Neurobiology, Language and Culture: Help DuWayne Again

I am moving right along with my exploration of cognitive function, language and culture. I am really enjoying my quest into human consciousness, social development and their intersect with language. Honestly, I spend a lot of time wavering between reading (and listening to audiobooks) about human cognition, evolution, language and culture - and sitting in a daze, trying to pick apart tendrils of thoughts and ideas. It often reminds me very much of being really stoned, without the accompanying debilitation. Indeed, due to the stimulant therapy and the Welbutrin, I am actually able to pick at the minutiae and consider it in and out of context - assessing the implications.

Given another year or so, I should be able to develop a reasonable hypothesis. That is, a hypothesis that will drive the research I conduct early in my career. I have developed some interesting questions that I really hope will lead me to that question that will take up much of my time in a few years. That is the investigation into the questions, not the answers. While it is theoretically possible to answer these questions, doing so would be exceedingly difficult - if not impossible, given the tools we have to work with right now. And that assumes the questions themselves are correct.

One of the big questions - or series of questions I am rather keen on right now, is the correlation between language and culture, language and cognition and culture and cognition. I have been spending much of my spare time, such as it is, exploring the co-evolution of language and the brain. I have also read some interesting stuff about the early evolution of culture. And studying psychology and linguistics, I note correlations of culture, psychology, psychopathology and language on a regular basis. The exact nature of these correlations are the most fascinating questions I have ever had. There are not many questions I have found more pleasure in exploring.

At the moment I am exploring the evolution of language and the evolution of culture for one of my papers. I am also working on a paper that explores the impact of language and culture on the expression and treatment of mood disorders.

So here is the help that I need. I have most of the source material I need, but at least one of my sources for both papers needs to be an interaction with another person. Because of the nature of what I am writing about, I am really hoping to find some folks who have some background in some aspect or another, of the topics I am writing about. I am especially interested in talking to someone with experience in cross cultural mental health services. I do actually have some people I could potentially harass for the first paper (though I would love to meet new people), I am mostly looking for someone to talk to about the second.

When I am done with my papers and they have been graded, I will go ahead and post them. I have one that I should be able to post sometime this next week. These two papers however, aren't due for another four weeks, so I doubt I am going to be able to post them for at least that long.

The Stigma of Addiction and other Mental Issues

The topic of stigma and mental problems has been coming up a lot for me lately, especially (of course) in relation to addiction.  So it was rather fortuitous to discover another great blog this morning and this post...

Sometimes I find it easy to forget about, because I have a lot of supportive, loving people in my life who just don't go in for stigma.  Couple that with having even less of a social life than usual this summer and I found myself in that comfortable place - the place where I just don't have to think about the destructive force of words - words that perpetuate shame.  It is that shame that really gets me fucking angry as hell.  I get enraged at the notion that a whole lot of people - some of whom I know - are so terribly ashamed of their own fucking brain.

To me, it is so obvious now...Feeling ashamed of the way one's brain works, is a lot like feeling ashamed of having brown eyes instead of blue, or red hair instead of blond.  It's obvious enough to me, that I forget sometimes that it is not so obvious to others.  It's obvious enough to me now, that I even forget sometimes that it wasn't always so obvious to me.  And even as obvious as it is, it is still easy enough to feel shame about who I have been and how I have behaved - because it is impossible to sort out where my neurochemical issues end and just plain old bad decision making begins.  It is especially hard, because everything I have done, all the bad decisions that I have made - all of it was at least influenced by the way my brain works.

How then, does one separate what one should be ashamed of, from what they should just accept as part of having neurological issues?

My short answer; one can't.  Trying to do so requires sorting through every factor that influences our decision making.  As a thought exercise, I would ask you to think for a moment, about the last book you read (or article).  I want you to consider everything that went into the decision to read it - don't just scratch the surface - dig deep into your motivations.  Follow the chain that brought you to the point where you wanted to read that book or article.  Where did your interest in the subject of that piece come from?  Where did the interest in whatever influenced you to get into that subject arise?  What else did you read, that indicated you might like to read this piece?  What influenced you to read that?  In short, try to untangle the skein of influences and motivations that brought you to the simple decision to read that book.  If it was a friend who recommended it, why do you trust their judgment?

