on drugs peddled by doctors who are firmly inside the pockets of pharmaceutical lobbyists. Alternative medicines and more natural forms of palliative care are routinely side-lined, disparaged and ridiculed as worthless forms of quackery, which is often untrue.

What is at stake is not the encroachment of the odd snake-oil salesman with dodgy herbal pills or untested claims of a new cancer treatment, but the defence of a multi-billion dollar medical monopoly. While the case for the supply and long-term health benefits of prescription drugs can be disputed, even this source of relief is increasingly squeezed as health insurance continues to shrink.  As Obama-care begins to bite and employers shift the payment of health insurance to the individuals, pharmaceutical companies, doctors and insurance companies are creating one big bonanza for themselves while ironically excluding people from basic medical care. [7]

The hardest hit is the elderly most of who struggle with supplementary insurance that just about stretches to prescription drugs. However, this too is falling away as employers and insurers decide it is not cost effective. From 2006 a Medicare reform bill included a prescription drug benefit which was always going to be a drop in the ocean from the start as rising prices and administration costs sky-rocketed.  And those without insurance have to pay the highest prices and this once again, is the poor, the battered middle classes and the elderly across all the lower social rungs.

It is children once again, who are providing the profitable testing ground for many psychiatrists and their pharmaceutical handlers.  The US healthcare system and many doctors who work within it are similarly shackled. As of 2013, there is a war going on between insurance companies that do not want to pay any claims, on one side and doctors and hospitals that have a cash incentive to keep the wheels of Medicare fraud and often unnecessary drug prescriptions and surgeries inexorably turning. Big Pharma keep doctors in their very deep pockets while insurance-led bureaucracy and the lawsuit culture maintains profit ratios as the Prime Directive instead of patient care.

The long and the short of it is the profits for pharmaceutical companies can only be viable and consistent when people have to take treatments indefinitely for an incurable disease. The maintenance of the medical status quo means more disease supported by conventional drug-based “cures” which may offer temporary respite and/or prolong the illness as well exacerbating existing symptoms. Through the covering up of negative results of cherry-picked drug trials they lie or bribe everyone from the FDA to the scientific community about their toxic products.

The suppression of alternative modalities and the dominance of a medical-drug cartel helps to keep profits high and global populations’ health low and is key to Big Pharma’s success.

 


Notes
[1] ‘A Medical Madoff: Anesthesiologist Faked Data in 21 Studies’By Brendan Borrell, Scientific American, March 10, 2009.
[2] ‘UK – Major antidepressants banned – suicide threat’ Medical News Today (MIT) December 13, 2003.
[3] ‘America: The Anti-Depressant nation?’ –  Pill Pushing – an inside report on the business side of anti-depressants RT News report with psychologist Bruce Levine, interviewed by Liz Wahl. July 15, 2012
[4] The Myth of the Chemical Cure: A Critique of Psychiatric Drug Treatment by Joanna Moncrieff. Published by Palgrave Macmillan; 2008. Revised edition, October 13, 2009 |ISBN-10: 0230574327.
[5] ‘Myth of the antipsychotic’by Adam James, The Guardian, March 2, 2008.
[6] ‘The Truth About the Drug Companies’ By Marcia Angell, The New York Review of Books, Volume 51, Number 12, July 15, 2004.
[7] ‘Why drug studies can’t be trusted’ by Dr. Mark Stengler, http://www.healthrevelations.com
[8] ‘Twenty million could lose employer coverage under Obama health care overhaul’ by Kate Randall, Global Research, March 17, 2012. “…during the administration’s campaign for its health care “reform,” the scheme was the opposite of universal and quality health care for all. Drawn up in close consultation with the insurance, pharmaceutical and hospital industries as well as Wall Street, it was driven by a determination to reduce government deficits and health care costs at the expense of the working class. In addition to cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from Medicare, the government health insurance program for the elderly, the plan is designed to ration health care on class lines, depriving millions of working people of benefits on which they currently rely.Beginning in 2014, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) will mandate individuals and families to obtain insurance or pay fines that could eventually rise to as much as 2 percent of income for all but the very poor. Those who purchase insurance on the health care “exchanges” set up under the PPACA will be at the mercy of private insurers who can increase premiums without any meaningful government oversight.Companies with more than 50 employees that stop offering health coverage will be levied a $2,000 per employee tax penalty. The CBO projection indicates that a significant proportion of businesses will find it financially advantageous to drop coverage and pay the penalty.”

Big Pharma I

 By M.K. Styllinski

“No one should approach the temple of science with the soul of a money changer.”
– Thomas Browne, English doctor


In a recent report it was stated that: “young people in developing nations are at least twice as likely to feel happy about their lives than their richer counterparts.” The survey of over 5,400 young people in 14 countries aged 16 to 34 years showed that 43 percent of the youth were unhappy with their lot. The main source of sadness came from the US and the UK. [1] With the US having already lost billions of dollars in revenue due to rude immigration officials and visa delays it suggests that this is merely the tip of a psychological crisis. [2]

According to a major US report on mental health in 2000, one in five Americans suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder each year and half the entire population have such disorders at some time in their lives. Mental illness, including suicide, is the number two cause of disability. [3] The report goes on to list a plethora of mental disorders with a fifth of all children showing signs and symptoms of diagnosable mental disorders in any given year; 5 percent suffering “extreme functional impairment” 15 percent of adults aged between 18 to 54 suffering from anxiety disorders; 7 percent battling mood disorders and just over 1 percent diagnosed with schizophrenia. Senior citizenship usually represents the onset of depression occurring mostly in the over 65’s. It is also the age group with the highest rate of suicide.

