Former Psychiatrist Sentenced for Child Sex Crimes

A Report from WNEP

Michael Kessler was sentenced to state prison Friday for trying to lure a 13-year-old boy to meet him for sex back in 2013.

“Michael, why did you tell the court you're sorry? Are you sorry you got caught? Or are you sorry you did it?" Newswatch 16 asked Kessler. He had no response.

Former psychiatrist Michael Kessler of Cresco is headed to a state prison after his sentencing in Monroe County Court. Kessler admits trying to lure a 13-year-old by to meet him and engage in sexual activity, sending him child porn and more. The boy’s mother says she’s glad Kessler will be behind bars.

"It caused a lot of anxiety not knowing and knowing that he knew where I lived and was my friend and he targeted my son,” said the boy’s mother Janet VanHorn.

That mother says she monitors her children’s phones and Facebook accounts. Two years ago she caught Kessler posing online as a 14-year old boy and turned the case over to Monroe County Detectives.

"She paid attention. She caught it early. She was on top of things and she took the right steps,” said Detective Brian Webbe of the Monroe County Detective Office.

Kessler worked at Pocono Psychiatric Associates near Marshalls Creek before his license was revoked in 2012. Prosecutors say Kessler was arrested four other times for sexual incidents in Massachusetts and New Jersey without facing jail time.

"It makes you angry because all these years he thought he was above the law. It made me want to fight even harder to make sure he faced punishment,” said VanHorn.

Now Kessler faces a year and a half to five years behind bars. And this mother of two has a message for other parents after a long tough two years waiting for justice.

“Parents need to be aware that they need to keep up on your social media you need to check your kids' phones and their Facebook. You need to be on top of it all because if you're not, Lord knows what could have happened,” said VanHorn.

How to Interpret Your Rorschach Ink Blots

I occasionally poke around the news site Reddit, and came across this discussion related to the Rorschach Ink Blots. It seems only fair to post some of the interpretation summaries so that Redditors can see how they did.

From a legal standpoint, the Rorschach test images have been in the public domain for many years in most countries, particularly those with a copyright term of up to 70 years post mortem auctoris. They have been in the public domain in Hermann Rorschach's native Switzerland since 1992 (70 years after the author's death, or 50 years after the cut-off date of 1942), according to Swiss copyright law. They are also in the public domain under United States copyright law where all works published before 1923 are considered to be in the public domain. This means that the Rorschach images may be used by anyone for any purpose. William Poundstone was, perhaps, first to make them public in his 1983 book Big Secrets, where he also described the method of administering the test

I imagine that these days a lot of people will see imagery from many of the games they have played, movies they have seen, local TV shows, popular songs, etc. The standard imagery seems to be based on psychoanalysis and original conjectures of the 1920s. It would probably be dangerous to try to derive universals, when so many variations exist between cultures and subcultures, etc in each region of planet earth.

For example, a Yankee team uniform has different meaning in New York City vs in Boston. (The two cities are known for a long standing sports rivalry)

Thus we come to this SPECIAL NOTE OF IMPORTANCE: There are different responses seen as normal depending on culture!!! Something interpreted as normal in one culture (Europe, etc) can be seen as a sign of schizophrenia in another culture (North America). Military people have different responses compared to nonmilitary. Different political parties have different responses.

For these and other reasons, I believe that the tests are NOT valid. What is given below is a combination from various sources. I regard inkblots to be no better than fortune-telling.

Origins of the Test

As a child, Hermann Rorschach was a big fan of a popular game called Klecksography, so much so that his nickname was "Kleck" (meaning "inkblot"). The idea of the game was to collect inkblot cards that could be bought from local shops and make associations and stories from the inkblots.

Rorschach went on to study psychiatry and while training, in 1918, he noticed that patients diagnosed with schizophrenia made radically different associations to the Klecksography inkblots than did normal people. He therefore developed the Rorschach test as a diagnostic tool for schizophrenia.

In 1896, a similar game was described in the United States by Ruth McEnery Stuart and Albert Bigelow Paine in a book titled Gobolinks, or Shadow-Pictures for Young and Old. The book explained how to make inkblot monsters ("gobolinks") and use them as prompts for writing imaginative verse.

The term Klecksography originates with the doctor and poet Justinus Kerner (1786-1862). Kerner also dealt with the interpretation of the images. After the color blobs were interpreted, he drew conclusions about the nature of the person. The interpretations were made using poetic rhymes.

As an artistic device and technique, the nature of the resulting images are affected to some degree by selective application and choice of the paint volume. Among the artists who experimented with Klecksography is J. Beuys.

Notes on the scientific value of the test

Rorschach never intended the inkblots to be used as a general personality test, but developed them as a tool for the diagnosis of schizophrenia. It was not until 1939 that the test was used as a projective test of personality, a use of which Rorschach had always been skeptical. Controversy about the reliability and validity of the Rorschach has been present since its conception. Today, many - probably most - psychologists think the Rorschach is nonsense.