If you just did as I asked, you probably got stuck rather close to the decision you made to read whatever it is you recently read.  Unless you took quite a bit of time and really went at it, you barely touched on a small fraction of everything that went into that very basic decision.  And even if you did take the time and focused, you quite likely still only scratched the surface - just a little deeper than some people would scratch.  Now think about this - we're just talking about the decision to read something.  How then does one sort out the decision to wander the country, sleeping outside as often as not?  How does one sort out the decisions to use virtually every mind altering substance set in front of them?  How does one sort out the decisions to have sex with virtually every woman and some men, who were willing and willing to use protection?  How does one sort the decisions that leaves one virtually homeless for more than five fucking years?  How does one sort the decisions to sell drugs, so one has drugs and sometimes a little money (and sometimes a lot of money)?  How does one sort the decisions to buy dope, instead of buying shoes that aren't literally falling apart at the seems?  How does one sort all the decisions that led to losing the roof over not only one's own head, but that of their family?

How does one sort the decisions that paint a picture of a reprehensible excuse for a human being?  How can such a person not be brutally ashamed of their own fucking brain - regardless of what actually influenced those decisions and how?

I wish there were a simple answer.  I really, really do, because it is hard being that person - hard not to be ashamed to the point of incapacitation.  It's hard not to extrapolate thirty some years of bad decisions into an inherent failure.  It is hard not to take those stigmas that are attatched to being mentally ill and accepting them as absolute truth.  But there is an excellent place to start - a place that not only helps the person who has made these decisions, but helps others as well.

Fighting these vile fucking stigmas is a very important place to start.  Being loud and proud of who and what one is, because as reprehensible as many of my decisions have been, I am also a good person on a great many levels.  And what makes me a good person, what fosters the positive - these factors are just as influenced by the way my brain works.  Just as the bad - the things that can foster shame - are influenced by the way my brain works, so are the positives.  The same chemistry that has seen me getting high on all manner of stupidity, has also seen me fostering my children's native intellect - communicating, reading and providing them with the absolute security of my absolute love for them.  The same chemistry that has seen me sleeping under bridges and in all manner of flops, has also seen me work feats of extreme beauty and grace in multi-million dollar homes.  The same chemistry that sees me lashing out in extremely harsh words, has also seen me develop a love for a wonderful women that transcends anything I ever thought anyone could feel in that context, let alone me.

Stigma is a trap.  Stigma is a prison of invisible bars that hold some people far more firmly than steel and concrete could ever manage.  Stigma does nothing but destroy and break further, people who are already broken and in need of healing.  Not broken because our brains are atypical, but because we haven't the tools to integrate our neurochemistry with the society in which we exist.  We are broken, because our society doesn't have a place for us - though that is slowly changing.  But regardless of what makes us broken, stigmas just exacerbate the problem - the brokeness - the shame.

ADHD, Bipolar and other neurological issues: A Quick Note

To be clear before I go further, the information available to me about those hitting this site is very limited. But one of the things that my site meter tells me about, is the referring URL, i.e. where you clicked in. And when a google search brings someone here, while I don't know who that person is, I do know what the search string was.

I have noticed that I get fairly regular hits from searches on ADHD, bipolar and neurological disorders. Often included are methylphenidate, ampehtamine, adderall, ritalin, substance abuse, etc.

Please, let me make you welcome. If you are hitting this post, feel free to peruse the rest of the blog, but more importantly, please let me know what you are looking for. While I am painfully busy right now, I would very much like to provide links in the sidebar to help facilitate your search and the searches of others who come after you. I do have several links that I intend on posting, but school and, well, ADHD behaviors have kept me from getting to it. Meanwhile, there are links to some forums that may be of use. Discussing our problems with people who have similar issues can be a major help in itself. And some of the forums provide links to other information - and you can always post a request for links.....

More than just a place to foster interesting discussions, I want this blog to also be a place where information on topics that affect me and those I love can be found. I have rather severe ADHD and not so intense bipolar issues. I have many years of experience with substance abuse issues and am studying psychology with the intent of going into addiction research and clinical work.

If you happen to be looking for substance abuse links, please take a look to the right of this, you may have to scroll down. There are some links now and that list will be growing as I have time to get to it.

So please, if you don't see what you're looking for, let me know. You can post anonymous links or email me (just write confidential in the subject line). While I am not a therapist and cannot provide mental health care, I can point you in different directions and am often happy to talk. While there is no legal compunction for me to do so, I am very discreet and will never post or talk about you. If you give me permission, I may discuss things you share with me, but would make sure to keep your identity private.

