Categories
All in the Mind

How to argue with awkward purveyors of home truths

Here are just a few strategies you can adopt when confronted with troublesome individuals who insist on expressing politically incorrect opinions that cannot be refuted by facts alone.

  1. Suggest any inconvenient belief is just "their opinion" and by implication at odds with "received opinion" as endorsed by mainstream experts or opinion leaders. Decent people merely choose among a narrow array of officially certified opinions, e.g. phoney debates between mainstream political parties.
  2. Suggest you have your own preferred sources of information or have just read a report indicating otherwise. Of course, your awkward adversary also has access to these sources because they are broadcast and published so widely or even given away for free on the way to work.
  3. If your opponent suggests that the globalisation of labour markets may not be such a good idea for medium to long term socio-environmental stability, do not hesitate to call her, or him a racist. No doubt only racist‚ Australian Aborigines opposed European colonisation and only racist Black Africans opposed French and British imperialism. And what about all those xenophobic Chinese who fought the British imposition of free trade in the opium market and isolationist Bengalis who opposed cheap British textile imports in the 18th and 19th centuries?
  4. Suggest your adversary's views are mere conspiracy theories, e.g. Aren't you verging on conspiracy theory territory there? Of course, conspiracies never happen because all public and private institutions are totally upfront about their true motives. MPs never lie, at least in the United Kingdom and big businesses are philanthropic organisations. Pigs also fly.
  5. Contact a psychiatrist to help your friend overcome her or his belief issues.
Categories
All in the Mind Power Dynamics

Hedonism Ablaze

What a coincidence! Just days after the US administration agreed to raise their country's debt ceiling and let the global consumption party go on for a few more months or maybe years, In London marauding mobs run riot, loot retail outlets and set commercial and residential buildings on fire. Reportedly it all started in Tottenham Hale, North East, on Saturday evening when demonstration against the police shooting of a minicab driver and alleged drug dealer, Mark Duggan, descended into violence, just four miles from my bedsit. Eye witness accounts and video footage clearly show that police lost control and were unable to contain the ensuing disorders. Some observers have dwelled on the conflicting evidence behind the initial incident, whose background builds on longstanding mistrust between the police and local communities. In 1985 a notorious riot on the Broadwater Farm Estate after Cynthia Jarrett, an African Caribbean woman, died during a police search of her home, later saw a Policeman, PC Keith Blakelock killed. Early reports indicated just another example of police brutality against an innocent man. It now looks much more like another case of police incompetence, as both bullets fired were police-issue, but the 29 year-old victim and father of four was undoubtedly involved with narco-trafficking Star Gang. That may not have justified his death, but like many other lads from sink estates in a city with over 50 billionaires he opted to service the service sector by not only facilitating the distribution of drugs, but living by the law of the gun.

The saddest part of all the destruction that has followed is that many young people in towns and cities across the UK see little future other than to party and re-enact some gangland fantasy. The more talented youths may aspire to becoming pop musicians, actors, dee-jays or film producers. A few entrepreneurs may open hairdressers, pubs, nightclubs, restaurants and gyms,. And a few conscientious individuals may be drawn to the caring surveillance professions such as social workers, police and learning support assistants, but many just choose to live on benefits. The purpose of life in London has now become simply having fun or rather exploiting other people's desire to indulge in frivolous entertainment. The city has long been a parasite on the world stage, importing huge quantities of additional goods through the proceeds of a global casino.

As riots spread to other London boroughs on Sunday and Monday, a pattern began to emerge. Thousands of hyperactive youths, a small but sizable minority in a city with over 8 million inhabitants, enjoyed re-ennacting the kind of wanton mayhem they had previously seen on TV and simulated on game consoles. Rather than protesting against the evil capitalist system that enslaves them they could not wait to get their hands on the latest electronic gadgets. Admittedly some food outlets were trashed too, many fast food eateries, but these were no food riots. Britain's generous social security system ensures nobody goes hungry unless they choose to squander their benefits on booze, drugs and gambling. Indeed the scenes of ransacked shopping districts reveal another grim reality. Most shops sell non-essential merchandise. One happy looter posted a picture of his bounty on Twitter, a vast collection of video games and other gadgetry. Was this some kind of statement against the UK/US invasion of Iraq, a sign of solidarity with starving Somalis or attempt to redistribute wealth from the rich to poor? The looter may have feigned his opposition to the excesses of British imperialism or pretended to care about malnourished Africans or the urban poor in a grotesquely overpriced city. But no, he just wanted some instant gratification.

