Categories
All in the Mind

Why Procreate?

While some of us may seem very self-absorbed thanks to generations of social atomisation and disconnection from our palaeolithic roots, most of us are wired to adore new life. All but the most callous of us have a soft spot for babies or at least are wise and socially responsible enough to give them special dispensation as future citizens for the survival of our community and ultimately of our species, but the world hardly lacks young people and hundreds of millions roam the streets destitute or laze at home with few employment prospects, largely because we have become entirely reliant on big business and big government. Now some want to depend on big biotech (an offshoot of big pharma) to let them procreate when they discover they can't have babies naturally. Based on a narrow interpretation of human rights, this sounds fine. Why should we all not be entitled to have children of our own and why should we restrict such rights to fertile young heterosexual couples?

Historically only the fittest survived. We gave each new member of our community a chance, but when disease or other calamities struck, we just accepted our fate and wished others would survive in their memory. As a result for millennia the global population grew only very gradually with plenty of regional fluctuations, periods of relative prosperity and growth followed by periods of disease, famine and warfare. Pre-agrarian communities needed large areas of bountiful terrain, usually in coastal areas or near rivers, and had to keep their numbers in check. While many hunter-gatherer communities survived into the modern area, with some remote tribes surviving into the 20th century, they were in a matter of generations either outnumbered or assimilated into agrarian societies, who developed the technology to cultivate crops, rear livestock, irrigate and, more important, store surpluses for later re-use. This enabled the specialisation of labour and the growth of non-productive administrative class, making us increasingly interdependent. While in feudal times many still had direct contact with the means of food production, most had to hand over a large proportion of their yield in return for a plot of land. With the advent of the industrial revolution, we could no longer simply draw on nature's bounty, but had to compete for control over storable and stealable resources produced by others by selling our labour. In the post-modern era we sell not so much our labour, as ourselves, for money that we can exchange for the material goods we either need or simply desire. Now, children have become not just another great marketing opportunity for our growth-obsessed business leaders, but also a commodity in and of themselves.

Recent reports in the mainstream media have lamented the refusal of some NHS trusts to provide IVF. Let us set the record straight. In-vitro fertilisation is a relatively new technology, unavailable to previous generations, and not only is it extremely expensive, it is statistically more likely to lead to premature births, birth defects and multiple births at a time when we are struggling to feed the world's 6.9 billion human beings. I know, for some socially responsible women, it must be distressing to see other socially irresponsible women produce offspring with great ease with little thought as to how they will provide for them. However, a little intellectual honesty would be welcome. Infertility has become an issue because many women postpone motherhood to pursue their career or because they wish to start a new family with their new partner. Some men also want to spread their genes with their new partner. With so many children born to parents unable to care for them, why can't infertile couples adopt?

Let's briefly consider the huge changes in family life and social welfare over the last century. Once considered a safety net enabling the downtrodden to find their feet again and ensuring all children had a fair start in life, the UK's benefits system has encouraged the breakup of families through generous handouts to single parents and teenage mothers, attracted widespread abuse of incapacity allowances and created a general culture of entitlement among the descendants of the country's once proud working class. Official unemployment figures mask the reality that over 5 million more people of working age are not in employment, education or training and neither are they full time housewives, so effectively true unemployment stands at 7.5 million. Technological advances have not only reduced infant mortality, but also automated many tedious domestic chores and manual jobs that occupy vast swatches of working classes. Housewives were not unemployed, but a crucial part of a family team, replaced now by myriad teachers, social workers, child psychologists and carers. Neither were chimney sweeps or cobblers useless, they performed essential duties, now often assigned to recent immigrants. The drive to get women into work has led millions to swap the tyranny of housework for the tyranny of low-paid office, retail and care work. Only a privileged minority of women pursue genuinely rewarding and intellectually stimulating careers, most make do with dead-end jobs in supermarkets or care homes, often juggling paid employment with their parental duties. As a result instead women have traded economic dependence on their husbands for subjugation to state handouts or large corporations. Back in the 70s and 80s many hoped to see a new era of leisure with the average working week reduced to 30 or maybe just 20 hours and extended maternal and paternal leave. However, 30 years of neoliberal policies, heightened competition in the labour market and rampant consumerism, mean without benefits and on typical salaries, both parents have to work 40 hours a week, often with long commutes of 2-3 hours a day, or rely on state handouts. The largest portion of a typical family's expenses go on mortgages or rent and since 1997 house prices in the South East of England have tripled, way in excess of the official retail inflation rate. To qualify for the latter a parent has to claim to have no other source of income (e.g. a spouse's salary). The biggest scam of all is housing benefit, effectively subsidising ripoff landlords and enabling the workshy to afford accommodation in areas of London. Hence the birth rate in the UK is highest in three groups:

  1. Ethnic minorities with a religious and/or cultural commitment to large families, willing to work harder, proactively seek all welfare benefits and sacrifice luxuries for the proliferation of their community.
  2. Workless underclasses who see children as a means of obtaining benefits.
  3. Upper middle classes who can easily survive on one salary and/or employ a childminder.

In the middle are the masses of honest hardworking adults on modest salaries, who simply cannot afford to have more than 1 or 2 children, unless they split up and have children with their new partners, hence the growing demand for IVF. Many educated adults delay having children until they have established a stable relationship and pursued a career, by which time one may have become infertile, but rather than adopt one of the millions of unwanted children born to mothers unable to provide the love and attention all children need, they succumb to biological emotions to further their own kind. Thus IVF is often marketed as means of boosting a woman's self-esteem. The availability of IVF creates an emotional need that could otherwise be met by adopting, fostering or simply looking after nieces, nephews or neighbours' children, but in an increasingly atomised and fearful society we dare not trust anyone else with our children. Indeed the authorities don't trust us to raise children unless we collaborate with a whole bunch of busy-body supervisors (community nurses, social workers, teachers) etc.. Being able to bring up your children as you see fit has now become a luxury reserved for the wealthy and residents of isolated rural communities, for only these groups can afford options such as private education, homeschooling or have access to small rural schools. Everyone else's children are sent to mainstream schools, exposed to thousands of hours of media promoting high-consumption fun culture and, should their behaviour or attitude raise suspicion, referred to child psychiatrists (often mistakenly renamed psychologists) and labelled with ADHD, OCD, depression or autism spectrum disorders or simply given anti-social behaviour orders. In short even if you do have biological children, they are not really yours as the corporate establishment through its media and education systems guides their development. Recently primary school teachers have become concerned that children start school without being toilet-trained first ( see Head Threatens to Ban Pupils Who Are Not Potty-Trained). Some parents responded by claiming toilet training was the responsibility of social care workers. Why have children at all if all you can do is let the state and big business bring them up? If you want loving offspring who respect you and may care for you when you grow old, you need to spread your love and values, not your genes.

Categories
All in the Mind

On The Laws of Probability

Every day we experience hundreds of near misses, accidents waiting to happen unless we take the right precautions and pay constant attention to all potential dangers. Yet the human brain can only actively focus on one event at a time, switching our attention to monitor the progress of other concomitant events. Some of us can switch between events better than others, but then some key tasks require much more intense concentration. The slightest momentary distraction can have unplanned consequences, like forgetting to close upstairs windows before leaving the house, leaving a frying pan on a stove unattended or as happened to me the other failing to check my rucksack still lay neatly between my feet in a crowded pub in central London during a recent Drupal meetup. Not only was my rucksack discretely lifted, but it contained my trusty laptop and my passport, renewed only last October. CCTV footage was unavailable as cameras had been turned off the previous day, Easter Monday. As I don't own a car or a house, this was pretty much my most valuable possession, without which I can't work as a Web software developer. Little did the thief know how important this object was to me personally and while others can tactfully express their commiseration, the pain remains. I had to bite the bullet, metaphorically speaking, and enact plan B. Get a new laptop and restore it from scratch. Luckily Apple's OS X's Time Machine came to the rescue. I was minded to buy a cheaper alternative, but to get up and running and avoid missing another day's work, I had to choose the more expensive route using funds I had set aside for something else. I hope someday soon, we can do all our work from a tablet with mission-critical data backed up remotely as envisaged by Google's up and coming Chrome OS, but alas network coverage cannot be guaranteed. On many other occasions, I had left my laptop temporarily vulnerable to smart thieves, in offices and even in bars while someone else kept a watchful eye, yet it had never happened. I had assumed among colleagues and friends, I would be safe. The conclusion is simple. If something can go wrong in theory, sooner or later it will go wrong. That's the lesson Japanese nuclear engineers had to learn in Fukushima. The chances of getting my MacBook back are exceedingly remote. Lies, damned lies and crime statistics. While the occurrence of burglaries has decreased mainly due to better surveillance technology, thieves have simply adopted new techniques. Smartphones and laptops are easy to carry away and sell. Many thefts simply go unreported, because victims know there is little the police can do. How can anyone seriously believe the oft-repeated claims about declining crime rates? In just 5 years in London, I've witnessed one murder and two burglaries first-hand.

Categories
All in the Mind Power Dynamics

Ubiquitous Assault on the Senses

How will future generations view early 21st century Britain? An age of enlightenment that allowed more women than ever to work, redefined loud arguments as domestic violence, exposed childhood sexual abuse and extended the benefits of prosperity to more people than ever. This is the spin of the neo-liberal media, i.e. you've never had it so good or experienced such a wonderfully fair and harmonious society. Surely you don't want to return to the dark ages when parents routinely spanked their children at the slightest hint of disobedience and women were chained to the proverbial kitchen sink? In affluent communities violence has been confined mainly to virtual reality, blasted through speakers in the form of death metal and rap, projected onto mega-screens and translated into a captivating and highly addictive games. We are not just separated from the harsh realities of nature as our forebears knew it, but shielded from the consequences of violent ideation, now a dominant form of entertainment. This genre of entertainment may be likened to less technologically advanced spectacles such as gladiatorial fights in ancient Rome, or more recently boxing, wrestling or fencing, but over the last 20 years we have witnessed the gradual encroachment of war themes into our leisure life It's no longer just war movies, thrillers and video nasties occupying little more than one or two hours a week, but over 80% of the most addictive video games, paintball, Laser Quest and steady repetitive raucous beats and metallic dins accompanying electronic sound marketed as music and played in locales as diverse as sports centres, shopping malls and even offices. Indeed some young people find it hard to concentrate without a continuous blur of discordant noise at work. So paradoxically one may not shout at one's spouse for fear of being charged with domestic abuse, but one may play gangster rap at full volume while washing the car. If one dares suggest first-person shooters trivialise violence, one is soon ridiculed as reactionary and wait for it, against progress. Dare one suggest rap triggers feelings of hatred and intolerance, one is routinely slammed as intolerant of our wonderful cultural diversity.
So while many of us feel increasingly powerless to change any aspect of our lives, we can only sit back and watch the spectacle of millions immersed in virtual violence in the safety of their bedrooms or offices. Paradoxically many first person shooter fans would be utterly horrified by the slightest hint of real-life gore. Recently an Italian teacher in a farming community arranged for her class to view the slaughtering of a pig. Parents were horrified, how could children learn the truth about meat processing. Sadly many pupils had previously believed meat comes from supermarkets in the same way as petrol just magically gushes from a filling station pump. Did our ancestors dream of heroic battles six to eight hours a day? Did they revel in death and destruction? At stake is the viability of human solidarity for if we dream of exacting revenge against perceived foes in times of economic disparity and limited per capita resources, we are doomed to repeat the worst democidal excesses of our recent history. To what extent is violence an inextricable part of the human condition and to what extent can culture either channel violent urges into socially useful activities or trigger violence in otherwise peaceful individuals?

