Тег: Violence

Treating the Incurable: A Single Case of a Psychopathic Patient Undergoing Therapy

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Since the first conceptualization of psychopathy in modern psychiatry, this condition has been considered practically incurable. However, there is an experimental approach that may refute such a view. Schema therapy is a psychotherapy for the treatment of personality disorders that has performed well in the therapy of borderline personality disorder, but has also been adapted for patients with other problems, including those with high levels of psychopathy.

There is a case study of schema therapy for psychopathy in a 25-year-old rapist. His father was a cruel man who subjected him to beatings and authoritarian upbringing. From the age of 8, the patient exhibited serious behavioral problems; at 17, he was first convicted of assault causing grievous bodily harm, and at 19, together with an accomplice, he committed rape, after which he tried to shift all the blame onto the victim (calling her a prostitute and claiming she had consented) and the accomplice (saying that he had forced him into it).

First, the patient took the PCL-R test. He scored 4 out of 8 on the interpersonal component (dishonesty, manipulativeness, etc.), 7 out of 8 on the affective component (lack of empathy, guilt, other emotions, and failure to take responsibility for his actions), 6 out of 10 on impulsivity, and 8 out of 10 on antisociality (history of behavioral problems and criminality). Considering additional traits outside the components (sexual promiscuity and a tendency toward multiple short-term relationships), he scored 28 out of 40—a high level of psychopathy.

The therapy lasted 4 years. In the first year, the therapist earned the patient’s trust and worked on his control over impulsive aggression. He also discussed his early behavioral problems and encouraged him to evaluate his emotions. Initially, the patient had difficulty with this and did not want to admit guilt for his actions. However, later, a sense of guilt was successfully evoked in him. He burst into tears, admitted responsibility, regretted that he could not restrain himself, and said that he deserved to pay for this act for the rest of his life. After a year, the therapist managed to establish a close emotional bond with the patient by employing empathic confrontation (convincing the patient of the sincerity of his intentions).

In the second year, the patient decided to make peace with his past. Additionally, he entered a relationship with a girl (who often accompanied his mother when visiting the clinic), after which he began to have conversations with the therapist about friendship and love. Although the relationship was later broken off due to the girl’s infidelity, he still wanted to build a healthy relationship.

In the last two years, the patient underwent imagery exercises in which he imagined, described, and worked through memories of his father’s cruel acts. After this, he was allowed to leave the clinic, he started a new relationship, and underwent resocialization. At the end of the 4 years of therapy, he was released, found a job, had a child, and no longer participated in criminal activities.

For another 3 years, he was monitored by the therapist and took the PCL-R test again. Now he scored only 1 out of 8 on the interpersonal component, 1 out of 8 on the affective component, and 3 out of 10 on impulsivity. Of course, the antisocial component remained unchanged, but this was primarily due to its historical nature. In total, he scored 14 out of 40, which is no longer a high indicator of psychopathy.

Of course, such an approach is very long. The creation and application of pharmacological agents to correct the dysfunction of the violence inhibition mechanism—due to which the interpersonal and affective components of psychopathy and the lack of certain emotions in a person manifest—could potentially yield a faster and more reliable result. But at the very least, it shatters the myth of the incurability of psychopathy and violent behavior, which gives us huge prospects in eradicating the problem of violence in human society. It should also be noted that congenital predispositions to weak violence inhibition tend to manifest in practice due to the negative influence of the environment, which is why proper psychological work with children is very important.

Some points regarding the self-domestication of humans and how they became friendlier

Voluntarist, Bitarch

As is known from the theory of human self-domestication, humans possess certain traits similar to those observed in domesticated animals. This includes brain development and behavioral aspects. In this context, it is worth highlighting some points regarding the development of a tendency toward non-aggressive behavior toward unfamiliar members of one’s own species, which will allow us to better understand why a normal human possesses a strongly expressed violence inhibition mechanism.

