Wilhelm Reich in the 21st Century

Monday, July 30, 2007

Monday the 30th was the first day of the conference proper. Mary Higgins was the first to speak. Her opening remarks were brief and to the point. She related the story of a phone call she’d received in November of 1957. The caller had stated that "it was all over", that Reich was dead. Mary then made it clear that while Reich’s life was over, his lifework was not. She stated that we were all there to learn about that work, to see how it had developed over the past 50 years, and what the future held for orgonomy. Kevin Hinchey spoke next. On March 22, 1957, Reich had been delivered to the Lewisburg Federal Penitentiary for violating the terms of the FDA injunction against the shipment of orgone accumulators. The violation of this injunction had led to the destruction of a number of orgone accumulators (ORACs) at the hands of federal marshals and the burning of thousands of Reich’s publications mentioning orgone energy. Reich had died in prison on November 3, 1957. Hinchey then reminded those in attendance that the 50th anniversary of Reich’s passing was approaching and stated that it was time to celebrate all that has been accomplished. He thanked the presenters for donating their time, and he thanked all of the participants for making the journey to Rangeley.

Hinchey then discussed Reich’s last will and testament. Reich had signed this document on March 8, 1957. In the will, Reich states that "the foremost task to be fulfilled [is] to safeguard the truth about my life and work against distortion and slander after my death". Hinchey stated that this is the likely reason why the archives were sealed for 50 years, i.e., to prevent against distortion and slander. He then stated that it is important that we reflect on Reich’s legacy and on the sadness of losing him. Surely, we all have wondered what might have happened, what could have happened, if not for the injunction and concomitant actions to dismiss and destroy his legacy. Indeed, stated Hinchey, it is regrettable that there are no researchers in the "mainstream" carrying on the work of Reich. There is too little interest in reading Reich’s writings—especially in universities and medical schools. He asked, where are the physicists and astrophysicists studying his works? Where are the young psychoanalysts studying his theories of character analysis, vegetotherapy, and orgone therapy? Hinchey went on to state how troubling the distortion that appears on Internet is, how regrettable it is that researchers are reluctant to cite Reich in their work, and how frustrating it is that there are so few funding sources willing to finance research relevant to orgonomy. Hinchey then stated that despite this there is much about which to be excited. There are over 282 archival boxes of materials that will soon be available to researchers, and, most importantly, the conference would be offering participants an opportunity to share and discuss the research that is ongoing.

Hinchey then pondered where hope for a sustainable future for Reich’s legacy lies. He pointed out that while numerous pioneers of thought were scorned during their lifetime, many were later vindicated. Perhaps, Hinchey stated, this is where the hope for Reich’s legacy lies. However, this will not simply happen. It requires diligence and hard work. Hinchey did not feel that the archives contained a "bombshell" (e.g. blueprints for the orgone motor). He felt that if the available literature had failed to sway researchers in mainstream science and medicine, then it was unlikely that anything in the archives would accomplish it. He implored those in attendance to revisit the primary materials already available and to continue to support the Wilhelm Reich Trust Fund, which operates the museum, continues to organize conferences, and ensures that Reich’s writings continue to be published.

Hinchey wrapped up his opening remarks by asking attendees to consider where the work Reich pioneered would be in January 2039, the 100th anniversary of the discovery of orgone energy, or in July 1940, the 100th anniversary of Reich’s discovery of orgone energy in the atmosphere. With hard work and good science Reich’s legacy will be vindicated (full transcript).

The next speaker was Dr. Rolf Løvvang, a practicing vegetotherapist, a member of the Norwegian Institute of Vegetotherapy, and director of the Wilhelm Reich House in Oslo. The title of his talk was "Principles of Vegetotherapy". Dr. Løvvang graduated from the University of Bergen in 1976 with a Ph.D. in psychology. As a medical student in 1975, he had encountered a patient who could not swallow his spit. Dr. Løvvang noted that the patient exhibited armoring in the region of the neck. He asked if he could touch the man about the neck, to which the man agreed. When Dr. Løvvang did touch him, the man swung his arm around violently and then began crying. This led to an important breakthrough in the treatment of this patient. This experience led to Dr. Løvvang’s interest in the relationship of soma and psyche and, by extension, Reichian vegetotherapy. He then studied under Dr. Bjørn Blumenthal, who had studied with Ola Raknes and Elsa Lindenberg. In 1987, Dr. Løvvang joined the Oslo Institute in Bergen and soon thereafter helped to establish the Wilhelm Reich House in Oslo. A few pictures of the house were shown to the audience, and Dr. Løvvang stated that Reich had been very fond of his home in Oslo.

Dr. Løvvang then gave a brief account of Reich’s time in Oslo. Reich, we learned, had arrived in Oslo in red convertible in 1934. His wife at the time, Elsa Lindenberg, had come with him. Elsa soon returned to Berlin; however, Dr. Løvvang told the audience of a letter Reich then sent to Elsa asking her to return (which she eventually did). In this letter Reich wrote at length about the house. It was in this house that Reich saw patients and carried out his vegetotherapeutic practice in Oslo. By 1934, Dr. Løvvang stated, Reich had begun to break from traditional psychoanalytic practice. This resulted from an increased interest in the somatic component of neuroses. At times, Reich’s vegetotherapy relied solely on touch. This new approach to therapy distanced Reich from former colleagues in Berlin and Vienna like Otto Fenichel—especially after Reich’s speech at the 1934 gathering of the International Psychoanalytic Association in Lucerne. Dr. Løvvang stated that by 1937, the Norwegian press campaign against Reich was in full swing. Yet, Reich continued to conduct important research in Oslo. It was here that Reich discovered orgone energy and constructed his first orgone accumulator, but Reich’s time in Norway was coming to end. The press campaign and the rising threat of German national socialism continued. On August 19, 1939, with some regret about leaving Elsa, Reich boarded a passenger ship for the United States.

Currently, Dr. Løvvang stated, the Wilhelm Reich House in Oslo is accumulating a library, hosting seminars, and providing a meeting place for European vegetotherapists and orgonomists. But the Reich House is in desperate need of operating funds. Dr. Løvvang is currently working to raise $100,000 to keep the house open.

Dr. Løvvang concluded his talk by discussing his own thoughts on vegetotherapy. He stated that he seeks first to develop a contact between himself and the patient (this theme of ‘contact’ would be repeated throughout the conference). He pointed out that therapy is a joint effort and that there is no success without help from the patient. Therapy, Dr. Løvvang stated, requires "total touch", i.e., contact with the patient via all five senses. There is a flow of energy both from the patient to the therapist and from the therapist to the patient. He sees therapy as "biological rehabilitation", and works to reestablish normality within the patient. The key, he stated, is breaking down anxiety, which has a linguistic root in the German word for "tightness". This requires dissolution of unhealthy behavior patterns established over many years—in many cases, a lifetime. Finally, there is a need for self-love, that is, the patient must learn to love themselves as they love others.

Dr. Conny Huthsteiner, vice-president of the Institute for Orgonomic Science and a practicing orgonomist, spoke next. Her talk was entitled "Vegetotherapy, Psychosomatic Unity, and Psychiatry". Dr. Huthsteiner studied psychology at the University of Munich and received her training in vegetotherapy from Morton Herskowitz. Echoing the statements of Dr. Løvvang, she stated that one of Reich’s great contributions to the fields of psychoanalysis and psychiatry was the incorporation of the somatic into the therapeutic process. Another aspect of Reich’s therapeutic technique was his focus on resistance. In doing so, Dr. Huthsteiner stated, Reich developed a "problem focused" approach to psychoanalytic care. This forms the basis of Reich’s character analytic technique, which looks not only at what the patient says, but how they express it. Of course, this bio-psychosocial model of the patient is now a given, but then it was quite new. This technique, Dr. Huthsteiner said, emphasized contact and the development of a relationship with the patient—an approach quite different from that practiced by other psychoanalysts in Vienna and Berlin at that time. Reich’s understanding of human psychosomatic unity led directly to the development of vegetotherapy.

Presently, Dr. Huthsteiner stated, most psychiatrists practice a type of biomedical therapy that focuses on biochemical processes. Reich’s technique, on the other hand, takes a holistic approach to therapy that takes into account the pulsation of orgone energy (or lack thereof) within the patient. And while there is evidence of some body-based therapy being practiced in the United States, Dr. Huthsteiner stated that Reich’s work is overlooked and/or ignored by American physicians, that body-based therapy—if practiced at all—is usually initiated by social workers and nurse practitioners.

Dr. Huthsteiner then made a point of emphasizing that orgonomy and vegetotherapy cannot overlook the centrality of the orgasm formula (tension-charge-discharge-relaxation) in Reich’s approach to therapy. Neurotics are incapable of complete discharge via orgasm (as a result of armoring), and the purpose of therapy is to restore orgastic potency within the patient.

