How to Remote Mind Control

Early Attempts at Mind Control

Beginning in the 1950s, the CIA and the U.S. military began large-scale operations aimed at mind control.

At the same time, research began on electrical stimulation of the deep brain as a treatment for psychiatric patients.

This was led by three doctors: Robert Heath of Tulane University, Jose Delgado of Yale University, and Carl Sem-Jacobsen of Norway.

They were later accused by the public of conducting mind control experiments for the government under the guise of treatment.

In the 1960s, a project was launched in Boston to modify the behavior of individuals with violent tendencies through brain surgery.

One patient subjected to the brain surgery as part of this project claimed that electrodes were implanted in his brain to remotely control his mood and behavior.

Governmental Mind Control Operations

CIA

In 1950, the CIA launched a mind control operation called Project BLUEBIRD. (United States Senate 1977, Scheflin and Opton 1978, Davison 2009)

This was an unethical and illegal operation where the memorandum stated that the Agency should experiment with "the surreptitious oral application of drugs on unwilling subjects for speech inducement purposes."

The following year, the CIA sought to partner with other government agencies, and collaborative efforts on mind-control research were agreed upon with the Army, Navy, and Air Force, and the operation was renamed Project ARTICHOKE.

The mission of the project was stated as follows:

• The evaluation and development of any method by which we can get information from a person against his will and without his knowledge.
• How can we counter the above measures if they are used against us?
• Can we get control of an individual to the point where he will do our bidding against his will and even against such fundamental laws of nature such as self-preservation? (Emphasis added.)
• How could we counter such measures if they were used against us?

The following year, in 1953, Project ARTICHOKE evolved into a larger operation known as Project MKULTRA.

The plan consisted of 149 sub-projects and involved 80 institutions.

Research, most of which was externally contracted, was conducted at industrial facilities, academic centers, hospitals, government research sites, and state and federal correctional and mental health institutions.

The liberties, rights, health, and safety of American citizens were disregarded, and men, women, children, prisoners, mental patients, criminals, schizophrenics, the elderly, and even terminally ill cancer patients were all used.

Project MKULTRA tested over 150 chemical substances, including LSD, to determine their effects on behavior.

In addition to drugs, research was conducted in a wide variety of categories, including radiation, hypnosis, electroshock, polygraphs, psychology, psychiatry, biological weapons, extrasensory perception, harassment techniques, electrical brain stimulation, and microwaves.

Since most of the records of Project MKULTRA were destroyed in 1973, it is still difficult even today to grasp the whole picture of how extensive this operation was and what it had actually accomplished.

U.S. Military, NSA

The CIA was not the only arm of the United States government to explore mind control methods. (United States Senate 1977, Scheflin and Opton 1978)

U.S. military intelligence independently initiated research programs to alter human behavior in the late 1940s and early 1950s.

In such operations, although the military and the CIA initially cooperated, a spirit of reciprocal exchanges of information disappeared due to jurisdictional conflicts.

U.S. military operations recorded include Project CHATTER by the Navy, Project MKNAOMI jointly conducted by the Army and the CIA, and the Edgewood Arsenal human experiments by the Army.

From 1955 to 1975, the Army Chemical Corps conducted experiments at Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland on some 6,720 U.S. military personnel to investigate the effects of drugs on the human body. (National Research Council 1982)

The drugs used included many harmful substances, such as LSD, sarin, mustard gas, and BZ gas.

Although the soldiers were said to have volunteered, it was clear these were unethical human experiments. They were not informed about the nature of the drugs, or even that drugs were involved at all. For example, LSD was secretly spiked into their drinks under the guise of a social gathering. (Scheflin and Opton 1978)

Compared to the mind control operations of the CIA, those of the U.S. military are poorly documented, making it even more difficult to grasp the whole picture.

Walter Bowart independently investigated the government's mind control operations and published his book ”Operation Mind Control" as a 317-page report. (Bowart 1978)

His findings are succinctly summarized at the beginning of Chapter 1.

"The testing of drugs by the CIA was just a part of the United States government’s top-secret mind-control project, a project which had spanned thirty-five years and had involved tens of thousands of individuals. It involved techniques of hypnosis, narco-hypnosis, electronic brain stimulation, behavioral effects of ultrasonic, microwave, and low-frequency sound, aversive and other behavior modification therapies. In fact, there was virtually no aspect of human behavioral control that was not explored in their search for the means to control the memory and will of both individuals and whole masses of people."

There is an interesting description in the book from a retired high-ranking U.S. military officer, who claimed that it was the military intelligence (NSA), not the CIA, that was the driving force behind the government's mind control operations. (Bowart 1978)

He even went so far as to say that the CIA was just the whipping boy for the NSA's misdeeds.

" … Don't kid yourself. This country is controlled by Pentagon. All the major decisions in this country are made by the military, from my observations on the clandestine side of things.

"The CIA’s just the whipping boy. NSA [the National Security Agency] are the ones who have the hit teams. Look into their records—you won't find a thing. Look into their budget, you can't. …

"The CIA’s just a figurehead. They are more world wide—like the FBI is. They're accountants, lawyers, file clerks, schoolboys. They are information gatherers. They’ve pulled a lot of goddamned shenanigans, I’m not going to deny that, but as far as intelligence goes the NSA’s far, far superior to them—far in advance in the 'black arts.'

"The CIA gets blamed for what NSA does. NSA is far more vicious and far more accomplished in their operations. The American people are kept in ignorance about this—they should be, too."

In fact, three doctors who were leading researchers in electrical stimulation of the human brain and who were suspected of conducting mind control research for the CIA were, as a matter of fact, all collaborating with the U.S. military.