In one study, domesticated animals such as pigs, rabbits, or guinea pigs, as well as animals characterized by cooperative breeding, such as the red fox and some primates, were found to possess a significantly larger amygdala volume and higher neuronal density within it compared to many other animal species. This is also true for humans, whom this study classifies as a cooperatively breeding species. During the Pleistocene (Ice Age), it became critically necessary for human survival for children to be cared for not only by their biological mothers but also by other group members. This led to the emergence of corresponding adaptations, including a reduction in children’s fear of close contact with other people and a reduction in mothers’ fear of other people approaching and caring for their children. Furthermore, prosociality, replacing aggressiveness, was extremely necessary for the evolution of all forms of human cultural cognition, including language.

Such an adaptation is fully consistent with the theory of the violence inhibition mechanism, according to which an unconditional reflex is triggered in humans when observing distress signals in others, such as expressions of fear or sadness, which deters them from causing harm by evoking negative feelings. The development of the amygdala led to better recognition and understanding of other people’s fear, which helps prevent a person from behaving aggressively toward them due to their own fear. This part of the brain plays a primary role in regulating aggressive behavior, which also aligns with the concept of a violence inhibitor. In many animals, this works similarly toward members of their own species.

Let’s look at another example of self-domestication: the pygmy chimpanzee (bonobo). Their females prefer to breed with non-aggressive males and jointly defend themselves against aggressive ones, which also steers their selection toward non-aggressiveness. Compared to common chimpanzees, the serotonin neuron density in the amygdala of bonobos is twice as high. This can generally be observed in species that do not typically exhibit aggressive behavior due to social frustration. And as we already know, the serotonergic system is a key regulator of aggressive behavior in animals and humans; the activation of certain serotonin receptors can completely eliminate attacking aggressive behavior toward conspecifics, replacing it, as a rule, with non-aggressive prosocial behavior (while this process does not suppress defensive behavior if a conspecific decides to attack first).

All these data prove once again that a healthy person is characterized by the inhibition of violence due to certain evolutionary adaptations, and that it relies on the full functioning of the amygdala and the serotonergic system. These data are extremely important for the search and development of therapeutic methods aimed at correcting dysfunction of the violence inhibitor in people who exhibit violent behavior and psychopathic predispositions.

Sources:
Cerrito, P., Burkart, J.M. (2023). Human Amygdala Volumetric Patterns Convergently Evolved in Cooperatively Breeding and Domesticated Species. Hum Nat. doi:10.1007/s12110-023-09461-3;
Hare, B. (2017). Survival of the Friendliest: Homo sapiens Evolved via Selection for Prosociality. Annual Review of Psychology, 68(1), 155–186. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-044201.

Who considers violence justified for the sake of achieving a greater good?

Voluntarist, Bitarch

When solving various kinds of moral problems, we can proceed either from a utilitarian point of view, which is result-oriented and consists of maximizing utility, or from a deontological one, which is action-oriented and consists of mandatory adherence to certain norms (including moral norms). For example, in the trolley dilemma, the first position justifies the killing of one innocent person to save many others, whereas the second position does not allow this and condemns any intentional infliction of harm on a person. However, not only thought experiments but many real-life situations can lead to the question of whether a human life should be sacrificed for some higher good. And it would be very interesting to see what choice is preferred by individuals who do not experience aversion to committing violence, have weakly expressed empathy, and possess other traits of psychopathy.

As we know, in the standard version of the trolley dilemma, a person must choose whether to redirect the trolley to a track where only one person is tied, or to do nothing, as a result of which the trolley will run over five people at once. A survey of 700 participants in a study showed that the choice in favor of taking action (sacrificing one for the benefit of many) was only slightly associated with traits of primary psychopathy (a person’s tendency toward callousness, lack of empathy, and a weak sense of guilt). However, in a modified version, where the participant had to decide whether to push a fat man off a bridge onto the tracks to stop the trolley, the choice in favor of this was strongly associated with all indicators of psychopathy. It seems that psychopathic individuals tend to believe that in this situation, killing the fat man is a completely justified action.