As more reports come in, the choice of looting targets seems to reflect the spirit of our times, to name but a few "The Sony Distribution Centre" in a large warehouse filled mainly with DVDs and game consoles in Enfield and the Party Superstore in Clapham. The big babies are throwing their toys out of their hyper-consumptive prams.

In reply to a New Labourite:

I wonder if New Labour's supporters will ever question the wisdom of economists whose advice has bankrupted the US and European economies in the name of growth? While New Labourites may distance themselves from the current ConDem coalition, they actively supported the previous administration with almost identical policies and equally subservient to the unaccountable multinational organisations who really run the country.

Recent debt-fuelled economic "growth" in the UK has mainly relied on banking and frivolous media services, aided only in part by North Sea Oil (the UK as a whole is now a net importer of oil and gas). Once demand for these non-essential services crumbles, as it surely will, Britain will have to start living within its own means. However, after 30 years of unashamedly pro-globalist policies (by which I mean reliance on global trade), a huge public and private debt and a large section of the working age population on benefits, the country will be ill-equipped to weather any storms. In a historical context globalism is but the last stage of imperialism, so let's call it global imperialism.

Circular Arguments over Immigration:

While mass immigration may create new jobs by boosting demand, that's an entirely circular argument, e.g. before the 2004 influx of Eastern Europeans there were 600,000 unfilled vacancies, 4 years later the UK still had the same number of unfilled vacancies, but a million more residents boosting the country's reliance on imports. The UK's population has not grown at such a fast rate since the end of WW2. During the 1970s and 80s more people left the UK than entered. Indeed we've witnessed a steady brain drain of talented Brits to the US and Australia and from countries like Nigeria, India and now Poland to the UK. We have a shortage of surgeons because many of the best UK born surgeons work in private hospitals abroad. The oft-repeated claim that "the economy benefits from immigration", means big business gets a short-term boost in profitability due to the influx of enthusiastic workers and total demand rises, but what is good for the economy in the short term is not necessarily good for society in the long term. These arguments made sense in countries like Australia, the US, Canada or Argentina. Indeed for some time now, UK economic growth has been consumption-driven. This logic fails to take account of rather obvious socio-envionmental factors. Southern England is now the most densely populated region of Europe and Londoners would starve within a week in the absence of food imports. Who said we need to boost aggregate consumption? We should be doing exactly the opposite. If you believe infinite economic growth is possible, then surely you'd have to believe in infinite energy and dismiss man-made climate change as a green plot to depopulate the earth (as some pro-growthists do), but you don't because it would be politically incorrect.

As we hit limits to growth, the consequences of a recent consumption frenzy growth will significantly reduce the earth's carrying capacity (i.e. more consumption per capita => fewer people). Yet new Labour's policies actively encourage procreation through Europe's most generous child benefits leading to a benefits-driven baby boom and these babies become young adults wanting to emulate Jeremy Clarkson because that's the consumer culture your friends in big business keep marketing. This observation may horrify you, I hear you murmuring "racist" or maybe sexist, but the facts on the ground are pretty undeniable, so don't shoot the messenger. We should not subsidise irresponsible procreation, because it will inevitably lead to more social problems further down the line. You know that. I know that, so stop pretending otherwise.

Waves of Migration and Social Breakdown

Advocates of mass immigration had claimed before 2003 we needed an influx of highly skilled Eastern Europeans because native Brits lacked these skills, although as you no doubt remember the Home Office estimated only 5000 to 13000 Eastern Europeans would move to the UK in the first year after their countries joined the EU,. The classic example was the Polish plumber. First why did British-born young adults not aspire to these jobs? Second how does simply importing skilled and semi-skiled workers form abroad address a skills shortage among the home-bred population? It doesn't. More important a large proportion of this new unemployable underclass in the London area are themselves descendants of immigrants from the 1950s and 60s, whose parents and grandparents had filled a skills gap. So many conflicts we see now are between different waves of immigrants, something that can only get worse in the event of economic meltdown. However, in the 1960s unemployment in the UK was negligible, two-parent families still very much the norm and housewives valued members of society. Fast forward 40 years and most of the manufacturing and skilled manual jobs that made the British working class proud have been outsourced or assigned to new communities. Whether you like it or not, only a small minority of people will ever excel in the kind of cerebral jobs created by a knowledge economy. I know from personal experience that while millions of people are proficient in the use of software applications, only a few have the mental discipline required to write programs. Hence there are more IT recruiters (talking the talk) than programmers (walking the walk). Back in 1997 your friend, Tony Blair, boasted about how Britain led the world in IT. I presume that's why so few young adults from the XBox generation can write more than a few lines of client-side Javascript code. Much of the rest of the knowledge economy revolves around marketing goods we don't really need and promoting various social agendas (hence growth in the charity sector), which in turn serve to create new markets.