I would measure progress, not in terms of material possessions or abstract statistics championed by bureaucrats, but as a broad measure of social harmony, contentment and self-fulfilment, a delicate balancing act focussed on the reduction of conflict and personal suffering, e.g. ambition can drive innovation leading to significant improvements in life, but also cause conflict and selfishness.

Human beings have a vast array of instinctual behaviours that may be unleashed under certain conditions. Some of our behvaiours require little active thought, either because they are essential to our existence and have been inherited from millions of years of evolution or because inculcated behaviours have become second nature. A healthy baby need not learn to suckle, breathe or even cry in response to basic nutritional needs. By contrast, humans did not evolve to drive cars or type, but many of us perform these tasks with amazing agility. In comparison with most other animals human babies are pretty helpless. Other newborn mammals can walk within minutes of birth. However, many other ingrained behaviours are learned skills building on our intellectual hardware and primitive reflexes, e.g. linguists such as Noam Chomsky believe complex language relies on a specialised brain functions absent in other species, but clearly the exact manifestation of our linguistic abilities depends largely on our environment. Our humanity determines our intellectual potential, while our environment determines how we develop and utilise our intellect. Without applying reason and compassion in the forebrain, a male responding to his innate libido might be inclined to sexually assault any unaccompanied attractive female within easy reach. Were we to let our basest instincts guide our actions, modern civilisation as we know it would never have arisen. The technological progress that helped us expand our food supply, tame nature to meet our needs and lower infant mortality relies on advanced forms of social organisation and co-operation, in which our intellect and sociability prevail over primitive forms of social control.

Violence has long been a feature of human existence, but its role and pervasiveness have varied enormously over the millennia. Many anthropologists have observed we are the only animal that wages war against other members of our own species, but disagree on whether tribal warfare first emerged in the Neolithic era as stone-age humans began farming and establishing more permanent settlements around fifteen to ten thousand years ago, or whether internecine conflict has always accompanied homo sapiens sapiens throughout the Paleolithic era. We might consider some exceptions, e.g. a lion may fight a rival over control of a pride and then slaughter cubs that are not their own. However, not only are lions some of the most ferocious mammals, but their survival depends largely on brute force and obedience within a tightly knit community and, more important, on hunting other animals. They evolved to be top of the food chain, not to go forth and multiply and thus dominate through numbers. On the African plains, aggressive predators are in a minority, while the vast majority are mere grazers, browsers or warblers. Violence as a survival strategy only works if your species has a low population and can feed on a much larger number of easy prey. It is plainly foolish to apply human ethics to other species. Lions are born to kill and care only for their immediate family. Notions such as compassion and solidarity simply do not enter a Lion's mindset.

We descend from a line of vegetarian and omnivorous primates, who succeeded in mastering their habitat through dexterity, cunning and social organisation rather than the exertion of physical force, which was largely reserved for travel, work, foraging, hunting of small animals and occasional defence against predators. Around six to seven million years separate us from our closest primate cousins, chimpanzees, but why would violence evolve as an innate human instinct? First we need to define violence a little more accurately. Many primates do not hunt at all preferring to forage as vegetarians should their habitat provide plentiful food, but we are most closely related to chimpanzees who do not only hunt, but have been observed resorting to violence as a means of conflict resolution and imposing their power on more submissive females. By contrast Bonobos, close cousins of chimpanzees, use playful erotica to diffuse social tensions. Obviously any carnivorous animal exerts physical force to catch and kill other animals. Few animals practice cannibalism except as a last resort in after a natural calamity. However, we do not relate to other animals in the same way as we relate to members of the same species. To a carnivore, other animals are food, not sentient beings. At this point it might be useful to distinguish intra-species violence from inter-species violence. Some would take an absolutist stance against murder of all sentient beings and thus promote vegan pacifism, arguing that human technology allows us to be at one with nature. However, most Vegans in wealthy countries relies on a huge human infrastructure that has completely reshaped our planet and effectively ethnically cleansed whole species from their natural habitats or confining them to wildlife reserves. To enable the apparently peaceful existence of a middle class Western European family with their 4 bedroom house, two cars, household appliances, endless gadgets, holidays abroad and weekly supermarket shopping sprees, we need to inflict violence on a huge scale against the planet's delicate eco-system, something many of us would rather deny. So we might not witness real warfare firsthand, but it is committed in our name so we can drive our cars and fill our refrigerators without much thought as to how that delicious frozen salmon ends up in our freezer. This warfare may not always be waged against non-collaborative communities, but simply displaces traditional human communities and other species in the name of progress.

In many ways we are slowly emerging from an age of apparent harmony, in which people from different socio-ethnic backgrounds learned to live and work together. Certainly throughout history different ethnic groups have intermingled, but also fought bloody battles. Most of us have enough trouble trying to care for our immediate kith and kin. We can easily relate to our immediate geographic community and if this is cohesive enough, we might help disadvantaged neighbours. Charity really does begin at home. All of a sudden we have been asked to care not just for other members of our ethnic community, i.e. a group of people with a common language, mores and cultural identity, but all 6.7 billion estimated to grace our planet in 2010. As this is clearly impossible, we just pretend to care and look after ourselves, but often seek revenge against rivals by playing victims to justify our selfish actions. In reality while many of us pretend to care about the wider human race and some of us have been known to help strangers in distress, unless we are very rich and/or resourceful, we can only practically look after number one and our immediate family and friends. More important a socially competitive and high-consumption society pressures people to acquire more material posessions for themselves, either through hard work or financial manipulation. As a result millions are so busy struggling to make ends meet in a never-ending rat race, they have little time for others. Philanthropy has become a luxury afforded to the fortunate professional classes with time on their hands, while often members of idle classes prefer to indulge in media therapy (watching TV, chatting on Facebook etc.) rather than help others in their community. And even when people do help others, deep-seated cultural prejudices condition how this is targeted. The idea that billions of atomised human beings immersed in variations of the same global culture will learn to love each other is clearly a myth.

Postscript

While the Web is deluged with gamers' rants against any attempt to limit their freedom to indulge and many journalists in mainstream newspapers make a living out of promoting virtual violence as a legitimate genre of entertainment, my thoughts are not entirely unique. An Yugoslav Australian, Dejan, reached similar conclusions:

Are we becoming a violence obsessed society? I think we are.

Is it the excitement or the adrenaline rush? Maybe its a product of the life pressures we face today or even a mixture of the aforementioned? Something surely is driving us towards this culture where violence is being glorified and aggressiveness respected. It seems that way. The political sphere, the media and entertainment industries promote this aggressive culture that cant be leading the world towards a prosperous future, quite the contrary. Read full article at http://socyberty.com/society/the-obsession-with-violence

Categories
All in the Mind

Oil Discovered Off the Falkland Islands?

Are all wars ultimately motivated by Greed?

How very convenient, by mere coincidence around 60 billion barrels of oil has been discovered within 150 miles of the Falkland Islands. Before you conclude this will save our economy from the effects of peak oil, that's approximately 2.75 years of global consumption and as in the North Sea would have a low EROEI (energy return on energy invested), i.e. it would require expensive oil rigs drilling hundreds of metres below the bottom of the Southern Atlantic Ocean. For more read Falklands oil prospects stir Anglo-Argentinian tensions

So far the UK government has spent tens of billions reoccupying and defending the largely desolate windswept Falkland Islands and its 1500 inhabitants. Why bother? Why did the Thatcher government not rehouse the inhabitants in the Hebrides back in 1982? It would have been much a cheaper option and saved several thousand lives.

I grew up in the 1960s and 70s, when the UK was at its least interventionist, at least outwardly. British soldiers struggled to keep peace in Northern Ireland and elsewhere seemed to be only deployed in multinational policing operations such as Cyprus. After public opposition to the Anglo-Israeli-French attempt to recapture the Suez Canal in 1956, The UK had amazingly refrained from deploying its troops in territories over which it had no jurisdiction. Notably Harold Wilson's 1964-70 government kept the UK out of the Vietnam War. Of course, that was just a façade, as the UK arms industry and military were fully integrated with NATO and the US military industrial complex and Britain continued to service colonial outposts such as Gibraltar and Hong Kong as well as deploying tens of thousands in its sector of West Germany. Yet despite relatively recent memories of the Second World War and the perceived threat of the Soviet Union, back in the 70s the British public were generally against the new mantra of preemptive interventionism. 30 years later British troops are stationed in Afghanistan, Iraq, the Balkans, Cyprus, Sierra Leone and numerous other outposts in official or unofficial capacities. And all along we are led to believe official pretexts for their presence.

Categories
All in the Mind

The Daily Motorist Mindset

The recent cold snap over much Western Europe with temperature lows not seen since infamous winter of 1963 has prompted Daily Mail columnists and their avid readers to deny any human effects on our eco-system. Yep, just because we are gripped by Arctic weather, does not mean 800 million motor vehicles and 6800 human beings have zilch effect on the environment.

Climate is unpredictable as are weather forecasts or for that matter the side effects of the exponential rise in human activity over the last 60 years. Global warming was always a gross oversimplification, climate destabilisation is much more accurate. Switch off the Gulf Stream, and the British climate resembles that of Newfoundland. The Daily Motorist mindset is driven by the belief in a green conspiracy to stop them driving their cars 40 miles to work everyday and doing the weekly shop at Tesco with food trucked in from thousands of miles away. The whole economy, including service-sector-led boom of the late 90s and early to mid 00s, is fuelled by consumption, consumption, consumption. Can we continue to consume at this rate along with 2.5 billion Chinese and Indian consumers eager to emulate a Western European standard of living? We've been on a huge consumer binge. It has consequences. Only time and science will tell exactly what those consequences are.

Categories
All in the Mind

BBC Drama Promotes Schizophrenia Myths

TV programmes promote agendas behind of smokescreen of wishful thinking. Waterloo Road is no exception.

Over the last three years Waterloo Road has sought to raise awareness about certain social issues with varying degrees of success and misinterpretation. Considering the programme's main appeal is to teenagers, it comes as a shock, but sadly not a surprise, that the last episode focussed the attention of millions of youngsters on one of the most poorly misunderstood psychiatric labels, schizophrenia, a dated term that should really be replaced by something more specific like psychosis. However, it is commonly referred to, in polite circles, by the euphemism "mental health" (shouldn't we all aspire to good mental health?"). Thus if this programme has done nothing it has instilled in people's minds that when teachers and social workers talk about "mental health", they really mean "schizophrenia" or plain English "madness".

Not only was the portrayal unrealistic, it perpetrated the myth that psychosis just bedevils someone out of the blue. As misfits are increasingly labelled with Aspergers and ADHD (and often diagnosed by the same so-called professionals), this excuses the behaviour of bullies against weirdoes. In the not too distant past, weirdoes were just kind of different, but nonetheless valid human beings. Now thanks to psychiatrisation, their deviant behaviour is considered pathological. If many teenage kids did not know what schizophrenia means, they do now and it will, thanks to the BBC, become the latest playground term of abuse.

In the vast majority of cases of real psychosis, either drugs, whether recreational or indeed prescribed, have been involved or there have been significant environmental factors, such as physical and emotional abuse, traumatic events, bullying, poor diet, exposure to hallucinogenic chemicals or, minor brain damage after an accident. In many cases psychosis represents the final stage in a downward spiral of alienation and rejection.

It seldom appears in well-balanced teenagers with a good diet, not into drugs, with a stable family background and plenty of friends. Out in the real world, over 50% of cases of psychosis in London are related to skunk, yet in the mythical world presented by the psychiatric/pharmaceutical lobby it is a hereditary "endogenous" disorder that merely has environmental triggers. Sure, some people may be more susceptible to manifest psychotic behaviour, but the potential is there in all of us. Everyone is a potential psychopath and all men are potential rapists.