Three Suspected Doctors

Electrical stimulation of the deep brain toward humans using implanted electrodes, now known as deep brain stimulation (DBS), was first conducted in psychiatric patients in the 1950s. (Hariz et al. 2010)

The three key figures involved were Robert Heath of Tulane University, Jose Delgado, who moved from Spain to Yale University, and Carl Sem-Jacobsen of Norway, who was trained at the Mayo Clinic.

Although they began their research independently in the early 1950s, all three doctors worked in psychiatric hospitals, implanting numerous electrodes deep within the brains of patients, and studied the effects of electrical stimulation on behavior.

They also had a curious commonality in that their primary subjects were schizophrenic patients.

Notably, all three doctors were suspected by the public of collaborating with the government's mind control operations through their research on electrical brain stimulation.

This suspicion is further strengthened by the fact that their research on electrical brain stimulation began about the same time as the mind control operations by the CIA and the U.S. military.

As mentioned above, there is evidence that all three doctors were indeed collaborating with the U.S. military.

Robert Heath

Heath's Background

Columbia psychiatrist Robert Heath moved to Tulane University in 1949 in search for complete research freedom, where he established the Department of Neurology and Psychiatry. (O’Neal et al. 2017)

Over the next 30 years, he conducted human experiments of electrical brain stimulation on approximately 100 patients. (Baumeister 2000)

The subjects were primarily schizophrenic patients, but also included epileptic and pain patients.

Experimental patients were primarily procured from a specially assigned ward in East Louisiana State Hospital by an arrangement with the state. (Scheflin and Opton 1978)

Occasionally, he also got patients from the Louisiana State Penitentiary and Charity Hospital in New Orleans.

It seems that many of these patients were often brought there against their will. (Rushton 1974)

For example, a gay man (B-19) was arrested on a drug charge and agreed to be admitted to Charity Hospital in New Orleans in exchange for the charges being dropped.

However, he was later transferred to Tulane University, over protests from himself and his therapist, where he was subjected to experiments on gay conversion through electrical brain stimulation.

Heath was also charged by a New Orleans human rights group as "Ward nurses at CHNO [Charity Hospital New Orleans] hide female patients from Heath's lackeys seeking victims."

Electrodes are typically implanted using stereotaxic techniques, which require minimal incisions and use a three-dimensional coordinate system to locate small targets within the brain.

However, the procedure used to implant the electrodes in the first 19 patients involved opening the cranium and visually implanting the electrodes directly. (Baumeister 2000)

As a result of this crude procedure, four suffered seizures, six developed infections, three showed other neurological aftereffects, one had acute cardiac failure, and two died from causes related to the brain infection.

While most researchers implant only a few electrodes in a patient for a few weeks, Heath implanted up to 125 electrodes in a single patient over a period of two to three years. (Heath 1971, Scheflin and Opton 1978)

Mind Control Allegations

Backlash from the Public

Heath conducted numerous human experiments in which he induced rage, fear, pleasure, desire, etc. in his subjects by electrical brain stimulation, changing their moods and behavior.

Several researchers have speculated that these experiments were funded by the CIA under Project MKULTRA. (O’Neal et al. 2017)

However, Heath did admit to being approached by a CIA official to conduct government research but claimed that he was not interested as he was more concerned with caring for his patients.

Despite his public denial, a scandal arose surrounding Heath’s, and therefore Tulane’s, suspected involvement in government research.

Students at Tulane University and the general public were outraged that the government was conducting mind control experiments under the guise of treating psychiatric illness.

A New Orleans human rights group accused Heath of abusing innocent patients and inmates through his experiments and held a protest to coincide with Heath's conference presentation. (Rushton 1974)

Involvement with the U.S. Military

As mentioned above, the U.S. Army conducted unethical human experiments on its own soldiers at Edgewood Arsenal in Maryland.

In March 1954 Heath was the principal speaker at a seminar conducted at Edgewood Arsenal medical laboratories. (Mohr and Gordonang 2001)

His subject was "Some Aspects of Electrical Stimulation and Recording in the Brain of Man."

Within a few months Tulane signed the Army "facility security clearance" for the Department of Neurology and Psychiatry.

This means that the U.S. military gained free access to Heath's research facilities, raising the possibility that Heath was cooperating with the military in conducting human experiments and providing unpublished experimental data to the military, and so on.

Also in 1957, Heath conducted experiments in which he administered hallucinogens such as LSD and mescaline to patients to examine their effects on behavior and electrical activity deep within the brain. (Monroe et al. 1957)

It was later revealed that the experiment was conducted under the contract with the U.S. Army. (Mohr and Gordonang 2001)

Summoned to Congress

Heath's ethical conduct was called into question, and in 1973 he was summoned before a U.S. Senate subcommittee, led by Senator Ted Kennedy. (United States Senate 1973, O’Neal et al. 2017)

At the committee, Heath said, “Cries of concern are frequently heard about 'mind control,'" acknowledging that people viewed him with suspicion.

However, he continued, "Certainly, the possibilities of brain research are broad and awesome. But this is no reason for introducing a dark age," downplaying the dangers of brain manipulation technology.

Heath went on to give an excuse that his experiments, in which he used electrical brain stimulation to induce anger or pleasure in patients, were part of his treatment.

But Senator Kennedy stated, "What you are really talking about is controlling behavior," and "This is behavioral control," pointing out that Heath's experiments constituted attempts at mind control.

He further said, "Would it not be adaptable to treat other people as well, normal people?" and "Should we not be concerned about mass application?" expressing concern that it could be abused to mass manipulate the population, and concluded his questioning of Heath.

It is ironic that this story was more than half a century ago, when the dangers of mind control techniques were more publicly recognized and seriously discussed than they are today.

If you told people today that there are suspicions of mind control of the population by the government, most people would dismiss it as a conspiracy theory without even a second glance.