A survey conducted on the members of The American Psychological Association Division-12, and The Indian Association of Clinical Psychologists showed concern from respondents about the limitations of the test (Wade et al 1978; Sharma, Ojha and Vagrecha, 1975; Dubey, 1982). Zubin (1965) has charged seven major failures as follows:

1. Failure to provide an objective system, free of arbitrary conventions, and showing high interscorer agreement.
2. Lack of satisfactory internal consistency, or test-retest reliability.
3. Failure to provide cogent evidence for clinical validity.
4. Failure of the individual Rorschach scoring categories to relate to diagnosis.
5. Lack of prognostic, or predictive validity with respect to the outcome of treatment, or later behavior.
6. Individual differences between groups of normal subjects.
7. Failure to find any significant relationships between Rorschach scores and intelligence, or creative ability.

Many professionals now feel that the Rorschach is outdated, inaccurate, and meaningless. For example:

"Nobody agrees how to score Rorschach responses objectively. There is nothing to show what any particular response means to the person who gives it. And, there is nothing to show what it means if a number of people give the same response. The ink blots are scientifically useless." (Bartol, 1983).

"The only thing the inkblots do reveal is the secret world of the examiner who interprets them. These doctors are probably saying more about themselves than about the subjects." (Anastasi, 1982).

What these comments seem to indicate is that the Rorschach is potentially unreliable, easily misinterpreted, and essentially not a valid means of determining what it claims to detect. For more information on the use and potential unreliability of the Rorschach test read "Misuse of Psychological Tests in Forensic Settings: Some Horrible Examples" by Ralph Underwager and Hollida Wakefield.

Notes for if you take the test

Every Rorschach image has at least one obvious representation of sexual anatomy. You're not expected to mention them all. In some interpretation schemes, mentioning more than four sex images in the ten plates is diagnostic of schizophrenia. Most Rorschach workers believe the sex images should play a part in the interpretation of responses even when not mentioned.

The trouble is, subjects who took Psychology 101 often assume they should detail every possible sex response, so allowances must be made. People have since also come up with various methods and systems to try to objectively score the tests, but a lot of it is still the basis of you think it should mean this, and they think it should mean something else. It is like dream interpretation or fortune telling.

Your best bet when taking the test is probably to stick to "seeing" healthy, friendly images. Avoid dark or violent answers ("I see a monster eating a baby's brain!"). Butterflies, people holding hands, leaves, mountains, etc are all generally considered to be "safe" responses (although nothing is guaranteed when taking the Rorschach). If you can show how a particular shape really does resemble something, go ahead and say so. If you come up with a novel or particularly interesting answer you may get "points" for your creativity. The fact is, however, that in the end it's mostly up to the examiner as to how your responses are interpreted.

Further notes and advice on taking the test from this source

Just as secret as the blots themselves are the ground rules for administering the test. There are a few things that you, as a subject, are supposed to know and a lot of things you aren't supposed to know. If you ask about something you're not supposed to know, the psychologist will give you a pat answer as prescribed in Rorschach literature. For example, if you ask if it is okay to turn the card upside down, the psychologist will respond that you may do as you like; it's up to you. The psychologist won't say that many of the cards are easier to interpret when turned; that most people do turn the cards; that he or she will make a notation with a little arrowhead every time you do turn a card; and that you lose points in the initiative department if you don't turn the cards.

You'll be handed the cards one by one in the fixed order devised by Rorschach (there are numbers on the backs of the cards for the psychologist's benefit). The first card, for instance, looks like a fox's head or a jack-o-lantern. The cards are thick, rectangular cardboard, 6 5/8 inches by 9 1/5 inches. Half of the blots are black ink on a white background. Two others are black and red ink on white, and the last three blots are multicolored. The psychologist will always put each card in your hands "right" side up.

You aren't supposed to know it, but the psychologist will write down everything you say. This includes any seemingly irrelevant questions you may have. To keep you from getting wise, the psychologist always arranges to sit to your side and a little behind you, so that you can't look at the card and the psychologist at the same time. Most subjects realize the psychologist is taking notes, of course, but they don't realize that the notes are a special shorthand record of everything said. Some psychologists use hidden tape recorders.

The psychologist will also time how long it takes you to respond, using a "tickless" watch. The psychologist will not ask you to hurry up or slow down and will not make any reference to time, but response times (in seconds) are one of the things he or she is writing in the notes.

Don't hold the card at an unusual angle. Watch how you phrase things. Say "This looks like ..." or "This could be ..." never "This is..." After all, you're supposed to realize that it is just a blot of ink on a card. By the same token, don't be too literal and say things as, "This is a blotch of black ink." Don't groan, get emotional, or make irrelevant comments. Don't put your hands on the cards to block out parts. The psychologist will watch for all of the foregoing as signs of brain damage.

If there are no right answers for the test, there are some general guidelines as to what is a normal response. You can probably see images in the inkblots proper and in the white spaces they enclose. Stick to the former. Don't be afraid of being obvious. There are several responses that almost everyone gives; mentioning these shows the psychologist you're a regular guy.

It is okay to be original if you can justify what you see in the shape, shading, or color of the blot. If you see an abalone and can point out why it looks like one, then say so. Justifiable original responses are usually judged to be indicative of creativity or intelligence.