As Writer Jim Windolf posed a somewhat more abrasive question on this subject in an October 1997 issue of The New York Observer:

If you add up all the psychological ailments Americans complain of, the portrait that emerges is of a nation of basket-cases. Ten million suffer from Seasonal Affective Disorder. Fourteen million are alcoholics. Fifteen million are pathologically socially anxious. Fifteen million are depressed. Three million suffer panic attacks. Ten million have Borderline Personality Disorder. Twelve million have ‘restless legs.’ Five million are obsessive/compulsive. Two million are manic-depressive. Ten million are addicted to sex.

“But give the experts a little time,” he quipped, “With another new quantifiable disorder or two, everybody in the country will be officially nuts.”

There are great numbers of honest, descent people who have become the technologically dispossessed whose jobs have been lost through labour-saving technologies and re-structured work places. Long-term reliance on technology has displaced vast numbers of blue-collar workers who have no skills to find other work taken by robotic efficiency and software streamlining. This has produced significant mental health problems in the unemployed. A spate of studies in the 1980s and 90s found distinct correlations between the rise in technological unemployment and “increased levels of depression and psychotic morbidity.”[4] One clinical psychologist whose patients include the “hard core” unemployed for up to and over fifteen years found “symptoms of pathology similar to dying patients.” As social commentator Jeremy Rifkin bluntly states: “The death of the Global labor force is being internalized by millions of workers who experience their own individual deaths, daily, at the hands of profit driven employers and a disinterested government.” [5]

big-pharmaThe answer to one in ten children in Europe suffering from depression is to give them more Prozac or to lock them up if they don’t fit into a particular diagnostic category. It may boost the exorbitant profits of pharmaceutical companies and that of their shareholders but it will only increase the mental health problems for youngsters. It doesn’t help that 46 percent of American adults can’t read well enough to understand the label on their prescription medicine for their own needs let alone the needs of their children. [6]

The European Medical Agency knows full well that this is a failure to find creative solutions and that such a product and many like it, are part of a class of drugs known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs).  There is copious evidence suggesting that some SSRIs are associated with an increased risk of suicidal behaviour and thoughts. Yet, the profit margins demand that such inconvenient data disappears down the throats of a new generation of children as young as eight years old. [7]

The pharmaceutical industry is big business. In 2006, global spending on prescription drugs reached $643 billion with the United States taking $289 billion in annual sales – almost half of the global pharmaceutical market, followed by the EU and Japan. While China, Russia and Mexico represent the emerging challengers to American dominance growing by 81 percent in 2006. [8] According to the retail prescription drug sales census from 1995 to 2006 U.S., prescriptions have had a 61 percent increase at $3.4 billion a year.  Retail sales of prescription drugs have soared by 250 percent from $72 billion to $250 billion, with the average price of prescriptions doubling from $30 to $68. But are these massive profits justified?

Big Pharma has no problem standing by its exorbitant price hikes claiming that Research and Development (R&D) investments are costly and in order to push the envelope of innovation and ultimate success, therefore, expenditure is inevitable. The only wrinkle in this sales pitch is that it is standard PR nonsense that bears no relation to reality.  R&D takes up the smallest part of Big Pharma budgets where for more than thirty years the industry has been one of the most profitable in the United States coming in at third place behind the oil and banking industries. The R&D excuse for theses price hikes is merely a ruse to extract more profits from a gullible public. Even the innovation is stunningly pedestrian when one considers the billions of dollars created each year. The vast majority of “new” drugs are simply variations of previously marketed drugs re-packaged and redesigned with a big advertising fanfare to make them appear original and innovative. The hundreds of different shampoos on offer to the consumer would be a suitable comparison: they offer a bewildering array of choice yet largely do exactly the same thing. The only difference is that the drugs may not have been sufficiently tested and may exacerbate and extend the problem while inducing addiction and over-reliance. However, like most companies which become too big the occasional cases of fraud become institutionalised to such a degree that before long, fraudulent activity becomes part of the very fabric of operations.

pharmaceuticalsThe Merck Corporation describes itself as: “A global healthcare leader working to help the world be well…” Nevertheless, it fraudulently represented the mumps component of its MMR vaccine, as well as lying to the public that the MMR II, used to replace the MMR vaccine Pluserix, was a viable, when studies proving the effectiveness of the vaccines were falsified. Merck allegedly did this from 2000 onwards in order to maintain its exclusive licence to sell the MMR vaccine and keep its monopoly of the US market, a practice that makes up much of the normal business of many pharmaceutical companies. [9]

A Child Health Safety report noted that “…virologists Stephen A. Krahling and Joan A. Wlochowski described a supervisor working for Merck manually changing test results that showed the vaccine wasn’t working and then hurriedly destroying the evidence to keep the fraud from being exposed.” [10] (More on the MMR vaccine in a future post: “Vaccine nations”).

