The Smiley Smile Message Board

Sez this piece in the Seattle P-I:
http://blog.seattlepi.com/people/2016/06/15/brian-wilson-the-voices-started-after-lsd/

"The 73-year-old musician, most famous for his pioneering work with the Beach Boys, spent much of his younger life as a recluse after developing schizophrenia in the 1960s. The condition means he hears voices, but it only began after he started taking LSD, also known as acid."

Now, I had always thought he started hearing them before he started doing LSD (such as the freak-out episode on the plane). Or maybe he didn't make himself clear to the writer of the article. Or maybe the article writer didn't understand him correctly. Or maybe he started going looney before the LSD, but the actual voices themselves didn't start until after.

Anyway...

I have a vague memory of reading a quote from Brian Wilson once saying that the voices started in '63 or '64. But I've looked for it pretty extensively and can't find it, so am beginning to think it was an amalgam of things in my brain.
In any case, one shouldn't assume that the sequence necessarily means cause and effect. Because people assume a relationship so frequently, LSD use by those with mental health issues, particularly with schizoid disorders and psychosis, has been studied pretty extensively, though the illegality of LSD has made structured tests difficult.
Anyway, the upshot is:
- LSD has not been shown to cause disorders (other than the direct reaction to the drug in your system);
- Some studies have indicated it might accelerate the onset of symptoms of a developing disorder.

Given B. Wilson's family history, it shouldn't be surprising that he had an inheritable condition. Given his childhood, it shouldn't be surprising that it developed into a full-fledged disorder.
Both schizoid personality disorder and bipolar disorder (which are the two things I understand Brian Wilson has been diagnosed with) tend to manifest in adolescence or post adolescence. Bipolar disorder has an average onset at the age of 25.

So he was probably already on the train, but LSD may have sped it up.

And after typing that I went to verify his diagnosis and, as most of you probably know, it's schizoaffective disorder, not schizoid personality disorder. Schizoaffective disorder actually tends to manifest later than schizoid personality disorder: not so much in adolescence, but in the 20s.
While reading about it, I came across this page that lists symptoms that should be familiar to any Beach Boys fan:
http://mentalhealth.com/home/dx/schizoaffective.html

Is it possible that it was some particularly heavy/bad dose that really affected Brian? Even if the voices started pre-LSD, I wonder if he could have just done a dose of LSD from a different, milder batch, and have come out of it much less unscathed. I guess this is the problem with drugs being illegal - the inability to know the origins and full ingredients of what you are taking. I'm sure many people have in fact overdosed on a bad batch of an illegal narcotic, and had the narcotic been legal and of reputable origin (the way legal weed is nowadays, and presumably sourced with less/no (?) risk of being "laced", or of a higher dose than specified), they may have been fine.

Of course, being predisposed to mental illness would mean that taking any strong drug could be like playing Russian Roulette with your brain chemistry. I actually personally know a coworker who tragically seriously got messed up after taking hallucinogenic mushrooms; he became violent toward his girlfriend (who not long afterwards broke up with him as a result) and erratic starting the day after (he'd certainly done shrooms before, and was a general pothead, but his reaction to this one particular dose was seemingly out of left field)... the day after the dose (when theoretically he would have been sobered up), he actually crawled naked under his apartment building crawl space (cops had to be called out), eventually went MIA being paranoid and driving to another state, and eventually lost his job, and is currently living in his car. Really, really sad stuff.

Not trying to defend LSD usage per se (I did it a few times many years back and fortunately had no long term side effects), but I guess I think the proper tack to take is: if you're gonna do LSD, it's best to do a more mild dose of reputable origin, and DON'T do it at all if you have any predisposition to mental illness (which of course may be unknowable). Certainly it's also easy to just say "don't do hallucinogenic drugs ever, under any circumstances". I just think instead of a blanket "just say no" campaign, it's good to be aware and educated of nuances in how these things can work and be unpredictable.

LSD wasn't illegal in CA until October, 1966.

Did you read the symptoms of schizoaffective disorder on the link I posted? It's so exactly BW's symptoms I don't see any reason to think that something else caused them.

This isn't a criticism, but a legitimate question to anyone who feels unsatisfied with BW's diagnosis and who searches for other reasons for his issues: why? What about his diagnosis doesn't answer your questions regarding Brian Wilson's behavior? Is it a mistrust of psychiatry in general? Is it just that the diagnosis took so long to be known that it's hard to shake the habit of searching for explanations? Or do you feel that the diagnosis doesn't fit the behavior? Or something else?

1. He has always stated that the voices began a week after taking LSD

2. It's highly likely that the '1963' claim in the L&M film came from Ledbetter

Would you mind answering my question above?
What makes it highly likely that it came from Melinda Ledbetter?

I recall that in his 'Landyography' (page 86 in my edition), 'Brian' talks about having heard horrible noises in his *sleep* from late 1963. His description is that they were "Loud, terrifying screams... like goblins in a haunted house".

Of course, I know most of the book is a heap of made-up junk, but if I remember rightly, SOME of it did come from interviews with Brian... and this claim would be consistent with what was said in Love and Mercy, on which the Wilsons were consultants. Of course, that's far from proof, but it chimed with me when I heard that date in the film. I have a nagging feeling I've heard him use that date in other interviews, too, but can't place them right now.

Of course, hearing screams in your sleep is not quite the same thing as what most of us would, I think, take to be the meaning of 'hearing voices', which I would think requires you to be fully conscious in order for the experience to be truly as disturbing as it undoubtedly is for those that suffer it. If I heard screams in my sleep, it would definitely disturb me, but when I woke, I think I'd be so relieved ("Phew, it was only a dream!") that I'd soon forget about it. But suddenly hearing voices during the day that you realise no-one else could hear would seriously disturb me.

But who knows - maybe that is how it started for Brian and it progressed to voices talking coherent words and sentences to him during his waking state later on in the 60s?

Just thinking aloud... don't mind me...