You don't want non sequiturs, images that don't fit the blot in the judgment of the psychologist. These may be interpreted as signs of psychosis. *(Comment: Again the cultural variation is important. If your are a big fan of Star Wars or Batman or Anime, you might upset some shrinks if all of your interpretations are filled with references to these cultural icons!)*

You're expected to see more than one thing on all or most of the cards. Not being able to see anything on a card suggests neurosis. Usually the more things you can see, the better, as long as they fit the form and color of the blot. Of course, you can see things in the whole blot or in parts of it, and images may overlap. *(Comment: Note more intelligent people tend to score higher on many pathology scales, since many scales do not correct for high response rate! if a subject gives twice as many responses overall, it is more likely that some of these will seem "pathological")*

Since time is a factor, it is important to come up with good answers fast. (It looks particularly bad if you take a long time and give a dumb, inappropriate answer.)

---

Information on Interpretations

The information on Interpretations is compiled from data seen at

1. www.your3dsource.com/are-you-crazy-inkblot-test.html
2. deltabravo.net/custody/rorschach.php and
3. www.mrcoward.com/slcusd/The Rorschach Test.htm

Pics are from Wikipedia, and are in the public domain in both Switzerland (their country of origin) and the USA.

Note that these pictures are pretty small, you can click on them to embiggen (i.e., see larger).

The Wikipedia article on the test now forwards the line that there is no specific correct answer to the test, and generally fudges any interpretation.

But see the general notes below, followed by the set of pictures.

I Repeat: SPECIAL NOTE OF IMPORTANCE: There are different responses seen as normal depending on culture!!! Something interpreted as normal in one culture (Europe, etc) can be seen as a sign of schizophrenia in another culture (North America)

French subjects often identify a chameleon in card VIII, which is normally classed as an "unusual" response, as opposed to other animals like cats and dogs; in Scandinavia, "Christmas elves" (nisser) is a popular response for card II, and "musical instrument" on card VI is popular for Japanese people, and different languages will exhibit semantic differences in naming the same object (the figure of card IV is often called a troll by Scandinavians and an ogre by French people).

Many "popular" responses (those given by at least one third of the North American sample used) seem to be universally popular, as shown by samples in Europe, Japan and South America, while specifically card IX's "human" response, the crab or spider in card X and one of either the butterfly or the bat in card I appear to be characteristic of North America.

Some critics argue that the testing psychologist must also project onto the patterns. A possible example sometimes attributed to the psychologist's subjective judgement is that responses are coded (among many other things), for "Form Quality": in essence, whether the subject's response fits with how the blot actually looks. Superficially this might be considered a subjective judgment, depending on how the examiner has internalized the categories involved. One example is that the response "bra" was considered a "sex" response by male psychologists, but a "clothing" response by females psychologists. Scoring systems have be developed to get around this, but in my personal opinion they sound like reading astrology charts, elaborately complex constructions on a foundation of sand.

For these and other reasons, I believe that the tests are NOT valid. What is given below is a combination from various sources. I regard it no better than fortune-telling.

---

The Rorschach Ink Blots

The cards are numbered 1 through 10, and that is the order in which they're always given to you by the psychologist. The originals are thick, rectangular cardboard, 6 5/8 inches by 9 1/5 inches. This will make a difference on what you see, vs the smaller images on a computer screen.

Plate I

Possible Sexual Imagery: Breasts, primarily the rounded areas at the top of the image.

Good/Common Answers: "Bat, butterfly, female figure (in the centre), moth"

You may be a little paranoid if you see: "Mask, animal face, jack o lantern"

Bad Answer: "Anything insulting about the female figure (it is an indicator of your own body image)"

The first blot is easy. How fast you answer is taken as an indication of how well you cope with new situations. The best reaction is to give one of the most common responses immediately.

A bad response is any that says something untoward about the central female figure. "She" is often judged to be a projection of your own self-image. Avoid the obvious comment that the figure has two breasts but no head.

If you don't give more than one answer for Plate I, many psychologists will drop a hint -- tell you to look closer.

Plate II

Possible Sexual Imagery: Male sex organ at top center or, in some cases, a vagina (at the center near the bottom).

You should see this image as: "Two human-like forms (females or clowns) If you don't it is an indicator that you have trouble relating to people."

Other Good/Common Answers: "Butterfly, cave entrance"

It is important to see this blot as two human figures usually females or clowns.

If you don't, it's seen as a sign that you have trouble relating to people. You may give other responses as well, such as cave entrance (the triangular white space between the two figures) and butterfly (the red "vagina," bottom center).

Should you mention the penis and vagina? Not necessarily. You may not say that the lower red area looks like a vagina, but psychologists assume that what you do say will show how you feel about women. Nix on "crab"; stick with "butterfly."

Plate III

Possible Sexual Imagery: Male sex organs and female breasts, right about where you would expect to find them.

This is the blot that allegedly can determine sexual preference.

A heterosexual response would be: "Seeing two male figures"

A homosexual response would be: "Seeing two androgynous (remember "Pat" from SNL?) or female figures."