The Vioxx pain-killer scandal is another example. In 2009 Merck was fined $321 million for illegally (and knowingly) marketing an unsafe drug, and after the company had reported over $11 billion in Vioxx sales during the 5 years the drug was on the market. Yet, the drug was so dangerous that Merck has paid almost $6 billion in litigation settlements and criminal fines. What this really means, according to journalist Craig Stellpflug: “Looking back we see the largest ever rise in US mortality rates occurred in 1999, the very year Vioxx was introduced. Not exactly a smoking-gun until you compare it with the largest ever drop in mortality in 2004, the year Vioxx was withdrawn. The net increase was 100,000 deaths per year in 1999 through 2004. … This equates to 500,000 people who died needlessly and Vioxx is the prime suspect in these murders.” [11]

GlaxoSmithKline was another large company recently caught out by its own greed and had to pay $3bn (£1.9bn) which resulted in the largest healthcare fraud settlement in US history. The drug giant pleaded guilty: “…to promoting two drugs for unapproved uses and failing to report safety data about a diabetes drug to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The settlement will cover criminal fines as well as civil settlements with the federal and state governments. The case concerns the drugs Paxil, Wellbutrin and Avandia.” [12]

According to U.S. federal investigators, GlaxoSmithKline:

• Routinely bribed doctors with luxury vacations and paid speaking gigs
• Fabricated drug safety data and lied to the FDA
• Defrauded Medicare and Medicaid out of billions
• Deceived regulators about the effectiveness of its drugs
• Relied on its deceptive practices to earn billions of dollars selling potentially dangerous drugs to unsuspecting consumers and medical patients
[13]

This was followed by an apology from GSK Vice President of Marketing Sir Andrew Witty having finally been caught with his hand in the cookie jar. In fact, millions of cookie jars. Whistleblower Gregory Thorpe believes the apology is worth very little as Witty was highly likely to have been involved with the illegal activity during the years he worked for the company. As Thorpe was punished by GSK for revealing the truth to the public with considerable pressure brought to bear on his stance, it is ironic indeed that Witty’s reward for his complicity was a knighthood. [14]

As part of a coordinated European program of routine inspection of safety reporting systems: “…80,000 reports for medicines marketed by Roche in the USA … had been collected through a Roche-sponsored patient support program, but which had not been evaluated to determine whether or not they should be reported as suspected adverse reactions to the EU authorities.”  What made this investigation particularly alarming were the reports of 15,161 patient deaths either through a natural progression of disease or via a causal link to the prescribed medicine.  As yet, nobody has thought to investigate these findings in the context of drug safety that was already known to be fraudulent at best. [15]

The presence and control of the medical community by drug companies on the internet and in subscription journals is widespread. Medical professionals who write articles for these medical journals do so to endorse specific drugs or medical devices. What is not commonly known is that most fail to disclose that they are receiving payment by Big Pharma for doing so. A report by the journal Archives of Medicine found approximately 50 percent of surgeons who received more than $1 million from orthopaedic medical device manufacturers did not disclose this information in their published journal articles.  The total for such payments amounted to $248 million in 2007. [16]

This report was preceded by the 2009 federal lawsuit filed against the AstraZeneca drug giant for paying Chicago psychiatrist Dr. Michael Reinstein almost $500,000 over a decade to conduct research and to promote its anti-psychotic drug, Seroquel which was found to have massive side effects. Reinstein was paid to essentially pimp for AstraZeneca by giving promotional speeches for the drug and to oversee a research company for which he was also paid in his capacity as consultant. It was alleged that Reinstein prescribed double the amount of drugs other psychiatrists administered for the same conditions. As patients reported their discomfort, pain and general suffering to Reinstein it was clear that profits were more important than patient concerns. Seroquel prescriptions from the doctor ran to more than 1,000 patients at a cost to the US taxpayer reaching $7.6 million.

Meanwhile, AstraZeneca racked up unknown millions. [17]

 


