Study highlights mental problems in US teens

Well, I suppose if one goes looking for evidence of something, then one will find it:

Study highlights mental problems in US teens

However, the National Institutes of Mental Health ("NIMH"), and the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Sychiatry ("JAACAS"), are not renowned for their impartiality.

Anyway, I think we should quickly drug these kids, before somebody thinks of something more constructive... The system's failed: if I ever satisfy myself that you've been using mental health diagnoses as a tool of social control, I will visit your own tools on you.

Is there a cure for Britain's most dangerous criminals?

Hmmm. Nice idea: shame about the execution:

Is there a cure for Britain's most dangerous criminals?

"They may be mentally ill or they may not be, but have very disorganised ways of thinking. They may not have lost touch with reality but they may have talked themselves into an alternative reality. Like the Royal Marsden [the hospital in London which provides specialist cancer care], we deliver highly specialised long-term care to very disabled people at Broadmoor."

Ms Adshead, you have no right to tell another person that there is an objective reality, which you subscribe to, and to which they should subscribe; and that their reality is aberrant and wrong - and the fact that most people would not murder their family does not make them right. I would point out that in your reality your patients are defective, and wrong. You will never learn anything, if you take that approach, because you must remember that in their reality, you are also defective, and wrong.

Compliments of the day from Mr Garuba Lawal

A business news update from Burkina Faso. I have been contacted by Mr Garuba Lawal, who is a banker in Burkina Faso. Now, my contact with Burkina Faso is extremely limited, but I cannot help but wonder if there are anything other than bank workers in this impoverished country? And if there is nobody but bankers, then what does that tell us about poverty and the banking industry?

Anyway, back to Mr Lawal, who has USD25mm, which he wants to transfer to my account, he says. As with Mr Tampy (see posts, passim), the legal beneficiary of these funds was a foreign national, who died 13 years ago, with his next of kin. Obviously, I'm massively intelligent and can see these patterns, but for those who can't, I'd just like to point out that prudence requires that if one is a foreign national investing in Burkina Faso, then one should steel oneself to the possibility of dying with all of one's family, based on the limited sample of evidence available to me.

So, there you go... If one is a bit strapped for cash, just be aware that there is corruption aplenty in West Africa, and there's free money to be made.

Revenge of the nerds: Should we listen to futurists or are they leading us towards ‘nerdocalypse’?

I've a confession to make: I nearly found this amusing ("I amuse you? I make you laugh?.." etc). And then I realized that the world is being conducted by, and for the benefit of, people such as the founder of PayPal. There may be other, altogether more interesting things than "the singularity" happening (and if the singularity happens, it will only happen for a small number of people - the ones who sponsored it), but they will never be looked at, for whatever reason.

Revenge of the nerds: Should we listen to futurists or are they leading us towards ‘nerdocalypse’?

Anyway, if you really want a philosophical discussion about what human evolution and AI is likely to look like, then it will have happened long before you realize it. Also, the idea of controlling AI strikes me as bizarre, but I can't quite put my finger on why, yet. Are we able to create something that can teach itself, or learn at an accelerated rate (and is that what we mean by AI, anyway?)? Would we even allow ourselves to create something that was more intelligent than us; and if we did create something more intelligent, would we acknowledge its existence, or would we just stifle it, for fear of what it would achieve, and would we not be terrified of being left behind? And if we create something that's ten times more intelligent (definition, please), than us, should we really assume that it's going to adopt the same model that we have (those who are in charge at the moment had better hope not).

I don't know: put 100 geeks in a room, and all one gets is self-aggrandizing bullshit - the world does not revolve around a couple of hundred moneyed individuals, you pricks. Evolution is about adapting to the shit one is faced with. The idea that one avoids the shit, by design, is the very antithesis of evolution, but it is the model that the founder of PayPal (for example), is following. And what happens when a piece of shit finds its way into one's perfect world? Ummm: the aroma!

Addendum:
I think I know why these monkeys want a super-human intelligence: it's so that they can feed it shit information, and have it construct solutions to the shitty problems that their own behaviour has created. In short, you want something superior to you that you can treat as a slave. Well, I hope it bites you on the arse, you lazy, duplicitous fuckers.

Daily vitamin pill could reduce dementia's effects by up to 50 per cent

I thought this was vaguely interesting...

