(1954). Certain Effects of Mescaline and Lysergic Acid on Psychological Functions. The Journal of Psychology: Vol. 38, No. 1, pp. 211-221.

*Sigma Xi Lecture, given at Temple University, November 20, 1950 and at Stanford University, May 25, 1951. †From the Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University.

(1951). The Effect of Thonzylamine Hydrochloride and Phenobarbital Sodium on Certain Psychological Functions. The Journal of Psychology: Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 181-200.

It has been the writer's privilege for the past four years to be a member of a research team engaged in the combined venture of trying to apply the best methods of medical science to the problems of psychosurgery, particularly the changes which are brought about in psychosurgery. May it be said immediately that the writer does not believe that any project has ever been carried out under more favorable circumstances, at least as far as adequate financial support and adequate technical personnel at the disposal of the research team was concerned. Any flaws which may have grown out of the work are, in the writer's estimation, to be attributed to a lack of ingenuity or intellectual ability on the part of the responsible investigators rather than to any lack of support. What I have to say may be taken up in the form of three different considerations or problems. First, what does not happen; second, what does happen, and third, what still remains to be determined. We may begin by considering briefly what does not happen psychologically after frontal lobe psychosurgery has been done in any of a variety of ways with mental patients or with patients suffering from intractable pain. As you know, the past 50 years has been a period when everything which was not clearly a function of some other par t of the human organism has been attributed to the frontal lobes. This portion of the brain has been held to be the seat of highest intellectaal ability; the lobes have been called the greatest achievement in evolutionary progress ; the frontal cortex has been said to be the measure of intellectual development of the human race, and so on and so on. One may speak of this era as that of "the reign of the myth of the frontal lobes." There was never any really conclusive evidence that there was anything very much which was functionally dependent on the frontal lobes, so far as either physiological or psychological functions were concerned. But there were a lot of things which physiologists and psychologists couldn't put anywhere else; and, since no one knew exactly what the frontal lobes were good for, they provided a very handy place to localize or store away speculations that had n o other abiding place.

T HAT there are wide differences among the various antihistaminic agents with respect to potency and duration of action is well known. That qualitalive and quantitative differences exist in undesirable side effects, particularl) sedat,ion, produced by these various agents seems equally probable. That is, agents having a common therapeutic result usually differ widely in potency! duration and side effects. However, the entire group of antihistamines are frequently said to produce more or less sedation in many patients. For example, in their recent book, The Antihistamines, Feinberg, Malkiel, and Feinberg write as follows : “The sedative effect of the antihistamines is their most charactcristic side action. Dependin g on the individual susc*eptibilities of the person, the nature of the specific drug and dose, this sedative action may assume varying degrees of severity. . . . In more severe effects the patient becomes groggy and, if still more severe, very sleepy. The sedative effect often reaches a stage comparable to that obtained from a soporific dose of a barbiturate and not infrequently the effect is even more pronounced. . . . This sedative action, except in its mildest form, is objectionable and endangers the patient as well as those who are dependent, for their safety on his alert,ness” (p. 193) .6 With respect t,o thonzylamine (Neohetramine) these authors state : “The commonest side action is sedation. With doses of 50 mg. we obtained an incidence of side actions of 9 per cent, with 100 mg., 16 per cent. ,4rbesmanl noted an incidence of 16 per cent, while Criep and Aaron” reported 10 per cent, and the Friedlaenders’ gave an incidence of 12 per cent for doses of 50 to 100 mg. ” (p. 201) .6 The only report that we have found of an objective attempt to measure side effects of antihistamines is that of Holtkamp, Hagerman, and Whitehead,s who t,ested the effect of Benadryl, Pyribenzamine, and Hydryllin on ten students. As measures they employed a cancellation test, reaction time, two-point discrimination, blood pressure, pulse, and respiration. They also made a note of any subjective change that occurred. They found that there was no consistent effect produced on any test by any of the three agents. (Application of the chisquare test of statistical significance to their data indicates that no statistically significant differences were found.) However, they conclude their report as follows : “Care should be taken . . to warn the patient of the dangers in-