Psychedelic Psychiatry

http://scienceblogs.com/neurophilosophy/2010/08/30/psychedelic-psychiatry/

Fuck it, sign me up!  I'll try anything at this point and I doubt any psychedelic is any worse than some of the RX drugs I've taken. In the realm of psych treatments nothing should be of the table.  Some people are still cool with electric shock therapy so why not this?

Handedness and a final thought on inteligence testing

    One thing not mentioned in any type of intelligence testing is handedness.  I have heard IQ tests being criticized for being culturally or racially biased and that may be the case but no one has mentioned let handed people.  I am left handed and have been doing some research about left vs right handed people.  The first thing that jumps out at me is the statistic that only around 10% of the world's population is left handed, meaning naturally our world has been built to cater to right handed people, beyond that or a long time left handed people were even stigmatized and feared.
  
     So it seems fair that there is likely a flaw in regards to handedness in IQ testing as well.  This hunch is reinforced when you look deeper into what handedness means.  Right handed people are left brain dominant while right handed people are right brain dominant-this in regards to the left and right brain hemispheres.  The brain hemispheres are not the same, they contain control centers for different things, that's not to say skill grounded on one side aren't usable by someone dominant in the other hemisphere, just that they will generally be stronger in those things grounded in their dominant hemisphere.
   
     I found that many of the left brain traits are measured in the IQ testing however many right  brain traits are neglected.  This may be in part due to the fact that the left brain stuff is easier to measure.  Regardless it is interesting and yet another variable in this discussion.  It seems to get more accurate results left and right handed people would need to be tested differently.  Or at least have an equal number of left and right brain strengths be measured but as it is now it seems very slanted.

     Like most things regarding how the mind works brain dominance is still not fully understood but what is for sure is that left handed people definitely think differently and perhaps see the world differently.   For some more detailed information here is an interesting article:
 http://www.sciences360.com/index.php/characteristics-of-left-vs-right-brain-dominance-4-26016/

 For some interesting facts about left handed people in general check out this very interesting list:
 http://www.everydayhealth.com/healthy-living-pictures/little-known-facts-about-lefthanders.aspx#/slide-1

    




    

Howard Gardner's theory of multiple inteligences (More info)

    Here is a link(http://www.businessballs.com/howardgardnermultipleintelligences.htm) with some pretty detailed info about the multiple intelligences theory I mentioned in my previous post.I don't think there is any perfect measure of such an abstract and debatable concept as intelligence but I do like this approach.

     It seems with Gardner's theory it would be easier to find people's strengths and weaknesses; this could be very helpful in education as different people respond better or worse to various teaching styles as well as subjects.

     For example, If someone scored poorly in math but excelled in linguistics it seems logical that trying to teach them advanced mathematics would most likely just be a waste of time, however they may excel in writing and math wouldn't be important at all to them.  I people's strengths were isolated in a test rather than by trial and error through education they could spend their time focusing on sharpening strengths and leave the things they are weak at to other people who are strong at them and vice versa.  Gardner's categories would certainly be more useful than the far less specific definitions of intelligence used in tests like the WAIS.

IQ(WAIS IV) testing flaws

     I recently got the results of an IQ test.  I'm not going to list the results because that is pretty much pointless and I think would come off as narcissistic anyway.  Instead I want to discuss how I feel the testing is flawed in many ways and how the results really raise more questions than answers.

    First of all, what is intelligence?  Apparently psychologists don't know and they debate this.  The test I took was the WAIS IV.  The WAIS I was made in 1955 by a psychologist, so in well under a single century ow intelligence is measure has changed at least four times by just one form of testing!  There are other tests as well.  Plus there is a theory by psychologist Howard Gardner that there are in fact eight different types of intelligence.  So what is intelligence? As far as psychology is concerned, the jury is out.  But the Merriam-Webster dictionary says intelligence is:
[1

a (1) :  the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations :  reason; also :  the skilled use of reason (2) :  the ability to apply knowledge to manipulate one's environment or to think abstractly as measured by objective criteria (as tests)

b Christian Science :  the basic eternal quality of divine Mind

c :  mental acuteness :  shrewdness

2

a :  an intelligent entity; especially :  angel

b :  intelligent minds or mind <cosmic intelligence>

3

:  the act of understanding :  comprehension

4

a :  information, news

b :  information concerning an enemy or possible enemy or an area; also :  an agency engaged in obtaining such information

5

:  the ability to perform computer functions ]

 

     So the dictionary basically further confuses an already muddy issue.  I would say it's very difficult to measure intelligence but of all the methods I have seen I like Gardner's theory best.  His eight types of intelligence are: Language, Logic and Math, Visual and Spacial, Music, Bodily Kin esthetic, Intrapersonal, Interpersonal and Naturalist.  having these categories seems a lot more practical than the standard forms or measurement which seem to favor certain traits while failing to measure others entirely.  

    Now I'll talk about the more specific flaws in the testing, some I believe are factual, others are more opinion based(like most of the study of this topic).  Before discussing how what is measured is flawed I want to point out the testing completely fails to measure divergent thinking and creativity.  I feel it also doesn't measure logic or reasoning as well as they could. 