Daily vitamin pill could reduce dementia's effects by up to 50 per cent

So, we have these (let's face it, mostly elderly), patients, who've probably been ignored for years, owing to their perceived condition. Then, they start receiving regular daily visitations, when the vitamins are administered. Perhaps the person administering the vitamins shares a few words, who knows? And then, every so often, a "scientist" comes along to ask some questions, to see if the vitamins have made any difference. And, fuck me, they have. At least, that's one interpretation of the results.

Another interpretation might be that the regular mental stimulation afforded by the daily visits and occasional interviews had a therapeutic effect. Nothing causes a person's mind to work like actually using that mind, I've noticed. Still, I'm not a scientist, and consequently I know absolutely nothing about anything. Thank God. On the other hand, I know everything there is to know about nothing, which is a great deal - you'd be surprised. And you can be sure that I'll be passing that knowledge on.

Compliments of the day from Mr Paduwa Tampy

Mr Tampy is a banking official in Burkina Faso (West Africa). He needs a foreign account, in order to transfer USD25mm, which has lain unclaimed in Mr Tampy's bank for thirteen years, since the owner of said funds died with his next of kin, conveniently enough.

Naturally, I was delighted to hear from Mr Tampy, this morning, and look forward to joining him in this successful business venture! Makes a fucking change from getting emails from "Olumuyiwa Obasanjo of BP, Nigeria," anyway!

Ketamine 'acts like magic' to lift depression, study says

Ah, yes: what could possibly be better than shooting ourselves up with horse tranquilizers, moonlighting as narcotics?

Ketamine 'acts like magic' to lift depression, study says

And not that I'm skeptical, or anything, but how does anybody know that neuroconnections are made/restored by this drug? There are billions of neuroconnections on a piece of grey matter the size of a pinhead. Do we have microscopes that powerful, now? And are we able to see inside a person's head while they're still alive, in order to watch this process taking place?

Word up: randomly creating connections in a scattergun approach is a recipe for disaster. There is no fucking magic, and one cannot create a facsimile of something that doesn't exist. Small wonder, then, that it appears that this is nothing other than a suppression device, with relief of depressive symptoms lasting a week.

'Wicked' woman jailed over false rape claim

Irresponsible? Wicked? Immature? Interesting... Why is it that people descend into the pejorative and hyperbole, when the facts will speak for themselves?

'Wicked' woman jailed over false rape claim

Let's see... Why did this woman choose a fabricated sexual assault, as a means of getting back at her friends? Do you suppose that that was the thing that she feared most from being left to find her own way home (a real assault, I mean, not a fabricated one), and that was why her mind was drawn to it?

Who knows? And, frankly, who cares? But, now, at least, this woman will be able to spend the rest of her life, knowing that she's irresponsible, wicked and immature, because nobody's ever going to countermand those labels, are they? You guys... your system has failed - something goes wrong, and you have to find somebody to punish!.. Why don't you just put things right, occasionally?

Botox approved for the prevention of chronic migraine

This'll make you laugh. It did me, anyway:

Botox approved for the prevention of chronic migraine

I was listening to BBC Radio 4, and an item came on the news. I checked the date several times, and having satisfied myself that it wasn't 1 April, I thought I'd poke some fun!

Regrettably, it's not mentioned in the piece cited, above, but in the radio "news" piece, it was said that a trial was carried out based upon "anecdotal" reports by those using Botox for the purpose of losing all expression in their facial muscles also experiencing a reduction in migraines. Now, it was my understanding that the MHRA didn't give a shit about anecdotal evidence, but apparently on the back of these reports, a trial was arranged. And the drug was approved for this secondary purpose.

I look forward to the MHRA deciding that anecdotal evidence of withdrawal problems, suicidality, akathasia, etc, etc, is worth a trial. But, then, it's not the MHRA that carries out the trials, is it? It's (mostly), the companies. The distinction between this case and SSRI adverse events is that there is no money to be made from proving that SSRI are placebos with lots of side effects. Is there?

Addendum:
Is there a direct correlation between the desire to have an expressionless face, and suffering from migraines? Put another way, do people who wish to look like Commander Data suffer migraines at a greater rate of incidence than the wider population?

Anti-fear drug 'could help wipe painful memories'

This is outrageous, it really is. Some pharmaceutical giant will no doubt make fabulous sums of money from this...

Anti-fear drug 'could help wipe painful memories'

It's tediously simple - we're talking 5-minute simple - to allow somebody to perceive a traumatic event differently, with their agreement, and the idea that some quack remedy is going to generate wealth on the back of others' trauma makes me want to vomit. No drug can be specific enough in its application to do this. It can't, because memories are too complex - and the suggestion that it can won't be enough to make it true.

