More threads by David Baxter PhD

David Baxter PhD

Late Founder
Sharing Their Demons on the Web
By SARAH KERSHAW, New York Times
November 13, 2008

FOR years they lived in solitary terror of the light beams that caused searing headaches, the technology that took control of their minds and bodies. They feared the stalkers, people whose voices shouted from the walls or screamed in their heads, ?We found you? and ?We want you dead.?

When people who believe such things reported them to the police, doctors or family, they said they were often told they were crazy. Sometimes they were medicated or locked in hospital wards, or fired from jobs and isolated from the outside world.

But when they found one another on the Internet, everything changed. So many others were having the same experiences.

Type ?mind control? or ?gang stalking? into Google, and Web sites appear that describe cases of persecution, both psychological and physical, related with the same minute details ? red and white cars following victims, vandalism of their homes, snickering by those around them.

Identified by some psychologists and psychiatrists as part of an ?extreme community? on the Internet that appears to encourage delusional thinking, a growing number of such Web sites are filled with stories from people who say they are victims of mind control and stalking by gangs of government agents. The sites are drawing the concern of mental health professionals and the interest of researchers in psychology and psychiatry.

Although many Internet groups that offer peer support are considered helpful to the mentally ill, some experts say Web sites that amplify reports of mind control and group stalking represent a dark side of social networking. They may reinforce the troubled thinking of the mentally ill and impede treatment.

Dr. Ralph Hoffman, a psychiatry professor at Yale who studies delusions, said a growing number of his research subjects have told him of visiting mind-control sites, and finding in them confirmation of their own experiences.

?The views of these belief systems are like a shark that has to be constantly fed,? Dr. Hoffman said. ?If you don?t feed the delusion, sooner or later it will die out or diminish on its own accord. The key thing is that it needs to be repetitively reinforced.?

That is what the Web sites do, he said. Similar concerns have arisen about a proliferation of sites that describe how to commit suicide, or others that promote anorexia and bulimia, providing detailed instructions on restricting food and photographs of skeletal women meant to be ?thinspiration.?

For people who regularly visit and write on message boards on the mind-control sites, the idea that others would describe the sites as promoting delusional and psychotic thinking is simply evidence of a cover-up of the truth.

?It was a big relief to find the community,? said Derrick Robinson, 55, a janitor in Cincinnati and president of Freedom from Covert Harassment and Surveillance, a group that claims several hundred regular users of its Web site. ?I felt that maybe there were others, but I wasn?t real sure until I did find this community,? Mr. Robinson said.

There is no concise survey of mind-control sites or others describing gang stalking ? whose users believe that groups of people are following and controlling them, as part of a test of neurological or other kinds of weapons likely conducted by the government ? on the Net. But they are easy to find. Some have hundreds of postings, along with links to dozers of similar sties. One, Gangstalkingworld.com, welcomes visitors with this description: ?Gang Stalking is a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individual?s life. The target is followed around and placed under surveillance by Civilian Spies/Snitches 24/7.?

The site lists more than 71,000 visitors, and it has links to several other sites, including Harrassment101.com, which has 965 posts.

One poster to Gang Stalking World wrote in August: ?It?s insane that I daily have to come home and try to figure out if my Web sites will still be up or shut down. This week they have really been playing with me, and so it was my time to play back.? The post directs readers to other gang-stalking sites should their favorite sites be shut down.

Mr. Robinson said in an interview that that he has been tortured and abused by gang stalkers and by ?neurological weaponry? since leaving the Navy in 1982. ?To read the stories and the similarity of the harassment techniques that were going on, to hear about the vandalism, appliance tampering and all the other things were designed to drive a person crazy, who do you go to with this?? he said. ?People will say you are delusional.?

For Mr. Robinson and several other Web site users interviewed for this article ? all of whom insisted they were not delusional, including one man who said he had been hospitalized in psychiatric wards ? the sites provide the powerful, unfamiliar experience of being understood by others.

?By and large, most people are sane and coherent and can relate exactly what?s happening to them,? Mr. Robinson said. ?They can say the things that would otherwise get them labeled as delusional.?

His group of self-described ?targeted individuals? met offline in Los Angeles last month for their inaugural conference, he said, where they attended a meeting to share stories, including the humiliating experiences of being told they are insane.

