Customer Reviews

Kinsey: Crimes and Consequences the Red Queen and the Grand Scheme

5 star:		(12)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Dr. Reisman's book on the work and influence of Alfred C. Kinsey and Indiana University is a must read to understand the sexual revolution and its far-reaching tentacles in American culture. That which was hidden is now revealed for all who have open minds to read and understand. This is a significant book based on solid research that should be read by professionals in most every profession including clergy, lawyers, physicians, educators, legislators, social workers, and anyone interested in knowing how our sexual mores have migrated to current levels. Dr. Reisman explains in detail the crimes and consequences of Alfred C. Kinsey's contrived, criminal, and fraudelent "science" that permeates the U.S. like water in a sponge.

Dr. Judith Reisman's new book, Kinsey: Crimes & Consequences; The Red Queen & The Grand Scheme, presents sinister material on the man who seduced America.

The 1960s' sexual revolution was based on the most elaborate and carefully crafted scientific fraud of this century, writes author Judith Reisman. Early sexologist Alfred C. Kinsey, with his two famous reports just 50 years ago, seemingly legitimized both profligacy and deviancy, and thus established "the sexual licence he [personally] espoused." Sexual Behaviour in the Human Male (1948) and its female equivalent (1953) kicked off no-fault divorce, the wife-swapping era, the gay rights movement, classroom sex education, sex "therapy" as a growth industry, explicit imagery in the media and entertainment industry, and an avalanche of pornography and obscenity.

Although Kinsey was a sexual revolutionary, Dr. Reisman contends, he was falsely portrayed by Indiana University where he worked, and the Rockefeller Foundation which funded him, "as just a normal American guy/husband/family man who simply 'discovered' that 'really' most American men commonly engaged in sexually aberrant and outlaw behaviour. Kinsey's 'research' alleged that 10% of American males were homosexual, that all of us were bisexual, that children were sexual from birth and could engage in sexual activity with adults without harm, plus a whole broad spectrum of things taught today in our schools and practised today in courts of law as fact and as true...It was fraud then, it is fraud now and it revolutionized this nation and turned us into Kinsey's [psychological] clones."

His "Grand Scheme" was to eliminate normal families in favour of selective breeding predicated upon racial and sexual eugenics, she charges, and his "scientific conclusions" were concocted to advance it. The reference is to the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland who wanted the sentence (beheading) carried out first and the verdict pronounced afterwards.

Disturbing information about Kinsey's work and private life has been accumulating since his death in 1956 at age 62. (The official cause was pneumonia due to overwork, but his extensive homosexual and sado-masochistic activities were likely contributors.) Dr. Reisman revealed much of it in 1990, for example, in Kinsey, Sex and Fraud. Even last year's resolutely non-condemnatory biography by fellow Indiana University scholar James H. Jones-Alfred C. Kinsey: A Public/Private Life (Norton)-is replete with gruesomely shocking details.

Kinsey: Crime and Consequences cannot be described as non-condemnatory. Its central figure, Dr. Reisman asserts, "fits the classic definition of a sexual psychopath." Had the public known that he "and his male population were sexually abnormal, the popular use of their data to change [our] law, education and public policy would have come to a screeching halt." He was able, however, to blackmail into silence associates who knew about "his extensive use of deviants, his large prison population or, worse, his active child molesters."

Still, she thinks his "findings" should have roused suspicion. "When I first read Kinsey's research, I thought this man is not reporting on America-he's reporting on himself and then projecting that onto the nation. Kinsey prostituted his own wife Clara...into acts of sodomy with fellow 'researchers,' which Kinsey filmed. He seduced his own students at Indiana University-male, not female students. He devised sexual activities with his 'co-workers,' who then became his co-authors. He [personally] engaged in violent sadistic activity, in which he harmed himself terribly... and appears to have died, frankly, as a result of the trauma to his body."

But his famed reports were carefully phrased to obscure the fact that words like "contacts," "partners" and "sex play" could signify grown men sodomizing children. He was also both racist and cautious about his colleagues, avoiding Jews, blacks and moral traditionalists. Dr. Reisman quotes Kinsey co-author Wardell Pomeroy (Kinsey and The Institute for Sex Research, Harper & Row, 1972), on his hiring technique: "As usual...we took his sexual history first...[Then] Kinsey put down his pen and said, 'I don't think you want to work for us.' 'But I do,' the researcher insisted. 'Well, Kinsey observed, 'you have just said that premarital intercourse might lead to later difficulties in marriage, that extramarital relations would break up a marriage, that homosexuality is abnormal, and intercourse with animals is ludicrous. Apparently you have all the answers....Why do you want to do research?'"

