4 ms·

Very good article to read. Not many places these days bother to cover a story like that. The behavior evinced by the researcher, Murphy, seems typical of the m

Very good article to read. Not many places these days bother to cover a story like that. The behavior evinced by the researcher, Murphy, seems typical of the modern technologist. Hubris, plain and simple. A better scientist would be just as concerned with the failures and rejects as with the successes. His ready ties to the military research centers are immediately troubling and suspect to me. The kind of experimentation they have been known to support, (MK series), makes me think this Murphy guy got an all but official blank check for his work. This TMS business is not quite half baked, not yet. They can talk about brainwaves and frontal lobes all day, but the facts are: the human mind is far too complicated to be fixed by a magnetic hammer, even when applied gently. Surmont's description of the TMS as a "digital narcotic" is probably worth more than any trial the FDA has ever done. Use of drugs and cannabis alongside brute force brainwave manipulation is a recipe for disaster. The problem with these treatments, is they completely fail to treat the real causes of mental instability. Reading through Surmont's life story, he is a textbook subject for mental experimentation. Unknown family history, Lack of a stable home, sexual abuse, military trauma, TBI, on and on. Hes a walking DSM-V. If I wanted someone I could use up and throw away, I couldnt find anyone better. The real disgusting part about the whole affair is, that it is the same tired failures Ive seen before, in real life with people I know. Here's a secret that they will never admit to: We have the technology to fix every case of "PTSD" that we get back from overseas. (TMS is not it btw). Being able to make and break the human mind are two sides of the same coin. The ability to thoroughly break and rebuild any human mind has been a trade secret of our intel agencies for about 40 years now. They are very good at it. All it would take, to solve PTSD, is to put the people who run those black projects in a talent exchange with the VA. But they will never give up thier secrets, and so men like Surmont are out there walking around untreated, like aging sticks of dynamite, sweating nitro. I could go on for hundreds of pages about the sordid history of American military medical experimentation. Im glad Surmont got a happy ending - somewhere in that San Diego daze, the man upstairs decided to help him out.

