-Caveat Lector-

Chuck has mentioned that this research was among the information that he
read in the CIA files [aka the Don Bolles Papers] in 1977...
-----

"Science fiction has already imagined men with intracerebral electrodes
engaged in all kinds of mischief under the perverse guidance of radio
waves sent by some evil scientist. "

++++++

http://www.angelfire.com/or/mctrl/chap19.htm


PHYSICAL CONTROL OF THE MIND
Toward a Psychocivilized Society
Jose M. R. Delgado, M.D. 1969
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Characteristics and Limitations of Brain Control
The possibility of man's controlling the thoughts of other men has
ranked as high in human fantasy as the control over transmutation of
metals, the possession of wings, or the power to take a trip to the
moon. Our generation has witnessed the accomplishment of so many nearly
impossible tasks that today we are ready to accept almost anything. In
the world of science, however, speculation and fantasy cannot replace
truth.

There is already abundant evidence that ESB can control a wide range of
functions, including motor activities and mental manifestations, in
animals and in man. We know that by electrical stimulation of specific
cerebral structures we can make a person friendlier or influence his
train of thought. In spite of its spectacular potential, ESB has
practical and theoretical limitations which should be delineated.

Predictability

When we get into a car and press the starter, the motor will almost
certainly begin to run in a few seconds. The brain, however, does not
have the simplicity of a machine. When electrodes are introduced into a
cerebral structure and stimulation is applied for the first time, we
really cannot predict the quality, localization, or intensity of the
evoked effects. We do not even

know that a response will appear. This is especially true for complex
structures, like the amygdaloid region, which have great functional
multiplicity; but it is also the case in relatively simple areas like
the motor cortex. The anatomical and functional variability of the brain
are factors which hinder prediction of ESB results (53). The importance
of these limiting factors is compounded by alterations in regional
activity related to changes in local, general, and environmental
circumstances. We know that certain functions are represented in
specific cerebral structures, but the precise location of a desired
target requires careful exploration, and implantation of only a few
contacts may be rather disappointing. After repeated explorations of a
selected area in several subjects, predictability of the observed
responses in that area for that species can be assessed with a higher
degree of confidence. Present information about functional mapping in
most cerebral areas is still rather incomplete.

Functional Monotony

Electrical stimulation is a nonspecific stimulus which always activates
a group of neurons in a similar way because there is no coded neural
message or feedback carried to the stimulating source. The responses,
therefore, are repeated in a monotonous way, and any variability is
related to changes in the stimulated subject. This functional monotony
rules out the possibility that an investigator could direct a subject
toward a target or induce him, like a robot, to perform any complex task
under remote-controlled orders.

Science fiction has already imagined men with intracerebral electrodes
engaged in all kinds of mischief under the perverse guidance of radio
waves sent by some evil scientist. The inherent limitations of ESB make
realization of this fantasy very remote. The flexion of a limb can be
radio controlled and an emotional state could also be set remotely, but
the sequences of responses and adaptation to the environment depend on
established intra-cerebral mechanisms whose complexity cannot be
duplicated by ESB. Even if we could stimulate different points of the
brain through twenty or thirty channels, it would be necessary to have
sensory feedback and computerized calculations for the programing of
simple spatiotemporal sequences. Induced performance of more complex
acts would be far beyond available methodology. It should be clarified
that I am talking about directing each phase of a response, and riot
about complex behavior such as lever pressing or fighting, which may be
triggered by ESB but develops according to individual experiential
circumstances which are beyond electrical control.

Skillful Performance

Many of the activities elicited by ESB certainly can be categorized as
skillful. Pressing a lever, climbing a cage wall, and looking for a
fight require good motor coordination and suitable processing of
information. Walking on two feet, which has been repeatedly elicited in
monkeys dorm- stimulation of the red nucleus (Figure 12), is another
example of refined coordination and equilibrium seldom observed in
spontaneous behavior.

These facts demonstrate that ESB may result in different types of
skillful performance, but it must be understood that these responses
represent the manifestation of skills already familiar to the subject.
Motor learning requires the reception of sensory inputs not only from
the environment but also from the performing muscles, and a relatively
lengthy process of motor training is required to perfect reactions
related to each type of performance and to store the appropriate
ideokinetic formulas in the brain for future reference and use. Much of
the brain participates in learning, and a monotonous train of pulses
applied to a limited pool of neurons cannot be expected to mimic its
complexity. The acquisition of a new skill is theoretically and
practically beyond the possibilities of electrical stimulation, but ESB
can create the desire to perform certain acts which may be skillful.

Individual Stability

Personal identity and reactivity depend on a large number of factors
accumulated through many years of experience interacting with genetic
trends within the complexity of neuronal networks. Language and culture
are among the essential elements of individual structure. All these
elements cannot be substituted for by the delivery of electricity to the
brain. Memories can be recalled, emotions awakened, and conversations
speeded up by ESB, but the patients always express themselves according
to their background and experience. It is possible to disturb
consciousness, to confuse sensory interpretations, or to elicit
hallucinations during excitation of the brain. It is also possible to
induce fear, pleasure, and chances in aggressive behavior, but these
responses do not represent the creation of a new personality - only a
change in emotionality or reactivity with the appearance of
manifestations closely related to the previous history of the subject.

