Son, it's like
a latrine in this society:
the human shit drifts to
the top.
--
My (heroic) father explains
human
society to
me ca. 1958.
|
I am still PEM-ed (see this for an
explanation) and so I didn't write any
Nederlog the last days. I did write some, on
different subjects, but that's not fit for
publishing right now.
There may be a later Nederlog
today in which I say a little more
about being still PEM-ed or about what I have
been writing on, but for the moment the
following will suffice:
One of the things that make it difficult to
write is the
mad and dangerous Simon Wessely's and
his journalistic helpers' or menials' latest
attacks on the human integrity and dignity of
millions of patients who are really ill with
ME, and namely this time with the message - as
always where Wessely is concerned, foisted
upon the public, without any real rational
evidence - that Simon Wessely and his
comrade shrinks are receiving death threats
made by patients with ME/CFS.
These now are brought to the
public without any evidence, by some
sick and sickening journalists - disgusting
drunk bullies, so far as I can read between
the lines of their kind colleagues - who work
for The Guardian and the BMJ, and who
clearly either know nothing about either
ME/CFS and about philosophy of science and
methodology, or impertinently lie and
posture as if they do.
As I said, there is not any rational
evidence for such "death threats", but
e.g. The Guardian's journalist willing
executioner and spreader of Wessely's bullshit spreads it
with a will, since
"The mild and
the long- suffering may suffer forever in
this world. As long as the patient will
suffer, the cruel will kick."
-- Rev. Sidney Smith
Also, if there is any truth to these
wild, unspecific, unproven allegations by
Wessely and his willing journalistic
executioners (*), it
only concerns one or a few, who did or who may
have done it, or who may have written some
fairly crazy mail that's easily misconstrued,
and who may not even have ME, or indeed - this
is the extent to which I trust Simon Wessely,
who in my psychologist's eyes is a sadist -
who may be Simon's very own assistants or
students, having their very own brand of
sadistic fun from an internet-café (as also happened to
dr. Myhill, it seems), and then taking
it to some journo-friends in the press, as if
this were "the truth, all the truth, and
nothing but the truth", and also clearly of
the kind that will not research
anything: They did not research the
alleged death-threats; they did not
research professor Wessely's standing in the
eyes of real medical specialists, whom you can
find e.g. here:
they did not read what ME/CFS is
and what manner of problems it causes to its
patients according to various qualified
medical doctors, who are real medical
researches instead of pseudoscientific
psychiatrists, also with a personal interest;
they did not research the sickening stories of
the manifold abuses of morality, medicine and
ill people psychiatrists have committed the
last hundred years, for which see
Also these journalists - e.g. in The Guardian
of sick sadistic shrinks: surely not The Guardians
of the interests of hundreds of thousands of
ill British patients: clearly, they
couldn't care less if their beloved shrink makes
patients go the way
of Sophia Mirza and Lynn Gilderdale, or
only will do some hypocritical handwringing to
the effect that they are not personally
accountable for the shit from sadistic
pychiatric assholes that they, as
journalists of The Pravda of Shrinks
that calls itself The Guardian, help shovel to
the public - nor the morality and humanity of
accusing hundreds of thousands of the possible
follies of one or a few, and indeed not at all
discussing the morality and humanity of refusing
ill people any help, merely on the ground
that a handful of shrinks, quite falsely,
quite dishonestly, quite immorally, and
without any rational evidence or real science,
accuse hundreds of thousands of somehow making
it up.
I find this thoroughly sickening, sick,
sadistic, dishonest and immoral, but
no: I do not find it
strange, since it is quite
human-all-too-human and explains a lot
about human history - again and again:
It's like a
latrine in this society:
the human shit drifts to the top.
-- My
father explains society to me
"The mild and
the long- suffering may suffer forever in
this world. As long as the patient will
suffer, the cruel will kick."
-- Rev. Sidney Smith
The
greatest bastards float to the top in almost
any regime and almost any institution,
as turds do in a latrine, if one does not
actively prevent this from happening, and so it happens not only in
governments, politics and in religions,
but so it
happens in pseudosciences like psychiatry
and in the very willing executioners of
authorities that often are journalists: It's
so much easier, so much better paid, so much
safer, to follow and serve authorities of
any kind and spread their lies and
impostures for pay.