Biographer Jones describes Kinsey as "one of the scholarly eugenicists of pre-WW II" who favoured mass sterilization for the lower classes and selective breeding for the "better classes." Moreover, Judith Reisman emphasizes, the Rockefeller Foundation was early interested in population control and in using the media to popularize it. The Reece Committee, investigating U.S. tax-exempt foundations in 1953-54, concluded that this "plutocratic control" was accomplished by "funding the 'right' university research by the 'right' researchers, then by funding mass media dissemination of the 'right' science data to the public." Kinsey's numbers made him a perfect fit for anyone eager to alter what he would call human "breeding patterns."

Dr. Reisman, a specialist in content analysis studies of written and visual media, lost many family members in the Holocaust. In that context she raises further sinister questions about Kinsey's data. For instance, who was the "lone pedophile," the "elderly gentleman" cited by Kinsey for his sexual molestation of 800 children? Who were "The Children of Table 34" and what became of them? How did Kinsey's "technically trained" observers gain access to the claimed 1,800 American children for illegal genital experiments? "To this day," she observes, "the Kinsey Institute and Indiana University have repeatedly...refused to reveal any names of the subjects or the experimenters." Nor has any one of these children ever come forward, although the institute seems an excellent target for lawsuits.

Even in the destitute 1930s, at the cited rate of a dollar a day, she doubts that children as young as three months were obtainable in such numbers around Bloomington, Indiana. She suggests an ominous but credible alternative: a collaborative link between Kinsey and Nazi Germany, then a police state where such "experimentation" could easily be conducted "as part of an ongoing collegial, cross-cultural, multinational, 'fact-finding' research project." She cites significant links, such as one George Sylvester Viereck, who worked for the German embassy in Washington, D.C., in those years, setting up Nazi front groups, and who is known to have been a Kinsey correspondent. Furthermore, the Rockefeller Foundation was simultaneously funding eugenics projects in Berlin.

Kinsey consistently kept secret his hypotheses and the basic facts upon which his conclusions rested, Dr. Reisman charges. "Neither Kinsey nor any of his team can rightly be termed 'scientists.' Their methodology was not scientific, for it was neither able to be replicated nor validated. Their data was anonymous, forced, secretly altered at will, and fraudulent. With the aid of the elite academic world and institutions and the support of public funds and the social planning foundations, Kinsey and his associates, who served as his own private male harem, conducted thousands of sexual interviews to present a false view of American sexual behaviours."

Amazingly, however, use of Kinsey data as authoritative has never been seriously challenged-until now. It must not continue, Dr. Reisman declares: "There [must] be a full and open public investigation into Kinsey's fraudulent data and its impact upon lawmakers, the military, the church, the press, the academic world, the family and all our institutions."

Kevin E. Abrams is co-author of The Pink Swastika: Homosexuality In The Nazi Party.

I found Dr. Reisman's book very informative and extremely well researched. It literally is a reference book on a scandal that was perpetrated on the American people with the help of foundations and the media. My biggest question throughout the book was why this information has not come to light before now and why something has not been done. When I read a book of this type I immediately go to the bibliography, for therein lies the veracity of the author. This book is meticulously researched. I highly recommend the book not for the subject matter, which is disturbing,but for the information that is available. It answers many questions about the declining state of our society.