In all likelihood you sought advice from so-called charities that promote the biogenetic model of madness.

In all honesty programmes like Waterloo Rd should steer well clear of "personality disorders" and focus on real social problems, not least the alienation of uncool children who fail to fit in with an increasingly conformist dumbed-down hive mentality. We are not disordered as individuals, society is...

Response:

Dear Mr Gard[e]ner

Thanks for your e-mail regarding 'Waterloo Road'.

I understand you had concerns that the programme focused on mental health issues and schizophrenia. I note you feel that this is an area that the programme should avoid.

As you are aware the programme focuses on its teachers and students, and confronts social issues, including affairs, abortion, divorce and suicide.

The show has been designed to be entertaining but at the same time we do hope that it has some real things to say about the experience of teaching in an inner city school, the barriers to that being an easy place to work and how hard teachers work to change the lives of some children.

Nevertheless, feedback like your own helps to inform the discussion about a programme's tone and content and the reactions of our audiences are closely studied by our producers and senior management to ensure the right judgement is being made about what is acceptable to the audience in general.

With your complaint in mind I can assure you that I've registered your comments on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all programme makers and commissioning executives within the BBC, and also their senior management. It ensures that your points, and all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.

Thanks again for taking the time to e-mail us.

Regards

name withheld for legal reason

BBC Complaints

Categories
All in the Mind Power Dynamics

Reality Denial

When do we let our political judgements be swayed not by a rational analysis of the facts, but by self-interest, wishful thinking, superstition or just plain irrational prejudices? Whether rapid climate change is taking place and is caused by human activity is surely a matter of scientific analysis, on which I suppose you may hold different perspectives. You may return from an unusually mild southern Greenland only to witness subzero temperatures in Madrid. Your objective analysis during a Spanish chill may sway you against the global warming hypothesis, but if you used a weather event selectively to discredit much more voluminous evidence to the contrary that would be bias. Supposing, as a mainstream newspaper pundit, I wished to prove most Iraqis supported the US/UK liberation of their country despite all the trouble, with sufficient funds I could easily arrange for a group of pro-occupation Iraqis to acquiesce to a little public relations. I could simply choose my sample in an area renowned for its support of the US/UK invaders, such as the Kurdish north. What I'm alluding to is our ability to construct a reality that matches our aspirations and prejudices by picking the facts that suit our agenda,

Some of us might like to think only others are prone to biased constructions of reality. We may accuse others of prejudice often as a rhetorical weapon against an argument we cannot empirically refute. This often follows fuzzy logic, e.g. "You claim there are too many people in London. The BNP (xenophobic British National Party) makes the same claim. The BNP is irrationally racist. So are you. Only a warped racist could believe London is overcrowded" or consider this "You claim we should take action to cope with climate change. So does the mainstream media representing big business, so you must be wrong". Well let's consider these assertions. First the portrayal many tend to exaggerate the arguments of their adversaries. A statement like "Planet Earth cannot support six billion human beings at current rates of consumption in the long term" soon becomes simplified to "We'd better start culling excess human beings now, so the rest of us can continue enjoy the same standard of living". Next comes a bold assertion about a common bête noire, an extremist grouping or demonised tyrant with whom is simply not done to sympathise. Sometimes media may have been so successful at marginalising dissident idea that the bête noire in question may actually present rational ideas, but the existence of genuine extremists and assorted nutters serves the establishment`s mind control agenda very well. Suppose a small radical Islamic sect called for the liquidation of all US millionaires.

The Problem Reaction Solution and Counterreaction

The basic difference between the infamous Italian Mafia, Camorra and Ndragata clans running protection rackets and modern states lies in their size, influence and control of the mainstream media, but the former often act as immature micro-states within states often offering many of the same services as the latter. Paying a pizzo or protection money to your local Mafia boss may seem extortion, but it's basically what we do when we pay taxes. Sure, to some extent, government money trickles back to the general populace providing many of us with jobs and redistributing wealth in an inherently unjust corporate economy. Here are just a few examples of classic problem reaction solutions:

  • We have rampant crime, therefore we need more police, more surveillance and tougher sentencing.
  • We have terrorists and political extremists in our midst, therefore we need more monitoring of people`s everyday lives and clamp down on hate speech.
  • We have unsustainable immigration, therefore we need tighter immigration controls, more police, more social workers, more new houses, more money spent on integration etc.
  • We are facing an environmental crisis, therefore we should trust our leaders to impose greater controls on our irresponsible behaviour as private citizens.

Thankfully many of us don't buy this logic. Why should we accept greater hardships because of macro-economic decisions taken by remote business leaders and politicians? All the above problems, if indeed they are problems, are created by an absurdly unsustainable and unbalanced economic system hooked on perpetual growth. Instead of asking "how should the state combat crime?", "how should the state deal with troublemakers?", "how should the state control the migration of human beings in a never-ending rat race?" or "how should the state and big business address climate change?", we should ask "Why do people turn to crime?", "Why do people resort to violence and hateful ideas?" or "Why are we facing an environmental catastrophe?". These more rational questions do not negate the existence or perception of real problems, but turn the questions raised by the mainstream media on their heads.

Nevertheless many of us react by negating the reality of the problems. A common notion on the liberal left is that "We don`t need Draconian legislation" (a conclusion I agree with) because crime has not risen recently and may have actually declined, a perception only possible if you live in a leafy suburb somewhere. Likewise we should value free speech, again a view I wholeheartedly agree with, because everyone is so tolerant and nice in these enlightened days, a perception only possible if you genuinely believe in the benefits of over twenty years of neo-liberal economics and social engineering. Next consider the conclusion that "we should not deport illegal immigrants, (and I would be loathe to trust the state to do so in anyone`s interests but their own), because we need more immigrants to boost our dynamic economy and do jobs we don`t want to do and besides this country can host tens of millions more (as long as we can continue importing cheap food)". Once again this conclusion tends to appeal to those who are doing fairly well and can afford to steer clear of the adverse side effects of unplanned economically driven migration. We see two sections of the mainstream media engaging in a phoney debate over immigration with both sides supporting the unsustainable model of perpetual growth that drives immigration in the first place. Some on the left are simply incapable of admitting that overcrowding will exacerbate the very socio-economic tensions we wish to eradicate, hiding behind a façade of cultural diversity, interethnic tolerance and international solidarity while relying on a globalised economy controlled by a small number of supranational corporations.

We see the same fuzzy thinking behind the looming environmental catastrophe, except here we see a distinct trend towards outright denial or downplaying of the evidence before us. To some extent it would be easier to argue with some left-leaning climate change deniers, if the mainstream media denied its reality. Why should we rely on former Vice President Al Gore to warn us of a pending disaster caused by human hyperactivity in large part due to his own country`s grotesque overconsumption?Yet we have let TV, Cinema and commercial Web services dominate our lives to such an extent, some of us only ever believe something when Hollywood-style edutainment movies endorse it.

The Rense Dot Com Mindset

Personally I`d treat many articles promoted by rense.com with the same degree of scepticism as I reserve for the Daily Mail, the favourite newspaper of Britain's disgruntled middle classes. They remind us of some home truths, correctly identify some social problems and then pursue their own agenda. Rense Dot Com has recently featured numerous articles challenging the notions of Peak Oil and manmade climate change, while simultaneously providing a platform for one of the US`s most vehement anti-immigration crusaders, Frosty Wooldridge. That unsustainable immigration is driven by unsustainable overconsumption does not really occur to a narrow conservative American mindset that just wishes to conserve their uniquely prosperous way of life threatened by low-paid immigrants and politicians attempting to increase fuel taxes.

The Greg Palast Mindset

I've covered the strange case of the Frank Füredi sect (RCP => LM Mag => Spiked Online) with their characteristic form of technocratic polemicism. However, much more commonly on the left we encounter an ideological refutation of environmental hard truths to support an unremitting optimism for the human progress. Such social optimists are willing to identify and expose the reactionary or unprogressive nature of today`s ruling elites. They rightly participate in the rhetorical crusade against Bush, Blair, the IMF/World Bank and the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, but somehow deep down still believe in the enduring myth of Western enlightenment capturing the hearts and minds of an oppressed underdeveloped world. Many on the left view the world in terms of good causes and are thus very susceptible to the emotional arguments of mainstream pundits promoting hidden agendas. Few could pretend life was easy for Afghani women under the infamous Taliban. I certainly would not like to live in a society in which women become little more than the property of their husbands kept in ignorance and under veil, but what right do we have to impose our worldviews on an autonomous community. Human rights is very relative concept with many trade-offs. When the warlords of the Northern Alliance gained power before the Taliban imposed its variant of Sharia law, women were regularly raped and many actually welcomed the protection these drastic laws claimed to provide, possibly in the same way many people in this country welcome the installation of CCTV cameras at every street corner, e-mail snooping and lynching of suspected paedophiles. The spectre of extreme misogyny served to dampen opposition to the invasion of Afghanistan and steer attention way from the true geopolitical goals of the exercise. Likewise leftwing immigrants rights campaigns fail to address the true causes of socially and environmentally unsustainable migration, often acting against the immediate interests of their own native working classes,

The Immigration Conundrum

The traditional difference between the left and right, at least in my simplified way of thinking, is that the former stands up for the rights of common people in general and the downtrodden in particular, while the latter defends the status quo often appealing to the forces of reaction against subversive and destabilising elements. In the fantasy world of the radical left working class British workers struggling to pay their mortgage or rent, forever in debt with their bank and doing overtime to settle bills and loan repayments, will, once politicised and enlightened, unite in struggle with the oppressed masses of the not-so-prosperous world. While we can cite many examples of Western European striking for better pay, improved working condition or against cutbacks or privatisation, we can cite few in which the same workers have taken industrial action in solidarity with much lower paid workers elsewhere. Indeed all evidence shows working class Europeans flocking to retail outlets to buy the very consumer goods whose deceptively low prices are only permitted only by favourable exchange rates or rather an injection of virtual money by banking cartels into high consumption economies. Whether you like it or not migration nearly always flows from economically and/or environmentally disadvantaged regions to more prosperous or more environmentally sustainable regions. The British didn't colonise Australia just to get a suntan or enjoy a more outdoor lifestyle, but because by the late 18th century the growing population of Britain's newly industrialised regions had become too much of a burden, so the excess population either died early through hunger or disease or emigrated. The same is happening today, except we see a movement away from countries currently undergoing structural readjustment to countries with plenty of virtual money, most of which have been or still are colonial powers. At the same time we see a smaller movement by the propertied classes away from the bustling metropolises of the wealthier countries to the greener and sunnier pastures of low-income countries. So while Poles, Romanians and Bulgarians flock to London, many Londoners are buying up properties at knock-down prices in Bulgaria, Cyprus, Qatar, France or Spain. However, in both cases we see the resurgence of 19th century divisions between a servant class and their professional masters. This is just fine, if you happen to own a house in London (currently a modest four-bedroom semi can fetch around £500,000 in many boroughs) and you don`t mind retiring or relocating. Many opt simply to move to the surrounding home counties and rent their London property. Indeed whole residential streets are now rented out to London's new migrant classes with several families often sharing a Lilliputian three-bedroom house. The new immigrant classes fill two key gaps in the labour market, traditional hands-on skilled jobs that fail to appeal to young Britons and low-paid service-sector-servicing roles. The latter category encompasses anything ranging from bartenders, childminders, care assistants, bus drivers to newspaper distributors, but the apparent gap in the labour market would cease to exist if the clientele had less expendable cash and more indigenous young people were prepared to do these jobs as they did until recently. Currently a high proportion of home-grown fruit and vegetables are harvested by migrant labour. If we paid home-grown farm workers a decent wage and sourced all crops suited to our climate locally, prices would inevitably rise even more than they are now as a result of fuel crops and soaring oil prices, but we`d adapt by consuming less junk. The immigration wave of the early 21st century has in effect enabled an unsustainable consumer-led service-oriented economy to stay afloat. In one extreme case a Polish family doctor flew every weekend all the way from Poznan, Western Poland, to Glasgow, hired a car to drive all the way to remote area of Aberdeenshire to earn £2000 as a weekend general practitioner owing to a temporary shortage of qualified GPs willing to work in the area. As budget airline Ryanair announce cutbacks following recent rises in oil prices, we may wonder how long this absurdity can continue, burning umpteenth barrels of fuel to cope with the consequences of unsustainable hedonism and a rat race that attracts the best minds away from their provincial to the citadels of power and corruption.