Mental health experts who have closely looked at the Web sites are careful to say that there is no way to prove if someone posting on, say, Mr. Robinson?s site, Freedomfchs.com, which says its mission is to seek justice for those singled out by ?organized stalking and electromagnetic torture,? is suffering from mental illness.

Vaughan Bell, a British psychologist who has researched the effect of the Internet on mental illness, first began tracking sites with reports of mind control in 2004. In 2006 he published a study concluding that there was an extensive Internet community around such beliefs, and he called 10 sites he studied ?likely psychotic sites.?

The extent of the community, Dr. Bell said, poses a paradox to the traditional way delusion is defined under the diagnostic guidelines of the American Psychiatric Association, which says that if a belief is held by a person?s ?culture or subculture,? it is not a delusion. The exception accounts for rituals of religious faith, for example.

Dr. Bell, whose study was published in the journal Psychopathology, said that it does not suggest all people participating in mind-control sites are delusional, and that a firm diagnosis of psychosis could only be done in person.

For people who say they are the target of mind control or gang stalking, there may be enough evidence in the scientific literature to fan their beliefs. Many sites point to MK-ULTRA, the code name for a covert C.I.A. mind-control and chemical interrogation program begun in the 1950s.

Recently the sites have linked to an article published in September in Time magazine, The Army?s Totally Serious Mind-Control Project, which described a $4 million contract given to the Army to develop ?thought helmets? that would allow troops to communicate through brain waves on the battlefield.

And the users of some sites have found the support of Jim Guest, a Republican state representative in Missouri, who wrote last year to his fellow legislators calling for an investigation into the claims of those who say they are being tortured by mind control.

?I?ve had enough calls, some from credible people ? professors ? being targeted by nonlethal weapons,? Mr. Guest said in a telephone interview, adding that nothing came of his request for a legislative investigation. ?They become psychologically affected by it. They have trouble sleeping at night.?

He added: ?I believe there are people who have been targeted by this. With this equipment, you have to test it on somebody to see if it works.?

Dr. Bell and some other mental health professionals say that even if the users of such sites are psychotic, forging an online connection to others and being told ? perhaps for the first time ? ?you are not crazy? could actually have a positive effect on their illnesses.

?We know, for example, that things like social support, all of these positive social aspects are very good for people?s mental illness,? Dr. Bell said. ?I wouldn?t say it?s entirely and completely positive, but it can be positive.?

Some research has shown that when people with delusions undergo group cognitive therapy, the group process can be helpful in their treatment.

But the Web sites are not moderated by professionals, and many postings discuss the failure of medication and say that mental health professionals are part of the conspiracy against them.

?These people lead quietly desperate lives,? said Dr. Jeffrey A. Lieberman, chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at Columbia University. ?And if they are reinforcing each other and pulling people toward something, if they are using the Internet and getting reinforcement, that?s good.?

The mind-control sites remind some experts of the accounts of those claiming to have been abducted by aliens in the 1970s and ?80s. One person?s story begat another until many insisted they had had virtually identical experiences of being taken onto space ships by silvery sloe-eyed creatures.

Some of those now posting on mind-control sites say they are being remotely ?sexually stimulated? by their torturers. Some alien abductees had said similar things. Subsequent research generally showed that those who believed they had been abducted were not psychotic, but suffering from severe memory and sleep problems, or personal traumas, Dr. Bell said.

Psychiatrists and researchers say it is too soon to say whether communication on the Internet among people who may be psychotic will negatively effect their illnesses.? This is a very complex little corner,? said Dr. Ken Duckworth, the medical director for the National Alliance on Mental Illness, an advocacy group. ?Some people may find it?s healing, but these are really hard questions. The Internet isn?t a cause of mental illness, it?s a complicating new variable.?
 

David Baxter PhD

Late Founder
Psychotic Websites
by Elias Aboujaoude, M.D.
July 20, 2009

Does the Internet encourage psychotic thinking?