As my title indicates, it is my personal
belief, writing as a psychologist and
philosopher, ill over three decades with ME,
and older than professor Wessely, that the
rational probability is that professor
Wessely is a sadist, a liar and a
pseudoscientist - which are
characteristics he shares with quite a few of
his fellow shrinks precisely because psychiatry
is since its inception a pseudoscience:
And therefore, and
especially because of the great power it
confers to those with degrees in it, indeed up
to having persons arrested for allegedly
thinking ill, this pseudoscience
attracts a far greater proportion of
instable, sadistic, manipulative, lying and
perverse characters to this decidedly
non-scientific branch of medicine than to
other branches of medicine, that aloso tend to
be far more difficult and far more scientific.
(Indeed, incidentally the same holds for
mostly the same reasons about clinical
psychology (**)).
Professor Wessely - like several of his mates
who utter forth on ME/CFS: perverts all, as
far as I can see, as a psychologist and
philosopher of science - seems to me a
mentally sick man who, in his case, tries to
compensate for the ills that were done to his
family, by causing ill to as many as he can
cause ill to, which may well - as the
great Freud taught us all, be something he is
quite unconscious of. (*)
I acquired this firmly
evidence-based explanation of Wessely
(and others) over a year ago, on the basis of
reading the truly amazing sick and degenerate
rot that professor Wessely and his associates
have published since 1988 (and that I had not
read before) as if it were 'evidence-based
science', which it very definitely is not, and
as I know very well indeed:
And I do intend to return to it,
because I strongly feel that professor
Wessely should be in an asylum, as a patient,
rather than persecuting hundreds of thousands
of genuinely ill British patients with his
very own potage of sick sadistic shrinkery,
also - as it happens - all in the very interests
of the incomes of shrinks, and to the effect
that whoever has a disease that medical
science as is cannot explain, has a disease
the patient makes up - for which reason
evidence of unknown or unexplained diseases
should, in the eyes of bullshitters and
crap-artists like Wessely, not be
researched but dismissed, and the patients
handed over, for pay, to a band of sick sadistic
shrinks, who pretend it is the patients who have
to be cured from their delusions, without help
for being ill, without medicines that address
their physical problems, and with forced
brain-washing and forced labour.
It's Soviet-style psychiatry,
and also the wet dream of sadistic shrinks, no
doubt, but indeed it is the psychiatric
fashion of the day: On the DSM-5TM - and the naive may wonder why.
Well.. the reasons for this seem
to be mostly (1) that leading psychiatrists
tend to be leading rotters, who are in it for
themselves, for the money, or so as to please
their personal perversions; (2) that
there is rather a lot of money to be made by
psychiatrists if
they can convince the public and the
governments that their manner of
grandstanding bullshit is rational science,
which is a lie or a delusion, even if it were
well-intended, which it isn't, except possibly
by total intellectual and moral
incompetents; while (3) the
professional medical organizations are very
much more interested in defending the
interests of medical colleagues than
of the patients of these colleagues,
and thus effectively refuse to correct the
lies, exaggerations, or clear bullshit of
their psychiatric "medical colleagues", also
without seeing these are stealing their income
and their patients, while slandering the
patients at the same time, all on the basis of
pseudoscientific bullshit and lack of
morality.
More later on the subject. Here
is emeritus professor medical chemistry (a real
science, not a pseudoscience) Malcolm Hooper (much
hated and maligned by pseudoscientific
shrinks, but NEVER rationally
and reasonably ANSWERED NOR ever REFUTED):
Professor
Hooper has given permission for this longer
article he submitted to the Observer to be
made public:
http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/Respons...er-article.htm
Observer article about Professor Wessely’s
allegations of death threats:
Professor Hooper’s response
25th August 2011
No right-minded person could condone any
campaign of vilification against scientists
(“Chronic fatigue syndrome researchers face
death threats from militants”; The Observer,
Sunday 21st August 2011); equally, no
right-minded person could condone what
psychiatrists such as Professor Wessely have
done to the UK ME community for the last 25
years.
No matter what the degree of provocation, it is
indefensible to liken people with myalgic
encephalomyelitis (ME) to the Animal Liberation
Front extremists. This will create a further
tidal wave of loathing against them. It is an
inexcusable attack on the whole ME community,
not just on those few people who may have
behaved irrationally. It might be thought that,
of all people, psychiatrists would know how to
recognise and deal with unbalanced behaviour
instead of exploiting it.