And as for the idea that we give people anti-fear drugs while they're experiencing trauma... Well, that's not open to abuse, is it?.. Reminds me of the storyline to Jacob's Ladder.

Gary McKinnon: 'They can't return me to a place I wasn't in'

[Derisive snort] The US authorities are too fucking stupid to get anything out of this guy:

Gary McKinnon: 'They can't return me to a place I wasn't in'

He's already out-thought them once - do they think that that was a fluke?

Addendum:
Of course they don't, but they're going to ignore the fact of their inconsistent approach to this type of "offence" and drive on towards their desired goal, even though that goal is a house built on sand. What is their motivation? Well, frankly, who cares - it'll be something tedious? Most likely, a desire to seek retribution in return for the humiliation of being successfully hacked by somebody that most would consider mentally aberrant, and who had the audacity to leave a message warning them of their vulnerability. Fucking halfwits - you have no authority; it was the first thing you abandoned.

Hopes for British 'victims' after Vioxx ruling

When I read this, I was reminded of a story I was told about an Irish entertainer, named Henry Kelly, who had been booked to do some after dinner speaking. As the story was told to me, he launched into some tedious monologue and after ten minutes, or so, the audience's attention had begun to wane. Fifteen minutes in, and there were evident signs of loss of interest. And after twenty minutes, the audience was openly holding conversations amongst themselves.

Kelly came to an abrupt halt, appalled by this rudeness... "Fuck the lotta yer; fuck the lotta yer," he railed "I bin paid, I got the fuckin' money, so fuck the lotta yer." And with that, he was gone.

And so it is with Merck, by the look of things. Although, obviously, it would take a criminal conviction for it to be true that Merck's conduct is fraudulent, although there seems to be little question that they have pocketed the cash, and provided less than satisfactory consideration, in return, much like Kelly (Kelly, of course, may not have been contracted to be interesting, and even if he had been, unless he knew that he was incapable of being interesting, his conduct wouldn't be fraudulent!). But in the meantime, it's just my opinion that Merck is just another bunch of sleazy, little fraudsters, with no ideas of their own. From another perspective, Merck is an honourable company, run by "winers".

Hopes for British 'victims' after Vioxx ruling

No 10 staff 'phoned anti-bullying helpline'

I've been thinking about this:

No 10 staff 'phoned anti-bullying helpline'

and I've decided that I don't really give a shit. Brown's behaviour, as alleged, is nothing. Has he created a culture, in which bullying and cover-up is the accepted means of controlling staff? We're not told that. Does he encourage others, through antilocution, to ostracize certain individuals? Does he target particular individuals, and ridicule and humiliate them, both behind their backs and to their face, such that any respect and authority that they require to carry out their duties is completely stripped away? Does he withhold information from subordinates, and encourage others to withhold information, such that those targeted subordinates are unable to carry out their functions? Does he exclude certain people from meetings, where subject matter is being discussed with which those people are closely concerned? In short, does he convey to said targeted individuals that they are not wanted, without ever having the grounds or the balls to say so? We're not told any of that, either.

If he doesn't do any of these things, then he's just a bloke in a stressful job, who should learn to say "sorry" occasionally (assuming that the allegations are true, obviously). If he has done these things, then he's a cunt who's abused his position and he should quietly fuck off and get himself some therapy.

Bruce Anderson: We not only have a right to use torture. We have a duty

Well, let's set the objective, shall we? Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Who the fuck is Bruce Anderson?

Bruce Anderson: We not only have a right to use torture. We have a duty

Bruce, Bruce, Bruce... Torture is unlawful. Has been for hundreds of years, as you point out in your article. You will fuck your mind up totally trying to argue in favour of it. Your argument appears to go along the lines of "well, they haven't done anything yet, but on the other hand, they may have done. So let's torture them, and find out." Riiiiiiiiigggghhhhht - I think you've just surrendered the moral highground, Bruce, me old mate, me old mucker, me old pal.

Addendum:
Just to reiterate: torture is forbidden by Law. As a matter of legal fact, then, we do not "have a right to use torture". On the contrary. As to having a duty... To whom do we owe this duty?.. Not to me, Bruce - it's not me who's terrified of terrorists, because I couldn't give a fuck, one way or another. So don't pretend that you have consensus, when you don't.

