1960s Pre-Asperger Disorder / Meds for Social Anxiety


Advertisement from the 1960s that promotes the drug Serentil as a solution for the anxiety that comes from not fitting in; for the type of patient who “responds with excessive anxiety” and “can’t make friends.” What used to be common social fact – awkwardness on the part of some individuals when among groups of people, becomes “pathological” and must be treated with drugs. Anxiety in a person “indicates” a disordered personality. By 1994, “social pathology” becomes basic to Autism and Asperger’s.

Note the “petty” social crimes that are judged to be “terrible” behavior.


Natural Selection should remove mental illness / Article

Behav Brain Sci. 2006 Aug;29(4):385-404; discussion 405-52.

Resolving the paradox of common, harmful, heritable mental disorders: which evolutionary genetic models work best?

Author information
  • 1Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23219. Matthew. C. Keller


Given that natural selection is so powerful at optimizing complex adaptations; why does it seem unable to eliminate genes (susceptibility alleles) that predispose to common, harmful, heritable mental disorders, such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder?

Comment: Natural selection is not a “thinking being”. It is an evolutionary process without intent. Nature does not say, “It’s time to eliminate those harmful, heritable mental disorders”. The disorders are NOT inherited: “susceptibility alleles” may be inherited, but the simple presence of these alleles does not constitute bipolar disorder nor schizophrenia. Bipolar and schizophrenia are the manifestation, or expression, of these alleles becoming active at some time in the carrier’s life.

We assess three leading explanations for this apparent paradox from evolutionary genetic theory: (1) ancestral neutrality (susceptibility alleles were not harmful among ancestors), (2) balancing selection (susceptibility alleles sometimes increased fitness), and (3) polygenic mutation-selection balance (mental disorders reflect the inevitable mutational load on the thousands of genes underlying human behavior). The first two explanations are commonly assumed in psychiatric genetics and Darwinian psychiatry, while mutation-selection has often been discounted. All three models can explain persistent genetic variance in some traits under some conditions, but the first two have serious problems in explaining human mental disorders.

Ancestral neutrality fails to explain low mental disorder frequencies and requires implausibly small selection coefficients against mental disorders given the data on the reproductive costs and impairment of mental disorders. Balancing selection (including spatio-temporal variation in selection, heterozygote advantage, antagonistic pleiotropy, and frequency-dependent selection) tends to favor environmentally contingent adaptations (which would show no heritability) or high-frequency alleles (which psychiatric genetics would have already found). Only polygenic mutation-selection balance seems consistent with the data on mental disorder prevalence rates, fitness costs, the likely rarity of susceptibility alleles, and the increased risks of mental disorders with brain trauma, inbreeding, and paternal age. This evolutionary genetic framework for mental disorders has wide-ranging implications for psychology, psychiatry, behavior genetics, molecular genetics, and evolutionary approaches to studying human behavior.





Personal Comment / Bipolar Treatment

I’m always relieved to discover new research on possible concrete “causes and contributions” to various so-called mental illnesses, a label we’re stuck with, because too many “experts” still believe that certain behaviors aren’t “physical” but supernatural in origin; murky psychic-emotional deformities that require arcane knowledge to understand and treat. Is some therapy constructive? Sure; having a person “captive” in a room for 30 minutes in an awkward “relationship” with a stranger may loosen thought processes that are otherwise guarded or unconscious. I have been told by several therapists, however, that “clients” rarely say much; how helpful is that? How boring? I guess the financial reward must make the effort worthwhile.

1def4039a5ab24a02800857dd7bd45d4_jpgWhatever may lighten the load on those people who live with “mental illness” is welcome by people, who to this point in American social history, have been treated very badly, with ineffective “management” by psychiatrists (massive prescribing of sledgehammer drugs) and psychologists “amusing themselves” by playing around with whatever nice packets of bullet-point nonsense they read in college: cheerleaders for obsolete “old guy” theories. Their dogma has no relation to the severity of what is going on in the suffering human body and mind.