Wessely says he is concerned that such behaviour
is putting off researchers but it is he who is
putting them off by his endless purveying of so
much negative publicity about people with ME. He
perpetuates the dismissive, often contemptuous,
attitude of many healthcare professionals toward
those with the disease.
The problem is that although these scientists
claim to be studying patients with ME, they are
studying people with chronic “fatigue” (ie.
chronic tiredness) but then claiming that their
results apply to those with ME; this has
resulted in a lack of appropriate NHS medical
services for those with ME and in incalculable
harm and distress to patients and their
desperate families.
Even though the World Health Organisation has
classified ME as a neurological disorder since
1969, the Wessely School teaches that it is not
a neurological but a psychosocial (behavioural)
disorder.
There are about 250,000 ME patients in the UK.
By comparison, there are about 83,000 people in
the UK suffering from multiple sclerosis, yet
the far larger numbers of ME patients coping
with an equally serious neurological disorder
are not only denied both medical and social
support but are ridiculed, mocked, disbelieved,
derided and abused by those charged with their
medical and social care.
Dr John Greensmith noted in a letter to The
Scotsman (when Wessely was making the same
claims of vilification by patients seven years
ago): “It is deplorable if he has been so
treated, no matter how controversial his views.
It is instructive, however, to examine how
Professor Wessely has raised passions to this
level of fervour by, perhaps, more than any
other single individual, being responsible for
making the area as controversial as it is”.
There has been a constant drip-feed of
denigration of patients with ME and a dismissal
of ME as an organic disease over the last
quarter of a century by Professors Simon
Wessely, Michael Sharpe and Peter White; they
all belong to a group dominated by psychiatrists
(named in Hansard in December 1998 as the
“Wessely School”).
Most of them work for the medical and permanent
health insurance industry. The industry is
panicking because it stands to lose millions if
it has to pay out for a severe life-long
physical illness whose worldwide incidence
appears to be escalating out of control. In
1994, Wessely went on record about the
industry’s concerns: “By 1990 insurance and
disability claims (for ME) were doubling every
year”. There is plentiful written evidence that
the Wessely School advise their insurance
industry paymasters that ME is a “functional”
(ie. non-organic) disorder, which is to the
financial advantage of the industry, as
functional disorders are excluded from cover.
Wessely and his colleagues are also advisors on
ME to Government Departments of State (and
Wessely’s wife is Chair of the Royal College of
General Practitioners); as a result, people with
ME are specifically targeted by the Department
for Work and Pensions, making it difficult for
them to claim State benefits, with the financial
support necessary for basic survival being
ruthlessly withdrawn. Many very sick and
destitute ME patients have had no alternative
but to commit suicide, rates of which in ME are
known to be higher than average (sadly, a fact
does little to mitigate the charge that they
were “mental malingerers”).
The Wessely School’s blatant financial conflict
of interest has been roundly condemned by a
group of senior parliamentarians including the
former Chairman of a House of Commons Science
and Technology Select Committee and former Dean
of Biology; a member of the Home Affairs Select
Committee; a Minister of State for the
Environment; a former President of the Royal
College of Physicians; the Deputy Speaker of the
House of Lords, and a former Health Minister and
Honorary Fellow of the Royal College of
Physicians.
The Wessely School’s endless assertions that ME
does not exist except as an aberrant illness
belief by those who are seeking secondary gain
(an assertion for which there is not a shred of
evidence, as the many doctors, nurses, medical
scientists, lawyers, teachers, and others who
have lost their valued careers, salaries, homes,
marriages and even families because of ME will
readily confirm) has created a climate of
disgust for patients with ME, giving rise to
such banner headlines as “GPs despise the ME
generation” published in the medical trade
magazine “GP Medicine”. Since the 1980s, they
have made a point of mocking and denigrating
sufferers from ME in a way they would not dare
do about patients with multiple sclerosis or
other neurological disorders and this has been
fed to and reflected in the national media.
The Wessely School insist that they can cure ME
by “cognitive restructuring” (ie. brain-washing
patients into believing that they do not suffer
from an organic illness but from wrong illness
beliefs) and by forcing them to ignore their
symptoms and engage in a programme of
incremental exercise (one MP suffering from ME
collapsed and died leaving the House of Commons
gym, having been told to exercise back to
fitness).
What is ME?
ME is a chronic, acquired neuroimmune disorder
that affects every bodily system, not only the
neurological and immune systems but also the
endocrine, cardiovascular and respiratory
systems as well as the musculoskeletal and
gastrointestinal systems.