Notes

[1] Young people in developed countries unhappy-survey Reuters, Nov 19, 2006.
[2] U.S. is most unfriendly country to visitors, survey says’ Reuters, Nov 20, 2006.
[3] Mental Health: A Report of the Surgeon General, Dec. 16, 1999.
[4] Quoted from Chapter 12, P. 195; The End of Work, – Technology, Jobs and your Future, The Decline of the Global Labor Force and the Dawn of the Post-Market Era by Jeremy Rifkin, published by Tarcher / Putnam Books 1995 |  ISBBN 0-87477-824-7.
[5] op. cit. Rifkin, (1995; p.197).
[6] Journal of American Medical Association via ‘Reading, Literacy & Education Statistics’ | http://www.readfaster.com/education_stats.asp
[7] ‘Eight-year-olds ‘can use Prozac’ BBC News, June 7, 2006.
[8] ‘The World’s Ten Best-Selling Drugs’ by Matthew Herper and Peter Kang March 22, 2006.
[9] ‘Scientists Sue Merck: Allege Fraud for MMR Vaccine’ by Dr. Suzanne Humphries, GreenMedInfo, July 4, 2012.
[10] ‘Are MMR vaccines dangerous for children? Dr Suzanne Humphries urges parents to get informed’, February 02, 2011. http://www.naturalnews.com/
[11] ‘Big Pharma: Getting away with murder’ June 07, 2012 by: Craig Stellpflug Natural News, http://www.naturalnews.com
[12] ‘GlaxoSmithKline to pay $3bn in USdrug fraud scandal’ BBC News, 2 July 2012.
[13] ‘GlaxoSmithKline fraud criminal charges’ By Ehthan A. Huff, Natural NewsJuly 8, 2012.
[14] ‘Glaxo admits “mistakes” over US guilt’ The Yorkshire Post, 26 July, 2012.
[15] ‘European Medicines Agency acts on deficiencies in Roche medicines-safety reporting’, June 21, 2012www.fiercepharma.com/
[16] ‘Surgeons fail to disclose big payments to journals’ Reuters, Sep 13, 2010.
[17] ‘Pharmaceutical Giant Paid $500,000 to Psychiatrist Who Used Chicago’s Poor as Guinea Pigs’ Dr. Michael Reinstein reaped a cool half million off his patients’ misery.’ By Christina Jewett and Sam Roe AlterNet, November 20, 2009.

Virtuality

 By M.K. Styllinski

Worldskin-01

World Skin (1997), Maurice Benayoun‘s virtual reality interactive installation | (wikipedia)

“There is a new world order and our children are carrying it around in their pockets.”

Beeban Kidron


“There is in every child at every stage a new miracle of vigorous unfolding.” So, said the psychologist Erik Erickson. This extraordinary neurological development used to be facilitated and encouraged by the art of storytelling which allowed archetypes and mythological motifs to be gently assimilated into the mind of the child, so that this process could begin from an emotionally nourished foundation. Television as a primary tool of the advertiser helped to replace this deeply-rooted tradition.

A study conducted by the cable television industry in February 1996 found that 57 per cent of television programmes contain “psychologically harmful” violence. The findings, the largest profiling of its kind, were taken from over 2,500 hours of television programming, carefully tracked and analysed. These research findings did not necessarily suggest that children could act more violently but that it could contribute to conditions whereby violence is seen as a normal part of life. By the age of 18, the average American child will have seen 200,000 murders on television [1] and since there is at least ten times as much crime on television and increasingly the internet as there is in the real world, this helps to create a rather skewed picture of the expectations of what life has to offer. [2]

By the time 2013 came around peer-reviewed studies were finding further negative effects of overexposure to television. A study undertaken by the University of Montreal, Canada, by Linda S. Pagani, Caroline Fitzpatrick & Tracie A. Barnett was published in Pediatric Research and the scientific journal Nature. The report entitled: ‘Early childhood television viewing and kindergarten entry readiness’ amassed data from a prospective longitudinal cohort of 991 girls and 1,006 boys and was analysed for the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development. The parent-reported data was collected from weekly hours of tele-viewing starting at about 2 and half years of age. Children were then scored “… on direct child assessments of vocabulary, mathematical knowledge, and motor skills, as well as kindergarten teacher reports of socio-emotional functioning…”

The research team’s results showed that watching television at 2.5 years: “… were associated with subsequent decreases in vocabulary and math skills, classroom engagement (which is largely determined by attention skills), victimization by classmates, and physical prowess at kindergarten.” The conclusions further suggested: “… the need for better parental awareness and compliance with existing viewing recommendations put forth by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).”

Childhood obesity, apathy, passivity, compliance, earlier sexual activity, attention deficit, impaired cognitive ability, hyperactivity, depression and aggression are all increasing in children. Television is could well be contributing to this global malaise. [3] It is not difficult to see why the child’s ability to actually learn is impaired. It is not the quantity of programmes that is at fault, but the quality. Given that the quality of television is tied to the market place, then it stands to reason that television will project these ways of being straight into the waiting brains of the young. Children aged 6 to 8 now respond to the image of a television as alcoholics do to images of drink. [4]

Though a contributory factor, it is not the content of the programming that is doing the damage. The child’s brain is under attack from a deluge of images at the precise time that the mind/brain matrix is attempting to build neural fields that are healthy and stable, with images sourced from within rather than implanted by negative anxiety and adrenalin-drenched images from without. Quick camera switches, rapid image movement, computer generated objects, computer generated morphing and other technological stimuli are called “jolts” or “technical events” which induce the hormonal “fight or flight” response  together with the accompanying adrenal rush. [5] It is an addictive habit that forces the mind to latch onto firm ground that is forever being snatched away. This mind/body addiction means a near catatonic state; the glassy-eyed child fixed to the induction of alpha waves, ensures a hypnotizing effect that is most damaging to the neural circuits still being formed in small children. With these artificial images comes a habitually false sense of reality which becomes hardwired as author and scientist Joseph Chiltern Pearce explains:

Television feeds both the stimulus and response into the infant-child’s brain as a single-paired effect and herein lays the danger. Television floods the brain with a counterfeit of the response of the brain is supposed to learn to make to the stimuli of words or music. As a result much structural coupling between mind and environment is eliminated; few metaphoric images develop; few higher cortical areas of the brain are called into play; few, if any symbolic structures develop. [6]

