Providentia

The Problem with Stalking

When Royce Baxter's GMC Yukon was pulled over in Washington's Thurston county in December 2010,  deputies found a handgun, four pit bulls, and a plastic bag of women's underwear, carefully sorted.  Police had already been searching for Baxter after he had been spotted breaking into a home in Olympia, Washington. and his vehicle was later found to contain a camerawith photos of the inside and outside of the house, pictures of the underwear of a woman  living there, and a key to the front door.    He had been obsessed with the woman, a former coworker, and had entered her house on repeated occasions to steal articles of her clothing.  Baxter was later charged with trying to have the woman's husband and his arresting officer killed.    In a statement that he made to the court during his trial, Baxter said "I am not the villain, the violent, dangerous person or criminal Detective Haller and Prosecutor (Andrew) Toynbee have attempted to so diligently and adamantly portray me as.  I am not a threat or danger to the victims … and I have never physically harmed, assaulted or injured anyone in any way, and I never would."

While everyone experiences "secret crushes" or infatuations at some point or other in their lifetimes, those crushes are usually harmless.  In more extreme cases though, the kind of obsessive love see in many stalkers can lead to far more serious consequences.  More often known as erotomania,  obsessive love is usually associated with celebrities being stalked by overzealous fans but such cases are probably more common than most people realize.   First identified by French psychiatrist Gaetan Gatian de Clerambault in his classic 1912 paper Les Psychoses Passionelles, the syndrome is also known as de Clerambault's syndrome in his honour.   Although de Clerambault considered erotomania to be found almost exclusively in females (all of the case studies in his paper were female), cases of males with erotomanic delusions were quickly identified as well   Numerous case histories have been reported in the psychiatric literature for decades but erotomania is no longer considered a separate diagnosis (it is not included in the DSM-V and is usually classified as part of a broader delusional disorder such as schizophrenia).

 Known cases of delusional erotomania tend to share the following characteristics:

• A delusional conviction that he or she is has a "love connection" with the intended target, including  covert messages being passed back and forth
• The intended target is usually of a much higher rank or social status
• In many  cases, the patient insists that the other person fell in love first and made the initial advances
• While the intended target rebuffs the patient's advances, the patient then constructs elaborate explanations of why there is no real evidence of rejection
• The intended target endures months, if not years, of embarrassment, humiliation, and fear over  the patient's advances.  If the patient is rejected too harshly, the intended target (or anyone perceived to be a threat to the relationship) may be physically harmed by the patient
• Erotomania is often a fixed delusion  which is resistant to any form of treatment

Celebrities stalked by obsessed fans include David Letterman, Uma Thurman, Steven Spielberg, Madonna,  and Rebecca Shaeffer (who was murdered by her stalker).    A study by forensic psychiatrist Park Dietz of  personal letters sent to celebrities and politicians  found that, of the 214 letters sent to celebrities, 16% showed erotomanic delusions with eleven of the writers actually believing that they were married to the object of their obsession.  Of the 100 people who wrote similar letters to politicians, five had erotomanic delusions and two believed that they were married. 

While many people with erotomania gradually give up when their love is not returned, the most dangerous cases involve love turning to hatred over perceived betrayal or jealousy.  One case that brought erotomania to public attention in  recent years was John  Hinckley Jr. whose obsession with actress Jodie Foster led to the subsequent assassination attempt on  U.S. President Ronald Reagan on March 30, 1981.  For Hinckley,  Jodie Foster became his entire world (likely triggered by her gripping portrayal as a prostitute in Taxi Driver).  After learning the location of her dormitory at Yale University,  Hinckley pursued Foster with numerous letters, phone calls, and notes designed to show his love for her.   In a page torn from an art book that was later found by his parents, Hinckley had written "Napoleon and Josephine- John and Jodie" under the picture of a bust of Napoleon Bonaparte.  The entire point of shooting the President involved proving to Jodie Foster that their union was inevitable by guaranteeing himself a place in the history books. 

In a final letter written just before the assassination attempt, Hinckley wrote that:

There is a definite possibility that I will be killed in my attempt to get Reagan.  It is for this very reason that I am writing you this letter now.  As you well know by now, I love you very much.  The past seven months I have left you dozens of poems, letters and messages in the faint hope you would develop an interest in me.  Although we talked on the phone a couple of times, I never had the nerve to simply introduce myself.   Besides my shyness,  I honestly did not wish to bother you.  I know the many messages left at your door and in your mailbox were a nuisance, but I felt it was the most painless way to express my love to you.  [...]

Jodie, I would abandon this idea of getting Reagan in a second if I could only win your heart and live out the rest of my life with you, whether it be in total obscurity or whatever.  I will admit to you that the reason I'm going ahead with this attempt now is because I cannot wait any longer to impress you.  I've got to do something now to make you understand in no uncertain terms that I am doing all of this for your sake. By sacrificing my freedome and possibly my life I hope to change your mind about me.  This letter is being written an hour before I leave for the Hilton Hotel.

Jodie, I'm asking you to please look into your heart, and at least give me the chance with this historical deed to gain your respect and love.  I love you forever.  John Hinckley.

Along with impressing Foster, Hinckley also apparently had a dream of somehow replacing President Reagan and living in the White House with her.  In an unmailed postcard found by the FBI after the assassination attempt , Hinckley had written "Dear Jodie,  one day you and I will occupy the White House and the peasants will drool with envy".   While President Reagan recovered from the shooting, several others at the scene were not so lucky (including Press Secretary James Brady who was left permanently disabled).   Found not guilty by reason of insanity, Hinckley was confined to St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington, D.C.  where he would remain for decades.   Even after his trial, he insisted that the shooting was "the greatest love offering in the history of the world" and public outrage over his sentence spurred new legislation to restrict the use of the insanity defense.  Though efforts by his family to have Hinkley released had been stymied by  continuing evidence of his  fixation on Jodie Foster, he was finally allowed to live with his mother in 2016 and he has since been allowed to live on his own.