There is evidence of widespread, chronic
inflammation and of serious problems with the
blood vessels in both adults and children.
The muscles of people with ME have been shown to
take much longer to recover from minimal
exercise. Direct impairments in oxygen delivery
have been clearly demonstrated. Cardiac output
in ME patients has been shown to barely meet
metabolic demand, so it is no wonder that
patients feel – and are – extremely ill, with
profound incapacity and nausea; many patients
cannot stand unsupported and often have
difficulty maintaining their balance.
There are more abnormal genes in ME than in
cancer: there is compelling evidence linking ME
with exposure to environmental toxins and
chemical warfare agents. Gene expression
research has demonstrated 16 genes as having an
expression profile associated with ME. Genes
affecting the immune system and the functioning
of muscles have been shown to be abnormal. A
neuronal component was identified that is
associated with hypomyelination of the central
nervous system. The researchers specifically
pointed out the association of organophosphates
(which include household pesticides) and
chemical warfare agents with the damaged genes.
Notably, after one of the researchers who
discovered these acquired (not inherited) gene
abnormalities in ME, Dr Jonathan Kerr, publicly
criticised the psychiatrists who control funding
for ME research at the Medical Research Council,
he lost his tenure and his contract was not
renewed.
He was not hounded out of his research by
patients with ME, but by those whose mission
seemed to be to ensure that his voice was
silenced, leaving the way open for more
dismissal and disparagement of those battling a
devastating disease.
At a press briefing in the United States on 3rd
November 2006, ME was described by Anthony
Komaroff, Professor of Medicine at Harvard and a
world-renowned ME expert as “this terrible
illness”.
People die from ME and UK coroners have recorded
it as a cause of death.
Evidence from autopsies of ME patients is
chilling: there is evidence of oedema,
inflammation in 75% of the spinal cord, damaged
arteries, congestion of the liver and spleen,
ischaemia of the bowel, rhabdomyolysis (the
breakdown of muscle fibres with release of
muscle fibre contents into the circulation, some
of which are toxic to the kidney), and
degeneration of the brain. The Medical Director
of one US support foundation commented: “Every
time you look closely at someone with this
disease, you see immense suffering. There
appears to be no limit as to the human toll that
this disease is capable of exerting on
patients”.
However, when in 2002 the UK Chief Medical
Officer publicly stated that ME should be
recognised alongside disorders such as multiple
sclerosis and motor neurone disease, the British
Medical Journal quoted Professor Michael Sharpe
responding by saying that just because the CMO
says something, it doesn’t mean that doctors
will pay any attention.
The Wessely School’s published views about
people with ME
Since about 1987 the Wessely School have
consistently rejected the biomedical evidence of
serious organic pathology in ME.
In 1990 Wessely asserted that ME exists “only
because well-meaning doctors have not learnt to
deal effectively with suggestible patients”.
That same year he wrote in a medical textbook:
“The description given by a leading
gastroenterologist at the Mayo Clinic remains
accurate: ‘The average doctor will see they are
neurotic and he will often be disgusted with
them’ ”.
In 1991, he cited medical comments made between
1880 and 1908 on patients with neurasthenia,
with the clear implication that such
descriptions apply equally well to today’s ME
patients: “always ailing, seldom ill; a useless,
noxious element of society; purely mental cases;
laziness, weakness of mind and
supersensitiveness characterises them all; the
terror of the busy physician”.
In 1992 the Wessely School directed that in
patients with ME, the first duty of the doctor
is to avoid legitimisation of symptoms; that
same year, Wessely went on record about his
intention to “eradicate” ME.
In 1994 ME was described by Wessely as merely “a
belief” and a “myth” (“I will argue that ME is
simply a belief, the belief that one has an
illness called ME……I will argue that this line
here (pointing to a slide) represents…the line
between real and unreal illness”) and he openly
named and mocked a seriously ill ME patient in a
lecture; that person is now dead.
In 1996, under the guise of a Report from the
Joint Royal Colleges of Physicians,
Psychiatrists and General Practitioners, the
Wessely School recommended that no
investigations should be performed to confirm
the diagnosis. (This advice to doctors was
re-stated in the 2007 NICE Clinical Guideline on
“CFS/ME” in which the Wessely School were
instrumental. This means that investigations
such as a comprehensive immune profile cannot be
ordered in the UK -- even though one specific
immune test always corresponds to disease
severity in ME patients -- nor can patients be
sent for fMRI scans that show clear evidence of
hypoperfusion in the brain, nor can doctors
request SPECT scans that show reduced blood flow
through the brain stem in ME patients in a
particular pattern that to date has not been
found in any other disease process).