A rational, scientific, approach to “mental suffering” is BADLY NEEDED. This must include careful and meticulous life histories of patients; not checking off 3 out of 5 “bullet points” on lists of incoherent “symptoms” drawn out of a hat; phony symptoms that result in “diagnosis” of made up disorders, the criteria for which change daily. A “welcome” event at first for many “seekers”, only to be followed by the disappointment of endless waiting for useless appointments, disinterested and distracted therapists, and/or being drugged into submission for the remainder of one’s life, or until a court order expires.


I was diagnosed bipolar at age 36 after 22 years of searching desperately for an explanation for my subjective “mood state” and outward behavior. A prescription for lithium changed those “living conditions” so dramatically for the better, that I embraced medication as a lifelong “sentence” with little hesitation. This necessitated being “bound to” a psychiatrist, or to be under the “surveillance of” of a psychiatrist to obtain lithium – a necessary arrangement; medications are powerful interventions to the “normal” brain environment and must be monitored, but the “monitoring” is rather crude: a blood level measured at one point in time cannot accurately follow the fluctuating levels of lithium in the blood that may occur each day, week in, week out – nor can changes in “mood and activity” be eliminated: the top and bottom extremes are “chopped off” a graph of “high and low peaks” – a nice sine curve that is one’s supposed “bipolar” path.

The monitoring doctor cannot possibly “quantify or qualify” the effects of a chemical sledgehammer on the brain-body by anecdotal hearsay from parents or spouses, the patient, or the psychiatrist’s own once-every-three-months-ten-second-interview with the patient. Or worse – as is common, a “report” from a psychologist who “sees” the patient on some regular basis, and though not qualified to do so, makes “recommendations” about drugs and dosages that the psychiatrist rubber stamps with renewed prescriptions.


The “treatment response” in any such incompetent scheme is to “try something else”, which in today’s psychiatry-psychology practices means adding “new” drugs and essentially “blaming” the patient for “whatever” is the source of continuing or additional symptoms; lack of results is attributed to unproven “progression” of his or her disorder or (illness, addiction, etc) and is due to “something in his or her brain”. It’s never the ineffective or dangerous medication. This is outrageous, and the result too often is a sample packet containing a “legal pharmaceutical medication” than that has been dropped off with misleading sales promotion materials at the practitioner’s ofiice; the “new” (or commonly old, but renamed) drug may have been approved exclusively for treatment of a specific condition, and not for bipolar, schizophrenia or any of the hundreds of diagnosis now current, but samples are handed over to the “patient” anyway – without a prescription being written. The measure of effectiveness would seem to be, that if the additional drug, or drug combination, doesn’t “kill the patient” it’s good to go!

I didn’t realize at the time of diagnosis that I had become an involuntary member of “experimentation on living human subjects” which is supposedly illegal (and is criminal, in my book), but because no one monitors the activity of psychiatrists (and bad consequences can be attributed to the patient, because everyone knows that people with mental illness are “crazy” and cause bad outcomes all by themselves: it’s unpopular, to say the least, to bring up the possibility that one’s prescriber isn’t paying attention to what the patient is telling them; is not reading warning labels, or is too lazy to keep up with ‘science’ that could inform their decisions.

Like any “drug addict” the person with a mental illness, who has no alternative relief, cannot afford to upset his or her “dealer”

…More later on how an Asperger diagnosis changed everything…

Scam, scam, scam / Mental Illness Exploitation by Commercial Websites


FROM: Psycom.net, this page is billed as “an advocacy group” that is the Legacy of Dr. Ivan Goldberg (Hmmm…who was this guy, who “pioneered” use of the internet for mental health agendas back in 1986?)

3 Minute Bipolar Disorder Test & Screening. Get Instant Results.

Bipolar Disorder Test, by Arnold Lieber, MD (Many Dr. Liebers pop up in Google search results.) ©1997 – 2016 Vertical Health LLC (A vast collection of commercial “health” websites)

The legal “weasel” message: This information is not designed to replace a physician’s independent judgment about the appropriateness or risks of a procedure for a given patient. Always consult your doctor about your medical conditions. Vertical Health & PsyCom do not provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Use of this website is conditional upon your acceptance of our User Agreement.