Most people see the two human figures. Both figures have prominent "breasts" and an equally prominent "penis." If you don't volunteer the gender of the figures, you'll be asked to specify it.

This blot has been the subject of much debate, so it's best to take your answer's meaning with a grain of salt. Does it work? Not really

The splotches of red ink are usually perceived separately. Common responses are "bow-tie" or "ribbon" (inner red area) and a stomach and esophagus (outer red areas).

Plate IV

Plate IV is the "father card." At first glance it is a difficult blot to see as a single image. The two lower corners are often described as shoes or boots. This card may also be seen as viewing a person from below or a male figure with an enormous sex organ.

The "boots" are fairly conspicuous; between them is the apparent head of a dog or Chinese dragon. Many subjects see the blot as an animal skin. After a few seconds, though, most can see it as a standing figure seen from below.

The boots become the feet, enlarged because of the unusual perspective. The arms and head, at the top, are smaller. Common descriptions are bear, gorilla, or man in a heavy coat. Rorschach theorists equate your description of the figure with your perception of your father or male authority figures.

Possible Sexual Imagery: A pair of male sex organs, typically seen at the top of the image. Some subjects may instead visualize a vagina in the upper center of the blot.

Good/Common Answers: "A standing figure (man, bear, gorilla)"

A Bad Answer Would Be: "To describe the figure as menacing in any way, i.e. a monster, or attacking gorilla, as this blot indentifies with your perception of your father, or authority figures."

Plate V

Possible Sexual Imagery: A pair of male sex organs at the very top of the inkblot.

Good/Common "Answers: Bat, Butterfly"

Bad Answers: "Seeing the butterfly antennae as scissors or any cutting device is an indicator of a castration complex. Schizophrenics occasionally see moving people in this image. Seeing crocodile heads on the ends of the bat's wings indicates hostility."

Rorschach himself thought this was the easiest blot to interpret. It is a bat or a butterfly, period. You don't want to mention anything else.

Many psychologists take particular note of the number of responses given to this plate. If you mention more images here than in either Plate IV or VI, it is suggestive of schizophrenia.

Plate VI

Possible Sexual Imagery: The head of the male sex organ (the portion at the top of the card) or alternately, a female sex organ (middle and bottom part of the card).

Common Answers: "animal hide, boat, submarine, mushroom cloud, men with long noses and goatees. Apparently this blot reveals subconscious attitudes about sexuality."

Occasionally described as a foreshortened view of a person with their arms outstretched.

Basically, the secret of this plate is to turn it. A good response is to say it looks like an animal hide (about the only reasonable response when held right side up), then turn it on its side and say it looks like a boat or surfaced submarine with reflection, and then turn it upside down and say it looks like a mushroom cloud, a pair of theater masks, or caricatures of men with long noses and goatees.

Plate VII

Possible Sexual Imagery: The female sex organs (seen at the bottom of the card where the figures join.

Good/Common Answers: "Two Girls, or Women"

Bad Answers: "Insulting descriptions of the two figures i.e. gossips, girls fighting, witches.

This card has a rough "V" shape sometimes described as faces pointing towards one another, "bunny ears", or similar visualizations.

This blot is supposed to reveal how you really feel about your mother. Virtually everyone sees two girls or women. Deprecating descriptions of the figures~ "witches," "gossips," "girls fighting," "spinsters" indicate poor maternal relations. Seeing the blot as thunderclouds instead of female figures suggests anxiety to some psychologists; seeing it as a walnut kernel may mean a vulvar fixation.

There is an entirely different side to this blot, but you're not supposed to see it. The white space between the girls or women can be interpreted as an oil lamp or similar object. It is claimed that only schizophrenics usually see the lamp.

Plate VIII

A very colorful card with blue, orange, pink, and gray ink. A roughly diamond-shaped image with lots of places to see things

Possible Sexual Imagery: Female sex organs, usually seen at the bottom of the card.

Good/Common Answers: "Four legged animals such as lions, pigs, bears, etc. on the sides. Other common responses are tree, butterfly, rib cage, christmas tree."

Bad/Answers: "Not seeing the four legged animals can indicate that you are mentally defective"

It is important that you see the four-legged animals- lions, pigs, bears, etc. -on the sides of the blot. They're one of the most common responses on the test, and you're assumed to be a mental defective if you don't see them. Other good responses are tree (gray triangle at top), butterfly (pink and orange area at bottom), and rib cage or anatomy chart (skeletal pattern in center between blue rectangles and gray triangles). The entire configuration can be seen as a heraldic design (good answer) or a Christmas tree with ornaments (reaching).

Children tend to like this blot and say a lot about it-the bright colors and animal shapes make it more interesting than your basic penis/vagina number (II, IV, or VI).

Plate IX

Another colorful card, this time with orange, pink, and green inks. This one is tough to visualize anything specific in; most test subjects struggle to find something to "see" in it.

Possible Sexual Imagery: Female sex organs, usually seen at the bottom of the card.

Good/Common Answers: "Fire, smoke, explosion, map, anatomy, flower."