 

      On to what it does measure.  There are four categories. Verbal comprehension, working memory, perceptual reasoning, and processing speed.  The verbal comprehension and perceptual reasoning parts I'm mostly ok with.  What they measure I would consider true forms of intelligence.  I have issue with the processing speed and working memory parts.  For example...

    

      Working memory measures attention, concentration and mental control.  Right off the bat I know that all of these things are essentially handicapped for me.  I have constant severe anxiety and nonstop racing thoughts/flight of ideas.  What this means is my attention, concentration and mental control are automatically impaired, I do not consider that equivalent to having lowered intelligence and feel that with a good anti anxiety medication that these things could be less impaired but so far the doctors continue fail to help me in that department.  Working memory also measure mathematics, something i know I can struggle in but luckily I don't see myself in any career where math is too important however of all the things this category measure I do consider mathematical skill a form of intelligence.

     The processing speed section measures visual perception/analysis, scanning speed, visual motor coordination, motor and mental speed, visual working memory and visual perceptual speed.  These are things that largely seem to have to do with senses or eye hand coordination.  I can hardly consider those relevant to intelligence at all and like the working memory stuff many of those things are impaired in the same ways.   

     The verbal comprehension and spacial reasoning parts measure how well you understand things.  They look at problem solving, comprehension and processing of data, vocabulary and culture. They cover reasoning, ability to deal with society, how observant one is as well as some other things.  The spacial reasoning part also measure some things that I don't necessarily see as intelligence though such as some forms of perception.  

     So all in all, I found the testing to be interesting yet lacking.  Plus some of the things they call intelligence I would consider something else.  I would like to learn more about Gardner's theory and feel it should become the standard as the eight category method of describing intelligence just seems far more practical and accurate.

Cannabis Habit and Schizophrenia May Have Genetic Link (article)

http://www.livescience.com/46483-cannabis-and-schizophrenia-genetic-link.html

so now scientists know that people with psychiatric issues are more likely to smoke weed based on genetics. No shit!...  Of course people suffering are going to reach for something that can give them some relief  The belief tends to be the opposite.  Doctors and scientists often see that people with psychosis use weed and they assume that's what caused the psychosis. That is lazy, backwards and foolish at best; at worst its horribly corrupt.

I take the correlation does not equal causation approach to this "finding".

Meth for kids!

Psychiatrists love giving little kids amphetamines.  That's a fact.  Most of the common ADD "treatments" are literally time released amphetamines.  The "doctors" are like Walter White but slicker.  If meth for kids is the best thing they've got for a disorder that is over diagnosed to begin with then there's a problem.

How is it not malpractice?

How can psychiatrists get away with prescribing drugs that often don't work and can cause death while simultaneously ignoring their patients thoughts when the only evidence they have is anecdotal?  How is ignoring the possibility of less dangerous potential treatment options in exchange for pushing more profitable ones any way ethical?  Do psychiatrists skip the Hippocratic oath or do they think its a joke?  How have none of these monsters been charged with malpractice for the poisons they deal and call medicines? How is calling psych drugs medicines not considered false advertisement?  Medicines are supposed to correct problems, most psych drugs just tranquilize, only the feeling isn't exactly tranquil.  How the FUCK can any medical doctor honestly believe that amphetamines, benzodiazapines, anti-psychotics, SSRIs, etc are safer options than natural NON TOXIC alternative medicines?  They can't be that stupid, they wouldn't have gotten through med school if they were.  I am convinced the only explanation for pill pushing alternative medicine bashing doctors is corruption and abuse of their position.  They are dirtier than the guy selling crack in an alley, but they have that doctorate so people take their word like its scripture.  They are the sneakiest drug dealers in town but as far as the law is concerned what they are doing is fine.  There is no justice in psychiatry.  I dare a psychiatrist to prove me wrong!

Fucking state psychiatric care....

I have to wait until august for a "courtesy visit" with a doctor I hate because just letting me switch apparently has to be an ordeal.  Seriously what the fuck? I actually had to make an appointment that's entire purpose is to tell this doctor that I'd rather see someone else.  This is supposed to be psych care but they are stressing me out worse. How incompetent does a healthcare system have to be that it can't just accept that you don't like a certain doctor and let you change without a hassle? My parents were convinced if I called the office they'd probably let me just switch  but I already had been told otherwise.  Maybe they will finally get pissed off at these fuckers too.  But my mom would rather I take pills than smoke weed so logic is lacking... And calling it a "courtesy visit" is really fucked up.  This drug dealer with a doctorate is fucking rude and crooked, so why should I owe him courtesy?  I think what I should do is go there HIGH AS HELL just to make him look like more of an asshole.  This is the guy that in a 5 minute time frame after not ever meeting me before bitched about me using weed THEN giving me a klonopin script.  He's an ass. 

I might be demon possesed.

I'm taking world religions in college right now and as part of a research paper have had to read about Catholicism.  In part one book there are 7 "symptoms" listed that may indicate authentic demonic possession.  Even when I'm calm I have arguably 4 of them.  So there's a good chance I got a demon in me.  But for that to be true the book the belief is based on would have to be true and since I view it as complete nonsense it's just laughable.