Retric 7y ago
The most bizarre aspect of mental illness is a few of them can actually be treated by drugs which are a huge blunt instrument. While nothing is going to be a panacea it seems possible possible for TMS to aid in a subset of mental problems for at least a subset of patients. I think the larger concern is people overselling any treatment. That’s especially true for anything even slightly experimental. Which is why Medicine is mostly taught from rote memorization over experimentation. That may occasionally fail some people, but as a system it’s avoiding a host of issues.
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  > The most bizarre aspect of mental illness is a few of them can actually be treated by drugs which are a huge blunt instrument It’s never seemed bizarre to me. You could treat a broken leg using only morphine if you wanted to. The pain will probably go away, but the leg won’t get less broken.
  - mlyle 7y ago
    Pharmaceuticals to treat mental illness are limited, but they're better than just palliative (morphine for a broken leg).
    - AmericanChopper 7y ago
      Morphine for a broken leg would be a symptomatic treatment in most cases (unless you were expected to die without recovering from it, then it would be palliative). As far as I can tell most medications for mental illnesses are also symptomatic. If somebody had general anxiety issues, and they started taking benzodiazepines, their anxiety issues would be expected to return if they stopped taking them. Unless they had also undertaken other non-pharmaceutical treatments during that time.
      - mlyle 7y ago
        > unless you were expected to die without recovering from it, then it would be palliative). I understand that palliative care has developed a connotation of "this is what we do for you when you're dying..." but the definition is e.g. palliate verb (used with object), pal·li·at·ed, pal·li·at·ing. to relieve or lessen without curing; mitigate; alleviate.
        AmericanChopper 7y ago
        Strictly speaking that’s what palliate means, but palliative care almost always refers to symptomatic care for people with life threatening conditions (see the WHO definition[0]). If you look at the way the phrase is most often used in medical literature, you can see it’s qualitatively different from general symptomatic treatment, as the potential side effects are assessed differently. You’d be much less concerned about a patient developing an opioid dependence if they’re terminally ill. For instance the standard[1] from BC describing guidelines for opiate prescriptions states: > This standard does not apply to active cancer care, palliative care, and management of substance use disorders. Physicians are expected to follow relevant clinical guidelines and established best practices in managing patients with these conditions. Nothing in this standard interferes with a physician’s obligation to provide aggressive symptom management to patients with active cancer, or nearing the end of their lives. [0] https://www.who.int/cancer/palliative/definition/en/ https://www.who.int/cancer/palliative/definition/en/ [1] https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/pdf/PSG-Safe-Prescribing.pdf https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/pdf/PSG-Safe-Prescribing.pdf
kyuudou 7y ago
Another bit from the article of great concern is the use of this new protocol on active duty personnel! Of course, as you noted, this is not a new thing as all branches have treated rank and file active duty as potential guinea pigs.
cryoshon 7y ago
>a secret that they will never admit to what evidence makes you think that this is the case? what's the technology to fix PTSD that you're speaking of?
austhrow743 7y ago
>Being able to make and break the human mind are two sides of the same coin. Do you have reason to believe that this is true specifically for the mind? I can't think of any other scenario where you would need to be able to make something in order to break it.
- shkkmo 7y ago
  I would suspect the claim is using a specific understanding of "break". Obviously you can break a human mind with a bullet or a chisel through the eye socket, but there are certain types of breakage that are not possible without much more nuanced understanding of how the mind functions. In general, I think the idea is that when we learn to create a type of thing, we also learn a great deal about new ways to destroy it.
  - mannykannot 7y ago
    But OP is claiming that some of the techniques used to break minds can be used to cure PTSD. Some of us are skeptical, and OP gives no reason to think that the 'two sides of the same coin' adage is applicable here.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
dfsegoat 7y ago
Legitimately do not think the MK ultra experiments are relevant to this. It was 60+ years ago, and it was the CIA - a civilian, not mil agency - in league with major universities.
harshreality 7y ago
You're talking about psychological manipulation, behaviorism, conditioning, NLP... that sort of thing? It's not like any of it's secret; it's just fragmented, buried and dismissed by mainstream culture because most people do not want to believe in a lack of independent human will or the idea that core behavior or beliefs can be intentionally manipulated. The idea makes most people so uncomfortable they won't even seriously consider the possibility. However, it seems that good political operatives and marketing people have a pretty good understanding of some parts of it. So do some police and military personnel, especially in other countries (like China) with less interest in ethics or human rights. So do people obsessed with animal training (although that can't use the language part of the equation). So do psychologists, in theory (they should, being psychologists), although most psychologists resort to higher-level therapeutic strategies that are really some suboptimal combination of low level behavior/conditioning/NLP strategies which are primarily what works.
- TheHeretic12 7y ago
  For those who are still lurking the comment chain and "Want to Know More," I'll leave you all this name only and wish you good luck on your trip down the rabbit hole: Fritz Springmeier, rest in peace.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
TeMPOraL 7y ago
> Being able to make and break the human mind are two sides of the same coin. The ability to thoroughly break and rebuild any human mind has been a trade secret of our intel agencies for about 40 years now. I'm not convinced. What about the side effects? I doubt you can break and rebuild someone's mind without lasting psychological damage. It's something intelligence agencies don't need to care about, but it's of crucial medical importance.
chriscappuccio 7y ago
What is the secret cure for PTSD? MDMA?

Retric 7y ago

The most bizarre aspect of mental illness is a few of them can actually be treated by drugs which are a huge blunt instrument. While nothing is going to be a panacea it seems possible possible for TMS to aid in a subset of mental problems for at least a subset of patients. I think the larger concern is people overselling any treatment. That’s especially true for anything even slightly experimental. Which is why Medicine is mostly taught from rote memorization over experimentation. That may occasionally fail some people, but as a system it’s avoiding a host of issues.