Bad Answers: "Mushroom cloud on the centre line at top can indicate paranoia. Monsters or men fighting can indicate poor social development."

If you're going to throw up your hands (figuratively!!!) and plead a mental block, this is the place to do it. The colors clash, apparently by Rorschach's design.

If you turn the card ninety degrees, you can make out a man's head in the pink areas at bottom. (The man is identified as Mark Twain, Santa Claus, or Teddy Roosevelt.)

As with Plate V, the psychologist may be counting the number of responses you give to this blot for comparison with the preceding and succeeding blots. You want to give fewer responses to this blot.

Plate X

This is the last Rorschach card and certainly the most colorful, consisting of blue, gray, pink, green, orange and yellow inks. It's a very complex mish-mash of shapes with lots of "activity" and plenty of places to "see" things.

Possible Sexual Imagery: Male sex organs at the top center of the card.

Good/Common Answers: "Sea life, or a view through a microscope. Also common: spiders, crabs, caterpillars, rabbit's head"

Bad Answers: "Two faces at top centre blowing bubbles, or smoking pipes can indicate an oral fixation"

The unspoken purpose of this last blot is to test your organizational ability. Plate X is full of colorful odds and ends easy to identify---blue spiders, gray crabs, paired orange maple seeds, green caterpillars, a light-green rabbit's head, yellow and orange fried eggs--and you're expected to list them.

But the psychologist will also be looking for a comprehensive answer, something that shows you grok the whole Gestalt. There are two good holistic answers: sea life and a view through a microscope.

Some subjects see two reddish faces at top center, separated by the orange maple key. If you describe them as blowing bubbles or smoking pipes, it may be interpreted as evidence of an oral fixation. Seeing the gray "testes" and "penis" as two animals eating a stick or tree indicates castration anxiety.

---

Welcome to Chemical Imbalance.org

As posted as an introduction on Chemical Imbalance.org

This website provides scholarly information on mental health topics of interest to helping professionals, as well as to the general public. We focus primarily on two controversial areas in the field of mental health. First, we examine the popular notion that depression and anxiety are caused by an imbalance of neurotransmitters which is corrected by antidepressant medication. Second, we discuss the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on psychiatric research. We also cover related topics, such as consumer advertising of psychiatric medications, clinical trial research, and media coverage of these issues.

The information on this site is for educational purposes and does not constitute medical advice. If you take psychiatric medications, please be aware that stopping them suddenly can be dangerous. Please consult with your prescribing physician regarding all treatment decisions.

We welcome them to the discussion.

Internet Addiction, Gaming, Porn, And Chat As The Mental Illnesses of the Future

A psychologist has an appropriately cynical view on the new world of Internet Addiction

Where are they now? Psychologist Richard Boylan

This is not an April Fools post, although it should be.

Dr. Richard Boylan is a former California psychologist who had his state psychology license revoked back in 1995 over allegations of improper sexual interaction with female patients in his hot tub (hydro 'therapy'?). He still uses the title doctor, even though he is not legally licensed for mental therapy anymore.

Boylan, Richard J., Ph.D. (PSY 10047)
Sacramento, CA
Interim Suspension Order issued June 3, 1994 - no practice. Partial stay granted July 21, 1994 - may treat male patients only.

Boylan, Richard J., Ph.D. (PSY 10047)
Sacramento, CA
B&P Code §2960(j). Gross negligence in the practice of psychology. Decision effective August 4, 1995. License revoked.

When we last checked in on the revoked Doctor, we found him peddling various oddities, such as helping your Space Alien Child adapt to life on Earth.

Never fear, he now assures us with a straight face

It is my pleasure and joy to announce that the 12 environmental scientists from the planet Altimar have now arrived on Earth.

Oh Joy ....

SEE: Full And Detailed Transcript of California Board of Psychology revoking Boylan's license to practice in Nov 1996 (via Archive.org)

See also this link

Buyer Beware.

Some Psychiatrists Addicted To Diagnosing Internet Addiction Syndrome

With a shout out to the TechDirt weblog who has this short item on Shrinks and 'Internet Addiciton Syndrome

from the must-be-good-for-business dept

Over the past few years, we've seen so many "calls" to label the use of certain technologies as "addictions" that we've noticed something of a... well... addiction by some to call for new technology addictions. Among the long, long list of possible addictions has been email addiction, web addiction, online porn addiction, video game addiction, internet addiction, and mobile phones or other gadget addictions. Almost every time, the call for addiction comes from a psychologist or psychiatrist trying to build up a reputation for treating such "addictions." It must be good for business (and perhaps a lot less harrowing than treating some other types of addictions).

So it shouldn't come as any surprise to see a psychiatrist now calling for internet addiction to become an officially classified addiction in the next version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (basically the official rulebook for such things). Of course, there are a few problems, including the fact that research has shown little evidence that the internet is really addictive, and almost every story of internet addiction really tends to be about deeper issues that resulted in someone seeking an outlet on the internet (from depression, bad family situations, alcoholism, etc.). Focusing on the "internet" part tends to have people trying to treat a symptom, not the disease. Hopefully, this new push will follow the same path as the one last year to have video games declared an addiction too. It didn't take long for that idea to get shot down.