This discussion led to the next focus of Dr. Huthsteiner’s talk: the current state of American psychiatry. She stated that American psychiatry is currently dominated by malpractice concerns, which have led to widespread reluctance to touch a patient. She stated that while it is not uncommon in Germany, where she studied, to view the patient naked, in America this rarely happens—and it is a major barrier to the effective practice of orgonomy in the United States. She stated that American therapists struggle to define boundaries of appropriate contact as well as techniques for handling transference and counter-transference by the patient and therapist. She then pointed out that much of the antipathy toward Reich in the fields of psychoanalysis and psychiatry results from the portrayal of Reich in college textbooks—in particular, that of Kaplan and Sadock. One can only imagine how this type of misrepresentation effects the attitudes of up and coming students toward Reich’s discoveries.

Dr. Huthsteiner closed with a quote from The Function of the Orgasm:

There is so much talk about the soldiers duty to give his life for his country. There is too little mention of the scientist's duty to defend, under all circumstances, what has been recognized to be true, no matter at what cost (p. xxix).

Dr. Harry Lewis spoke next. Dr. Lewis is co-founder of the Institute for the Study of the Work of Wilhelm Reich, a faculty member of the New School for Social Research in New York City, and has been a practicing orgone therapist for the last 25 years. The title of his talk was "The Centrality of Pulsation and the Function of the Orgasm in Orgone Therapy: Our Roots in Nature". Dr. Lewis began his talk by reemphasizing the centrality of the orgasm formula in Reich’s work. He stated that the two most important discoveries of Reich’s were the orgasm formula and orgone energy. However, he emphasized that these discoveries evolved from an existing body of work. He pointed out that Freud studied biology before embracing psychoanalysis and that Reich’s career began by following in Freud’s footsteps. That orgone energy existed was not questioned by Reich. Based on his extensive scientific investigation and massive amounts of data, Reich felt that he was dealing with a natural energy. As such, what motivated him was a desire to move the study of orgone energy into the realm of natural science. Dr. Lewis even proposed that Reich was aware of this energy prior to his enlistment in the Austrian army, and pointed to Reich’s early letters as evidence.

Dr. Lewis then touched on the theme of contact and stated that contact with the patient exists on an elemental level, not just an intellectual level (a statement that echoed Dr. Løvvang’s comments on "total touch"). Dr. Lewis stated that if the patient does not feel the contact, then the experience with the therapist will be perceived as inauthentic.

Dr. Lewis noted that Reich’s findings were based on scientific methodology and hopes that the opening of the Reich archives will provide a clearer picture of Reich’s scientific process and the copious amounts of work Reich accomplished in the laboratory. He then concluded his talk by emphasizing the centrality of the orgasm theory in any discussion of Reich’s work and that the goal of all therapy is the reestablishment of orgastic potency and the ability for self-regulation. Whether or not this is absolutely attainable is not the question; the key is working toward the goal and trying to get as close to that goal as possible. The obstacles to this goal are taking an overly mechanistic approach to therapy (i.e. counting orgasms or partners). To counter this, therapists must maintain a perception of the holistic functionality of the organism. We must remember that genuine contact is not exemplified in a mechanistic sexual experience; it is dependent on the presence of a natural bio-energetic love; a capacity for this love cannot be sentimentally generated or maintained.

As a follow-up, one conference attendee asked Dr. Lewis why there is so little data in the primary texts. He responded by reminding participants that The Function of the Orgasm was a scientific autobiographical text, not a scientific paper. Indeed, he stated, there is a misperception in the mainstream that Reich did not have data to support his early research; however, Dr. Lewis said that the data does exist in such texts as the Bioelectrical Invesitgation of Sexuality and Anxiety and other works that are less well known to the general readership. He ended these remarks by expressing his hope that the archives would make Reich’s data and research much more fully available—and that this data and research must be reviewed and considered on an active, on-going basis.

The president of the American College of Orgonomy, Dr. Peter Crist, spoke next. The title of his talk was "Bioenergetic Principles of Orgonotic Contact: Their Application to Medical and Social Orgonomy". Dr. Crist began his talk by asking, "What is contact?". In orgonomy, he stated, it goes beyond physical contact. It may involve feelings of love; it is emotional and energetic. Reich first addressed contact in the paper he delivered in Lucerne in 1934 (which was expanded upon and reprinted in the third edition of Character Analysis; see Chapter XIII: "Psychic Contact and Vegetative Current"). At this point in his research, Reich had already recognized the importance of the somatic (or biological) component in therapy. Dr. Crist pointed out that by the 1940s Reich had begun to take a bioenergetic approach to schizophrenia. In his writings on the subject, Reich had noted that a schizophrenic patient had observed the motion of real energy moving within her. This led to the development of orgonometry in the late 40s, and these findings were later published in the Orgone Energy Bulletin.

Next, Dr. Crist presented attendees with a simple formula:

excitation + perception = contact

He stated that contact involves an integration of excitation and perception. He then distinguished between two types of perception: sensation and emotion. These types of perception are intertwined, i.e., sensations impact our emotions, and emotions impact sensation. A biopathy, he stated, is merely an illness characterized by a disturbance of excitation and/or perception. Dr. Crist also distinguished between two types of biopathies: somatic and psychic. Dr Crist’s model, by which one might understand contact as the sum total of perception and excitation and by which one can better understand the development of both somatic and psychic biopathies, offered a useful framework for further discussion of contact—a theme that had already been discussed by each presenter that morning.

Dr. Crist then shifted his discussion from medical orgonomy to social orgonomy. In the social realm, excitation and perception are also necessary for social contact. Any relationship, he stated, is a functional relationship with an excitant and a percipient. Naturally, these roles shift in order to maintain integrated social contact. Dr. Crist then showed a short video clip. The clip showed a handful of interactions between mothers and their newborns. The point was to show how newborns react (excitation) to facial expression (perception). Of note, the newborns would mimic the facial expressions of their mothers and would also cycle through a number of learned expressions in order to get the attention of non-responsive mothers. Dr. Crist drove his point home by quoting from Children of the Future:

Orgonotic contact is the most essential experiential and emotional element in the interrelationship between mother and child, particularly prenatally and during the first days and weeks of life. The future fate of the child depends on it. It seems to be the core of the newborn infant’s emotional development (Reich’s emphasis, p.99).

Dr. Crist wrapped up his presentation by differentiating between medical and social orgonomy. He stated that social orgonomy focuses on relationships while medical orgonomy focuses on the individual. Any treatment must incorporate both, i.e., you cannot treat the patient without developing a social relationship. By extension, the emotional plague is a resistance to contact—whether such resistance is a conscious choice or not.

The final speaker of the morning session was Dr. Morton Herskowitz, a former student of Reich’s and the president of the Institute for Orgonomic Science. His talk was entitled "The Practice of Psychiatric Orgone Therapy in the Current Psychiatric Milieu". Dr. Herskowitz began his talk by reading the entry for Wilhelm Reich in the 1977 edition of Kaplan and Sadock’s psychology textbook. This entry closes with a statement regarding the misinformed and, unfortunately, oft-repeated notion that Reich promoted the orgone accumulator as a cure for cancer. He then read from the 1988 edition. This version is even less factual and, Dr. Herskowitz surmised, was actually intended to describe Otto Rank. Whether this is true or not, it was obvious that the editors had little concern for getting the facts right regarding Reich’s life and research.

Dr. Herskowitz then offered a brief critique of modern psychiatry. He began by criticizing American psychiatry, which, by and large, compartmentalizes biopathies instead of looking at them holistically, vitalistically, and with an eye toward energetic movement within the body. He also took issue with excessive dependence on medications for the treatment of neuroses. Many pharmaceuticals, he pointed out, have secondary effects which are harmful to patients—including weight gain and loss of libidinal drive. Finally, Dr. Herskowitz critiqued the purely genetic approach to neuroses and other biopathies. He stated that Reich had dismissed discussions of genetics because they did not take social factors into account. On this point, Dr. Herskowitz admitted that Reich should probably have given more thought to genetics, but he did feel that to exclude social factors from the discussion was unwise. Modern psychiatry, he stated, must work to identify both the physical/neurological disorder and the personality disorder. However, too often modern psychiatry focuses almost exclusively on the physical/neurological disorder. Dr. Herskowitz felt this was because many psychiatrists are not familiar enough with personality disorders to make sound diagnoses, and he stated that psychopharmacology and orgonotic psychiatry should not exist separately. The former can inform the latter and vice versa. Science, he felt, has become too mechanistic.