The study also found that individuals with higher psychopathy scores tend to have a desire to cause harm to people for the sake of achieving some higher good. Yet, at the same time, they do not strive to help in the impartial maximization of the well-being of as many people as possible. To be clear, it can be put this way: a psychopath is ready to accept human casualties and commit violence to achieve a higher good, but he would not help with his wallet, even if he possesses funds that are not very necessary to him and could significantly help many other people.

Additionally, participants were surveyed on a number of dilemmas from the CNI model, which assesses their sensitivity to consequences (C), moral norms (N), and preference for inaction over action (I). Naturally, higher psychopathy scores were associated with a greater tendency to make utilitarian rather than deontological decisions. To be more precise, according to the Levenson test, this result was significantly associated with indicators of primary psychopathy specifically, and only weakly with indicators of secondary psychopathy (reflecting emotional instability and the presence of psychological problems in a person). According to the triarchic model of psychopathy, it was associated with a person’s tendency toward meanness. And according to the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI), it was associated with egocentric impulsivity, fearless dominance, and cold-bloodedness.

It can be concluded that the more impaired an individual’s violence inhibition mechanism is—which in practice manifests as traits of primary psychopathy—the more they are inclined to make a utilitarian rather than a deontological choice. Human casualties and violence are justified for them if they believe that this will lead to some higher good for many people. At the same time, the interesting point is that they are not particularly inclined to sacrifice their own well-being for this purpose. In real life, this can easily be seen in the example of various kinds of dictators who pursued one ideology or another. At the same time, non-psychopathic individuals prefer to follow moral norms and not sacrifice human lives. They will not choose to intentionally cause harm to a person.

Bacteria against violence

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Rather interesting results are demonstrated by a study of germ-free mice. As it turned out, they behave much more aggressively than their normal counterparts. At the same time, returning gut microorganisms to them immediately or 6 weeks after birth demonstrated a significant reduction in aggressive behavior during experiments conducted at the 12th week of their lives. Additionally, a number of studies[1][2] demonstrate that the absence of gut microbes leads to impairments in brain development, including a decrease in serotonergic signaling and the expression of 5-HT1A receptors, which play a key role in the full functioning of the violence inhibition mechanism. In general, the gut-brain axis has a significant influence on the regulation of behavior and mood. For example, disruption of the gut microbiota caused by alcoholism leads to depressive and anxious states due to dysfunction of emotional control in the amygdala, prefrontal cortex, and hypothalamus (it should be noted that these brain regions are also key in the regulation of aggression).

Such data indicate to us not only the fact that gut microorganisms are important for the full development of the brain, but also the possibility of therapy for certain neurophysiological abnormalities, including the same dysfunction of the violence inhibitor, through the use of probiotics; researchers are already pointing to the potential of probiotics in the therapy of affective (mood) disorders. A result similar to the use of certain 5-HT1A/1B receptor agonists can be expected, i.e., the elimination of attacking aggression from behavior without affecting defensive aggression and other behaviors. At the same time, it is potentially possible to achieve a more stable and long-term result by selectively developing probiotics specifically for the therapy of this dysfunction.

Theoretically, probiotics that could be suitable for such a task can be identified. Bifidobacterium breve (M2CF22M7) and Bifidobacterium longum infantis (E41), administered to mice over a 5-week period with stress exposure experiments, improved the regulation of the secretion of the serotonin precursor 5-HTP, and also increased the level of serotonin itself in the brain. Given that they also improved the expression of the TPH1 gene, a possible similar effect on the TPH2 gene in the brain (which is important in the regulation of aggression and the functioning of the serotonergic system) exists, although this still requires confirmation. Lactobacillus casei (54-2-33), necessarily administered together with the prebiotic inulin (which is necessary to stimulate bacterial growth) for 14 days to young rats, increased the level of 5-HT1A receptor mRNA in their hippocampus. Also, a 4-week administration to young rats of a mixture of galacto-oligosaccharide and polydextrose prebiotics, as well as the prebiotic lactoferrin, which stimulated the growth of various types of lactobacilli, prevented the stress-induced decrease in 5-HT1A receptor mRNA levels.