In 1997 Professor Michael Sharpe referred to ME
as a “pseudo-disease diagnosis”.
In 1999 Sharpe said about ME patients: “Those
who cannot be fitted into a scheme of objective
bodily illness yet refuse to be placed into and
accept the stigma of mental illness remain the
undeserving sick of our society and our health
service”.
Between February and April 2002 Wessely was
involved with a poll of “non-diseases” carried
out amongst doctors by the British Medical
Journal: along with big ears and freckles, the
poll found ME to be a non-disease that is best
left medically untreated. As a result, patients
with ME were struck off their GP’s list, one
extremely sick person being told scathingly
“This practice does not treat non-existent
diseases”.
For those who want or need to find out about the
published organic pathology in ME, a summary of
the biomedical abnormalities can found in
Section 2 of “Magical Medicine: How to Make a
Disease Disappear” (http:///www.meactionuk.org.uk/magical-medicine.htm)
and those who want a fully referenced account of
what the Wessely School and the insurance
industry are really up to can read the rest of
the 442 page report.
The Wessely School’s dismissal and rejection of
the biomedical evidence on ME has continued
unabated. It was not the fact that UK scientists
such as Professor Myra McClure failed to find
evidence of the retrovirus XMRV found in ME
patients by US researchers that caused such an
eruption of anger within the ME community: it
was the utterly triumphant and contemptuous
comments of certain of those scientists whose
studies failed to replicate the original XMRV
study published in Science (2009:326:585-589)
that so incensed some people with ME and the
medical scientists and clinicians who are
striving to help them.
Patients with ME know what Wessely really thinks
about them, as his published views leave no room
for doubt or conjecture (for illustrations of
his descriptions of ME/CFS patients, see
“Quotable Quotes about ME/CFS”: http://www.meactionuk.org.uk/Quotabl...es_Updated.pdf).
The views of the Wessely School about ME have
repeatedly been shown by medical scientists of
international repute to be completely wrong: the
recently published International Consensus
Criteria for ME produced by 26 world experts
from 13 countries points to widespread
inflammation and multisystemic neuropathology,
consistent with the WHO classification of ME as
a neurological disorder, of which the cardinal
symptom is post-exertional nalaise. The authors
state: “Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME), also
referred to in the literature as chronic fatigue
syndrome, is a complex disease involving
profound dysregulation of the central nervous
system and immune system, dysfunction of
cellular energy metabolism and ion transport and
cardiovascular abnormalities. The underlying
pathophysiology produces measureable
abnormalities in physical and cognitive function
and provides a basis for understanding the
symptomatology.”
What is astonishing is that no NHS clinician has
the autonomy to regard ME as a somatoform
disorder because the WHO classifies it as a
neurological disorder; the Department of Health
has confirmed in writing that: “The ICD-10 is an
NHS Information Standard….The NHS has a long
history of using the ICD. There is a legal
obligation for Department of Health to provide
ICD data to the WHO for international
comparison. The NHS was mandated to implement
ICD-10 on 1 April 1995, at which time there was
a formal consultation (emphasis
added)….Implementation…applies to NHS
organisations and their system suppliers, such
as acute and foundation trusts, primary care
trusts, and the NHS Information Centre”.
Not only the Wessely School themselves but also
many GPs and NHS neurologists are in breach of
that mandate: in 2010, 84% of neurologists
questioned stated that they do not believe that
ME exists as a neurological condition.
Who is abusing whom?
For the Wessely School to ignore the scientific
evidence that ME is a biomedical disorder is
abusive of patients with the disorder; for them
to advise the DWP decision-makers and to train
ATOS examiners that ME is a mental disorder is
abusive; to section patients with ME and remove
them from their distraught families is abusive;
to make sick people worse by inappropriate
interventions is abusive; to deny them financial
support necessary to survive is abusive; to mock
them and to misinform others about their serious
disorder is abusive; to insist that they suffer
from wrong thinking and a fear of activity when
they suffer from a very serious and significant
medical disorder with reproducible multiple
systemic abnormalities is abusive.