Divorced from a measured and contextual response, the media plays its part in shovelling on fear and insecurity, pumping international horrors into our living rooms and already tired minds. There is always a variety of ways that consumer culture can allow you to buy back that security, however fleeting. Instinctual sex and violence ensures a “dumbed down” populace while ensuring ratings increases more of the same. In other words:

Since there is no way to stop the images, one merely gives over to them. More than this, one has to clear all channels of reception to allow them in more cleanly. Thinking only gets in the way.” […]  Every advertiser, for example, knows that before you can convince anyone of anything, you shatter their existing mental set and then restructure awareness along lines which are useful to you. You do this with a few very simple techniques like fast-moving images, jumping among attention focuses, and switching moods… [7] [Emphasis mine]

Our potential brain becomes imprisoned by the lower limbic brain and is sedated by the habitual and familiar: it is safe, comfortable, passive and devoid of the subtle nuances of creativity. Drop in doses of random violence and meaningless sex into the pliable mind of the child and a progressive normalisation of a pathological world view begins to take place. The child’s highly emotional mind ensures an easy state for conditioning. It is literally contoured towards states of acceptance. Babies and toddlers are unconsciously shocked into submission and programmed into mediocrity even before they can rationalize and conceptualise. Whether they will be able to think critically and discern truth from fiction later in life in combination with other environmental factors, is the key question.

The mass programming of movies, magazines, gaming and the integration of the internet and T.V. cannot by themselves, be considered threatening to the psychology of children and young adults. It is unlikely for example, that playing extremely violent, hyper-realistic, computer games such as Grand Theft Auto or Mortal Kombat is going to cause irreversible damage if they played occasionally. However, taken together and with the emphasis on the type of content being absorbed, one can make such a statement with assurance. At the age children begin to play video games they have not sufficiently developed the ability to distinguish between what is reality and what is not. These forms of mind stimulation make sure that, as adults, our focus lies in the realm of subjectivity rather than objectivity while all the time we believe the reverse.

The average American absorbs 34 GB of information a day, though half of it is obtained from playing video games. [8] It is little wonder that such games are coming under repeated suspicion when we read the following reviews from online gaming sites: “Hit man: Blood Money delivers the most brutal and realistic simulation of life as the world’s deadliest assassin.” In this game you must eliminate your opponents using a variety of weapons and killing techniques. One scene depicts a basement shootout where several busty, bronzed, bikini-clad maidens must be summarily blown away to progress to the next level. In the opening start-page one can see the hit man holding one of these aforementioned women by the throat with the implication that he intends to use her as a shield. You can imagine what follows.

Another game describes a futuristic battle where: “…three nations with opposing political views have erupted in an all-out war. From the cockpit of a giant metal ‘HOUND’, you must power your tower of heavy artillery through giant war zones while backing five others on your squad and dodging the firepower of six other live players via Xbox Live.” And further: “In Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter you can play as a Ghost, the best trained and equipped soldier the US Army has to offer. The year is 2013 and an insurgency has broken out in Mexico City, and it is your job to infiltrate the city and attempt to restore order.” That of course, means wiping out as many folks as you can. Or if a more gory enterprise is more to your taste: “Ninety-Nine Nights is a pure hack-and-slasher, brought to you by both Mizuguchi’s Q!” There is no limit to the number of weapons you can conjure and use nor the amount and variety of people you can kill. No irritating shades of grey here.

What about some good old fashioned propaganda? You need not look far for a double helping of “fun” in the guise of FA-18 Operation Desert Storm where, as an intrepid US pilot in the Allied Coalition, you must fly your FA-18 Hornet across enemy lines to bring down Iraqi forces for the ultimate glory that was Operation Desert Storm in the 1991 Gulf war. Then there is Conflict: Desert Storm II Back to Baghdad where one on-line reviewer seemed to epitomize the dissociation involved with the reality of war versus the de-sensitization of real life:

“… there’s one thing that makes Conflict Desert Storm so engaging, and that’s the feeling you get when you’re all alone, your companions’ dead bodies scattered all around you, hiding behind a couple of clay pots to avoid the tank that’s just feet away. Finding yourself in this position just illustrates the sense of loneliness on the battle-field as you have no one to watch your back and success from this point becomes even more rewarding. The fine line is, that Conflict Desert Storm is simply better than any other war game that I’ve ever played and well worth the 10 quid that I paid for it…”

One wonders what the dead US soldiers and the millions of dead and mutilated Iraqi civilians would say to such “entertainment.” Such is the price of suffering that is reduced to teenage computer games and a “ten quid” tension ride.

Is there really such a difference between the programming of “Shock and Awe” pop video coverage courtesy of Fox T.V. and the gaming consoles in most American and European homes? If you were thinking that “Shock and Awe” sounded like a perfect computer game title then it will come as no surprise that the company’s US computer game office asked the Patent Office to let them register the words as a trademark. Sony backed down from plans to use the phrase as a title for its game about the war with Iraq due to customer and gamers distaste at such a move, especially as the patent was applied for only one day after the war started.