1. I don't know the answer to (or care about) the irrelevant question you posed. Anyone who is interested in the relationship between LSD and latent psychosis (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=%22lsd%22+predispos*+%22schizophrenia%22&tbm=bks) can look it up for themselves. Anyone who is super interested in the specifics of Brian Wilson's mental health -- be it whether he is genetically predisposed to mental illness, how far you can trace it in his family tree, or if he's really schizoaffective like his doctors say he is -- should be more concerned with their own mental well-being.

2. Until September 2014, it was never claimed by anyone on record that Wilson experienced auditory hallucinations before taking LSD. Obviously someone close to Wilson knows something the public doesn't. Everything in the L&M film was 'fact checked' by the family, with Ledbetter as primary consultant. It's not 100% that the detail came from *her* specifically, but if she thought the '1963' date was inaccurate, it almost certainly would not have made it into the film.

Oren Moverman was very much interested in 'setting the record straight' based on what Ledbetter (or other people) had to say.

• Moverman: "One of my favorite corrections in the Brian mythology is when he’s sitting with Melinda and he’s at the piano and he’s like, “I don’t know, it just comes out,” and she says, “I have to ask you, did you really spend two years in bed?” And he says, “It was actually three years,” and then we added that line, “At least that’s what I tell people.” And there were sort of like these little things were there was sort of like a whole mythology about who Brian Wilson is and what his life is, but some of it is real, some of it is based on reality, and some of it is kind of an exaggeration or manipulation of facts or lore that just sort of happened through the years. So we were playing also with the idea that some of it may not be true. ... I think everything in the movie is based on fact, everything is based on research, but there were definitely shortcuts that we had to take and different things that we hand to twist around.  The Brian/Melinda story, every single scene in that part of the movie happened, because I talked to Melinda and she told me all these stories and I just transformed them into scenes ... all those things really happened at least in the way she told them. So that was sort of the official story. (http://collider.com/love-and-mercy-oren-moverman-on-making-a-cinematic-brian-williams-biopic/)"

So if she (or somebody else) knows better, why does Wilson always say that the hallucinations started after the LSD? Who knows. Go ask him. Or her. Or continue pointlessly discussing this inconclusive subject for a further 50 pages, as these threads tend to go.

In response:

1. Really? What are your sources?

2. What would be the point of that, or further, why claim someone heard voices earlier than they did?

Street drugs were bad for Brian and I believe they are bad for almost anyone. Still, I find it very hard to believe that his LSD trips caused him to hear voices. Even if there is evidence of Brian saying that himself at some point, it does not mean it to be true.

If this is your feeling towards people interesting in discussing the topic, and you feel it's such a pointless discussion, why are you participating in it at all? Why would you even click on the thread in the first place?

I mean, I didn't burst into the "What if the Beach Boys had been born women?" thread just to say I thought it was a useless, ridiculous topic. If people want to discuss that, have at it. It's the whole point of the board.

The OP's only question was about when exactly Wilson started hearing voices. The fact that Wilson is afflicted with the disorder is important for providing a significant degree of context (https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=creativity%20and%20mental%20illness) -- it'd be useful to know when the hallucinations started so that one can have a specific point of reference when analyzing his music. That's the extent of my interest.


1. "I’d taken some psychedelic drugs, and then about a week after that I started hearing voices, and they’ve never stopped. For a long time I thought to myself, “Oh, I can’t deal with this.” But I learned to deal with it anyway. (http://www.abilitymagazine.com/past/brianW/brianw.html)"

2. The point of what?


Wasn't aware of that -- good note

That makes sense; I'm sure we all cherry pick bits of info in various threads that we personally find interesting. But I think every post in this thread has been "on-topic" enough to not warrant dismissive commentary characterizing elements of the discussion as "pointless."

The original question was about when he started hearing voices. Someone trying to get to the bottom of *why* Brian said what he did on this topic at various points, and addressing accusations that some public claims came "from Ledbetter" are all on topic for this sort of discussion.

I'd say if one feels the topic is not worthy of discussion, and one feels the pertinent question has been asked and answered, then again, why continue to read or post?

Ty Emily for your link. I'm fully convinced that the diagnosis is correct and Brian was genetically (AND environmentally) predisposed to develop the illness. I'm also convinced that Brian is perfectly right when he strongly advises people not to "do drugs", and he is talking from horrible personal experience.
My own very short experience in my youth was much less horrible, thankfully, but scary enough.

What are your sources for "He has always stated that the voices began a week after taking LSD" and "until September 2014, it was never claimed by anyone on record that Wilson experienced auditory hallucinations before taking LSD" (emphases mine)?
One quote can not be the source for either of those statements.

Here is a link to a Brian interview.  Straight from the master.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/05/brian-wilson-hallucinations_n_7520014.hml

Hope it copies!  ;)

I've never had a super huge amount of interest specifically in Brian's LSD history, so can someone refresh my memory: Do we know what date/year is commonly known as his first time taking LSD?

The same interview cited in a previous thread some ways up above is preceded by a bit where he seems to indicate he was hearing voices on stage while still touring with the Beach Boys, which would of course date it to early-mid 1965 at the latest. Had he taken LSD prior to quitting the touring band?

I did read that link, thanks for posting it. I don't for one moment doubt that LSD helped contribute to messing him up. Brian was the wrong guy with the wrong brain chemistry and predisposition to mental illness to be taking LSD, and more specifically to be taking LSD from the particular batch of LSD which he took from.

My pondering was just that I wonder two things: if you remove LSD from the equation, and Brian never touches the stuff, do his problems manifest in the same way, or in a lesser way (but still present)? I would tend to think the latter. I don't think LSD was the single cause for everything, but I think it factored heavily, plus I believe the emotional bullies that were in his life contributed to getting his emotions tied up in knots, and I can't think those are negligible factors either. Not a direct cause for voices, just a way of rubbing salt on a wound, so to speak.