Legal gloves come off in row over 'torture'

"Calumny and slur"? Right, so if we start using language more commonly associated with 19th Century literature, this will make us sound more authoratative? And will, with a bit of luck, deflect from the possibility that we were either naive, or turned a blind eye? Because the UK "intelligence" services are the very paragons of moral rectitude, unlike their scum-sucking American cousins, and could never involve themselves in activities forbidden by law (unless they thought that they could get away with it, in which case any level of depravity is acceptable).

Legal gloves come off in row over 'torture'

And Howells is then reported to "take a pop" at the Master of the Rolls. Perhaps it's worth pointing out that the incumbent of this ancient office is the second most senior judge in the UK, after the Lord Chief Justice. Howells is obviously very wise, and understands the considerations and arguments, legal and rhetorical, which senior judges consider when making a judgment. Whereas Lord Neuberger is merely the second most senior judge in the UK.

Howells then appears to evidence his belief of MI5's innocence by citing a conversation he had with, erm, the boss of MI5. Beautiful - "taken on trust"? Now where have we heard that, before? Naive? No, Dr Howells, you're just fucking stupid.

Matt

White House warns UK ruling could 'complicate' intelligence-sharing

This is hilarious... Listen Baeraech, you don't have any fucking intelligence to share; not a scintilla. And you can be as disappointed as you fucking like, but you don't run the UK's legal system, so don't be surprised if it throws [up] more than the occasional decision that you don't like your way. Actually: fuck you - our legal system has fuck all to do with you, and makes its decisions as if you don't exist and therefore cannot consider your interests, because your interests don't exist, either. As a consequence, when it's not protecting the interests of our Establishment, it just occasionally manages to protect our rights and liberties.

White House warns UK ruling could 'complicate' intelligence-sharing

In any event, you have a culture based almost entirely on secrecy. Dear God, you're terrified of giving an opinion without clearing it with your superiors, first, just in case you say something embarassing and "off-message". What a bunch of fucking wankers you are. And, more than that, you spend your time actively withholding (sorry, that's "managing" in your language), information. Did you think that others (ie, everybody), weren't doing that, too? The upshot is that not one of you cunts knows what's going on.

I trust that I've managed to convey my utter contempt for the assumption that you've made, a propos the UK courts keeping your shitty little secrets. Fuck you: be embarassed.

Blair attacks his critics' tendency to 'conspiracy theories'

This made me chuckle:

Blair attacks his critics' tendency to 'conspiracy theories'

I was particularly tickled by this little gem:

"I think it's partly because we have this curious habit – I don't think it's confined to Britain actually – where people find it hard to come to the point where they say: 'We disagree – you're a reasonable person, I'm a reasonable person – but we disagree.' There's always got to be a scandal as to why you hold your view..."

Look, Blah: there is no scandal, and there is no conspiracy... You decided to go to war, because you believe that it is acceptable to engage in violence, preferably vicariously because you're too much of a coward to do your own violence. So did Shrub. And in this you are no better than Saddam Hussein.

Any conspiracy centres around how you chose to justify your vicarious violence... Didn't it boil down to Hussein not being a particularly nice guy, in the end (after the WMD failed to materialize, and so on)? You're a violent man, Blah, and you just can't admit it... There were other solutions, but your mind is too closed to perceive them - nasty, vicious little monkey that you are.

Go on, then, Blah... Tell me I'm a reasonable person.

Anger after Pope slams 'unjust' UK equality laws

I read this, and didn't know what to make of it. So I thought about it, for a while. And then I realized: I don't give a fuck. There was a time when I would. I would have written a lengthy diatribe, demanding to know how it is "unjust" for the active exercize of prejudice to be forbidden. But not now.

Anger after Pope slams 'unjust' UK equality laws

He's just a pointless little monkey in a white dress. And am I right in thinking that he claims to be the closest thing humanity has to God? Really? Fuck me - he must have a very low opinion of God in order to express His word in these bigoted terms, that's all I can say!

Witnesses for the prosecution: how Blair is suffering trial by Chilcot

This is a public enquiry, I should point out, and not a criminal case. As such, there is no "prosecution" taking place. Other than in the court of public opinion, that is...

Witnesses for the prosecution: how Blair is suffering trial by Chilcot

I'll sum this up, for you: Blah's a fucking liar and the American administration of Shrub is a bunch of administrative fuckwits, with serious control issues, large guns and small penises.

Matt

When war is just – by Obama the peace prize winner

When war is just – by Obama the peace prize winner

"We will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations – acting individually or in concert – will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified."

Some people can justify anything, given their objectives... You're a fucking idiot, Baerach.