Jose Delgado

Delgado's Background

Over the next two decades Delgado conducted human experiments of electrical brain stimulation on 25 patients, most of them schizophrenics and epileptics, at a now-abandoned psychiatric hospital in Rhode Island.

However, Delgado conducted extensive research on monkeys and other animals rather than humans, focusing particularly on the inhibition of aggressiveness.

Just as Heath preferred electrical stimulation of the septal area, which is called the pleasure center, Delgado preferred electrical stimulation of the caudate nucleus, which could be called the inhibition center.

He invented an implantable brain stimulator that can be remotely controlled via a radio transmitter called the stimoceiver.

The stimoceiver was implanted in cats, monkeys, chimpanzees, gibbons, bulls, and even humans, demonstrating its ability to remotely manipulate the moods and behavior of the subjects.

So, the stimoceiver was like a prototype of modern brain chips.

Mind Control Allegations

Involvement with the U.S. Military

Delgado's research of social behavior in monkey groups sparked speculation about mind control in human society. (Blackwell 2014)

Delgado, just like Heath, was also suspected of being involved in CIA mind control research.

In reality, however, much of Delgado's research funding came from the U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force. (Scheflin and Opton 1978)

A well-known one, conducted in cooperation with the Air Force, was an experiment in which he remotely controlled the brain of a chimpanzee to render it lethargic. (See page 6, "Inhibition.")

In this experiment, the stimoceiver was implanted in the chimpanzee's brain, and brainwaves from the amygdala, obtained wirelessly, were analyzed by a computer. If a state of excitement was detected, it automatically sent a stimulation signal to the reticular formation, producing a pain sensation.

After a few days, the chimpanzees became lethargic and showed no signs of excitement, yet its performance on the given tasks did not decline.

If applied to humans, this would make it possible to punish people by generating pain signals in their brains just for having the rebellious intention in their minds, so I think it is fair to suspect that this was indeed an experiment aimed at controlling the behavior of the masses.

Physical Control of the Mind

In 1970 Delgado published a highly controversial book called "Physical Control of the Mind." (Delgado 1970)

In this book, he laid bare his grand ambition of complete control of human behavior by means of plans and instruments made by humans, using electrical brain stimulation. (p. 179)

And he proposed the establishment of a large national agency, like NASA, with the goal of “conquering the human mind.” (p. 259)

Delgado believed that such technology could develop "a future psychocivilized human being, a less cruel, happier, and better man." (p. 232)

But to me it sounds like he just wants to remake humans into livestock-like beings that have lost their aggressiveness, which would be convenient for dictators.

Indeed, the book is riddled with the claims that could be considered dictatorial or totalitarian propaganda, such as the following (pp. 219-220, 250-253):

• Propose slipping anti-fertility drugs into the water supplies for population control.
• Slaves were happier than the free blacks in modern ghettos.
• The people in dictatorial countries are just as happy as those in democratic countries.
• Denies the human rights of newborns and encourages modification of mental structures by government-controlled "intelligent planning" from babyhood.

In 1972, with this book, psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin vehemently denounced Delgado as "the great apologist for Technologic Totalitarianism, complete with an outright attack on…principles of personal autonomy, independence and freedom, man's 'inalienable rights' as annunciated in the Declaration of Independence." (Breggin 1982)

Stimoceiver Implantation Allegations

In the 1970s, Delgado began receiving accusations from strangers that he had secretly implanted the stimoceiver in their brains. (Horgan 2005)

One woman who made this claim sued Delgado and Yale University for $1 million, although he had never met her.

However, there is also a case where there is sufficient reason to suspect that a stimoceiver had secretly been implanted. (see "Boston Violence Project" below)

The researchers who worked on this case were collaborating with Delgado and had received the stimoceiver from him.

In the midst of these allegations, Delgado accepted an offer for the position of head of the medical school at the Autonomous University in Madrid, and returned to Spain in 1974.

Remote Control of the Brain by Electromagnetic Waves

In Spain, Delgado shifted his research focus to remote control of the brain using electromagnetic waves, which does not require implanted electrodes.

Anticipating modern techniques such as transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), he invented a halo-like device and a helmet that could deliver electromagnetic pulses to specific neural regions. (Horgan 2005)

Delgado tested the device on both animals and humans, successfully inducing drowsiness, arousal, and other states.

A monkey put to sleep by electromagnetic irradiation (MCAULIFFE 1985)

Carl Sem-Jacobsen

Sem-Jacobsen's Background

Norwegian practitioner Carl Sem-Jacobsen joined underground resistance against the Nazi WW2 occupants. (Dietrichs 2022)

Toward the end of the war he had to flee to neutral Sweden to avoid being caught by the Nazis.

There he met American officers, was recruited as a captain in the U.S. Special Forces, and participated in the liberation of Northern Norway.

At the same time, he was working for the Office of Strategic Services, a precursor to the CIA.

After the war, Sem-Jacobsen traveled to the United States to receive psychiatric training at the now-abandoned Rochester State Hospital and Mayo Clinic in Minnesota.

At the time, the Mayo Clinic staff visited Rochester State Hospital, where they performed many lobotomies on mentally ill patients. (Scheitler and Wijdicks 2024)

There he participated in studies of recording and electrical stimulation deep within the brain in humans using implanted electrodes. (Dietrichs 2022)

Returning to Norway in 1956, Sem-Jacobsen established his own neurophysiology laboratory at a psychiatric hospital in Oslo.

Most of the funding came from the U.S. military and NASA.

By 1976, he had conducted human experiments of electrical brain stimulation on 220 patients, primarily those with schizophrenia and Parkinson's disease. (Sem-Jacobsen 1968, Sem-Jacobsen 1976)

The first 100 were studied in Rochester, Minnesota, and the last 120 patients were studied in Norway.

In Norway, despite working in the psychiatric hospital, Sem-Jacobsen focused on Parkinson's disease.