The Sick Man of Europe

Back in the 1970s Britain, as we then called England + Wales + Scotland, was known as the sick man of Europe, strike-prone, inefficient and basking in the glory of a bygone era of imperial and industrial might. Thatcherism proved a very bitter pill to swallow, with unemployment rising officially to over 3.5 million and unofficially to over 6 million with millions of manufacturing jobs gone forever. The economic resurgence of the mid and late 1980s saw mainly the growth of services. While the early years of the Major government saw a brief resurgence in the manufacturing sector through inward investment and a low pound, the current administration has overseen the almost complete outsourcing of what remained of Britain`s manufacturing base. Besides services, three industries dominate UK industry, military hardware, energy and pharmaceuticals, all relying on imported components and raw materials. In an idyllic past each community had the right mix of professional farmers, manufacturers, craftspeople and service providers. We all need and expect housing, furniture, plumbing, electrical power, domestic appliances, food, restaurants, roads, public transport, schools and healthcare, yet for some reason the professions essential to the provision of these goods and services do not appeal very much to young Brits, by which I mean anyone who grew up mainly in England, Scotland or Wales. As a result numerous essential professions were by the mid 1990s severely under-resourced. People management, sales, media and leisure-related professions tend to appeal much more to a generation raised on TV, pop music, movies and now video-games and the Internet. However, on a structural level we can observe that many traditional professions only exist as human resources within a larger organisation rather than self-employed workers and small tradespeople offering services to their local community. Rather than encourage entrepreneurism, the gradual takeover of a handful of supermarket chains and retail outlets of not only the food supply, but also furniture, clothing, DIY and commodity appliances restricts the scope of small businesses to essentially franchisees or minor service providers, or rather contractors, of larger corporations. If you grew up in a sprawling suburban housing estate, went shopping once a week at large supermarket, while your parents worked as loyal enforcers in a state-corporate system to earn credit to buy readily available goods, you may be tempted to opt for the easiest and least stressful means of making money. Thus the prospect of becoming a baker or plumber only becomes attractive, if the potential earnings offset the enormous effort required to learn the tricks of the trade and other members of one's extended family or local community serve as professional role models. Instead too many people in this country have grown to consider such tradespeople as simple low-end and easily replaceable human resources or possibly quaint characters portrayed on TV sitcoms or seen in exotic backwaters. TV chef, Jamie Oliver, recently took his healthy school meals campaign to the wilds of rural Lincolnshire, only to discover school catering staff unaware of local vegetable suppliers literally a stone`s throw from the school grounds preferring instead to visit their nearest supermarket. Yet down on the ground farmers are compelled to hire cheaper migrant labour in order to maintain the low prices that the big supermarket chain impose. As always there are two sides to a story. Polish smallholders have been driven off their land because foreign food chains like UK-based Tesco and the French Carrefour group have taken over large sections of the distribution chain preferring to buy from a smaller number of large agribusinesses rather than from thousands of smallholders that had until recently dominated Polish farming. The resulting conglomeration and restructuring inevitably caused rampant unemployment and a huge pool of cheap labour. Not surprisingly many Polish newcomers to the British Isles consider the natives here lazy, spoilt little brats.

Would it not have been better for the English, Scots and Welsh to relearn the skills we need to fend for ourselves, and leave Eastern Europeans to develop independently and sustainably rather than emulate the ultimately soul-destroying and unsustainable Anglo-American neo-liberal model.

Categories
All in the Mind

Rethinking Autism – Assorted notes

What is Asperger`s Anyway ?

Were this personality type promoted as schizophrenia without psychosis, few parents or affected individuals would ever seek diagnosis, yet the history of the emergence of this social construct clearly demonstrates its origins in psychiatry. In little more than a decade, Asperger`s has become so instilled in the public mind in Anglo-Saxon countries that journalists and playwrights may use it as a byword for social ineptitude or mindblindness. Social workers, teachers, parents and psychologists have contributed to a stereotyped view of this condition. It may refer to a form of mad professor syndrome associated with eccentric habits and incessant lecturing on some niche subject, to extreme social anxiety or to emotional immaturity. Ironically the AS-diagnosed may be considered both extrovert, when lecturing others, and introvert when isolating themselves from social gatherings. These diagnostic inconsistencies have led to the co-diagnosis of more categories such as Semantic Pragmatic Disorder (mad professor syndrome), Social Anxiety Disorder (shyness), Tourettes, Dyspraxia and ADHD. The best definition in support of the orthodox extended Autistic Spectrum Theory concerns purported deficits in the Theory of Mind module and thus an inability to instinctively empathise with others. We cannot deny that many AS-diagnosed individuals, as they are known in the psychiatric literature, seem exceedingly wrapped up in their own micro-worlds and have considerable problems interacting with peers at school, work or in the neighbourhood, often falling victim to bullying and deliberate alienation. The Asperger`s label purportedly provides hope that all this perceived suffering is not the fault of the affected individual, his parents or even necessarily of his peers, but of a lack of awareness of the individual`s neurological difference and society`s failure to accommodate the other-brained. Thus not only mind blindness is equated with physiological handicaps, some see neurological diversity as worthy of same equal rights treatment or positive discrimination as applied to other disadvantaged sections of the community such as women or ethno-racial minorities. However, this hope comes at a considerable price, that of delegating control of one`s own life to external intermediaries. After learning that normal people often bend the truth to avoid offence to others, but also to gain greater social acceptance and personal advantage over others, we are expected to place our trust in nice neurotypicals who have our best interests at heart. As Asperger`s individuals allegedly lack presentational and negotiating skills, they are naturally excluded from representing themselves except under the guidance of professionals and activists in the growing autism sector.

Three Marketing Pitches

The autism sector presents ASDs in three divergent ways, depending on the audience.

  1. When addressing affected individuals the literature emphasises the positives of neurological difference and the need for differentiation from mainstream neurologically typical society. Problems are analysed in terms of aspies' alleged deficits in emotional intelligence, a concept as dubious as categorising people based on intelligence quotient.
  2. When addressing parents and teachers, both positives and negatives are highlighted, but usually in terms of people management and their responsibility to treat their aspie children differently.
  3. When addressing various social, healthcare and law-enforcement agencies, ASDs are presented clearly as psychiatric disorders.

A good aspie accepts not only his or her fundamental neurological difference, but also resigns to the fact that this puts him or her at a disadvantage in mainstream society requiring some form of advocacy. If AS-diagnosed persons were able to stand up for themselves, as some Internet advocacy groups would like to suggest, and form viable independent communities, the label would become meaningless with any perceived disability, stigma or social alienation removed. Yet such communities have never materialised because anyone diagnosed by a mental health professional has logically undergone a period of emotional distress and under-achievement in an important aspect of their life, meaning they are inevitably sucked into the mental health system with its focus on monitoring, medication, work placements and training schemes.

Emotional Intelligence

Clearly not all us show the same degree of emotional sensitivity to others. Some, notably Simon Baron Cohen, have hypothesised a dichotomy of systemising and empathising, with males generally faring better at the former and females tending to excel more at the latter. However, it is possible to construct an alternative explanation for these manifest differences, based more on experience, societal expectations and hormonal changes.

The Control Agenda

NB: Some may view any heading with the key word agenda as a sign of paranoia.

Since the inception of childhood in its modern form, the main institutions responsible for child development have been parents and the local community, with a key role played by religious organisations with a strong presence on the ground. Industrialisation saw the transfer of close-knit rural communities to towns and cities. Indeed to some extent the early educational gains of the renaissance as the growing British economy of the 18th and early 19th centuries demanded child labour. Children had little time to develop emotionally before they entered the tough life of work and assumed responsibilities we now only afford to adults. Some have hypothesised an end of childhood in the post-modern era, in which pervasive media reveal the secrets of adulthood (cf. Neil Postman) leading to earlier sexualisation and a blurring of the distinctions that for many centuries demarcated the key phases of our life. The late 19th and the first six decades of the 20th century probably represented the heyday of the family. Throughout that period a large number of children remained parentless as a result of precarious economic circumstances and migration to more prosperous regions, with many being either adopted by relatives in their extended family or sent to orphanages, run largely by the dominant religious institutions. Fifteen years after the official end of second World War and after a decade of continuous economic growth, by 1960 the vast majority of children were born into stable nuclear families with married parents. More important one parent played the role of primary breadwinner, while the other dedicated herself to multiple roles of house management, childcare, psychotherapy, learning support and public relations. As noted elsewhere, these tasks have now been professionalised. Before the word house-husband entered our customary lexicon, fathers were not absent from children's lives as progressively shorter working weeks and more generous holidays enabled families to spend more time together. By and large society expected mothers to postpone their professional ambitions until their children no longer needed their vigilance, emotional and logistical support. The breadwinner + housewife partnership had considerable flexibility, especially if the family had a small business, with the female partner becoming a key team player in the family's commercial dealings too. Until the late 60s most grocery shopping in the UK was still done in small family-run outlets. This model admittedly had many faults and inequalities. The primary breadwinner technically earned the family's income, purchased or rented the family's property and treasured belongings, offering his spouse spending money. In crude economic terms the housewife was an employee of her husband, but also a dependent in legal terms. For working class housewives without another source of income, low-paid part-time jobs remained the only option.

A number of economic and cultural changes have radically changed the domestic landscape in Western Europe and North America, and nowhere more so than in the UK. Even within a stable marriage, society now expects mothers to return to work as soon as their children start school. Indeed parents receive state subsidies for childcare if they return to work even earlier. Other European countries have lightened the impact of working mothers by extending maternity leave or even, as the case of Sweden and Norway, extending the same rights to fathers. However, for the first time in recent human history most children attend day institutions by the age of 3, with many starting as young as 6 months. If a mother wishes to pursue a career, that means the child spends 6-10 hours of his day away from her/his parents, home environment and often separated from an extended family or close-knit neighbourhood. On her or his return home, the child spends much of the potential quality time not interacting with her or his parents or exploring their immediate surroundings and treasured objects as in traditional households, but often glued to children TV or immersed in a kid-friendly virtual reality preparing them psychologically for a very different world to the one their parents knew. Again cultural comparisons reveal some notable differences among the the world's most prosperous countries. Although Southern European countries have undergone much structural and cultural change over the last few decades, this has manifested itself mainly in lower birth rates, with Italian and Spanish women only having around 1.3 children each on average, smaller family units, much later ages of marriage and more stay-at-home adult offspring. Indeed it is not uncommon for Italians to live with their parents well into their 40s until they marry or are compelled to move for work. Even the most cosmopolitan-minded Southern Europeans, often spending a few years abroad for work experience or master foreign languages, have firm cultural roots much deeper than a mere affinity with their country's number one supermarket chain, top TV shows, top video games or latest rock music. These phenomena are viewed as a superficial layer of international culture. Nowhere is this cultural affinity more embedded, by comparison with the UK, than in cuisine, usually simple with a healthy range of ingredients available locally. Few self-respecting Southern Europeans choose to save time with ready meals, replete with addictive additives. On three measures of lifestyle change, the UK stands at one extreme on an international spectrum.