My other question which I ponder is, as I'd mentioned in my previous post, if there was some particularly harsh/heavy dose of chemicals in a particular LSD dose that especially messed him up... had Brian not done *that* particular dose, but had instead done a dose that was less strong, could he have incurred less (maybe not zero, but less) longterm damage as a result? We'll never know for sure, but I'd tend to think this is possible too. For example... for anyone who has ever tried weed edibles... it is well known that sometimes they can be relatively mild, and sometimes they can REALLY mess you up in a really bad way. They are unpredictable, and I can certainly understand a blanket "stay away" recommendation being wise, but that said, I think it's possible to have non-damaging experiences on psychedelics, and that it was likely *possible* for Brian to have been able to have had non-damaging experiences on psychedelics. Unwise and risky considering his predispositions to begin with? Yes, certainly. I won't argue that.

Aha!!!
You just revived my memory. I didn't read him saying '63 or '64. I read him saying (in a different interview) that the voices were one of the reasons he quit touring (so in my head I made it '63 or '64.) The claim is he first took LSD sometime in '65.

Brian talks about hearing voices soon after taking LSD in "beautiful dreamer" if I remember correctly.

One thing I can't get over, many people who appeared in beautiful dreamer said that drugs had very little to do with the Brian Wilson story (except Brian).  Michael Vosse was adamant about it and referred to it as a "big red herring".  Yet Brian specifically states he didn't hear voices until after taking LSD.  So, something does not add up.     

http://www.esquire.co.uk/culture/interviews/a10139/brian-wilson-beach-boys-what-ive-learned/ (http://www.esquire.co.uk/culture/interviews/a10139/brian-wilson-beach-boys-what-ive-learned/)

I think the red herring is the sequence. I think Brian Wilson probably experienced it as causative because of the sequence. But I think if you step back and look, he was already on the trajectory. Take LSD out of the picture -

he's considered quirky then
he has panic attacks then
he has manic episodes  then <--- insert LSD here
he has hallucinations then
he has depressive episodes
and on and on

I guess it's a perfectly linear and familiar development without the LSD or with the LSD. There's no final answer. Based on our different experiences and reading we are inclined to see it one way or the other.

But for Brian Wilson, if he experienced it that way, he's going to have a harder time adjusting his thinking to new information than an observer.

What were the manic episodes? Not coming to mind.

The hyped "up" he was on and off of as described in '65 and '66 - the heightened creativity and concentration, the perfectionism. Obviously in late '66 early '67 he had a more extreme manic episode, but you can hear it on the Party! and Pet Sounds sessions.

:lol

As someone who is bipolar myself, I agree that that time period had all the makings of an extended manic episode.

It's not that it doesn't add up so much as that people "that were there" have their own bias and also didn't and don't know everything just because they spent some time with Brian. No one that tripped with Brian is going to want to admit that maybe it was a really stupid thing to do.

The real problem is that Brian for most of his life, has said things in interviews that contradict other things he said or eventually will say. I just watched the 76 or 77 interview with Brian talking about the Love You album and how he did a lot of cocaine and it messed up his mind and caused him to spend all that time lying around his room. This interview, at a time when MANY people have attested to the fact that he was constantly asking people for cocaine. There is one person that posts here frequently, that knew Brian on a personal level and gives the impression that Brian never really did a lot of drugs. Well he did. That does not mean by any stretch that his mental problems were a result of street drugs. I don't think they were. I also believe the drugs that really caused additional permanent problems for Brian outside his mental issues were the ones Landy fed him.

Trying to determine when Brian first started having auditory hallucinations is actually a very interesting topic. One of those things that sort of really does matter for anyone interested in historical accuracy.

Lets not forget there is no consensus on the "panic attack at 30,000 feet".

Lorren Daro said Brian told him he faked it (to get out of having to tour)
Mike has no knowledge of it.
Al is not going to say anything.
Carl cannot say anything.
This may never be resolved.

"AL: But eventually Brian became worn down and tired from all the work, the producing, from what I've been able to gather. And it was on our way to Houston, Texas, I was sitting next to him on the plane, and he just broke down and cried, he just crashed right there. This was at the end of 64, right after "When I Grow Up (To Be a Man).""

- http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/the-healing-of-brother-brian-the-rolling-stone-interview-with-the-beach-boys-19761104?page=15
In an interview with Carl, Dennis and Mike present.


"We were really scared for him," says Jardine. "[We were] concerned for him because he was so upset. He obviously had a breakdown. None of us had ever witnessed something like that." (Curiously, Love doesn't recall the incident. "I don't know if it was because I wasn't there or some other reason," he says. " might have been in another part of the plane. I think his brothers were closer to that than I was at the time.")"

-http://www.houstonpress.com/music/shored-up-6564082

There's also, in some cases, and I stress *some*, a clear subtext to the assertion that Brian didn't start having auditory hallucinations (or other ailments/maladies/symptoms) until he took LSD, and the subtext in those cases is simple: Brian's condition/state/prognosis/problems (and therefore any number of potential other problems that befell the band) are his fault, wholly or at least more so than any pre-existing mental illness outside of his control.

There are some spectators/fans/commentators, etc. who, generally speaking, are much less empathetic or sympathetic to Brian and his ailments over the years, and it's no coincidence that some of these same people (and let me stress I'm truly not singling out any particular person) likely subscribe to the theory that Brian's choice to take LSD caused more of his problems than other external factors.

For myself, my bigger pet peeve is those that see Brian now (or in the last 20-25 years) who think a lot of his latter-day ticks and problems are due to "doing drugs in the 60s", when a *lot* of his latter-day problems came from the over-prescription of drugs by Landy. He got *exponentially* weirder and started with the slurred speech and all of that in the late 80s/early 90s after being with Landy for some time.

Check out some raw film interview footage of Brian from 1976 (a tiny bit of which was used in the "An American Band" film), or even the "bed" interview from the Lorne Michaels special. His tone of voice and demeanor is something he never demonstrated in the late 80s or early 90s.

Lorren Daro is full of sh*t and everything he said had to be taken with a grain of salt.

At least Brian thinks so, anyway.

