3 ms·

Absolutely insane, that someone believes that randomly destroying parts of the brain will "cure one's depression", or other illnesses (like mental health issues

Absolutely insane, that someone believes that randomly destroying parts of the brain will "cure one's depression", or other illnesses (like mental health issues or migraines). This is an insanely depressing read.

quickthrower2 3y ago
Snake oil! He had to believe it to make money.
bowsamic 3y ago
[flagged]
- gus_massa 3y ago
  From Wikipedia: > by 1951, almost 20,000 lobotomies had been performed in the United States > On average, there was a mortality rate of approximately 5% during the 1940s. > He described one 29-year-old woman as being, following lobotomy, a "smiling, lazy and satisfactory patient with the personality of an oyster" who could not remember Freeman's name and endlessly poured coffee from an empty pot. It helped in many cases, but it was bad in many cases. I'd like to see an statistic and also read carefully what is the definition of a "success" case.
- 221qqwe 3y ago
  Define worked. Turning a 'violently suicidal' person into a zombie might seem like a success from the perspective of those who have to live with/take care of them/etc. Then again euthanasia should also be very effective if that's your only goal.
- BossingAround 3y ago
  Yes; in the article, there were some lucky cases, some not so lucky: > Anna Ruth Channels suffered from severe headaches and was referred to Freeman in 1950. He prescribed a transorbital lobotomy. The procedure cured Channels of her headaches, but it left her with the mind of a child, according to her daughter, Carol Noelle. On the whole, I'd say it's an utterly barbaric, even idiotic, procedure. As I said, believing that random tissue damage has "healing properties" is so idiotic I cannot believe it. At least if it was specific to some parts of the brain, e.g. "for depression, destroy this part of the brain," it'd be a bit more understandable (not by much though).
nick__m 3y ago
The insanity is with the randomness! Precisely destroying a small part of the brain with focused ultrasounds is almost miraculous for people with debilitating essential tremors and research are underway to fine tune that technique for parkison.
guraf 3y ago
Electro convulsive therapy is still routinely performed when pharmaceutical options have been exhausted, and damaging the brain is the intent. I went through a few rounds myself in modern day America where we pride ourselves in not being barbarians. The first time I did not even consent, my spouse did it for me (in the 80s). To this day I never fully recovered. And yet if I complain people will just point to "studies" that say it works. Guess what, such studies also existed for lobotomy.

quickthrower2 3y ago

Snake oil! He had to believe it to make money.

bowsamic 3y ago

[flagged]

gus_massa 3y ago
From Wikipedia: > by 1951, almost 20,000 lobotomies had been performed in the United States > On average, there was a mortality rate of approximately 5% during the 1940s. > He described one 29-year-old woman as being, following lobotomy, a "smiling, lazy and satisfactory patient with the personality of an oyster" who could not remember Freeman's name and endlessly poured coffee from an empty pot. It helped in many cases, but it was bad in many cases. I'd like to see an statistic and also read carefully what is the definition of a "success" case.
221qqwe 3y ago
Define worked. Turning a 'violently suicidal' person into a zombie might seem like a success from the perspective of those who have to live with/take care of them/etc. Then again euthanasia should also be very effective if that's your only goal.
BossingAround 3y ago
Yes; in the article, there were some lucky cases, some not so lucky: > Anna Ruth Channels suffered from severe headaches and was referred to Freeman in 1950. He prescribed a transorbital lobotomy. The procedure cured Channels of her headaches, but it left her with the mind of a child, according to her daughter, Carol Noelle. On the whole, I'd say it's an utterly barbaric, even idiotic, procedure. As I said, believing that random tissue damage has "healing properties" is so idiotic I cannot believe it. At least if it was specific to some parts of the brain, e.g. "for depression, destroy this part of the brain," it'd be a bit more understandable (not by much though).

nick__m 3y ago

The insanity is with the randomness! Precisely destroying a small part of the brain with focused ultrasounds is almost miraculous for people with debilitating essential tremors and research are underway to fine tune that technique for parkison.

guraf 3y ago

Electro convulsive therapy is still routinely performed when pharmaceutical options have been exhausted, and damaging the brain is the intent. I went through a few rounds myself in modern day America where we pride ourselves in not being barbarians. The first time I did not even consent, my spouse did it for me (in the 80s). To this day I never fully recovered. And yet if I complain people will just point to "studies" that say it works. Guess what, such studies also existed for lobotomy.