We are accustomed to people allowing the less attractive features of their personalities to blossom online. Lewd, impulsive, and antisocial behavior becomes irresistible when potential perpetrators are shielded by secrecy and online anonymity. That is how many cyber communities devolve into mudslinging, making a mockery of etiquette or even netiquette as their members compete in eviscerating one another. But online forums can also serve as examples of the opposite process, an arguably equally unhealthy state of blind, mutual agreement.

"Groupthink" was defined by psychologist Irving Janis as "a mode of thinking that people engage in when they are deeply involved in a cohesive in-group," and "when the members' strivings for unanimity override their motivation to realistically appraise alternative courses of action." Groupthink sacrifices reasonable dissent and counterpoint in the interest of group solidarity and the single agenda. Especially when it comes to Internet communities that coalesce around a narrow cause, as opposed to large, open, communities like YouTube or Flickr, silence is often preferable to voicing an opinion deemed threatening to the group's homogeneous fabric.

A twenty-four-year-old patient I treated for schizophrenia introduced me to a dangerous form of groupthink on display in a number of overtly psychotic websites. There, individuals who, like my patient, believe they are victims of mind control, share stories of harassment and tips on how to break free.

"Gang Stalking is a systemic form of control, which seeks to destroy every aspect of a Targeted Individuals life," warns the banner on gangstalkingworld.com, one of several such websites. "The Target is followed around and placed under surveillance by Civilian Spies/Snitches 24/7." The perpetrators of abuse include "Royal Canadian Mounted Police" using a "telepathic amplifier that works with microwaves," "Freemasonic intelligence agencies" using "frequency weapons," "bad guys" using "psychotronics," and "Warsaw Pact" researchers using "hypnosis and electromagnetic waves."

My patient, who after five years of denying his illness was finally starting to accept that medications might be a good option, found confirmation of his odd experiences on these websites in a way that "justified" his paranoia and hallucinations. Once again, he believed the CIA really implanted a chip in his brain and that he didn't need antipsychotic medication, only a neurosurgeon who can take the chip out.

A British study from 2006 by Dr. Vaughan Bell was among the first to examine this phenomenon. As part of the study, three independent psychiatrists were asked to evaluate 10 online mind-control accounts identified through a simple Google search. Their task was (a) to determine whether the poster was psychotic based on his writing and (b) to analyze the hyperlinks within each post to look for evidence of social organization among posters and visitors.

The three psychiatrists were in high agreement that "signs of psychosis are strongly present" in the 10 accounts, indicating that posters were very likely to be schizophrenic. (Because the psychiatrists were blind to each other's assessments and to the purpose of the study, no "groupthink" process can be blamed for their consensus!) Furthermore, the links embedded within the posts showed "evidence of social organization and community, based around the content of these experiences and beliefs."

Social networking around pathology carries the worrisome risk of normalizing an abnormal experience, as like-minded individuals share their stories without any outside input to raise the possibility that the unusual experiences they are describing may actually be the product of a serious illness. The study authors point out that the end result may be that the very diagnosis of schizophrenia is questioned. As stated in the DSM, the "bible" used by mental health professionals for psychiatric diagnosticating, an unusual belief is not considered psychotic, and therefore is not pathological, if it is "accepted by other members of the person's culture or subculture." With cultures and subcultures of all stripes proliferating online, it is easier than ever to find a virtual place where some people's eccentricities, or in this case, hallucinatory experiences, are considered the norm. Who are we to call them schizophrenic or ask them to "conform," when everyone around them partakes in the same delusion?

Precisely when we need someone to confront us and loudly disagree with us, a form of groupthink sometimes takes over homogenous online circles, in a way that can be very self-defeating. In my patient's case, it helped convince him that he was entirely normal.

That is the exact opposite of a support group.
 

Will

Member
You posted an eerily similar article, here:

http//forum.psychlinks.ca/internet-behavior/14389-sharing-their-demons-on-the-web-delusions-and-the-internet.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Justaday

Member
Re:
Sharing Their Demons on the Web By SARAH KERSHAW, New York Times
November 13, 2008

This is an interesting article and now in light of the Jared Loughner case. . . They say he didn't follow the TV news, or radio, but I really wonder about his exposure to some of those "alternative news sites" or other alternative media forms, e.g. documentaries re: conspiracy theories. . .