Reisman is indeed a biased writer, as the reviewer from Chicago notes. Her biases are: she opposes adult men having sex with infants, she assumes that when a child screams and pushes her "male partner" away it means that the child wants the man to stop, and she is repelled by zoophilia (look it up). I, too, was incredulous that Kinsey got away with all of this pseudoscientific "research", but he did. Reisman also exposes that his partner went on to found SIECUS, the Sex Information and Education Council of the US, the leading consultant to school districts on sex education today. As far as Kinsey deserving a "thoughtful and unbiased" reviewer - he has one in James Jones, his biographer. But the facts are facts, as Jones has verified. Kinsey invented the "10 %" myth, so well known, and also was responsible for lightened penalties on child sex offenders (he proved that kids "ask for it"). Kinsey's self-inflicted injuries speak volumes about his own sex life, and there is not one single statement about Kinsey in Reisman's book that is unverified by Kinsey or his associates. I got his reports to see what they were like, and Kinsey is his own best witness against himself. His use of psychopathic sex offenders as subjects guaranted that he would get the data he wanted, and then he presented it as "normal" male behavior. If anyone wonders why sex education in schools doesn't achieve stated goals, read this book, and you will come to understand the problem. Thank you, Dr. Reisman - you are very courageous.

Many of us have wondered, as we behold the explosion of pornography, contraception, abortion, sexual abuse of children, the AIDS crisis and the legal "right" to all kinds of immoral practices over the past 50 years, "How did it come to this? How has our nation become so corrupted?" This is the book that answers that question.

Judith Reisman was a singer/songwriter/producer for American children's television whose life seemed to be going wonderfully until she discovered that her 10-year-old daughter had been sexually abused by the 13-year-old son of family friends; but what horrified her almost as much as the abuse itself was the attitude of a respected aunt and an old friend, both of whom responded in almost identical words: that the girl may have been looking for it, because "children are sexual from birth".

This set Reisman to search deeper into sexual abuse, until she found the source: the researches of Alfred Kinsey.

Kinsey was an unlikely revolutionary: a zoologist who studied wasps. In the 1930s he decided to apply the methods he had used with wasps to the study of human sexuality. His stated aim was to report on the sexual behaviour of normal Americans.

He interviewed thousands of people, asking them intimate and detailed questions about every aspect of their sexual lives. He was supported by generous grants from Indiana University, and later by grants from the Rockefeller Foundation. He published his findings in Sexual Behavior in the Human Male in 1948 and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female in 1953.

Kinsey's methods violated almost every principle of scientific research. He was so vague and even contradictory about his methods that his results could never be checked by independent scientists. He only published summaries of his results, never his actual data. He never even published his questionnaires, although he wrote that "The interviewer should not make it easy for a subject to deny his participation any form of sexual activity... We always assume that everyone has engaged in every type of activity." He gave an example: "Yes, I know you have never done that, but how old were you the first time you did it?" This mode of questioning was designed to greatly inflate his figures for all kinds of practices.

Years later some men confessed they had told Kinsey the wildest stories they could think of, because that was what he wanted to hear.

He always claimed that his subjects were a representative sample of normal white Americans, but who were these "normal" subjects?

His first subjects were volunteers from a "marriage course" that he ran at the university. Psychologist Abraham Maslow warned him that most volunteers would be "high dominance". In other words, people who volunteered to talk about their sexuality - especially in the relatively innocent 1940s - would be more unconventional and sexually aggressive than average students. When Kinsey refused to listen, Maslow encouraged his own students to volunteer for Kinsey's survey, and found that over 90% of volunteers were "high dominance", but still Kinsey ignored his advice.

The second group consisted of approximately 1400 prisoners, though he did not record whether a subject was a prisoner, a college student, or whatever. Even more seriously, he did not take a random sample of prisoners but specifically sought out sex offenders, particularly those who committed rarer (and thus more extreme) sexual crimes. He argued that criminals are no different from normal men - they are just the ones unlucky enough to get caught.

He also recruited hundreds of subjects through homosexual bars and bathhouses. In addition, he interviewed men and women from several institutions, including a number of "feeble-minded" subjects.

Less is known about his female subjects, though he admits to interviewing "burlesque performers", models, artists, and "taxi dancers". His difficulty in finding normal women is reflected in his decision to classify a "married" woman as a woman who had lived with a man for at least a year, even if she is a prostitute living with her pimp.

Instead of employing experienced researchers to help him, he selected young students who would be totally dependent on him. He would not employ anyone, even a cleaner, without first taking his sexual history. He put enormous pressure on his co-workers and their wives to allow themselves to be filmed in explicit sexual encounters. This not only gave him enormous power over them through the implicit threat of blackmail, but further skewed his results for "married" men and women.

Kinsey claimed that he was simply collecting data, but it is clear that he had an agenda: he wanted to prove that sexual behaviour in humans was the same as in animals, that all behaviours are normal, that there is no medical or other reason for forbidding incest, that all moral codes are wrong and all laws against sexual practices should be abolished.