Erotomania is often associated with stalking behaviour but most cases of criminal sexual harassment typically involve former partners or former employees/coworkers.   While celebrities typically have security staff to deal with overly amorous admirers, ordinary citizens need to rely on police for protection.  Unfortunately, many victims of erotomanic stalkers are often reluctant to make a formal complaint due to fear of retaliation or the hope that the stalker will simply give up in time.  Even restraining orders are only marginally effective unless there is an anti-stalking law in place. 

Victims should take every measure possible to protect themselves including providing a picture of the stalker to friends and family as well as having an emergency police number to call (preferably dealing with the same police officer each time).  They should also refuse to respond to the stalking in any way (including meeting with the stalker directly).  Every contact attempt by the stalker should be documented and reported and victims should insist on periodic police drive-bys and a security system for protection.   Victims should also avoid being alone whenever possible and should carry a mobile phone and a personal alarm. 

Sadly, none of these measures are foolproof and victims are often left isolated and afraid since police rarely have the power to act effectively until after the stalker has become violent.    For more information and to learn about available resources, please contact the following organizations.

National Stalking Helpline (U.S)

Stalkingvictims.com

Network for Surviving Stalking (U.K.)

Why Are People So Skeptical About Psychology?

Why can't psychologists get respect?

A provocative article published a few years back in American Psychologist tackles that very question.  Written by the late Emory University psychologist , Scott Lilienfeld (also one of the co-authors of 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior), the article examines why psychology has become the "Rodney Dangerfield of the sciences" with a public reputation for being unscientific. 

While the science of psychology has often faced legitimate criticism for overly depending on statistical significance testing, overly vague psychological models, and political correctness that limits legitimate scientific investigation into sensitive issues,  most of those criticisms have been raised by psychologists on the inside seeking to strengthen the discipline as a whole.  As a result, these disputes are often invisible to people outside psychology itself and public skepticism concerning psychology typically focuses on misunderstandings of what psychology is and the sorts of questions that psychologists attempt to answer.  

This pervasive misunderstanding can have far-reaching consequences.   Not only do elected politicians voting on science funding often short-change psychological research projects for not being "real science" (including omitting psychology from some funding agencies lists for  STEM disciplines), but potential mental health consumers who might otherwise benefit from psychological treatment may be reluctant to seek help due to misconceptions about what a psychologist actually does.

While psychologist advocacy groups (including the American Psychological Association and the Association for Psychological Science) have tried to fight back against these misconceptions, public attitudes concerning psychology and psychological research have been slow to change.  In 2006, the American Psychological Association Science Directorate released a pamphlet titled  Prepare Now to Prevail If Your Research is Attacked:  Self-Defense for the Psychological Scientist which basically advised researchers on how to defend themselves  against political, media, and public attacks that misrepresent their findings.   The pamphlet provides basic self-defense tips such as: 

• Be aware that the grant application abstract from your research is accessible to and searchable by the public and Congress and should describe your research in lay terms.
• Create an easy-to-understand, one-page summary of your research that illustrates why it is important to the public.
• Request media training from your university.  and
• Establish a relationship with your university’s public and legislative affairs office.

Unfortunately, as Dr. Lilienfeld pointed out in his article, efforts by researchers to fight misconceptions about their research are only mildly effective since they overlook the underlying reasons for widespread skepticism about psychology.   In addressing this skepticism, he focused on two basic questions:  a) are the negative views of psychology's scientific status held by many outsiders warranted? and b) what are the principal sources of the views?   

Negative media views about psychology date to the very beginnings of psychology itself with early psychologists such as William James who wrote uncritically about spiritualism and other pseudoscientific fads.  While other psychologists including Hugo Munsterberg and Theodore Flournoy distinguished themselves as skeptical debunkers, their efforts tended not to be so well-publicized.  Early attempts by forensic psychologists to prove the credibility of psychological research in the courtroom also helped damage the credibility of psychologists as a whole.  As one example, Harvard psychologist, Hugo Munsterberg, had a particularly troubling love-hate relationship with the media and his testimony during the 1907 Harry Orchard trial severely undermined the credibility of the fledgling science of forensic psychology for years afterward.  Regardless of the scientific merits of the research, media  controversies surrounding psychologists such as William Moulton Marston and his lie detector, B.F. Skinner' and his "Heir Conditioner", and Wilhelm Reich and orgone technology likely reinforced the view of mental health researchers as wooly-headed and unscientific.

Even in the the present day, numerous editorials and unflattering stories about psychological research are still common.  A 1982 New York Times editorial by Nicholas Wade reported on a Psychology Today survey that asked eleven psychologists to identify the most significant finding in psychology for the previous fifteen years.   The editorial, titled "If This is Consensus, Psychology Can't Be Much of a Science" used the lack of consensus among the polled psychologists and concluded that  "The results are astonishing: it would seem that there have been none".  The editorial's author added that the failed consensus "evinces a serious problem in their academic discipline".    It was during this same period that David Stockman, President Reagan's then-Director of the Office of Management and Budget justified the decision to slash behavioural science funding by declaring that psychology was a pseudo-science. 

Along with unflattering criticisms of psychology in the media, opinion surveys have indicated that large segments of society continue to view psychology as unscientific and that daily life experiences were often sufficient to provide most people with adequate exposure to make informed opinions about human behaviour.  One 1998 survey study found that both the general population and college faculty rated psychology and sociology as being significant lower than five other disciplines (biology, chemistry, economics, medicine, and physics) in terms of their "contribution of the discipline to society".  Psychologists were specifically identified as being lower in expertise than most other disciplines and that the general population was typically better off relying on "common sense".

A 2008 marketing study commissioned by the American Psychological Association reflected ongoing public misgivings about the scientific value of psychology.  While 82 per cent of study respondents agreed that psychological research helped to improve people's lives, only a minority of participants had a clear idea of what psychologists actually did or the full range of research issues addressed by psychological research.  The overwhelming consensus was that psychology is a "soft science" with less rigour than most other disciplines as well as requiring less time to develop expertise as opposed to other sciences.   Other studies have shown widespread skepticism about psychology's value to society compared to other scientific disciplines seen as more important.