At the moment, the topic of the influence of probiotics on the development and functioning of the brain can be called quite poorly studied. However, existing data already point to another promising direction in the development of therapy for various neurophysiological dysfunctions, including problems with violence inhibition. If bacterial strains are developed that, in an adequate (non-harmful) quantity in the gut, prove capable of significantly improving the work of the serotonergic system and certain brain regions, it will become possible to carry out therapy for violent behavior extremely effectively without the need for the constant use of corresponding medications.

What will happen if violent individuals are removed from a collective or society

The story of biologist Robert Sapolsky, who observed baboons for decades, is quite well known. The alpha males in the observed troop behaved quite brutally, exhibiting extremely high levels of violence toward their peers. But at one point, the troop discovered a human garbage dump, which only these alpha males could approach, as they had to fight alpha males from another troop for access to the dump. At some point, they contracted an infection at the dump and subsequently died, leaving the troop without its excessively aggressive individuals. And the most interesting part begins next: although a hierarchy continued to exist in the troop (replacements for the alpha males were found), the fighting and violence between peers ceased, and this result persisted for decades, long after the original males had already died of old age.

A question sometimes arises: isn’t a certain number of violent individuals in any collective or society a normal state of affairs? If the violent ones are removed, won’t someone else inevitably take their place? An affirmative answer to these questions, of course, has no real basis, nor does it align with the ethological observations demonstrated above. There is no such thing as a natural number of violent individuals; there are only pathological individuals, whose removal (or better yet, therapy for their violence) will lead to the elimination from society of a pathology consisting of a dysfunction in the violence inhibition mechanism.

Moreover, it would be foolish to assume that for non-violent individuals, the disappearance of current violent actors would suddenly suppress their violence inhibitor and that they, who previously felt a repulsion toward harming their peers, would stop feeling it. Only individuals who did not feel this initially but remained hidden might reveal themselves in such a situation. Of course, research demonstrates an increase in testosterone levels in male primates who are no longer under pressure from higher-ranking males. However, the inhibition of violence is a function of the serotonergic system, which testosterone does not contradict, increasing aggressiveness only within clear limits. In a healthy individual, the inhibitory function of serotonin and the pro-aggressive function of testosterone work in parallel, keeping aggression as a functional behavior.

Why some private companies cause harm

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Private companies, especially from the perspective of supporters of left-wing socio-economic views, are often considered socially irresponsible, working solely for their own material gain, while being completely unconcerned about the impact of their activities on society and the environment in which they exist. It cannot be denied that such a statement is to some extent true, as it is not difficult to imagine how a businessman might dump toxic waste into a river or squeeze the last bit of strength out of their employees without providing fair compensation for their labor. However, this is not always the case, and the problem of “bad” companies deserves a closer look.

A study on the topic of corporate psychopathy can help us with this. In it, 346 Australian employees took part in a survey in which they rated their supervisors (managers) for psychopathy using the PM-MRV test; they were able to rate both current and previous supervisors, resulting in a total of 567 individuals being evaluated. Based on the survey results, the managers were divided into normal, dysfunctional (partially psychopathic), and psychopathic. The test itself includes standard items for assessing primary psychopathy, such as superficial charm, deceitfulness, manipulativeness, a grandiose opinion of oneself, a lack of remorse regarding causing harm to employees, cold-bloodedness, a lack of empathy, and an unwillingness to take responsibility (shifting the blame for one’s own mistakes onto others). In addition to the psychopathy of the managers, the study assessed whether the activities of the companies with these managers were socially and environmentally responsible, beneficial to the local community, and loyal to the employees.

Of the 567 managers, 292 were rated as normal, 132 as dysfunctional, and 143 as psychopathic. Such a high proportion of psychopathic individuals among managers (as much as 25%), which significantly exceeds the general population (only 1%), should not be surprising, as such positions, which grant a person power over others, strongly attract psychopaths and give them the opportunity to fully unfold their cruel abilities. Now we should pay attention to how companies with these different types of managers conduct their activities.