  1. The UK has the smallest percentage of children growing up in stable families with both parents, with one parent dedicated to their upbringing in their pre-school years.
  2. UK children spend much more time watching television or immersed in other forms of electronic entertainment.
  3. UK children, especially from the lower social categories, are much less likely to eat wholesome meals at the table with the rest of their family.

However, within the British Isles we observe an additional social divide. The above trends are much more entrenched in the lower social classes. A recent survey showed that in the lower 25th percentile over 90% of the children had a TV set in their bedroom usually complete with a DVD player and game console, while in the upper 25th percentile this figure stands at just 50%. Needless to say, in Southern Europe with a much more outdoor lifestyle, even fewer pre-adolescent children have monitors or game consoles in their private space. Many family units with limited floor space do not even have a dining room table, but somehow make room for all sorts of electronic wizardry.

Some commentators view this metamorphosis of childhood as a sign of progress, focussing on other developments such as social disapprobation of corporal punishment both at school and within the family and a growing awareness or rather codification of children's rights. Indeed many look back at the 1960s and 70s as an era of child abuse and intolerance towards people with different sexual orientations or neurological profiles. Nobody can dispute that various forms of child abuse and neglect have existed throughout human history, but as a rule social stability and widely distributed prosperity without the extreme income disparity that we see in modern Britain and in the US tend to reduce the potential social triggers of such abuse. Thus the new orthodoxy maintains that greater social intervention, more psychiatric screening and tougher laws are the best means of preventing child abuse and building a society more at ease with itself. Others [cite] have observed that media preoccupation with abusive adults, antisocial behaviour and dysfunctional families generates a climate of fear and distrust, so even some of the best parents, trying hard to cope in a frenetic society, are referred to social workers or the police. While many desperate cases leave social care professionals with little practical choice, we would dispute that state intervention into the private lives of families is the best way to tackle problems that have socio-economic and cultural roots. However, if the emotional problems that hundreds of thousands of young people undoubtedly face are categorised as personality disorders with a significant genetic component, the case for psychiatric intervention seems much stronger.

It would be way too simplistic to conclude that any single socio-environmental factor, be it the breakup of traditional families, addiction to video games or artificial colourings added to popular fizzy drinks, directly cause any of the new generation of personality disorders. One needs first to analyse the case histories of those diagnosed and identify obvious biological factors, which in the case of the extended autistic spectrum would separate cases of Kanner's and regressive autism from the much larger group diagnosed on the basis of behaviour alone. Next we should reevaluate behavioural autism within the wider social context of early 21st century Britain. Not only do employers place a greater emphasis on teamwork and interpersonal skills, but to survive in modern public sector schools children arguably need to hone much more advanced social skills and adopt much more effective coping strategies if they wish to integrate within the mainstream social and learning environments. The diagnosis of Asperger's, Tourettes, OCD and Social Anxiety Disorder has risen in concomitance with a general trend towards greater atomisation of communities and more geographically distributed social networks, with wide-ranging effects on our sense of self. In such a fluid environment it is not hard to envisage that some individuals fail to fit in and begin to exhibit behavioural traits that teachers, parents and colleagues consider maladaptive and which inevitably lead to social exclusion, which in turn may trigger the onset of more problematic psychological complexes. We see a rise in many other types of labelled syndromes, eating disorders, self-harm, lack of concentration at school or work and various forms of obsessive compulsive behaviour.

Lower-cased social conservatives tend to view the current situation through a different filter, focussing on unruly behaviour, lack of respect and falling academic standards, at least . When criticism of personality disorder screening comes from those who would like to turn the clock back to the 1950s when children allegedly knew their place in society and respected adults , the mental health establishment dons its progressive and liberal coat, advocating greater awareness and tolerance of the neurologically diverse. In reality at stake are different means of social control. Do we trust parents and the local community to raise tomorrow's adult citizens or do we transfer this responsibility to myriad agencies run by the state or funded by large corporations? Media sensationalism serves to convince us that many parents, whether single or living together, are irresponsible and potentially abusive. Even teachers and community workers such as scout leaders or church activists often face allegations of child abuse. In recent years we have seen a huge decline in male primary school teachers, partly because the relatively low salaries on offer fail to appeal to this demographic, but also because many would-be school masters fear accusations of paedophilia. At a time when millions of ordinary children suffer from severe emotional neglect with parents often living apart or working antisocial hours and bullies rife at school, abuse has been redefined as specific acts in which only psychopathic adults indulge. Absent from this simplistic analysis, popularised by the red-top press, is the blurring of boundaries between adulthood and childhood, with both groups often treated as minors worthy of supervision, as noted brilliantly by Michael Bywater's satirical Big Babies. In a nutshell we may think of the old adage 'Treat people like monkeys and they might behave like monkeys'. There is certainly more than anecdotal evidence that the professionalisation of childcare and adult supervision infantilises both groups. Every mental health awareness raising campaign merely spreads the message that many adults cannot be trusted unsupervised. Far from combatting stigma this approach sows the seeds of distrust about conditions of which people were previously unaware, except in the more down-to-earth form of character and moods. A classic example is one busy mother's reaction to her daughter's tantrum in a supermarket car park. Most conscientious parents find such outbursts deeply embarrassing, but also need to prevent further occurrences and not succumb to the temptation to win their child's temporary favour by satisfying their every whim and fancy to avoid public embarrassment. Ms Ball of Luton chose to lock her screaming three year-old daughter in the car while she returned to the supermarket to get some essential groceries, only to return five minutes later by which time a member of the public had reported the incident to the police. A few hours later a police officer turned up at Ms Ball's doorstep. So what lesson did her daughter learn? "Naughty mummy, next time I want her to buy something I'll just scream louder". All too often child abuse is assessed by simplistic criteria such as smacking, shouting or temporary confinement, the latter being increasingly common as politically correct parents reject the former two options. Thus many parents not only have to hold down jobs, but often find themselves between a rock and a hard place when it comes to dealing with problem behaviour. An inability to assert their authority and win a child's respect early on can have catastrophic consequences leading to much more traumatic family rows than short-lived humiliation a child feels at the receiving end of traditional means of parental discipline. Successful and self-confident parents respected by other close friends and family and integrated into a stable community find it much easier to avoid either corporal punishment or extreme capricious behaviour. Many professionals responsible for setting parental guidelines seem unaware of the stigma many parents in precarious employment and personal situations find themselves. If you're under pressure at work, have just lost your job or been abandoned by your partner, you tend to lack self-respect with obvious ramifications for your relationship with your offspring. A child's behaviour and academic performance has been shown to improve simply because their breadwinner parent has secured more rewarding employment, has greater self-confidence and thus is more successful at winning his or her child's respect. In modern parlance a parent who lacks professional success and is isolated from the community is branded a loser, unworthy of respect. The media presents young minds with imagery of role model families with parents always keeping their cool, empathising with their kids by playing sport and indulging in youth culture and pursuing a successful career with plenty of spare time. Reality on the ground contrasts drastically with this rose-tinted vision of postmodern life. Few parents can hope to compete with those portrayed in 1990s American sitcoms, though many try their best often compensating for their failings in sport, dance, personal relationships and professional success by acquiescing to their children's material desires fuelled by a multi-billion pound advertising industry. As a multitude of pressures produces a heightened level of peer competition at school, college and work, it is not difficult to imagine that many would rather leave a cultural rat race and join one of their own making. Parents are often made to feel guilty if they deny their children of the chance to compete culturally with their peers, which often means adapting to subcultures targeted at vulnerable youth markets. In many working class neighbourhoods of provincial Britain to win in the cultural stakes a teenage boy might need the latest and greatest game console with the most awesome first-person shooter game, especially if he fares badly at sport.

The classic portrayal of an aspie boy reciting bus timetables, collecting coins and spending hours on end obsessing with model railway bears little relation the kind of severe emotional problems experienced by millions of young people today and probably belongs to a bygone modernist era in which such pursuits were met with general approval. Early interest in mechanics and numbers can pave the way to a future career in engineering. Indeed the UK has a woeful dearth of competent engineers, often importing human resources from far and wide for routine tasks such as as railway maintenance or road building.

Psychologists [cite] observed interactions between engineers from Germany, Britain and some other countries who collaborated on the design of a new Airship in 2002 [verify]. Language was not the main barrier as English served as the lingua franca for all work-related matters. While one might not expect the German engineers to understand the subtleties of colloquial native English and its myriad regional accents, the setting in Germany meant most adapted to a more standardised form of English. Instead the main barrier proved to be the engineers' attitude to teamwork. Anglo-Saxon engineers would thrive in technical meetings and at working in groups, while German engineers would thrive at creative autonomous work, often taking the initiative to introduce new features in line with their understanding of technical requirements and finding the endless technical meeting of their British and American colleagues a pointless waste of resources. Indeed the latter groups often proved unable to undertake any task without guidance or rather without the benefit of groupthink. Ironically this collective approach seldom reaches a consensus by considering the experience and views of all those involved, but rather tends to invite members lower in the pecking order to go with the flow. In any meeting of mind, some enjoy higher status than others and most participants, especially those more in tune with the teamwork ethos, would rather voice their creatively worded agreement than raise a contrary opinion or simply suggest new ways to implement collective decisions, but challenge those key policy decisions. Commercial organisations cannot afford to have large numbers of ambitious engineers or programmers working creatively on their own projects with conflicting approaches. In reality the teamwork ethos compels participants to adapt to the will of their team leader who in turn reports to a multi-tiered bureaucracy of project managers, who tend to view everything in terms of the allocation of human resources. Post-modern teaching techniques also favour a groupthink mentality. Most notably UK and US schools have a strong bias towards group work over whole-class teaching with extensive time reserved for homework, as practised in countries as diverse as Germany, France, Italy, Japan and Korea. The Anglo-Saxon models focuses on a child's ability to integrate into a team rather than adhere to a core curriculum, taught to the whole class, while developing more specialised skills independently. In a group teaching situation a child who has finds it harder than others to mingle with his or her classmates is at a natural disadvantage, often lacking motivation and inspiration to learn.

One cannot fail to observe the huge rise in the UK in the number of learning support staff. One often sees large classes with over 30 pupils split into a smaller groups of 4-6 with one class teacher and a lower-paid learning support assistant working alongside a pupil diagnosed with a behavioural disorder and/or learning difficulty. Indeed other children fail to distinguish naughty classmates, who need special help because of their behaviour, from thick kids, who need special help because they can't grasp key concepts. They all just receive the generic label of special needs, increasingly uttered on playgrounds in a derogatory manner. Learning support staff also seem equally confused, often applying the same approach to intellectually gifted children diagnosed with AS as to children failing to attain basic levels of literacy and numeracy for their age. However, rather than blame teaching staff for their lack of awareness of a growing array of personality and learning disorders, we need merely observe that children within the same diagnostic category exhibit a huge range of learning and behavioural patterns.