The studies that found violent video games had long-term, detrimental effects were given a further boost of credibility when in 2001, Japanese Professor Ryuta Kawashima, a brain imaging specialist, decided to investigate the levels of brain activity in children playing video games. He was hoping that his research would benefit the gaming world, thus possibilities for his own funding. His findings however, did not please the games manufacturers. The professor was convinced that children who play computer and video games excessively will not develop their frontal lobes and may therefore be more prone to act more violently as they grow up. [9]

As well as a clear correlation between watching violent video games and increased aggression, poor academic performance has also been repeatedly found to be a consistent result of prolonged gaming. [10]  In a world of apps and i-phones these effects are beginning to reach deeper into the young and are causing concern from a number of scientists and academics.

Maryanne Wolf, an author and cognitive neuroscientist at Tufts University in Massachusetts quoted in a September 2010 Guardian piece states: “It takes time to think deeply about information and we are becoming accustomed to moving on to the next distraction. I worry that the circuits that give us deep reading abilities will atrophy in adults and not be properly formed in the young.” The New York Time’s Nick Bilton reported on The UK Millennium Cohort Study in his March 31st article of 2013: ‘The Child, the Tablet and the Developing Mind.’ The study, which had been following 19,000 children born in 2000 and 2001 published a report in in the same year and found that children who watched more than three hours of television or DVDs a day “… had a higher chance of behavioural problems, emotional symptoms and relationship problems by the time they were 7 than children who did not. The study, of a sample of 11,000 children, found that children who played video games — often age-appropriate games — for the same amount of time did not show any signs of negative behavioral changes by the same age.”

So, it seems it is the quality and content and exposure time to these types of technology that is the issue.

Digitale-DemenzIn Europe, German neuropsychiatrist Dr. Manfred Spitzer has shown in his book Digitale Demenz (Digital Dementia – 2012) that when young children are exposed to too much computer-based activities their brain development suffers resulting in irreversible deformations. [11] Though not the first to investigate the effects of computers and software on young brains, his findings have drawn considerable criticism, not for the science it seems, but for the heresy of pointing out substantial drawbacks in the perceived perfection of a new technology that is currently re-shaping lives.

Researchers in 2005 also found a new perceptual effect they labelled “attentional rubber-necking” which appears to mimic the “jolts” and “shocks” we have from the dynamics of visual pollution. The Vanderbilt and Yale University study found that when people are exposed to erotic or violent images they often fail to fully process what they see immediately after. [12] It seems the mind’s capacity to absorb information – and perhaps crucial data – can switch off like a light bulb in a darkened room, or in the researchers words, an “emotion-induced blindness.” New research also suggests that young adult brains continue to be malleable to new thoughts and ideas (especially when fused with a highly emotional content) up until age 18 and beyond, though the areas of the brain affected tend to change.

The organizing and re-integrating of new sensory information via this technology shows such a “synthesis helps shape the kinds of emotional and behavioural responses [children] have to new experiences.” [13] It is these experiences that dictate exactly how a personality and its brain responds and perceives the outer world and whether it attains a creative or entropic response. How can an individual learn to understand himself and his psychological “wounds” if he is distracted and buffered by chemical inducing technology; where feelings, thoughts and dreams are fused with artifice?

The merging of official culture with new forms of technological addiction seems assured. Evelyn Pringle, writing for online journal Counterpunch in April 2010 revealed more information regarding the experiments in the effects of technology on children in her widely quoted report: ‘The Psychiatric Drugging of Infants and Toddlers.’ In 2010, the University of Maryland conducted an experiment named “Unplugged.” Researchers asked 200 undergraduates to stop using all internet and cell phone technology for one day and to keep a diary of how they were feeling. Many of the students reported symptoms of dependency and addiction. The University of Maryland concluded that: “Most college students are not just unwilling, but functionally unable, to be without their media links to the world.” This means that similar studies are unlikely to attract the participants needed for further evaluations.

Research quoted by Newsweek’s Tony Dokoupil in his in-depth July 2012 report: ‘Is the Web Driving Us Mad?’ is also instructive.  He introduces Professor Gary Small, the head of UCLA’s Memory and Aging Research Center, who, in 2008, proved conclusively that changes in the brain occurred even with moderate Internet use. 24 people were used in the study half of which were experienced internet users and the others very green. While the green users were normal, the veteran users’ brains were scanned and found to have “fundamental” alterations in the prefrontal cortexes. Then, each of the newbie participants were instructed to spend five hours online and then scanned again. A definite “re-wiring” of their brains had taken place.  More from Dokoupil’s research presently.

The latest technological appendages that we and especially children cannot do without are the i-phones, i-pads and tablets. The new diagnosis of i-phone addiction disorder is starting to do the rounds. Journalist Evelyn Pringle further highlights cases from Taiwan involving one:

 “… high-school boy who ended up in an asylum after his iPhone usage reached 24 hours a day. The other [case] featured a 31-year-old saleswoman who used her phone while driving. Both cases might have been laughed off if not for a 200-person Stanford study of iPhone habits released at the same time. It found that one in 10 users feels ‘fully addicted’ to his or her phone. All but 6 percent of the sample admitted some level of compulsion, while 3 percent won’t let anyone else touch their phones.”