The Century of the Self - A BBC Documentary

A BBC Documentary on Google Video, describing how those in power have used Freud's theories to try and control the dangerous crowd in an age of mass democracy. An interesting view into the minds of folks in government who look to sell us their agenda.

More specifically it is about the rise of the Public Relations industry, and the Role of Edward Bernaise (a nephew of Sigmund Freud) in the creation and development of this field, especially in the realm of politics.

This probably would not air in the USA, for a variety of reasons, including much footage that dates back to the early Clinton and Blair years. Has an odd conservative twist to it.

Each part is about 1 hour long.

Part 1 - Happiness Machines



Part 2 - The Engineering of Consent



Part 3 - There is Policeman Inside all our Heads He Must Be Destroyed



Part 4 - Eight People Sipping Wine in Kettering (Engineering politics)



There is more info here, at the Information Clearing House website.

Sigmund Freud introduced the idea that humans were in a struggle with their animalistic natures and if this goes unchecked then people will run around naked destroying things and society will fall apart. He apparently had very little confidence in humans.

This idea was widely accepted especially in the upper classes thus confirming of the fear that Democracy left unchecked could destroy their society. If the people could not be trusted to control their basic animalistic nature, then how would they know how to vote?

In steps Freud’s nephew Edward Bernaise. Propaganda during war was nothing new, but Bernaise saw an opportunity to use the unconscious desires of humans to manipulate the masses in times of peace also. Bernaise believed that by fulfilling the unconscious desires of people would change a potentially unruly population into a controlled docile one.

Bernaise invented the much used term “public relations,” and used it to turn the population of the United States into consumers. Before Bernaise worked his magic, the American population only bought goods according to their needs. It was practically unheard of to buy something for any other reason.

Bernaise made it acceptable to make a purchase based on desires.

Using Hollywood through product placement, and the media, he changed the population into an easily placated self-absorbed group where before they were actively participating. Over the years, this has changed Democracy from a function of the entire society into less than a passing diversion. It is not by accident that here in the United States we have perhaps a lower voter turnout than anywhere else in the world.

Bernaise put his methodology to the test in many areas. Bernaise, being approached by the tobacco company, effectively double their customers with one wave of his wand. He asked had a few women light up after a march in front of the press and in a movie or two prominent actresses were instructed to smoke and almost overnight erased the stigma of women smoking. After this victory and his ideas tested and proven, Bernaise was ready to move onto bigger things. He was involved in all sorts of advertising and promotion from the automobile industry to governmental agencies that needed public support.

Although there have been many attempts to oppose these methods as unethical, they have gone largely unopposed. As long as industry is making money and politicians are passing the laws they are pushing for the industry, they will continue to go unopposed.

This is pure propaganda and is intended to be a psychological attack at the essence of humanity to evoke a non-response to governmental malfeasance and other societal issues as well as to evoke a gluttonous consumer based society. If that seems to sum up much of how the world seems to consider most Americans, at least we can now tell that it is not by accident.

The methods had been used for years to promote the hard to sell policies of the government, but starting with Clinton and Blair a new use was found. Polls were taken to find out what the voter desired most. These finding were easily turned into speeches and in the cases of Clinton and Blair, won elections.

Blair took it one step farther and used it to set policy while Clinton simply did what he and his advisors thought was best after the election was won. Blair took polls and no one seemed concerned about the rail system in Britain, so little funding was appropriated until trains began derailing and killing people. Politicians soon learned that people’s concerns were not always in line with their needs.

Of course if they had studied Bernaise and the methodology of the polls, they would have known this. Now, politicians use the polls to write their speeches and continue to do what they feel is best regardless of what they say in the speeches.

This is why Bush talks about peace and wages war and all the other double speak that persists, to placate to the desires and not the needs of society which effectively placates the masses.

One would think that the population would eventually catch on to this trick, and perhaps some have, but the public relations business is stronger and more centralized than ever. Just a few short years ago, there were over 50 media stations broadcasting news to Americans. Now there are only five. This number could go lower soon, but at this point the company heads are all of one voice pounding out PR about whatever they want us to think we want.

The journalism schools in the U.S. are very few and most have switched over to public relations. Journalists will soon go the way of the dinosaur if something does not change this horrible trend.

Psychologist's Book Slammed on Amazon After Fox News Debacle

As Reported on Gaming Daily

Syndicated radio talk-show host and psychologist Cooper Lawrence is now getting a taste of the gaming and Internet community following her appearance on Fox News in which she criticized Mass Effect (a game she never played) and appeared to talk in an almost condescending tone to GameTrailers' Geoff Keighley (who was barely given the time of day to defend the game).

In the past few days Lawrence's book The Cult of Perfection: Making Peace with Your Inner Overachiever has been slammed with negative reviews on Amazon.com as backlash for her comments on Mass Effect. As of press time, out of 565 reviews 503 are 1-star and 48 are 2-star. Only 12 people have rated her book with a 5-star review.

