tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post3622219716500036071..comments2024-03-29T10:24:20.171+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: Reaction times in a 'perfectly matched' Victorian versus modern population sample: A litmus test of honesty and competenceBruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-21803715745462347342013-06-18T18:29:32.782+01:002013-06-18T18:29:32.782+01:00@JK - The observation is that RT gets worse, while...@JK - The observation is that RT gets worse, while IQ tests go in the opposite direction and improve. <br /><br />I don't really see what the paper has to do with RT - I personally think this paper is wrong pretty much across the board (from what I know from other sources, including experience of meeting some Victorians) - but it could be correct and not have implications for RT. <br /><br />Could you spell out the link further? Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-15880592754856752392013-06-18T18:03:56.343+01:002013-06-18T18:03:56.343+01:00A bit late to this party, sorry, but I've just...A bit late to this party, sorry, but I've just come across something. What if it's all true (quicker RT and higher IQ among Victorians), but it was due to PHENOTYPIC changes?<br /><br />The assumption has been that the Victorians couldn't possibly have bested 'modern' times in terms of phenotypic enhancements to RT and IQ.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2672390/" rel="nofollow">This surprising 2009 paper</a> casts some doubt on that bland assumption.<br /><br />"...we argue in this paper, using a range of historical evidence, which Britain and its world-dominating empire were supported by a workforce, an army and a navy comprised of individuals who were healthier, fitter and stronger than we are today. They were almost entirely free of the degenerative diseases which maim and kill so many of us, and although it is commonly stated that this is because they all died young, the reverse is true; public records reveal that they lived as long – or longer – than we do in the 21st century."JohnKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-2183227489491236202013-05-29T18:28:17.115+01:002013-05-29T18:28:17.115+01:00@d - too recent - but such drugs would certainly r...@d - too recent - but such drugs would certainly reduce performance in many kinds of cognitive test, plus the long term brain damage. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-27982704597347331702013-05-29T16:27:15.732+01:002013-05-29T16:27:15.732+01:00Oh well, here's a flyer. It's not (just) ...Oh well, here's a flyer. It's not (just) dysgenic breeding that's making us stupider it's (partly) the medicines we take.deariemenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-8551741660947788262013-05-29T05:37:45.339+01:002013-05-29T05:37:45.339+01:00@d - I haven't looked at this particular study...@d - I haven't looked at this particular study; but the conclusion has been amply shown by both David Healy and Robert Whitaker and in the published literature generally.<br /><br />It's the drugs - especially the new/ atypical antipsychotics, and their truly vast over-prescription - almost certainly. <br /><br />This isn't rocket science! I mean, you just have to open your eyes and see what happens to people; and stop lying that it would have happened anyway. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-35634148311456866562013-05-28T23:37:26.956+01:002013-05-28T23:37:26.956+01:00Forgive me for going O/T, but I wondered if you mi...Forgive me for going O/T, but I wondered if you might have anything to say about this quotation from Richard Lehman's blog at the BMJ?<br /><br />"This is the most shocking and shaming medical paper I’ve read for a long time: a survey of the gap in life expectancy for preventable physical illness in psychiatric patients. It comes from Western Australia, which presumably enjoys the same standards of psychiatric care as the rest of the rich world. “When using active prevalence of disorder (contact with services in previous five years), the life expectancy gap increased from 13.5 to 15.9 years for males and from 10.4 to 12.0 years for females between 1985 and 2005. Additionally, 77.7% of excess deaths were attributed to physical health conditions, including cardiovascular disease (29.9%) and cancer (13.5%). Suicide was the cause of 13.9% of excess deaths.” This is a scandal which needs urgent further investigation: are we becoming indifferent to physical illness and early death in the mentally ill? And are the newer drugs like olanzapine and quetiapine that we hand out so liberally actually contributing to an epidemic of cardiovascular disease in these patients??"deariemenoreply@blogger.com