Hugh Palmer

Bateson as scientist and therapist: Steps towards ‘fourfold vision’

2012-01-05T11:49:00.003Z

Some thoughts (due to be published and presented later this year) on Bateson and therapy....

William Blake, 1825, Job Affrighted by a Vision of his God

Bateson was a scientist, he was precise and loathed ‘muddled’ thinking but he also advocated being human with patients (he actively treated patients between 1948 and 1963) and part of what he attempted to do was ’help them find valuable patterns in their lives’.

Whilst known more as a theorist than therapist, Bateson, in this transcript of a patient interview in 1958, revealed a disarmingly transparent way of being with others, here in a conversation with a family about why they often moved location:

Bateson. I agree with much of what you say.
Mother. Moving is just for the birds
B. Having been an old –
Father. (laughing)
M. And even birds stay in the same nest (laughs).
B. – been an old mover myself. I spend time in New Guinea, in the Dutch East Indies, and God knows what else.
M. Well –
B. But –
M. It’s all right if you’re built that way. I mean each person has to do –
F. No.
B. I don’t know.
M. The reasons have to be voluntary. Mine are involuntary, I know –
B. I was frankly running away from all sorts of things.
(Bateson, cited in Lipset 1980 p. 220-221)

Jay Haley, in a personal letter to Lipset, suggested that Bateson would ‘…stay up all night with alcoholics, to get them through…He felt that being human with people was good for them’ (Lipset, 1980 p. 215). R.D. Laing, who observed Bateson in 1962, considered that, like some of the best therapists, Bateson didn't regard himself as a ‘therapist’, suggesting that “....If I was the patient in the session, I certainly wouldn’t have felt there was anything to be frightened of...he never indicated that he thought in terms of actually actively adopting strategic, practical means to use to pry people out of the entanglement they were in...” (Lipset, 1980, p.220) According to William Fry, Bateson was like an anthropologist with families; more of an observer than clinician or therapist, and would “...Switch between that role and a sort of friendly mother’s brother...raising tantalising and significant issues...They were very intuitive and hit the nail on the head, and would do all sorts of terrible things...creating insights and stirring family patterns up”. (Lipset, 1980, p.219-20)

Bateson showed compassion and intuition in his interactions, and he often emphasised the importance of therapists and doctors ‘being human’ with their patients, but was simultaneously able to also take on a more ‘scientific observer’ position, too and seemed to shift between these different positions. Eventually, he became disillusioned with psychotherapy, in part because of Haley’s inability to fully understand epistemological issues, particularly with regard to power, and left to study dolphins.

Haley again: “Bateson didn’t like power. He didn’t even like the word...anyone who said ‘I’m going to change this person’. If they said ‘I will offer this person some ideas, and if they change, it’s up to them,’ then Gregory would have no trouble with them. But if you take responsibility for changing people, then you would have a problem...Any influence outside the person’s range is odious to him. Any indirect manipulation is [also] out of the question”. (in Lipsett, 1982, p.226)

‘Power’ is a problem because we believe in it. Bateson agreed with Haley that power is a central human concern; he just wished that us humans would stop believing in power because the pursuit of power entails epistemological errors of thinking that always cause trouble. At the very least, the extent of our power-seeking seems to be influenced by culture. Instead of thinking of power in human relationships, we would be better served by reflexive dialogue about the ‘metaphor of power’, and see ourselves as simply parts of a larger situation. (Harries-Jones, 1995)

Bateson talks of power and lineal control in the domain of scientific explanation, whereas, as therapists, when we talk of "power," are speaking in the humanist domains of experience and description. “It is profoundly different to speak of power and lineal causality in the domains of experience or description as opposed to speaking of these matters in the domain of scientific explanation”. (Dell 1989) We need to be able to move between these different positions of both punctuation and of abstraction – but how?

According to Charlton (2008), Bateson considered that psychology was evolving in two directions:
• Humanist – working with clients as one human being with another, intuitively responding from personal emotional resources to ‘act spontaneously out of his own integrity’.
• Circularistic – consciously scientific, articulate about methods and results, aiming for predictability and logical coherence.

Bateson saw a way forward as a compromise; a working together of both types of practice; between intuition and examination/description, each informing the other. Charlton adds to this:

“Humanist, scientist, artist and theoretician are all needed to form the cybernetic unity of healing” (Charlton 2008, p. 94)

In my opinion, therapy truly influenced by Bateson would involve moving between all four positions (Humanist, scientist, artist and theoretician) and having the wisdom to value them all.

Now I a fourfold vision see,
And a fourfold vision is given to me;
Tis fourfold in my supreme delight,
And threefold in soft Beulah's night,
And twofold Always. May God us keep
From Single vision & Newton's sleep.
William Blake, Letter to Thomas Butt, 22 November 1802.

A crude description of Blake’s fourfold vision might be:
• Single Vision – ‘Newton’s sleep’ - linear thinking. Knowledge. Rational. Material.
• Twofold Vision – Appreciating our connection with nature and the environment.
• Threefold Vision – Unconscious processes, memory and intuition.
• Fourfold Vision – The delight of experiencing single, twofold and threefold vision, with constant twofold visioning in daily life.

I would like to offer this version for therapists (and others who are engaged in 'people work')

Single Vision – The Scientist:

Good observation skills.
Linear descriptions:

What is the issue?
Who is involved?
When does it happen?
Where does it happen?

Consideration of non-systemic explanations

e.g. physical illness, disabilities

Twofold Vision – The Theorist:

Consciously scientific observation of patterns within the family system.
Circular causality.
Relational aspects.
Systemic theorising.
First order cybernetics.

Threefold Vision - The Humanist:

Being human.
Connecting with personal experiences and intuitions, embodied aspects of practice.
Empathy.
Self of the therapist.
Disclosure and transparency.
Second order cybernetics.

Fourfold Vision - The Artist:

The aesthetic delight of working with and between single, twofold and threefold experience.
Self of therapist and family located and theorised in wider and wider contexts.
Higher levels of abstraction.
Mystery.
Sparkling moments.

References
Bateson, G. (1972) Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Charlton, N. (2008) Understanding Gregory Bateson: Mind, beauty and the sacred Earth. New York: SUNY Press.
Dell, P. (1989) Violence and the Systemic View: The Problem of Power. Family Process, 28: 1, 1-14.
Harries-Jones, P. (1995) A Recursive Vision: Ecological Understanding and Gregory Bateson. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Lipsett, D. (1980). Gregory Bateson, the Legacy of a Scientist. Boston: Beacon Press

Functional medicine: A systems approach to medicine

2011-11-18T12:47:00.000Z

Mark Hyman, MD has dedicated his career to identifying and addressing the root causes of chronic illness through a groundbreaking whole-systems medicine approach known as Functional Medicine

Bateson and Steve Jobs

2011-11-08T22:30:00.004Z

“I think that cybernetics is the biggest bite out of the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge that mankind has taken in the last 2000 years. But most such bites out of the apple have proven to be rather indigestible – usually for cybernetic reasons.” — Gregory Bateson.

“From Versailles to Cybernetics”, 1966. In Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology. University of Chicago Press, 1972.

This quote inspired Steve Jobs to come up with the Apple Logo.

Gregory Bateson, an English anthropologist, was probably one of the most important thinkers of the last century, and much of what he wrote about is critically relevant for how we think about dealing with the major problems we face as a species. His main concern was for us to change the way we think; what he described as a 'cybernetic epistemology' in effect is challenge for us to not only think about systems and complexity but to think systemically.

A song for #occupy #ows #olsx

2011-11-05T11:52:00.003Z

You don't have to take this crap

You don't have to sit back and relax

You can actually try changing it

I know we've always been taught to rely

Upon those in authority -

But you never know until you try

How things just might be -

If we came together so strongly

Are you gonna try to make this work

Or spend your days down in the dirt

You see things can change -

YES an' walls can come tumbling down!

Governments crack and systems fall

'cause Unity is powerful -

Lights go out - walls come tumbling down!

The competition is a colour TV

We're on still pause with the video machine

That keep you slave to the H.P.

Until the Unity is threatend by

Those who have and who have not -

Those who are with and those who are without

And dangle jobs like a donkey's carrot -

Until you don't know where you are

Are you gonna realize

The class war's real and not mythologized

And like Jericho - You see walls can come tumbling down!

Are you gonna be threatend by

The public enemies No. 10 -

Those who play the power game

They take the profits - you take the blame -

When they tell you there's no rise in pay

Are you gonna try an' make this work

Or spend your days down in the dirt -

You see things CAN change -

YES an' walls can come tumbling down!

Style Council - 1985

How to stop smoking AND lose weight

2011-10-29T10:57:00.008+01:00

Many people will find the thought of stopping smoking means also contemplating gaining weight. This need not be the case. I stopped smoking and lost weight (two stone or 28 pounds in 12 weeks) at the same time.

So can you.

I was getting annoyed with myself for comfort eating and smoking to relieve the upset that other people were causing me (I had been experiencing a particularly bad time with a work related situation) and was drinking a little more than was probably good for me. I decided to rebel against the crazy situation that I was in; smoking, drinking and over-eating to comfort myself because of how other people were making me feel.

It was time to begin my own resistance movement, and I suggest that you will need to do the same; instead of comfort eating and smoking, get angry at the reasons that you comfort eat and get angry with the reasons you smoke.

To be blunt, if you don’t want to stop smoking and lose weight, you won’t. Stop reading now, go and eat something, have a cigarette.

If you do want to stop smoking and lose weight then here is what I did. Three simple steps:

1 - Start the diet.

I chose the Dukan diet to start off with. This diet might not suit everyone, and to be blunt, there is no need to enrol on any of his fancy and expensive programmes, or even buy his book. I’ll explain the diet later.

2 – Stop smoking one week later

Give yourself about a week after starting the diet. By then you will have noticed some differences from the diet and will be feeling a little more positive because you will have lost some weight. Stopping smoking can be really hard, but having the focus of the diet helps. Feel free to use a nicotine substitute, but avoid Champix. I found nicotine lozenges most palatable. Use the lozenges as often as and for as long as you want (within reason, probably no more than six months), but try to get down to using 1mg ones within a few weeks.

3 – Avoid alcohol

Yes, I know this is harsh, but there are two reasons to do this. The first reason is that alcohol is so full of carbohydrates that it will not help you lose weight, the second is that the association with smoking may be too strong. The third reason (yes, I can’t count) is that alcohol is bad for you.

The Dukan Diet for cheapskates like me

The Dukan diet is a low carbohydrate, low fat diet, a bit like the Atkins diet but with no fat. These diets work on the principle that if we take in little carbohydrate (sugars and starches) our bodies will burn off fat deposits instead.

Your body uses carbohydrates as its main fuel source. Sugars and starches are broken down into simple sugars during digestion. They're then absorbed into your bloodstream, where they're known as blood sugar (glucose). From there, the glucose enters your body's cells with the help of insulin. Some of this glucose is used by your body for energy and extra glucose is stored in your liver, muscles and other cells for later use or is converted to fat.