Mind Control Allegations

Commonalities between the three

Heath, Delgado, and Sem-Jacobsen are often mentioned together as controversial figures involved in unethical human experiments in the early days of deep brain stimulation. (Hariz et al. 2010, Breggin 1982, Scheflin and Opton 1978)

What is interesting is that Sem-Jacobsen himself specifically names Heath and Delgado's research group and speaks of them in the same breath as his own. (Sem-Jacobsen 1968)

"The three centers, working independently, had the same basic objective: to improve the psychosurgical operation—leucotomy—by studying before the actual operation the electrical activity of tissue."

"The techniques developed all outgrowth of earlier animal studies—were amazingly similar in their final refinement."

Like Heath, he conducted human experiments in which he administered hallucinogens (LSD, mescaline, and adrenochrome) to patients to investigate electrical changes deep within the brain. (SCHWARZ 1956)

Involvement with the U.S. Military

Sem-Jacobsen demonstrated that electrical brain stimulation can produce a wide variety of responses in humans and manipulate their moods and behavior. (Sem-Jacobsen 1968)

Because of the special funding of Sem-Jacobsen's institute by the U.S. military, rumors soon started to spread that he was performing secret mind control experiments. (Dietrichs 2022)

Since he, during WW2, met and personally knew the CIA director, words were also out that he was working for the CIA.

The family had burnt all of Sem-Jacobsen's personal files.

Another allegation also surfaced that Norwegian authorities were part of the plot, supporting Sem-Jacobsen's mind control experiments.

A documentary about these allegations was broadcast nationwide in 2000.

The program was produced by journalist Mr. Gerhard Helskog, who has received several awards for his journalism, and made the following claims: (Bull et al. 2003)

• Helpless people had their heads opened. Not because they were to receive treatment, but because they had been involuntarily or unknowingly drawn into an experiment on behavioral control. These experiments are probably unique in the history of science.
• The reason why Norwegians were used was no less surprising: In Norway, patients had such weak rights that American authorities risked less legal trouble if they used Norwegians in their experiments than if they used American citizens.
• It went so far that in Norway we conducted experiments on humans that were only conducted on animals elsewhere in the Western world.
• The money transferred from the USA was placed in foreign accounts in violation of currency regulations. The Gerhardsen government played an active role in facilitating the conditions for this research.
• The connection to the Norwegian military was striking.
• And again it looked as if it was the CIA that benefited from the experiments.

Because of the serious allegations, the Norwegian government in 2001 appointed a special committee to investigate whether unethical medical experiments had been performed on human beings in Norway during the period 1945–1975.

The involvement of the U.S. military was already known, but it turned out that Sem-Jacobsen had received support from all branches of the U.S. military and had numerous contracts with the U.S. military. (Bull et al. 2003)

In each of the contract documents, there was a reference to a final report submitted by Sem-Jacobsen, but these final reports were kept classified in the U.S. and not accessible to the Norwegian committee.

On the other hand, the documentation confirming the allegations that Sem-Jacobsen received support or funding from the CIA was not found. (Bull et al. 2003)

That is, the same pattern as in Heath and Delgado was revealed : they were cooperating with the U.S. military, not the CIA, in their research on electrical brain stimulation.

Unethical Human Experiments

Like Heath, he implanted electrodes in every region of the patient's brain and conducted electrical stimulation, but offered no basis that this would be therapeutic. (Sem-Jacobsen 1968)

However, while the committee acknowledged that Sem Jacobsen's experiments went beyond medical treatment, it did not find them to be unethical human experiments. (Bull et al. 2003)

"The investigation has shown that the patients, once they had had electrodes implanted, were subjected to recordings and stimulations that may have been more extensive—for example, with regard to the placement of electrodes and the time period for mapping—than the treatment would have required."

"However, the committee has not uncovered any circumstances that show that this has been at the expense of the patient's best interests, since the data could also be used to improve the treatment for the individual patient."

The responses Sem-Jacobsen elicited from his patients through electrical brain stimulation were extremely diverse, including fear, anxiety, depression, anger, euphoria, sexual pleasure, orgasm, tremor onset, tremor cessation, disruption of consciousness, confusion, drowsiness, wakefulness, visual hallucinations, auditory hallucinations, olfactory hallucinations, gustatory hallucinations, pain, skin sensations, warmth, coldness, vestibular sensations, speech disturbances, muscle contractions, movements, apnea, arrhythmias, sweating, nausea, vomiting, and the urge to urinate. (Sem-Jacobsen 1968)

Of these, only "tremor onset" and "tremor cessation" would be useful in treating the patients with Parkinson's disease, but he also categorizes other reactions unrelated to treatment and analyzes them in detail.

I find it hard to believe that this could ever be “used to improve the treatment for the individual patient.”

Also, in order to induce these responses, patients had electrodes inserted into their brains that were not necessary for their treatment, exposing them to serious risks including cerebral hemorrhage, paralysis, and death.

I believe this was done "at the expense of the patient's best interests.”

Frank Ervin and Vernon Mark

Boston Violence Project

In the 1960s, against the backdrop of rising violent crime, the Boston Violence Project was launched to study violent behavior and psychosurgery as a countermeasure. (Casey 2015, Breggin 1973, Scheflin and Opton 1978)

The project was government-sponsored and obtained large federal funding from the Justice Department and the National Institute of Mental Health, among others.

The three people commissioned to the projects were Harvard neurosurgeon Frank Ervin and Harvard psychiatrist Vernon Mark in Boston, and their colleague, neurosurgeon William Sweet.

In their book "Violence and the Brain," Ervin and Mark proposed a permanent solution to violent behavior: the destruction of portions of the brain of violence-prone individuals.

Sweet appealed for funding to establish a metric for identifying potential criminals.

Specifically, he proposed that violent individuals be screened for neurological irregularities in the limbic system, e.g., the amygdala.