THE “Bipolar” TEST –

“Complete the following to get an instant assessment on the likelihood that you or a loved one is displaying signs (notice avoidance of the word “symptoms”) of bipolar disorder. All results are completely private and confidential.”

Possible responses on actual test form, with check boxes: 1. Not at all 2. Just a little 3. Somewhat 4. Moderately 5. Quite a lot 6. Very much

No surprise! This “form” is standard (and not remotely science-based) in psychology and psychiatry. The same super-generalized, non-quantitative, self-diagnosing and “rigged” statements, framed by a guided and deceptive “bipolar set-up” of statements; either-or extremes which could be checked moderate to “very much” by any human… especially teenagers and young adults. The “up and down” moods and level of activity choices are very repetitive, and focus on one’s response automatically indicating “mania or depression” (how obvious can this fraud get?) These statements are actually descriptions of normal “puberty changes” that all children and parents endure.

Notice the use of “at times, sometimes, etc., which IMPLY quantity, but are not defined: one time in my life; twenty times in the last six months; every day? This is TOTALLY illegitimate.

Use of capitalization is in the original test.

Any human alive on planet earth could truthfully respond to these test statements and wind up as a bipolar suspect, but so could any HAMPSTER.  

1. At times I am MUCH more talkative or speak MUCH faster than usual:
2. There have been times when I was MUCH more active or did MANY more things than usual.
3. I get into moods where I feel VERY speeded up or irritable.
4. There have been times when I have felt both high (elated) and low (depressed) AT THE SAME TIME.
5. At times I have been MUCH more interested in sex than usual.
6. My self-confidence ranges from GREAT self-doubt to EQUALLY GREAT overconfidence.
7. There have been GREAT variations in the quantity or quality of my work.
8. FOR NO OBVIOUS REASON I sometimes have been VERY angry or hostile.
9. Sometimes I am mentally dull and at other times I think VERY creatively.
10. At times I am GREATLY interested in being with people and at other times I just want to be left alone with my thoughts.
11. At some times I have GREAT optimism and at other times EQUALLY GREAT pessimism.
12. Some of the time I show MUCH tearfulness and crying and at other times I laugh and joke EXCESSIVELY.

Be sure to click Next to see your results

These bogus “reference” sites, supposedly written by, or overseen by, psychiatrists and psychologists, are often “fronts’ for massive profit-making commercial  enterprises – for medical groups, publishers of self-help crap, “find a therapist” searches, related advertisers, guides and non-regulated expensive, but unproven services and treatments, or hidden “charity scams”. Every “legally permissible” deceptive tactic is used: legal? Yes; the government makes “exceptions” for white collar criminals via corporate, and interest group domination, of lawmaking by congress and myriad agencies that develop policy. Many “laws” are now written by business groups and corporations that simply “submit” the law to be passed. Special privilege to “lie” is accorded to both private and public-sponsored activity of the hugely profitable  Mental Health / Big Pharma industries that PLAGUE the United States economy, and which leave individual Americans with LITTLE TO NO HELP: The “prison-jail” industry is the default mental health system.

The Big Question:

Why do the legitimate members and professionals in psychiatry and psychology “look the other way” at these ethical and criminal violations of their “high status” fields, which are plummeting into an abyss of scammers, pop-culture financial exploitation and “despised groups” that manipulate profit from human misery? “Legal drug dealers” has become an apt reference for cynical exploiters of a “manufactured” mental health crisis.











“Wild Horses” in Wyoming; some are feral, but many have the short triangular heads early horses.

DNA analysis shows that prehistoric cave paintings of horses were realistic depictions of the Paleolithic environment, including the leopard-spotted horse.