Personally, I do enjoy the entertainment of conspiracy theories, but to also be able to detach and critically think and evaluate. A psychotic individual I don't think is capable of detachment. And yes, I can see it as being another
"complicating new variable.”

I checked out some of those "alt-'news'-sites"-- OMG! Truly bizarre sub-culture, feeding of paranoia. E.g. the right-wing libertarian sites, with inflamed rhetoric and all these adds about guns, and changing money to gold and silver because economic doom is anticipated (collapse of economy). E.g. Alex P. Jones "INFO-WARS: because there's a war on your mind". . . it seems to go a bit far, IMO. It reminds me of the 1950's hysteria re: the folks who have their underground shelters in anticipation of nuclear war, stocking up on can foods, and guns, and ready for chaos and anarchy.

Why aren't the suggesting using the tools that are still available re: democracy, but it's still all this fear-feeding, and it's really surprising how this has spread, including even to military sites.

I enjoy Noam Chomsky (a left-wing libertarian), but for others who don't think there are other preventative steps and using the tools of democracy and while they are arming themselves, it looks really frightenings, that's all I've got to say.

But it's the predispositions of others who grativate towards these things, and it's not healthy if there are already pre-existing risks for development of psychosis.

I've tried to enter dialogue with presummably the more balanced (e.g. active in the army) and I'm hearing some radical views and fears from there. Maybe it's ego feeding, maybe because some of these people have been in zones in other countries where anarchy and chaos has errupted due to sudden failing economies, humanitarian missions. It's pretty wild, IMO. One thing I did experience conflict with, is that they fear pscyhology and psychiatry, because it would label them as "deviant", "distrubed"-- there's an anti-intellectualism occurring, "common day man" bias-- especially Stateside, re: 2nd Ammendment and 1st Ammendment-- and it does look like there's some excessive craziness, distortions stemming from 'half-truths'.

One of the sites had a picture of Obama, next to Stalin and Hitler-- there's a crazy ferver, and it makes me feel nervous about it. I'm always feeling watchful re: signs in the rise of fascism-- as in hate-speech and paranoia feeding, distorted fears-- not seeming to know how to ground fear-- it's all done for effect-- that sort of stuff can be highly motivation and lead to profits for advertizers for guns, and survival kits, etc.

Bizzare that post Arizona shooting, the sales for Glock 19s went up 60%. . . it's like a large group shared-psychosis thing happening.

I don't know if I can reject all the stories re: mind control experiments-- there is obvious evidence, Lippman's work in the 1920's, Joseph Gerbels, re: propaganda, maybe correlational, but it does seems obvious, when one evaluates the discourse and content analysis, that it does appear that some of these formulas do apply-- like anything, marketing-- which seems to be what politics is a lot about these days, spin-doctoring, brand loyalty techniques.

But there are lines to be drawn, and a person with psychosis is going to have features in symptoms where it's obvious it's more psychosis, than just uncritical, detached reading of conspiracy theories etc. For me, it's less of a panic, because it's not really that new and I have some education which makes it easier to detach.

There's the free-speechers over there, but there seem to be several other elements that are broken in our democracy, re: weaknesses in our education system; weaknesses in our mental health systems (and weaknesses in protocols for handling mental illness in schools, workplaces, crisis help, etc.)-- because these are equally important re: the freedom of more free, "free-will". I see a lot of inconsistencies, other key principles for a healthy democracy are missed. There seems to be an overuse of hate-speech, fear-based distortive reasoning and censoring of facts (it's become so ideological biased, even those who claim that's not existing with them. . .). . .

I think there are genuine cases of things like, abusive cult abuse, and there are even higher up people in authority who have been involved. I think that is still possible. But I'm not attached to that, as in I can say that with absolute certainty and act in paranoid ways about it.

But I can understand the confusion for a person who has become psychotic and these things are feeding the delusions, so it's even harder to present a reality check, if they can go ahead and source these other nutty people out there (who have a 'voice of authority'). . . yes, complicated.

Other things in society e.g. the erroding of other civil rights brought in by post-911 legislation. How can one really tell with the outside environment is reflecting so much paranoia-- but it is discernable in the person's attachment to ideas as truth, and other psychotic symptoms, speech patterns, etc.
 
Replying is not possible. This forum is only available as an archive.
Top