Moreover, the tags customers associated with the product were telling: ignorant (350), hypocrisy (286), garbage (284), hypocrite (267), junk (264), hack (254), terrible (231), bigot (217), bigoted (197), bias (168).

Yesterday Electronic Arts (owner of Mass Effect developer BioWare) sent a letter to Fox News requesting a correction.

Psychiatrist as marketing drone, advocates more 'Off Label' use of prescriptions

Wasn't there a new law passed to address the long term aspects of drug safety. Didn't we recent read about the perils of drug companies encouraging off label uses of drugs for a variety of uses? With a fine of over half a TRILLION (with a T) dollars? Yet here we have a psychiatrist claiming that not only does this not really happen, but that we need more of it. Sounds like a marketing drone to me.

Overly restrictive intellectual property laws devalue the "repurposing" of existing medications for new uses, slowing their availability as life-saving treatments, a Portland researcher contends.

S. Paul Berger, M.D., assistant professor of psychiatry and behavioral neuroscience in the Oregon Health & Science University School of Medicine and the Portland Veterans Affairs Medical Center, writes in a letter appearing in the current issue of the journal Nature that "economics and patent laws" keep pharmaceutical companies from finding new uses for old drugs.

Instead, drug companies "reinvent the wheel" by spending millions of dollars to develop new drugs for diseases that existing drugs have already been shown to be effective against in off-label uses, Berger believes. As a result, new drugs take years to reach consumers who need them as they undergo lengthy testing in clinical trials required by the Food and Drug Administration, and the development costs are passed on to consumers.

[...]

Introducing Anti-Government Phobia

Another Satirical Disease that might be coming to a shrink near you. (note the author's name Ivor E. Tower = Ivory Tower) As seen here:

This study conclusively demonstrates that unfounded fear of government is a recognizable mental illness, closely related to paranoid schizophrenia. Anti-Government Phobia (AGP) differs from most mental illnesses, however, in that it is highly infectious and has an acute onset. [...]

Having the patient committed to a qualified mental health institution is the best option for family and loved ones. For this reason, all psychiatrists and family physicians should be provided with educational materials which will help them recognize the various symptoms and warning signs accompanying onset. Since comparatively little is known about Anti-Government Phobia at the present time, a government-funded health commission should be set up to oversee, and help focus, future research.

Full satire at the link

Several drug companies have now been caught deleting important information from Wikipedia, in order to downplay the risk of their drugs

Wikipedia has developed a reputation as a semi-reliable onlineencyclopedia, and in general, it is not too bad with non-controversial material. But since anyone can edit Wikipedia, some controversial subjects have been subject to continual re-edits. And some companies have been acting to remove items that would be bad PR for the company, even if true. From the Brand Week NRX weblog

The first drug company caught messing with the Wikipedia was AstraZeneca. References to claims that Seroquel allegedly made teenagers “more likely to think about harming or killing themselves” were deleted by a user of a computer registered to the drug company, according to Times.

According to Patients not Patents, now it is Abbott Laboratories who've been caught doing the same thing. The group alleges that "employees of Abbott Laboratories have been altering entries to Wikipedia, the popular online encyclopedia, to eliminate information questioning the safety of its top-selling drugs."

The tool used to catch these corporate erasers is the WikiScanner, which was developed by Virgil Griffith, a researcher at the California Institute of Technology, and it reveals changes to the online encyclopaedia by linking edits back to the computers from which they were done, using each computer’s unique IP address. The scanner has wreaked havoc in news media, politics and among corporations caught redhanded "improving" articles.

Patients not Patents found that in July of 2007, a computer at Abbott Laboratories’ Chicago office was used to delete a reference to a Mayo Clinic study that revealed that patients taking the arthritis drug Humira faced triple the risk of developing certain kinds of cancers and twice the risk of developing serious infections. The study was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2006.

The same computer was used to remove articles describing public interest groups’ attempt to have Abbott’s weight-loss drug Meridia banned after the drug was found to increase the risk of heart attack and stroke in some patients.

The site’s editors restored the deleted information, but Patients not Patents claim that Abbott’s activities illustrate drug companies’ eagerness to suppress safety concerns.

Jeffrey Light, Executive Director of the Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group said, “The argument that drug companies can be trusted to provide adequate safety information on their own products has been used by the pharmaceutical industry to fight against government regulation of consumer advertising. Clearly such trust is misplaced. As Abbott’s actions have demonstrated, drug companies will attempt to hide unfavorable safety information when they think nobody is watching.”

Ex mental health worker charged in massive child sex case

From the Belfast Telegraph

This is the former Ulster charity worker accused of storing more than 23,000 images of child sex abuse on his computer.

Londonderry man John Llewelyn James (39) is now at the centre of one of the biggest alleged cases of child pornography ever uncovered in Northern Ireland.

The 39-year-old, from Garvagh Road in the city, was allegedly found to be in possession of 23,642 indecent images of children. Some of the material was classed as level five - the most serious level.

A court has refused him bail after police said he admitted having a " strong sexual interest in children".

James was a part-time worker with the North West Forum for people with disabilities when indecent images were allegedly found on his work computer in March 2006.