Autonomy, Coercion and Reproductive Decisions

There are a lot of directions I want to go on this topic, but I am finding my time sharply limited and if all goes well it will be even more limited soon. So I am going to have to let the flow of this discussion go where it will for the most part, rather than exerting much control over it. In that vein, Comrade PhysioProf has made a comment that rather nicely dovetails with the one right after it, made by Becca.

For me the key ethical distinction is between the autonomous reproductive choices of individuals coerced reproductive decision-making by the state.

Which sounds pretty good on it's face. But what about other coercive elements? And what about coercion for humane purposes. With these questions in mind, I would like to explore them through the consideration of Lysosomal Storage Diseases. Two key elements tie most LS diseases; They are almost always fatal, with few having any available treatment and exceptionally painful for the victim. And most of them can be found through prenatal testing. To make them perfect for this question, there are a few LS diseases that can be treated, but said treatments include some of the most expensive drugs ever created, running from $250,000 to $450, 000 per year for life. Also, it is possible to pre-test potential mates who have a heightened expectation for some LS diseases, such as Tays Sachs, for the recessive genes.

So to start, is it entirely unworthy of even asking if maybe it would be ok to require pregnant women who have a fetus that tests positive for infantile Tays Sachs terminate their pregnancy? Or is it unreasonable to require couples who both carry the recessive gene for TS not reproduce? To put it more bluntly; Is it unreasonable to restrict the reproductive rights of someone who is extremely likely to have an infant that is going to suffer horrendous pain and die before their third birthday? I don't have an easy answer, but I would argue that it's unethical not to consider these questions.

My next question would be one of financial coercion. One of my closest friends is married to a women who had a brother with Hunter syndrome. Their daughter is a very close friend to my son and a child I love very dearly. She is also entirely unaware of the terror her parents went through when they first learned they had conceived. Because there was a significant risk that is that lovely little girl had been a boy, that he would have had Hunter syndrome. At the time, there was absolutely no hope for a person with Hunter syndrome. Just pain, retardation and death by thirty - usually in adolescence.

But there is a new hope. The FDA approved the drug Eleprase for the treatment of Hunter syndrome in 2006. But this treatment isn't without significant drawbacks. It requires a weekly IV infusion and a risk of anaphylactic reaction requires it be provided in a facility capable of handling a serious medical emergency. It is also a maintenance drug, that must be continued for life.

Finally, we get to arguably the worse drawback. Eleprase treatments come at a cost of around $300,000 annually. So who should be required to pay for these treatments? Should the insurance company have a right to not cover the cost, for children who's parents knew there was a significant risk of Hunter syndrome and chose to have that child anyways? Should the state cover the cost? Who should lose out on care because the state is covering the cost? (i.e. where should the rationing be placed to cover it?)

Now you can tell me that LSD's are really quite rare and that I'm throwing hypotheticals out here that have little real world impact. First, let me be quite clear, this is not minimal real impact to those who experience these diseases first hand. But more importantly, we are learning more and more every day about the genetic predisposition for a lot of other diseases. These are questions that could well have a far more significant impact on more people in the future.

And please, lets not make any assumptions about anyone's motives or beliefs. This is a touchy topic for a lot of people, including me. I'm not a fucking monster trying to force anyone to kill their babies, nor am I a monster for deciding that my youngest wouldn't be with us today if he his amniotic had tested positive for down syndrome. The next nasty email I get about this will probably be published on the front page of this blog, with contact information.

Sorry about the silence

Complete and utter chaos, would be an understatement. Life is absolutely insane these days. But I do have several issues that have been grinding at me, that I hope to hit on soonish. Not sure what the priorities will come out as, but here are the topics;

The abolition of marriage as a civil institution, beyond marriage equality for GLTs. More and more, I am finding that I am far from alone on this. I have a lot to say on this issue, but in short, even allowing gay marriage, would still restrict marriage rights to those who are in, or are willing to claim to be in a romantic relationship. I for one, find this ridiculous.

The absurdity of simplistic dichotomies (to steal a phrase from my brother). As the primaries are getting into full steam, the stench of partisan politics is enough to make the strongest of iron stomachs retch. From republicrats, to the conservative/liberal dichotomy, where do I fit in? Where do you? When you really think about it, do the labels we are pegged with really fit, even if they are self imposed? I am prochoice, progayrights, for ending the drug war and believe in a comprehensive, if a not so comfy welfare state. I am also progun, fiscally conservative and dead against affirmative action.

Private security contractors in America. Another topic my bro has written a lot about lately, I would like to hit on it from a different angle. Though this article does a particularly great job of expressing what the America with PSC's might look like, I think it's important to look at where they already are. Do you have PSC's operating in your towns business district? Portland does and it is a problem.