ESB cannot substitute one personality for another because electricity
cannot replicate or influence all the innumerable factors which
integrate individual identity. Contrary to the stories of science
fiction writers, we cannot modify political ideology, past history, or
national loyalties by electrical tickling of some secret areas of the
brain. A complete change in personality is beyond the theoretical and
practical potential of ESB, although limited modification of a
determined aspect of personal reactions is possible. In spite of
important limitations, we are certainly facing basic ethical problems
about when, why, and how some of these changes are acceptable, and
especially about who will have the responsibility of influencing the
cerebral activities of other human beings.


Technical Complexity

Electrical stimulation of the central nervous system requires careful
planning, complex methodology, and the skillful collaboration of
specialists with knowledge and experience in anatomy, neurophysiology,
and psychology. Several prerequisites, including construction of the
delicate multilead electrodes and refined facilities for stereotaxic
neurosurgery, are necessary. The selection of neuronal targets and
appropriate parameters of stimulation require further sophistication and
knowledge of functional brain mapping as well as electronic technology.
In addition, medical and psychiatric experience is necessary in order to
take care of the patient, to interpret the results obtained, and to plan
the delivery of stimulations. These elaborate requirements limit the
clinical application of intracerebral electrodes which like other modern
medical interventions depends on team work, equipment, and facilities
available in only a few medical centers. At the same time, the
procedure's complexity acts as a safeguard against the possible improper
use of ESB by untrained or unethical persons.

Functions Beyond the Control of ESB

We are in the initial steps of a new technology, and while it is
difficult to predict the limits of unknown territory, we may suppose
that cerebral manifestations which depend on the elaboration of complex
information will elude electrical control. For example, reading a book
or listening to a conversation involves reception of many messages which
cannot be mimicked by ESB. A pattern of behavior which is not in the
brain cannot be organized or invented under electrical control. ESB
cannot be used as a teaching tool because skills such as playing the
piano, speaking a language, or solving a problem require complex sensory
inputs. Sequential behavior or even elemental motor responses cannot be
synthesized by cerebral stimulation, although they are easily evoked if
they have already been established in the excited area as ideokinetic
formulas. Since electrical stimulation does not carry specific thoughts
it is not feasible as a technique to implant ideas or direct behavioral
performance in a specific context. Because of its lack of symbolic
meaning, electricity could not induce effects comparable to some
posthypnotic performances.

====

http://www.angelfire.com/or/mctrl/chap14.htm

A high-ranking monkey expresses rage by attacking submissive members of
the colony, but what would he the consequences of stimulating the brain
of lower-ranking animals? Could they be induced to challenge the
authority of other monkeys, including perhaps even the boss, or would
their social inhibitions block the electrically induced hostility? These
questions were investigated in one colony by changing its composition to
increase progressively the social rank of one member, a female named
Lina, who in the first grouping of four animals ranked lowest,
progressing to third rank in the second group and to second rank in the
third group. Social dominance was evaluated during extended control
periods using the criteria of number of spontaneous agonistic and sexual
interactions, priority in food getting, and territoriality. On two
successive mornings in each colony Lina was radio stimulated for 5
seconds once a minute for one hour in the nucleus posterolateralis of
the thalamus. In all three colonies, these stimulations induced Lina to
run across the cage, climb to the ceiling, lick, vocalize, and according
to her social status, to attack other animals. In group I, where l,ina
was submissive, she tried to attack another monkey only once, and she
was threatened or attacked 24 times. In group 2 she became more
aggressive (24 occurrences) and was attacked only 3 times, while in
group 3 Lina attacked other monkeys 79 times and was not threatened at
all. No changes in the number of agonistic acts were observed in any
group before or after the stimulation hour, showing that alterations in
Lina's aggressive behavior were determined by ESB.

In summary, intraspecies aggression has been evoked in cats and monkeys
by electrical stimulation of several cerebral structures, and its
expression is dependent on the social setting. Unlike purely motor
effects including complex sequences which have no social significance,
an artificially evoked aggressive act may be directed against a specific
group member or may be entirely suppressed, according to the stimulated
subject's social rank.

Many questions remain to be answered. Which cerebral areas are
responsible for spontaneous aggressive behavior? By what mechanisms are
environmental inputs interpreted as undesirable? How does cultural
training influence the reactivity of specific cerebral areas? Can
neurophysiological mechanisms of violence be re-educated, or are
individual responses set for life after early imprinting? It is
interesting that application of ESB modified the interpretation of the
environment, changing the peaceful relations of a group of animals into
sudden overt hostility. The same sensory inputs provided by the presence
of other animals, which were neutral during control periods, were under
ESB the cue for a ferocious and well-directed attack. Apparently brain
stimulation introduced an emotional bias which altered interpretation of
the surroundings.

While neurophysiological activity may be influenced or perhaps even set
by genetic factors and past experience, the brain is the direct
interpreter of environmental inputs and the determinant of behavioral
responses. To understand the causes and plan remedies for intraspecific
aggression in animals and man require knowledge of both sociology and
neurophysiology. Electricity cannot determine the target for hostility
or direct the sequences of aggressive behavior, which are both related
to the past history of the stimulated subject and to his immediate
adaptation to changing circumstances. Artificially triggered and
spontaneously provoked aggression have many elements in common,
suggesting that in both cases similar areas of the brain have been
activated.


++++++

M. F. Abernathy -- [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] -- 04/23/02

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to