AmericanChopper 7y ago
> The most bizarre aspect of mental illness is a few of them can actually be treated by drugs which are a huge blunt instrument It’s never seemed bizarre to me. You could treat a broken leg using only morphine if you wanted to. The pain will probably go away, but the leg won’t get less broken.
- mlyle 7y ago
  Pharmaceuticals to treat mental illness are limited, but they're better than just palliative (morphine for a broken leg).
  - AmericanChopper 7y ago
    Morphine for a broken leg would be a symptomatic treatment in most cases (unless you were expected to die without recovering from it, then it would be palliative). As far as I can tell most medications for mental illnesses are also symptomatic. If somebody had general anxiety issues, and they started taking benzodiazepines, their anxiety issues would be expected to return if they stopped taking them. Unless they had also undertaken other non-pharmaceutical treatments during that time.
    - mlyle 7y ago
      > unless you were expected to die without recovering from it, then it would be palliative). I understand that palliative care has developed a connotation of "this is what we do for you when you're dying..." but the definition is e.g. palliate verb (used with object), pal·li·at·ed, pal·li·at·ing. to relieve or lessen without curing; mitigate; alleviate.
      - AmericanChopper 7y ago
        Strictly speaking that’s what palliate means, but palliative care almost always refers to symptomatic care for people with life threatening conditions (see the WHO definition[0]). If you look at the way the phrase is most often used in medical literature, you can see it’s qualitatively different from general symptomatic treatment, as the potential side effects are assessed differently. You’d be much less concerned about a patient developing an opioid dependence if they’re terminally ill. For instance the standard[1] from BC describing guidelines for opiate prescriptions states: > This standard does not apply to active cancer care, palliative care, and management of substance use disorders. Physicians are expected to follow relevant clinical guidelines and established best practices in managing patients with these conditions. Nothing in this standard interferes with a physician’s obligation to provide aggressive symptom management to patients with active cancer, or nearing the end of their lives. [0] https://www.who.int/cancer/palliative/definition/en/ https://www.who.int/cancer/palliative/definition/en/ [1] https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/pdf/PSG-Safe-Prescribing.pdf https://www.cpsbc.ca/files/pdf/PSG-Safe-Prescribing.pdf

kyuudou 7y ago

Another bit from the article of great concern is the use of this new protocol on active duty personnel! Of course, as you noted, this is not a new thing as all branches have treated rank and file active duty as potential guinea pigs.

cryoshon 7y ago

>a secret that they will never admit to what evidence makes you think that this is the case? what's the technology to fix PTSD that you're speaking of?

austhrow743 7y ago

>Being able to make and break the human mind are two sides of the same coin. Do you have reason to believe that this is true specifically for the mind? I can't think of any other scenario where you would need to be able to make something in order to break it.

shkkmo 7y ago
I would suspect the claim is using a specific understanding of "break". Obviously you can break a human mind with a bullet or a chisel through the eye socket, but there are certain types of breakage that are not possible without much more nuanced understanding of how the mind functions. In general, I think the idea is that when we learn to create a type of thing, we also learn a great deal about new ways to destroy it.
- mannykannot 7y ago
  But OP is claiming that some of the techniques used to break minds can be used to cure PTSD. Some of us are skeptical, and OP gives no reason to think that the 'two sides of the same coin' adage is applicable here.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

dfsegoat 7y ago

Legitimately do not think the MK ultra experiments are relevant to this. It was 60+ years ago, and it was the CIA - a civilian, not mil agency - in league with major universities.

harshreality 7y ago

You're talking about psychological manipulation, behaviorism, conditioning, NLP... that sort of thing? It's not like any of it's secret; it's just fragmented, buried and dismissed by mainstream culture because most people do not want to believe in a lack of independent human will or the idea that core behavior or beliefs can be intentionally manipulated. The idea makes most people so uncomfortable they won't even seriously consider the possibility. However, it seems that good political operatives and marketing people have a pretty good understanding of some parts of it. So do some police and military personnel, especially in other countries (like China) with less interest in ethics or human rights. So do people obsessed with animal training (although that can't use the language part of the equation). So do psychologists, in theory (they should, being psychologists), although most psychologists resort to higher-level therapeutic strategies that are really some suboptimal combination of low level behavior/conditioning/NLP strategies which are primarily what works.

TheHeretic12 7y ago
For those who are still lurking the comment chain and "Want to Know More," I'll leave you all this name only and wish you good luck on your trip down the rabbit hole: Fritz Springmeier, rest in peace.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

TeMPOraL 7y ago

> Being able to make and break the human mind are two sides of the same coin. The ability to thoroughly break and rebuild any human mind has been a trade secret of our intel agencies for about 40 years now. I'm not convinced. What about the side effects? I doubt you can break and rebuild someone's mind without lasting psychological damage. It's something intelligence agencies don't need to care about, but it's of crucial medical importance.

chriscappuccio 7y ago

What is the secret cure for PTSD? MDMA?