Dr. Herskowitz concluded by commenting on the necessity of physical contact between patient and therapist. He stated that in mainstream American psychiatry, touch stops at handshakes. He placed the blame for the prohibition on psychiatrists who have failed to refrain from engaging in sexual contact with patients, i.e., patients are denied touch not because of their own shortcomings but because of the therapist’s inability to control himself/herself. This is truly unfortunate, according to Dr. Herskowitz, because touch is, in fact, the most basic form of human contact. It is biologically essential to the development of all healthy human relationships.

We then recessed for lunch. The first speaker of the afternoon session was Renata Reich Moise, C.N.M. Ms. Moise is the granddaughter of Wilhelm Reich and currently works as a Certified Nurse Midwife in a community hospital setting with mothers and infants. The title of her talk was "Applications of Reich's Legacy in Midwifery and Nursing". Ms. Moise was born in 1960, two and a half years after the death of Reich. She related a few stories about growing up in Reich's shadow. Her father, Bill Moise, owned and operated a cloudbuster, and she had easy access to an orgone accumulator and an orgone shooter. She remembered turning in a paper referencing The Cancer Biopathy in college, only to have it returned with large red X's scrawled across each page which mentioned Reich's theories. She also recalled a guest speaker in one of her classes referring to Reich as "crazy". All of this was a bit tough for her. She had gone from a life in which orgone and the discoveries of her grandfather were taken for granted to a life in which his work was dismissed or, at best, marginalized. As such, she currently struggles in a world dominated by conventional medical attitudes.

Ms. Moise She stated that childrearing begins before birth (in fact, before conception) with the mother and her partner. The disposition of the mother and/or her partner can affect the child, as can the lack of a partner during and after pregnancy (although in some instances a mother without a parter does much better than a mother with a difficult partnership). The relationship of the parents and the happiness of the mother are crucial to the well-being of the child. In this regard, there is an element of marriage counseling to the practice of midwifery. Ms. Moise then described examples of armoring in mothers that she had observed. Some mothers, she noted, like their flat bellies. As such, when they began to show their pregnancy, these mothers would contract there stomach muscles in an irrational effort to maintain their flat stomach. Other mothers, with abdominal armoring, would report that it was painful when the baby kicked. She also pointed out how important the relationship between the mother and the midwife was during pregnancy. Ms. Moise stated that while birth is not gentle, the relationship between the mother and the midwife should be. As a midwife, Ms. Moise stated that she is often in contact with individuals who have never been in therapy of any kind before. In this regard, her advice and contact with these mothers serves as an example of ways in which the work of Reich extends beyond that conducted by medical orgonomists and psychiatrists.

Ms. Moise concluded her talk by stressing the importance of addressing sexual dissatisfaction in women. She has found that women who can achieve orgasm often have an easier experience with birth. To this end, she has created a pamphlet for women of all ages about achieving orgasm, entitled "The Big O". This pamphlet explains the benefits of orgasm, obstacles to achieving them, techniques for having them, and a warning against faking orgasm. Ms. Moise then took questions from the audience.

The first question concerned circumcision, and she stated that she does not advocate it, nor does she advocate episiotomies during childbirth. The next person asked if she practiced the butterfly massage technique pioneered by her mother Eva Reich. She stated that she does employ it occasionally and wishes that she did so more often. The third questioner asked if she had tips for treating postpartum depression, and Ms. Moise suggested use of an orgone blanket. Finally, she was asked if she encountered people in her practice who had heard of Reich. She stated that this did not happen very often.

Dr. Dale Rosin, a medical orgonomist and a clinical professor at the American College of Orgonomy spoke next. His presentation was entitled "Orgone Therapy and Children". He began his presentation by stating that working with children can be both heartbreaking and joyous. As with adults, working with children comes down to character and muscular armoring, and this is accomplished, as with adults, by working directly on the musculature, by play acting, by imitation, and by talking. The difference lies in the amount of armoring. A child, by and large, has far fewer layers of armor than the average adult. The first step is establishing contact.

Armoring, Dr. Rosin stated, is the result of barriers to natural functioning. This may begin at birth (the trauma of passing through the birth canal, circumcision, swaddling, etc.), and it often manifests itself as a fear of punishment that leads to a holding back of emotion and/or emotional detachment. Dr. Rosin also stated that armoring may result from early childhood trauma, for example, prematurely-imposed toilet training. In almost all cases, the process begins before the child is verbal. Dr. Rosin then gave a number of examples of how armoring manifests in children at different stages of development. He also emphasized the importance of assessing and understanding the disposition of the child’s parents. He stated that treating a child without treating the parents may lead to a successful treatment that is not lasting because of parental reaction to the treated child. Dr. Rosin then shared the details of a handful of cases studies with the conference attendees.

The first case concerned a patient named "Angelo", a 16-year old honor student whose father had recently died. Angelo had been present and had unsuccessfully tried to resuscitate his father via CPR. Afterwards, Angelo had become withdrawn. When Dr. Rosin first met with him, his face was expressionless, and the patient showed no emotions and appeared guarded, sullen, and exhibited shallow breathing. Dr. Rosin worked first to establish contact. As he began to slowly develop this sought-after contact, the relationship between Angelo and him began to "soften". When Dr. Rosin pointed out Angelo’s shallow breathing, Angelo attempted to deepen it and then began to sob. Angelo soon came to the realization that he was holding back his emotions (as his father had) and, happy with the initial results, continued therapy.

The second case concerned an 8-year old boy named "Robby". He suffered from frequent episodes of moodiness and pouting and had been somewhat rejected by his friends for being too touchy and too talkative. Another doctor had diagnosed him with ADHD, but his parents had decided to seek out the opinion of a medical orgonomist instead. Dr. Rosin began by trying to convince Robby to sit still. When asked about a girl in his class that had died two years earlier, Robby began to cry. After he had stopped crying, he was relaxed and not overly talkative. Dr. Rosin also worked with the parents and encouraged them to be less punitive with their son. Next, Dr. Rosin worked through Bobby’s aggression by treating the muscular armor in his neck. This led to episodes of what Dr. Rosin referred to as "therapeutic biting". Within two months, Bobby had greatly improved, and he continued his therapy.

The third case was a 2-month old baby named "Colin" who had been born prematurely. He was born during the 34th week of pregnancy. The doctor had used forceps. Colin had had to be resuscitated at birth and was fitted with a breathing device involving a strap that was placed around the child’s chest. After two months, Colin had become inconsolable as a result of what was obviously uncomfortable treatment. Dr. Rosin began by addressing the tightness in the infant’s chest and jaw. Colin reacted by loosening up and crying. Dr. Rosin felt that Colin needed to cry to let out the anxiety and pain of his birth and post-birth treatment. He encouraged the boy’s mother to allow him to cry for longer periods but to stay with him. The strap also played a major role in the infant’s discomfort, and use of this was greatly reduced. As a result of treatment, Colin improved dramatically.

The final case involved a 7-year old boy named "Peter". Peter would often cry and throw temper tantrums when told "No" by his mother. However, at school, Peter was fine. When with his mother, he would cling and cry. When his mother would leave the room he would cry, and Dr. Rosin noted that his throat was tight and armored. Dr. Rosin tried imitating the boy’s crying. When he did this, Peter would stop crying and then slug Dr. Rosin. Dr. Rosin then began complimenting the boy on his crying, praising his technique and skill. This inspired Peter to brag about his ability to get what he wanted from his mother by crying. Dr. Rosin told the boy’s mother that she had to deal with Peter more effectively. She was told not to give in to his tantrums—though Peter would likely react strongly to this attitude at first.

These examples served to show how effective orgone therapy could be on children. However, Dr. Rosin concluded his talk by stating that while orgone therapy can be extremely effective when handling armored children, it is not nearly as effective as raising a healthy child from the start. Following Dr. Rosin’s presentation, Dr. Crist showed a 12-minute segment from a documentary produced by the American College of Orgonomy entitled Right From the Start. The clip included scenes of orgonomists working both with infants and parents. As Dr. Crist pointed out, working with infants was Reich’s real passion.

The final activity of the first day was a panel discussion featuring all of the presenters from that day. Dr. Philip Bennett moderated the discussion.

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Dr. Håvard Nilsen, a historian from the University of Oslo, would be kicking off the day’s proceedings. His talk was entitled "The Troll Circle: The Social Construction of Wilhelm Reich as Pseudo-Scientist". A novel finished in August of 1958 by the Norwegian author Sigurd Hoel, The Troll Circle tells the story of a young man working to introduce new agricultural methods to a struggling village. The book jacket of the first English-language edition of the book includes the following summary:

Hoel throws the light of modern psychoanalysis on the ancient legends, myths, and superstitions surrounding the quest of Håvard Viland [the protagonist]. The farmer wants to bring hope and dignity into the lives of everybody, even the lowliest cotter, but he is an outsider in his backward rural community. Tricked into marriage, gradually cut off, pushed into the position of scapegoat, and deliberately misunderstood, Håvard becomes the personification of stifled goodwill and strangulated progress. It is shocking that he becomes the victim of a circle of aggressive neighbors and officials intent on maintaining the status quo by sticking to the old, accustomed ways and business-as-usual politics.