This widespread abuse of ME patients continues
unabated in the UK.
Robin McKie implies that it is these scientists
themselves who are being abused by the very
patients they are trying to help. If this is
true – and if it is corroborated by the police
and is not another public attack on people with
ME so often used by the Wessely School in the
past when yet more research appears that
vitiates their own beliefs -- it is an entirely
unacceptable state of affairs and must be
condemned without reservation.
However, responsible journalists should exercise
the requisite journalistic neutrality when
reporting a “story” and report the whole issue,
not just regurgitate uncritically what they are
fed by those with well-established vested
interests. McKie would do well to redress the
balance by reporting the presentation by
Catriona Courtier at the Royal Society of
Medicine meeting in the “Medicine and me” series
on 11th July 2009 in which she emphasised the
scandalous situation faced by ME patients in the
UK:
“Over the twenty years I have had this illness,
what has really bedevilled the situation of
patients with ME has been the belief, which has
been persistently promulgated, that we are
suffering, not from a physical illness but from
an illness belief. This is at the root of all
the problems we experience: the lack of
resources, the hostility and disbelief from some
doctors, the ignorance and disinterest in our
symptoms, the ineffective treatments, the
harmful treatments and in the very worst cases,
the imposition of psychiatric treatment against
the patient's wishes.
“Those who promulgate the view that ME is an
illness belief have undermined the mutual trust
and respect that should exist between doctor and
patient. They have done a great disservice to
both patients and to the medical profession.
“I began by describing the severely affected as
the weakest among us. In some ways they are the
strongest… to live for many years with an
illness like ME is a huge feat of human
endurance and courage but is seldom recognised
as such. People with ME at all levels deserve to
be respected. They deserve to be listened to”.
That patients with ME continue to be neither
listened to, appropriately investigated nor
correctly cared for but abused and effectively
abandoned is believed by many to be the shameful
legacy of the Wessely School.
Notes for Editors
1. All the above statements can be substantiated
by literature references.
2. Much other information has been omitted
purely for reasons of space; there are many
harrowing stories, as documented by Natalie
Boulton in her book “Lost Voices” and her DVD
“Voices from the Shadows” that is to be shown at
an international film festival in the autumn.
Thank you very much, professor Hooper! It's astounding
how few and far between truly rational and
truly reasonable men are, but then they do
exist, albeit alas in a small minority.
Notes
(*) This is a conscious
reference by me, who is the son of a hero of
the Dutch Resistance against Nazism, to Daniel
Goldhagen and Christopher Browning
"I fear we
live in a world in which war and racism are
ubiquitous, in which the powers of
government mobilization and legitimization
are powerful and increasing, in which a
sense of personal responsibility is
increasingly attenuated by specialization
and bureaucratization, and in which
peer-group exerts tremendous pressures on
behavior and sets moral norms. In such a
world, I fear, modern governments that wish
to commit mass murder will seldom fail in
their efforts for being unable to induce "ordinary men"
to become their "willing executioners." " (Christopher
R. Browning, "Ordinary men", p. 222-3)
Knowing a
lot about concentration-camps, and
having myself a grandparent murdered there
and a father who survived several of them,
for being a resistance fighter, not
for being a Jew, I'd like to suggest there
is evidence - quite a lot, according to
Dutch psychiatric specialists on WW II,
PTSD, and concentration-camp survivors and
their children - that professor Wessely's
father, who is said to have survived
Treblinka, not as a resistance
fighter, but as a Jew, survived by
collaborating, and wreaked this on his son,
who wreaked this on patients with ME/CFS.
I am willing to produce the
evidence in a court, where I can also make
my own claims concerning damages for
slander, discrimination, false accusations,
and conscious medical immorality agains
Wessely.
(**) Having
studied psychology I can assure the
reader that (1) it also is hardly a serious
rational empirical science, though some of
its parts are - that also often have been
restyled these days as "neuroscience" or
"neurocognitive science", to distinguish
these from psychobabble - and also that (2)
the students of the specialism called clinical
psychology - those who, like
Bleijenberg, end up as psychobabbling
therapists or professors in it - were, as a
group, the most evidently neurotic and
disturbed group of students I have seen in
the whole university: Most of them clearly
had personal problems to solve! (Indeed, the
morally bad thing is that most them did not
and still got a degree in psychology, and
then were let loose on the public, to make
money with psychobabble.)
|