But why is this skepticism so widespread?  According to Dr. Lilienfield, the skepticism often focuses on six common misconceptions about psychology that are often cited by critics:

• Psychology is merely "common sense"
• Psychology does not use scientific methods
• Psychology can not yield meaningful generalizations because everyone is unique
• Psychology does not yield repeatable results
• Psychology can not make precise predictions
• Psychology is not useful to society

While psychologists can respond to these misconceptions effectively, Dr. Lilienfield stresses that widespread skepticism is often reinforced by the slowness on the part of psychologist to weed out those questionable practice that often still thrive.   These practices include the continuing use of treatments and tests that do not have adequate scientific support such as alternative medicine, "recovered memories" of past abuse using hypnosis or other suggestive techniques, as well as the failure of psychologists to use the best evidence-based treatments to treat emotional or behavioural problems.   Of the thousands of self-help books (many of which prominently feature the authors as psychologists), only a small percentage actually off scientifically tested information.  These books often feature oversimplified advice or make elaborate claims that go well beyond established scientific research.   Also, there seems to be widespread resistance among psychologists to test established mental health treatments scientifically which can often feed into public skepticism.

In the end, this failure to police psychology as a whole means that media psychologists such as Dr. Phil McGraw and Dr. Laura Schlessinger (whose Ph.D is in physiology) are free to present themselves as psychology's public face and to dispense unscientific advice freely.  That  the American Psychological Association invited "Dr. Phil" to speak at its 2006 annual convention to highlight the effective communication of psychology to the public reflects the problem that many psychologists face in being accepted as scientists.  Even the very word "psychologist" is often a source of confusiondue to role diffusion between psychologists, psychotherapists, psychoanalysts, social workers, and psychiatrists who often provide highly similar services.   Surveys have consistently shown that large segments of the American general population are unable to distinguish between different mental health professionals.

Along with the general role confusion facing psychologists seeking acceptance, Dr.Lilienfeld also identified cognitive biases underlying public skepticism of psychological research.   These include hindsight bias (regarding a research conclusion as seeming obvious in hindsight),  that research questions addressed by psychologists are often perceived as less difficult to answer than questions addressed by scientists in other disciplines, the failure to distinguish basic from applied research, the popularity of reductionist explanations of human behaviour (including explanations based on neuroscience, biochemistry, and human evolution),  as well as the refusal to accept that certain subjects can be tested empirically at all, a.k.a  the scientific impotence excuse. 

So where does this leave us?   While large segments of the general population are still skeptical of psychology's value, survey data suggests some cause for optimism although there is considerably more that needs to be done.   As Dr. Lilienfeld points out, psychologists cannot blame their continuing credibility problems exclusively on public misconceptions.    The failure of psychologists to embrace evidence-based practices and to keep advocating treatments that have been shown not to work effectively is definitely part of the problem.  As well, we shouldn't let flashy media psychologists continue to be seen as psychology's public face instead of the more legitimate research psychologists who can provide a more balanced view of what psychology is really about.   Since academics are often reluctant to confront pseudoscience, misconceptions continue to flourish.

In his conclusion, Dr. Lilienfeld made the following recommendations:  on the individual level,  psychologists need to make a greater effort to make their work available to the public through popular writing (Daniel Kahnemann, Steven Pinker, Dan Ariely,  Christoper Chabris and Daniel Simons are all examples of psychologists who have written bestselling books on psychology).   On the institutional level, universities and psychology advocacy groups need to make a greater effort to integrate psychological research into psychology's public face instead of simply reacting blindly to controversies as they arise.  He also stresses the need to debate the often legitimate objections that many people raise to questionable practices in psychology and to weed out those fads that are ultimately damaging to our reputations as psychologists.  Psychologists should stop feeling threatened by public skepticism and learn to recognize that this skepticism can be a useful way of identifying potential problems in our profession and how we are seen by non-psychologists.

To close this post, I think Dr. Lilienfeld's closing words would probably work best:

Just as former New York City Mayor Ed Koch (1981) became famous for asking his constituents “How'm I doing?” as a means of gauging his performance, we as a field should continually be asking the general public “How are we doing?” and be prepared to take their critical feedback to heart if their answers are not to our liking

For the abstract.

 

Does the Gut Microbiome Affect How People Respond to Antipsychotic Medication?

Patients with psychosis usually respond to one antipsychotic drug and not to another; one third fail to respond to any. Some patients, who initially do well, stop responding. Some develop serious side effects even at low doses. While several of the reasons for this variability are known, many are not. A new review published in the journal Behavioral Brain Research examines the potential role of intestinal organisms in response/non-response to antipsychotics. Much of the literature in this field is relatively new and still, for the most part, theoretical. A growing number of animal experiments and clinical trials are starting to point, however, to substantial effects of antipsychotics on the composition of gut bacteria and, reciprocally, to the effects of microbiota on the pharmacokinetics of antipsychotic medication. Because so many factors influence the constituents of the human intestine, it is difficult, at present, to sort out how much one or more either enhance or dampen the benefits of antipsychotics or the character/severity of the adverse effects they induce. Dietary and other therapies are being devised to reverse dysbiosis. If successful, such therapies plus the modification of factors that, together, are known to determine the composition of microbiota could help to maximize the effectiveness of currently available antipsychotic therapy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

For the abstract

Accused Witch Burned Alive in South Africa

Four people are currently in custody in the South African village of Mbuzini after an 80-year-old woman was hacked with a hoe and subsequently burned alive in her house for being a suspected witch.  

The woman, Dumisile Mahlangu  had been living alone since her husband's death and with no adult children in the area, was accused of witchcraft following allegations that she had been caught "sprinkling something" in a neighbour's yard last Saturday. After word spread that "a witch had been caught", a mob forcibly took the accused witch back to her house where she was repeatedly struck with a hoe.   She was then locked in her house which was then set on fire leaving her to burn to death inside.