His prejudice is reflected in his use of language. In well over a thousand pages of data on sexuality, he does not refer to love or childbirth, nor does he use the terms "mother" and "father". The only time he uses the word "perversion" is to describe women sleeping in nightgowns!

There is little or no mention of jealousy, rape, venereal disease, pregnancy, abortion - anything that could give a negative impression about unbridled sex. Kinsey reduces everything to "contacts" with "partners". Even a rape is classified as a "contact". Any sexual activity involving children is classified as "sex play", even if the child was raped.

His presentation of his results is a hopeless muddle. Page 5 of his first book has a map of the United States showing the location of approximately 21,350 subjects. However, on p.10 he says he interviewed 12,214 people. According to Clyde Martin, his statistician, the team interviewed 18,000 but only used data for about a quarter of them. Kinsey also gives figures of "about 6300 males", of which 5300 are white males, and 7789 females, of which 1849 were removed because they were non-white or prison inmates - a total of about 12,240 subjects. According to a table showing their occupations, there are 4940 male subjects, while other tables show totals of 4120 and 4069. If Kinsey cannot be trusted to present something as simple as a consistent number of subjects, how can his results have any credibility?

The head of the Rockefeller Foundation's Natural Science Division was appalled at the team's sloppy statistical methods, yet the Foundation continued to finance the project. The American Statistical Association produced a 318-page book detailing the problems in Kinsey's research, but this too appears to have been largely ignored.

The most sickening aspect of Kinsey's research is his work on children. One table in his book is entitled "Pre-adolescent experience in orgasm", based on the observations of 317 males aged 2 months to 15 years. (His description of "orgasm" in young children sounds more like extreme distress.) He also has tables labelled "Speed of pre-adolescent orgasm" and "Multiple orgasm in pre-adolescent males".

Incredibly, these were accepted simply as "scientific data", with little or no recognition that Kinsey could only have obtained them through the abuse of hundreds of children. Kinsey even added: "The observers emphasise that there are some of these pre-adolescent boys (estimated by one observer to be less than one quarter of the cases), who fail to reach climax even under prolonged and varied and repeated stimulation."

Kinsey's associate Paul Gebhard later wrote of the child data: "Most of it was done by one individual, a man with scientific training, and not a known scientist. The other cases were done by parents, at our suggestion, and... by nursery school personnel."

Kinsey regarded this "individual" as a hero because he had collected detailed data on sexual contacts with 800 children without getting caught, and offered him a substantial amount of money for his records.

Gebhard wrote that they had refused to cooperate with the police after interviewing a paedophile (possibly the individual already mentioned) who was responsible for the sex murder of a child.

Yet Kinsey wrote that it is difficult to understand why a child should be disturbed by sexual activity with an adult, and that a child molester "may have contributed favourably to their later sociosexual development." He said that adult sexual approaches to children were harmless: of 1075 girls who had been sexually approached, only one had suffered a serious injury, "which, however, did not appear to do any appreciable damage." Most of his data on this topic came from the paedophiles; Kinsey made no attempt to follow up on the children's welfare.

The team asked for men having sexual contacts with young girls to keep records to help science. Although most of these victims are unknown, Reisman contacted a woman who had been abused from the age of 4 to12 by her father and grandfather, who both sent their observations to Kinsey. Her father took her to meet Kinsey, who asked her if she was happy; she said yes, as her father had instructed her. Her father later gave her a signed copy of Kinsey's report to see her "contribution to science".

Kinsey's results are possibly what we would expect from a collection of sexually aggressive college students, active homosexuals, convicted sex criminals and paedophiles, especially given Kinsey's fraudulent methods and creative statistics. The problem was that he insisted that these were "normal" Americans. His clear intention was to make homosexuality, incest and other perversions look respectable.

He asserted that 95% of American men had violated the law - 85% had premarital sex, 69% had patronised prostitutes, 45% had committed adultery, 10-37% had committed homosexual acts, and 17% had sex with animals! His most absurd claim was that only 4-6% of men are exclusively heterosexual, while 10% are exclusively homosexual and everyone else is somewhere in between.