Autistogenesis

Social commentators have observed how the media treats the general population like children whose complaints and dissatisfaction are based on an incomplete or rather immature appraisal of the facts, i.e. they are simply not aware of the true complexity of the situation and are thus ill-qualified to judge tough decisions that politicians have had to take. This assumes, naturally, that politicians have a better grip on reality than average resident of a suburban sprawl estate commuting 30 miles to work everyday and witnessing first-hand the transformation of her or his country of birth. When someone cries wolf, simply stating the obvious, their opinion is often defined by leading political pundits as ill-considered or worse deeply prejudiced. A more rational analysis reveals that politicians tend to protect vested state or commercial interests, which may naturally not correspond with those of large sections of their electorate. This general establishment attitude has no unique qualities. For much of history the general populace just got on with their mundane lives owing due allegiance and respect to local leaders. With low material expectations most were content just to earn a living, so necessities like food, shelter and security mattered much more than abstract concepts like democracy. Indeed throughout much of its history Western democracy has really involved a consultation process with competing social and commercial forces with voting power linked either to one's social status or wealth. Universal suffrage is a relatively phenomenon, but to last without rocking any boats or challenging elite interests it has to be micromanaged. One may look back to heyday of two party politics in the UK in which the Conservative and Labour seemed to offer voters alternative policies with the latter championing reforms to bring about a more egalitarian redistribution of wealth with a wider social safety net. Fast forward to the early 20th century and the main parties differ little of any of the fundamental issues of the day. Indeed the social forces that have given rise to the new generation of personality disorders started under a Conservative government and continued unabated under a Labour government. So why do ordinary people not rebel and form their own parties more representative of their true feelings? Let us consider three possible answers. First people are simply too immersed in their busy lives of work and entertainment to spare a thought for political alternatives, so they merely respond emotionally to the rhetoric of mainstream politicians, often taking the lead of popular media pundits. Second when groups do offer policies outside the mainstream consensus, they are quickly deemed extremist, prejudiced or simply naïve wishful thinking. Third, the media invest billions dumbing people down diverting attention from the real issues at stake, spreading fear and fomenting reactions that effectively empower remote institutions, e.g. a food poisoning scare may lead to the closure of small farms and traders and consolidate the domination of large supermarkets as only the latter can afford to meet new food safety regulations. So adults are expected to vote, but are only considered mature or worthy of respect if they exercise their electoral power within the confines of mainstream political parties. Here we see a dichotomy between largely upper middle class political activists, who have the time and resources to engage in the democratic process, and the masses who are merely expected to place a cross next to their preferred brand of the establishment party. As long as dissent can be confined to a small politicised minority or denounced as the wild rants of ill-informed plebs, it can be micromanaged. Undoubtedly the political insight of individuals within the general population varies enormously. When an infamous big brother contestant, later accused of racism, erroneously claimed Margaret Thatcher was leader of the Labour Party, media pundits had a field day. How can we trust ignoramuses like this to determine our country's future direction, they wondered. That the then Labour leader, Tony Blair, followed very much in Margaret Thatcher's footsteps taking her reforms to the next level seemed irrelevant, today's youth are expected to know who plays for which team, but not necessarily to analyse their actions.

We see the same social dynamic at play in the management of any workplace. Some get promoted to managerial positions while others either specialise in technical roles or accept a lowly status. Presumably the skills required to rise through the glass ceiling relate not just to one's professional competence, but to one's emotional intelligence. If you lack people skills, you are effectively excluded from all client-facing or people-managing positions. You become a faceless implementer of requirements that others have set. The transition from a largely manufacturing and mercantile economy to a service-led information economy has led to a proliferation of sales representatives, project managers, advertising executives, consultants, public speakers and creative writers whose main role is to persuade others to buy products, change their working patterns or simply toe the corporate line. And they do so with increasing sophistication. Only a generation ago most workers had specific and largely methodical jobs. As long as they understood what was expected of them and could perform their assigned tasks to the management's satisfaction and did not rock any boats or break any explicit rules, little else mattered. To succeed an engineer of the modern area needs an obsessive interest in their chosen specialisation, requiring prolonged periods of analysis and research to the exclusion of social niceties. Let us consider a technical feasibility study on the conversion of an old warehouse into luxury apartments, experience in structural engineering and hard geophysical facts are required. An analysis based on social osmosis, seeking guidance from the perceived integrity of other qualified experts, may lead to disastrous decisions, such as investing large amounts of capital into a project doomed to failure due to underlying structural weaknesses or wasting valuable resources on demolishing a building that was structurally intact and replacing it with a substandard building. To obtain an objective judgement, based on solid experience, you need to consult someone with a clear focus on the matter at hand, but easily swayed by emotions and thus influenced by peer pressure. Within a relatively short time span social networking and an aptitude to assimilate into a hive mentality have to varying degrees become prerequisites for most jobs in a post-industrial world. Indeed in many organisations we a social stratification at play, in which talented technical staff deemed to lack social skills are micromanaged by project managers, often younger than their human resources, whose role is to smooth relations between different team players, but in reality enforce an agenda determined by upper management. On closer analysis this burgeoning people management bureaucracy serves purposes other than efficiency or worker-management relations. It effectively prevents individual teamplayers involved in a small technical aspect of a larger project from seeing the whole picture.

Key Points

  1. We should challenge the validity of the extended autistic spectrum theory (AST) as a meaningful diagnostic category, but stress that subgroups within it may have more consistent and identifiable causal pathways.
  2. Both psycho-social and biological factors may cause antisocial or even psychopathic behaviour. We can change the former by nurturing a more socially cohesive, egalitarian, sustainable and less stressful community, while the latter requires invasive intervention into people's private lives.
  3. We should stress the wide range of symptoms, behavioural patterns, performance and outcomes associated with ASDs. They need not have the same causal pathways, though of course the AST (as defined above) can only be understood in its social context.
  4. ASDs tend to be defined by behaviour, which in my mind says little about their causes. A closer analysis reveals that a high proportion of those deemed to have severe autistic symptoms from an early age have other medical conditions pointing to a biological cause. Rather than focusing on the neurodevelopmental consequences of the underlying medical conditions, which may result in behavioural patterns now considered autistic, autistic spectrum theorists try to link their problems with the behaviour exhibited by other categories of perfectly functional human beings, whose behavioural deviance may be caused by largely psycho-social factors and some minor biological variables (somatopsychic).
  5. Biological factors are both numerous and complex and not necessarily genetic. Genes are little more than a blueprint determining the more physical and mechanical aspects of our personhood. The efficiency and sensitivity of motor and sensory processing may be influenced within the same species by minor genetic variations, but also by diet, contaminants, radiation etc.
  6. Neuroplasticity may also explain how some deviant behaviours may become so ingrained that a person finds it hard to unlearn habits that others consider dysfunctional or fails to learn skills that to others is second nature, e.g. my father never learned to swim or the fact I'm so bad at ball games may partly be attributed a lack of rigourous training in key stages of childhood. A brain develops post-partum fine-tuned specialised logical modules (or circuits) required to survive in a given cultural setting, e.g. in hunter-gatherer societies acute hand-eye co-ordination and premonition would be essential skills, while mental arithmetic would be of limited utility.
  7. Psychiatry. Recently we`ve seen a blurring of the distinctions traditionally made between psychology, psychiatry, psychopathology and neurology. As I commented rather provocatively on my blog site, we don`t really need psychiatry, but this should not be interpreted as an offence against individual psychiatrists who have the best interests of their clients/patients at heart. Indeed in my recent experience many psychologists, social workers and autism/personality disorder professionals adhere much more to the psychiatric model than many real psychiatrists, well aware of the psycho-socio elements in the bio-psycho-socio triad. Nobody can seriously doubt that some behaviours are either immoral or antisocial and others very dysfunctional, the issue at stake is whether a large section of the general population has significant cerebral defects that require lifelong intervention of one form or another. It is my understanding that psychology is the science of the mind and neurology the science of the brain. Criminology is self-explanatory and psychopathology suggests some people`s minds may be so warped as to be totally oblivious to the psychosocial consequences of their actions on others. Where does this leave psychiatry? To me the psychiatric model supports the notion that all deviant or unacceptable behaviour is caused by a defect in the person`s brain. In my mind we need psychology and neurology. Criminologists, depending how society defines criminality, may then investigate the psycho-socio-bio causes crime.
  8. Mercury and MMR: It stands to reason that if the AST is invalid then not all cases on this spectrum may be attributed to a single cause. The diagnostic rise did start before the introduction of MMR, but sky-rocketed in the mid 1990s several years after its introduction. However, we can only seriously link bio-chemical contaminants with regressive autism, in which relatively normal progress goes into reverse gear at between 18 to 36 months of age. I can certainly vividly remember my children`s key stages of development in this period. In short, as you are probably aware, there are two hypotheses. The first relates to the live measles virus in the triple jab. Donna Williams, (born in the same year as me), suggested regressive autism may be immunoglobulin G deficiency, but still strongly recommended the MMR jab for everyone else. I was very much in favour of having my two kids vaccinated (too many of Michael Crichton`s bio-scare novels maybe), while Stefania had doubts, fuelled mainly by an Italian friend of hers who rejected all forms of vaccination. The MMR jab in Italy at the time was thimerosal-free, while the UK variant was not until 2001 I believe. More important because of large anti-vaccination movement and widespread public scepticism, its uptake was as low as 50% in many areas, yet despite the occasional outbreak of measles very few cases of measles-induced brain damage or fatalities resulted. Indeed I can recall getting measles and rubella myself (but failing to get mumps) when most just considered a childhood disease that would help build your body`s defences. If anything what concerns me most is the media`s manipulation of this scandal (first playing it up largely through the Daily Mail and a Channel 5 debate and then setting up Andrew Wakefield as a fall guy, vilified especially in the Guardianesque liberal press. Now citing a Danish study showing no significant difference in the prevalence of autism between MMR-vaccinated and unvaccinated groups, the establishment appears complacent in its desire to push ahead with new mass medication initiatives. This has to some extent confused the public with a false debate about the efficacy of vaccines, rather than the causes of severe behavioural disorders. The second hypothesis, much more credible IMHO, relates to mercury and other heavy metal poisoning, especially in combination with high levels of testosterone. Intriguingly Dr J B Handley, a proponent of this thesis, cites Simon Baron Cohen`s research revealing a higher levels of testosterone in subjects considered on the autistic spectrum. More important, vaccines are not the only source of heavy metals. Some research, cited by Dr Handleys, shows that amalgam fillings not only pass the blood-brain barrier, but can be transmitted to newborns perinatally. Also exposure to various forms of radiation may cause neurological damage. Currently most controversy relates to the links between mobile phones and microwaves in general and brain cancer, but let us not forget the good old X-Ray, until the 1980s often used during pregnancy. I did find this odd link http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/radiation.html from what I`d consider to be a pro-psychiatry source (namely favouring the genetic causation of psychosis).
  9. Epilepsy: A sizeable proportion of ASD individuals, especially those with more severe emotional withdrawal, learning handicaps and stims, have at some stage had epileptic seizures. Obviously millions of epileptics do not exhibit autistic behaviour, but the seizures may affect different parts of the brain and in some individuals the brain may be better able to reorganise itself after a seizure. I mentioned the case of a young man I had worked with on a council project. He too had been diagnosed with Asperger`s, but required 24/7 support and the permanent presence of a key worker. It turns out he had regular epileptic seizures as a teenager and regressed rapidly after the age of 7. These are case notes his employability advisor divulged to me in confidence. I also know of someone who had been erroneously given strong anticonvulsants for 15 years ending up in a day centre alongside people with severe learning disabilities. When his medication was withdrawn, his mental faculties returned. Could we not simply be classifying all sorts of diverse cases under one happy umbrella.
  10. Possible causal categories:
  1. Rare genetic deformities of the brain.
  2. Heavy metal poisoning and/or exposure to radiation causing varying degrees of cerebral abnormalities affecting language, cognition, perception and fine-motor control.
  3. Excessive cultural emphasis on the importance of physical perfection and dexterity in culturally significant sports and pursuits, i.e. the coolness factor (see below) to the detriment of otherwise perfectly functional human beings.
  4. Emotional neglect and/or cultural alienation inducing emotional withdrawal and depression with the onset of many features associated with Asperger`s Syndrome.
Trait

Overlapping psychiatric labels

Lack of eye contact

Depression, social anxiety disorder. In general a lack of eye contract results from lack of self-confidence either to due to one`s state of mind or self-image. The same person may exhibit widely different degrees of reciprocal eye-contact in different social situations.