Dr. Nilsen argued that Reich served as Hoel’s model for the protagonist, a claim that has not been put forward despite numerous eariler analyses of the work.

Dr. Nilsen stated that Reich suffered due to the fact that he was framed as a pseudo-scientist while in Norway, and that he was never able to shake off this stigmatization even after he immigrated to the United States. As such, Dr. Nilsen posed the following simple, yet to-the-point, question: What happened in Norway? Reich’s time in Norway was crucial with regard to the development of his thought socially, scientifically, and politically; however, little detailed analysis of this phase of Reich’s career exists in English. Dr. Nilsen stated that Reich had come to Norway in 1934 at the invitation of Harald Schjelderup, a professor of philosophy at the University of Oslo. Schjelderup had studied physics and experimental psychology as well as being trained as a psychoanalyst in Vienna. Reich’s move into experimental psychology may have been inspired by Schjelderup. Like Reich, Schjelderup was interested in proving the scientific value of psychoanalysis.

In 1935, Norway installed a social-democratic system similar to the one then being dismantled in Austria and Germany. Reich himself had joined the Norwegian communist party upon arrival (though he would leave the party for good in 1936). It was during this time that Leon Trotsky applied for asylum in Norway. Trotsky was then working on his book The Revolution Betrayed, which was critical of the Bolshevik Revolution. At the same time, Reich was working on a similarly-themed essay entitled "The Masses and the State" (available in volume 30 of the Journal of Orgonomy or in an edited form in recent editions of The Mass Psychology of Fascism). According to historical documents accessed by Dr. Nilsen (the papers of Trotsky's secretary), Reich secretly met with Trotsky in September 1936. Trotsky was eventually expelled from Norway in June 1936, but Reich found himself grouped together with Trotsky given their mutual criticism of the Bolshevik Revolution. Reich would come under fire for "The Masses and the State" in a communist paper published during Stalin’s purge of Trotskyism in the Soviet Union. With the onset of the Moscow Trials, also the government press organ changed its attitude towards Reich, now seen as a troublesome political refugee. Thus began the press campaign against Reich—something motivated more by politics, Dr. Nilsen argued, than by opposition to his work with bions.

Arnulf Øverland, a Norwegian poet, composed a poem entitled "You Must Not Sleep" that was published on the cover of Reich’s journal Zeitschrift für Politische Psychologie und Sexualökonomie. Dr. Nilsen read an original translation of this. As the Norwegian Labour party had taken issue with the Trotskyites in Norway, Reich’s connection to Trotsky stripped him of important political protection. According to Dr. Nilsen, it also opened the way for further attacks on Reich by other Norwegian scientists. The charge was led by Johan Scharffenberg. Attacks on Reich began to appear on an almost daily basis in the Norwegian mainstream press. Reich was called a "Jewish pornographer", and his laboratory was referred to as a "bordello" in some articles. In addition, there was mounting rejection of psychoanalysis.

According to Dr. Nilsen, another of the few defenders of Reich during this time was Rolf Stenersen, who had financed much of Reich’s work in Norway. Stenersen clearly saw the connection between the persecution of Trotsky and that of Reich. But the opposition to Reich was too great, and he now came under fire from immigration officials and his residence permit was challenged. In October 1939, Reich would emigrate to the United States.

Dr. Nilsen concluded his talk by asking how all of this changed Reich. He stated that after Norway, Reich became broody and demanded formal titles. For example, in Europe he had been "Willy", but in the U.S. he was always "Dr. Reich"—even with his wife. Of course, the most unfortunate consequence of the Norway years was the branding of Reich as pseudo-scientist, and the fact that he was never able to completely shake off this image. Dr. Nilsen stated that, given that fifty years that have passed and the potential in the opening of the archives, perhaps the "troll circle" can finally be broken.

The next presenter was Dr. James Strick, a history of science professor at Franklin & Marshall College in Pennsylvania. The title of his talk was "The Place of Reich’s Bion Experiments in the History of Biology and Medicine". According to Dr. Strick, Reich’s discovery of the bions had been precipitated by his desire to study charge and discharge (i.e. tension and release) at the cellular level. By 1934, Reich had summarized his thoughts on these issues—at least as they related to humans—in the orgasm formula. In 1935-36 he also conducted experiments to measure the electrical potential of the skin during periods of relaxation and excitation. His analysis of the “basic antithesis of vegetative life” led to Reich’s partnering of a chemical interest with his biological charge/discharge model. Reich famously became interested in the process of cultivating amoebas in a grass infusion, which led to his observation of the breakdown of the grass into microscopic vesicles that Reich referred to as bions. He observed that over ime these bions then clumped together to form single-celled protists such as amebae. Bions, like single-celled organisms, exhibit energetic pulsation.

Dr. Strick pointed out that Reich was able to culture bions not only from disintegrating organic matter but also autoclaved material, including non-organic matter like sand and iron fillings. Reich assumed he was witnessing both biogenesis and abiogenesis, and his thought led him to further ponder if the orgasm formula was not, in fact, a life formula. As a result of these experiments, Reich became convinced that life must be studied in its natural state, i.e., when possible one must observe living cells, not dead, dyed cells. Reich felt that to do otherwise only led to the reinforcement of mechanistic views of life. Dr. Strick stated that this approach is indicative of Reich’s embrace of dialectical materialism. However, because Reich’s conceptualization of dialectical materialism differed from the mainstream view, by 1939 or ’40 he began to use the term "energetic functionalism"

Dr. Strick then discussed how Reich’s work with the bions led to his theories concerning the cancer biopathy. Reich had observed living cancer tissue and saw similarities between the propagation of cancer cells and the development of protozoa from grass infusions—the fundamental difference being that cancer cells develop in the absence of life energy and oxygen. In addition, the development of cancer cells creates an environment that encourages the formation of more cancer cells. Dr. Strick pointed out that Reich had argued that the disease is not the tumor (which is a late-stage development); but rather, the disease is a biopathy rooted in the chronic armoring of the organism.

Reich’s work with PA bions cultured from different substances eventually led to his discovery of SAPA (SAnd PAcket) bions. These bions displayed a remarkable charge that could be measured via charged insulators like rubber, using an electroscope. Reich also discovered that SAPA bions were able to kill cancer cells. To better understand this energy (which he eventually named ‘orgone’), Reich treated cancer mice with SAPA bion injections—and, later, with the orgone accumulator. Reich then developed the Reich blood test, which allows a physician to assess the orgonotic charge of an individual.

Dr. Strick then addressed the issue of how Reich’s work was received by scientists and physicians in the mainstream. At that time, it was stated, mainstream science was distancing itself from a vitalistic approach and embracing reductionist, mechanistic molecular biology and the supremacy of the electron microscope. Pharmacology was beginning to wholeheartedly embrace chemical tools like antibiotics and sulfa drugs. Basically, scientists were no longer studying life while it lived. It should be noted that Reich was neither a vitalist or a mechanist; rather, he was pursuing a "third way". Unfortunately, Reich found himself lumped in with the vitalists by individuals like Warren Weaver, the funding conduit of the Rockefeller Foundation (RF), whose reductionist worldview of science saw little beyond the promise of physical-chemical science. Dr. Strick pointed out that Bronislaw Malinowski had, at one point, encouraged the Rockefeller Foundation to fund Reich’s bion work, and a representative of the Foundation had been dispatched to Norway to meet with Reich. However, Reich’s research was not selected for funding, Dr. Strick stated, because of the challenges to Reich’s research that existed from other RF-funded scientists at that time in Norway. Of course, Reich would eventually continue his research in the United States, but he had to fund his work via his therapeutic practice.

Dr. Strick concluded his talk by positing that if Reich is right, then there is a lot of research to do. This is especially true with regard to the treatment of cancer, depression, and anxiety—perhaps even all biopathies that are explained bio-chemically.

The next presenter was Stephen S. Nagy, M.D., a psychiatrist and microscopist. Dr. Nagy’s work with photography through the microscope has earned him international recognition in competitions sponsored by Nikon and Olympus. The title of his presentation was "Modern Microscopy and the Reich Blood Tests: Switching from Revolutionary to Normal Science". Dr. Nagy began his talk by referencing the distinction between normal and revolutionary science by Dr. Thomas Kuhn in his book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. According to Kuhn, normal science seeks data in order to support a theory (or paradigm), while revolutionary science begins when a researcher realizes that an experimental result is different from the result predicted by the operating paradigm or theory. In this situation, science requires one to discard either the data or the theory. If the theory is discarded, then a new paradigm must be created which explains the data, and by so doing, the researcher develops a completely new perception of the world. Dr. Nagy pointed out that Dr. Reich was a revolutionary scientist because his scientific method specifically searched for data which did not fit his current hypothesis, and which pursued these aberrant facts as the most important data. Dr. Nagy postulated that this research strategy, which led to large conceptual leaps between his theories, helps in part to explain why mainstream academic scientists have difficulty in following the progression of his thinking.