In the case of normal managers, the vast majority of respondents (89.3%) rated the company’s activities as socially and environmentally responsible. However, this figure drops to 66% in the presence of dysfunctional managers and to 52.5% in the case of psychopathic managers. Additionally, 85.8% of respondents rated the company’s activities as beneficial to the local community if normal managers were employed. For companies with dysfunctional managers, this figure drops to 75%, and in the case of psychopathic managers, it falls to 55.1%. Furthermore, the majority of respondents (79.6%) agreed that the company behaves loyally toward employees in the presence of normal managers, but this figure drops as low as 23.7% in the presence of psychopathic managers. This confirms that corporate psychopaths do not care at all about those who work with them or under them. It is also worth noting that in the case of normal managers, 82% of respondents felt recognition for a job well done, whereas only 24.8% of respondents stated this in the presence of psychopathic managers.

One can see how strongly parameters such as social and environmental responsibility, providing benefit to the local community, and loyalty to employees on the part of the company depend on the psychopathy of its managers. Moreover, the study we are considering assessed primary psychopathy specifically, and its manifestation, as is known, is strongly linked to a dysfunction of the violence inhibition mechanism, due to which an individual ceases to experience internal resistance and repulsion toward causing harm to other people. And the problem of “bad” companies is unlikely to be solved as long as individuals with such a pathology hold their leadership positions. It undoubtedly requires therapy and eradication from society.

The critical error of dystopias about a non-violent society: there is no need to cut anything out of a human

Voluntarist, Bitarch

In a number of works demonstrating a non-violent society or the results of eradicating violent behavior in a specific person, the essence boils down to the alleged existence of some aggressive stimulus, which is precisely why a person becomes capable of hitting or killing someone, committing brutal crimes, or even starting wars. Having named it the cause of violence, the authors then describe societies in which, to eradicate it, they decided to suppress or literally cut this stimulus out of the person. The results of such a process turn out to be extremely discouraging – we get “castrated” people and a society deprived of all its creative potential.

Let’s start with Stanislaw Lem’s “Return from the Stars,” where people undergo a procedure called “betrization” – the neutralization of aggressive stimuli in the brain and the strengthening of the self-preservation instinct. According to Lem, in a peaceful society, people would become lackadaisical, unable to perform complex tasks, and would stop experiencing strong emotions. Let’s also recall Anthony Burgess’s “A Clockwork Orange,” where the main character undergoes a complete brainwashing. Being a devout Catholic, Burgess is inclined to believe that man is driven to violence by original sin, however, he possesses free will and the choice of whether to commit violence, and eradicating this freedom would be sinful. One could also briefly mention the anime series “Psycho-Pass,” in whose society certain works of art were even banned for inducing aggression in people, and in one scene, people who did see violence turned out to be absolutely indifferent and emotionless toward the victim’s suffering. There is one more work in which art was also banned for the same reason, but it will be appropriate to mention it a bit later.

All these works make the same critical mistake. In reality, it is not the presence, but precisely the lack of certain stimuli that makes a person capable of violence. As research demonstrates, aggression is often not the result of a loss of self-control, but may even require self-control for the intentional commission of acts of violence. Furthermore, improving self-control in aggressive people does not always help them, and may even do the opposite – it can make them even more effective aggressors. And psychopathic individuals, who commit the vast majority of violent crimes, often experience enhanced development of self-control from adolescence.

The same position can be derived from the theory of the violence inhibition mechanism – the ability of some individuals to cause harm to other people stems from their inability to experience internal repulsion and resistance toward it. They also have reduced empathy and guilt. Moreover, the effect of the most promising means for treating aggressive behavior (agonists of certain serotonin receptors) consists in stimulating and restoring full nervous activity, rather than in suppressing and eradicating anything.

A world in which they decided to fight violence and other evil by cutting something out of a person is most realistically demonstrated in the film “Equilibrium.” Its events take place after a “Third World” war, and human emotions were named as its main cause, which they now decided to suppress using a specific drug. Only, if you look closely at the people in this work, they have become not peaceful and ideal, but unfeeling psychopaths. This is especially evident in the “clerics” – soldiers whose task is to detect people who have shown emotions, destroy works of art, and kill all those who resist the regime.