Do you seriously think British born young adults cannot learn plumbing, bricklaying or farming? Their forebears did. Why did they become de-skilled? And if there was such an urgent need for friendly smiling retail and catering staff, why could big business not tap into the large pool of British unemployed, many of whose parents were immigrants themselves? Why had they become so demotivated and unwilling to get out of the bed in the morning? You may blame Thatcher, who oversaw a tremendous rise in benefits dependency, but Tony Blair followed in her footsteps albeit with different rhetoric.

"Tariq Jahan had lost his 21-year-old son Haroon, murdered in the Winson Green area of Birmingham by thugs who drove at him in their car in what appears to have been a racist attack. No one could be more aware of the simmering racial tensions between Asians in his neighbourhood and those of Caribbean ancestry".

So why should we tolerate further erosions of civil liberties turning us all into suspects to deal with the side effects of over-development and its recent manifestations as unbridled consumerism, narcissism and media trivialisation of violence. Yet as a result of these policies we will soon be cajoled into accepting even more authoritarianism

Attacking our Communities?

Globalist policies destroyed these communities. A community requires shared values, customs and social cohesion that cannot be built if its composition keeps changing. Ordinary people cannot afford to live in London except if the government, read taxpayers, subsidises rents. Indeed among the main beneficiaries of New Labour's welfare and immigration policies have been landlords, who in many cases can charge what they like because the Department of Word and Pensions will pick up the bill. As a result we have mind-boggling cases (that I have witnessed personally) of families subsidised to the tune of £3000-4000 a month? Let's do some maths. A typical semi in London is around £320,000 ... that means a couple needs to earn £80,000 per annum to get a mortgage, while real average salaries are closer to £30,000. Indeed in Scotland, I knew many on 15/16 K per annum as late as 2009. In case you haven't noticed there has been a whole scale exodus from vast swathes of London. Deny it if you will, but normal working people cannot afford to live here, unless like me they can tolerate a single room. So we have the chattering classes on 100K+ a year, wealthy advertising and media executives, and then street after street of houses converted into flats and rented to a motley crew of migrant workers, home-grown benefits scroungers and miscellaneous gangsters. What a wonderful community!

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

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

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

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.

Categories
All in the Mind War Crimes

On The Nature of Violence

Consuming re-enactments of violence in various forms has long brought considerable pleasure to large number of people, especially but by no means exclusively, males. Quite clearly many residents of middle class suburbs in towns and cities across the prosperous world are relatively shielded from the real-world physical violence that millions experience on a daily basis in much of the world, but with extraordinary levels of intensity in regions where wars of resistance and internecine conflict rage. David Edwards of Medialens quite correctly contrasted the almost daily massacres in Iraq with the occasional school and office shoot-outs in the US and Europe. 36 dead i the Virgina Tech massacre is a tragedy, sure, but hundreds slain day in day out is an affront against humanity. However, many who have moved from some of the world's worst conflict zones to the obsessively consumerist dystopia of the wider American empire feel ironically under greater threat.

Violence means much more than the simple exertion of physical force with the intent to maim or kill others, it means the exertion of physical, sensory, mental or economic force to deny others of their livelihood, whose definition varies according to cultural expectations. To make a simple example, the only difference between machine-gunning a family of African subsistence farmers and evicting the same family from their land while failing to provide them with alternative means of sustenance is immediacy. In the former scenario they die instantly, in the second they starve slowly. So is society as it has evolved recently in the UK become more or less violent?

Nominally, it may have actually become less violent. Parents seem much less willing to resort to physical force to rein in their offspring, mindful of the consequences if their sheer frustration leads them to overstep the mark. As noted elsewhere crime statistics rely heavily on classification and reporting, but based purely on calls to national helplines there has been a huge rise in parents falling victim to physical abuse by their sons and daughters. The mass media, including the liberal establishment's BBC, also seems preoccupied with the spectre of child abuse, especially when attributable to outmoded institutions such as the Church and where the blame can be placed clearly with sad sexually deprived individuals who unleash their fantasies on the innocent. As usual such a narrow focus misses the details of a much bigger picture. Child abuse is an abstract concept. Certainly extreme deprivation leading to severe malnutrition, life-threatening disease and violence leaving permanent physical and psychological scars affect a person's long-term potential.