Meanwhile, the UK Telegraph ran a report from 2013 By Victoria Ward, entitled: ‘Toddlers becoming so addicted to iPads they require therapy.’ As the title suggested toddlers are fast becoming addicted to i-pads and tablets as a result of lazy parenting and a symptom of a laissez-faire attitude to technology in general. Many medical experts are concerned that: “… parents who allow babies and toddlers to access tablet computers for several hours a day are in danger of causing ‘dangerous’ long term effects,” The report stated. It went on to describe the case of a four-year-old girl from the South East of England who is the youngest known patient being treated in the UK. Dr Richard Graham, who launched the UK’s first technology addiction programme in 2010 is seeing an increasing number of children displaying symptoms of severe addiction in relation to i-pads and internet-based technology. A 28-day “digital detox” programme is offered to desperate parents at the Capio Nightingale Hospital in London. He told the Telegraph that:  “… young technology addicts experienced the same withdrawal symptoms as alcoholics or heroin addicts, when the devices were taken away. He warned that the condition prevented young people from forming normal social relationships, leaving them drained by the constant interaction.”

But as baby-proof iPad covers and iPotties flood the market of convenience it seems this particular addiction will provide another market for healing and drug prescription.

Over in the United States Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. is distributing tablets along with suitable curricula to college students. Part of the Department of Education and Common Core education initiative, it promises to lock children into a monolithic, centralised screen-based education with very little participation from parents and educators. Since children spend most of their days locked into their laptops, i-phones and computer games now they’ll be spending the rest of their waking hours staring into a computer screen studying a curriculum they already had little interest in.

Founded by Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology EdX, a nonprofit enterprise offers online courses using automated software and artificial intelligence to grade student essays and other written answers. As the New York Time’s John Markoff, describes it in his piece: ‘Essay-Grading Software Offers Professors a Break’: “Imagine taking a college exam, and, instead of handing in a blue book and getting a grade from a professor a few weeks later, clicking the “send” button when you are done and receiving a grade back instantly, your essay scored by a software program. And then, instead of being done with that exam, imagine that the system would immediately let you rewrite the test to try to improve your grade.” The idea is to free up more time for college and University professors. That efficiency meme again…

Though many educators and academics loathe the idea and are resisting its implementation it seems inevitable that such automation in education will become the norm in a system that prides itself on technocratic principles rather than the needs of the child. ‘The Epidemic of Media Multi-tasking while learning’, by Annie Murphy Paul posted in May of 2013 to education/tech site http://www.navigator.compasslearning.com explored this very subject. It reached some disturbing conclusions, namely the erosion of student’s focus and attention through excessive multi-tasking.

Researchers from the lab of Larry Rosen, a psychology professor at California State University-Dominguez Hills followed students as they went about their onerous studying and where he and his colleagues “… counted the number of windows open on the students’ screens and noted whether the students were wearing ear-buds.”

While ticking boxes on a check-list which included: “reading a book, writing on paper, typing on the computer—and also using email, looking at Facebook, engaging in instant messaging, texting, talking on the phone, watching television, listening to music, surfing the web.” It seems that students’ “on-task behavior” began to decline at after only two minutes choosing to respond to text messages or checking Facebook. Only 65 percent of the observation period was spent doing homework. Rosen stated: “We were amazed at how frequently they multitasked, even though they knew someone was watching. It really seems that they could not go for 15 minutes without engaging their devices,” adding, “It was kind of scary, actually.”

Unlike radio, the T.V., – and by extension, the internet – by replacing storytelling and other shared activities, may have paradoxically contributed to the loss of societal communication and cohesion. Eventually, this has devalued play in all its forms, eroded parenting skills, even inducing ignorance towards the idea of parenting itself. The internet is certainly an extraordinary tool for knowledge, information and social exchange, but naturally, it has a dark side which can be forgotten in the rush to embrace it.

From Tony Dokoupil’s Newsweek article, he usefully summarises the rate of change and some of its effects:

In less than the span of a single childhood, Americans have merged with their machines, staring at a screen for at least eight hours a day, more time than we spend on any other activity including sleeping. Teens fit some seven hours of screen time into the average school day; 11, if you count time spent multitasking on several devices. When President Obama last ran for office, the iPhone had yet to be launched. Now smartphones outnumber the old models in America, and more than a third of users get online before getting out of bed.

Meanwhile, texting has become like blinking: the average person, regardless of age, sends or receives about 400 texts a month, four times the 2007 number. The average teen processes an astounding 3,700 texts a month, double the 2007 figure. And more than two thirds of these normal, everyday cyborgs, myself included, report feeling their phone vibrate when in fact nothing is happening. Researchers call it “phantom-vibration syndrome.”

Dukoupil reported on the latest peer-reviewed research and other common findings which could only be seen as a slap in the face of internet utopians. He further stated: “The current incarnation of the Internet—portable, social, accelerated, and all-pervasive—may be making us not just dumber or lonelier but more depressed and anxious, prone to obsessive-compulsive and attention-deficit disorders, even outright psychotic. Our digitized minds can scan like those of drug addicts, and normal people are breaking down in sad and seemingly new ways.”