The theory behind most low carbohydrate diets is that insulin prevents fat breakdown in the body by allowing sugar to be used for energy and by decreasing carbohydrates we reduce insulin levels, which causes the body to burn stored fat for energy and ultimately helps you shed excess weight and reduce risk factors for a variety of health conditions. I can attest to this as my cholesterol levels have significantly reduced.

Doing the Dukan means reducing sugar and carbohydrate. A lot.

Shopping list for your first week.

· Oat bran. This stuff is amazing; it reduces cholesterol, and you will be eating it every day.

· Skimmed milk

· Fat free, unsweetened yoghurt

· Fat free cottage cheese

· Fat free quark cheese

· Fat free fromage frais

· Sucralose sweetener, like Splenda

· Diet cola or similar diet drink

· Low fat proteins, including:

o Chicken

o Ham

o Beef (steak, mince)

o Fish and seafood

o Surimi (crab sticks)

o Quorn (plain)

o Tofu

o Textured vegetable Protein(TVP)

o Eggs – but no more than one a day

As you can see there is scope for someone who is a vegetarian to do this diet, although it is pretty limited if you are a vegan.

Week one

Dukan calls this the ‘attack phase’ and he recommends between 3 and seven days of only foodstuffs identified in the shopping list above.

You must drink plenty of fluids. Diet cola or tea and coffee are fine, made with skimmed milk and sweetened with splenda, but do try to drink plenty of water. Aim for two litres a day.

You should eat around two table spoons of oat bran every day. The oat bran can be made into pancakes (use some oat bran, fromage frais, an egg, and skimmed milk to make a thick batter, and them cook in a skillet sprayed with a little light oil) but to be honest, I found that most ways of preparing oat bran gave me terrible wind, and found the solution was easy; it is oat bran porridge.

I now start each day with a bowl of oat bran porridge, simply made by mixing two table spoons of oat bran, a good spoonful of splenda and skimmed milk, bunging the lot into a microwave and cooking on high until it bubbles up. Experiment until you get the consistency you like, just remember, the more you cook the oat bran, the less you will fart!

Eat as much protein as you like; I often have crab sticks for lunch, maybe with some wasabi (Japanese horseradish - very hot!) and a dash of soy sauce to add some interest. For my evening meal I might dry fry lean mince with some chopped up onions (onions and other things, like gherkin are ok in the attack phase to add some flavour) and eat with some cottage cheese on the side.

Another favourite of mine is to make a chicken tikka (marinade some chicken chunks overnight in yoghurt mixed with a bit of chilli powder and garam masala, then oven cook for 40 mins to an hour) served with yoghurt relish with chopped onion, chilli and a bit of mint.

I also bake with oat bran and discovered that quark cheese with a bit of lemon juice and splenda makes a great topping for a cheesecake.

The rest is up to you, but feel free to experiment. There are plenty of recipes online.

Week two onward

By now, hopefully you will be feeling more positive. You are doing something to change your life for the better and will have already lost some weight.

Now it is time to stop smoking. Use nicotine replacement therapy freely.

Whenever you have the urge for a cigarette, take in a deep breath of clean air, exhale it slowly, and relax a little. That little tip helped me.

From now on, every other day you can add vegetables to your diet. Choose low carbohydrate, high fibre vegetables. Salad vegetables are pretty much a free food now.

A couple of months later

By now you will have lost weight, and still be free from cigarettes too. This will be a massive achievement, and you will feel much healthier and be able to wear clothes that look good on you rather than hide you. Do remember though, that life will NOT be perfect!

By now you will be familiar (possibly even bored) with the low carbohydrate diet. It might be worth considering changing onto a low Glycaemic Index diet now, to incorporate more (slow release) carbohydrates into your diet.

Good luck!

Edit - November 2011.

Exercise

It is not necessary to exercise to lose weight, however, I recommend a half hour to an hour brisk walk every day, if you can.

Individualism and Collectivism: Schismogenesis and #occupywallstreet

2011-10-28T12:26:00.007+01:00

Most social systems require a balance between symmetrical and complementary relationships or patterns.

A symmetrical pattern is characterised by ‘tit for tat’. You hit me, I’ll hit you back. Obviously, this pattern has its uses, but unchecked would lead to the destruction of one of the parties in the relationship, and thus end the relationship too.

A complementary relationship is characterised, crudely, by a sadist and masochist, where the behaviour of one party complements that of the other. Again, this type of relationship can be useful, but unchecked, this pattern can lead to destruction as the sadist becomes increasingly sadistic and the masochist becomes increasingly masochistic.

Gregory Bateson (1972) referred to these runaway patterns that lead to destruction as ‘schismogenesis’ and argued that most relationships need to have a balance between complementarity and symmetry patterns. This balance could be thought of as a form of homeostasis. For example if a relationship is tending towards more ‘tit for tat’ (symmetrical) patterns, for example both partners becoming more violent, if one party becomes submissive (complementary), this would disrupt the runaway pattern and lead to a balance. Of course this new complementary pattern will, in time, need to be balanced by more symmetrical behaviour and so on.

In an earlier article I wrote about how privileging personal gain over co-operation can ultimately become self-defeating, and I wonder if there are parallels in the current political context where we might think of balancing patterns of behaviour on a societal level.

Short term, personal gain seems to be the raison d'être of the individualist culture; characterised by politicians whose policies are influenced by terms of office, popularity and benefitting themselves and where corporations are motivated by keeping profits up and shareholders happy. It has become increasingly evident with recent revelations regarding News International and the scandal involving Liam Fox and his friend Adam Werritty that politics and corporate desires are intimately connected, adding more weight to suspicions that there is small elite of people who conspire to serve their own needs.

The benefits of this culture are of course, competition (although sometimes this is faux), comparatively cheap prices and a reasonable standard of living for many people (in the developed world).

The downside to this type of culture is that the addiction to short term gains for the few is leading to future consequences that are self-defeating and destructive.

Cheap, unhealthy processed food has led to phenomenal numbers of people becoming obese, and diabetes is likely to be a massive burden on future health care services.

The environment is exploited without regard to the long term consequences of pollution and deforestation. The fact that global corporations sponsor climate change deniers is significant. Their addiction to short term profits over-rides any responsibility for future generations. Automobile manufacturers and oil companies have a vested interest in lobbying governments to keep citizens dependant on cars rather than other forms of mass transit.

The developed world’s addiction to oil is almost certainly the reason for US intervention in the Middle East, with countless dead and injured. The concept of transgenerational trauma (Shevlin & McGuigan, 2003) indicates that relatives of people affected by trauma, including those born after traumatic events, have symptoms of post traumatic stress. This does not bode well for the future health of states so significantly impacted upon by conflict. A dominant narrative of the developed world’s rapacity is likely to feed the emergence of more dissent and violence from poorer states.

A balance is required to counter what I believe is a runaway pattern of individualism, where a more collectivist, long term approach might privilege and prioritise differently, considering more closely the long term ethical and environmental consequences of behaviour. I hope that the #occupywallstreet movement is the beginning of this counter-balance. It is, so far, a peaceful and determined protest and it is to be hoped that it remains so.

I’d like to close with these words from Gregory Bateson’s daughter, Nora; words which I believe offer a wider understanding of the situation:

“When you peel back all of the lovely accomplishments of the great revolutionaries what do you find? At the center there is this: They did the impossible. They risked everything, and changed the unchangeable. Occupy Wall St...This is the exhale we have been waiting for. This movement is the release of all we have held back, and all we have deferred: the fatal complications of poverty, ecological disaster, and political injustice against. Until now, we have been betting away our futures to keep this monster from tipping over; we have been covering for it, nursing it, convincing ourselves we were even proud of it. Like children of abusive alcoholic parents-- we have been silenced for so long. Finally the unsayable is being said, giving the unmovable boulders of this illusion of subservience to economic structures an opportunity to crumble. We were as my father said, “double binded” by the loop of needing the corporate body to both employ us and then relieve us of our earnings for what we thought was survival, but is actually destroying our real survival in our environment and with each other. Now, the thing that has kept us rapt and bound is grotesque: oozing greed, eating its young, poisoning us, the earth and even itself. If we can remember, that these structures are constructs of our imagination, not forged in nature, we can begin to re-imagine the system. Ideas... are what we are working with, and they can grow, change, evolve. We can live better, but first, we occupy. Don’t be distracted by the deeds of the change-makers, the “what” in what they changed, really, the key is THAT they did not wrap themselves in the practicalities of reason. Of course it’s impossible, that is why we have to do it.” Nora Bateson

Shevlin, M. & McGuigan, K. (2003) The long-term psychological impact of Bloody Sunday on families of the victims as measured by The Revised Impact of Event Scale.

British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42: 4, 427–432.

Fixing a 'broken society'

2011-10-26T11:03:00.005+01:00

“Something is profoundly wrong with the way we live today. For 30 years we have made a virtue out of the pursuit of material self-interest: indeed, this very pursuit now constitutes whatever remains of our sense of collective purpose”. Tony Judt; Ill fares the Land

Salvador Minuchin, the originator of structural family therapy, considered that, in order to function healthily, a family needs structures, boundaries and rules.

Within the wider family system, sub-systems work together, and complement each others roles. The boundaries of a subsystem are the rules defining who participates, and how. For example, the boundary of a parental subsystem is defined when a parent tells an older child, “You are not your brother’s parent. If he is watching something on TV he shouldn’t, tell me and I will take care of it”.

For proper family functioning, the boundaries of subsystems must be clear and defined well enough to allow subsystem members to carry out their functions without undue interference, but they must allow contact between the members of the subsystem and others.

In addition to clarity of boundaries, most families can be conceived of as falling somewhere along a continuum of whose poles are the two extremes of diffuse boundaries and overly rigid boundaries. These two extremes of boundary functioning are typically called enmeshment and disengagement.

Members of enmeshed subsystems or families may be handicapped in that the heightened sense of belonging requires a major yielding of autonomy. In contrast, members of disengaged subsystems or families may function autonomously but have a skewed sense of independence and lack feelings of loyalty and belonging and the capacity for interdependence and for requesting support when needed.

The clarity and range of boundaries within a family are useful parameters for the evaluation of family functioning, but is this the case in a broader society?

Where does a society begin and end? What sort of boundaries delineate any given society and its sub-systems and are they permeable or rigid?

If our society was a family, my sense is that we have an extremely small subsystem that is very much disengaged from the remaining subsystems. The extreme level of disengagement, along with the disparity in size and wealth between this subsystem and the remaining societal sub-systems is toxic.

This toxicity leads to what David Cameron described as a 'broken society'; lack of social cohesion, poor health, increased dependency on drugs and alcohol and crime. In contrast, societies that have more equality seem to do better.Richard Wilkinson a researcher in social inequalities in health and the social determinants of health in a 1997 paper published in the British Medical Journal suggested that “one reason why greater income equality is associated with better health seems to be that it tends to improve social cohesion and reduce the social divisions”.