They related the malfunctions of the brain to "arson, sniping, and assault" and even implied that "the riot leaders may have diseased brains."

These proposals of theirs were met with fierce public outcry.

Civil libertarians, civil rights and community activists, leaders of the anti-psychiatry movement, and some U.S. Congressmen collectively accused these doctors and government agencies of using violent crime as an excuse to further political projects to oppress those who dissent.

The opposition gained considerable momentum, and the Boston Violence Project was terminated. (Breggin 1982)

Mark, Ervin, and Sweet were compelled to modify their original statements about the efficacy of psychosurgery in the political arena.

Mind Control Allegations

Violent Behavior Induction Experiments

As a part of the Boston violence project, Ervin and Mark studied many patients with violent behavior at Massachusetts General Hospital. (Mark and Ervin 1970, Scheflin and Opton 1978)

However, most of the 35 patients admitted for this study of violent behavior were not that really violent.

Most were either badly behaved teenagers or epileptics who sometimes had temper tantrums when they did not get their way.

The concept of the Boston Violence Project was to suppress violent behavior through psychosurgery; specifically, the destruction of the medial amygdala was applied to the patients.

Prior to the operation, they also conducted experiments of electrical brain stimulation, which are documented for their famous patients Ms. Julia P. and Mr. Thomas R. (See page 2, "Rage.")

Electrical stimulation of the medial region of the amygdala in both subjects was shown to induce violent behavior.

As they had been provided with the stimoceiver by Delgado, attempts were also made to remotely induce violent behavior in the subjects using radio transmitters.

According to their reports, subsequent destruction of the medial amygdala subsided the violent behavior of Ms. Julia and Mr. Thomas.

Accusations from Dr. Breggin

After receiving letters from concerned family and a ward nurse, Dr. Peter Breggin, a Harvard-educated psychiatrist, began his own investigation into the Boston Violence Project. (Breggin 1973, Breggin 1973)

The doctor then discovered that the reports about both Ms. Julia and Mr. Thomas were incomplete and contained falsehoods, and that extremely inhumane treatment had been given to Mr. Thomas in particular.

As for Ms. Julia, her violent behavior was supposed to have subsided, but in fact her impulsive behavior did not leave her even after the surgery.

She began to deteriorate and became more and more depressed and got suicidal.

A letter from a nurse on the ward read:

"He (Dr. Mark) implanted a couple of electrodes and proceeded to 'burn out' sections of her temporal lobe. The only problem was that her impulsive behavior did not leave her and she began to deteriorate in front of my very eyes... She stopped her wonderful guitar playing. She stopped wanting to engage in long intellectual discussions. She became more and more depressed. Suicidal ... I did see pictures of her in Life about the time of the riots as an illustration of a person 'before and after' psychosurgery. That article never mentioned her later deterioration, and severe emotional suffering."

In subsequent interviews with those involved, the doctor discovered that, contrary to the impression in the publications, she remained chronically hospitalized.

As for Mr. Thomas, the doctor also scrutinized many of the hospital records and interviewed the patient, his family, and involved professionals.

The doctor found that, contrary to what the publications said, he was not a violent person before the surgery, and all of the violent incidents occurred after the surgery.

Before his surgery, Mr. Thomas, a military veteran, worked as a brilliant engineer, and had never been diagnosed psychiatrically with anything more serious than a "personality pattern disorder," one reserved for mild problems with no psychotic symptoms.

In their writings, Mark and Ervin described Mr. Thomas as a "violent" man committing "serious assaults" against his wife, children, co-workers, and others, but no such facts were confirmed.

After his surgery, he frequently became violent, requiring sedatives, a locked ward, and even restraints.

After the discharge, Mr. Thomas was released in the care of his mother and returned with her to the West Coast. She described him as sickly, pale, and weak at the time.

Within a short time, it was apparent he was too confused to take care of himself, and he was picked up by police in a neighboring city. A few months later, he was admitted to a West Coast V.A. Hospital for the first psychiatric hospitalization of his life.

He was hallucinating, delusional, and confused, and was diagnosed with "schizophrenic reaction, paranoid type."

He claimed that the doctors at Massachusetts General Hospital had implanted electrodes in his brain and were remotely controlling his moods and behavior.

However, given the fact that the patient was involved in the experiments using the stimoceiver to remotely induce violent behavior, this claim has valid reason.

However, in consideration of the fact that the patient was subjected to participating in the experiment using the stimoceiver to remotely induce violent behavior, there is some point to this claim.

In addition, the destruction of the medial amygdala applied to Mr. Thomas is performed in the hope of suppressing aggressiveness, so it is inexplicable that his aggressiveness increased after this surgery. However, it is explicable if he had in fact received electrical stimulation of the medial amygdala.

Dr. Breggin also casts a skeptical eye on the dismissal of the patient claim as delusions, as follows. (Breggin 1994)

"Was Thomas inherently 'crazy,' or had the doctors driven him insane by stimulating and melting his brain, including remote-control experiments? We don't have to speculate. In a paper delivered at a Bar Harbor, Maine, conference in 1971, Mark, Ervin, and Sweet described Thomas's response after the second psychosurgical lesion was made in his brain. Thomas required antipsychotic medication because he developed 'delusions (of remote brain stimulation).' Given the stimo-receiver experiments, the use of the word 'delusions' in this context is deeply misleading.

"On the first V.A. admission, as noted, Thomas was talking about being 'paralyzed' when he was seemingly normal physically. Where would such a bizarre idea come from? In a 1969 article by Ervin, Mark, and Oregon neurologist Janice Stevens, Thomas's reactions to various points of stimulation are listed on a diagram, including one area that made him feel 'everything leaving, paralyzed.' During another stimulation he said, 'Somebody else is controlling me and moving my arms and legs (no movement visible).'"