I don't know about much less empathetic or sympathetic or coincidences but I believe Brian is the chief proponent of this view that "Brian's choice to take LSD caused more of his problems than other external factors"; not really a fan invention.

12 years ago he felt differently, or at least said as much, and seemed to pass it off more as a red herring.

Personally,  I think he was already predisposed to having issues and the LSD just expedited things.

Plus... Brian doesn't want to have to repeatedly go into describing the nuances and grey areas of external factors, people who repeatedly bullied and emotionally scarred him and helped further psychological trauma, etc. Just the quick "LSD is bad, don't do it" thing is an easy way to just lump it all into one answer (one that won't get lots of pushback or followup questions that Brian doesn't want to have to answer).

Similarly, I also don't see Brian talking about the undeniable, irrefutable fact of Landy's over-prescription of legal drugs causing him damage. Which is perhaps understandable... it's probably more of a touchy subject. Comparatively, just taking the self-blame and saying that his own choice to do LSD was a poor one is the easy way out of the line of questions. Brian certainly isn't wrong to give his LSD non-recommendation. I just don't think it's the full picture, nor should anyone think it is.

Plus, it's a complex issue and Brian doesn't always give complex answers to questions.

My impression is that Brian realizes it's generally the right thing to do to tell people drugs are bad. He'll occasionally reference the creative spark LSD may have provided, but otherwise notes that drugs are bad.

But really, how often does he talk about hard drug use in the late 70s or early 80s, and how often does he say *that* use has caused him problems? How often has he noted that Landy's drug prescriptions took a huge toll?

Brian wasn't near death in late 1982 because he taken LSD in 1967 or whenever. That was, apparently, hard drugs, alcohol, and perhaps also a bad diet.

Brian didn't get exponentially weirder by 1991 because of LSD. That was Landy meds.

I can't imagine someone who has been through what Brian has would even be able to tell how much all of these factors contributed to his problems.

I guess you have to use your own judgement.  VDP backed him up.  What is his reason for lying exactly?

This idea has been beat to death already. Only a handful of people believe Darro's claim. Furthermore, if Brian himself who has always BS'd people indeed told Darro's he faked it that still means nothing. Parks or Darro or anyone else isn't gospel because they hanged with Brian for a short spell and did LSD with him. Like I said in my longer post further up....you're talking about people with their own bias. They don't even have to be "lying" per say, more like spinning their possible roll in Brian losing it.

Here's a question: has anyone in the entire BB sphere of family, friends, collaborators, and other unscrupulous characters, *ever* at any point hinted at any tiny level of personal responsibility in being a contributing factor to either Brian's or Dennis' personal problems, or substance abuse? I wonder if Murry ever privately apologized to any of his sons (doubt it). I'm not sure I've ever heard a twinge of regret from anyone, except Al commenting on how they should have appreciated Dennis more, or Mike giving a vague comment about how everyone wasn't always as nice as they could have been (paraphrasing).

Of course, what Brian and Denny did to themselves from a destructive standpoint was ultimately their personal choice (I don't need anyone reminding me of this)... yet I still think people can be negative contributing factors to others' mental illnesses and substance abuse in some way, however inadvertently. I think that nobody publicly wants to concede to anything. I guess I understand it, people in general can be defensive. Nobody wants to be the fall guy, even a little tiny bit.

But you'll never get the full story because of this.

I would love to know what a great many people in the BB story would say about the subject under the influence of truth serum, or dare I say, under the influence of LSD, where they might just have emotional epiphanies.

Do you remember where he said that? It seems like it must be sort of the outlier in his responses. He seems to be pretty consistent in his insistence that he started hearing voices after taking LSD and, if I remember right, pointing to drugs as the source or beginning of his problems etc.

Hmm. He's never been shy of talking about his 'nervous breakdown' which preceded the drug use, as far as I know. And he's also said he had one or two more during the following year. I don't think he ever said drugs were the beginning of his problems.

Interviews for promotion for BWPS and subsequent tour,  and the Beautiful Dreamer doc was slanted that way.  In fact, I recall discussion here commenting on the doc downplaying it too much.

I don't think he's every claimed his "nervous breakdown" was even a problem that I remember.  It seems to me he definitely sees hearing angry voices as a problem and he usually says it began on taking LSD, although even there he has said every few days the voices say nice/loving things.

Sorry but I think this is just weird.

That's fine.  Which part(s)?

The conceptualizing of a nervous breakdown as not a problem. I mean, perhaps he's not specifically called it "a problem," but I'd think that anyone would consider it one. I can see where you're going with saying that the idea that the voices were caused by the LSD was spread and perhaps initiated by Brian Wilson himself. But to extract from that that his problems were caused by LSD, or that he's spread that his problems were, when he's said he was abused by his dad and had breakdowns before that, entails, as you've indicated, considering that abuse and breakdowns aren't "problems." Which, again, might be what some think, but it seems like a weird thing to think. 'Weird' in this case meaning unusual.

To me it seems that to Brian it was more of a lovesick embarrassment and others characterize it as "nervous breakdown", maybe I missed something.  To me Brian is trying to get people to understand his problem was drug abuse (including Landy's abuse with "medication") and started with LSD. 

Two different occasions get convoluted: the Houston "breakdown" was not the incident with Marilyn and Mike and the consequent airplane phone calls and marriage proposal. That was an earlier occasion on a trip to Australia.
The Houston thing sounds like a classic panic attack.

Looking at it that way really puts things in a different light. It's so easy for us as fans to look at that period like "look at Brian, overflowing with creativity, just bursting with ideas", and yes, being on a manic high can feel really great when you're there, but when you come down from it....well, I can understand why it was difficult for Brian to look back at that period. I can understand why he would say "it was inappropriate music for us to be making". But only someone who's lived with bi-polar (I'm borderline) can really understand what hell that is.