However, to the surprise of many wishful thinking do-gooders, back in the 70s school kids often preferred a quick dose of corporal punishment to the prospect of several hours detention or humiliation in front of their parents. This doesn't mean corporal punishment is good, but may often in the real world be viewed as the lesser of two evils. Seriously, how many children ever ended up in hospital as a result of excessive corporal punishment? Now compare this with the number hospitalised as a result of school or street fights. If teenagers are drawn into a subculture of pervasive recreational drugs, having to resort to theft or prostitution to feed their habit, who should we blame? The parents, society or some alleged genetic weakness in the kids themselves? Increasingly social workers and health professionals turn to the third explanation, but often blame controlling or traditionally strict parents. To compete in today's superficial social rat race, parents need to act and look as cool as the media role models their kids aspire to. To win your teenage daughter's trust, you may need to undergo cosmetic surgery or simply let her have her way when friends invite her for a night out on the town. In a community where most children respected their parents and were not under media-induced peer pressure to participate actively in a deceptively named fun culture of all night raves, life was easy for sensible parents whose only wish was to steer their children away from danger. But Blair's Britain is not like that. Open your eyes and ears in any shopping centre, remove yourself temporarily from your early 21st century bubble and you'll soon realise you're surrounded by technicolor, high-fidelity bullies unleashing incessant doses of none-too-subtle psychological torture. “Heh, you, you're not as cool as these dudes!". If you dare to complain about the unbearable rap beat in a clothes store or, as I did once, in a book store, expect to be either ignored or if you insist to receive a mildly reassuring talk from some lowly shop manager about marketing. In any case be in no doubt, that your aversion to a non-stop blur is your problem, not theirs.

Violence may be defined, at least according to the free dictionary bundled with my computer:

  • Behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
  • Strength of emotion or an unpleasant or destructive natural force : the violence of her own feelings.
  • The unlawful exercise of physical force or intimidation by the exhibition of such force.

Based on the latter two definitions, provocative imagery and noise intimidate as much or even more than physical force. The media like to remind us of the importance of mental health, but fail to examine their own role in adversely destabilising our sense of self. The media frequently practices another intimidatory form of violence, humiliation by association. Over the last week the media has successfully whipped up hysteria against the alleged abductor of a three year old girl on holiday in Portugal with her well-to-do parents. In the recent past we've seen masses of Sun-readers engage in animated protests, sometimes resorting to violence, against real and alleged paedophiles. Thus anyone unknown to the community at large and whose behaviour may at times seem suspect may fall victim to a paedo witch hunt. That's an awful lot of people in our atomised island state, where close-knit communities are largely a distant memory. Only a few months ago the media lynched a lonesome resident of Ipswich falsely accusing him of the murder of five prostitutes and publishing details of his MySpace activities. Should we arrest the remaining millions of alienated adults whose social life has been reduced to virtual tomfoolery. Why not arrest all those idiots on person.com who broadcast masturbation live from their Webcams? All this socially divisive fear-mongering generates intimidatory violence against anyone who fails to meet societal expectations and withdraws into an alienated existence. Violence is anything that harms people mentally or physically. No society is devoid of violence, but where conflict is minimised, so to is violence in all its forms. Otherwise psychological intimidation and alienation can soon manifest themselves physically either through self-harm, drug abuse or direct attacks against the person.

Categories
All in the Mind

The Arbitrary Extension of the Autistic Spectrum

Over the last twenty years we have witnessed a semantic shift in the concepts of autism and the wider autistic spectrum. The former may assume three broad definitions:

  1. A mental condition devoid of a theory of mind with which to relate to other human beings. In this sense we all start life in an autistic state and gradually develop progressively more advanced theories of mind. Early attachment with one's primary care-giver and bonding with real-world friends clearly play a crucial role. However, alienation, severe depression and other traumatic events may cause individuals to regress to a more autistic state.
  2. A severe pervasive communication disorder affecting the early progress of key developmental milestones, in which an individual fails to empathise with or respond emotionally to other human beings as members of the same species or community. It is accompanied by a severe intellectual handicap in 70% to 80% of cases. This kind of classic Kanner's autism affects a very small minority of children. However, recently we have seen a rise in regressive autism, in which children develop normally for the first 24 to 48 months and then regress into an autistic state (as per definition 1). In some cases regression has been known to occur at even later stages, however, it is reasonable to conclude that such a deterioration in a person's emotional and social intelligence stems from an underlying neurobiological abnormality. Even if we include the latter group the percentage, according to statistics furnished by the National Autistic Society, of people with high-functioning or low-functioning autism does not exceed 0.2% of the UK population. This is admittedly higher than official autism rates in many other European countries, but individuals with such severe impairments would be classified as in some way learning disabled in all countries with advanced health and social services.
  3. A pervasive personality disorder affecting socialising patterns often accompanied by obsessive interest in a narrow range of circumscribed subjects, relative lack of empathy, relatively poor soft skills, tendency to work alone rather than as a team player, lack of expressiveness in one's body language, idiosyncratic mannerisms, depression, hypersensitivity to sensory inputs etc.. This spectrum usually includes Asperger's Syndrome and Semantic Pragmatic Disorder, but is often extended to include even vaguer labels such as ADHD, Tourettes, Social Anxiety Disorder and schizophrenia. We cannot ignore the conspicuous fact that numerous individuals have been diagnosed with two or more of these labels at different times in their lives. Unlike autistics as per definition 2 people in this category have all reached essential developmental milestones within the normal range. They are thinking, talking, emotionally responsive human beings whose behavioural traits blend into the mainstream. Indeed many question whether the behavioural traits associated with these labels should be considered in any way pathological, and thus worthy of treatment, at all.