The doctor described this suspicion with the phrase "the kernel of truth in his delusions," and stood on the side of Mr. Thomas.

Possible side effects of treatment included partial blindness, memory problems, blackout spells, and confusion, as well as more obvious side effects such as chronic psychosis, chronic hospitalization, and total disability.

He was subsequently declared "totally disabled" by the VA and "an incompetent" by the court, and this once brilliant engineer who had been working up to his presurgical evaluations now became a ward of his mother.

A $2 million suit against Mark and Ervin charging malpractice and lack of informed consent was eventually filed. (Rushton 1974)

Below is the full text of Dr. Breggin's investigation report of Mr. Thomas:

Breggin 1973

The Psychosurgery of Thomas R. A Follow-up Study

Introduction
This is an independent followup study of a patient of three nationally known physicians: Vernon Mark, M.D., Associate Professor at Harvard Medical School and Director of Neurosurgery at the Boston City Hospital; William Sweet, M.D., Professor at Harvard Medical School and Director of Neurosurgery at the Massachusetts General Hospital; and Frank Ervin, formerly of Boston, now Professor of Psychiatry at UCLA in Los Angeles. All three men are members of the Neuro-Research Foundation of Boston, through which they have obtained large federal funding for studies of violent behavior and psychosurgery.

These men have gained considerable public attention by promoting brain surgery for the control of violence and by linking their studies and therapies to political problems such as ghetto rioting and political assassinations. They have gained funds for themselves from the Justice Department and the National Institute of Mental Health, and may soon gain further monies from the National Institute of Health and the California Council on Criminal Justice (Peter Breggin, 1973). These reasons might in themselves suffice for a critical examination of their work. But perhaps more important, the operation they have promoted so highly, amygdalotomy, has become the major technique advocated in several recent projects of great importance to the public, including attempts to operate on state mental hospital patients in Virginia and Michigan and on prisoners in California.

Our first inkling that these men were not fully or accurately reporting on their patients' fate came more than a year ago when we first received a lengthy letter from a nurse who had known their most famous patient, Julia, before and after surgery. She wrote:

"He (Dr. Mark) implanted a couple of electrodes and proceeded to 'burn out' sections of her temporal lobe. The only problem was that her impulsive behavior did not leave her and she began to deteriorate in front of my very eyes... She stopped her wonderful guitar playing. She stopped wanting to engage in long intellectual discussions. She became more and more depressed. Suicidal ...
I did see pictures of her in Life about the time of the riots as an illustration of a person 'before and after' psychosurgery. That article never mentioned her later deterioration, and severe emotional suffering."

Interviews with this nurse elaborated on the patient's fate, and through various sources we were able to gain admissions from Dr. Mark-contrary to the impressions in his publication-that she has remained chronically hospitalized.

More recently, as I shall describe, neurologist Ernest Rodin has given evidence that Mark, Ervin and Sweet misled the public and the profession in all of their cases in Violence and the Brain. But most important, in the following case of Thomas R. we have the first complete followup of a patient operated on by Mark, Ervin and Sweet, including data from interviews with the patient, his family, and involved professionals, as well as many of the hospital records.

Thomas R.: Summary
Thomas R. is one of the patients most often cited by Drs. Mark, Ervin and Sweet in support of their brain surgery (amygdalotomy) for the cure of violence allegedly associated with psychomotor epilepsy. Elsewhere I have criticized at length the concept of any association between epilepsy and violence (Peter Breggin, 1972 and 1973), and recent articles (Ernest Rodin, 1973) and testimony in the Michigan injunction against psychosurgery in the state mental hospitals have strongly suggested that this association is mythical, a mere justification for psychosurgery. This evaluation of Thomas R. will not deal with this question, however. Instead it will focus entirely upon the fate of Thomas R. as shown in his life before and after his surgery at the hands of Mark, Ervin and Sweet. It is of some interest, nonetheless, that Thomas R. was an important model for Harry Benson in Michael Crichton's novel, Terminal Man, and that in the afterword to the paperback edition, Crichton takes some pain to explain that he was misled, presumably by Drs. Mark, Ervin and Sweet, into making a connection between epilepsy and violence.

In at least three (Vernon Mark and Frank Ervin, 1968, 1970; Vernon Mark, William Sweet and Frank Ervin, 1972) sources, Mark, Ervin and Sweet describe Thomas R. as a "violent" man committing "serious assaults" against his wife, children, co-workers and motorists he encountered on the road. In one source (Vernon Mark and Frank Ervin, 1968) they say he was paranoid toward his wife. In interviews they have implied he was psychotic prior to surgery. In all three sources he is described as suffering from not one single outburst of rage since his operations. In none is there any mention of serious side-effects from the surgery, such as psychosis, inability to work, chronic hospitalization or terror of psychosurgery. In their latest article in 1972, the only listed side effect is temporary "impotence."

My own followup of Thomas R. began with a request from his family who contacted me to explain that he had been, in their opinion, destroyed by the surgery. I have since reviewed the hospital charts before and after the surgery and over a period of six years since the surgery, and I have interviewed the family, the patient, the psychiatrist who treated him prior to Mark, Ervin and Sweet, and other relevant individuals. Suffice to say at this point that Thomas R. has only become seriously violent since his surgery, and that since his surgery he has been totally disabled, chronically hospitalized, and subject to nightmarish terrors that he will be caught and operated on again at the Massachusetts General Hospital.