In a statement released by police spokesperson Brigadier Leonard Hlathi, where was no proof that the old woman was guilty of any wrongdoing  and that eyewitnesses should have called the police to prevent mob action.   Police have since arrested four people, aged 22 to 44, including the owners of the house that the accused witch was supposedly cursing.   The investigation is still underway and other arrests are also expected in future.    he arrested suspects have been charged with murder and arson and will appear in the Tonga magistrate's court next week.

Mpumalanga Police Commissioner Lieutenant General Mondli Zuma has publicly stated that it is "disheartening that the elderly community often suffered such accusations from sections of the society."   Along with warning villagers that they would be prosecuted over any other witch killings, he also directed police to  ensure that those people arrested  for these crimes face the full might of the law.

As for the villagers themselves, they have already refused to allow Mahlangu to be buried in their village and accused police of protecting witches.  “This woman have been bewitching us here... we caught her in the act. We don't want her to be buried in our village. Tomorrow (Tuesday) we will be protesting outside the court because they arrested people who saved the community from the witch,” said a community member when talking to the press and who who asked not to be named.

Belief in witchcraft remains strong in many parts of Africa, including South Aftrica's Mpumalanga province where  Mbuzini is located.    Elderly villagers living alone are often accused of being responsible for any calamity that occurs though accusations of witchcraft can be made against people of all ages, including children, albinos, the disabled, and the mentally ill.   Children, especially orphans, remain particularly vulnerable and may be subjected to violent exorcism rituals to "purge" them of the evil spirits possessing them.   Witchcraft accusation are also becoming increasingly common in immigrant communities due to the influence of evangelical movements.

For more information

 

The Electric Doctor Abrams (Part Two of Two)

Continued from Part One

By the mid-1920s,  Albert Abrams had an extremely profitable Electronic Medicine empire with thousands of practitioners who had completed his training.  They ranged from licensed physicians to faith healers and  could be found across the United States as well as many foreign countries.   Though there was no way to tell how much money he was raking in from all this, Electronic Medicine had certainly made Abrams a millionaire.

But the backlash wasn't long in coming.  Even as Abrams continued his lectures proclaiming the benefits of Electronic Medicine, the American Medical Association denounced Abrams' machines and declared him to be, "easily ranked as the dean of twentieth century charlatans". One skeptic even took a sample of chicken blood to an Abrams-trained therapist who diagnosed it as being from a patient with cancer and tuberculosis. Other trials with bird and animal blood had much the same result.  Even Robert Andrews Millikan, prominent physicist and Nobel laureate, testified in one legal case that Abrams' machines had "no value whatsoever" and that described one oscilloclast as a "device a 10-year-old boy would build to fool and 8-year-old."

But it was the an intensive,  investigation into Electronic Medicine by Scientific American magazine published in 1924 that proved to be  the final nail in Albert Abrams' coffin.  A committee of medical doctors, engineers, physicists, and electricians carefully assessed Abrams' techniques and theories for more than a year before concluding that "the claims advanced on behalf of E. R. A. (Electronic Reactions of Abrams) and of electronic practice in general are not substantiated and it is our belief that they have no basis in fact. In our opinion, the so-called electronic treatments are without value.”  Not only did Abrams' system fail every test they could devise, but that the vibrations that Abrams' equipment purportedly measured were billions of times weaker than actual electronic vibrations.    They even tried severing wires in the oscilloclast that Abrams' licensees were using to make diagnoses only to find that they honestly couldn't tell whether it was working or not.   Committee members also  interviewed the tinkerer who made Abrams' diagnostic devices and found that Abrams had never even explained to the tinkerer how the boxes should be put together. 

Abrams responded to  all of these attacks with his usual outrage and insisted that jealous competitors were trying to silence him.   Not only did he use patient testimonials to demonstrate that his methods were superior to traditional medicine, but he also insisted that most doctors did more harm than good with their non-Electronic alternatives.  He was also quick to mock anyone who presented him with results that contradicted his theories.  When one researcher found no evidence of an electric current passing through one of his machines, Abrams reportedly laughed and replied, "Of course not, the machines are electronic, not electric".

Abrams was also continually reinventing his methods and the different gadgets that he used on his patients.  This included his "reflexophone", "sphygmobiometer", and his improved "biodynamizer" (basically the same old devices with new electrodes or filaments attached).   He also began drifting further away from medicine with even more elaborate claims, including his insisting that he could use his machines to turn silver into gold.  

But the aging Abrams was also losing his characteristic fire as he grew older.   By 1923, he had resigned from most medical organizations when his health went into decline.  Already subject to wild mood swings and rampant paranoia, he became increasingly obsessed with the idea that he was on the verge of death.   He was also exhausted by the numerous lawsuits filed against him though he continued to defend Electronic Medicine to the very end.   

Albert Abrams died of pneumonia on January 13, 1924, just days before being scheduled to testify in another case brought against him. His front-page obituary in the San Francisco Examiner declared that, "worry over attacks launched on his theories in all parts of the civilized world by members of the medical profession led to a breakdown in his health three months ago".    Interestingly enough, despite his own declining health, he relied exclusively on conventional medicine.   According to one source, two of his own assistants had offered to bring an oscilloclast and a dynamometer to his death bed in the hope of saving him but Abrams simply said nothing but waved them both away. 

Abrams' passing also marked the end of an era for electrotherapy.   While he was already in the process of building the ten-story "Abrams College of Electronic Medicine" and also planned to launch a new free clinic to provide health services to the poor, none of this ever materialized.  Despite leaving instructions in his will to fund both projects from his substantial estate (along with leaving flowers in perpetuity on the graves of both his wives), family members managed to break the will after years of litigation.   His death also helped erode whatever public support Electronic Medicine enjoyed and none of his trained practitioners seemed inclined to continue his crusade.   Within a decade, Electronic Medicine was essentially dead.

So, what led an undoubtedly brilliant physician to abandon conventional medicine and throw away his hard-won reputation?  We will likely never know for certain though the death of both his wives, along with his own dissatisfaction with conventional medicine may have been what first set him on the road to alterative-medicine fame.   Perhaps the kindest obituary came from one source who described him as a "magician who came to believe in his own magic."