He later went on to suggest that “the psychosocial effects of relative deprivation are unlikely to be confined to health… where death rates from accidents, violence, and alcohol related causes seem to be particularly closely related to wider income inequalities, the predominance of behavioural causes may reflect changes in social cohesion”.

From a structural therapy point of view, a family that has serious problems needs to be restructured. If we think at a societal level, this would involve changing the structure of the society, making it more functional by altering the existing hierarchy and interaction patterns.In a recent TED lecture, Wilkinson argues for a fairer, progressive tax system to address inequalities.

However, a more comprehensive solution to the problem of restructuring our society has been addressed by Tony Judt, who argued that the whittled-down Left squandered a huge opportunity to show the mainstream that new ways of seeing and thinking are desirable. In the aftermath of recent financial crises, it’s pretty much impossible to argue that financial markets properly regulate themselves.

Judt advocates a revival of the central values of American liberalism or European social democracy. He calls for the beneficent authority of a welfare state (in one form or another) to redress the excesses of unregulated market forces; a course that emphatically rejects both dogmatic socialism and unrestrained capitalism.

His version of social democracy (or, for Americans, liberalism) envisages a society less materialistic, less individualistic and more community-minded than the present one, based on an economy in which capitalism, while by no means abolished, is on the other hand firmly tamed and regulated.

In light of these great upward shifts of wealth, Judt (who died in 2010) felt that, at that time, no civic movement had gained mainstream influence. Perhaps the #occupy protests are the beginning of this very movement?

Judt. T. (2010). Ill fares the land. London; Penguin.

Minuchin, S. & Fishman, H. C. (2004). Family Therapy Techniques. Harvard: Harvard University Press

Wilkinson, R. G. (1997). Socioeconomic determinants of health: Health inequalities: relative or absolute material standards? BMJ 314: 591

Mong: Language, Ricky Gervais, Wittgenstein and Humpty Dumpty

2011-10-24T09:08:00.005+01:00

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in a rather scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.' - Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking-Glass

As Lewis Carroll wryly noted, words require a shared meaning rather than an idiosyncratic meaning chosen by the speaker. Wittgenstein argued that definitions of words emerge from what he termed ‘forms of life’, roughly the culture and society in which they are used, although he might have observed that this emergence is a process; sometimes words have different resonances and meanings to different generations or groups within a broader culture. A recent example of this unfixed meaning of words was evident in the use of the word ‘mong’ by the comedian Ricky Gervais on twitter, which caused a polarised response in some media.

In popular, current usage, the word ‘mong’ refers to a state of being messed up, and ‘monged’ was often used as an equivalent term in the north West of the UK for being ‘stoned’ on cannabis. However, the word ‘mong’ derives from the term ‘Mongolism’ or, more accurately ‘Mongolian Idiocy’ used (formally) to describe people with Down’s syndrome up until 1961, and formally dropped by the World Health Organisation in 1965.

Having grown up with an older sister who, since the early 1960’s has been formally described and diagnosed as ‘mentally handicapped’, ‘autistic’ and ‘learning disabled’, I frequently had to endure my peers and strangers calling her ‘mongy’, ‘spaz’ or ‘retard’, or our family being stared at when my sister made some unusual (to others) gestures and movements when she was feeling happy. It was not pleasant, and was sometimes quite distressing, especially when I was very young.

Gervais’ casual use of the word ‘mong’ suggests that, in popular culture, language that is derogatory to people with learning disabilities is more acceptable (or can be used with less sensitivity) than words that are derogatory about race, or other differences. Black people can protest about (or even appropriate) the offensive word ‘nigger’, Asians can do likewise with the offensive term ‘Paki'. People with learning disabilities cannot protest as easily; in a sense they are more vulnerable, and make easier targets for bullies but we all have a responsibility to challenge derogatory and hate language, no matter who the target.

Gervais and his sidekick Stephen Merchant previously insulted the actress Victoria Wright who has cherubism, and they seem happy to push the limits of post modern, ironic comedy to teeter on the edge of being bullies rather than funny. Which is a shame. Whilst Gervais may not have meant to cause offence by using the term 'mong', how he positions his comedy in relation to disability and derogatory language in the future will be the acid test.

Robbing from the vulnerable

2011-08-11T15:01:00.003+01:00

The above video is from recent events in London. It shows a young Malaysian being simultaneously helped and robbed by a group of youths. The video was shown on the BBC news and understandably provoked quite a lot of reaction.

I felt this is quite an interesting motif to reflect upon from a broader perspective, thinking about how what was perpetrated in the video above models behaviour at other levels of society; from politics, corporate business and finance, healthcare, education and of course, the media.

Most corporations want our money, usually in exchange for junk.

Junk food that is full of additives, junk equipment that has obsolescence built in, junk insurance that is full of small print to minimise pay-outs and junk clothes, with a limited life and manufactured by people living in poverty.

Meanwhile, on a larger stage, the same deceits continue...

Children blown to pieces by cluster bombs as democracy is forced upon populaces.

Troops killed in the name of war on an abstract concept - terror - which is in reality serving the interests of oil companies.

The muggers in the above video are simply replicating what happens routinely to us all. That young man being mugged is you. He is all of us who are being robbed under the pretext of being helped.

All the time, the rich get richer - last year, according to Mary Ridell writing in the Telegraph, the combined fortunes of the 1,000 richest people in Britain rose by 30 per cent to £333.5 billion.

News International and the myth of power

2011-07-18T13:18:00.005+01:00

Lord Acton famously said that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The English anthropologist and social scientist Gregory Bateson argued that power does not exist in relationship and that, in fact, it is a myth. He said, in Steps to an ecology of mind (1978) that

‘…the myth of power is, of course, a very powerful myth, and probably most people in this world more or less believe in it. It is a myth, which, if everybody believes in it, becomes to that extent self-validating. But it is still epistemological lunacy and leads inevitably to various sorts of disaster’.

Bateson’s view on power was critiqued at the time, particularly by other social scientists and therapists who felt that to deny power was to deny the experiences of abused people, particularly women. On the surface, this seemed a reasonable critique; what reasonable person could deny that an abuser has power over the abused? However, this critique misses the wider point of Bateson’s argument, which is that the conventional (erroneous) use of the term power is that of a metaphor drawn from the language of physics (along with terms like energy, force, impact and so on), which have no place in a biological, social world of information, context and meaning. Instead of thinking of power in human relationships, we would be better served by reflexive dialogue about the metaphor of power, and see ourselves as simply parts of a larger situation. For this to be necessary, both sides in a conflict would need to be proud and humble rather than arrogant.

The sort of disaster that Bateson alluded to, and that humanity is facing is, in part, linked to the self perpetuating pursuit of the myth of power. Hand in hand with the myth of power is the concept of profit. To be rich, in the conventional epistemology, is to be powerful, and therefore, to control resources is seen as an imperative by states that wish to maintain and increase power.

Noam Chomsky recently wrote (available here) ‘there is every reason to suppose that today's policy-makers basically adhere to the judgment of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s influential advisor A.A. Berle that control of the incomparable energy reserves of the Middle East would yield "substantial control of the world." And correspondingly, that loss of control would threaten the project of global dominance that was clearly articulated during World War II, and that has been sustained in the face of major changes in world order since that day’.

Later in this article Chomsky writes:

‘Systemic risk in the financial system can be remedied by the taxpayer, but no one will come to the rescue if the environment is destroyed. That it must be destroyed is close to an institutional imperative. Business leaders who are conducting propaganda campaigns to convince the population that anthropogenic global warming is a liberal hoax understand full well how grave is the threat, but they must maximize short-term profit and market share. If they don't, someone else will.

This vicious cycle could well turn out to be lethal. To see how grave the danger is, simply have a look at the new Congress in the U.S., propelled into power by business funding and propaganda. Almost all are climate deniers. They have already begun to cut funding for measures that might mitigate environmental catastrophe. Worse, some are true believers; for example, the new head of a subcommittee on the environment who explained that global warming cannot be a problem because God promised Noah that there will not be another flood’.

In short, the pursuit of the myth of power with its attendant need to maintain profits and control resources has led to the loss of countless lives in the Middle East, active denial of the reality of global warming, and as I have indicated elsewhere, the abuse and misuse of ‘evidence’ in rushing through incompletely trialled medicines for the sake of short-term gain.

Relevant to the current situation with News International, Bateson (1978) also wrote

‘What is true is that the idea of power corrupts. Power corrupts most rapidly those who believe in it, and it is they who will want it most. Obviously, our democratic system tends to give power to those who hunger for it and gives every opportunity to those who don’t want power to avoid getting it. Not a very satisfactory arrangement if power corrupts those who believe in it and want it…Perhaps there is no such thing as unilateral power. After all, the man ‘in power’ depends on receiving information all the time from outside. He responds to that information just as much as he ’causes’ things to happen… it is an interaction, and not a lineal situation’.

Clearly the Murdoch entertainment/propaganda machine has been intimately linked with, and and has been a mouthpiece for, the political/corporate elite who routinely have been committing crimes against humanity. The stone that has been lifted by the telephone hacking scandal has shed light on some worrying relationships between the elite and the media and sent all sorts of people scurrying for cover. Perhaps now is the time to challenge the world order typified by the pursuit of power by the elites.

Bateson discussed how Goebbels, the Nazi Minister for Propaganda, believed he was powerful and in control of the Nazi propaganda machine when in reality he was guided by informants (effectively Goebbels was dependent on feedback) and ultimately his belief in his control of the system ultimately led to its destruction. The arrogance and confidence of a mileau where the hacking of telephones and bribery of police was condoned (or even encouraged) would indicate that News International, like Goebbels, was lured into believing in its own 'power'.

Let us not fall into the same fallacious trap that power can be overcome with more power, but instead through humility, dialogue, persistence and by recognising our own part in this very dangerous situation.

References:

Bateson, G. (1978) Steps to an ecology of mind. London: Paladin.
Chomsky, N. (2011) Is the world too big to fail? The contours of global order. http://www.chomsky.info/articles/20110421.htm accessed 18th July 2011.