Deficiency in processing nonverbal communication, especially subtle facial expressions.

Semantic Pragmatic Disorder and to a lesser extent bipolar affective disorder. This deficiency is at best relative. Baron-Cohen and others have suggested a brain module responsible for processing nonverbal information often quoting research showing as much as 90% of information is conveyed through means other than mere spoken or written words. A classic example would be a weather forecast presented by an attractive scantily clad and soft-spoken woman on an idyllic beach. Clearly viewers would process much more information than meteorological data. Asperger`s individuals are considered literal thinkers. However, all aspies I`ve met not only respond to nonverbal cues, but actively use expressions and gestures to express emotions. The vacant expressions associated with a subset of the AS diagnosed can easily be attributed to a sense of alienation from mainstream social culture and in some cases to side effects of antipsychotic medication.

Encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus

OCD, except in this condition the obsession itself is considered dysfunctional or maladaptive while in AS it is just an all-consuming fascination that excludes interest in a broader range of culturally appropriate subjects. However, a more detached analysis would reveal that a high proportion of the population have obsessive interest in a narrow range of subjects, except they do so in an adaptive and culturally appropriate way.

Failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level

ADHD, Semantic Pragmatic Disorder. This really refers to the core reason many parents, teachers or social workers to seek to have their children diagnosed in the first place, a failure to fit in. AS-diagnosed children are often reported to be more at ease with teachers or

A lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interest or achievements with other people

Depression. As a rule a lack of self-confidence in social situations and a preoccupation with one`s own problems tends to exclude interest in other people`s lives and interests. My observations would suggest a huge range within the general population in the ability to empathise with other people`s lives. Those who succeed very well in this enterprise may find it easier to make friends and take on team-leading roles. However, the extent to which one can feign interest in all subjects or empathise with all predicaments is limited. Usually a socially adept person can empathise with a range of interests and emotions within the common experience of their culture. Thus this statement is simply a generalisation that holds true for most people diagnosed with AS. One reason some people may not seem so eager to share achievements is a general sense of inferiority in everything but their chosen specialisation.

Stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms

Depression, Bipolar Affective Disorder: This criterion really refers to severe autistics. However, tics are not uncommon within the general population as a reaction to a traumatic experience or way of coping with an inferiority complex. The kind of never-ending stims, such as persistent rocking, associated with Kanner`s and regressive autistics are rare in AS individuals, whose mannerisms match more closely the kind of nervous twitches common in depressed persons in general. That these symptoms can be observed in large proportion of AS-diagnosed individuals proves little about their cause. Of note, many psychoactive medications, both SSRIs and antipsychotics, have nervous twitches as known side effects.

Persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

Humanity: Obsessive interest in objects is characteristic not only of a depressed and withdrawn state of mind, but also of a phase of discovery and exploration. If someone had not fixated long enough on the tendency of logs to roll down slopes, the wheel may never have been invented. Most people fixate with a very narrow range of objects.

  1. The ADHD Connection: This condition has received more critiques largely because it is more readily diagnosed in the US, UK and other countries who follow the Anglo-American psychiatric model and because of the rather obvious role of large pharmaceutical multinationals in the promotion of this disorder, treated most commonly with methylphenidate. As most ADHD-diagnosed children show few signs of the kind of emotional withdrawal and obsessive interest characteristic of autistic spectrum disorders, including this category within the autistic spectrum would confuse parents of severely autistic children and the public perception of autism as a one-dimensional spectrum of varying degrees of introversion. However, on the ground hundreds of thousands of parents have their children first diagnosed with ADHD when they first encounter problems with social integration at school, only to have the diagnosis reviewed and changed to Asperger`s Syndrome when their child reveals a special academic talent and slightly longer attention span than previously feared. It certainly appears odd that the same child may first cause concern due to his alleged lack of focus and then due to his obsessive focus in one subject. Many social workers in the UK have observed that working class kids are more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD, while children with better educated parents tend to receive an AS label. Whichever way, in an alarming number of cases, Ritalin is offered as an integral part of the treatment. Diane M. Kennedy wrote a whole book, the ADHD Autism Connection, with a forward by none other than autism celebrity Temple Grandin. The last two chapters are dedicated to treatment and it should come as little surprise that overall the book is very much in favour of medication albeit emphasising that misdiagnosis may lead to the prescription of the wrong medication. Ms Kennedy not only see links with ADHD, but with Bipolar Affective Disorder and Manic Depression. If we extend the autistic spectrum to cover people liable to be diagnosed with these labels, then we may soon reach as much as 10% of the population. The fact is there are no neat dividing lines between these categories. Rather than infinitely extending the autistic spectrum, we should reassess its validity. It may only make sense when severe developmental impairments are observed within the first 24 months of life, with all subsequent emotional problems down to a combination of environmental influences interacting with one`s physical inheritance.
  2. Autism as a State of Mind: So far we have considered two interpretations of this catch-all term, a pervasive cerebral disorder and neurological variable that one may have to varying degrees. However, there is a third perspective. Autism is simply a state of mind common to the whole of humanity. In a nutshell, we may think of this phenomenon as "being totally wrapped up in oneself and the immediate physical world to the exclusion of the wider social world". This is certainly our initial state as newborns. In the first days of life a baby can quickly adapt to surrogate mothers as long as her/his basic needs are met, but after a week or more of close proximity with a mother figure, her/his whole world becomes the mother figure and the fulfilment of her/his personal needs. To feel embarrassment, sadness, inferiority or alienation represents an awareness of, but an inability to integrate with, the wider social world. Thus a completely autistic person would feel no embarrassment or sorrow. At a party a genuine autistic, by this definition, would happily stand alone in the corner with tomato juice spilt all over his shirt playing a moronic video game on his portable game console, totally oblivious to the emotions of other human beings in the same room. By contrast a typical AS-diagnosed person would feel deep embarrassment and quickly sneak out at the earliest opportunity. The crucial variables here are our sense of self (cf. Kenneth Gergen`s Multiphrenia theory) and cultural influences on personal development (cf. Michael Bywater`s satirical book Big Babies).

Autistogenic Culture

I like this coinage, but it can logically only refer to psycho-social influences. Thus if autism, as a cerebral difference, may only apply to a miniscule percentage (0.2% by NAS statistics) of severely handicapped autistics, we have to move on to another definition of autism. If a person`s brain is unable to assimilate the full depth of recent cultural change, as in the case of many people with severe intellectual impairment, autism is an acultural phenomenon, but we take the above definition of autism as a state of mind culture may indeed induce autistic behaviour. Beyond the first few hours of postnatal life, nobody is completely autistic as defined above. Our subsequent development may lead us to exhibit various forms of awareness of and concern for other people`s feelings. Consider if you will the current craze among many urban teenagers to play load rap music on their mobile phones in buses and trains. This behaviour annoys a large proportion of passengers, though few complain. Do they simply want to enjoy the music, usually very distorted, without earphones or do they deliberately want to annoy anyone who does not share their musical taste? In other words to what extent can we define their behaviour as deliberately antisocial and to what extent are they simply unaware of other people`s feelings? We might define this as social autism, introversion not into oneself but into a small clique within a larger social group, resulting in total indifference to the feelings of those outside the clique. However, I'd dispute that in today's interconnected and media-saturated world anyone can be truly isolated from the wider reality of mass socialisation. We just integrate differently with societal expectations.

Many have observed the absurdity that in modern Britain some of us hardly ever talk to our neighbours, but thinks nothing of communicating with friends, colleagues or just vague acquaintances thousands of miles away, just because they share an interest or indulgence with us. The logic of globalisation has persuaded many of us of the need to conform with remote global norms as taught in leading educational establishments, broadcast on TV and popularised via numerous high traffic Web sites, leaving aside generations of familial culture and leading a general distrust of recalcitrant neighbours still wedded to the old ways. So while we may gain friends in remote locales, we lose friends in the geographic community. Indeed even the concept of community has morphed from a group of people living in close proximity and sharing resources, services and values to one of an amorphous collection of human beings who share some special interest. Thus we have the gay community, the Java developer community, the Star Wars fans community, the Halo gamers community, not to mention the Autistic Spectrum scene. (Of note some European languages such as German retain their native term for the geographic community, but use the English word for virtual community). Unlike close-knit geographic communities, none of these communities can exist in isolation. Members of the Java developers community may be gifted programmers but lack a sufficient diversity of skills and social cohesion to form a viable self-sustaining community. Traditionally most geographic communities have had to develop some degree of functional autonomy for the provision of essential goods and services. Each community would have its highly skilled tradespeople, farmers, builders, joiners, market gardeners, bakers, fishmongers, butchers and more recently plumbers, electricians, mechanics and engineers. Individual members of the community would respond largely to community demands, which may naturally stem from geostrategic and technological developments elsewhere, but nonetheless as perceived locally. Fast forward to modern Britain and we find over 90% of the grocery trade controlled by a handful of supermarket chains. Geographic communities have been replaced by housing estates, which may attract residents from a wide geographic area with diverse ethnocultural backgrounds and thus little emotional loyalty to their place of abode. Supermarket chains compete to win planning permission to meet local demand, which itself depends on remote macro-economic conditions. Supermarket staff seldom learn the trade from close relatives or choose to pursue this career path. Rather they are trained to work as part of large corporations and usually view their employment there as a temporary money-earner. With the exception of managerial staff, few superstore staff remain in the same workplace for longer than two years. Thus lasting loyalty to the family business is replaced by transitory allegiance to a corporate entity.

Categories
All in the Mind

Peddling Misery – Letter to the Independent on Sunday

I refer to your piece (IoS 20/04/08) about Depression Awareness Week. We all know Alastair Campbell sold his soul to the military-industrial complex by playing a key role in preparing public opinion for the Iraqi oil grab and acting as spin-doctor-in-chief for one of this country's most mendacious administrations, now apparently he has sold out to big pharma too. Depression Awareness Week will do nothing to tackle the root causes of the misery and lack of self worth millions of us suffer day in day out. It will, however, serve to instil in the public mind the illusion that emotional distress bears no relation to real life events or societal values, but is supposedly endogenous, somehow divorced from a wider reality. I also note the familiar tactics of the growing emotional disorder industry. First they categorise a set of behavioural symptoms as a disease in its own right and then promote it through media campaigns by hiring the services of celebrities who share some of these traits.

Emotions are part of the human experience and it comes as some relief that even Mr Campbell failed to cope with the strains of his professional distorsions of reality. However, rather than take pills to wish away these moral dilemmas and suppress our true selves, we should look at the real causes of people's woes in a highly competitive and image-obsessed society and not just the bio- component of the classic bio-psycho-social triad.

Your article mentioned Depression Alliance, co-sponsored by Eli Lilly and Boehringer Ingelheim. In 2005 they organised a "Pulling Together" campaign to increase awareness among physicians, patients and the media of a link between physical symptoms and depression. This soon earned a subtitle as "Consumer Media Campaign National Depression Week for Eli Lilly's and Boehringer Ingelheim's Cymbalta". Let us not forget the many victims of the numerous side effects of common antidepressants this campaign seeks to promote, such as insomnia, dry mouths (accelerating tooth decay), weight gain, sudden mood swings and suicidal thoughts.