Unfortunately, Abrams' death and the demise of  Electronic Medicine didn't prevent other hucksters from peddling other electrotherapy cures.  Granted, the AMA and other medical organizations became more aggressive about investigating suspected quackery while the Food and Drug Administration imposed more rigid regulations during the 1930s, including mandatory testing of proposed medical devices to ensure that they meet minimum standards for safety and effectiveness.  All of which reined in the hucksters, at least to some extent, but hardly put them out of business.

One would-be medical pioneer whose career began soon after Albert Abrams' death had to be Royal Raymond Rife.   Despite being a noted inventor who did pioneering work in time-lapse micro-photography and cinematography, he soon turned to making  bizarre claims about being able to detect viruses using a microscope he invented (using some technique which was mysteriously lost).  Not only did he claim to have detected the viruses that caused diseases such as tuberculosis, he also isolated what he insisted was a virus that caused cancer.   Rife followed up on this discovery by inventing what he called a "beam ray" that could bombard affected cells with radionic energy generated using a helium-filled tube.   Though he denied finding a cancer cure as such, he still insisted that his "Rife machines" had medical benefits while warning against "medical fakers" offering false hope to patients.   

Never as successful as Abrams, Rife  tried and failed to convince the world that his machines represented a major scientific breakthrough.  Embittered by this failure (which he blamed on a conspiracy by the American Medical Association to suppress his discovery),  he died a pauper in 1971.   And, that would have been it for him except for the publication of a book by Barry Lynes in 1987.  Titled The Cancer Cure That Worked: Fifty Years of Suppression, the book claimed that the American Medical Association had deliberately run Rife out of business due to the lost income from his cancer cures.  Almost inevitably, the book revived interest in Rike's machines, or at least machines which bear his name, which continue to be marketed as cures for cancer and HIV/Aids.

Rife machines are just one of the many different "electronic" gadgets that continue to be available,  usually courtesy of the Internet and social media (I choose not to provide any links here, do your own research).  But not Albert Abrams' devices, sadly enough.  For all the fame and fortune he enjoyed during his lifetime, nobody seems inclined to revive interest in his work the way that Barry Lynes did with Raymond Rife.  Whether because his oscilloclasts lack the same appeal that Rife and his ilk or not, Albert Abrams doesn't appear to be a likely candidate for being rediscovered. 

For now, he is simply part of San Francisco's colourful history, not to mention a warning about how easy it is for new medical fads to be forgotten.  

Being Sinister

Lefties have never had it easy.

From the dawn of recorded history, being left-handed has often been viewed with fear and suspicion.  The Bible contains numerous passages condemning left-handedness.  The most famous of these references comes from the Book of Matthew:  "Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, 'Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.' ... Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, 'Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels."  Everything from handshaking customs (shaking the left hand rather than the right is still considered a deep insult in many Moslem countries) to language use seemed stacked against the lowly southpaw.  

In most European languages, "right" has a double meaning conveying justice, lawfulness, and truth (i.e.. righteous, right-minded, etc.).  Words for "left", on the other hand, don't fare as well.  The French gauche, the Italian sinistra, and the Portuguese canhoto also provide alternative meanings such as "brash", "awkward", and "uncouth".  The very word sinister comes from the Latin word for left, and also provides the medical term for left-handedness, sinistrality.  

Strangely enough, actual references to right and left-handedness are difficult to find prior to the nineteenth century.  While archaeological examination of Stone-age implements tends not to show a clear right-handed preference in Stone age populations, evidence of hemispheric lateralization and presumed hand preference likely predates humanity itself.  Despite famous historical figures who were known to be left-handed (including Leonardo da Vinci, Benjamin Franklin, and Lewis Carroll), actual evidence that left-handed people were persecuted in ancient times seems hard to find.  Of course, prior to the advent of universal literacy, left-handers (who are typically ambidextrous to some extent) had few difficulties in conforming to social norms relating to "proper hand usage".

The earliest known medical reference to left-handedness was by Sir Thomas Browne who published Pseudoxia Epidemica, or Enquiries into Very Many Received Tenets and Commonly Presum'd Truths, Which Examined Prove but Vulgar Errors in 1648.  In dismissing prejudice against left-handers as being a "vulgar error", Browne struck the first blow for fairness.  A century later, Benjamin Franklin wrote the famous A Petition of the Left Hand directed against right-handed bias in schools.  Aside from those two examples, however, there was little else written on the subject prior to the nineteenth century.  

By the mid-19th century however, things began to change.  Medical researchers often debated on whether left-handers were born or made, i.e., was it due to heredity or environment?  With the discovery of hemispheric lateralization and specialized brain structures linked to language, the question of why right-handedness tended to be predominant in most cultures was inevitably linked to evolutionary factors (Darwinism was all the rage at the time).   Anthropologists reporting on "primitive cultures" such as Hottentots and Bushmen found a greater than expected incidence of left-handedness.  Similar findings were made by archaeologists researching prehistoric art which seemed reaffirm the impression that right-handedness was a mark of evolutionary success while those left-handers who still remained could be seen as "hereditary degenerates".  Over the next few decades, researchers linked left-handedness to a range of psychiatric and medical abnormalities including "feeble-mindedness" and psychosis.

The most notorious indictment of left-handedness came from Cesare Lombroso (who was already world-famous for his research linking heredity and crime).  In 1903, Lombroso published in Left-Handedness and Left-Sidedness  in The North American Review.  In this paper, Lombroso reported that a disproportionate number of "criminals and lunatics" were left-handed and that "persons who are more agile with the left hand ... are ordinarily found among women, children, and savages, and they were more numerous in ages past than they are now".  By associating left-handedness with genetic inferiority, new policies designed to weed out left-handedness became another platform in the growing eugenics movements of the time. 

Almost inevitably, the arguments against left-handedness took on a decidedly racist component.  In his 1913 diatribe against left-handedness, Edward Tenney Brewster wrote that "that sinisterity (left handedness) is slightly more common, in the lower strata of society than in the higher, among negroes than among white persons, and among savages than among civilized persons.  He added that " the curious thing about the inheritance of left-handedness—which, as we have seen, depends on a peculiarity of the brain—is that it resembles closely the inheritance of two other peculiarities which are also dependent on brain structure—namely, mental ability and moral excellence".  Breeding out left-handedness became a sacred duty for eugenics supporters.