He told the world that most women engaged in petting, premarital sex, adultery, masturbation and oral sex. Without any evidence at all, he argued that masturbation and premarital sex helped achieve a satisfactory sexual adjustment in marriage, especially for women. He was disappointed that so few girls had sex with animals.

In 1960 Drs Phyllis and Eberhard Kronhausen, who were fans Kinsey's research, tried to validate it by interviewing 200 male college students; they found that the students considered premarital intercourse highly objectionable, that oral sex was very rare, sodomy and bestiality were unheard of, and that one student out of 200 was homosexual. An earlier investigation had found that even prostitutes were unwilling to engage in oral sex. Kinsey's conclusions were completely invalid. And yet the world took him seriously.

The Rockefeller Foundation launched the Kinsey reports with unprecedented publicity. Suddenly everyone was talking about Kinsey. He was in constant demand as a speaker to groups of all sorts, often to massive audiences. He was called to give expert legal advice on sex crimes to courts and legislatures, and helped to reduce criminals' sentences.

Kinsey's influence on American law-making is profound. His name has been cited approximately almost 6000 times articles in American law journals since 1948 - far more often than any other social scientist. In 1989 a publication of the National Research Council divided America's legal history into the "Pre-Kinsey" and "Post-Kinsey" eras.

He had scientifically "proven" that women are promiscuous, and that women, girls and even infants are unharmed by rape and sexual offences, so laws designed to protect them were pointless and even hypocritical. He had also proven that 95% of American men were sex offenders according to the current laws, and so the only alternatives were to prosecute 95% of the male population or to change the laws.

In 1955, the American Law Institute (ALI) released its "Model Penal Code", using Kinsey as an authority to try to abolish or relax all laws relating to sexual offences, making the ridiculous claim that the sex offender is not likely to be a repeat offender. This Code has formed the basis of most of the changes to laws in the United States over the past fifty years, particularly in the areas of marriage, family and sexual behaviour - which in turn has acted as an inspiration to other countries around the world, including Australia.

Soon laws began to fall or become softened: laws against fornication, adultery, contraception, abortion, under-age sex, incest, rape, homosexuality.

Kinsey's other major achievement was in the area of sex education, which he knew would play an essential role in converting the nation to his ideology. In 1964 the Kinsey Institute launched SIECUS, the Sex Information and Education Council of the United States, which has been responsible, directly or indirectly, for almost all the sex ed programs of the last 30 years.

Other effects followed. The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of disorders in 1973, followed by sadism and paedophilia in 1995, deciding that the desire to have sex with children is only a disorder if the paedophile feels guilt or anxiety about his desires.

All of this had enormous effects on the behaviour of Americans, particularly the young. Girls who did not want to have sex with their boyfriends were made to feel that they were abnormal, as were boys who did not keep up with the furious rates of sexual behaviour proclaimed by Kinsey's figures. Others, confused about their "sexual identity", were easily persuaded that they were homosexual. Men who were sexually attracted to children found that their attraction was harmless. The ghastly legacy of the Kinsey reports is that their false statistics are now coming true.

One of the most telling results of the Kinseyan revolution is the increase in violent sexual crime. In the 1930s in New York, an average of 108 women were murdered per year, and 6% of these cases involved suspected rape; in 1995, 4654 were murdered, and 3333 of these were raped - an increase of 55 000%.

What is astonishing is that it has taken half a century for the details of this man's deception, fraud and criminal behaviour to come to light, and they are still strenuously denied.

This is a tremendously important book, and yet it is not easy to recommend. Reisman has censored many of her quotes and references, but the nature of the subject matter is so perverse that it is often difficult to read. It is also, unfortunately, very repetitive and sometimes poorly organised and confusing. Nevertheless, for anyone wanting to know the truth about what has happened to our society, it is essential reading.

The Kinsey Institute's web site still appeals for funds for the "scientific" study of "sexually transmitted diseases, teenage pregnancy, sexual abuse, assault and harassment" - failing to admit, of course, that their founder was a major cause of these problems. The appeal ends: "Your gift does make a difference." Kinsey's research certainly has made a difference - to the millions whose lives have been ruined by homosexuality, venereal disease, rape, incest and sexual abuse.