As someone who has been diagnosed with AS myself, I know from personal experience that the psychological problems that lead affected individuals or their close relatives to seek diagnosis are very real. Many live very isolated lives coping with long-term unemployment and extreme social alienation. Any caring society should reach out to such vulnerable people. However, the growing autism and Asperger's support sector is unanimous in concluding that:

  1. People with personality disorders as per definition 3 belong to the newfangled autistic spectrum.
  2. The underlying cause of their problems is neurobiological, i.e. They have different brains.

These assertions are recycled in countless books, magazine articles, medical abstracts and Web sites, despite the fact hardly any of the 380,000 (according to NAS statistics) people diagnosed with AS have ever had a PET or fMRI scan. The evidence cited to support the theory that AS-individuals have a clearly identifiable brain structure different from that of so-called neurotypicals is at best fragmentary and inconsistent, but more important refers in most cases to genuine autistics (HFA or LFA). They also fail to explain how some individuals have recovered emotionally and socially from severe traumatic brain injuries or account for the latest research into the emerging field of neuroplasticity, which shows how the frontal cortex regularly rewires itself in response to environmental stimuli. Thus it should not surprise us if individuals with a given set of behavioural traits yield analogous activation patterns in the orbito-frontal cortex during an fMRI scan, as results for the same individual have been shown to vary in response to mood and recent personal experiences.

Heterogeneity of AS-diagnosed Individuals

Before we can generalise the behavioural or alleged neurological differences associated with Asperger's individuals, we need to ask whether they form a homogeneous group in any meaningful sense. Most affected individuals are diagnosed on the basis of clinical observation. I know of one specific instance in which an individual was diagnosed after a single one-hour session. Increasingly diagnosticians consider AS to be the high-end of the autistic spectrum, so a sizable number of individuals, who would previously be labelled as HFA or regressive autistics, are labelled AS because they can talk.

Misdiagnosis: The Case of Joe

As a community support worker in a project aiming to provide individuals with a learning disability with some work experience, I came into contact with a young man, who I will call Joe to respect his confidentiality. At the time I had recently been diagnosed with AS myself and was particularly keen to develop a rapport with Joe. His speech was limited and greatly simplified, he seemed relatively oblivious to conversations going on around him, his expressions of key social concepts were extremely simplified (e.g. “My dad builds bad houses†meant "my father is an architect whose work may have been criticised"). Admittedly he had islets of ability, notably in trains and aeroplanes, but at the age of 23 was for all intents and purposes illiterate and despite the best efforts of numerous special education teachers and social workers he had only very basic numeracy. He could, however, perform some tasks, such as working a badge-making machine, extremely well and had showed interest in sealife and dry-stone dyking. However, sometimes his support workers would mislead others by overstating his abilities, e.g. He had attended an electronics course at a local college and had learned to solder components onto a printed circuit board, but had no idea of the functions and relationships of the components. His masterpiece exhibited by an eager support worker was little more than a plastic board with a neat artistically arranged pattern of transistors and resistors. Joe required 24 hour support and showed no interest at all in socialising with or even remembering the names of colleagues. How could such a person be diagnosed with AS and placed in the same category as nerdish university professors or sufferers of social anxiety?

I later learned more of Joe's background. He had apparently regressed rapidly from the age of seven and had suffered repeated epileptic convulsions as a teenager. For many years he would not talk at all. I know nothing of his medical history, but it is to be assumed that he had been administered barbiturates and benzodiazepines with side effects known to induce severe retardation.