In pathologizing left-handers, teachers and child-care authorities in most cultures began to advocate the forced reorientation of left-handed children.  Although some early educational psychologists spoke out against the practice (and some even encouraged teaching children to become ambidextrous instead), forcing left-handed children to use their right hands became accepted practice in countries around the world.  The methods used range from gentle encouragement to physical discipline and the results were often mixed. 

While some children made the transition with few problems, the long-term consequences of forced right-handedness remain controversial and often depends on the harshness of the teaching method used.  Although stuttering, emotional stunting, and motor impairments have long been reported in hand reorientation cases, research into 'converted' left-handers has also shown evidence of neurological changes, increased incidence of schizophrenia, and potential writing problems.  Since forced right-handedness continues to be practiced in many countries, the true extent to which it actually occurs likely can't be determined with any accuracy.  Countries where active discouragement of left-handedness have been known to occur until relatively recently include China, Japan, Russia, and most Moslem countries. 

Given the ongoing biases favouring right-handedness in most settings, left-handed children still face numerous obstacles at school and at home.  In recent years, there has been a groundswell of support for left-handers including resources to make living in a right-handed dominant world easier.  Maybe Ned Flanders had the right (sorry) idea with his left-handed store...

Does Sleep Medication Affect Cognition?

Sleep medications, especially benzodiazepines, are known to cause motor and cognitive impairments as side-effects from their use. However, an evaluation of the effects of sleep medications in general on prospective and retrospective memory remains to be seen. A new study published in the journal, Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry evaluates the effects of the different types of sleep medicines using the total score and the 8 subscales of the Prospective and Retrospective Memory Questionnaire (PRMQ) in a representative sample from the Municipality of São Paulo. The effects of each type of medication on these same parameters were evaluated afterwards. Each analysis was performed controlling for different covariates to observe their degree of interference on the observed results. Impairment due to use of sleep aid medication was observed in 6 of the 8 subscales, as well in the overall score of the PRMQ when compared to non-users. Prospective subscales were particularly affected, even when controlling for highly interfering covariates such as depression and anxiety, and objective sleep variables related to sleep architecture and wakefulness in the night. Few effects were detected between the various types of medication even when controlling for covariates, suggesting that a sample with higher power is necessary to conduct a more detailed analysis. Using pharmacological aids to improve sleep may impair prospective and (to some extent) retrospective memory. Therefore, the relationship between sleep impairment, memory deficits and medication use must be considered by physicians. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)

For the abstract

Lawyer Says Client Not Criminally Responsible for 2016 Stabbing Death of High School Student

An attorney for a man convicted of stabbing two high school students in Abbotsford, one fatally,  stated that his client lacked the mental capacity to understand what he did was wrong.    In his argument at the New Westminster B.C. Supreme Court hearing for his client, Gabriel Klein, Martin Peters stated that Klein's psychotic state caused him to believe that Klein believed he was stabbing a witch and a zombie with maggots coming out of its back, not two teenage girls.  " Klein did not appreciate the nature and quality of his actions. Klein certainly did not appreciate the consequences of his actions were the fatal harm to Letisha Reimer and the maiming of (her friend)," Peters said.

On November 1, 2016, the 20-year-old Klein stole a knife and subsequently entered a high school where he saw 13-year-old Letisha Reimer and her friend who was not named by the press.   He then  stabbed Reimer thirteen times and seriously injured the second student.    Despite his history of mental illness, Klein refused to have his psychiatric history admitted as evidence and was subsequently convicted last March of murder and attempted murder.  The case has generated intense publicity across British Columbia given the brutal nature of the crime and the age of the victims who were apparently selected at random.

In a new sentencing hearing, Klein testified that hat he was following the directions of voices in his head which told him that his victims were monsters and that stabbing them was "just."  He also told  the court that he hadn't understand the moral consequences and had been diagnosed as psychotic during a pre-trial assessment.    Despite Klein's claim of having been undergone a forensic assessment, no defense witnesses were called during the hearing.   Klein has also shown significant problems recalling essential details during cross-examination and his responses have been inconsistent, something that the Crown prosecutors maintain undermined his credibility.  For example, Klein  that he  crossed the border into Washington state two days before the attack at the school because he thought the RCMP and Hells Angels were after him, but admitted in cross examination he told border guards he had crossed by accident because he didn’t want to get in trouble.   He also admitted to lying to police about having previously been robbed because he believed it might have made him more sympathetic.

Despite public interest in the case, COVID restrictions limited actual seating in the courtroom.   As a result, most of the attendants watched a livestream of the hearing at a closed room in a local community centre.   In a statement to CTV News, a spokesperson for Letisha Reimer’s family said that he is hoping the judge will find there’s not enough evidence to find Klein not criminally responsible for his actions.  “That would be my hope, and that way it would spare the families all this sort of grief that they’re re-experiencing just after the anniversary of the murder,” he said. “At the end of the day, Letisha’s not here, and Gabriel Klein is permitted to sit on a stand and basically rewrite history of what took place. He’s introducing seemingly new information to try to minimize what he did.”

The trial is proceeding.

 

 

The Electric Doctor Abrams (Part One of Two)

By the turn of the 20th century, electricity was all the rage. 

Newspapers were filled with stories about technical geniuses  like Thomas Edison, Nikola Tesla, and George Westinghouse working to bring electricity into every home.  Certainly, the prospect of new and improved labour-saving devices, all run by electricity, must have seemed miraculous enough.  So was it any wonder that more and more medical hucksters began turning out health products promising to cure every ailment under the sun using the power of electricity?  A full listing of the various "devices" being offered through newspaper ads and through mail order would likely fill a good-sized book.   Still, he leading figure of 20th century electrical quackery had to be Albert Abrams., the dean of bogus electrotherapy, and likely the most famous name ever to be associated associated with  electrotherapy.