September 2011, Daily News Full Article

Prehistoric Cave Paintings of Horses Were Spot-On, Say Scientists

Long thought by many as possible abstract or symbolic expressions as opposed to representations of real animals, the famous Paleolithic horse paintings found in caves such as Lascaux and Chauvet in France likely reflect what the prehistoric humans actually saw in their natural environment, suggest researchers who conducted a recent DNA study.

“However, our research removes the need for any symbolic explanation of the horses. People drew what they saw, and that gives us greater confidence in understanding Paleolithic depictions of other species as naturalistic illustrations.”


Yes, Paleolithic people were concrete visual thinkers! They could not “hunt for” and eat purple dinosaurs, nor shop the farmer’s market for gourmet chili peppers and gluten-free artisanal breads. They didn’t make “cartoon” drawings of actual living animals so that they could make stuffed animals with little appliqued hearts on them to sell online: they killed and ate horses.

They did access interior cave chambers – a feat that was at times astounding, in order to teach hunting and survival skills to the kids; to teach them animal behavior, hunting strategies, teamwork and safety, and which animals were seasonally available and where – which is what hunters still do.

A literal "hunting" scene? Man (he has a penis" is killed by a bison - not paying attention because he's placing "bird decoys"

A literal “hunting” scene? Man (he has a penis) is killed by a charging bison – the hunter was not paying attention to his surroundings because he was busy placing “bird decoys” mounted on sticks, which could be stuck in the mud bottom of a lake shore. Could be! There are many “literal” possibilities behind cave art.

This was done visually – an obvious fact. Real “hunts” were portrayed as “picture stories” which could be referred to again and again to impart critical information  on hunting behavior that was successful, and behavior that was fatal. Doing this in a cave (a literal visio-spatial “model” for mammalian reproduction anatomy) not only protected the actual drawings, (they are still present many thousands of years later) but encouraged the earth to “birth” new animals to replace those that die. Pregnant animals are featured: is this a “conservation” reminder to not kill females that are about to increase and perpetuate a prey species, a common prohibition today? Human bodies were left in caves, notably with red pigment – literally blood – the skeletons meant perhaps to supply “mother earth with “scaffolds” or models on which to build new “people”. It can be noted that the “origin” stories of many human groups claim that their ancestors emerged from the earth’s interior, an idea in accordance with cave, and cave burial activities. As “culture” collected, artificial caves – mounds, pyramids, temples and “whole body” burials and tombs sufficed where no caves existed.

Was this a “supernatural activity”? I think not. Reverence for the animals came from absolute necessity, stress and fear and similar status in the animal environment; humans were in as much danger of injury, predation and sudden death as all the other creatures in the food chain. Hunting large animals with “up close” weaponry was no joke: this “identification” of “being in the same boat” as the animals was true empathy, which engendered respect for life, not insincere socially-prescribed clichés as empathy is defined today. 

The location of “spirits” (natural physical, chemical and biological forces as observed in movement, change, metamorphosis, growth and decay, could be observed in every animal, plant and object; across the sky, ocean, and land. The world of sense and perception is an interactive system: this is and was true for all living forms. These physical forces were properly seen to “live” in prominent landmarks, springs, streams and lakes, and in unusually-shaped, patterned or colored pebbles; in shells, bones, or other “curious” artifacts found in the environment; collecting these force-containing objects” is the concrete expression of human experience and observation. Material properties, shapes, forms and patterns do have “power” – to teach; to become useful as tools and sources of food, medicine, clothing, shelter and confidence that challenges may be met and overcome through creative use of what is provided by the environment. This potential for utility offers “real” magic: invention.

(Supernatural magic retains the object, or a “copy” of its form, but attributes personal power to whomever possesses the “object” – power achieved by the devotee’s recitation of charms, spells, prayers and ritual actions believed to “seal the deal”. Words are believed to possess power and to corner the power for one’s own use. This principle is blatantly active  in the never-ending obsession to find the Holy Grail, the Arc of the Covenant, and myriad other objects, (and LOL) in the “quest” by archaeologists to “dig up, possess and identify” cultural artifacts, thus gaining “ownership” of archaic knowledge. The “interpretation” of a suspiciously high percentage of what archeaologists identify as “sacred ritual religious or spiritual objects”) only adds to the “power” gained; naming and describing confers “ownership” of magic power. Countless peoples have experienced this “appropriation” over the history of Western archaeological activity.