It is thus quite possible to select a group of AS-diagnosed individuals with severe emotional deficits for fMRI screening and then conclude, erroneously IMHO, that others with apparently less severe symptoms, conform to the same neurological pattern.

Two Very Different Phenomena

I believe we are faced with two very different phenomena, whose similarities are only apparent on the basis of cursory clinical observation.

  1. Neurobiological autism, i.e. Caused by a fundamental brain abnormality. It should be stressed that there is an enormous variation within this group and many genuine autistics are not only talented, but have progressed to write books and lead successful careers (Donna Williams and Temple Grandin come to mind). Also as the onset of autistic behaviour varies considerably there are likely to be many subgroups with different aetiologies, e.g. regressive or late onset autistics are less likely to have an inherent genetic defect.
  2. Psychological disturbance of culturally defined normal emotional and social development: This encompasses by far the largest group of people classified within the broad autistic spectrum. The associated idiosyncratic behavioural traits, labelled autistic, AS, ADHD etc.., result from a complex interaction with environmental, somatic and psychological influences.

Possible Causes of Psychological Asperger's

For want of a better term I will stick with the label Asperger's, a loose term for people exhibiting the behavioural traits outlined in the DSM-IV. At this stage it should be noted that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual is a publication of the American Psychiatric Association, but is a common reference in a number of other countries, notably the Anglo-Saxon World (UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) and regions with close to the Anglo-Saxon model such as Scandinavia. AS entered the DSM at the same time as ADHD and diagnosis only became common in the mid to late 1990s following considerable media exposure by various advocacy groups. Many psychologists have already questioned the validity of ADHD as a psychiatric label. Others have long challenged the very concept or neurobiological origins of schizophrenia or more recent constructs such as bipolar disorder. AS-diagnosed individuals cover a wide spectrum of behavioural traits that clearly overlap with those associated with other psychiatric labels.

It is important to distinguish somatic and minor neurological adaptation that may affect an individual's sensory perception or relative ability to perform complex tasks such as playing ball games, dancing or multitasking in an environment with conflicting sensory input on one hand, from fundamental neurological difference that completely inhibit a person's ability to form relationships, communicate or relate to other people in a characteristically human way. E.g. Many visually impaired people suffer forms of social alienation, but nobody would suggest that blindness in itself stops people from forming meaningful human relationships or causes clinical depression. The latter symptoms arise because normal social interaction is inhibited by a sensory impairment. Likewise a person who has suffered severe facial burns is expected to take time to adapt psychologically to people's duplicitous reactions to their disfigurement. As long as these differences are clearly identifiable and labelled as disabilities, other people can learn to compensate and often overcompensate.

  1. Dyspraxia:Many, but by no means all, AS-diagnosed people have various degrees of dyspraxia, namely a deficiency in hand-eye co-ordination, a slightly delayed reaction time or just plain clumsiness. This is likely to have a neurobiological basis. As a child I tried to join in football games, but simply kept missing the ball. At the time I put this down to a weak left eye, but obviously some people have better fine-motor co-ordination than others in the same way as some are more musically talented than others, but we'd only define people with a severe motor impairment as in any way disabled. Also only a minority of dyspraxics would meet the diagnostic criteria for AS. We may merely state that there is a relatively high correlation between dyspraxia and AS. Dyspraxia affects our ability to participate fully culturally important pursuits such as ball games and dancing, making us appear uncool and choose other more individual pursuits, isolating ourselves from a key part of mainstream social life and depriving us of opportunities to learn team-playing techniques so important in today's socially competitive society.
  2. Minor Disfigurements: Many AS-diagnosed people have minor aesthetic disfigurements, severe teenage acne, eating disorders etc.. IMHO AS-like behavioural traits often develop as a reaction to social rejection or an inferiority complex.
  3. Cultural Mismatch: A very large proportion of the AS-diagnosed individuals I have met are in some way culturally mismatched, i.e. come from a family background somehow out of tune with the prevailing culture in their neighbourhood or school. Of fifteen adults who regularly attend the Edinburgh group, at least two attended private schools and thus have atypical accents for their locale, three (including myself) moved to the area recently from elsewhere in the UK, one moved from Germany and was diagnosed here (and seems intent on converting some of us to his brand of Christianity), most of the rest come from middle class backgrounds. Indeed I'd say only 3 or 4 come from ordinary working class backgrounds at all, who incidentally tend to be the least vocal at meetings. IMHO AS-like behavioural traits tend to develop as a reaction to cultural alienation in the absence of a strong sense of community. This may explain why relatively few members of non-white ethnic minorities have been diagnosed with AS. I have come into a contact with a Hong-Kong born, ethnically Chinese, young man diagnosed with AS, but his cultural affiliation is most definitely Anglo-American.
  4. Modern Lifestyle: AS-like behaviour is only identifiable in regions that have adopted a high-consumption economic model in which most people are employed in the tertiary sector with a prolonged adolescence and a high percentage of young adults attending further education. In regions where most people are involved in the primary or secondary sectors (farming or extraction and crafts or production) the relative social handicaps associated with AS are neither apparent nor considered pathological. Some people are considered to have different characters with different relative strengths and weaknesses. We cannot ignore the psychological effects of radical cultural changes in the space of a few generations. Only a generation ago, the whole media universe (TV, video-games, computers, mobile phones etc.) played a relatively peripheral role in the development of imagination, creative play and social relationships. The diagnosis of a new series of personality disorders in children and adolescents has coincided with a significant rise in exposure to a virtual world of electronic media and a breakdown in traditional family life.