Born in San Francisco in 1863, Abrams was the son of aa prominent banker and distinguished himself from an early age due to  his brilliant mind.   By the  time he turned nineteen, he had earned his medical doctorate from the University of Heidelberg (one of the world's foremost medical schools) and went on to become a professor of pathology at Cooper College (later absorbed into Stanford University Medical School) before he turned thirty.  Along as serving as a consultant at numerous prominent hospitals, he also authored a slate of medical books and research papers that still stand up to medical scrutiny even today.   Aside from making money with his private practice, he became independently wealthy through his marriage to two different heiresses, both of whom died young and who bequeathed their sizable estates to him.

Despite his eminent medical reputation, not to mention being a member of California's high society, Dr. Abrams' career eventually veered into a decidedly different direction by 1910.   After developing a strong professional interest in orthopedic medicine, he published two books focusing on the role of spinal treatment in curing disease.  Abrams also began training other doctors in Spondylotherapy, i.e., manipulating the spine to treat various medical conditions  and had a strong influence on the chiropractic movement.   But really, his foray into alternative medicine was just beginning...

For whatever reason, he soon gave up on spinal manipulation after developing what he called his Theory of Electronic Medical Analysis.   According to this theory, every disease had a signature electronic vibration that could be measured using specialized instruments.   This led to the invention of the dynamizer - a device developed by Abrams which became the cornerstone of his Electronic Reactions of Abrams diagnostic system (ERA for short).

In a nutshell, ERA worked by putting drops of the patient's blood onto blotting paper (the blood was first "cleansed" by treating it with a horseshoe magnet) and then placing it into the dynamizer. A wire was then attached to the forehead of a second, healthy person who stood on grounded plates (this second subject was known as a "reagent"). The reagent was stripped to the waist and placed facing westward.   When the dynamizer passed the vibrational frequency of the blood sample to the reagent, Abrams or one of his disciples tapped the reagent's abdomen. Based on the tapping, Abrams claimed to be able to pinpoint the nature and location of any disease in the patient's body.   On those few occasions when a dynamizer wasn't available,  he was able to diagnose patients by using his hands to find "rough areas" of the skin to find the affected body part that he insisted was responsible for whatever symptoms they were experiencing.

Visitors seeking out Dr. Abrams could find him at the luxurious medical office he maintained at 2151 Sacramento Street in San Francisco.  There the patient would be escorted to the reception area by Dr. Abrams' extremely androgynous assistant.  Not even bothering with gathering a medical history, the assistant simply asked each patient what they "thought" was wrong with them.  At this point, Dr. Abrams would come in and collect blood and saliva samples, not to mention a sample of the patient's handwriting, all of which would be placed in the dynamizer for a proper diagnosis.  After calling in the reagent, usually a young man stripped to the waist, the good doctor would then recite a complex series of numbers based on what he learned by tapping the young reagent's abdomen and which his assistant would dutifully record.   Once the diagnosis was made, Abrams then dismissed the reagent and proceeded with giving the patient a diagnosis and recommending the proper treatment.

Though Abrams often prescribed different medications to cure the supposed disease he had diagnosed in his patients, the treatment Abrams provided  usually involved his other great invention, the oscilloclast.  Basically  a boxlike gadget with electrodes to be placed on the patient's body, Abrams claimed that his oscilloclast could be used to cure patients by "duplicating and neutralizing the signature vibration of disease".  In extreme cases, he also rubbed his patients with assorted colored salves (the ingredients of which remained a proprietary secret).    

Though he maintained his own busy practice, Abrams hardly stopped there.  Through aggressive marketing, Abrams recruited and trained various "electronic practitioners", all of whom treated disease using machines leased from Abrams' company. Not only did Abrams collect a hefty sum from everyone undergoing his training, he also rented all necessary machines to his graduates, including their own dynamizer and oscillocast (Abrams maintained a strict legal license banning anyone else from producing them).  All of this would become a factor in later lawsuits, bit we'll get to that later.   

 It was quite a lucrative business for a while. Not only did Abrams become a favourite of osteopaths and chiropractors of the time, but he also made numerous friends in the media. His supporters included novelist Upton Sinclair and Pearson's Magazine.  A perennial showman, Abrams proudly boasted that his Electronic Medicine could cure a dizzying array of diseases, including hypertension, pneumonia, liver problems, cancer, skin problems, etc.   He even claimed that the Soviet government had called him in to consult on the treatment that the dying Lenin was receiving in Moscow and that he could diagnose patients remotely by using "electronic waves" going through telephone wires.  Not only did he insist that his machines allowed him to predict how long a patient might live by examining their vibrations, but he even used handwriting samples from people who were long dead to diagnose them as well.   For example, he used autographs from writers such as Samuel Johnson and Samuel Pepys to conclude that they had both developed syphilis prior to their deaths (he said the same of Henry Longfellow and Edgar Allan Poe).  

But that was hardly the full extent of the kind of "medical advice" that the good Dr. Abrams dispensed.   He was a rabid anti-vaccine advocate who insisted that all white people were susceptible to syphilis due to the widespread use of vaccines, something that he insisted led to white people being prone to "vibratory" medical problems (no word on what it did to other races, though).   He also insisted that all surgery was inherently dangerous and that people who have been operated on would inevitably develop cancer due to the damage that surgery did to the body's vibrations.   

Though there have always been a plethora of medical hucksters dispensing questionable advice, the sad part was that people often listened to what Albert Abrams had to say.   Not only did he have a widespread following  but his appeal as a medical showman virtually guaranteed enormous publicity whenever he made a formal pronouncement about medicine.   Even in the United Kingdom, visitors to the venerable Trafalgar Square in the heart of London could see an electric sign proclaiming the benefits of Electronic Medicine.   The outcome of one famous paternity case in San Francisco actually hinged on the evidence that Abrams provided which determined (through electronic analysis alone) that the defendant was the father of the child in question.