Newsweek conducted its own research reviewing findings from over a dozen countries all of which are following the same trajectory of addiction with their attendant negative effects. These include depression, reactive psychosis, anxiety, and the common rise in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). The latter is linked to internet and i-phone addiction after studies reported by journalists Alan Schwartz and Sarah Cohen in a New York Times article of March 2013: ‘A.D.H.D. Seen in 11% of U.S. Children as Diagnoses Rise’ confirmed nearly one in five high school age boys and 11 percent of school-age children in general have received a medical diagnosis of ADHD. This is what the data revealed after a 53 percent rise in the condition in just a decade. Is there a link? Many believe so. Which makes a very lucrative case for Big Pharma, since all these children need to be medicalised, it seems.

It is no coincidence that also in the last decade the number of children less than a year old receiving medication has sky-rocketed in the United States. Diagnoses of bipolar disorder has also doubled over the last decade according to a Reuters report. Journalist by Evelyn Pringle writing for the previously mentioned 2010 Counterpunch article observed: “Of antipsychotic-treated children in the 2007 study sample, [from Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry] the most common diagnoses were pervasive developmental disorder or mental retardation (28.2%), ADHD (23.7%), and disruptive behavior disorder (12.9%).

In one sense, all of us who use computers are made addicts since the average person spends more than 38 hours online due to the rapidly changing nature of technology tied to the workplace. The child however, is in the front line of this neurological change.

With a diet of gratuitous violence – whether comic book or ultra-realism – the child is habituated to a glut of sensation and the neurological stunting that eventuates. Anything less than this is “boring”. A spiritual vacuum condemns our future adults to a “filthy tide” of cheap thrills and superficiality wrapped in soft quilts of technical addiction. The damaged care for the damaged and perpetuate the legacy. Notwithstanding the background link of 18 Certificate computer gaming in most of the US shooting massacres of recent times, the ubiquitous and increasing levels of extreme violence and destruction classed as entertainment on our TVs and in our cinemas is deeply concerning.

When combined with the rise of SMART society and social media it can only exacerbate an already violence-saturated culture. However, the key to reducing this incursion seems to lie in the quality and content of the internet and video games and the type of technology to which we expose our children.

In writer Eli Khamarov’s words: “Most people are awaiting Virtual Reality; I’m awaiting virtuous reality.”

 


Notes

[1] Robert E. Hales, The American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Psychiatry (2008) p. 1472.
[2] ‘Development of a Cognitive Process Model to Explain the Effects of Heavy Television Viewing on Social Judgment’ L. J. Shrum, Rutgers University | http://www.acrwebsite.org/search/view-conference-proceedings.aspx?Id=8172
[3] Archives of Paediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (Vol 159, p 607, p 614, p 619, p 687) quoted from NewScientist.com news service ‘Watching TV harms kids’ academic success’ by Anna Gosline July 4, 2005.
[4] “Lure of Television is stronger than a smile” by David Lister, The Times, November 7, 2006: “Previous research into the behaviour of young children and babies has shown that they prefer to look at faces and do so instinctively in order to learn and to communicate. This was borne out by an initial experiment on 34 five-year-olds, 25 eight-year-olds and 34 adults, in which they were each shown a photograph of a face alongside either a doll’s house, a toy boat, a toy train, a tap, a teapot or a wall clock. The overwhelming majority looked at the image of a face before the competing object.In a second experiment, however, 143 children aged 5 to 8 were seated in front of a computer screen on which the image of a blank television screen was shown next to a face for less than a second. The children were told to press the spacebar as soon as they saw a bar of chocolate appear on the screen. Most of the children aged 6 to 8 pressed the spacebar fastest when the chocolate bar appeared behind the picture of the television and not the face, suggesting that they were already looking at it. Only the five-year-olds responded fastest when the chocolate was behind the face. Martin Doherty, a lecturer in psychology at the University of Stirling, who carried out the research with Dr Bindemann, said: ‘One of the interesting things is that five-year-olds still have a face bias but six-year-olds don’t.’”
[5] Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television by Jerry Mander, published by William Morrow, 1978 | ISBN: 0688082742.
[6] p.166; Evolutions End: Claiming the Potential of Our Intelligence By Joseph Chiltern Pearce Published by HarperCollins 1992, ISBN 0-06-250693-5.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Part of the Daily American Diet, 34 Gigabytes of Data’ By Nick Bilton, The New York Times, December 9, 2009.
[9] ‘Heavy Video Game Use by Kids May slow Brain Development – Game industry disputes findings of Japanese study’ – The Observer August 19, 2001.
[10] Video games ‘increase aggression’, 23 April, 2000, BBC News.
[11] Digitale Demenz: Wie wir uns und unsere Kinder um den Verstand bringen By Manfred Spitzer. (only in German at the time of writing.)
[12] ‘Researchers explore a perceptual effect called ‘attentional rubbernecking’ by Melanie Moran, August 2005 Vanderbilt University, Nashville USA.
[13] ‘Brains of Young Adults Not Fully Mature’ By Ker Than http://www.livescience.com February, 2006.