Next, Dr. Nagy discussed the use of the microscope in orgonomy. He pointed out that Dr. Reich was not a trained microscopist and —neither were his students. At the time that Dr. Reich was working with the microscope, only brightfield and darkfield illumination were available. The theory and development of phase contrast illumination won Frits Zernike the Nobel Prize in 1953 and did not become available commercially until later. Differential interference contrast illumination was also developed in the mid-1950s. Both techniques allow a clearer view of living material. Dr. Nagy stated that it is very difficult to view living material using brightfield and darkfield illumination. Since Reich’s time, there have been many advances in the field of microscopy. In addition to Phase Contrast and DIC, digital photography now allows use of complex software to make specific measurements that eliminate the subjectivity of earlier visual and photographic techniques when doing these experiments. The technology exists to objectify the measurements of the RBT, but it is very expensive. Also, new technology can be difficult to understand and use, and knowledge of a tool’s potential is essential to maximize the opportunities any technology might afford the researcher. Dr. Nagy then shared a humorous video clip that drove this point home.

Dr. Reich developed four parts of the Reich Blood Test in an attempt to quantify energetic charge in the human being and to measure the tendency toward bionous breakdown. Dr. Nagy stated that all of these methods require further vigorous testing. Because there is no standard protocol for conducting these tests, one must always assusme that the Reich Blood Test is strictly experimental, and that tests done in different locations by different researchers cannot be assumed to be equivalent tests. The four variations of the Reich Blood Test are: 1) observation of the cohesiveness of blood emerging from a finger puncture site; 2) microscopic observation of the properties of the red blood cells and their disintegration in physiologic saline; 3) autoclavation of the blood with an examination of the blood clot; and 4) a blood culture test to look for the growth of t-bacilli. Dr. Nagy pointed out the important work that Courtney Baker, Robert Dew, Michael Ganz, and Louisa Lance did with the Reich Blood Test in the early 1980s to validate the test. But because of these researcher’s lack of training in microscopy, their experimental protocol intrduced variables which makes reproducing the experiments unnecessarily difficult. Thus, it is difficult to compare an individual’s RBT results with the findings of these researchers.

Dr. Nagy pointed out a few parameters that he felt should be incorporated into any standard protocol for conducting the Reich Blood Test. These included: ensuring cleanliness of hands and glassware; using a buffered saline solution to maintain the pH of the solution during the test;, boiling both microscope slides and cover slips in distilled water for 15 minutes prior to use to extract alkalai from the glass;, controlling the temperature of the microscope slide during the test and the importance avoiding breathing on the preparations during the test as saline absorbs CO2 which can affect the shape of the red blood cells. He strongly recommended using flat microscope slides and No.1.5 cover slips, which would rest on “risers” created by attaching No. 0 cover slips to the slide with Norland Optical Adhesive to support the cover slip from the sides.

Dr. Nagy concluded his talk by asking what defines a useful lab test. His answer to the question was reproducibility, standardization, and and an understanding of the meaning of results (i.e. that there is a clearly defined range of normal and abnormal outcomes based upon a large number of tests). Until this has been done, the test remains experimental.

One attendee asked Dr. Nagy exactly what the Reich Blood Test was measuring and whether or not the orgonotic potential of blood cells might be impacted by factors like diet. Dr. Nagy stated that questions like these are exactly why the experiment needs to be carried out on a large scale under controlled conditions so that researchers have a large data set from which to draw conclusions.

Dr. Stefan Müschenich, an orgonomically oriented psychiatrist and psychotherapist in Münster (northwest Germany) spoke next. The topic of his presentation was "Scientific Research on the Orgone Energy Accumulator and on Wilhelm Reich’s Concept of Biopathies". Dr. Müschenich´s experiences in orgonomy are broad. He underwent orgone therapy, studied the literature by Reich and his followers, learned how to conduct the bion experiments and the Reich Blood Test, and participated in cloudbusting operations. Recently he has translated two German-language articles for the Journal of Orgonomy.

In his presentation, Dr. Müschenich reviewed all experiments that have been conducted about the effects of the orgone accumulator (ORAC). First, he discussed Reich’s findings about temperature differences between a control box and an ORAC (the To-T phenomenon), and conveyed a survey of studies which have replicated this effect since Reich’s death. He then dealt with Reich’s discovery that an electroscope discharges slower inside an ORAC than inside a control box. He also mentioned recent British investigations involving infrared imaging of the ORAC as well as DeMeo’s finding that water evaporates slower within an ORAC.

Dr. Müschenich then discussed the statistically significant scientific evidence for the beneficial effects of the ORAC on plant growth and on wound-healing. Afterwards he proceeded to show how the ORAC affects the human organism. The therapeutic use of the device has been tested on patients suffering from a large variety of pathologic conditions. However, Dr. Müschenich pointed out that research on human subjects primarily occurs in Europe (particularly in Germany) rather than in the US—which is due to the hesitation of American physicians to prescribe the ORAC for patients because of the history of FDA injunction against Reich and of current problems with malpractice insurances.

The lecturer then conveyed the results of a number of case studies about how the ORAC influences physiological parameters in humans. He thoroughly discussed an extensive double-blind experiment which had been undertaken by Rainer Gebauer and himself in 1986 at the University of Marburg. The results of this study were impressive: accumulator treatment causes highly significant increases of body-core temperature, skin temperature, and pulse frequency. Also, subjective psychological changes during ORAC sessions were investigated, and a distinct correlation with weather conditions was identified. A follow-up experiment by Hebenstreit in 1995 essentially corroborated these effects, while Snyder (1989) and Steck (1992 & 1994) also confirmed the efficacy of the ORAC on physiological functions but used different methodological approaches. Dr. Müschenich offered ideas for further research projects by suggesting, for instance, that a future study could investigate the skin potential in patients suffering from skin biopathies like malignant melanoma.

Dr. Müschenich also initiated a discussion about possible combinations of physical and psychiatric orgone therapy with drug treatment. He postulated that certain pharmaceuticals interfere with the orgonotic pulsation of the human organism, while others may enhance this organismic pulsation and thereby might work synergistically with accumulator sessions and/or psychiatric orgone therapy. For example, vitamins and small doses of caffeine have been found to stimulate orgonotic pulsation, while other drugs (like MDMA) inhibit the bodily pulsation. Dr. Müschenich stressed, for example, that if he has to prescribe an antidepressant in his practice, he tries to avoid drugs that impede sexual functioning (like the SSRIs and the old TCAs) in favor of those which have no sexual side effects (e.g. Mirtazapine or the MAO-Inhibitors). He also made the point that in cases where the low energetic charge of the patient is based on a severe biopathy, one cannot mechanistically "pour orgone into the body" via the ORAC; rather, one has to combine accumulator sessions with psychiatric orgone therapy or with psychotherapeutic and drug-treatment approaches.

Dr. Müschenich concluded his lecture by giving a summary of his medical doctor’s thesis about Wilhelm Reich’s concept of psycho-somato-social disorders (i.e. "biopathies") as opposed to healthy functioning (which he termed "orgastic potency"). In this dissertation he identified the scientific priority of many of Reich’s discoveries in the history of medicine and natural sciences. Then the author extensively discussed the meaning of Reich’s concept of health within the context of modern medicine, sexology and the “cultural debate”. In this connection Dr. Müschenich referred to the conflict between Reich and Freud in the 1920s over the so-called "cultural debate" and finally elaborated on the relationship between the functional identity of our "Inner Desert" (i.e., the "desertification" of our emotional lives) and the "Outer Desert" (i.e., the drying-out and desertification of our geographical environment.

The first speaker that afternoon was Dr. Alberto Foglia, a practicing medical orgonomist based in Switzerland. The title of his talk was "Orgonomic Medicine", which was split into two sections: "Two Cases of Graves Disease" and "A Preliminary Report". His presentation took the form of a review of a number of cases histories. The first two cases histories detailed his treatment of two patients suffering from Graves' disease, an inflammatory disease of the thyroid caused by auto-antibodies within the thyroid and characterized by a goiter, exophthalmos (i.e. bulging of the eyes), and muscle weakness. Dr. Foglia pointed out that mainstream medical treatment of Graves disease often meets with mixed results.