Violent people need not fewer, but more emotions. They need not suppression, but on the contrary – stimulation of nervous activity. In order not to commit violence, one must feel more strongly, not more weakly. And Lem’s “betrization” in the real world would more likely lead to total psychopathy, rather than to some peaceful but passive society. The nature of violence described in dystopian works has little in common with real violence.

What distinguishes aggressive behavior in healthy people from that in psychopathically predisposed individuals

Voluntarist, Bitarch

Not all aggressive behavior in humans can be called the result of some mental deviation, or, at least, a deviation as serious as a dysfunction of the violence inhibition mechanism and psychopathic predispositions. Some aggressive behavior, for example, self-defense, is completely natural based on ethological definitions and evolutionary data. Therefore, the question arises as to what the difference is between the aggressive behavior of ordinary people and that of psychopathic individuals

To answer this question, aggressive behavior must be divided into reactive and proactive forms. Reactive aggression manifests spontaneously or impulsively; it is not planned behavior and carries absolutely no goals other than causing harm directly within a conflict situation. Of course, it can be pathological, and sometimes it can be classified as violence from an ethological point of view. However, reactive aggression can also be completely natural non-pathological behavior, such as self-defense. In turn, proactive or instrumental aggression consists of achieving a specific result; it is the planned and motivated infliction of harm upon a victim. There is little reason to doubt the pathology and violent nature of behavior in which a person intentionally attempts to achieve something specifically by causing harm to other people.

As demonstrated by a vast number of studies, there is a strong link between a person’s level of psychopathic traits and the reactivity/proactivity of their aggressive behavior. For example, psychopathic criminals are more prone to violent attacks, and their aggressive behavior can be both proactive and reactive, whereas the crimes of non-psychopathic individuals are more reactive. This is especially true in the case of the most violent crimes, such as rape and murder. At the same time, less serious crimes, such as theft or burglary, can be committed with equal probability by both a psychopath and a non-psychopath. Similar results are shown in studies of the non-criminal population. Individuals prone to instrumental aggression are more psychopathic.

Even in the case of imprisoned murderers, higher levels of psychopathy are associated with greater proactivity or instrumentality of their crimes. In the case of clinical psychopaths, as much as 90-93% of murders are purely instrumental, without the slightest trace of reactivity. And even a criminal committing a single act of instrumental violence is already associated with an increased level of psychopathy. Furthermore, a current study of murderers sentenced to death in California demonstrates that individuals with low levels of psychopathy (less than 15% of the sample) often had no prior criminal record, repented for their deeds, and behaved according to judicial norms. Other individuals were prone to worse behavior. And five individuals (less than 1% of the sample) with the highest psychopathy scores were the most brutal criminals—serial sexual murderers.

These and many other data once again confirm that while not all aggressive behavior is a sign of a mentally unhealthy individual, the commission of violent attacks as planned and intentional behavior pursuing certain goals definitely demonstrates a dysfunction of the violence inhibition mechanism and psychopathic predispositions. Such people pose the greatest threat to every member of society, as due to their pathology, they are capable of using violence as a tool, which leaves ordinary people only the fate of the victim.

Aggression as a result of “self-control,” not its loss

Voluntarist, Bitarch

For a long time, violence was treated as something that arises due to a person’s loss of self-control. Even therapeutic measures aimed at curbing aggressiveness most often involve the development and strengthening of self-control, so that short-term impulses do not determine one’s behavior more strongly than rational thinking and long-term goals. Of course, in the case of reactive aggression arising as a result of frustration, impulsivity, or an emotional outburst, these are fairly obvious things. But such aggression is far from the biggest problem. As a rule, it is short-term, does not go beyond the specific provoking or conflict situation, and does not pursue any intentional goals. Additionally, some forms of reactive aggression, such as defensive aggression, are completely normal and natural.

The real biggest problem is controlled aggression. A current study, published this month, asserts that a significant portion of aggression is not the result of a loss of self-control. Often, on the contrary, it requires self-control—for example, to carry out a calculated act of revenge. Furthermore, improving self-control in aggressive people does not necessarily reduce their violent predispositions; in fact, it may even make them more effective in committing violence. And psychopathic individuals, who account for the bulk of violent crimes, often experience an enhanced development of self-control starting from adolescence.