Police were informed and seized the computer along with his laptop.

He had previously worked with a mental health charity which trained GPs and emergency staff in Derry on how to deal with mentally ill patients.

At a recent bail hearing in the High Court the judge was told that James admitted he had accessed the images via the internet at work and at home.

He also admitted to having a sexual interest in children aged six to 14 and police said they feared he posed a significant risk to children.

High Court Judge Mr Justice Gillen refused bail saying that the protection of vulnerable children was one of the highest priorities invested in the courts.

When James first appeared in court charged with making and possessing indecent images of children reporting restrictions were enforced to prevent him from being named over fears for his safety. However, the restrictions were lifted in the High Court last week.

During his first court appearance, his defence solicitor Charles Kane said that James was willing to undergo therapy.

He raised concerns that his client might self-harm and added that there was no risk of James reoffending if he had no access to the internet.

Charging him with the offences at Londonderry Magistrate's Court in April, resident magistrate Mr Barney McElholm described child pornography as "a cancer" in society and said there does not appear to be "any way to successfully treat people with paedophile tendencies".

He added: "There would not be the amounts of money to be made by criminal elements if it was not for people willing to download, view and pay for [child pornography]. This cancer in our society has to be tackled at every level."

Online pharmacies a growing source of illegal drugs

From this report

People addicted to prescription drugs are increasingly avoiding doctors and hospitals to get their supply.

Instead, they're relying on the Internet.

Drug shipments from illegal online pharmacies were once so frequent in Appalachia that delivery companies had to add trucks to their routes.

Police have cracked down on such deliveries, but are still confronted by a booming global network of so-called rogue pharmacies operating online.

A recent study by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University found hundreds of Web sites illegally dispensing drugs like Vicodin and Xanax without prescriptions.

All that's required in most cases is a credit card.

The federal Drug Enforcement Administration says such pharmacies are not only illegal, but dangerous.

Congress is considering legislation that would stiffen penalties for illegal online prescription drug sales.

Ze Zmerican Zsychiatric Azzoziation

I came across this item here, and have the permission of the author to repost it. It is not my writing, but I find it amusing

Ze Zmerican Zsychiatric Azzoziation

Captain Drugs, Mr. Feelgood, touchy feely, Crapco, it slices, it dices... One size fits all, the ultimate snake oil, no prior test required, no medical history need be perused. submerge your problems in a chemical sea of tranquility. Is everybody happy? You betcha, money is made. No problem too big, no problem too small. The UNIVERSAL CURE! And you thought snake oil salesmen had it rough, and who brings you this wonderful panacea?

Ze Zmerican Zsychiatric Azzoziation.

Governments and companies will love this.

Any complaints, graft, corruption, nepotism... no problem... and you thought the old Soviet Union had the plan for political dissidents...

We now use their latest methods!

Hey kids, having a hard time dealing with the real world of medical school? Had a screwed up childhood? Want an easy out, no problem, you have a future making the really big bucks deciding, I mean deriding people's futures. Help your government today! If you can just say yes to putting away people wronged by:

Incompetent Bureaucrats...
Graft...
Corruption...
Nepotism...
Sexual Harassment...

You fill in the blank...

We even have a "bird-dog" program for public employees in major cities, referred to as an "Employee Assistance Program" to help these people "right out". A never ending supply of the disgruntled for you to "help". Who cares if they are right?

The hell with fixing the system, let's make money. Besides, there are dozens more behind that person, who could be in your office right now making you money; and if they don't like it, they are nuts anyway.

After all, they are guilty. As one bureaucrat was overheard saying, after this monster had threatened a man, his wife and his 4 year old with death, "... because we accuse you, you are guilty...". If you get one that isn't crazy, no problem, we got the drugs to get them there.

Guaranteed repeat business, you get the business, they get the business, the drug companies (pay off those research and payola dollars for moneymaking non-natural patentable toxic remedies) get the business, the FDA gets the business, and with the drugs everyone is happy.

See that patient over there? Just look at that stupor! and he used to cause trouble.

No more trouble there, and think of the money he generates for your cash-flow. Yep, just think of him, not as a patient, but rather, just one more annuity for your bank account, and you really didn't want to have to solve or look at his problems in real depth, of course not.

Who wants to listen to that?

That takes time and that is expensive, that would loose money! Next!

A couple of pills and voila, chemical lobotomy, and the employer is happy too. "God" bless you, you kept down costs, just think of the smile on the accountant's faces.

Who cares if you really didn't help him or if you prolonged natural life crises from months to years?

Can you say cash flow? You contributed to the economy! Don't bother your little head with the path of broken lives you leave behind you, you defended the corrupt from the weak, and you can even say you helped.

You do believe it, don't you? Of course you do, you want to, don't you, or should I say you have to, to keep going ... It's ok, don't look to close, that's good!

Yep, a truly burgeoning field with a future.

(Not offered in areas where morality still applies. Coming to a hospital or clinic near you.)

(This advertisement not paid for by Ze Zmerican Zychiatric Azzoziation.)

P.S. I have a fixzation on zzzzz'z, znore...