Followup Report on Thomas R.
Prior to 1965, Thomas R. was indeed a "brilliant engineer," as Mark, Ervin and Sweet describe him. At the age of thirty-one, he had proven himself as an engineer with responsibility for other men and as an inventor with patents on the Land camera. He did apparently develop psychomotor epilepsy, perhaps as a result of various head trauma or a coma, but the clinical picture is far from the definitive one presented by Mark, Ervin and Sweet. For example, his psychiatrist, contrary to their reports (Peter Breggin, 1973), never saw him have a seizure. Whatever seizures he did have were well-controlled on medication until four months prior to the hospital workups that led to his brain surgery. But his seizure difficulties should have been no surprise, for he had several bouts of severe lung infection, as well as serious marital problems and finally a minor auto accident that upset him. Nonetheless, he was able to return to work, and the hospital charts describe him as constantly employed through December, 1965. He continued to work intermittently up until his series of diagnostic hospitalizations beginning 3/11/66.

In 1965 Thomas began to have serious marital problems. He visited his wife's psychiatrist who decided that his fights with her might have an organic component since Thomas claimed to have little memory for them. Thomas' wife was indeed afraid of him, but the psychiatrist can remember no actual harm that was done to her. He did, on occasion, throw cans of food dangerously near to her in the heat of argument. The psychiatrist referred him to the Massachusetts General, and the patient, a veteran, was sent to the V.A. where his extensive neurologic workups began under the supervision of Drs. Mark, Ervin and Sweet. They were about to begin their project on surgery for the control of violence allegedly associated with epilepsy, and were actively seeking a patient. The psychiatrist, meanwhile, felt over his head in these matters and dropped out of the case. From then on, the chart is almost entirely neurologic in its orientation.

In retrospect his psychiatrist remembers that Thomas was depressed, but not sufficiently depressed to warrant electroshock or drugs. His memory is entirely consistent with the hospital records which report no hallucinations, delusions, paranoid ideas or signs of difficulty with thinking. In the charts, his most serious psychiatric diagnosis is "personality pattern disturbance," one reserved for mild problems with no psychotic symptomatology.

Concerning his violence, repeated notes specify that it was unrelated to anyone except his mother and more recently his wife. But his mother was not present to give information, and she denies that he was ever violent to her. The most complete workup in the charts says "He has never been in any trouble at work or otherwise for aggressive behavior, never been in jail or a mental hospital." The hospital summary of 4/5/66 specifies "physical violence mainly consisting of throwing objects in the room, but never injuring anyone." In four diagnostic hospitalizations between 3/11/66 and 9/4/66 he was never restrained, never forced into a locked ward, or in any way treated as a dangerous man. During one series he fled the V.A. and went to the Massachusetts Eye and Ear where an in-depth evaluation concluded that he had psychomotor epilepsy but no serious problem with violence. He was discharged to be followed at the clinic, but family pressures apparently led him back to the V.A. and the pre-psychosurgery workup. All this is in marked contrast to the published assertions of his psychosurgeons who wrote in 1972: "violent rage: this was sometimes directed at his co-workers and friends, but it was mostly expressed toward his wife and children." Most disturbing, as we shall see, his first serious violence develops on the wards with Mark, Ervin and Sweet when they attempt to operate on him.

Much of his history on the neurosurgery service of Mass. General is pieced together from letters, his mother's notes, some hospital materials and other sources. From the start, Thomas R. called the diagnostic procedures "science fiction" and wrote his mother that he would spare her the descriptions. From articles and books, however, we learn that he was implanted with four strands of electrodes, each running nearly the length of his brain, two on each side. Each strand contained 20 or more smaller electrodes for stimulation and/or lesion making in various parts of the brain, from one end of the temporal lobe to the other.

By 10/21/66 the first lesions were apparently being made, and by 10/28/66 his concerned mother began to make efforts to find out what was going on. She contacted Dr. Mark and received back a telegram from the project reassuring her that her son was undergoing "minor surgery." The electrodes were to remain in place for many months for highly experimental brain stimulation and brain lesion exercises. He wrote his mother that he was being operated on through a government grant, perhaps leading to his later assertions, recorded on a medical commitment certificate, "Claims he is a guinea pig of the government and goes wher ever he is ordered by the 'Group.' He feels he is some sort of robot..."

From the start, Thomas was terrified of the surgery, and he fled home across the continent at one time. In at least two sources (quoted in the appendix to this followup), Mark and Ervin admit that he was "enraged" at the thought of lesions in his head, except when he was pacified by "lateral stimulation of the amygdala." They describe how he first I gave consent to the surgery while under stimulation, and then grew "enraged" at "the idea of anyone's making a destructive lesion in his brain." Mark and Ervin describe this on at least two occasions, and then proudly claim that after the lesion was finally made he no longer was a danger on the ward. What they fail to mention is this-every hospital record describes Thomas R. as a meek and docile man on the wards-until they threaten to make lesions in his brain at Mass. General.

In later years, Thomas will again become violent on hospital wards for fear that someone is about to "destroy his brain" with electrodes.

In their book, Violence and the Brain, Mark and Ervin describe Thomas R. as paranoid because he accused his wife of being unfaithful with a neighbor. They comment on the pathological rages he had when she denied this. Nowhere do Mark and Ervin tell us that during this hospitalization, while the patient was fully wired up, his wife filed for divorce, served papers on him on the ward, and soon married the man that "paranoid" Thomas had been concerned about.

Letters to his mother mention both the divorce and his "bad reactions" to the multiple lesions. On 5/19/67 he is hoping the wires will soon come out, but according to her notes it is not until 8/1/67 that they are removed-more than seven months after implantation. No longer able to see his wife and children, he was released in the care of his mother on 8/27/67 and returned with her to the West Coast. She describes him as sickly, pale and weak at the time.

