(Another in the series of abstracts from pertinent articles related to mind control.) PSYCHOLOGICAL RESPONSES IN THE HUMAN TO INTRACEREBRAL ELECTRICAL STIMULATION Extract from a medical report of 1962 by the researchers, G.F. Mahl, A. Rothenberg, J.M. Delgado and Hannibal Hamlin at the Department of Physiology and Psychiatry, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut This is a report of some observable psychological effects of intracerebral stimulation in a patient with psychomotor epilepsy. Diagnostic study with the implanted electrode technique devel9oped by Delgado provided the opportunity to make these observations. Our interest in responses to brain stimulation originated with Penfield's report (PENFLED, W, and ROBERT, L; Speech and Brain Mechanisms, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 1959) of perceptual and memorial responses to openfield stimulation of the temporal lobe in the human, and with Kubie's general discussions based partly on Penfield's work. Others had also demonstrated in animals, correlations between functions of the frontotemporal region and emotions as well as feeding and sexual activity. The arousal of fear, which could motivate learning, by stimulation of areas related to the frontotemporal region had also been demonstrated. . . Questions arising from the preceding investigations guided the present study. Given the fact that a patient was being studied diagnostically with the implanted-electrode technique which makes it possible to observe stimulation effects in the relatively unrestricted interview situation repeated over a number of days. The patient entered the hospital (a large state mental institution where the investigation was conducted) on September 29, 1955. Final preoperative evaluation included medical and psychological interviews and EEG study with scalp electrodes. Medication ceased upon admission and was withheld during the course of the investigation.. . . The electrodes have been described in detail elsewhere. Each needle is approximately 12cmm long (50mm being in the brain substance) and 0.5mm in diameter. The needle electrode contains seven leads which terminate at many points 8mm apart. The final lead terminates at the tip. Each plate electrode, made of polyethylene, is approximately 12cm long and also contains seven leads which terminate 5mm apart along the length of the plate. The leads of each electrode protrude externally to a socket. . . . The patient was told the general diagnostic purpose of the electrode implantation and that both stimulation and recordings would be done at times by means of the electrodes. She was also told that sometimes stimulation produced reactions, feelings, and ideas and that sometimes it did not. We did not tell the patient which were stimulation or nonstimulation interviews, nor the sites or time of stimulations. The interview opens with some discussion of her husband's visit that afternoon and she talks again about her daughter. She knows that her daughter is concerned about her and wonders if the girl says prayers for her every night. She admits that she, herself, has said silent prayers while in the hospital. Briefly then, the conversation turns to her plans to quit work. Again, she wonders about the causes of her illness. There is a short pause following Stim. 2 at Post Ndl. 3-4, and she says, "Oh, a crazy word just came to me." As the interviewer tries to elicit clarification of the experience, she begins to wonder if these words that come to her are products of her imagination just as she wondered previously whether her spells were due to her imagination. She becomes quiet and appears thoughtful. . . . . At first, she will not tell the interviewer what happened. Finally, she tell him, "I think it wasn't nice . . . it must have been dirty. . . maybe a word. . . It wasn't a swear word." The patient thinks she said the word. She resumed praying silently, explaining, "just saying my prayers so my mind won't drift some place." Several times during the interview she complains that her nose itches and occasionally reports that her head hurts, but no other physical sensations are reported. Towards the end of the interview, she becomes teasing and somewhat verbally seductive to the interviewer. She apologizes for having gotten angry at him on occasion and reports feeling much more relaxed at the end. With stimulation, the patient exclaimed as if in pain and said, "Oh, right in my ear and then my mouth again - Oh, I got like a shock then. Through my ear, and through my jaw again. And, I didn't move my mouth - It felt like water or something wet on my tongue - [It was like} a sharp pain - Tastes funny. I feel as though my mouth smells or something." The patient heard the voice of a girl who worked with her speaking to her: "A (patient's name), that guy is - tough." The patient added: "The girl says to me that her brother-in-law says something about someone's gotta go to work-" The words "floats in the tide" came to the patient. The words "Purse into school" and "pake into school" came to the patients. She uttered the first phrase, apparently when it "came to her." There were eight additional ideational experiences that could not be related easily to the interview content or interaction. In none did the patient specify the person or the words involved. The following statements represent what she conveyed about these eight responses. 1. A word came to her. 2. A "person said a saying." 3. "Some girl" said "something true." 4. Somebody said something. 5. a word came to her. 6. A "crazy" word came to her. 7. Somebody said something. 8 Somebody said a "dirty" word. In five of the 13 extrinsic experiences, the patient identified the people she heard as being ones she knew and thus heard in the past. In one of these five experiences, a man was talking "silly," as he often had in the past, and in three more of the five experiences the patient identified the words spoken as actually having been said by these people in the past. We cannot say whether the content of the other eight extrinsic experiences referred to the patient's past or not. The patient made no reference to the past in describing them, a circumstance that could be due to a variety of factors. Defensiveness of reporting and instantaneous repression, arising from the fear of insanity as well as from other anxiety and guilt over the content of the experiences, could very well have prevented the patient from providing the missing memorial reference for these eight experiences. But two of them show in a very obvious and unequivocal way that thoughts of the patient at the moment of stimulation may be related to the perceptual content evoked by the stimulation. These are the experiences elicited by Stim. 10, Interview 6, and Stim 8, Interview 7, both at Ant. Ndl. 5-6. Immediately before the first of these two stimulations the patient was talking about her daughter's desire for a baby sister and, if the patient is to be believed, she herself was then thinking that she would like to have another baby. With stimulation the patient hears a female voice say "I got a baby. . sister." Just before the other stimulation the patient was speaking of her "spells" at work and of actual details of her work. Upon stimulation she hears the voice of a girl who used to work with her. And the words uttered by the girl include the phrase, "someone's gotta go to work." (Baldwin reports a very similar observation. The visual hallucinatory responses of a 28 years old man varied in content with the sex and identity of the observer seated before him in the operating room. Here one could assume that the overt interchanges concerning couples babies, etc., and finally the patient's speech, was accompanied ************************************************************** MINDCONTROL-L Mind Control and Psyops Mailing List To unsubscribe or subscribe: send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text: "unsubscribe MINDCONTROL-L" or "subscribe MINDCONTROL-L". Post to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wes Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, list moderator