Of course, this should not be a particularly great discovery for those who know about the theory of the violence inhibition mechanism and understand why the vast majority of people do not harm others, at least intentionally. A person often commits violence not because of an excess of emotionality and irrational behavior, nor due to an impulsive nature, but on the contrary—because of a lack of emotionality and extremely cold-blooded, calculating behavior aimed at obtaining profit and achieving personal goals, regardless of whether someone will be harmed, or even if it is necessary to personally and directly cause that harm, up to and including murder. However, it is good that such a position is now gaining popularity in scientific circles and is replacing outdated views that emphasize reactive aggression at the expense of studying and understanding proactive aggression.

Self-control and rationality, of course, will stop a person from committing impulsive aggressive acts on emotional grounds. But if one imagines an absolutely rational person capable of making decisions and acting completely without emotion, such a person would be a much greater threat than just some unrestrained idiot, who would most likely stop once they saw and understood that their actions could actually seriously harm someone. In a full and healthy regulation of aggression, it is indispensable that a person experiences strong repulsion and resistance to any attempt to harm someone or commit a violent attack.

There can be no question of somehow restraining, limiting, or controlling such resistance to violence, nor the feelings in whose development it plays a key role, such as empathy and guilt. Therapy for aggressive individuals should, first and foremost, be aimed precisely at the development and restoration of such emotional reactions—that is, the return of the correct functioning of the violence inhibition mechanism. After all, a person who is capable of experiencing such reactions in fairly strong manifestations will certainly not commit violence.

Our practical successes in the therapy of violence

Voluntarist, Bitarch

The primary activity of the “Voluntarist” project is the study of the nature of violent behavior, in which we have succeeded thanks to the violence inhibition mechanism theory. Violence is primarily a pathology, a malfunction of internal neurophysiological mechanisms, causing a person to stop experiencing sufficient repulsion and resistance to causing harm to other people. Additionally, a series of animal experiments demonstrates the possibility of treating such a disorder; some agents are capable of eliminating attacking aggression in intraspecific clashes without affecting defensive aggression and other forms of behavior, i.e., acting selectively. Some of these agents are of natural origin, primarily belonging to Asian medicine.

Given the accessibility of agents in this category, distributed as medicinal herbs or bioactive supplements, organizing experiments to test them is not an overly difficult task and proved manageable even for a small team associated with our project. For now, the experiments are ongoing, and the final protocol and conclusions are still far off; however, some intermediate results have already demonstrated success that cannot go unshared.

1. Experimental Setup

The experiment consists of combining the resident-intruder paradigm and social isolation in rats. The development of territoriality (for example, in their own cage) and the absence of social contacts provoke attacking aggression in them when encountering a conspecific, especially if the latter has a lower weight. First, a series of control experiments is conducted, after which the agents can be tested. Due to the small number of available subjects (5 residents and 5 intruders), they are used repeatedly; however, experiments are conducted no more often than once every 3 days, and every other time a control experiment is performed to measure the aggressiveness of the resident subjects to ensure its presence and that any subsequent decrease observed will be due to the application of the agent rather than external factors.

2. Kamishoyosan and Si Ni San

Several already tested agents demonstrated a significant influence on rat behavior, but the reduction in aggressiveness either did not occur, was insufficient, or was non-selective. However, among them, one agent proved extremely effective. This is Kamishoyosan (and in our case, the Chinese analog Jia Wei Xiao Yao Wan produced by Min Shan) — a popular agent in Asian medicine that is potentially, based on pharmacological data, capable of activating the violence inhibition mechanism.

Relying on the fact that a scientific publication on this agent demonstrated only a partial effect in the case of a single oral application at a dosage of 400 mg/kg, we decided to test dosages of 500 mg/kg and 1 g/kg. Furthermore, the second dosage was applied to an extremely aggressive subject that always actively attacked a conspecific introduced into its cage. However, the original study did not measure aggressiveness specifically in intraspecific clashes, and according to another study, a dosage of 200 mg/kg is the best for maximizing social activity in mice during contact with conspecifics, so we decided to test that as well.