Words have redefined human experience, as an enclosed and limited “supernatural” version of existence; the body (and all physical processes and forms) is believed to be an “illusion” that disguises a hidden “real universe” in which infantile desire dictates a narcissistic “scheme” that defies all reason. Physical reality is no longer the source for the observable environment; an imaginary mental “state” of self-centeredness is given credence as the creative realm. This inversion of cause and effect exists ONLY in the modern human mind, and results in incredible misinterpretation about what the concrete “wild human” brain functioned.



Wild Horses / Paleolithic Paintings and Hunting Today

Dog Model of the Self-Domestication of Modern Neotenic Humans

The Rise of the Dog | Full Episode

Watch: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/dogs-that-changed-the-world-video-full-episode-the-rise-of-the-dog/8369/

“This film explores how the domestication of dogs might have taken place, including the theory of biologist Raymond Coppinger that it was the animals themselves — and human trash — that inspired the transformation. The genetic analysis of Peter Savolainen of the Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden has placed the origins of domesticated dogs — and those of the first dog — in East Asia.”



Comment: Some typical “fanciful” assertions and about both “wild humans and dogs” – a bit “airy-fairy” about our treatment of dogs and other animals, behavior which is too often horrifically brutal, but I think it’s increasingly obvious that the evolution of dogs by both natural selection, self-domestication and extreme artificial selection by humans is a model for how contemporary Homo sapiens “came to be” a paedogenic-neotenic domesticated animal. We too, are a collection of “breeds” known by each other using mostly derogatory labels and outright lies about physical, cultural, and moral inferiorities: Race, subhuman intelligence, claims of being “chosen” by God, the supremacy of religious belief systems, poltical arrangements, languages, social hierarchies and even “fashion” or “beauty” judgements. Any imaginable “difference” is exploited to denigrate ‘other breeds” or human variation.

Humans! An ongoing evolutionary marvel and disaster.

And yes, I suspect that Asperger’s are less domesticated than hyper-social, magical thinking “neurotypicals” – with a sensory apparatus and brain type that processes the environment more like our “wild ancestors” – just as some dog breeds retain behavior and traits that are closer to their wolf ancestor than the many highly altered and neotenic “pet” breeds. The health consequences of “over-domestication” are alarmingly similar in humans, both mentally and physically.

But, like dogs – we never seem to let “social riles” totally prevent “natural” reproductive practices between “different types” of humans. Nature perhaps knows best!

Wyoming compared to the United Kingdom / updated bonus video

United Kingdom (an entire country): 243,000 Sq. Kilometers (95% the area of WY) / 64.1 million population.

Wyoming (one U.S. State): 295,000 Sq. Kilometers / 548,000 population.

I often stress that our pre-agricultural (forager, hunter-gatherer) ancestors could not possibly be physically, behaviorally and psychologically identical to contemporary neotenic, hyper-social humans, and yet archaeologists, anthropologists and psychologists promote this bizarre fiction. This uniformity isn’t even true today.


Remove 63.5 million people from the present day UK. That’s Wyoming. I guarantee that even in a modern global economy, Wyomingites and Londoners have far different “ways” of being human and of adapting to the environment, because the environments are drastically different, especially the social environment. The effects of environment on behavior are rarely considered when over-generalizing “modern” humans. It is assumed that white urban academics define Homo sapiens as  a species – obviously an idiotic belief.

There is not one human brain type, nor is there one prescription for human behavior.


White Hall Palace, London.

White Hall dormitory on U of WY campus in Laramie. The tallest building in the state at 11 stories – 134′. Also reported as 12 or 13 stories and 200′ tall by various blips on the internet. As usual, no one seems to know.