Brian Wilson: ‘The voices started after LSD’

[Debbie KL]

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. 

So very, very true.

[Cam Mott]

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. 

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). 

[filledeplage]

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. 

So very, very true.

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.   

[Chocolate Shake Man]

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. 

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). 

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

[Cam Mott]

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. 

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). 

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

Doesn't matter to what I said.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

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. 

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). 

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?

[Cam Mott]

I think you should read it again.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

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.

[Cam Mott]

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.

[filledeplage]

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. 

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). 

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?

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 ?

[Chocolate Shake Man]

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.

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.

[Bicyclerider]

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.

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.

[guitarfool2002]

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.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

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.

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.

[Cam Mott]

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

[Chocolate Shake Man]

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.

[Emily]

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.

[filledeplage]

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. 

[Emily]

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.

[filledeplage]

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.

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!    

[Emily]

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.

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

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

 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. 

false.

[filledeplage]

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.

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

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

The Campaign to Change Direction is not directed to LSD.  A person who goes public to raise awareness to a problem is an activist. 

 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. 

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. 

[Emily]

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

[filledeplage]

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

It serves as evidence of injury. 

[Emily]

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

It serves as evidence of injury.  

which no one has questioned.