Within a short time, it is apparent he is too confused to take care of himself, and he is picked up by police in a neighboring city, hospitalized, and then returned home. Then on 11/20/67 he is admitted to a West Coast V.A. Hospital for the first psychiatric hospitalization of his life. He is hallucinating, delusional, confused and requires a locked Iward and heavy medication for the first time in his life. When he is discharged six months later, his doctors have still been unable to get the Mass. General Records and do not, apparently, realize the kernel of truth in his delusions as they report in the hospital discharge summary of 5/22/68:

"...chief complaint of paralysis from the waist down. Patient stated that the origin of the paralysis was because Massachusetts General Hospital were (sic) controlling him by creating lesions in his brain tissue by microwave and that they had placed electrodes in his brain tissue sometime before. Stated that they can control him, control his moods, and control his actions, they can turn him up or turn him down. He apparently left the East coast, the area where he had been under treatment by these doctors, approximately three months ago."

He was diagnosed "schizophrenic reaction, paranoid type," the first of many such diagnoses in many hospitals as he became a chronic hospital patient over the next six years.

In August of 1968, nine or more months after his admission, Drs. Mark and Ervin published the first of their glowing reports on this successful case. They mentioned his brilliance, described his alleged violence and its cure, and never mentioned a word about his fate.

As of 10/28/68 the V.A. declared him "totally disabled" for the first time in his life, and that status has remained in force to this day. With the hospitali'zation of 10/23/68 we have the first evidence of serious violence and involvement with the police in his life. The hospital staff note reads "arrested by police-involved in fight, very impulsive." Another mentions "emotional outbursts." He continues to be hospitalized at various places in different states, always complaining that his brain is being destroyed by electrodes and expressing fear of the Massachusetts General Hospital. He is continually hallucinated, deluded and confused, totally unable to work or to care for himself. Drs. Mark, Ervin and Sweet are of course aware of this because the hospitals and the family continually call them. Even the patient had to be put on a locked ward at one point because he continually calls Dr. Mark about his condition.

In 1970, Drs. Mark and Ervin with the acknowledged help of Dr. Sweet published Violence and the Brain, inIcluding detailed histories of four successful psychosurgical cases, one of them Thomas R. Their concluding sentence is "Four years have passed since the operation during which time Thomas has not had a single episode of rage." Not only do they ignore his first contact with the police over a fight, as well as emotional outbursts requiring heavy sedation, they fail to mention his psychosis, his total disability or his terror of the Massachusetts General Hospital.

On 2/18/71, Dr. Mark wrote to the V.A. asking them to continue the patient's total disability. The V.A. agrees, but denies Mark's contention that his psychiatric problem is service connected.

On 10/8/71 Thomas R. was declared "an incompetent" by the courts and this once brilliant engineer who had been working up to his presurgical evaluations now became a ward of his mother. He has remained so since, alternating between hospitals and home.

From 7/21/71 through 10/28/72 Thomas R. was back in Boston for continuous diagnostic evaluations and treatment at the two V.A. hospitals, where he was seen by Dr. Sherwin, a colleague of Mark, Ervin and Sweet, and he is again considered for transfer to the Massachusetts General Hospital. According to his family, concerned staff intervened and prevented the transfer. During this hospitalization, his difficulties are dated to the surgery, and it is stated "since that time the patient has been free of seizures but has had a progressive psychiatric disturbance culminating in signs and symptoms of schizophrenia." Typical of many such reports over the several years, a mental status exam observes, "His memory is somewhat impaired for recent events and past life, could not give details of early history; said it is because his brain cells are constantly burned by microwaves."

In the same year, 1972, Mark, Ervin and Sweet wrote a followup of all their patients in a compendium, Psychosurgery, and again claimed that Thomas R. had been cured of his violence. Under side-effects they listed temporary "impotence" and nothing more. Not only did they leave out a host of confusing probable side-effects, such as his partial blindness, his memory problems, his black out spells and confusion; but they totally leave out the more gross sequellae-chronic psychosis, chronic hospitalization, total disability.

On 8/9/72, Ira Sherwin, now Project Neurologist for Mark, was interviewed by another neurologist, Ernest Rodin, from Detroit's Lafayette Clinic. Rodin favored psychosurgery and came sympathetically to learn more about the marvelous followup results in the books and papers of Mark, Ervin and Sweet. Rodin was dismayed by the contrast between what he was now told and what he had read. In particular, Sherwin told him that none of the four patients touted in Violence and the Brain and elsewhere had been substantially helped by the surgery in regard to their violence or otherwise. He also acknowledged that Thomas R. would "never be able to function in society." Rodin's report on this visit, complete with quotes, is public record as an exhibit (AC4) in the current trial to stop psychosurgery in Michigan state hospitals. Rodin came away seriously disillusioned with their work, claiming that many others in Boston and elsewhere, including Jose Delgado, now felt the same.

In his most recent hospitalization, 12/5/72 to 2/14/73, Thomas R. is showing an increasing trend toward more and more serious violence. The emergency admission certificate signed by a physician reads "Patient is delusional and violent... Attacked his father physically today. Very assaultive to PCT (aid) and decided we were trying to destroy him with microwaves." The first progress note within the chart describes him as "very aggressive, belligerent, dangerous at present." Restraints and intramuscular Thorazine are used on him.

As in the past, throughout this hospitalization he walked about with newspapers, bags, books and other material on or around his head to protect himself from further surgery. Nurses' notes contain many references such as "I was murdered by microwaves." The chart includes a handwritten note by the patient which says:

"Doctor: The Mass. General and Labs who have frequencies to my brain are taking my life by transmitting to me and killing all the useful cells in my brain to take my life."

Toward the end of his stay he upset the entire ward by writing "murder" on the dayroom wall.

On May 1, 1973, Frank Ervin was interviewed on tape by Williamson Good of Freedom Magazine in Los Angeles. Under heavy pressure Ervin at last admitted that Thomas R. "remains very crazy, perhaps somewhat crazier than when we saw him ... No more seizures. No more violence."

I interviewed Thomas R. on May 4, 1973, in his home, and found his condition to be the same as that described throughout his hospitalizations.

References