The first case study concerned a woman named "Christina", who was diagnosed with Graves disease at the age of 22. Her decision to seek the assistance of Dr. Foglia evolved from a desire to get rid of her bulimia. The patient was excessively talkative, and she exhibited discernable tension in her neck and chest. Dr. Foglia learned that she had been beaten by her father as a child. He began with therapy sessions rooted in character analysis in an effort to overcome initial suspicions. This led to a reduction of her bulimic inclinations; however, the patient began to cry spastically in therapy (which he attributed to the patients disgust with herself and others). Presently, he has succeeded in working through much of the armoring in the patient’s throat.

The second case study concerned another woman named "Maria", who was diagnosed with Graves disease at the age of 41. She had suffered from hyperthyroidism for the previous 10 years. When Dr. Foglia first met with her, he noted that her face was expressionless and that she had a guarded disposition. In therapy, the patient had trouble tolerating the intensity of her feelings. After five years of therapy, she had gotten to a point where she found it much easier to express her emotions—especially rage. At this point, Dr. Foglia began treating the woman with the medical DOR-buster. The reaction to this treatment was dramatic. The patient went from a state of expressionlessness to anxiety bordering on terror. With orgone therapy she was able to enhance her ability to express her misery through the throat. She began to express herself more freely. Eventually her anxiety gave way to memories of childhood misery, and then to a catharsis.

Both of the cases served to point out the characteriologic-emotional component of biopathies. Dr. Foglia did not state this explicitly, and many of his case studies were presented as such, leaving it to the audience members to draw their own conclusions.

Dr. Foglia next discussed successes and failures associated with use of the medical DOR-buster in his practice. The case studies he shared served to show how the medical DOR-buster loosens emotions and sensations that had been dorment prior to treatment by moving stagnant energy within the organism. These emotions and sensations subsequently have to be released with the help of orgone therapy in order to affect not only a deeper emotional result, but also a somatic result. He first showed attendees photographs of his orgone energy accumulators and his medical DOR-buster. The first condition discussed was carpal tunnel syndrome. The first patient was a 77-year old male first diagnosed in 1998. The medical DOR-buster was used successfully, but the patient later relapsed. The second patient, a 40-year old female, was successfully treated. A 35-year old female was successfully treated after 10 sessions. A fourth patient, a 45-year old female, was treated successfully with the DOR-buster after trying conventional treatment for 15 years.

The case of a 55-year old male suffering from Haglund’s deformity (i.e. inflammation of the heel) was treated with the DOR-buster. After 26 treatments, Dr. Foglia had made significant progress. The patient, however, went into remission shortly thereafter, and treatment was resumed. A 44-year old patient who had suffered from balantitis since 1983 was treated successfully with the medical DOR-buster in the early 1990s. Dr. Foglia also shared details of the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (i.e. tennis elbow), lower back pain, Bell’s palsy, atypical facial pain, cluster headaches, pubic symphysitis, and an anal ulcer with fistulation. Other disorders that he has treated with the medical DOR-buster include Hashimoto’s thyroiditis, bronchial asthma, osteoarthritis, lupus erythematodes, lung cancer, breast cancer, head of pancreas carcinoma, and metastatic colon cancer. He did note that the cancer cases were accompanied by administration of the Reich Blood Test. He has also treated the following emotional disorders with the DOR-buster: bruxism (i.e. grinding of the teeth), hysterical conversion, and catatonic schizophrenia.

Dr. Foglia concluded his talk by sharing some of his conclusions. He stated first and foremost that his accomplishments represent a work in progress. He is attempting to better understand the potential application of the medical DOR-buster, and he said that he has had much more success with the medical DOR-buster than the orgone energy accumulator. His presentation was followed by a short question and answer session. The first question was: What type of orgone energy accumulator do you use? He stated that he uses a 10-ply ORAC. The second question was: How long are the medical DOR-buster sessions? He said that they last about 20 minutes. The third question was: How do you choose whether or not to use the medical DOR-buster or the ORAC? He said that "inflammatory biopathic" patients are treated with the DOR-buster, while "shrinking biopathies" are treated with the ORAC. The final question concerned an earlier statement of Dr. Foglia’s (he had stated that he never points the DOR-buster at the abdomen of the patient). He responded by stating that he felt that it was better to have bad energy in the abdomen than no energy at all, but that he might consider using it in such a fashion if he were to ever be presented with another case of pancreatic cancer.

Dr. Peter Crist, president of the American College of Orgonomy, spoke next. His short presentation consisted of two topics: "Some Notes on the Reich Blood Tests" and "A Report on Workshops in Orgone Biophysics". Regarding the Reich Blood Test, Dr. Crist first showed a time-lapse DVD clip of blood disintegration during the Reich Blood Test. He stated that the same two individuals administer all of the Reich Blood Tests for the ACO, a physician and a technician, and that this consistency removes the interrater artifact from the test. He stated that the Reich Blood Test offers insight into potential treatment of autoimmune disorders with the orgone energy accumulator.

Dr. Crist then discussed the workshops in orgone biophysics sponsored by the American College of Orgonomy. They began in the summer of 1973. In the early years of the workshops, attendees were required to bring their own microscopes. Presently, microscopes are provided. These workshops include the examination of cancer mice, running the To-T experiment, and administering the Reich Blood Test.

The first speaker of the evening was Haakon Sandoy, a documentary filmmaker and the chairman of the Wilhelm Reich House in Oslo. The title of his talk was "The Norwegian Press Campaign Against Reich". Mr. Sandoy had worked with a librarian to track down press clippings published between 1934 and 1939 in daily newspapers as well as clippings from weekly and monthly magazines relevant to Reich’s time in Norway. He was able to track down 178 newspaper articles in addition to clippings from magazines. Mr. Sandoy pointed out that in some cases, Reich is not mentioned by name in the articles (e.g. sometimes he is simply referred to as the ‘quack’). In other cases, Reich is repeatedly and, one could surmise, intentionally referred to as ‘Mister’ and not ‘Doctor’.

Mr. Sandoy first contextualized Reich’s time in Norway by reminding attendees of the manner in which Reich had arrived in Norway, i.e., in a red convertible with an attractive wife. He made friends quickly, but he had also sown the seeds of envy. An article had already appeared in the Norwegian press prior to Reich’s arrival (a review of The Mass Psychology of Fascism), and a review of Character Analysis appeared just after his arrival. Mr. Sandoy stated that Reich actually wanted to avoid the press and was not interested in publishing in the Norwegian press—especially after being referred to as a "pornographer" in an early article. Other critics said that his work belonged in "dirty magazines". One rare voice cautioned against the "book burning mentality" that seemed to be manifesting in Norway.

Beginning in September of 1937, with the publication of the first studies of the bions, the bulk of the material critical of Reich began to appear in the press. One of the earliest attributed Reich’s claims of movement on the part of the bions to Brownian movement. Two days later, on the 23rd of September, Reich published an article asking people to contact him and to give him time to verify his findings instead of rushing to publish articles that sensationalized his work. This did not help. The next day articles appeared in which other researchers claiming to have repeated Reich’s experiments stated that they had been unable to reproduce Reich’s results. Reich responded by stating that it was not possible for these researchers to have had enough time to duplicate his experiments. This did not help either.

Mr. Sandoy pointed out that while this was going on, there were continued attacks on Reich’s psychoanalytic theories. There were also attacks on the applicability of psychoanalysis to social contexts. As Dr. Håvard Nilsen had pointed out, many of the attacks on Reich were led by Johan Scharffenberg.

Next, Mr. Sandoy referred to an interview with Reich published in April 1938. In this interview, Reich defended his work and stated that the orgasm theory was applicable to all life, from the single-celled organism to the human being. He stated that Reich continued to ask for peaceful working conditions and an end to the attacks—again, to no avail. In July 1938, the Norwegian government recommended strict regulations on the ability of non-Norwegian psychoanalysts, and the press called for the revocation of Reich’s work permit. Due to time constraints, Mr. Sandoy was unable to finish his talk, but I was able to later ask him about Reich’s last year in Norway. Beginning with the July 1938 push for the revocation of his work permit, Reich began seeking transport to the United States. This matter was complicated by the fact that Reich had come to Norway using an Austrian passport, for, by mid-1938, there was no Austria anymore. He then attempted to immigrate to the United States from Poland via Denmark, but this attempt also failed. Eventually, he was able to secure a Norwegian passport, and left for the United States in October 1939 just before the beginning of the Second World War.

Dr. Conny Huthsteiner spoke next, and the title of her talk was ”Weather Engineering in Contact with Space: Global Warming and the Planetary Emergency”.. Dr. Huthsteiner’s article is published in the December 2005 issue of the Annals of the Institute for Orgonomic Science. Dr. Huthsteiner began by reminding attendees that these experiments are detailed in Reich’s last published work, Contact with Space. For her analysis, she went through microfilm of the Tucson newspapers from that period of time and looked at the weather reports from federal and state weather reporting agencies, and compared them to the results Reich described. She told us that Reich chose Arizona for his experiments not only because of the desert conditions existing there, but because he felt that Tucson was in the path of the orgonotic galactic stream running from the equatorial Pacific toward the northeast United States. Reich’s goal was not to create rain but rather to simply increase the humidity of the region and restore the natural rain cycles.. She said that Reich’s cloudbusting operations north of Tucson took place in the midst of a 30-year drought. Her research provided her with insight into the ways in which the press handled the UFO sightings that were reported at that time. As is written in Contact with Space, Reich and his colleagues sighted UFOs while conducting cloudbusting operations in Maine and Arizona. Dr. Huthsteiner reported that the U.S. government conducted 23 above ground A-bomb tests near Las Vegas between February and March of 1955. She speculated to what extent these tests impacted Reich’s experiments, given the extensive atmospheric influence Reich observed in the Oranur experiment.

At first Reich felt that he and his workers were making little progress in cloudbusting. The atmospheric barriers, or DOR, were very strong in the desert region. After a few weeks, they noticed "some protozoal greening" and a few UFOs. To expedite the process, Reich had the oranur needle delivered to Tucson. Reich had found that holding the needle close to the cloudbuster amplified its effects. Reich felt that by December 1954 he had significantly affected the humidity of the region, which correlated with public reports on weather. He also felt that the effects of his operations were likely impacting the weather as far away as the northeastern United States. In January 1955, Tucson experienced record low temperatures and record high precipitation. In fact, Dr. Huthsteiner pointed out that 26 of the 366 records for coldest days in Tucson occurred while Reich was engaged in the cloudbusting operation. Further examination of the reported weather at that time revealed that in April 1955 there were severe dust storms in Arizona and noticeably cool winds. In July, there were record highs and lows, and, in August, Tucson experienced record rainfall. 1955 was the second wettest year in Arizona history, in the midst of a 30 year drought cycle, that started up again the year following.

Dr. Huthsteiner concluded her talk by pointing out Reich’s foresight in many meteorological observations, that were new in his time, but have since become generally accepted knowledge. She believes that the radical weather events that are being observed in this era of global warming are very similar to the unusual weather events Reich’s operations elicited in the Tucson region, and wondered if we could understand some symptoms of global warming to the atmosphere’s attempt to heal itself, i.e., self-regulate and heal a blocked, hyperenergetic DOR atmosphere.

The final speaker of the evening was Dr. Philip Bennett. The title of his talk was "Wilhelm Reich’s Concept of Work Democracy". Dr. Bennett pointed out six articles on the subject of work democracy published by Reich between 1939 and 1947. These articles were listed on a handout that was distributed to those present. In "Work Democracy in Action", published in 1947 in the Annals of the Orgone Institute, Reich laments the fact that some of his students understood biology but not sociology, while others understood sociology but not biology. Early in this article, Reich describes the necessity of understanding both the sociological and biological origins of human suffering. Reich states, "The teaching and research structure of orgone biophysics of today is composed of analytic depth psychology, biology of the instincts, physics of the instincts, sociology of the instincts and mass psychology, organ pathology, clinical medicine, pedagogies and, last not least, social politics" (p.6). With regard to political orientation, Dr. Bennett pointed out that advocates of work democracy, according to Reich, "lean neither to the right nor to the left, but only go forward".

Next, Dr. Bennett discussed Reich’s revision of his earlier writings on work democratic themes. He pointed out that in 1951, Reich went back to his monograph The Invasion of Compulsory Sex-Morality and took out the phrase "primitive communism" because he felt that the word "communism" had be co-opted by "red fascists". He replaced the word "communism" with the phrase "work democracy" (Reich also added a footnote to the newer edition discussing this change).

Ten major themes in Reich’s writings on the subject of work democracy were then discussed. According to Dr. Bennett, these are:

1. Work democracy is an ideal not yet realized
2. It is a social/political structure analogous to but also importantly different from formal democracy, i.e., the kind of democracy that exists in the U.S. today
3. It requires that individuals take collective, social, and individual responsibility for their own lives
4. Work democracy is manifested in all natural and rational work relationships
5. But it can become distorted, under present conditions, in light of human rigidity
6. Work democracy is not a political ideology, nor can it be realized through party politics
7. Work democracy is international in scope and vision
8. Work democracy is to be contrasted with mystical yearnings for some utopia on the one hand, and the foregoing of individual responsibility in lieu of some form of totalitarianism, i.e., the notion that a "great leader" will solve all of our problems for us
9. Work democracy is in some way related to and seen as a replacement for communism
10. Genuine freedom can only be found in work democracy

Dr. Bennett noted that while Reich was critical of anarchism, within the context of one meaning of the term "anarchism," Reich's ideas are anarchistic. He concluded his talk by stating that Reich was only interested in rational criticism. He felt that critics should know something about the field that they criticize and that their criticism should be constructive and move the work forward. To clarify, Dr. Bennett stated that Reich was likely interested in what Hegel referred to as "immanent critcism".

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

The first presenter was Dr. James DeMeo, director of the Orgone Biophysical Research Laboratory near Ashland, Oregon. His talk was entitled "Contemporary Applications of the Reich C.O.R.E. Methods for Drought Abatement and Desert-Greening: 1977-2007". Dr. DeMeo stated that he first became interested in orgonomy in 1970. By 1977, he was studying cosmic orgone engineering (i.e. cloudbusting) at the University of Kansas. He said that Reich addressed cloudbusting in several resources—specifically, the Orgone Energy Bulletin, the Oranur Experiment, C.O.R.E., and Contact with Space. The science of cloudbusting is rooted in the energy-absorbing characteristic of water. The metal pipes of the cloudbuster simply allow one to focus this energy and draw it from the atmosphere, thereby changing its state of excitation and movement. Reich, Dr. DeMeo stated, had worked out methods for cloud elimination and creation. The basic cosmic orgone engineering (or C.O.R.E.) principles are rooted in the fact that orgone energy exists in the atmosphere, that clouds are regions of high orgone potential, that the jet streams are high velocity orgone energy streams, and that atmospheric orgonotic pulsation is expressed in the shift from rainy weather to dry weather to rainy weather, etc. When the atmosphere is healthy and self-regulating, orgonotic pulsation exists naturally in the atmosphere. However, when the atmosphere stagnates and orgonotic pulsation is disturbed, the cloudbuster can be used to restore natural motility in the atmosphere.

Dr. DeMeo stated that Reich’s findings are being validated by mainstream science. Reich had conducted cloudbusting operations in Tucson, Arizona, and had clarified the role of DOR in drought and desert creation. Reich, according to DeMeo, was the first to write about atmospheric acidity and ozone as factors in typical forest death crisis. Reich's ideas on DOR anticipated later classical atmospheric science discoveries regarding the precipitation-blocking nature of "dry fogs" and "pollution clouds" in the atmosphere. In addition, Reich was the first known non-military scientist to discuss high altitude air streams (i.e. jet streams) as primary orgone energy streams, and he was also the first to speak about a blue-glowing energy envelope surrounding the Earth, something later confirmed in photographs made by the astronauts.

Since 1960, a handful of individuals have been involved in systematic cloudbusting operations. These include Richard Blasband (1965 to the present), Jerome Eden (1970-1990), Courtney Baker, John Schleining, Charles Kelley, and a few others. Presently, there is a C.O.R.E. Network active in the United States made up of just under ten individuals. This network works together on coordinated cloudbusting operations. Dr. DeMeo, himself, has been involved in a number of cloudbusting operations since 1980. He has made 13 separate expeditions to Africa and the Middle East, and he has conducted numerous operations in the United States.

Next, Dr. DeMeo discussed his work at the University of Kansas. There he had a program set-up for photo-documentation, rainfall measurement, and theoretical discussion. He showed a number of slides of the operations in Kansas and the data collected. This information was originally written up in Dr. DeMeo’s Master’s Thesis. He then discussed several OROPs (or ORgone OPerations) conducted between 1989 and 1999. The first was OROP Arizona 1989 conducted near Blythe, Arizona. This operation took place on five separate occasions over that summer, each lasting about three days, and was pre-announced to the National Weather Service. In general, DOR-haze in the region would clear up within about two hours. An overall analysis of the entire experiment indicated a doubling of precipitation for a full week after operations, for a multi-state region. When Dr. DeMeo approached the National Weather Service to discuss his findings, he found that they had purged their files of his initial notification. This significant result verifying Reich's original findings elicited no interest from his fellow scientists, outside the field of orgonomy.

The second OROP discussed occurred from late 1991 to early 1992 in Israel. This OROP was instigated by a 3-year drought in the region. Dr. DeMeo received permission and logistical support from the Israeli government and worked for 10 days on DOR abatement in various locations. He then began a "rain draw". This led to record-breaking rains—the most in 50 years—and the restoration of healthy atmospheric pulsation. The following months saw regular rainfall, and Dr. DeMeo showed a number of before-and-after slides of various bodies of water. Officially, however, authorities attributed the rainfall to the eruption of Mount Pinotubo on the other side of the planet, which had actually occurred months before Dr. DeMeo began the operation.

In 1992 and 1993, Dr. DeMeo's team travelled to Namibia on the southwestern coast of Africa. The OROP aimed to break a 12-year sustained drought. He conducted the cloudbusting operation with full permission and support of the Namibian government. There were two 3-week phases to the work. As in Israel, the cloudbuster was constructed locally. Within a few days of the operation, positive results were achieved. Dr. DeMeo’s team then moved throughout a small part of the country. As pulsation was restored, rains became regular again. The locals were extremely grateful, while the official reaction was best summed up in the words of a Namibian meteorologist Dr. DeMeo had approached: "Only God can make it rain, so get the hell out of my office!"

Dr. DeMeo lead a team which conducted 5 years of summertime operations in the east African nation of Eritrea (located on the southwestern shore of the Red Sea). These occurred every summer starting in 1994 and ending in 1999 (with a break only in 1996). Eritrea had suffered through 30 years of drought and concomitant civil war. This OROP was conducted with full permission and logistical support from the Eritrean government, funded by a mix of private donors, foundation grants, and by the Eritrean Ministry of Agriculture. It involved a team of six operators and assistants (all of whom worked pro bono). Again, the cloudbuster was built on site. The OROP led to the restoration of atmospheric orgonotic pulsation and an end to the 30-year drought after only the first year of operations. An average 40% increase in rainfall was determined for the 15-day period after the start of operations, as compared to before operations commenced. However, regional wars led to the discontinuation of the project. Dr. DeMeo did point out that by the year 2000, so much rain was flowing down the Nile that overflow lakes formed after authorities were forced to release water from Lake Nasser, to prevent rising water from breaching the dam.

There were a few questions from the audience for Dr. DeMeo. The first attendee asked him if by making it rain in one place, you make the desert grow in another. Dr. DeMeo responded by stating that he felt that orgonotic pulsation spreads; however, it was still an important question that required further research. The second question was: Were the locals aware of what was going on? Dr. DeMeo said that they were and that they were delighted with the results.

Following Dr. DeMeo’s presentation were three short presentations. The first of these was "Orgonomy and Agriculture: Energetic Quality of Fertile Soil and Fresh Food". The speaker was Dr. Joseph Heckman, a professor of soil science at Rutgers University. Just as ignorance of orgonomy holds back medicine, meteorology, and other natural sciences, Dr. Heckman explained, it also holds back the development of the agricultural sciences. He stated that contact is as important on the farm as it is in the doctor’s office. Dr. Heckman said that A.S. Neill, who was interested in the work of Dr. Albert Howard, brought the issue of agriculture to Reich’s attention in a letter dated September 25, 1942. Reich responded on October 17, 1942. Basically, composting is not just a fermentation process, but it is a bionous process, i.e., compost has an orgonotic charge. As such, Dr. Heckman stated that food grown in soils containing compost may be of a higher quality. Unfortunately, mainstream science seems to dismiss the notion of ‘vitality’ when referring to food and compost.

To make his point about the orgonotic charge of various foods, Dr. Heckman referred to the table Reich published in The Cancer Biopathy listing the orgonotic potential of different foods. As an example, he pointed out that unpasteurized milk has an orgonotic charge substantially greater than that of pasteurized milk. Dr. Heckman emphasized that even if high quality foods are produced from humus or fertile bion-rich soil, later mishandling of foods via industrial processing results in the loss of much of the special vital qualities of these foods. At this point, Dr. Heckman’s presentation was cut short due to time constraints (note: Dr. Heckman has elaborated on the above in a paper on the history of organic farming).

The next presenter was Dr. Ron Maio, a professor in the Department of Emergency Medicine at the University of Michigan. The title of his talk was "A View from the Outside: Considerations for Getting Reich’s Medical Therapies to Patients". Dr. Maio was first asked by his daughter to attend a conference at Orgonon. She was very interested to hear how he would respond to the concepts being discussed. At that time he was asked by Mary Higgins and Kevin Hinchey how Reich’s research might be best brought to the attention of mainstream physicians and academics. It was around this time that he and Dr. Conny Huthsteiner first began to consider construction of a research trial involving the treatment of burns using the orgone blanket.

He then discussed obstacles to orgonomic research in the United States. To begin, he said that there was no reason why orgonomy shouldn’t be studied and funded by NCCAM/NIH grants that currently go to a number of alternative medicine projects. In addition, he has seen nothing in FDA documentation that indicates that you cannot use the orgone energy accumulator in clinical studies. Dr. Maio concluded his talk by encouraging researchers and physicians to organize more conferences—perhaps even a conference that specifically addresses medical orgonomy.

The final short presentation was given by Dr. James DeMeo. His topic was very similar to Dr. Maio’s, and his talk was entitled "Orgonomic Research: Overcoming Obstacles". Dr. DeMeo began his talk by mentioning the importance of students and professionals taking risks, that it’s important, at times, to "test the waters". Students interested in orgonomy should be willing to take greater risks, to at least try to do orgonomic research in an open manner. If this fails, they can always go back to more orthodox research subjects. Later in life, DeMeo noted, people often accept greater personal responsibilties, such as children and family, and this can make them more hesitant to openly support controversial issues which could affect their incomes. He noted professionals nevertheless have a responsibility to stand up for facts and truth, when such opportunity and necessity arises. Dr. DeMeo stated that he put a lot of effort into finding a school that would allow him to openly study Reich’s ideas while younger. He encouraged scholars and physicians interested in orgonomy and Reich to try and publish papers in mainstream journals, and to take a more public stance. Resistance to Reich, he said, does not occur at the scholarly level so much as it exists in the administrative echelons of various psychological, meteorological, sociological, and medical organizations, and on the peer-review boards of the major journals. As such, he has found that while there is organizational resistance to orgonomy, scholars at conferences are much more receptive.

The largest obstacle to orgonomic research, Dr. DeMeo stated, was the emotional plague. He concluded his short talk by encouraging attendees to, at the very least, write letters to the editors of publications that denigrate Reich’s research, or ignore his priority in scientific findings.

The conference closed with remarks from Mary Higgins and Kevin Hinchey concerning the opening of the Wilhelm Reich archives. As way of introducing the topic, they provided the group with historical context. At the time of Reich’s death in 1957, the archives were stored in the Orgone Energy Observatory at Orgonon. According to Reich’s will, the archives were to be stored for 50 years following his death. The original executor of Reich’s estate was Eva Reich. The duties were then passed to Mary Higgins in late 1958. Ms. Higgins recounted arriving in Rangeley in early 1959 just after a huge snowstorm. The next day she met with an assessor. It was then that it was discovered that the archives were no longer in the observatory but had been removed Aurora Karrer, a companion of Reich’s toward the end of his life. Soon thereafter, the effort to recover Reich’s archives began. At first Ms. Karrer denied that she had them, so Ms. Higgins took her to court. A number of suitcases were eventually produced; however, not all of the materials were there. The continuing effort to recover the archives from Ms. Karrer in their entirety has gone on for the past 47 years.

Initially, Ms. Higgins kept the archives at her home in Forest Hills, New York. It was Roger Straus, chairman of the publishing house Farrar, Straus, & Giroux, who initiated contact with the Countway Library at Harvard University. After turning down offers to house the archives from the Library of Congress and the University of Maine, the Reich Trust eventually chose to house them at the Countway Library. At present, the materials at the Countway Library include 98 cubic feet of materials in 282 archival boxes. Scholars receiving permission from a review board appointed by the Wilhelm Reich Trust Fund to access the archives at the Countway Library will be able to view them in a small, supervised reading room. Mr. Hinchey stated that a finding aid is in the process of being compiled.

In November 2007, the archives will be opened. During the first week, only the surviving members of Reich’s family will be granted access. Thereafter, there will be an application process. The review board consists of Kevin Hinchey, Dr. James Strick, and Dr. Linda Gibson. Eventually, the Countway Library would like to have a professional archivist process the collection. This will cost an estimated $100,000.

Mr. Hinchey and Ms. Higgins then asked all of the presenters what they hope to learn about via the materials in the archive. Interests ranged from information on the orgone motor to Reich’s opinions of his students to bion research to the cloudbuster to patient histories to the plethora of research data and correspondence that is surely there. The conference closed with thanks to the presenters, the staff and volunteers who help keep Orgonon running, the attendees, those who made the event possible, and to Mary Higgins and Kevin Hinchey for organizing the conference.