Judith Reisman makes an extremely compelling case for the impact the Kinsey studies have had on the Law and culture of the world. It is clear from the material found in the Kinsey books themselves that some data was obtained by illegal experimentation. Critical terms such as marriage were redefined by the Kinsey team to manipulate the data and arrive at a contrived and desired conclusion. This book is a must read for anyone interested in the state of the culture, particularly in the US.

Karl Popper has warned us of the blindness of mankind to his own prejudices. To avoid this some contemporaries are "deconstructing" the current culture. They would be well served to read Dr. Reisman's book. Kinsey reduced the human community into a colony mentality. Sex became not a socialization process for the moral and most human in us, but for the hedonistic and catatonic. Fortunately, "justice" and "honesty" have no 'statue of limitations', Judith Reisman's book should be the reason for reopening your readings on the Nuerenbury War Trials and their roots in the antithesis of "objectity". Sadly, it shows that many american scientists and policy makers were not very far apart in their morality from either the Nazi or from the Bolshevik.

The historical roots of the interplay of culture, morality, politics, and even aesthetics should surprise no one. But, a concrete documentation of the extension of Nieztsche's iconoclastics into the ethical and political targeting of the 'family and community' is here.

Dr. Reisman has set in motion the need for examining very carefully the current explosion of information coming out of the postwar years. The "Freedom of Information" files that are now available under court order from the A. Hiss trials are only one example of the adding of names and personalities to many of those shadow entities who made policy decisions from the '30's until the present.

Wars may end, but the cultural clashes that gave rise to them are ultimately moral clashes. These outlast the thrust and cut of the conflict and are enshrined in the character (or lack of it) within the human being.

Dr. Reisman has documented this with precision and clarity. Will we ask the next set of necessary questions? Are Kinsy's methods and reputedly 'scientific' decisions still effecting our society? Were they ever justified scientifically? Did Kinsey's work ever do more than promote his own "religious convictions" of the nature of science? Did a transposed entymologist really have the credentials or the credibility to respectably do the work that he was supposed to have verified? Why was he accepted so uncritically by the American psychological establishment? How could Kinsey's work, especially with its allegiances and fellow travelers with the Nazi party have received suçh enormous credibilty with the the American psychological movements, the Rockerfeller Foundation, the Ford Foundation and the federal government?

Were all of the "scientific" and public entities merely reaffirming Karl Popper's claim: 'Science" is just as much a prisoner of its own paradigms as any other ideology has been?'Read in between the lines, ask behind the lines and study the lines of Dr. Reisman's book and you will be able to answer this question for yourself! But, we should really be focused on the follow up books from Dr. Reisman and from others on these issues. (SSC, Salem, MA: 1999)

This book is a well researched, well laid out exposé of an American giant. Dr. Reisman writes in an easy to understand, step-by-step manner. I had read biographies of Alfred Kinsey before. In them, Dr. Kinsey came off as being a little too perfect. This book hits hard. The most telling thing is that the most damning information on Kinsey comes from the man himself! This is the man who's successors have the ear of our public schools. As a parent, it is absolutely chilling to me that these are the people who advise our education dept. on what is appropriate to teach our children regarding sexualality. Thank you Dr. Reisman for exposing this man and his followers for the criminals they are!

This book needed more proofreading--I found quite a few typos as well as grammatical problems in several sentences. However, Dr. Reisman has done a masterful job in exposing the bias, dishonesty and outright criminality of Kinsey and his team. I found this book absolutely fascinating -- I read the whole thing and I want to study more about the "eugenics" movement of the early 20th century, which promoted the weeding out of defective genes through birth control, among other methods, and gave birth to the Planned Parenthood organization.

Dr. Reisman gives evidence that Alfred Kinsey may have been directly involved in child sex abuse (for his "research"), and she shows that he did work closely with pedophiles, even hiding the identity of a child murderer in a police investigation. Kinsey and his atheistic, misogynist, anti-child philosophy gave credibility to an entire industry of "sexology" and sex research, not to mention the multi-billion dollar pornography industry. Hugh Hefner, founder of Playboy, credits Kinsey with opening his eyes to the joys of sex (without morality). Fifty years later, our poor children are reaping the fruits of the horrible seeds sown by Alfred Kinsey and his team of sex abusers. Indiana University should be forever ashamed to have sponsored him.

she has to blame someone, right?

that aside, this biotch is crazy. save your money and just take some crazy pills.