The War on Vice. Because gods know, the guy down the street smoking a joint is causing irreparable damage to your lifestyle. Especially if he has a hooker once in a while. And that friendly poker game in his basement once a week, how dare he skirt the state and native monopoly on gambling. So lets spend billions upon billions annually, persecuting these folks. Lets continue to incarcerate a larger percentage of our population than any other country* in the world. Yeah! We're number one!

*Keeping in mind that China tends to execute, rather than incarcerate. And they're not alone.

There are these and more. Including more on ADHD, bipolar and neurodiversity. More discussions of rights in the abstract. More thoughts on euthanasia. More about denialism. And a discussion about about CAM "medicine" and a (hopefully) soon to be published print article, by your's truly. Indeed, if all goes well, I will have a print article out, about the HIV/AIDS denial (and denialism in general) as well as the CAM article.

So what do you think I should focus on first?

By and by, my baby has discovered the things that flop around him are hands and he controls them. He has also started smiling and giggling, though the giggles are rather a disturbing sound. Unfortunately, he seems to have some distaste for the camera, so the smiles are yet unrecorded.
Homeschooling is definitely starting to come together, though it is slow and unweildy as of yet. But we have found even more resources and are starting to get a stride.

Eugenics Is Not A Four Letter Word

Quick note, the baby is not here yet, though momma is bursting at the seams. We are incredibly busy all around, preparing for the baby, preparing for Christmas and preparing for our adventures into the world of homeschooling. I have managed to find some work to cover a little break that I didn't need, which should keep us afloat. On to the posting at hand then.

I have paid little attention, as I have been busy, but Seed's SciBlogs have been been hammering away at one Jim West of the Discovery Institute, a “think” tank devoted to pushing the teaching of creationism into U.S. Public schools. Suffice to say that DI is nothing more than a PR organization, rife with dishonesty. PZ Meyers started in on West a while ago with this post, which I admit I haven't actually read (I include the link for context only).

Lately, sciblogger Greg Laden joined in the fray, ruffling the feathers of sciblogger Orac. In short, Laden made some rather outrageous claims about the origins of forced eugenics programs, both those that happened in the U.S. (dark enough themselves) and those of the Nazis (i.e. The extermination of millions of Jews and other undesirables). Orac corrects the mistaken notion that the intellectual propagators of these atrocious eugenics programs were mostly Christians. In comments on both Greg's and Orac's posts, Colugo adds a lot of very interesting information to the mix.

Now I am not going to argue that the early part of the twentieth century was not to a strong degree, a world gone mad with some truly frightening notions about eugenics. From forced sterilizations, to mass exterminations, forced eugenics was a very ugly, fundamentally bigoted beast. But that is not the whole picture, not by a long shot. There is something important missing in this discussion of eugenics, that is the notion that not all eugenics is bad. Indeed, much of what falls under the heading of eugenics isn't even controversial. Unfortunately, some of it is controversial. Some of it skates very fine, ethical, dare I say, moral lines. The problem with making eugenics into some bogey man, is that it inserts a certain hysteria into a very important discussion.

So what is eugenics?

Let me start with this simple exercise. When you were choosing a mate (assuming you are a breeder of some sort), did you ever consider what your children might look like, if this person or that, was the mate you chose? Did you ever consider their intellect, for the same reason? In short, was one of the factors in choosing your mate, what they might contribute genetically? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, congratulations, you practiced a very basic form of eugenics. Not the least bit controversial, evil or unreasonable.

Lets then up it a notch. I have gotten to know quite a few folks in the world of neurodiversity. Many of them great folks. Several of them have made the conscious decision not to reproduce, because they do not want to pass on what are likely genetic disorders (at least influenced by genetics) to the children they would produce. I.e. They have identified some genetic trait that they believe it would be best not to propagate and therefor chosen not to reproduce. This too, is a form of eugenics.

Now we get to some meat. Herein lies a more controversial aspect of the discussion of eugenics, one that I will state outright, I don't have a problem with. Nonetheless, there are plenty of people who have serious objections, including readers of this blog. Right now, today, medical science has progressed to the point that we can identify many disorders and congenital diseases, in vitro. My partner and I had a bit of a scare, when the nurse called about an elevated risk for downs syndrome, with the baby that is due any time now. Lets just say that she handled it badly – leading us to believe it was a significant risk, rather than a less than three percent risk.