Whatever the actual benefits of Abrams' miracle cures, there was no disputing that they made him a very wealthy man.  Evidence of this wealth included a magnificent mansion in San Francisco, lavishly decorated with expensive furnishings and a stunning collection of Oriental art and rare books.   He also maintained an enormous wardrobe, complete with expensive jewelry which he wore during his many lecture tours abroad.    Though Abrams'  fame as a medical huckster peaked in the years immediately following World War I, he even found a way to profit from Prohibition when it began in 1920 (he claimed that his devices could duplicate the vibrational frequency of alcohol to produce an "electrical high" without the hangover).   

Still, it was only a matter of time before the backlash set in for Abrams' movement. More on that next week...

Continue to Part Two

 

The Rise and Fall of The New Messiah

Whatever else you can say about the Reverend Homer Aubrey Tomlinson, he was definitely a showman.   As for his other achievements, real and self-proclaimed, you will have to decide that for yourself...

Born in 1892 in Westfield, Indiana, he was the oldest son and presumed heir of Ambrose Jessup Tomlinson, the founder of the Church of God of Prophecy, one of the earliest Pentecostal denominations.     Despite an early career in an advertising agency, Homer joined his father's ministry in 1922, reportedly after a life-changing experience when he was "almost struck by lightning."    Along with establishing a congregation in Jamaica, New York and evangelizing across the Northeast, Homer Tomlinson also became well-known for grandiose stunts.   This included conducting the world's first parachute wedding at the New York World's Fair.   Along with Tomlinson, the bride and groom, best man, maid of honour, and four musicians all took part in the ceremony after they jumped out of a plane together.  

Possibly due to his controversial antics, Homer Tomlinson was passed over as his father's successor following Ambrose's death in 1943.   The church elders claimed to have received a message in tongues to "bring forth the younger son" and Homer was left out in the cold when his legal battle to control the church failed.   Bouncing back from this disappointment,  Homer Tomlinson went on to found his own denomination, the Church of God based in New York city.  

With his usual flair for self-publicity (did I mention he was a former ad-man?),  Homer announced that his mission was to usher in the Kingdom of God by getting church members elected to public office.   With little hope of securing a Democratic or Republican nomination as a presidential candidate,  he decided to found his own political party instead.    The platform for the Theocratic party he founded in 1952 was straightforward enough:   unification of church and state, abolishing taxation in favour of tithing, and creating two new cabinet posts, a secretary of righteousness and a secretary of the Holy Bible.   Despite running for president in 1952, 1960, 1964, and 1968, his support was never particularly strong.  Best estimates suggest that he only got 20 votes in 1964 alone. 

Despite the failure of his presidential ambitions, Homer Tomlinson moved on to more grandiose goals.   After a 1954 convention of his Church of God reportedly acclaimed him a "almost a new Messiah", he declared himself to be King of the World.    Traveling to more than 100 countries, he staged numerous coronation ceremonies to proclaim his royal status.  With his gold-plated crown, his blue silk robes, an inflatable globe that he held in his hands,  a 15-inch flag featuring the "scepter of righteousness", and a cheap folding chair which served as his surrogate "Throne of David",  Tomlinson's coronation ceremonies were certainly picturesque, if nothing else.  

Though most of these ceremonies took place at local airports, one of them was held in Moscow's Red Square to the bemusement of the Soviet government (Pravda referred to it as a publicity stunt by "an American actor").    He later claimed that his 1958 Red Square coronation "melted the Iron Curtain" and fostered peace (not that anyone else noted an easing of Cold War tensions afterward).   In the years following his first coronations as King of All The Nations of Men, he stated: "I crowned myself in every state, and at 67 colleges, and I visited 101 nations and crowned myself King in every one, including Russia in Red Square, in Moscow on July 12, 1958.  Crowds greeted me everywhere."    Homer insisted that his traveling to different countries helped usher in the Kingdom of God by preventing revolutions, encouraging world peace, and ending droughts.

As part of his grandiose plan to reshape the world, Homer planned to move the seat of the United Nations to Jerusalem where its ambassadors would be replaced by preachers.   Not only would Jerusalem become the world's centre of finance and culture, any nation that waged a war would be struck by drought and plague.   The Ten Commandments would be formally enacted into law everywhere and taxation would be replaced by tithing.   All laws everywhere would be replaced by his own "48 laws" which, among other things, banned liquor and tobacco, provided equality for all, offered forgiveness for repentant criminals, and promoted love. 

The actual size of Homer Tomlinson's congregation, all of whom he dubbed "saints", was always hard to calculate but he confidently placed it at 75,000 with 600 ministers under his control.    At other times, he assumed that all the world's Pentecostalists were under his dominion (though they likely didn't share this opinion).   As for his actual congregation, many of his followers were apparently dissatisfied with his leadership and one of them, Grady R. Kent, formed a separate denomination, Church of All Nations in 1957.  

When he wasn't travelling, Homer ran his world-wide empire from the two-story frame house in Queen's Village in New York City where his "mission" continued right up to his death in 1968.  According to an obituary in the New York Times,  he died quietly in a Manhattan hospital after a long illness.   Described as the "portly, pink-faced, cheery leader of the Church of God",  he was survived by his wife Marie whom he had met in an Aimee Temple McPherson revival tent in 1919.   Along with their two sons, he was also survived by their six grandchildren.   He is buried in Long Island cemetery. 

Though the Church of God still exists, the church website rather downplays the eccentric life of Bishop Tomlinson.   After his death, he was succeeded by Voy M. Bullen who then moved the church to Huntsville, Alabama to be closer to the centre of the movement.    While Tomlinson's church has undergone various moves and schisms since his death, the Church of God is reported to have over 70,000 followers at present but this figure is considered to be likely inflated.  

So, was Homer Tomlinson prone to grandiose delusions or was his "King of the World" campaign nothing more than an elaborate publicity stunt?   While his various "coronations" had no actual validity, they certainly kept him in the public eye.   Stirring up controversy ensured that Homer A. Tomlinson had greater name recognition than the other competing denominations, even if he picked up a reputation for being a crackpot along the way. 

And, perhaps that was enough for him.