Categories
All in the Mind

Dental Health Scandal: Playing Politics with Genes

Few empiricists would deny that both environmental and genetic factors determine subtle variations in the physical health, performance and behaviour of human beings. After repeatedly telling us that diet and lifestyle are largely to blame for the obesity epidemic, the popular media now inform that genetics plays a crucial role in our susceptibility to gaining weight, e.g. two different people eating the same intake of junk food may have very different weights. Our genes do after all provide us with blueprint for future development and as noted elsewhere determine largely physiological features. However, to pretend diet plays no role in our health would equally be a travesty of the truth. There are surprisingly few obese people in poor agrarian communities where most people get plenty of exercise in the course of their daily struggle for survival and have little time or resources to indulge in the wonders of convenience food, like microwaveable ready-meals or take-out pizzas, yet many of their genetic close cousins in the prosperous world would put on weight quickly. Often sensationalist media reports simplify our understanding of key issues like emotional well-being, intellectual performance, behavioural problems, dental health and eating disorders. It`s interesting how the establishment media highlight or suppress extensive research into the causes of very real human problems to promote their agendas or defend key interest groups.

We are led to believe that genetics plays a huge role in the determination of psychiatric illnesses, but only a minor role in dental health. We tend to be much more tolerant of severe acne, facial burns and balding than evidence of bad dentistry or bad oral hygiene. One cannot exactly shake hands, smile and discretely inform a new acquaintance that contrary to appearances one brushes and flosses one`s teeth twice a day. One has to have white teeth or hide one`s dental fixtures from general public view. As a result it`s easier to get a psychiatric diagnosis on the NHS than personalised dental treatment. Make no mistake, the consumption of sugary drinks and food, especially refined sugar and lactose, and poor oral hygiene, e.g. a failure to brush one`s teeth regularly and correctly, cause caries in the same way as eating Big Macs cause obesity. If you have a balanced diet, with plenty of vegetables, and consume the occasional hamburger made from premium beef, you may enjoy good health, but a diet of nothing but junk food, consisting mainly of carbohydrates, diary products and cheap meat, makes you extremely susceptible to all sorts of illnesses. However, that`s not the whole picture. The human body has evolved to cope with extreme variations of dietary intake. Our distant hunter-gatherer ancestors became omnivores as a survival strategy with a seasonally variable diet. Our teeth evolved in the pre-toothpaste era to cope with a diet of vegetables, fruit, nuts, fish and meat. In terms of human evolution milk and refined sugar were a very late addition to our diet. Indeed northern Caucasian peoples developed antibodies in order to digest cow`s milk. Later in the 19th century our diet transformed with advent of refined sugar and wider availability of tea, coffee (both served with milk and sugar in Britain), cakes and other confectionaries. Before the mid 19th century dentistry was a dark art confined to the aristocracy, who also happened to be the biggest consumers of sugary delights. By the turn of the 20th century (1900) most working class British adults had severe dental decay with many missing most of their teeth, but as films and photographs from the period can attest many actresses and models retained healthy smiles in age without toothpaste, fluoridation or artificial dental crowns. Dentures were a poor substitute for natural teeth that fooled no-one, but the toothless. In the early twentieth century the streets of British cities teemed with people exhibiting little shame in their visibly decayed, missing or badly patched gnashers. Abroad this became known as the British mouth. The masses could simply not afford restorative dental treatment and had not yet acquired the custom of brushing their teeth.

If we compare the smiles of post-modern image-obsessed young adults with a strict dental hygiene regime, regular dental check-ups and even tooth whitening sessions with Africa`s rural poor, we are struck only by the greater authenticity and relative lack of alignment of the latter group, for caries are exceedingly rare in black Africans with a traditional diet. Open your eyes in a busy cosmopolitan city and observe the huge variation in people`s mouths and dental structures. Some will casually and nonchalantly show the full splendour of their naturally white teeth, while others feel more at ease in more tight-lipped facial gestures barely revealing their teeth, but few of us react very well to an unashamed display of discoloured and crooked teeth. Yet, it seems illogical that we would have evolved in antiquity to suffer perennially from persistent tooth aches, that would inevntably result with the same diet, but in the complete absence of dentistry and toothpaste, with only tooth picks and water. The most critical age for dental health tends to be adolescence when our adult teeth have replaced our primary teeth, our wisdom teeth begin to emerge and we are less likely to care about diet and oral hygiene.

Letter to Ms Keen, Minister for Health

Dear Assistant of the Right Hon. Ms Keen,

In my recent correspondence about the state of NHS dentistry and my pragmatic, but costly, decision to spend over £6000 on private treatment, I stated quite categorically that I do not wish to be persuaded mercury amalgams are somehow safe. I`ve read and heard it all before. Believe it or I am an intelligent 44 year-old programmer, and have within the limits of normal human imperfection, taken good care of my teeth since early childhood. I did not eat excessive amount of sweets or chocolates as a youngster. Mars bars were a rare treat in my family and have not eaten hardly any chocolate since associating it with acne as a teenager. This was also the period when I has 10 mercury amalgams, only two of which now remain thankfully having had three removed in the last two weeks, others went with tooth extractions. If I had followed the advice of an NHS dentist, not only would I have retained two of these back teeth (one to be replaced with an implant), but it would have impossible to realign my teeth for what is today an essential cosmetic procedure so my front teeth can look vaguely normal. I do not have unreasonable pretensions. You are not addressing some mars-bar chewing, fizzy drink guzzling ignoramus who forgets to clean his teeth twice a day. There are only two reasons I have delayed this essential dental treatment. One financial and the second a psychological aversion to the practices of NHS dentists. I have a complex dental structure, crowded teeth in a small mouth. This makes restoration much more time-consuming. X-rays, of which I finally obtained electronic copies, quite clearly reveal the extent of bad dentistry. My back teeth were drilled and filled in adolescence with little regard to wisdom teeth that had not yet emerged and when two did emerge, they were promptly drilled and filled, and were thus gradually pushed to the left. Do I need lectures on oral hygiene? No I had those 30 years ago.

No amount of official denial of the adverse effects of this crude technique or reports from distant organisations, known to be under pressure from numerous lobbying groups, can replace what is for me a very personal experience. I may rely on remote scientific data to establish the mass of the planet Pluto, but the state of my teeth and my experience with NHS drill-and-fill conveyor belt dentistry are facts I can judge very well on my own.

The so-called evidence you cite is extremely selective. The name of the game is public relations and damage control.

It seems clear to me that your replies did not take into account the actual content of my letters, but were merely treated as another case of a humble subject unconvinced of the purported safety of mercury amalgams. As it is unlikely that you would have spent much time on one individual case, you simply recycle material prepared for other humble subjects. Don`t ever forget, in a democracy you are our servants and should not defend the vested interests of powerful lobbies who do not have the best interests of humble subjects at heart. So if we the people don`t want mercury amalgams because we refuse to believe your pseudo-scientific denials, provide us with alternatives. If those alternative don`t work, then we`ll look into something else. Mercury amalgams are technologically superseded. Currently the NHS wastes money on all sorts of things, overpriced proprietary software, where perfectly functional free alternatives exist, psychoactive drugs and Viagra. In this context the cost of alternatives such as porcelain onlays and inlays in back teeth would be minimal. We pay taxes and national insurance to receive medical treatment to meet our needs, not to be brainwashed by biased lobbying groups.

I also disagree fundamentally with your one-size-fits-all mentality, which underlies NHS policy making. I`ll take my family as a case in point. My mother lost her upper teeth at around my age and can never remember her gorging cakes, chocolate and fizzy drinks. She`d drink plenty of tea, but stopped adding sugar in the early 70s and as far as can recall always brushed her teeth. She now has none of her own teeth. My father on the hand retains all his own teeth to this very day, yet grew up in the same period with a similar diet. The point is oral hygiene and diet are only part of the story. Some of us are simply not blessed with a very resilient dental structure and hence will fall victim to caries much more easily than others.

If major dental associations such as the BDA admitted the neurological and physiological damage caused by mercury amalgams, it would open a can of worms with potentially millions of Europeans claiming damages. A beneficial side effect of the current obsession with cosmetic dentistry is leading all but the most underprivileged and misinformed sections of the European population to avoid mercury amalgams like the plague. As an aside, the downside to this obsession is that anyone with naturally crooked or stain-susceptible teeth (i.e. where enamel turns translucent rather than white revealing the dentin beneath) is likely to suffer from an inferiority complex. The only people I have ever heard defend amalgams are dentists and lobbyists, not ordinary citizens. Some are lucky with resilient well-placed amalgams, but so many others have experienced cracked molars and progressively uglier amalgam replacement fillings. Whenever a back tooth needs a new filling, patients that can afford it almost always choose white fillings, which are of course much larger than they would be had an amalgam never been placed at the outset. Why force people to go private, rather than provide this basic level of care on the NHS. In most cases old amalgams can be replaced with composites (in the case of small cavities), onlays, inlays or crowns. Only in the most severe cases would an implant be required.

Your latest reply simply regurgitates industry propaganda. That it has made its way to the highest echelons of the EU bureaucracy is of some concern but rest assured where democracy works at a local level mercury amalgams are on their way out. It has been completely banned in Sweden and Norway and is being phased out in Denmark and Germany with an absolute ban on mercury amalgams in under 21 year olds. In most of Southern Europe the state does not subside dentistry at all or not to the same extent and so when given the choice most parents will pay extra to have white fillings. In the UK the prevalence of mercury amalgams in adolescents is largely a class and ethnic issue. It is much more common among the white lower working classes, practically the only group with a high risk of dental decay (owing to diet and genetics) unable to afford private dentistry. The logic behind mercury amalgams is that patients will not take good care of their teeth.

"Only 300 studies published since 1996 had sufficient merit to be included in their report -- studies that analyzed mercury in urine samples as a marker for mercury exposure. Methyl mercury from fish is not found in urine samples, explains Karol."

The panel is wrong in using urine mercury levels as a measure of mercury exposure. Science has shown this. In fact, most studies on children indicate that the ones with the highest urine, blood or hair levels of mercury were the healthiest. That is because of those exposed to mercury, the ones with the highest urine, blood and hair levels are the ones effectively excreting the mercury. Three different research groups have shown that autistic children have much lower mercury in their hair, yet have higher body burdens of mercury. This implies that an inability to excrete mercury by a subset of the population represents those that will respond badly to a low chronic exposure to mercury.

I suggest this subset is much larger than the government would like to believe. Consider a simple analogy, many people get away with smoking 20 cigarettes a day into old age, so if we applied the same logic to smoking, we would conclude it`s safe except for people allergic to nicotine inhalation. Clearly absurd, but some smokers die early from lung cancer or heart failure, while others miraculously live into their 90s.

Apparently you cannot read your own Web site, the last place I`d expect to find evidence exposing the dangers of mercury in dentistry. May I refer you to http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Researchanddevelopment/A-Z/Primarydentalcare/DH_4002164, which states quite clearly.

"A pilot study conducted by ourselves has shown that reductions in memory functioning were measurable amongst a group of dentists using a computerised package of psychomotor tests."

Ie. in the subset of humanity that fails to excrete mercury efficiently (hence the reason why researchers should measure blood mercury rather than urine mercury levels) the neurological effects of low-level mercury exposure has long been scientifically attested.

Let`s be honest the only group that actively defends mercury amalgams is organised dentistry and its army of litigation-aware lobbyists.

Don`t waste another penny defending it. At the very least, let people have white fillings on the NHS if they pay a little extra. But best of all, follow other European countries and ban it completely.