June 11, 2006

Explosive-anger disorder.

An awful lot of people have it, and, amazingly enough, the broader it's defined, the more people have it. So the question is, how many people do you want to have it?


Dave said...

Reading the article, the following jumps out at me:

At some point in their lives, between 5.4 percent and 7.3 percent of U.S. adults qualify for a diagnosis of intermittent explosive disorder, concludes a team led by sociologist Ronald C. Kessler of Harvard Medical School in Boston. Those percentages, which depend on whether the syndrome is narrowly or broadly defined, correspond to between 11.5 million and 16 million people, respectively.

In any given year, intermittent explosive disorder affects between 2.7 percent and 3.9 percent of adults, or from 5.9 million to 8.5 million people, Kessler and his coworkers report. "We never thought we'd find such high prevalence rates for this condition," Kessler says.

Essentially, this is like arguing "at any given point in the year between XX and YY percent of Americans are sneezing."

Given a population of 300 million people, over 31,536,000 seconds in a year, you can say that, at any second, a sizeable percentage of that population is suffering from any malady known to man (heart attack, asthma, rape, drunkenness, coughing, slitting their wrists with a knife, falling down a staircase, getting singed by someone's cigarette, etc., etc., ad infinitum.)

You could also say, of course, that in any given second a large percentage of the American population is experiencing something good (getting promoted, getting laid, getting their first kiss, getting a job, winning at the slot machines, having their first novel published, writing sly comments on Althouse's blog, etc., etc., ad infinitum.)

This "story" such as it is seems rather idiotic. Given a large enough population any condition known to man, be it positive or negative, will show some prevalance over time.

Jacques Cuze said...

A useful project you could undertake would be to rid the courts of psychological mumbo-jumbo.

Ann Althouse said...

Jacques: It's hard to believe that explosive-anger disorder would get far in court. It would seem to cover way too many acts of violence!

Jacques Cuze said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jacques Cuze said...

Never can tell, the psychs are incented to pathologize everything, lawyers are incented to hire psychs as expert witnesses when they can't find actual evidence, and judges are incented to defer to the psychs in lieu of actually having to judge.

It's a bad situation all around for justice, but due process wins out and so does the psychological-legal-industrial complex.

Paco Wové said...


A useful project you could undertake would be to cure yourself of your pathological love/hate obsession with Althouse.

"You bad, evil professor! Take me seriously!! Stop disagreeing with me!!! Pay attention to meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

J said...

"An awful lot of people have it"

Including everyone who's ever owned a computer.

John Jenkins said...

I don't think this would survive a Daubert hearing in any rational courthouse (read as: outside California).

Chris O'Brien said...

This Is Absolute Bullsh*t!!!!!! I read something like this and I WANT TO PUNCH A WALL!!!!!


Jennifer said...

I'm glad we're back to ridiculing the trolls. I realize that it just encourages them. And they do seem to be swarming in again lately. (Does it seem cyclical to anyone else?) But, it can be so funny.

Wickedpinto said...

Everyone needs an outlet into which they vent their stored aggression. Even matronly loving women have it.

I didn't bother to read, this is obvious. EVERYONE needs some form of outlet. I am, in fact, in life, one of the most courteous, kinda, charismatic and pleasent people you will ever meet. Thats why I walk away from attachments so easily.

As soon as I detect derision on the part of another, I walk away, cuz If I let "the lion out" or whatever the term is, _I_ don't like it. So I walk away, when others inspire that part of me.

The net, makes me more tolerant cuz I can loose the lion and never really suffer, I can apologize after the fact, and be forgiven, for my honesty, while the side of me needing simple basic animalistic satiation has been fed.

I ALWAYS say "thank you" after waiting several minutes to be attended at the grocery store.

I ALWAYS wave at least one waiting car to enter traffic ahead of me.

I ALWAYS wave women and men older than I ahead of me, when reaching an intersection.

But occasionaly, I get stuck behind self serving "penguins" (the fat, indifferent people ESPECIALLY if they are carrying umbrella's marching so slow they will reach the crucifiction at approximately the time of armageddon. Hitting ME in the face with the webbing of their umbrella while walking to work so slowly, that it feels like a mac based gamer program.) After so much of that? I need to YELL about the penguins, and once thats done? I come back into life and become a gentleman.

The gentlest of men? Tend to be the ones with the most offensive jobs, spend a night with a Marine and enjoy a dinner.

Invite a Servicemember over for thanksgiving.

Thank a police officer for pulling you over as they misunderstand your "suspicious" behaviour, and you will find someone who at first, is percieved as an oppressor, become a BRILLIANTLY kind courtier.

I Promise you.

Steve said...

Abu Musab al Zarqawi suffered from I.E.D., but he was cured by minor surgery.

Sigivald said...


Murderous Grammar Rage rising... rising... falling... rising...