Often these factors coexist or become self-perpetuating, e.g. Someone with a very low sense of self-esteem as a result of a cultural mismatch or relatively mild form of dyspraxia may not care much about personal appearance and hygiene and is more likely to adopt a couch potato lifestyle, with resulting eating disorders, obesity, acne etc.., for fear of rejection in the real world. Among the many secondary traits associated with AS, an Edinburgh-based autism consultant stressed sleeping disorders, yet failed to mention that insomnia has huge cultural variables. It seems obvious that sleeping patterns would be disrupted by long-term unemployment and addiction to television, computers and video-games. Also conspicuously absent from her speech was the fact that a known side effect of the medication prescribed to sufferers of AS, chiefly Prozac, Effexor and Paxil, is insomnia. The same can be said of the steady gaze considered characteristic of AS.

The Psychiatric Establishment and the Learning Disability Agenda

First let us distinguish three concepts:

  1. Neurologically determined intellectual impairment: This is commonly known as a learning disability and replaces mental retardation and mental handicap. While there are certainly many borderline cases, and undoubtedly many of cases of regression, this infers a fundamental and irreversible cerebral abnormality and should not be confused with low personal achievement due to environmental and psychological factors.
  2. Severe psychopathic personality disorders: Whatever the causes, the behaviour of some individuals is clearly antisocial. We need to examine why there has been a concomitant relaxation of the criteria used for such disorders and a rise in the number of depressed or socially alienated people seeking some form of psychological help or referred by others to psychiatrists. Although definitions vary considerably, psychopaths are thankfully a relatively marginal phenomenon. Most people would only kill under extreme duress or after prolonged operant conditioning, e.g. army training.
  3. Psychological problems aka mental health problems . These affect us all to varying degrees at some time in our life.

First it is my opinion that the first category only applies to a very select group of individuals who need our help. Second the emergence of the autistic spectrum concept has enabled a considerable blurring of these categories both in the public mind and more disturbingly among psychologists. Most of the literature about Asperger's Syndrome emphasises that affected individuals lie in the normal to high IQ range. However, most people referred to the NHS psychologist who diagnosed me had some form of learning disability, i.e. an IQ < 70. This term means different things to different people, e.g. it may apply to dyslexics with above-average IQ's. It is commonly confused with learning difficulty, e.g. A child with a mild visual impairment has a learning difficulty because she might need to sit closer to the blackboard or need reading books with extra large print. Clearly the PR machine of the autism sector emphasises that AS means autism without a learning disability, but the psychiatric establishment thinks otherwise. It classifies AS as a form of social blindness that severely impairs an individual's ability to interact responsibly in a social environment. It thus follows that to protect an AS-diagnosed individual from the consequences of his own actions, he needs special help and support, often a euphemism for control.

Again the autism sector seldom mentions schizophrenia or bipolar disorders, while the psychiatric establishment, with whom the former collaborates very closely (with individuals moving from one sector to the other), considers schizophrenia either as part of the autistic spectrum (cf. Lorna Wing) or at least closely related. There have been a few high profile cases of young men diagnosed with AS who have committed heinous acts. In one recent case a teenager murdered the daughter of two of his parent's closest friends. In another a man murdered his wife because he suspected her of having an affair with a colleague. The inference is thus that AS individuals, though usually just a little eccentric, are particularly prone to psychopathic behaviour and thus need more help and support before they contemplate such acts. By failing to distinguish the vague concept of “people who some psychiatrist has labelled with AS†with the more psychologically valid concept of “people who manifest a clearly identifiable set of behavioural traitsâ€, we are being lulled into accepting a huge expansion of the autism/AS sector and through the backdoor, of the psychiatric establishment. This latter aspect should be of particular concern to us in view of new legislation for compulsory screening for personality disorders and mental health problems in the United States.

Next we need to ask who this sector is really helping? As previously outlined, I know of two organisations in Edinburgh (Autism Initiatives and IntoWork) who have incredibly low staff/client ratios. IntoWork helps people on the spectrum find a job. Based on their performance so far (and I know many of their staff and clients), it would make more economic sense to use the funds allocated to this organisation to artificially create jobs for their clients. The autism sector keeps stressing the need for advice and information. I ask what use is incorrect, inconsistent and/or scientifically unproven information? What advice can a trained autism advisor give that many other socially aware volunteers could not give? In the end what each individual needs is a chance to meet new people, form friendships, complete education and get meaningful and adequately well-paid employment. Often the setting up of various “Asperger support groups†only ghettoises individuals who are already both vulnerable and isolated. All too often they are recruited to raise autism awareness (spread the message), thereby advancing the careers of their support workers.

Explaining the Enigma

The Asperger's enigma cannot be understood in isolation. If we believe that Aspies have radically different brain structures, then the psychiatric establishment may have a point. The real evidence on the ground I've seen so far shows clearly that the AS-diagnosed form such a heterogeneous group with such a wide variety of personalities and behavioural traits that any attempt to map their brains and identify neurological patterns would prove meaningless. Even a cursory look at available research reveals conspicuous inconsistencies with many themes common to the identification of other psychiatric labels or mental health problems, .e.g. It is extremely doubtful that relative serotonin levels could explain autism, yet leading autism experts such as Richard Howlin recycle such notions.

If over the next few years we witness a further proliferation of new personality disorders, I feel we should be extremely sceptical at the real agenda behind this movement. Also note that estimates for the incidence of AS, SPD, Tourettes, ADHD and Schizophrenia vary considerably. In some school catchment areas in the incidence of ADHD has already reached 1 in 5, in others it barely figures. Likewise some statistics suggest as many as 1 in 100 people have been diagnosed with AS or other related conditions, but many autism advisors suggest the figure is much higher. Again the same NHS autism co-ordinator, has publicly stated that as many as 10% of adults have AS. Where do they get these statistics from? Yes, a very high fraction of people share to varying degrees some of the traits outlined in DSM-IV, but what exactly does that prove if hardly a single trait is mandatory for diagnosis?

Do all aspies freak out in the presence of bright lights and loud noises ?
Apparently not I have met an aspie in Edinburgh who loves discos and noisy pubs and incidentally has no special interests to speak of, just a record of antisocial behaviour and joblessness.
Are all aspies blind to subtle facial expressions?
Again this varies a good deal, I'd say only relatively so and in some cases not at all?
Are all aspies loners by choice?
In my experience this is rarely the case, most actively seek friendships and become depressed precisely because of their social failings?
Are all aspies unaware of social etiquette or other people's feelings?
Only in so far that many are so depressed or alienated that they cannot identify with their peers, but given the chance most will soon develop empathy, especially for other like-labelled individuals.
Are all aspies scared of travelling to new locations?
Some are relatively stay-at-home types, but many I've met are intrepid travellers who would just like a companion.
Are aspies anticonformist?
Some are, but then some are positively conformist, often turning into faithful recruits to new causes, such as autism awareness.
Why do so many apsies think they belong to the autistic spectrum?
Because they have been taught so and failure to extend solidarity to a small minority of genuine autistics is simply politically incorrect. For many aspies autism simply defines their true selves. Some even talk of my autism as if it were a cherished attribute or possession. Some will celebrate autism as a positive trait and liken their struggle against discrimination to that of ethnic minorities. However, while we should all oppose discrimination against people with different personalities, the analogy with racism ends there. First people of black African descent form a clearly identifiable ethnic subset of the human species. Second no self-respecting black rights activist would campaign for "biologically inferior wogs" to be provided more help and support to overcome the natural superiority of the master race. They rightly challenge all claims of racial superiority and point to the socio-environmental causes, the legacy of slavery and imperialism, of their comparative lack of achievement in multicultural countries like the United States. Being focused, intellectual, frank or even hypersensitive to sensory disturbances are all great qualities. What is wrong is a society that labels such traits as pathological.

The problems faced by most people diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome will not be solved until we remove confusing psychiatric labels and dissociate culturally mediated personality traits from cases of severe intellectual impairment or severe communication disorders. We need to look at our society, not at biomedical solutions to personal problems.