I have read that Brian took Stanley Owsley's "Blue Sunshine", the purest form of LSD ever to hit the streets. Had he taken more than 150-200 micrograms, he would definitely have lost it, temporarily, if not permanently. Read about Owsley here: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/owsley-stanley-the-king-of-lsd-20110314

For what it's worth, according to Loren Darro about 15 years ago the dose Brian took the first time was Owsley and was 125 mics but he suspected Brian was possibly taking higher doses obtained from others like Terry Sachen.

I have just finished reading the Rolling Stone Collectors Edition on Pink Floyd. One article reprinted was about Syd Barrett's fall into madness. A lot of discussion from band members & inner circle about the effects of LSD on Syd.

Some say he was headed towards mental issues all along, song say LSD flipped that switch. Others say he went mad by the heavy, constant dosing of LSD. Not comparing Syd to Brian but it's interesting to think about. Two mad geniuses tripped up by LSD apparently.

I wonder how aware of each other, and in particular, each other's mental issues attributed to the same drug, Syd and Brian were/are of each other.

Just a theory, but I think Brian would've had his issues whether or not he had dropped acid, and Syd  wouldn't have....but Syd was far worse off than Brian ever was.

IMHO.

Or not.
"Some say he was headed towards mental issues all along"
I think at times both of them were also crazy as in "crazy like a fox." Meaning that the crazy is over-blown and a lot of what each did had a logic and was perhaps a sane reaction to their circumstances. Some people don't want the life that everybody thinks they should want.

I think Brian, originally, was the sanest in the crazy world revolving around him. That takes a big toll on anybody, particularly when you are also the main money provider.

Good point,  and I think you may be right.  It would make sense.

Ty Billy. Of course I agree with you that Brian would've had his issues whether or not he had dropped acid, and don't see any contradiction in what Brian himself says. When he names "doing drugs" as his grestest regret, he's perfectly right. He can't regret his genes, his father or people's greediness: he had no responsabilities there. Drugs he could have avoided, though with a great exercise of willpower. Probably drugs weren't his main problem, but they surely didn't help.
I think today's Brian is rather self-conscious about his public character and doesn't want to be "a bad example" for youth. Imho that explains two of the main staples of his interviews, i.e. his regret for drugs and his advice to young musicians to always complete songs (another big regret of his, I guess).

And, I would agree.  Brian misses nothing on stage, looks pretty aware of everything that is going on, notices audience members, will send a smile their way, or the OK sign, but, even if there was some underlying issue, Brian treats the LSD as an "event" in the same way being in a car accident is...an event" - marked in time, that Brian tells us, that had a profound and lasting/permanent effect.  

Brian would know best as one knows one's own self.  Substances, whether prescribed or not, can have no effect or a lasting effect.  Brian asserts that it was lasting and not in a good way.   ;)

I make no conclusions.  But it is interesting that there was debate amongst Syd's band mates as to if, and to what degree, LSD had contributed to his mental breakdown.

In Brian's case, he continued to produce master works post LSD, the genius continued!  While Syd, on the other hand, was  finished. And not that Syd was ever an equal to Brian.

Agreed.  Brian is often the sanest person in the room to this day - even if it's a concert hall, I'm thinking.  While the rest of us get caught up in things to the point that we lose it, he seems to have that ability to step back and see it clearly. As FdP said, Brian misses nothing onstage.  I'm thinking he doesn't miss much going on, period.  It's quite a gift (and a curse, probably).

At the time Brian was enthusiastic about his LSD trips and unlike Syd Barrett who has been reported to have taken LSD almost daily for weeks at a time, which could mess with anyone's mind permanently, Brian took a limited number of trips - he has said three I believe.  Even after a bad trip, once the drug is out of the system the individual is usually back to their baseline, although there can be flashbacks and panic attacks.  Other than Brian I have never heard of anyone after LSD hearing voices on a daily basis telling them negative things.  So although you can never say for sure Brian would have heard the voices even if he hadn't taken LSD, I find it very unlikely that LSD was the cause.  Mental illness was the cause and Brian was showing signs of that before LSD.  The LSD may have accelerated it but it would have happened anyway.

I've spoken to paranoid schizophrenics who abused drugs including LSD and it was clear that their mental illness preceded and prompted the drug use and the drug use made the mental illness worse more quickly - and yes I realize Brian is schizoaffective and not paranoid schizophrenic but the idea is the same.

I'm not a doctor but going only by Google (which is never wrong) some feel there may be a link between LSD and schizoaffective symptoms, perhaps a weak link. Maybe it's just me from a few synopsis on Google (which is never misleading either) my civilian sense is schizoaffective might be a label for not sure; confusing symptoms which are sort of this and sort of that but not really this or not really that.

And further...try and get a clear definition of the difference between schizoaffective and paranoid schizophrenic. Most of the symptoms are identical. I doubt the upcoming book will clear things up, but you would think that Brian or someone very close to him would be able to say with some certainty when the voices indeed started. Some of the stuff regarding Brian and the Beach Boys is in fact pretty cut and dried, but no one ever seems to take the time to clarify.

The existence of a correlation between the time Brian took drugs and the time he first showed symptoms doesn't mean there's a causation.

Brian took drugs, which may or may not have exacerbated his symptoms, but there's no evidence that the drugs caused the mental illness. He was a young adult, in the time of life when schizo- type illnesses usually take hold. He was also in the time of life when many people experiment with drugs. But the fact that the two things took place at roughly the same time doesn't mean one caused the other.

However, I'm sure whatever happened when he took LSD couldn't have helped his peace of mind.

Schizoaffective Disorder and Schizophrenia are separately defined in the DSM with different signs.
Cam, what synthesis of peer-reviewed studies did you find that show it's likely that LSD causes schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder?

None, this:

https://www.nami.org/NAMI/media/NAMI-Media/Images/FactSheets/Schizoaffective-Disorder-FS.pdf (https://www.nami.org/NAMI/media/NAMI-Media/Images/FactSheets/Schizoaffective-Disorder-FS.pdf)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/04/01/lsd-could-make-you-smarter-happier-and-healthier-should-we-all-try-it/?postshare=5701459688240312&tid=ss_mail (https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/04/01/lsd-could-make-you-smarter-happier-and-healthier-should-we-all-try-it/?postshare=5701459688240312&tid=ss_mail)

I know I've read a good synthesis of studies, but I apparently didn't book mark it and don't have time to find it now. In the meantime, here are a few:
http://www.emmasofia.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Psychedelics-not-linked-to-mental-health-problems-or-suicidal-behavior.pdf?115a76
The study above is discussed in:
http://www.ntnu.edu/news/2013-news/lsd-survey
http://www.nature.com/news/no-link-found-between-psychedelics-and-psychosis-1.16968

This (http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/42393/title/Studies--Psychedelics-Not-Bad-for-Mental-Health/) discusses that study as well as this one: http://jop.sagepub.com/content/29/3/280

The Johansen study is also discussed here (http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/03/truth-about-psychedelics-and-mental-illness.html), along with a third by Matthew W. Johnson from Johns Hopkins and  Peter S. Hendricks, Christopher B. Thorne, C. Brendan Clark and David W. Coombs of the University of Alabama at Birmingham. I don't have time to find the original paper, but if you search 'Johnson Hendricks LSD' you will find many pages with citations and summaries.

So, are there any peer-reviewed studies that support the claim that there's a causative relationship? I've searched and found the opposite.

You can put on this list.. Peter Green Jeremy Spencer Danny Kirwan.. From the original Fleetwood Mac.. They all flipped out.. LSD in question came from soundman.. Owsley Stanley of the Grateful Dead....Mac played many gigs with the DEAD.. orange sunshine.. purple haze.. orange barrel.. paper acid... clear light.. among other variations.. BW  also took this along with many others .. If you lived on west coast in 60"s and 70"s this is what you bought.. how far east this went i dont know.. The stuff was to strong.. No one knew how many mikes was a normal dose.. Pete townsend took acid at WOODSTOCK.. Said he was on a trip for a WEEK.. UNACEPTABLE... The Dead played woodstock.. LOL.. This info is in numerous books and online.. You can laugh if ya want but its true..

Right...but many of the symptoms are similar if not identical. Complicating things further, a patient can see three Psychiatrists and is liable to get varying diagnosis and treatment methods.

In any case my two cents on this thread is not intended to debate medical definitions and such. One last time.....it should not be that hard to get a factual answer as to if Brian heard voices well before taking LSD or not. 1963 as mentioned in the film? 1964? 1965? Debating what extent drugs played a roll or cause and affect is a separate issue. You would think Brian or someone would know.

I'll wait until someone does a synopsis of those studies (too lazy) but the point was what Brian claims, like:

"When HuffPost Live asked the veteran singer if he felt his LSD narrative had been exaggerated over the years, he candidly replied, “Not really, no.”

“The truth is that I did take LSD,” he continued. “All I know is that after I took it, I had auditory hallucinations.”

Brian Wilson

Again I pose the question: does that mean that LSD in and of itself is necessarily to blame? Or perhaps just the fact that he took too big a dose at one time?

Not trying to be an LSD apologist, or to say that it's a wise move to take LSD if one might have any emotional/mental problems already brewing. I just still contend that it's *possible* that had Brian taken a smaller dose, or perhaps a dose of just a completely different origin, that perhaps things would have turned out differently.

IMO, it's perhaps the LSD narrative that has been exaggerated, when maybe it should be just a bit more focused on the fact that he took some SUPER strong stuff, which may be the real reason why it had such an impact. I of course can still understand how Brian would dissuade anyone from ever taking LSD under any circumstances, considering what happened to him, and considering all of the unknowns of how any given dose could affect any particular person adversely. It's certainly risky.

I find it remarkable that posted scientific studies sway no one's opinion which is based on their anecdotal sample of 2-5 people.
Obviously I should stop finding that remarkable.

Emily - you definitely shouldn't find that remarkable (although I do, as well).

People prefer their own opinions over science in 101% of scientific studies (sorry, a joke, but not).

People prefer their own opinions over the truth whenever the truth makes them look like an ass.  :)

Some facts about "Bear" Owsley in this article. And worth noting as this article mentions, the previous supplies of LSD were coming in from either the pure Sandoz labs batches, or any number of underground chemists who were trying to synthesize and recreate the drug and not succeeding. Owsley and Melissa Cargill happened to be the most skilled chemists who succeeded, around 1964-65, and at the time the drug had not yet been made illegal (that was October 1966) but the materials to make it were very expensive and restricted as to who could buy the materials and compounds needed to make it (more info in the article). The government trials and tests of the kind Ken Kesey was paid to participate in used the Sandoz labs products, I believe, as these were the most pure and clean doses of the drug, and direct from the original lab source. It was the Sandoz LSD that was also being explored by the medical fields and the fields of psychiatry and psychology in the late 50's and early 60's, in clinical studies and controlled uses on patients, as well as various CIA and military "studies".

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/owsley-stanley-the-king-of-lsd-20110314?page=5 (http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/owsley-stanley-the-king-of-lsd-20110314?page=5)

So very, very true.

I don't think Brian's an ass because his opinion/reality doesn't fit a study by someone's definition of what he means or long-after-the-fact diagnosis (especially by fans). 

Here is the problem I have with many of these studies which tend to "substitute the judgment of another" for the patient (or affected person.)  Often, these studies are tainted by a monetary interest and are not "honest science" but "checkbook science" - and it defies the concept that all these studies are conducted in an honest manner but "subsidized" by industry for the ulterior motive of a re-branding of an old medication for a new income stream - and is called "drug repositioning."   That is only one motivation. 

Or, they are manipulated, for industry, such as big tobacco, or the insurance companies to deny coverage for workers comp. claims. There is a tendency to suppress what is contrary to an income stream.  And changing standards for research to influence an outcome.  It is becoming politicized, as well.

http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/late-lessons-2/late-lessons-chapters/late-lessons-ii-chapter-7 (this is one of many - and there are many which provide the basic schemes of research that is manipulated for profit or to prospectively counteract a class action lawsuit for multiple injuries.   

Often a parent will bring a child to the doctor and won't be listened to as far as symptoms are concerned, and, yes they are doctors, but the "listening" quality is ignored.  I am listening to what Brian is saying because no one knows the "event" and the "result" better than Brian, who is pretty straightforward and candid.  He tells it like it is.     

Before I believe a study, I want to know who funded it, and whether the researchers have a nexus to a drug company or a type of reward system which causes the "variables" to be manipulated.  It is how "black box warnings" came to be on medications, and many are after-the-fact with multiple injuries reported and a rush to advance the drug to the marketplace. 

People would be hurt, and it would be discovered that the science was hurried or manipulated to arrive at a certain result.  If Brian says that his symptoms came after taking LSD, I am believing that source because it is not a second hand source, it is the primary source of information.  He describes an "event" and what followed after that event. 
 
As for me, if Brian says it was LSD that caused (or even aggravated or exacerbated a preexisting condition,) then that is a primary source and not because he is the Great Brian Wilson, but because he (was the patient) who had that experience and reported that outcome and in that sequence of cause-and-effect.  ;) 

You know that Brian is aware of the studies that Emily linked to on this thread?

Doesn't matter to what I said.

Yes it does. The comment you were responding to was in reference to people who choose to believe anecdotal evidence over empirical evidence. No one was calling Brian an ass because as far as I know Brian has never chosen between those two options. Do you have evidence that Brian is aware of the empirical evidence that Emily has made available?

I think you should read it again.

Read what again? Your post? If it doesn't mean what I interpreted it to mean then I don't know what you mean.

Brian has his opinion/reality and others have their "truth", it doesn't matter if Brian is aware of someone else's "truth", he isn't an asshole for having his opinion/reality because it doesn't fit someone else's opinion/"truth"/armchair diagnosis.  Feel free to argue with Brian over his own opinion/reality.

CSM - that is just confrontational.  Even if there are empirical studies (which I take with a box of Himalayan pink) - there is always margin of error and "absolutely no absolutes."  And, even with medications or vaccines (note the Vaccine Injury Acts) there are a number of adverse reactions/effects.  Maybe Brian is one of those?  Even if there are studies which indicate another result, there is always Murphy's Law.  

If Brian says it was an "event" as described in the article, and regarded as "fateful" at 25, he is looking it as a before-and-after.  

Here is an old study (1964) before Tim Leary dosed his students at Harvard which got him fired published in the American Journal of Psychiatry.  Leary also had CIA ties and dosed some seminary students.  

"It is likely that more cases of this condition will occur because of the current fad of unsupervised consumption of hallucinogenic drugs in repeated doses." (Rosenthal)

"It should be also noted that the visual system is not the only now affected by LSD as auditory, tactile and old factor hallucinations have also been reported in the acute state." (Rosenthal)

https://erowid.org/psychoactives/journals/psychoactives_journal3.shtml

And, I believe Brian. If he says the damage happened in that way, I believe him.  Who is anyone to question his account ?

People are free to have whatever opinions they want but no rational person would accept these opinions as reality when they conflicts with empirical evidence even if the person's opinions happen to be Brian Wilson's. Personally I wouldn't call that person names though. I would also say that equating personal opinions with empirical evidence is an extremely dangerous conflation.

Brian has said different things about his LSD experiences and whether they were helpful or hurtful through the years.  Taking one comment about the voices and LSD doesn't tell the whole story.  Also, when did Brian finally tell someone he was hearing voices?  Clearly he was hiding it for some time - I don't think it was discussed or mentioned in any articles about the band or in interviews until the second go round with Landy?  Did the family know and keep it secret?

And again, the comment Cam is enamored with shows only association not causation.

To clarify, my comment was not directed at Brian Wilson but rather the notion (which recently appeared on this forum in other areas) that because someone believes something strongly enough that belief becomes the truth.

I just saw on a news feed that people who paid to attend a Tony Robbins "seminar" were invited to walk across a bed of hot, burning coals in order to - I guess - boost their self-confidence and the power of positive thinking and belief or whatever Robbins sells in his seminars, and a few ended up with burned feet that required treatment.

Now, logic says that walking across hot coals has been a carnival stunt for a long time, and it has as much to do with the physics of heat transfer and conduction and all the rest as it does mysticism and positive thinking. If someone believes as strongly as they are able to believe that walking barefoot into a pit of hot coals will not burn their skin, that doesn't mean those who did get burned at this Robbins seminar simply were not "thinking" strongly enough or without the proper focus and energy, and they ended up burned while those with the proper mindset upon entering the pit of hot coals were following Robbins' guidance and went into the coals with the right frame of mind.

Yet some of Robbins' followers blamed those who got burned because they weren't in the right mental "zone" or something, and that's why those who did suffer burns got injured.

Really? Sadly, yes. That's the belief and the delusion. Which many of these people pay thousands of dollars to watch what amounts to a carnival barker at a sideshow.

It means that common sense tells us that if you walk into a pit of hot coals and happen to hit a spot where the fire is hottest and the surface coals have not cooled, you will get burned. I could think and wish and believe and hope all I want that I can touch a hot frying pan and it won't burn, but that doesn't mean basic physics won't kick in and my hand will be burned, and it will hurt like hell.

I'd like to discuss more about the topic of drugs like LSD and similar psychedelics related to the history and application in the field of psychology, but I had to clarify that first. The comment was not directed at Brian Wilson but rather at some folks who believe what they want to believe, while the actual truth be damned. The people who will have a very painful time walking over the next month or so because they were told to believe hard enough that you won't get burned by walking across hot coals have unfortunately had to face reality as they feel each step they'll be taking as pain instead of normal activity, and hopefully wonder "what the hell was I thinking???" so it won't happen again.

That's how I took it as well. No matter how many times I read it, I do not see how it could have been directed towards Brian.

Brian is telling his reality; everyone else is making generalized claims about truth and causalities and studies, and projecting backward diagnosis.

There is a strain of thought, generally associated with postmodernism and poststructuralism that holds that reality is merely whatever narrative you happen to believe in because all of reality and any conception of truth is socially constructed. I don't adhere to that philosophy, personally. In fact I was just watching a Paul McCartney interview where he said that Revolver was released before Rubber Soul. To me that's not reality because it isn't based on anything that's real - it's based on an incorrect interpretation of the past. Again, McCartney is free to his opinion but I don't accept that as reality. I don't think we all get personal realities - that, to me, conflicts with accepted definitions of the term.

Brian is indeed telling his reality: he experienced a few events in a certain sequence. I'm not sure that he believes that one caused the other, but the evidence is that it doesn't. No one's denying the reality of his experience; just pointing out that posters who assert that there's a causative relationship are most likely wrong. Intuition is very often wrong.

Emily - I liken Brian's "reality" if you will, to those thousands of parents whose children were poisoned by vaccines and who manifested autistic spectrum symptoms after an immunization where it was an "event." He is bucking the establishment.  It is a good thing. 

Then, go back to the doctor who utterly denies that the vaccine was responsible for causation.  Or a black box warning that was kept from a patient who experienced an adverse reaction.  I cited a 1964 study before it became somewhat vogue to use LSD to expand your mind.  These studies contradict each other with respect to causation. 

Now, Brian has the mic, and as a result of his activism, those who denied the causation may be forced to either re-study the events or retract their studies in terms of a universal applicability.  We can always find some "evidence" to support a position.  It is important to find evidence that might not agree with our position to show that there is a divergence in opinion.  One size does not always fit all. 

There's also no evidence of a link between vaccinations and autism.
Brian Wilson is not an 'activist' for claiming a link between LSD and mental health disorders. That is extremely manipulative and disingenuous. I don't know why some of you have an agenda to deny reality and imply, falsely, a causative link between LSD and mental health disorders, but to imply that Brian Wilson shares that agenda is, at the least, obnoxious.
Sometimes, one size fits all. Sometimes there are facts and they are the facts no matter who you are, and whether or not you deny them.

Emily - anecdotally, there were about 10 shots in 1983.  Now there are 36-38.

http://www.drmomma.org/2011/01/cc-manatory-vaccine-scheule-1983-vs.html

More classrooms were opened to address the increase in core evaluations for special education for autism related disorders contemporaneous to the increase in vaccines.  There is a relationship, otherwise there would not be a fund to compensate those injured by vaccines.  There is no denial where a fund is set up to compensate injuries.  Big pharma denies liabilty and also the influence on docs to use the vaccines that are prepared by these pharmaceuticals with little oversight and fast-tracked for FDA approval.  

That is not to say that they are not useful.  The schedule and the number of vaccines administered is made to accomodate the doctors and not the infants and children.  As many as 5 can be given at a time. With 5 vaccines given at a time, how is the offending agent isolated?  

There are also complaints from the military of injuries caused by vaccines.  The military revaccinates recruits, even if they provide proof of a full series of vaccinations.  It is not convenient for them to exclude those who bring their full vaccination records.  So they are given double everything, even with medical proof of immunity.

http://vaccine-injury.info/military-shots.cfm

Brian has become a non-traditional activist in raising awarenss to behavioral health disorders.  It is called The Campaign to Change Direction.  

Happy Weekend people!    :beer

Which makes no claim whatsoever  that LSD causes mental health problems, so calling him an 'activist' in that context is dishonest.


false.

http:www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/

False?  The program is administered by the Feds, through the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

Vaccine compensation and injury table.

http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/vaccineinjurytable.pdf

It would not be there with perameters if there was no injury. The National Childhood Vaccine Injur Act was promulgated in 1986.  It now includes seasonal flu vaccines. 

False that it serves as evidence of a link between autism and vaccines.

It serves as evidence of injury. 

which no one has questioned.

This is exhausting.  Thanks to more of the usual convoluted logic from the usual suspects.  It is headache inducing.  Do I have evidence of injury?

It was a general statement and I pointed out how I didn't think it applied to Brian specifically since we were specifically discussing Brian.

Maybe it will turn out Brian actually knows himself and something like the seemingly not yet well understood Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder turns out to be the diagnosis and his insistence his auditory hallucinations are related to the few (or many, whichever) times he took LSD are the "reality testing" required for the causation of the diagnosis.

I think 'insisting' is a mischaracterization.

How about persistence?

"Maybe it will turn out Brian actually knows himself and something like the seemingly not yet well understood Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder turns out to be the diagnosis and his persistence his auditory hallucinations are related to the few (or many, whichever) times he took LSD and are the "reality testing" required for the causation of the diagnosis."

I paged through Leaf's Beach Boys book this morning and was surprised to see the paragraph about Landy diagnosing Brian as a paranoid schizophrenic based on Marilyn's description of Brian's behavior. The thing that jumped out was that this was Landy 1 during 15 big ones era. To the point of this post...I guess I assumed Landy considering Brian a paranoid schizophrenic happened during the Landy 2 eightees. Can anyone shed light as to wether or not Landy stood by his "diagnosis" of Brian during their entire relationship together? Hack that Landy was, it still seems weird to me that he would stand by that diagnosis for so long had he not believed it. Didn't anyone else question it?  Carl, Dennis...anyone or everyone else believe Landy's diagnosis accurate?

had he not believed that it would make him very wealthy

When all is said and done, I get only a two-word message from all this: "Poor Brian."

I'll grant you that...yes. Landy was a slime and the big picture for him was getting rich at Brian's expense. That said, didn't anyone question Brian being diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic? That is a serious and major mental disorder. It's not like he was diagnosed with having pneumonia when he really only had a bad cold. I'm pondering this because it seems to me anyone close to Brian seemed to have accepted Landy's diagnosis even if he was off. If that is the case, then it would clear up a lot of the debate about Brian's state all the way back into the '60's. The debates about Brian just being a drug casualty and such.

n/m