Pfizer, makers of Champix , and dirty tricks

2010-12-10T11:52:00.002Z

From the Guardian, 9th December 2010

The world's biggest pharmaceutical company hired investigators to unearth evidence of corruption against the Nigerian attorney general in order to persuade him to drop legal action over a controversial drug trial involving children with meningitis, according to a leaked US embassy cable.
Pfizer was sued by the Nigerian state and federal authorities, who claimed that children were harmed by a new antibiotic, Trovan, during the trial, which took place in the middle of a meningitis epidemic of unprecedented scale in Kano in the north of Nigeria in 1996.
Last year, the company came to a tentative settlement with the Kano state government which was to cost it $75m.
But the cable suggests that the US drug giant did not want to pay out to settle the two cases – one civil and one criminal – brought by the Nigerian federal government.
The cable reports a meeting between Pfizer's country manager, Enrico Liggeri, and US officials at the Abuja embassy on 9 April 2009. It states: "According to Liggeri, Pfizer had hired investigators to uncover corruption links to federal attorney general Michael Aondoakaa to expose him and put pressure on him to drop the federal cases. He said Pfizer's investigators were passing this information to local media."
The cable, classified confidential by economic counsellor Robert Tansey, continues: "A series of damaging articles detailing Aondoakaa's 'alleged' corruption ties were published in February and March. Liggeri contended that Pfizer had much more damaging information on Aondoakaa and that Aondoakaa's cronies were pressuring him to drop the suit for fear of further negative articles."

The leak in full:

Monday, 20 April 2009, 16:00
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 ABUJA 000671
SIPDIS
DEPT PASS TO USTR-AGAMA
DEPT PASS USAID AFR/SD FOR CURTIS AND ATWOOD
BAGHDAD FOR DUNDAS MCCULLOUGH
TREASURY FOR PETERS, IERONIMO AND HALL
DOC FOR 3317/ITA/OA/KBURRESS AND 3130/USFC/OIO/ANESA/CREED
EO 12958 DECL: 04/20/2034
TAGS ECON, EINV, EAID, ETRD, PGOV, NI
SUBJECT: NIGERIA: PFIZER REACHES PRELIMINARY AGREEMENT FOR
A $75 MILLION SETTLEMENT
Classified By: Economic Counselor Robert Tansey for reasons 1.4(B&D)
1. (C) Summary. In an April 2 meeting with the Ambassador, Pfizer lawyers Joe Petrosinelli and Atiba Adams reported that Pfizer and the Kano State government had reached a preliminary settlement on lawsuits arising from medical tests conducted with Trovan (oral antibiotic) on children living in Kano during a meningitis epidemic in 1996. Petrosinelli said Pfizer has agreed to the Kano State Attorney General's (AG) settlement offer of $75 million, including a $10 million payment for legal fees, $30 million to the Kano State government, and $35 million for the participants and families. According to Adams, several final details need to be worked out on the mechanism for payment. Pfizer strongly recommends setting up a $35 million trust fund for the participants to be administered by a neutral third party and for the $30 million for the Kano State government to be used for improving health care in the state. Pfizer underscored that the Nigerian representatives wanted lump sum checks and that Pfizer is concerned with potential transparency issues. The next step is a meeting between high-level Pfizer officials and Nigerian side at a neutral location to work out the final details. End Summary.
2. (SBU) On April 2 Pfizer lawyers Joe Petrosinelli and Atiba Adams and Pfizer Nigeria Country Director Enrico Liggeri met with the Ambassador and EconDep to discuss the status of settlement negotiations. Four lawsuits were brought against Pfizer stemming from medical tests with the oral antibiotic Trovan conducted on children living in Kano during a meningitis epidemic in 1996. In Kano State Court there is one civil suit and one criminal case and in the Federal High Court there is one civil suit and one criminal case. Since 2006, Petrosinelli and Adams have been briefing the Mission on the status of the cases.
Settlement Reached
------------------
3. (C) Petrosinelli reported that Pfizer had tentatively reached "an agreement in principle" on the Kano AG's settlement offer of $75 million. Adams explained that the parties agreed that the $75 million would be broken down as follows - a $10 million payment for legal fees; $30 million to the Kano State government; and $35 million to participants and families. Petrosinelli noted, that Pfizer has worked closely with former Nigerian Head of State Yakubu Gowon and that he has played a positive mediation role with Kano State and the federal government. Petrosinelli said Gowon also spoke with Kano State Governor Mallam Ibrahim Shekarau, who directed the Kano AG to reduce the settlement demand from $150 million to $75 million. Adams reported that Gowon met with President Yar'Adua and convinced him to drop the two federal high court cases against Pfizer. (Comment: In 1966 Gowon became the head of state following a military coup that deposed Major General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi who had come to power via an earlier military coup. He was head of state from 1966 to 1975. He now plays an elder statesman role in Nigerian politics. End Comment.)
More Discussions Needed
-----------------------

4. (C) According to Adams, details need to be worked out on the mechanism for payments to the Kano State government and participants because Pfizer is unwilling to give a lump sum payment. Pfizer is concerned with transparency issues and is pushing for a $35 million trust fund for the participants to be administered by a neutral third party and the remaining $30 million to be used for improving health care in Kano state. Pfizer underscored that the Nigerian representatives were pushing for lump sum checks and Pfizer will not agree to that. Pfizer is considering rebuilding Kano's Infectious Disease Hospital where the trial was conducted and working with health care nongovernmental organizations. Adams suggested that the trust fund for participants be administered by a neutral third party because he expects "additional" participants to come forward after they hear about the settlement. The Ambassador suggested Pfizer work with NGOs already working in Kano State and for Pfizer to consider working with local NGO implementing partners that the USG has used because of their transparency record.
ABUJA 00000671 002 OF 002
EconDep provided Pfizer a copy of the U.S.-Nigeria Framework for Partnership document as a guide for existing projects and partners in Kano. Petrosinelli explained that the next step was a meeting at a neutral location between high-level Pfizer officials and the Nigerian side to work out final details and conclude the settlement.
Pfizer Exposes Attorney General
-------------------------------
5. (C) In follow up to the April 2 meeting, EconDep met with Pfizer Country Manager Enrico Liggeri in Lagos on April 9. (Note: Liggeri has years of experience in Nigeria because his family operated a business in Lagos from the early 1960s to the late 1980s. He spent most of his childhood in Lagos. End Note.) Liggeri said Pfizer was not happy settling the case, but had come to the conclusion that the $75 million figure was reasonable because the suits had been ongoing for many years costing Pfizer more than $15 million a year in legal and investigative fees. According to Liggeri, Pfizer had hired investigators to uncover corruption links to Federal Attorney General Michael Aondoakaa to expose him and put pressure on him to drop the federal cases. He said Pfizer's investigators were passing this information to local media, XXXXXXXXXXXX. A series of damaging articles detailing Aondoakaa's "alleged" corruption ties were published in February and March. Liggeri contended that Pfizer had much more damaging information on Aondoakaa and that Aondoakaa's cronies were pressuring him to drop the suit for fear of further negative articles.
6. (C) Liggeri commented that the lawsuits were wholly political in nature because the NGO Doctors Without Borders administered Trovan to other children during the 1996 meningitis epidemic and the Nigerian government has taken no action. He underscored that the suit has had a "chilling effect" on international pharmaceutical companies because companies are no longer willing to conduct clinical testing in Nigeria. Liggeri opined that when another outbreak occurs no company will come to Nigeria's aid.
7. (C) Comment: Pfizer's image in Nigeria has been damaged due to this ongoing case. Pfizer's management considers Nigeria a major growth market for its products and having this case behind it will help in efforts to rebuild its image here. Final discussions on the $30 million and $35 million are likely to be tricky because the Nigerian side wants to control who gets the money, not Pfizer. The U.S. Mission will continue to advocate for transparency in settling the case and also note to GON authorities that Pfizer must abide by the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and cannot simple hand over large sums of money to state and local officials. Petrosinelli and Adams will get back to the Mission on what further assistance may be needed. End Comment.
8. (U) This cable was coordinated with ConGen Lagos. SANDERS

Wikileaks: Dominant and subjugated narratives

2010-12-04T11:59:00.005Z

There seems to be international condemnation of Wikileaks. The founder, Julian Assange, is at the centre of intense media speculation and a hate campaign against him in, particularly in the US, following the leak of 250,000 US diplomatic cables.

It is clear that most governments, particularly those closely involved with the US, are acutely embarrassed by the leaks. The leaks reveal the duplicitous nature of many governments and the lies and deceptions that characterise governments’ relationships with each other and their own populaces.

Of course, the dominant story from any government is that they are as transparent as possible and that politicians are honest people trying to do the best for their countries.

But the populations of these counties are, to a greater or lesser degree, aware of a subjugated story; this is a story where corruption is rife in many parts of the world, including wherever we happen to live. This story is where politicians routinely lie. This is the story of our leaders thinking of themselves, not the greater good. This is the story where business deals and politics are blurred, where giant corporations lurk behind decisions to send troops to war. This is the story of atrocities commited in the name of democracy and freedom.

Julian Assange and Wikileaks have thickened this alternative story, and at the same time, thinned the dominant narrative of ‘honest government’.

As the Wikileaks cables are being revealed, there has been a general cynicism evident regarding the process used by FIFA to select the host nations for the 2018 World Cup. Whilst this might be regarded as a joke, it nevertheless casts light on the dubious activities and horse-trading that seems commonplace in international relations.

It is going to be interesting to see how this pans out. What will the implications be if Assange is silenced? I think the context is rapidly changing; people are becoming surer of their cynicism of governments, and if Assange is arrested or murdered, this will only serve to thicken the subjugated story and cast even more doubt on the dominant story. It may even prove to be the tipping point and the stories will flip; and this will have serious consequences. People are going to demand something better.

Champix (Chantix, Varenicline) UK Class Action against Pfizer?

2010-09-19T22:11:00.002+01:00

A few people have contacted me following terrifying and sometimes dangerous experiences when taking Varenicline, asking what can be done about this drug.

In the light of accumulating scientific evidence that varenicline is associated with thoughts and acts of aggression/violence, they have been talking about the possibility of bringing a class action case ( these are cases in which a group of people collectively bring a claim to court - historically very much an American phenomenon).

Class actions are relatively new in the UK, but there are class actions lined up in the US and Canada regarding Varenicline, so please get in touch with me if you think you might be able to make a claim. Also, we'd be grateful for any legal advice that might be of help.

Stopping smoking and the danger of Champix (varenicline) and alcohol - an update

2010-09-01T10:41:00.005+01:00

It is just over two years since I wrote my initial post following my own terrifying experience with Champix (a.k.a. Chantix or Varenicline).

Since then I have received several messages from distressed individuals who have had similar, or worse experiences.

Invariably the person concerned is confused and frightened; they have acted out of character, often hurting the people they love most, having behaved in violent or criminal ways, yet have no recollection of the events and now find themselves facing criminal charges and the breakdown of relationships.

The outpouring of hatred towards the actor Nick Williams in the popular press at the time he was cleared of assaulting his girlfriend whilst under the influence of Champix and alcohol also reveals another difficulty. People simply are not believed.

Naturally, Pfizer have a vested interest in their drug, which must be worth billions to them, and I have had to delete comments that were blatantly marketing the drug from this site.

Of course Pfizer are working hard to gather ‘evidence’ to counter claims that Champix presents a risk. I am sceptical about any research funded by a company who have so much money at stake. See my earlier post on evidence based medicine here.

Yet the situation in the US is different. In July 2009, the Food and Drug Administration issued this notice:

‘FDA notified healthcare professionals and patients that it has required the manufacturers of the smoking cessation aids varenicline (Chantix) and bupropion (Zyban and generics) to add new Boxed Warnings and develop patient Medication Guides highlighting the risk of serious neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients using these products. These symptoms include changes in behavior, hostility, agitation, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts and behavior, and attempted suicide. The added warnings are based on the continued review of postmarketing adverse event reports for varenicline and bupropion received by the FDA. These reports included those with a temporal relationship between the use of varenicline or bupropion and suicidal events and the occurrence of suicidal ideation and suicidal behavior in patients with no history of psychiatric disease.

Healthcare professionals should advise patients to stop taking varenicline or bupropion and contact a healthcare provider immediately if they experience agitation, depressed mood, and any changes in behavior that are not typical of nicotine withdrawal, or if they experience suicidal thoughts or behavior’.

It is encouraging that growing numbers of Chantix lawsuits have been filed in the United States on behalf of individuals who have suffered injuries from the neuropsychiatric side effects of Chantix and for family members of individuals who have committed suicide on Chantix.

In October 2009, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated all federal Chantix lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. According to a pretrial scheduling order issued earlier this year, the first Chantix trial is unlikely to reach a jury until at least 2012.

When people ask me for advice, it is hard for me to know where to direct them, and I usually suggest they ask their lawyer to do some digging themselves. Clearly this is not enough, and perhaps we need a concerted effort in the UK to support people affected.

Of note to people in the UK, at last we have some evidence to support people. A recent (2010) study published in The Annals of Pharmacotherapy highlighed the link between Chantix and violent or aggressive behaviour. Researchers found several common characteristics among cases where Chantix users engaged in unprovoked acts of violence, often with no prior indication of similar behavior. Researchers found that violent and aggressive behavior ended for 93% of the subjects when they stopped taking Chantix.

Male and female brains, complexity and objectification

2009-03-25T22:44:00.008Z

Recently I was teaching a group of MSc students about chaos and complexity theories and how they might be relevant to leading organisations. One of the things that struck me is that working with complex self adaptive systems requires a focus on relationships between the parts of the system rather than on the component parts themselves. Of course, to a systemic therapist, this is nothing new, but the implications for leadership and management in our economy are huge.

Unfortunately, the dominant ways of thinking (especially in the West) are reductionist and lineal, and while this is fine for dealing with and managing simple systems or problems, relational, systemic thinking is required for dealing with the complex, non-lineal systems that would include nations, corporations, services (such as the NHS), hospitals, or even small and medium enterprises.

Simon Baron-Cohen (who is a Professor of Psychology at Cambridge University and researches on the autistic spectrum) notes that people with ‘male brains’ tend to be good at what he calls ‘systemising’, which he describes as the drive to analyse and explore and extract the underlying rules that govern the behaviour of a system as well as the drive to construct systems. I would argue that this is very much thinking about systems, rather than thinking systemically and being able to include self within a given system. This ‘male’ type of thinking is characterised by more focus on detail, components and parts, rather than relationships.

While the male brain tends towards logic, and the female brain towards empathy, neither are actually exclusive to each gender; in fact most of us are somewhere in the continuum between both extremes. Of course, manifestations of the extremes of either might range from ‘mindblindness’ and autism on the male side to ‘logicblindness’ and attributing mind, thoughts and feelings to inanimate objects, on the female side.

The male brain focus fits in very much with the reductionist, lineal thinking associated with science since Descartes, and though this type of thought is useful, is may be less helpful when thinking about and managing complex systems. Generally, women tend to be more relationally orientated and empathic, which suggests that leading and managing complex adaptive systems might be more suited to women than men. To get more women into roles where they can use their skills in dealing with complex, relational issues will require a massive shift, and the effort required to get more women into leadership roles at all levels of society is not just about equality – it is a necessity.

William Hamilton, an evolutionary biologist said “People divide roughly, it seems to me, into two kinds, or rather a continuum is stretched between two extremes. There are people people, and things people.” It would seem that women are more likely to be ‘people people’, and men are more likely to be ‘things people’.

These same differences in thinking might also go some way to understanding why men are more likely to ‘objectify’ women. If ‘male brainedness’ is less relational and more about things, or objects, perhaps for some men, women are simply that – objects. I was staggered by the lifelike ‘love dolls’ manufactured in Japan, which seems to me to be an extreme and literal form of the objectification of women by men.

Evidence based medicine: Selective use of evidence and the role of drug companies

2008-12-01T15:36:00.006Z

Recently I was talking to my daughter Hannah about the work she was doing for one of her modules. Although her degree is in Marine Biology, for some reason she was looking at National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines, and how they work.

We had some interesting discussions about what evidence is accessed by NICE, about randomised controlled trials (RCT’s) and the consultation process. What emerged from her review confirmed my suspicions regarding the use of evidence, particularly by drug companies who have a vested interest in their products being recommended in guidelines.

In 2003, the Department of Health agency responsible for ensuring that medicines meet appropriate standards of safety and effectiveness (the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency—MHRA), released data regarding the risks and benefits of newer antidepressants used to treat depression in children and young people.

The information published on the MHRA's website included both previously published and never before published data obtained directly from the manufacturers of the SSRIs ("selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors") and other newer atypical antidepressant drugs. These data were collected after earlier work had raised concerns about the safety of paroxetine (Seroxat) and venlafaxine (Efexor, Efexor XL) in children and young people with depression.

Based on their review of the data, the MHRA concluded that all of the newer antidepressant drugs, other than fluoxetine (Prozac), carried serious risks that outweighed any benefits. The MHRA, therefore gave warning of the potential that these drugs could increase the risk of suicide-related behaviour (rather than decreasing it—as would be expected of an antidepressant) when using these drugs in the treatment of depression in childhood and adolescence.

The National Collaborating Centre for Mental Health (NCCMH) had been commissioned by NICE to produce national guidelines for the whole of the NHS on the treatment of depression in children and young people. NCCMH is an evidence-based guideline development unit jointly run by the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the British Psychological Society and funded by NICE.

However, the NCCMH only had access to published data, so, when the MHRA verdict on the SSRIs became public, it became evident that the MHRA had access to information about a total of 11 trials, of which the NCCMH had only seen 5.

Because of the inconsistency between the MHRA's findings and the published literature, several members of the NCCMH committee (Whittington et. al. 2004), decided to compare and contrast the published data with the unpublished data. This work was designed as an experiment to test out what the difference might (or might not) be if, in producing a guideline, the committee had access to the unpublished as well as the published literature.

They concluded that the published evidence was more favourable than the unpublished evidence, and most importantly that it was only when all evidence was examined that it was clear that the risks (particularly the increased risk of suicidal behaviour and thinking) outweighed the benefits.

They also found evidence to suggest that at least one of the drug companies who had undertaken trials of an SSRI in the treatment of childhood and adolescent depression had withheld publication of trial data on the grounds that it contained evidence that the drug was unlikely to be effective in treating depression in this age group.

A UK psychiatrist, David Healy, has been raising similar concerns for a while. He has general concerns about influence of pharmaceutical companies and the way that they don't mention the problems in the way that academics are expected to do so. He has evidence of one paper being written by a pharmaceutical company, but where academics appear to be the main authors. He has a particular concern about this influence on bipolar disorders, particularly since NICE guidelines quote one of the articles in which very young children are given the diagnosis of bipolar disorder and prescribed medication as part of a 'trial'.
You can access one of Healy’s papers here: http://www.furiousseasons.com/documents/healybp.pdf

In June this year, the New York Times published an article identifying that a world-renowned Harvard child psychiatrist, Dr. Joseph Biederman, whose work has helped ‘fuel an explosion in the use of powerful antipsychotic medicines in children’ earned at least $1.6 million in consulting fees from drug makers from 2000 to 2007 but for years did not report much of this income to university officials, according to information given Congressional investigators.

In my earlier article about Champix I didn’t mention that the manufacturers did not trial the drug with patients who have a history of mental health problems at all, and the drug was released on evidence that was derived from an ungeneralisable sample of the population.

Drug companies can afford to fund trials into their newly developed products. They may, as seen above, be selective in the evidence that they see fit to publish. The vast resources to fund for research into other therapies, for example talking therapies, are simply not available. Funding this type of research is down to practitioners on a local level, or perhaps interested University faculties. This means there is a huge disparity in what evidence is available for NICE (or those advising NICE) to base their decisions upon.

And the evidence is skewed.

Reference
Whittington C, Kendall T, Fonagy P, Cottrell D, Cotgrove A, Boddington E. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in childhood depression: systematic review of published versus unpublished data. The Lancet, 24 April 2004; Volume 363: Number 9418, 1341-45.

Stopping smoking and the danger of Champix (varenicline) and alcohol

2008-08-18T11:51:00.006+01:00

I have helped a lot of people stop smoking over the past few years, although my own struggle with cigarettes continues to be tempestuous!

I used a medication called Champix (varenicline) successfully in 2007, and gave up for seven months, but unfortunately started again. I used Champix a second time in June 2008, and have discovered some serious side effects, so much so that I can no longer recommend its use.

I was aware of the depersonalising effects of Champix, and associated these with the sleep disturbance, but while we were on holiday, one evening when we’d all been enjoying a few drinks, I experienced what can only be described as a psychotic episode. I could not explain this episode at all; up until then I had been pretty happy, enjoying a much needed break.

As you might imagine, I was pretty upset about what happened, but discovered by chance when doing some research for a teaching session on suicide that the mix of varenicline and alcohol can be extremely dangerous.

Recently there has been some discussion over the death of the musician Carter Albrecht, who was shot by a neighbour following his use of alcohol with Champix (known as Chantix in the US). Albrecht, best known as a member of Edie Brickell and the New Bohemians, started taking Chantix in late August 2007. He was well liked in the community, and had no prior history of violence. Immediately, Albrecht began to complain of vivid, hallucinatory dreams (a Chantix side effect). One night about a week after he started taking Chantix, Albrecht had a violent encounter with his girlfriend.

The episode occurred after Albrecht had consumed a couple of alcoholic drinks. Albrecht’s girlfriend reported that he was confused, and did not recognize her. Before the night was over, Albrecht had been shot dead by a terrified neighbour on whose property he had trespassed. After Albrecht’s death, many other Chantix users complained of similar episodes of violent or suicidal behaviour, especially when they had consumed alcohol. The Chantix label does caution against alcohol use, but it does not warn that drinking alcohol while taking Chantix could lead to violent or suicidal behaviour. Furthermore, Chantix’s reaction with alcohol has not been studied in clinical trials.

This page shocked me. Read some of the stories, and you might begin to imagine what might have happened while we were on holiday.

UPDATE: There is now accumulating scientific evidence that varenicline is associated with thoughts and acts of aggression/violence see these articles -

Thoughts and Acts of Aggression/Violence Toward Others Reported in Association with Varenicline

Prescription Drugs Associated with Reports of Violence Towards Others

The context of crime, neglect and ill health

2008-05-23T15:51:00.003+01:00

In the news recently has been coverage of the story of the sad death of seven year old Khyra Ishaq, who may have died of starvation. Her mother and stepfather will be charged with neglect, a criminal offence.

Several sources recognise that poverty and neglect are linked, and it can be argued that poverty is not a matter of choice, but neglect is. Also linked to poverty are issues of crime, drug and alcohol use and obesity, all of which are considered major topical social issues, and all of which have an element of choice to them. But is it that simple?

I have often considered that crime and ill-health are linked by wider contexts, yet politically, both are treated as very different issues.

In the UK our jails are full; the population bulletin for May 16th 2008 states the population in prisons in

England

and Wales stands at 82,682. This represents around 148 per 100,000 of the national population. In contrast, the United States has the highest prison population rate in the world, some 738 per 100,000.

Some people argue that we should be increasing our capacity to incarcerate criminals, for example Stephen Pollard writing in the Spectator suggests: “Britain certainly imprisons a higher percentage of its population. But this is a meaningless measure, since it takes no account of the proportion of the population who commit crimes. Allow for the extraordinary proportion of the UK population which commits crimes, and Britain has a low imprisonment rate. Whereas Britain imprisons 12 people per 1,000 crimes, Spain imprisons 48 and

Ireland

33”

Taking Pollard’s argument further, we would need to quadruple the amount of incarceration, having spaces for a third of a million inmates, representing around 590 prisoners per 100,000 of the national population.

This raises a question for me. If it is true that such a large proportion of the British population commits crimes, why is this so?

Our understanding of crime itself may lead to problems. Crime is not the name for an action – it is the name given to a class of actions performed in a particular context. Some of these actions are directed at the authorities who forbid them. The punishment of the actions will not remove the context that characterise those actions. You can’t stop someone from being a criminal by punishing what he or she does. If that was the case, we wouldn’t need larger prisons. If punishment was a viable solution, crime would have ceased thousands of years ago. In the film KPAX, when the character Prot is asked by his psychiatrist why they don’t have laws on his planet, he replied ‘Because every sentient being in the universe knows the difference between right and wrong’.

Most humans know the difference between what is right and what is wrong, so why do so many choose to do what is wrong? More importantly, what is the context that these actions take place in? I would argue that it is the same context that gives rise to drug and alcohol problems, obesity and neglect. Nacro’s 2006 briefing paper suggests crime impacts upon health, which may be true, but they miss the point that crime is a symptom, as is poor health, of a wider contextual problem. And the context isn’t simply inequalities, social exclusion or poverty; in fact, these are as much symptoms as crime or illness.

What then, is context is it that gives rise to the symptoms I have described? Part of the context is our way of thinking, characterised by ideas that ‘more is better’ in terms of money, material possessions and power. To begin to challenge the global high rates of crime and illness we urgently need to think differently about ourselves and the worlds we inhabit, and, as Bateson put it, make steps towards an ecology of mind.

In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth, and the top 1% controlled 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth. Similar distribution patterns are found in other countries. Those people that control the wealth also control the media, at the very least have a major influence upon governments, and they control the prices we pay for everything, from food to petrol.

Unfortunately, those with power tend to want to retain it. They have absolutely no reason to change the way they think; after all the current mind-set works for them. This is western democratic society and it is the context that inculcates crime and preventable illness; a combination of our epistemology, one that values power, and a society that manifests power through wealth.

Putting myself in opposition with Gregory Bateson who was an atheist (I would call myself agnostic), I also believe that as spiritual beings (even atheists might appreciate the sacred), we may be able to challenge this context through a quiet revolution, a revolution of showing love, kindness and forgiveness. The wealthy cannot take their money or their power with them on the next stage of their journey, and I doubt that any of them will be much happier; that is assuming that they are happy at all.

Immanence and transcendence

2006-10-29T15:08:00.002Z

Up until 1995, I had developed an epistemology that pretty much was in line with Bateson’s idea of immanence. It seemed to me that mind was a relationship between body and environment, and there was nothing more than that. No spirit, nothing transcendent.

Then my father died. He’d had surgery 3 years previously for a melanoma which had required considerable plastic reconstruction and whilst never as able to get around as much, for three years had been reasonably happy. Then he began to get back pain, and in a matter of weeks was very ill, being cared for at home (luckily the local GP was experienced in palliative care) having developed metastases in his bones.

I remember two days before he died, he told me about his past, his childhood and how he and his younger sister were evacuees and shunted all over during the war. I’d heard these stories before and had a feeling that there was something else he wanted to tell me, but he was holding back. I didn’t press him though. There was one thing I did know about his past, but it was unspoken; he knew that I was aware of one particular event that had taken place around 10 years previously which I had put down to an aberration on his part.

Later that evening, Dad slipped into unconsciousness and he died two days later. Both I and my mother were with him as he died, and we both commented on the sensation of something filling the room and then moving off away and out of the house. Looking at his body, I felt that it was simply a shell. My father was no longer there. It looked like a younger, more peaceful version of my father,

A few months later, I began to dream of him. He would appear in my dreams, typically it would be a family occasion and he would be there, usually smiling, but never saying anything. In these dreams, we all knew he was dead, but accepted and enjoyed his presence. On several occasions, he wanted to communicate with me, but when he tried, his mouth was lined with what looked like black velvet, and no sounds could emerge.

These dreams went on for some time, and I figured it was part of the grieving process. However, an opportunity presented itself one day, when I was staying with my aunt and I asked her if there was a secret aspect to my father. Eventually after a lot of thought, she admitted there was, that she knew about it, and wondered what had made me ask. I told her about the event I knew about, but not the dreams. The following weekend, I asked my mother, and while she needed to be certain what I was talking about before admitting anything, when she realised what I now understood about my father, the floodgates opened. I heard about the terrible difficulties they’d had, the struggles, and how they loved each other despite some considerable problems.

I’m not prepared to go fully into the details here, as they are not relevant at this point, but needless to say, I appreciated that my father was a lot more complex than I’d thought and also a lot stronger than I ever could imagine. I now had a sense that the things he’d been trying to tell me in my dreams had, at last, been said.

At this point, I suppose it was convenient and reasonable for me to assume that the dreams were simply part of my grieving and based in part on the event that had happened many years ago. Unbeknown to me, this assumption was about to change.

A few weeks later, we went for a meal with some friends, and were happily enjoying a post meal glass of wine when I became aware of a presence in the room. I remember thinking ‘It feels like Dad is here’ and saying so. The others laughed, but then I distinctly saw my father, sitting in an armchair, grinning from ear to ear! Whilst appearing transparent, he was wearing a familiar tweed jacket, and looked surprisingly well for a ghost. I told the others that I could actually see him, and pointed to the chair he was in. The others thought this was a hoot and that clearly I was off my trolley. My friend’s wife went and sat on the chair, as if to say there was nothing there. I was laughing by now, because my father’s grin was even wider, and he evidently found the situation funny. I could still see him superimposed over her, still grinning.

Then he faded, and I became aware that he was in front of me, and slightly above my head height. Rather than being able to see him, I had a sensation of him being aware of my life, the mistakes I had made, the good things I had done and an overwhelming sense of love. It was as if he could see into my life and accepted and loved me for what I was. And he knew that the love was reciprocated and was glad I now knew the story he had been unable to tell me when he was alive. I tried to explain what was going on to the others who by now were feeling a little unsettled and wondering if I was completely mad. My friend asked out aloud if my dad would let them know he was there.

I remember the look on their faces when, seconds later, there was a huge rap on their back door. They were mortified, and scared. I was still laughing, still feeling bathed in the incredible sense of love and acceptance I had been shown. We opened the back door and peered outside. On their lawn, several toys and balls had been laid out in a perfectly straight line. I tried to reassure the others that everything was fine, but they were pretty shaken.

Following that evening, my dreams subsided and I felt that my father was moving on. I recalled as a child I once asked him to let me know he was alright after he died. He had kept to his word. And I no longer believed that once we died that it was over. There is something about us that is transcendent. And I had direct experience of it.

Since then, I have had more experiences, two notable ones being once with the father of a friend when we lived in New Zealand, and a more frightening experience that was down to my not understanding what I was dealing with. I may write about these events in the future.

I have written an article on after-death communication, hopefully due to be published with some re-working, but it is here for those of you who are interested.

Surveillance Medicine

2006-10-29T10:02:00.004Z

In 1995, I came across an article that really made me stop and think. It was my first introduction to Foucauldian ideas, and related very much to the theme of Health Promotion, a subject that I was teaching back then. As I think back, this paper had a huge influence on my subsequent thinking.

The article was David Armstrong’s The Rise of Surveillance Medicine, published in The Sociology of Health and Illness 17:3, and you can access it here.

Armstrong discusses how medicine evolved from ‘Bedside Medicine’, located in the patient’s home and where the focus was on the symptoms described by the patient, to ‘Hospital Medicine’ located in the neutral hospital setting, where the focus is less on patients identified symptoms, but on signs detected by the doctor and laboratory tests performed by the medical staff.

He goes on to talk about how the focus of medicine has moved now, and that the focus is on the normal population – locating illness outside of the body. This is ‘Surveillance Medicine’ where illness is a permanent, nascent potential within and between us all and is managed by screening the population and mass immunisations.

What is ‘normal’ is defined by centile charts that define normal weight, height and so on for the population. This medical gaze is on all aspects of our lives – the entire continuum from birth to death has become medicalised.

Another manifestation of medical power is in our accepting and internalising surveillance medicine, the medical gaze is performed by ourselves in self-monitoring our lifestyles, including diet and weight, sexual behaviour, exercise and smoking.

Armstrong might not be surprised to find now that ordinary foodstuffs are becoming medicalised, for example yoghurts with ‘friendly bacteria’ and spreads with sterols to reduce cholesterol.

What our benevolent, paternalistic medical friends might not have appreciated is how harmful to people all this worry about being normal and healthy actually can be.

Perhaps, though, they do…

Transformation

2006-10-27T12:39:00.001+01:00

Whilst my previous entry reveals the potentially abusive nature of reality TV shows, especially those where children are concerned, I would like to explore another, more rewarding aspect of the experience.

The next day, I managed to get to work, but was clearly in no fit state to deliver a lecture (which, if I recall correctly was ironically on Jean Watson’s Theory of Human Caring) and my manager sent me straight off to see the staff counsellor.

Rachael, as it turned out, was no ordinary counsellor, but was in the final stages of her training in Jungian Psychotherapy. My life was about to change.

I realised that not only was I in crisis, feeling angry and guilty for having exposed my family to an ordeal over the weekend, but also still had some unresolved issues from a breakdown I had experienced about 5 years previously.

The support and help from Rachael was unlike any form of counselling I had been engaged in, either as a therapist or as a client. Up until then, I had done a lot of client centred counselling as a nurse and had spent about two years to training in family therapy. I’d also done a fair bit of Neuro-linguistic Programming (NLP) in the past. I didn’t know much about analysis, and to be blunt, considered it was likely to be over elaborate and indulgent.

I was wrong.

I had noticed some interesting images pinned up on her wall, many of which seemed to relate to alchemy and fairy tales. I was intrigued by these images, and some of the conversation centred on my interpretation of them. I recall some later conversations were about my dreams, and how the elements in my dreams might represent aspects of myself.

However, the most fascinating aspect of the work with Rachael was her introduction to me of the concept of alchemcal transformation. Jung had been very interested in alchemy, and considered that alchemists, whilst overtly appearing to be engaged in efforts to create the philosopher’s stone (philosophi lapis), actually were engaged in a process of inner transformation that paralleled the chemical work being undertaken.

I particularly like the idea of the alchemical process being a metaphor for the process of psychological change. The alchemist uses a crucible to heat up the prima materia and is at once both observing and experiencing the process.

I rather like this quote from Jung:

“The alchemists, who in their own way knew more about the nature of the individuation process than we moderns do, expressed this paradox through the symbol of the uroboros, the snake that eats its own tail. In the age-old image of the uroboros lies the thought of devouring oneself and turning oneself into a circulatory process, for it was clear to the more astute alchemists that the prima materia of the art was man himself.

The ouroboros is a dramatic symbol for the integration and assimilation of the opposite, i.e. of the shadow. This 'feed-back' process is at the same time a symbol of immortality, since it is said of the uroboros that he slays himself and brings himself to life, fertilises himself and gives birth to himself. He symbolises the One, who proceeds from the clash of opposites, and he therefore constitutes the secret of the prima materia which [...] unquestionably stems from man's unconscious'. (Collected Works, Vol. 14 para.513)”

I have continued my interest in alchemy and in Jung’s writing since returning to the U.K., even now, although I am now in the final year of my MSc in Family Therapy, which on the surface seems unrelated. However, as Jung’s quote above demonstrates, he is fully aware of circular processes and feedback, and I suspect that thinking about both Family Therapy and Jungian Psychotherapy may prove to be fertile ground.

At home on their own

2006-10-26T19:01:00.000+01:00

This is a story that is funny in hindsight, but wasn’t at all funny when it happened.

When we were living in New Zealand, Hannah and Sam (then aged 13 and 11) were happy enough, going to school and enjoying the Kiwi way of life. They attended drama lessons at a local community centre, and one evening came home with a flyer from a TV company asking for volunteers for a new TV show.

If only we’d thrown the accursed thing out! But no, that would have been too sensible for a proud dad like me!

We thought it might be exciting and educational for the kids to be involved in a TV programme and I contacted the company to find out more. I was told that the show was about the children redecorating parts of the house in fun themes. This sounded like it could be interesting. I remembered seeing some such programme where the family ended up with some great improvements to their house, so said sure, we were interested.

Our house was a pretty spectacular timber building with lots of balconies located in the Lynfield/Blockhouse Bay area of Auckland, overlooking the Manakau harbour. We all loved it.

Inside, it had been carefully decorated (by the previous owners) with neutral colours that were used throughout the house. We had what in New Zealand was known as a ‘Rumpus Room’ and this large, mainly pine clad room was used by the children as a space to muck around, use their computer or watch TV.

Downstairs was a spacious open plan living area that incorporated our kitchen and dining table. This area was the hub of the house, and Donna and I really liked this space.

Not long after the phone calls and email contact with the TV company, we were visited by a very pleasant researcher, who spoke to Donna and I and the children. She wanted the children to generate some ideas for redecorating parts of the house. Donna and I told her we were happy for them to do use the rumpus room, their bedrooms and outside, but under no circumstances do anything to the living area. The ideas that the children came up with were supposed to be kept from Donna and I but the children told us that they had planned a space theme for the rumpus room and a tropical beach theme for outside.

The TV company were evidently taken with the children and our house and before too long came to do some initial filming, where they interviewed us all, and then Donna and I and the children separately. We got to meet the presenter, the interior designer, the producer and director, and of course the cameraman and sound man. They all seemed great people, friendly and interested in us as a family. The presenter talked to the children about their ideas and they all seemed very excited about the prospect of making their ideas come to life.

A few weeks later, the weekend arrived. Donna and I were to be whisked off to a luxury hotel for the weekend, whilst the children got to work with the team. The first indication that things weren’t quite right was when Sam locked himself in a cupboard not long after the team arrived. I spent quite a while trying to persuade him to come out, but he was adamant that he did not want to be involved. I thought he had cold feet and tried harder to convince him that it would be a lot of fun for him. Sam said ‘They aren’t going to do what we planned’ but I didn’t register his concern or distress. I thought he was just being awkward. How wrong I was.

Donna and I were filmed saying goodbye to the children, and then getting into the luxury car provided by the TV company, to be driven off to the hotel. Within seconds, however, the car stopped and we were asked to drive ourselves in our car to the hotel. We were somewhat perplexed by this, but went along with the request. We drove into Auckland, and checked in at the hotel, and spent much of the day wandering around the city. We had been asked to be at the hotel for 6pm for more filming and duly waited in our room, when the director arrived with a small video camera. We were filmed watching two snips of video showing what looked like our kitchen being painted with a dark blue and some sand being tipped somewhere. Donna and I were quite concerned at this point, but didn’t say much. Later we phoned the house and spoke to Bharti, our friend who was looking after the children. Bharti sounded concerned. She told us that Sam wasn’t feeling too well (he had a cold) but both of the children were really worried about what was happening to the house and how we’d react.

The next day, we were asked to be ready to return home at six in the evening. During the day the luxury car arrived and we were filmed both getting in and out of it. After editing, it really did look as though we had been driven to and from the hotel by the TV company. We set off to be back home for six, but received a phone call asking us to be there by seven instead, so Donna and I hung around our local supermarket, feeling more and more apprehensive. When we finally arrived home, we were asked to go straight to the garage and wait there. We waited in the garage for two hours. Much of the equipment the crew had used in our garage was covered in black cloth, but I could see polystyrene packing from what looked like a kitchen appliance poking out from behind some cloth. The smell of paint was very strong.

Finally, the team were ready to film the reveal. We were asked to keep our eyes closed and led up the back stairs to the rumpus room. Upon opening our eyes, we discovered a bizarre scene of a spaceship, floating spaceman and smoke. The presenter was evidently quite excited by this spectacle and crowed about how marvellous it all was. I wasn’t too impressed, but thought that seeing as it was the rumpus room, there was no harm done.

Next we were led into our bedroom, where I was asked to lie on the bed and pretend to snore. I was immediately drenched by a jet of water from a small pipe that had been tacked to the door frame, and this jet continued to squirt haphazardly despite the fact that I had leapt off the bed. I watched the bed slowly becoming drenched with a heavy heart.

Following this discomfiture, Donna and I were led through the upper floor of the house and down the stairs to our living area. It sounded ominously hollow as we made our way down the stairs with our eyes shut.

The final reveal was presumably the highlight of the evening – at least as far as the team was concerned. What we saw was unbelievable. Our kitchen and dining area had been turned into an undersea world, complete with a mural of a killer whale on the wall, a boat built around the work surface and around two tons of sand deposited on the dining area floor. To cap it all, a rusty ‘treasure chest’ sat on top of the sand to complete the effect.

The presenter by this time was squealing with pleasure, but Donna and I were stony faced and unable to say much. We were really angry. The director, realising how upset we were, made some comment about how these programmes affect real people, but the producer curtly told her to do her job of directing and shut up.

The team promptly packed up and left. That was it, as far as they were concerned.

They had left the house virtually uninhabitable. Sam became really distressed at this point, and his anguish was punctuated by the house fire alarm suddenly going off. A smoke machine had been accidentally left on in the rumpus room for over an hour. I was devastated. It was one in the morning, my son was in tears, we couldn’t even make a coffee and I was due to present a key lecture at nine in the morning. To cap it all, the bed was soaking wet.

Whilst we were naive in letting this happen, the situation revealed that 'reality TV' has it's dark side. All of us were misled by the team, but the extent to which the children were manipulated only became evident in the following days. Not only had their wishes been disregarded, they had been put in a position where they were directed to do things that they knew would upset their parents and were actually directed in what to say on camera too.

The contract I had signed (under the mistaken assumption the TV company were decent people) was watertight. If I took any action against them or made any public mention of our experience, I would be held responsible for any losses if the programme was not transmitted - up to NZ$100,000. I had never felt so angry, nor so impotent.

To be continued...

Cooperation vs personal gain

2006-04-04T10:11:00.001+01:00

Last night Sam, my 14 year old son, waited impatiently for the deadline for the Leeds Festival tickets to go on sale at 19.30. He had been waiting for weeks, eagerly reading the latest rumours about which bands would be performing, and planning with his friends how they would get there and back, using the usual parental taxi services to go each day rather than camping.

Despite repeated attempts to get onto the website to purchase the tickets, by 22.30 he was dejected. The weekend tickets for £135 were already sold out

Within an hour, over 700 tickets were being offered on eBay, many sellers having bought the maximum six tickets per household and selling all of them in lots of two. Some tickets were fetching in excess of £250 - quite a profit.

Today, no doubt there will be a lot of fed up teenagers who weren’t able to get their tickets last night.

Nowadays, it seems that personal gain takes precedent over thinking about the other person. This strategy is fine in the short term, it works and individuals profit. However, in the long term where there are limited resources, profiteering can be counter-productive. Game theory applied to biology suggests that both intra and inter species cooperation increases the chances of survival.

A parallel to this can be found in an online game I sometimes play. Players can play on one of two sides, and whilst the equipment used by each side is different, it is pretty much balanced (despite the claims of some vociferous complainers on both sides) the main difference is that more players tend to play on one particular side (let’s call that side ‘A’). The reasons for people predominantly choosing side A are unclear, but once people have chosen a side, they tend to make friends and become loyal to that side.

When more people log in to side A than side B, side A wins more, and the players may feel justified in considering that they are better players, and because they are doing well, they are more inclined to play more. However, side B players will feel fed up and less inclined to play. When this pattern continues, more and more players from side B will unsubscribe from the game or play for side A – increasing the imbalance even further. If this pattern continues, the players of side A will not have any opponents left and the game will fold, leaving them with no game at all.

Again, it is evident that some players from side A are unable to grasp this, and attribute their successes to such things as superior tactics and playing skill, blaming side B for not having enough morale or organisation. One player summed up this attitude with a quote, which I thought summed it up nicely:

“You're just like the monkey who had an electrode hooked to his brain that gave him an orgasm every time he hit a button. The monkey died.”

I think the game developers have a sticky problem. They need to find ways of balancing the numbers to ensure all who play their game get to win on a 50:50 basis, rather than side A winning campaign after campaign. I’m sure they will – after all, their survival depends on it.

Remembrance

2006-03-30T12:03:00.001+01:00

There is a movement to honour the last surviving veteran of the First World War with a state funeral. I remember hearing from an old veteran his view that once no-one was left to remember the events, it would be in effect a 'second death' for the millions who lost their lives during that conflict. Perhaps a state funeral might, to an extent, help acknowledge this 'second death'.

Thinking about the events of the First World War got me thinking about the legacy of that war. It marked the rise of modernism, but also changed attitudes at other levels. Young men were sent to their deaths by much older generals. The lack of respect for older people that is apparent nowadays may well be traced back to this turning around of values where an older generation wittingly sacrificed a younger generation.

Another consequence of the First World War that still haunts us can be traced back to the terms of armistice, particularly the Treaty of Versailles. The Germans were losing the war, yet it was dragging on. Bateson, in 'Steps to an ecology of mind' notes that the grand-daddy of public relations, an American called George Creel, had the idea that the Germans would surrender if a 'soft' armistice was offered. The fourteen point plan was conceived. The plan was delivered by an honest man, the American President Woodrow Wilson, and the Germans duly surrendered. However, Germany continued to be blockaded for another year, humiliating and starving the people. When the Treaty of Versailles was finally drawn up, it was punitive, demanding reparations and loss of territories from an already bankrupt Germany. The Germans signed under protest; they had surrendered under the impression that the fourteen point plan was credible.

It has probably always been acceptable to be dishonest, or at least mislead, in making war. Making peace, at least up until Creel our public relations guru had his way, had always been pretty much honourable. The Germans were demoralized even further and the result was the Second World War. The fourteen point plan had been intended to save American lives. An estimated 55.7 million lives were lost in World War Two; of these 295,000 were American troops.

This major deception in making peace changed attitudes across the world. I believe we are still experiencing the effects. A state funeral for the last of the veterans could well be represent an act of remembrance for a time before public relations; before the rules for negotiating peace were changed.

Conscious purpose and the environment

2006-03-26T12:49:00.001+01:00

Most people who enjoy natural history series such as Planet Earth will appreciate the incredible balance that is found in nature between different species that depend on each other for survival. This balance has evolved through thousands of years. Yet this balance is not conscious; blackbirds don't think 'It's going to be a poor summer so we'll lay fewer eggs'. Gregory Bateson, the English anthropologist appreciated that this balance reflected an inherent wisdom. Mind, he suggested, was an integral apsect of this interrelationship. A multitude of diverse creatures have survived, as part of the environment, for millenia. This graceful and unconscious balancing act between the parts of the larger system comprised of species and the environment has been incredibly successful.

But now we are threatened by our own conscious purpose. As a species, we don't live in unconscious harmony wth the environment, in fact, we tend to think of ourselves as separate from the environment; having 'dominion' over the whole of creation. Perhaps this has worked for a few thousand years. However, I doubt anyone affected by the effects of global warming would agree that we still have dominion over the earth.

As a species we are dependant on exploiting the resources of the planet to maintain the lifestyles we have become accustomed to. In a sense, we are addicted to these finite resources, resources that when used create carbon dioxide and other pollutants that are contributing to global warming. To be blunt, most of the things that governments are doing to address this problem are inadequate. Whilst I have railed against speeding fines that seem inconsistent, I would not object to speed limits being imposed to reduce emissions. But changing a society through taxes is hardly adequate considering the potentially disastrous global effects of climate change.

What is required is something more drastic than carbon taxes. We urgently need to think about how we think. One of the first things we can do is begin to appreciate that we are part of the environment, not separate from it.

We need to begin to appreciate that perhaps there is a wisdom inherent in nature that is greater than ours. Some might even wonder if some kind of deity may be discerned in this ecological wisdom.

We can begin to think more systemically. Bateson called this a cybernetic epistemology. "The individual mind is immanent but not only in the body. It is immanent also in the pathways and messages outside the body; and there is a larger mind of which the individual mind is only a subsystem. This larger mind is comparable to God and is perhaps what some people mean by 'God,' but it is still immanent in the total interconnected social system and planetary ecology."

Bateson saw the problems we were heading for overy 40 years ago. In his words (From Brockman) "Perhaps all exploration of the world of ideas is only a searching for a rediscovery, and perhaps it is such rediscovery of the latent that defines us as "human," "conscious," and "twice born." But if this be so, then we all must sometimes hear St. Paul's "voice" echoing down the ages: "It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks."

I am suggesting to you that all the multiple insults, the double binds and invasions that we all experience in life, the impact (to use an inappropriate physical word) whereby experience corrupts our epistemology, challenging the core of our existence, and thereby seducing us into a false cult of the ego—what I am suggesting is that the process whereby double binds and other traumas teach us a false epistemology is already well advanced in most occidentals and perhaps most orientals, and that those whom we call "schizophrenics" are those in whom the endless kicking against the pricks has become intolerable."

Is it too late to change our ways of thinking? Perhaps the technological advances charactaristic of our 'false epistemology' may help to forestall climate change, but will they buy our species enough time to ensure our survival?

The rich get richer.

2006-03-23T15:36:00.001Z

Since 1997, the richest 1,000 people have seen their wealth increase from £99bn to £250bn, which enables them to exercise huge social and political influence. More than 65,000 rich individuals live in Britain but pay little or no tax. They are sheltered by Britain's archaic domicile and residence laws.

To finance a crumbling social infrastructure, taxes on ordinary citizens have been increased by raising VAT and freezing personal allowances. To alleviate poverty, the Government introduced a 10% rate in 1999-2000, now payable on taxable income of £2,020. The number of people caught in this bracket has increased from 2.28m to 3.4m. A record 3.3m people pay 40%, at a modest taxable income of £31,400.

Is it any surprise many people cannot afford to buy homes or save enough for their pension? In fact, the top fifth of earners pay a smaller proportion of their income in tax than the bottom fifth. At the same time, fat cats use tax havens and pay themselves in gold bars, fine wine and exotic currencies to avoid taxes and National Insurance.

Successive British Governments have failed to shackle the tax avoidance industry. Some $11.5 trillion (£6.01 trillion) of the world's money is hidden in tax havens such as Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man. If taxed, this could raise global revenues of $255bn a year and help to alleviate poverty in Africa and developing countries.

Many tax havens are Crown dependencies and the Government could end their shady business. It should refuse to award public contracts to any company that uses tax havens and concocts transactions solely designed to avoid taxes. Yet these organisations and their controllers have been pampered by all governments, especially as they finance political parties, politicians and think-tanks.

Government could make accountancy firms and their partners personally liable for developing and marketing dubious tax avoidance schemes but instead they have been rewarded with massive public contracts. The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) alone has yielded more than £500m in fees for big accountancy practices.

Isn't it time political parties explained their proposals for ending the wealth transfers from ordinary people to multinational companies and the rich elite?

Dialogue and the war on terror

2006-03-06T10:44:00.002Z

The Danish Premier called for dialogue in resolving the conflict between Islamic extremists and Western countries.

The trouble is, the potential for dialogue started some time ago, and no-one seemed to want to listen.

On February 26, 1993, a bomb exploded beneath the World Trade Center in New York, killing six people and injuring over a thousand. Five years later, a jury in New York City found Ramzi Ahmed Yousef guilty of the bombing. Yousef was asked if he wanted to make a statement before being sentenced. This is usually a situation where the person who has been convicted has an opportunity to express remorse for the crime. However, Yousef defiantly explained that in his worldview, he had acted honorably. He said:

You keep talking also about collective punishment
and killing innocent people to force
governments to change their policies; you call
this terrorism when someone would kill innocent
people or civilians in order to force the
government to change its policies. Well, you
were the first one who invented this terrorism.

You were the first one who killed
innocent people, and you are the first one
who introduced this type of terrorism to the
history of mankind when you dropped an
atomic bomb which killed tens of thousands
of women and children in Japan and when
you killed over a hundred thousand people,
most of them civilians, in Tokyo with
fire bombings. You killed them by burning
them to death. And you killed civilians in
Vietnam with chemicals as with the socalled
Orange agent. You killed civilians
and innocent people, not soldiers, innocent
people every single war you went. You went
to wars more than any other country in this
century, and then you have the nerve to talk
about killing innocent people.
And now you have invented new ways
to kill innocent people. You have so-called
economic embargo which kills nobody
other than children and elderly people, and
which other than Iraq you have been placing
the economic embargo on Cuba and other
countries for over 35 years. . .

The government in its summations and
opening said that I was a terrorist. Yes, I am
a terrorist and I am proud of it. And I support
terrorism so long as it was against the
United States Government and against
Israel, because you are more than terrorists;
you are the one who invented terrorism and
using it every day. You are butchers, liars
and hypocrites.

Immediately after this statement, Judge Kevin Duffy sentenced Yousef to 240 years in prison. He went beyond the requirements of his role by recommending that the sentence be served in solitary confinement, imposing a fine of $4.5 million, and ordering Yousef to provide $250 million in restitution.

Whilst many people might vehemently agree with Yousef, his statement outlined a position that is taken by some people.

Without dialogue we cannot learn about why people take the positions they do, nor will they understand the positions we take. When people take opposing positions, without dialogue, there will be conflict.

Dialogue requires that we do four things:

Suspend our judgment
When we learn to suspend judgment, to "hold our positions more lightly", we open the door to see others' points of view. It is not that we do away with our judgments and opinions - this would be impossible. We simply create a space between our judgment and our reaction, and thus open a door for listening.

Identify our assumptions
It is probably obvious to most of us that our assumptions play a large role in how we evaluate our environment, the decisions we make and how we behave. Yet, it is just this aspect of our thinking that we consistently overlook when we seek to solve problems, resolve conflicts, or create synergy among diverse people. Our prejudices are 'pre-judgments', and sometimes we need to reflect on these ideas we hold. By learning how to identify our assumptions, we can also explore differences with others, work to build common ground and consensus, and get to the bottom of core misunderstandings and differences.

Listening: Key to Perception
The way we listen has a lot to do with our capacity to learn and build quality relationships with others. When we are able to suspend judgment and listen to diverse perspectives we expand and deepen our world view. It is the act of listening that allows for integration and synthesis of new insights and possibilities. When we listen deeply we are willing to be influenced by and learn from others.

Inquiry and Reflection
Inquiry elicits information. Reflection permits the inspection of information and the perception of relationships. The combination of reflection and inquiry enables us to learn, to think creatively, and to build on past experience (versus simply repeating the same patterns over and over again). By creating pauses to reflect, we learn to work with silence and slow down the rate of conversation. We become able to identify assumptions and reactive patterns and open the door for new ideas and possibilities.

Perhaps by encouraging and modelling dialogic approaches to dealing with conflict, the world might be a more peaceful place. That means the West being prepared to shift it's position from rapacious involvement in the Middle East as well as terrorists being prepared to stop killing.