We want this baby. Our whole family is excited (no matter how I whine about it). But with a child already, who has followed in his papa's ADHD footsteps, there is no way that we could raise a child with those sorts of special needs. Not without seriously undermining the care and attention that the son we have now requires. Nor would we find it reasonable to burden society with such a child. It would have been a hard, but simple answer; abortion. For those who have rather profound objections to the notion of abortion, please do not judge me too harshly. Yes, this decision was reached without very much discussion. Mostly we just looked at each other, already knowing the way it would be. It took little time to consider it. This is because we are all too aware of the implications.

Nor is this limited to down syndrome. There are a host of disorders that can and routinely are diagnosed in vitro. While it is not a frequent occurrence, this does lead to decisions to terminate pregnancies. This too, is eugenics.

Finally, we come to even more controversial aspects of the discussion; where is the science going?

Our understanding of genetics and DNA, is increasing at an exponential rate. Already we have developed many gene therapies for treating certain disorders, Tays Sachs being a huge one. We are very close to viable therapies that can be started in vitro (I believe some already are). The question becomes, what is acceptable? What can we reasonably eliminate from our society? For instance, what about ADHD? Bipolar disorder? Schizophrenia? Autism? What about homosexuality?

The flip side of this, is the discussion of enhancements. What if it becomes possible to enhance certain characteristics, such as intelligence, endurance, fine motor skills, or spacial reasoning? What about absolute engineering, such as Aldous Huxley describes in Brave New World? A vast panacea is opening up before us, right now. Unfortunately, we are too busy freaking out over the terminology to actually have a serious, coherent discussion. Eugenics is not a four letter word, but it does carry rather serious implications, that require their time in the limelight.

Want To Silence Your Critics, Go After Their Kids

Addendum, the technorati search now turns up nothing, but it was there earlier, when I clicked over to it.

Another one from Orac. For those who don't click over, in short, a scum called John Best, managed to get a great voice for neurodiversity, Kev of Left Brain, Right Brain, to close up shop. Not through lawsuits, not through direct threats of physical violence, but by attacking Kev's daughter. Real class act, our Mr. Best. I will not link to Mr. Best, or his anti-neurodiversity screeds. But here is a quote that was found via technorati, by two of Orac's commenters;

1. Hey Dad, if you stop treating me like a monkey to teach me how to perform some simple tasks, you might find out that I'm very ill mentally. I can't learn those things you want me to learn because my brain just won't work right. You're a real horse's ass Dad, for defending the drug companies who scrambled my brain. Any decent father...celebrating, Dad. Being autistic sucks. Not being able to talk sucks. Not having friends sucks

2. Hey Dad, Weren't you listening to me? I didn't ask you to attack that nice Mr Best who wants me to enjoy my life. I asked you to help me. How does attacking a parent who helps his son help me, Dad? I don't care about this neurodiversity crap, Dad. I just want to be like normal kids. Please Dad, I hope you won't be mean

Calming down now. I have autistic friends. My five year old has autistic friends. This makes me very angry. Beyond the pale kind of pissed. If you have read me for long, you might have noticed my discussion of ADHD and bipolar, which touched briefly on neurodiversity. I will discuss it again soon, as it is obviously needed. But this post is meant to illustrate yet another tactic that is quite handy for stifling criticism, a theme lately.

This is probably the most common tactic used to stifle dissenting views. The use of personal and familial mocking and abuse. It is huge in the blogosphere. Not mere taunting or parody, but harsh, hard attacks on one's family. Sometimes it is taken too far and reaches the level of threats, that go a little past insinuation. But usually, the practitioners of this vile practice stay just this side of legal. Making it no less repugnant.

As I am way behind on all sorts of posting, I have to apologiuse, but those posts will probably be a while in coming. I am working on a few important pieces that are taking precedence. One is a longer post on methods of silencing critics and chilling free expression. Another is a long overdue discussion of neurodiversity that will probably encompass the end of my story about my life with ADHD and finally, I am working on a article about "alternative" medicine, that is intended for publication in one of the Portland weekly papers, here in the heart of CAM country. All that and I am still working a big job. I will try to get more short posts, referencing other bloggers and articles, but for the heavy writing, I am busy.

This would also be a good time to reiterate that I welcome guest and crosspostings. Just email me if you are interested. And as always, don't hesitate because you're afraid that I'll disagree with you. Unless you want to perpetrate denialism on my blog, dissenting views are welcome here, as long as they are civil (on the front page at least, try to keep it reasonable in comments, but there is a lot moree leeway there)