As expected, the effect of Kamishoyosan was neither sedative nor stimulating; it proved to be specifically anti-aggressive. Aggressive attacks were eliminated in all three experiments, and even if they appeared occasionally, it was exclusively in non-intense forms. At the same time, while dosages of 500 mg/kg and 1 g/kg did not disrupt the social and non-social activity of the rats, the reduction in their aggressiveness occurred through an increase in inactivity. On the other hand, the 200 mg/kg dosage replaced aggressive behavior specifically with non-aggressive social activity.

However, the question of the specific mechanism of Kamishoyosan’s action remained open. It was necessary to determine which specific component and bioactive substance from this mixture of herbal extracts produces this effect, so we decided to test the agent Si Ni San, which contains only three components from Kamishoyosan and was expected to produce the same effect. A dosage of 500 mg/kg was tested, and the result was confirmed — a previously highly aggressive subject, which had performed active attacks on the intruder subject, including during the control experiment before the application of the agent, ceased the attacks. At the same time, its non-social activity was not significantly reduced, and its social non-aggressive activity actually increased, although inactivity also increased, but not at the expense of these forms of activity (only at the expense of attacks). This means that the effect was specifically anti-aggressive, not sedative.

Detailed study of materials on mixtures similar to Si Ni San suggests to us that the main bioactive substance in them, including Kamishoyosan, may be paeoniflorin from the extract of Paeonia lactiflora (white peony) — one of the components of these mixtures. Research indicates that this substance both activates serotonin 5-HT/1A receptors and affects the expression of TPH2 and SERT genes associated with the functioning of serotonin and the violence inhibitor. Also, in general, substances from this extract further influence the expression of the MAO-A gene, which is also extremely important in the matter of aggressive behavior. Based on all this, we obtain the most promising candidate for a component from the previously mentioned mixtures that activates the violence inhibition mechanism.

3. Inhalation Experiments

In addition to oral application, in the case of some agents, inhalation (breathing in a drug with bioactive substances) can also be used. Especially considering the overall possibility of creating an effective agent of this kind; for example, the recently approved inhalation drug Zavzpret (or Zavegepant) proved so effective in the therapy of chronic migraine that in some patients it works in as little as 15 minutes and for 48 hours after application.

To date, we have managed to test three such agents containing the substances d-limonene and linalool, which act as agonists of serotonin 5-HT/1A receptors. All of them are essential oils from different parts of the bitter orange (Citrus aurantium). We used fruit peel oil, which consists almost entirely of d-limonene; flower oil (neroli), which roughly contains 34% linalool and 10% d-limonene; and twig and leaf oil (petitgrain), containing up to 40% linalool.

Inhalation was carried out as follows — for 10 minutes, a mixture of essential oil, an equal amount of emulsifier (oil solvent), and water if necessary, was evaporated in an isolated chamber (60 L). Then, a rat was placed in the chamber and remained there for another 10 minutes while the evaporation of the mixture into the chamber continued. 2 ml of bitter orange peel oil, 4.5 ml of neroli oil, and 5 ml of petitgrain oil were used in a mixture with a volume of 10 ml (sufficient for 20 minutes of evaporation).

All agents had a significant anti-aggressive effect; attacks were either completely eliminated or reduced to extremely rare and non-intense manifestations. And, of course, the effect is selective. Meanwhile, the inhalation of vapors of other essential oils (clove, lemongrass, sage), which do not contain these substances, did not eliminate intense aggressive attacks. Obviously, the substances in them do not act on the neurophysiological mechanisms associated with the violence inhibitor.

Experiments are still ongoing, and most likely other agents affecting the violence inhibitor will be found. However, we have already been able to confirm the very concept of this mechanism and the possibility of such an effect by using various methods of delivering active substances into the body.

I am also attaching recordings of the process of conducting successful experiments to the material: