Working

W
Working
ki to
t Extend
E t d Democracy
D
to
t All 

V
Volume
V l
Volume
2, N
2
Number
b 3
3

March

M
M
March
h 2013
2013

TO: THE CALIFORNIA STATE LEGISLATURE
Dear California State Legislature:
ecause you have the full authority to amend, repeal and make
new state law, We, the PBSP-SHU
Short-Corridor Representatives, respectfully request on behalf of all CDCR prisoners, male and female, that you please:
1. Amend California Penal Code sections
2600 and 2601, to restore the original
“Inmate Bill of Rights” that was signed
and enacted into law by the present Governor Jerry Brown in 1976. The Bill of
Rights, for example, stated that CDCR
prisoners, and thus their extended family members, were guaranteed rights to
receive personal visits, subject only to
such restrictions as were necessary for
the reasonable security of the institution
[see former Id. section 2601(d)].
2. Amend California Penal Code, section
2933.6, so that all SHU and Ad. Seg [D-

B

CONTENTS
To The Legislature ...................1
Editorial Comments..................2
Prison Studies of Isolation .......2
End Solitary, NY Bar Assoc......5
Court Affirms on Race ..............6
Venezuela Prison Riot..............6
Quote Box ................................6
Chowchilla Rally.......................7
Social Deprivation as Torture ...8

status] CDCR prisoners can again earn
and receive onethird [1/3] good-behavior credit earning
off their sentence
for remaining disciplinary free while
in SHU or Ad. Seg.
Because, as it stands
right now, these prisoners receive absolutely zero credit for
this good behavior,
which provides zero
incentive whatsoever for them to remain
disciplinary free while in there. Also,
under this current law, one who is validated as either a gang member or associate (which the majority of new and old
CDCR prisoners will be labeled as being
under the CDCR’s new “Security Threat
Group” and “Step-Down Program” proposals, as stated at the beginning of our
demands) who has no rule violation reports and remains disciplinary free, who
for example has a “release date” [not a
life term], those prisoners will be forced
to complete their entire prison sentence
in the SHU and then be released straight
from SHU back to the free world pretty
angry that he or she did not have their
prison sentence reduced for their good
behavior. So, we ask you, why should
a CDCR prisoner even bother remaining
disciplinary free? Especially if he or she
will still be released at the end of their
prison sentence, whether they remain
disciplinary free or not? Therefore,
amending the “original” law to remove
the 1/3 good behavior credit earning so

D-status CDCR prisoners can no longer
reduce their prison sentence was a grave
error. Because, if you look back at the
“original” bill and reasons for giving 1/3
credit for good behavior, you will discover that it was given as a “prison security” reason, so that CDCR prisoners will
have a reason/incentive to remain disciplinary free, even while on D-status. We
SHU Reps are life-term prisoners, so we
are asking that this law be re-amended/
repealed for all those who do have a release date, and who under CDCR’s new
proposals will end up doing their entire
sentence in SHU with no incentive to remain disciplinary free while in SHU or
in Ad. Seg. Thus, not re-amending/repealing it is in itself a security threat not
only for those prisoners and prison staff
in SHU/Ad. Seg, but also to society as a
whole when these prisoners are released
back into the free world.
3. Amend California Penal Code, section
5006, relating to our “Inmate Welfare
Fund” [IWF], so that it is used, for example, to purchase all the needed exercise/

recreation and entertainment equipment,
etc. [see attached demands at orders (26)
through (28)]. This way, prisons cannot
continue to play delay games with these
monies as they have been doing with the
monies set aside for that purpose from
the CDCR budget. In addition, the IWF
belongs to all CDCR prisoners. It was
created to reimburse services to prisoners, including their training and education and to underwrite the prison canteens. Prisoners who are taxed for that
purpose by the CDCR on purchases and
the like have paid every penny themselves that goes into the IWF. Those
monies are not court-ordered restitution
funds, nor do they belong to CDCR—
even though they act like it does. Again,
the IWF belongs to all CDCR prisoners
so the prisoners and their prisoner-representatives in every CDCR prison [GP,
Ad. Seg/SHU, etc.] should also have a
say how it should be spent at the institutional level. Therefore, when the issue
is over our IWF, the legislature should
write and pass bills that are written in
clear plain language on issues like the
ones we CDCR prisoners are requesting
here so that our monies can be spent on
our immediate needs and benefit. And so
CDCR officials cannot continue to twist
vague language into something else, like
they have been doing for decades now.
and
4. Amend California Penal Code section
2085.5, where the “restitution fines” that
CDCR prisoners have to pay into the
Restitution Funds be reduced to a reasonable level from 55% to 33% that a
prisoner has to pay on all incoming monies. we request this of the legislature for
the simple fact that CDCR no longer
provides enough prison paying jobs.
Where prisoners themselves used to pay
100% of their restitution, now, instead,
their loved ones—not the prisoners—are
the ones paying the 100% price whenever they send in any monies to their
imprisoned love ones. All these loved
ones are also free citizens, tax-payers
and voters.
Thank you very much for considering
our requests. ●
Respectfully submitted (1-13-2013),
Todd Ashker, C-58191, Sitawa Nantambu Jamaa (Dewberry), C-35671, Arturo
Castellanos, C-17275, Antonio Guillen,
P-81948, The PBSP-SHU-Prisoner-ShortCorridor-Representatives
2

EDITORIAL 2-3

T

he January issue of Rock was censored at Pelican Bay because of
an article that started on page four
and ended on page seven. The title of the
article was “PBSP - SHU, Short Corridor
Representatives Responsive Opposition to
CDCR’s October 11, 2012 STG Pilot Program”, and was written on December 3rd.
In this issue I am being extra careful not
to print anything that may raise the ire of
Pelican Bay’s censorship police.
Again, victims of the thought police
should file 602s and go through the entire
administrative appeal process. The censorship issue is getting out of hand. The warden did not respond to my administrative
appeal, 602s are being “lost” until the appeal window has closed, etc.
The arrogance of your captors is appalling. All of this will and more be separate counts on our lawsuit. I am working
with prisoners in drafting a Title 42, Sec.
1983 civil rights complaint in the Western
District of Washington (it will probably
be transferred to the Northern District of
California). I plan to pay the filing fee of
$350. If any of you have extra money you
can contribute toward this it will be a help.
Send the money to me with a note that it
is toward the filing fee, not the newsletter.
I’ve just learned that the February issue
of Rock was also censored as a threat to the
security and order of the prison. Of course,
once again, the newsletter was only banned
at Pelican Bay. Also censored from PBSP
was the January issue of the S.F. Bayview
newspaper and the latest PHSS News. I am
in touch with Mary, the editor of the Bayview, and with some of the folks at PHSS
News, regarding a community response to
this heavy-handed government suppression
of our right to communicate.
The lawsuit mentioned above presently
only challenges the censorship of the November issue of Rock, but may be amended
to include other issues of the newsletter and
perhaps even other publications.
The bottom line is this, in an effort to
preclude the possibility of this issue being
censored by your captors I have removed,
gutted even, the very best of the newsletter’s content, including important articles
containing news you can use, as well as
the entire section of letters from subscribers (many of which addressed the ongoing
inter-racial celling discussion and other
important issues). Lastly, I apologize for
sending out this watered version of Rock. ●

PRISON STUDIES
OF SOLITARY
CONFINEMENT:
A bibliography of research on
psychological effects of social isolation, pre-trial isolation and supermax conditions
Are Haram Klykken, University of Tromsø
his is a bibliography of the psychological effects of solitary confinement, limited to studies based on
samples of prison populations. Case studies, animal studies, autobiographies, and
studies on volunteers are not included.
After an extensive search of a range of research literature databases, 39 articles were
found. The following are the results of 20
of these studies.

T

Questionnaire studies
Andersen et al. (2000) conducted a longitudinal study on Danish remand prisoner
in solitary confinement (n = 133) and nonsolitary confinement (n = 95). The method
of assessment included questionnaires and
clinical interviews. Results showed that
incidence of psychiatric disorders was significantly higher in prisoners in solitary
confinement. The most common disorder
was adjustment disorder, followed by depression.
O’Keefe, Klebe, Stucker, Sturm, and
Leggett (2010) studied prisoners in solitary
confinement (n = 127) compared to prisoners in the general prison population (n =
76) and prisoners sent to a psychiatric care
facility (n = 67). The method of assessment
included questionnaires and clinical interviews. Results showed that mentally ill
prisoners in solitary confinement improved
slightly over time, while prisoners without
mental illness did not change.
Zinger, Wichmann, and Andrews (2001)
conducted a longitudinal study of prisoners
in administrative segregation (n = 83) and
prisoners from the general prison population (n = 53). The method of assessment
included questionnaires and clinical interviews. Results showed no evidence for
deterioration of the psychological health of
segregated prisoners.
Gamman (1995) studied Norwegian remand prisoners in solitary confinement (n
= 27) and non-solitary confinement (n =
27). Results showed that prisoners in solitary confinement experienced more sleeps
problems, concentration problems, probRock

lems with their circadian rhythm, anxiety symptoms, depressive symptoms, and
pains. The study also found that treatment
of depressive symptoms was ineffective
during isolation.
Miller (1994) studied prisoners in administrative detention (n = 10), disciplinary
segregation (n = 10), and the general prison
population (n = 10). Results showed a positive correlation between level of restriction
and level of psychological distress.
Miller and Young (1997), in a follow-up
study of Miller (1994), studied prisoners in
administrative detention (n = 10), disciplinary segregation (n = 10), and the general
prison population (n = 10). Results showed
a positive correlation between level of restriction and level of psychological distress, which replicated the previous study.
Suedfeld, Ramirez, Deaton, and BakerBrown (1982) studied prisoners (n = 78)
who had experienced solitary confinement
and prisoners who had not experienced solitary confinement. The method of assessment included questionnaires and clinical
interviews. Results showed no significant
difference between the two groups.
Clinical interviews
Lovell (2008) studied prisoners in solitary confinement (n = 87). The method of
assessment was clinical interviews and review of medical records. Results showed
that 45% of prisoners in solitary confinement suffered from serious mental illness,
marked psychological symptoms, psychological breakdowns, or brain damage.
Andersen, Sestoft, Lillebæk, Gabrielsen,
and Hemmingsen (2003) conducted a longitudinal study on remand prisoners in solitary confinement (n = 133) and non-solitary confinement (n = 95). Results showed
that the non-solitary confinement group
had decreasing scores of psychopathology
and improved functioning over time, while

By Michael Russell, PBSP

Volume 2, Number 3

the solitary confinement group remained
unchanged. After transferral from solitary
confinement to non-solitary confinement,
scores on psychopathology were reduced.
According to the authors, this indicates that
the conditions in solitary confinement are
distressing, and that the psychopathological symptoms are, at least partially, temporary.
Cloyes, Lovell, Allen, & Rhodes (2006)
studied prisoners in solitary confinement
(n = 87). Results showed that 22% of inmates in solitary confinement had a marked
or severe degree of distress. This does not
necessarily indicate serious mental illness,
but rather what the authors describe as psychosocial impairment.
Hodgins and Côté (1991) studied prisoners in two types of solitary confinement
units (n1 = 41, n2 = 32). Results show that
severe mental disorders are more prevalent
in solitary confinement prisoners. However, most of the mentally ill prisoners suffered from mental illness before they were
sentenced to the penitentiary.
Coid et al. (2003a) studied prisoners
from England and Wales in two stages (n1
= 3,141, n2 = 496). Results showed that
prisoners with mental illness did not have
a higher likelihood of being sent to solitary
confinement than other prisoners.
Medical and prison records
O’Keefe (2007) studied prisoners with
mental illness in administrative segregation
(n = 443), prisoners with mental illness in
the general prison population (n = 3,802),
prisoners without mental illness in administrative segregation (n = 766), and prisoners
without mental illness in the general prison
population (n = 12,382). Results show that
mental illness is both more prevalent and
more severe in solitary confinement.
Sestoft (1998) studied Danish prisoners
in solitary confinement (n = 152) and nonsolitary confinement (n = 193). Results
showed that the
incidence of psychiatric problems
is higher in solitary
confinement. The
risk of getting psychiatric problems
also increased with
time spent in solitary confinement.
Lanes
(2009)
studied prisoners
categorized with
self-injurious behavior (n = 132)

compared to prisoners without self-injurious behavior (n = 132). Results showed
that prisoners with self-injurious behavior,
and that were being treated for mental disorder, had drastically reduced time between
episodes of self-harm after being placed in
solitary confinement.
Lovell, Johnson, and Cain (2007) studied prisoners (n = 200) in supermax prisons
compared to a control group (n = 6,453) in
Washington State. Results showed a significantly higher recidivism rate in prisoners
released directly from supermax, compared
to other prisoners. No significant relationship was found between time spent in supermax and recidivism.
Smith (2008) conducted an archival study
on prisoners from a Pennsylvania-model
prison and an Auburn-model prison in the
period of 1878 – 1915. Results showed that
one third of the prisoners were negatively
affected by solitary confinement. Of mental health problems, what was described
as “insanity” was the most common. The
most common physical symptoms were
lethargy and dyspeptic problems.
Mears and Bales (2009) studied prisoners from Florida in solitary confinement (n
= 1,241) and matched prisoners from the
general population (n = 1,241). Results
showed that recidivism associated with solitary confinement prisoners is more often
related to violent crimes. No relationship
was found between time spent in solitary
confinement and recidivism, as well as between direct release from solitary confinement and recidivism.
Psychophysiological studies
Ecclestone, Gendreau, and Knox (1974)
studied prisoners in solitary confinement (n
= 8) and prisoners from the general prison
population (n = 8). The method of assessment was measurement of adrenocortical
activity. Results showed that there was no
significant difference in stress levels between the two groups.
Gendreau, Freedman, Wilde, and Scott
(1972) studied prisoners in solitary confinement (n = 10) and prisoners from the
general prison population (n = 10). The
method of assessment was EEG measurement. Results showed that the prisoners
in solitary confinement had reduced EEG
frequencies, while the other group’s EEG
frequencies remained stable.
Conclusion
Thus, of the 20 studies summarized here,
15 studies found solitary confinement to
3

be detrimental, four studies had neutral
results, and one study found it to be beneficial.
Bibliography
Andersen, H. S., Sestoft, D, Lillebæk,
T., Gabrielsen, G., Hemmingsen, R., &
Kramp, P. (2000). A longitudinal study of
prisoners on remand: Psychiatric prevalence, incidence and psychopathology in
solitary vs. non-solitary confinement. Acta
Psychiatrica Scandinavia, 102, 19-25.
Andersen, H. S., Sestoft, D., Lillebæk,
T., Gabrielsen, G, & Hemmingsen, R.
(2003). A longitudinal study of prisoners
on remand: Repeated measures of psychopathology in the initial phase of solitary
versus non-solitary confinement. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 26,
165-177.
Arrigo, B. A., & Bullock, J. L. (2008).
The psychological effects of solitary confinement on prisoners in supermax units:
Reviewing what we know and recommending what should change. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative
Criminology, 52, 622-640.
Barte, H. N. (1989). Isolation in prison.
Perspectives Psychiatriques, 28(19), 252255.
Brodsky, S., & Scogin, F. (1988). Inmates in protective custody: First data on
emotional effects. Forensic Reports, 1,
267-280.
Chadick, C. D. (2009). Psychological
symptoms of administrative long-term
segregation: A pre-and post- segregation
analysis at a Kansas correctional facility.
Unpublished dissertation. Emporia State
University, Kansas.
Cloyes, K. G., Lovell, D., Allen, D. G.,
& Rhodes, L. A. (2006). Assessment of
psychosocial impairment in a supermaximum security unit sample. Criminal Justice
and Behavior, 33, 760-781.
Coid, J., Petruckevitch, A., Bebbington,
P., Jenkins, R., Brugha, T., Lewis, G., Farrell, M., Singleton, N. (2003a). Psychiatric
morbidity in prisoners and solitary cellular
confinement, I: Disciplinary segregation.
Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 14, 298-319.
Coid, J., Petruckevitch, A., Bebbington,
P., Jenkins, R., Brugha, T., Lewis, G., Farrell, M., Singleton, N. (2003b). Psychiatric
morbidity in prisoners and solitary cellular confinement, II: Special (‘strip’) cells.
Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 14, 321-340.
Cremona, G. (1929). Solitary confine4

ment and insanity. Archivio di Antropologia Criminale, Psychiatria, e Medicina Legale, 49, 773-801.
Dye, M. H. (2010). Deprivation, importation, and prison suicide: Combined effects of institutional Conditions and inmate
composition. Journal of Criminal Justice,
38, 796-806.
Ecclestone, C. E. J., Gendreau, P., &
Knox, C. (1974). Solitary confinement of
prisoners: An assessment of its effects on
inmates’ personal constructs and adrenocortial activity. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 6, 178-191.
Gamman, T. (1995). Uheldige helsemessige effekter av isolasjon. Tidsskrift for den
Norske Lægeforening, 115, 2243-2246.
Gendreau, P., Freedman, N. L., Wilde,
G. J. S., & Scott, G. D. (1972). Changes in
EEG alpha frequency and evoked response
latency during solitary confinement. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 79, 54-59.
Grassian, S. (1983). Psychopathological
effects of solitary confinement. American
Journal of Psychiatry, 140, 1450-1454.
Grassian, S. (2006). Psychiatric effects
of solitary confinement. Washington University Journal of
Law and Policy, 22, 325-383.
Haney, C. (2003). Mental health issues
in long-term solitary and “supermax” confinement. Crime and Delinquency, 49, 124156.
Haney, C., & Lynch, M. (1997). Regulating prisons of the future: A psychological
analysis of supermax and solitary confinement. New York University Review of Law
and Social Change, 23, 477-570.
Hodgins, S., & Côtè, G. (1991). The
mental health of penitentiary inmates in
isolation. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 33, 175-182.
Lanes, E. (2009). The association of
administrative segregation placement and
other risk factors with the self-injury-free
time of male prisoners. Journal of Offender
Rehabilitation, 48, 539-546.
Lovell, D. (2008). Patterns of disturbed
behavior in a supermax population. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35, 985-1004.
Lovell, D., Johnson, L. C., & Cain K. C.
(2007). Recidivism of supermax prisoners
in Washington state. Crime and Delinquency, 53, 633-656.
Mears, D. P., & Bales, W. D. (2009).
Supermax incarceration and recidivism.
Criminology, 47, 1131- 1166.
Miller, H. A. (1994). Reexamining psychological distress in the current conditions
of segregation. Journal of Correctional

Health Care, 1, 39-53.
Miller, H. A., & Young G. R. (1997).
Prison segregation: Administrative detention remedy or mental health problem?
Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 7,
85-94.
O’Keefe, M. L. (2007). Administrative
segregation for mentally ill inmates. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 45(1 & 2),
149-165.
O’Keefe, M. L. (2008). Administrative
segregation from within – A corrections
perspective. Prison Journal, 88, 123-143.
O’Keefe, M. L., Klebe, K. J., Stucker,
A., Sturm, K., & Leggett, W. (2010) .One
year longitudinal study of the psychological effects of administrative segregation.
Final report submitted to National Institute
of Justice.Grant No. 2006-IJ-CS-0015. Retrieved Feb. 24, 2012, from https://www.
ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/232973.pdf
Scott, G. D., & Gendreau, P. (1969). Psychiatric implications of sensory deprivation
in a maximum security prison. Canadian
Psychiatric Association Journal, 14, 337341.
Sestoft, D. M., Andersen, H. S., Lillebæk, T., & Gabrielsen. G. (1998). Impact
of solitary confinement on hospitalization
among Danish prisoners in custody. International Journal of Law and psychiatry, 21,
99-108.
Smith, P. S. (2006). The effects of solitary confinement on prison inmates: A brief
history and review of the literature. Crime
and Justice, 34, 441-528.
Smith, P. S. (2008). “Degenerate criminals” - Mental health and psychiatric studies of Danish prisoners in solitary confinement, 1870-1920. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 35, 1048-1064.
Suedfeld, P., Ramirez, C, Deaton, J., &
Baker-Brown, G. (1982). Reactions and
attributes of prisoners in solitary confinement. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 9,
303-340.
Volkart, R., Dittrich, A., Rothenfluh, T.,
& Werner, P. (1983). Eine kontrollierte
untersuchung uber psychopathologische
effekte der einzelhaft. Psychologie – Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Psychologie
und ihre Anwendungen, 42, 25-46.
Volkart, R., Rothenfluh, T., Kobelt, W.,
Dittrich, A., & Ernst, K. (1983). Einselhaft
als risikofactor fur psychiatrische hospitalisierung. Psychiatria Clinica, 16, 365-377.
Walters, R. H., Callagan, J. E., & Newman, A. F. (1963). Effects of solitary confinement on prisoners. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 119, 771-773.
Rock

Way, B. B., Sawyer, D. A., Barboza, S.,
& Nash, R. (2007). Inmate suicide and
time spent in special disciplinary housing
in New York state prison. Psychiatric
Services, 58, 558-560.
Wynn, J. R. (2007). Psychopathology in
supermax prisons: A New York state study.
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation) City
University of New York, NY, USA.
Zinger, I., Wichmann, C., & Andrews,
D. A. (2001). The psychological effects
of 60 days in administrative segregation.
Canadian Journal of Criminology, 43, 4783.●

NY STATE BAR
ASSOCIATION
CALLS FOR
RESTRICTIONS
ON USE OF LONGTERM SOLITARY
CONFINEMENT

C

iting strong evidence that demonstrates long-term negative impacts
of housing inmates in solitary confinement, the New York State Bar Association today called for significant cutbacks in
the use of long-term inmate isolation and
new protocols for separating violent and
nonviolent prisoners.
The Association’s House of Delegates
approved the report on solitary confinement, prepared by the Committee on Civil
Rights, at its January 25 meeting in New
York City.

By Fernando Bermudez

Volume 2, Number 3

Of the approximately 56,000 inmates
being held in New York’s 60 state prisons,
about 4,500—or 8 percent— are in solitary
confinement at any time, according to the
report. Nearly 2,800 New York inmates are
serving more than a year in solitary confinement, the report states. A disproportionate number of inmates in isolation are
African-Americans and Latinos.
“Inmates in long-term solitary confinement often suffer serious psychological
problems, including depression, hallucinations, emotional breakdowns and suicidal behavior,” said State Bar Association
President Seymour W. James (The Legal
Aid Society in New York City.) “New York
needs to adopt other means of separating
prisoners who violate institutional rules
from the general prison population without resorting to such harmful and outdated
measures.”
Civil Rights Committee Chair Diana
Sagorika Sen of New York City (Office of
Federal Contract Compliance Programs)
said, “The practice is applied at a significantly higher rate to blacks and Latinos,
and unduly targets those with mental health
and substance abuse problems.”
The report cites numerous experts and
studies on solitary confinement’s detrimental effects on mental health in reaching its
conclusions. “Courts of law, legal scholars,
medical commentators and independent
observers have documented the wide range
of deleterious effects that solitary confinement can have on the confined individual,”
the report states.
In support of its recommendations, the
committee cited a report by the New York
Civil Liberties Union issued in October
2012 that found that New York’s use of solitary confinement is “arbitrary and unjustified, harms prison and corrections staff,
and negatively impacts prison and community safety.”
Solitary confinement, according to several studies, has been shown to have an
impact on inmate suicide rates, particularly
among those suffering from mental illness.
A 1996 U.S. Department of Justice study
concluded that “based chiefly on overwhelming consistent research, isolation
should be avoided whenever possible.”
One inmate who was subjected to longterm solitary confinement, quoted in a report by Prisoners’ Legal Services of New
York, compared being released into the
general population after years in isolation
to “leaving a hungry dog in a cage and then
releasing it. … There is nothing beneficial

or therapeutic regarding this confinement.”
During a forum on solitary confinement
held during the State Bar’s Annual Meeting
in January 2012, David Fathi, director of
the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Prison Project in New York, agreed
that there are times when certain inmates
need to be separated from others. But he
questioned the methods and extent of the
confinement and whether long-term solitary confinement actually improves prison
safety.

Solitary confinement
should be profoundly restricted in state prisons
and locally operated jails
In addition to the extreme psychological effects that long-term isolation has
on inmates, particularly the mentally ill,
substance abusers and young inmates, the
practice also promotes racial tensions in
prison and contributes to additional violent
behavior within the prison after isolated
inmates are returned to the general population, the report states.
Among the recommendations in the report approved by the House of Delegates
for addressing problems associated with
solitary confinement in New York’s prisons
are:
Solitary confinement should be profoundly restricted in state prisons and locally operated jails by adopting strict standards to ensure it is used in very limited
and legitimate circumstances.
Prison and jail officials should adopt
stringent criteria for separating violent
and nonviolent prisoners; set standards for
ensuring separation under the “least restrictive conditions practicable;” identify
inmates who should not be in solitary confinement; and reduce the number of Special
Housing Unit beds.
Solitary confinement sentences should
be limited to no more than 15 days. Craig
Haney, a renowned solitary confinement
expert, is quoted in the report as saying that
negative psychological effects take effect
within 10 days
The state Legislature should enact measures needed to restrict the use of solitary
confinement in state and local facilities
across the state. In addition, it should
conduct public hearings to to examine the
harmful effects of long-term solitary confinement.
The report is available at www.nysba.
org/solitaryconfinement.
5

APPEALS COURT
VENEZUELA
AFFIRMS NO RACE PRISON RIOT
riot at the Uribana prison in BarquiBASED ACTIONS
simetoa, Venezuela, left at least 61

T

he court reiterates its orders in the
case of Escalera v. Terhune . Specifically, CDCR staff at PBSP is ordered to refrain from affording preferential
treatment to inmates on the basis of ethnicity. In their discretion, the [habeas petition]
respondents may lock down the prison, and
may release inmates from lockdown based
upon individual behavior, and upon informed predictions of individual behavior;
but not on the basis of ethnicity. On a short
term emergency basis, respondents may
separate inmates on the basis of ethnicity,
if prison security requires it, so long as it
is not done preferentially. CDCR staff at
Pelican Bay State Prison is ordered, within
60 days, to cease and desist from managing
inmates as members or associates of disruptive groups, unless those inmates have
been individually validated as members
or associates pursuant to [California Code
of Regulations, title 15, section] 3378. Inmates who are not parties to this case, or to
the case of Escalera v. Terhune may seek
enforcement of the orders made herein by
filing a pleading in this case. ●
The entire opinion can be found here:
http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/A132816.PDF

A

people dead, a hospital director in
the city said on January 26th. About 120
more people were wounded in clashes that
erupted late Friday between the inmates
and national guard soldiers. Media outlets reported that most of the dead were
inmates. Government officials pledged a
thorough investigation. Uribana prison
was built to hold up to 850 inmates but currently has about 1,400.

Media outlets reported
that most of the dead
were inmates.
Similar though less deadly clashes have
flared repeatedly during the past few years.
In April and May, a prison uprising in La
Planta prison in Caracas blocked authorities from going inside for nearly three
weeks. One prisoner was killed and five
people were wounded, including two National Guard soldiers and three inmates.
Two months later, another riot broke out
at a penitentiary in Merida, and the Venezuelan Prisons Observatory reported 30
killed. In August, 25 people were killed
and 43 wounded when two groups of inmates fought a gun battle inside Yare I
prison south of Caracas. ●
Seattle Times, January 28, 3013

Quote Box
“The notion that a radical is one who
hates his country is naïve and usually
idiotic. He is, more likely, one who likes
his country more than the rest of us, and
is thus more disturbed than the rest of us
when he sees it debauched. He is not a
bad citizen turning to crime; he is a good
citizen driven to despair.”
H. L. Mencken
As People crushed by laws, have no
hope but to evade power. If the laws are
their enemies, they will be enemies to
the law; and those who have much to
hope for and nothing to lose will always
be dangerous.”
Edmund Burke
“When bad men combine, the good
must associate; else they will fall, one by
one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.”
George Berkeley
“Over grown military establishments
are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded
as particularly hostile to republican liberty.”
George Washington
“The spirit of this country is totally adverse to a large military force.”
Thomas Jefferson
“The military caste did not originate
as a party of patriots, but as a party of
bandits”
Henry Louis Mencken
“An unconscious people, an indoctrinated people, a people fed only partisan
information and opinion that confirm
their own bias, a people made morbidly
obese in mind and spirit by the junk food
of propaganda, is less inclined to put up
a fight, ask questions and be skeptical.
That kind of orthodoxy can kill a democracy - or worse.”
Bill Moyers
“Sit down before fact as a little child,
be prepared to give up every preconceived notion, follow humbly wherever
and whatever abysses nature leads, or
you will learn nothing.”
Thomas Henry Huxley

By Fernando Bermudez

6

Rock

RALLYING TO
END WOMEN’S
PRISON CRISIS IN
CALIFORNIA
By Angela Y. Davis and Windy Click,
1-24-2013
ust a couple of weeks ago, Gov. Jerry
Brown declared California’s prison
crisis over and demanded an end to
federal oversight of the state prison system.
This declaration was especially troubling
given that it coincided with reports of severe overcrowding at Central California
Women’s Facility (CCWF), which is filled
to twice its capacity, and news that the Valley State Prison for Women (VSPW), just
across the road, would be closed as a women’s prison and then filled with men.
Furthermore, the California Department
of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
plans to open a new facility for women at
the notorious Folsom Prison.
Despite threats of retaliation, more than
1,000 prisoners inside CCWF and VSPW
sent declarations demanding that VSPW
not be converted to a men’s facility, that it
be shut down and that thousands of women
who sit needlessly in horrendous conditions in places like CCWF be released.
Those of us working to end the prison
crisis, and those of us who have lived inside these prisons, can tell countless stories
of ongoing suffering: up to eight people living in cells that were built for four, or even
two; lack of basic hygiene; the spread of infections; and failure to address preventable
illnesses leading to health disasters.
One of us knew a woman who suffered
from a severe stomachache for more than
six months and when she was finally seen
by a doctor was given only Pepto-Bismol.
Ultimately, she was diagnosed with stage
IV stomach cancer and died shortly thereafter.
The effects of poor health conditions
and crowding are especially difficult for
elderly prisoners, and the widespread use
of lockdowns are contributing to mental

J

Volume 2, Number 3

health problems, including suicide. Access
to jobs, programs and legal resources are
largely unavailable. People living inside
these prisons, along with their advocates on
the outside, have noted that these unimaginable conditions and the state’s decision to
continue to crowd women and transgendered people into these prisons constitute
clear violations of human and civil rights.
In 2006, then Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that 4,500 people in women’s prisons could be released. Five years
later, the prison administration said that
4,000 prisoners -- female, pregnant or primary caregivers with less than two years of
their sentences left -- were eligible to serve
the rest of their time in residential homes,
residential substance-abuse treatment programs or transitional facilities. However,
since this Alternative Custody Program
went into effect, only a few hundred people
have been released. Why does such suffering continue?

One reason given by the prison administration is that there is a lack of services and
programs at the local level that would support their release. Yet while the state offers
huge financial incentives for counties to
build new jails, it offers nothing to expand
housing and health care programs that are
underfunded in most communities, and it
opens a new facility for women at Folsom
Prison. What are we left to assume? That
even though the prison administration has
said that thousands of women could safely
be sent home, there is a priority on keeping them locked up and on expanding the
number of cages for them. What does this
say about how we view the lives of these
overwhelmingly poor women and transgendered people of color?
We are joining thousands of prisoners
and families when we declare it is past time
to bring our loved ones home. It is past
time to stop the prison and jail expansion
that has devastated our communities. It is
past time to stop the criminalizing of our
families, friends and neighbors. It is time
to end policies like Three Strikes that leave
many to needlessly die of old age in cages.
It is time to institute and expand parole for
sick and elderly people. It is time to widen
alternatives to imprisonment. Thousands

of people in women’s prisons can be freed
right now. Money saved by reducing the
prison population could provide drug treatment, re-entry services, mental health support and job programs.
On Saturday, people from throughout the
state will get on buses and travel to Chowchilla to stand in solidarity with the 3,900
women and transgendered prisoners who
are being crammed into space designed for
2,000, who against all odds have spoken
out against the terrible conditions of their
confinement.
We will join them in demanding no more
cells, no new women’s facilities, no new
men’s facilities. We are calling this a Freedom Rally because we are fighting for the
dignity and humanity of our loved ones.
We are fighting to bring them -- as well as
their families -- home to communities that
are safe, sustainable and strong.
Angela Y. Davis is a political activist,
author and distinguished professor emerita
at University of California at Santa Cruz.
Wendy Click is a former inmate at Valley
State Prison for Women. ●
Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.
com/2013/01/24/3147163/davis-and-clickrallying-to-end.html#storylink=cpy
Photos: Bottom left,
demonstrators park their cars
near the entrance to the women’s
prison at Chowchilla. Middle
column, demonstrators march to
prison. Top right column, people
gather in front of the prison to
protest in support of women
prisoners.

Prisoner
Artists!
Prison
ArtArt
is ais
nonprofit
Prison
a nonwebsite.
It chargesthat
a 10
profit website
percent
feeaiften
yourperart
charges
or
craftservice
sells. Send
SASE
cent
fee
if
for a free brochure. No
your art or craft
SASE, no brochure. This
sells.
Send
a SASE
offer
void
where
profor free
hibited
bybrochure.
prison rules.

Sell Your Art
On the Web
Sell prisonercreated art or
crafts (except
writings). Send
only copies, no
originals!
Prison Art Project
P.O. Box 47439
Seattle, WA 98146
www.prisonart.org
sales@prisonart.org
206-271-5003

7

SOCIAL
DEPRIVATION AS
TORTURE:
A bibliography of research
about adult animals in social
isolation
Linn-Therese Brattli Mortensen,
University of Tromsø
umans are social mammals, of the
primate order. Our biology, our behavior, and our pathologies are not
unique to us. In a quest to understand, and
reduce, solitary confinement, one source of
information is the many reports of social
isolation of other social mammals, especially primates.
The following is a bibliography of research reports on social isolation and social
deprivation of adult animals can be informative about the consequences of solitary
confinement on humans. This bibliography is a first attempt to create an exhaustive bibliography of such literature. If
readers find errors or omission, we would
be pleased to be informed. Contact: Floyd.
Rudmin@UiT.No
Not all of the bibliography has been read
and summarized yet. But a sample of 54
articles shows that social deprivation of
animals has a many negative effects, including changes in behavior and in brain
anatomy and brain physiology.
Studies show that socially isolated
animals are more depressed and more
anxious that animals that are grouped together (Berry, 2012; Garzon,1981; Suomi,
1975). Isolated rodents showed a significant increase in locomotor activity (Garzon, 1981), were more immobile in the
forced swim test (Martin, 2010), and had
increased emotionality and hypothalamic
pituitary adrenal axis reactivity (Berry,
2012). Isolated primates showed several
symptoms of depressive behavior, higher
levels of stereotypy, less grooming, higher
levels of self-clasping and more passivity
to social stimuli long after the experiment
was over (Suomi, 1975).
Social isolation has also been linked to
more aggressive behavior (Malkesman,
2006; Miczek, 1978). Rats that were isolated when they were 2 months old, showed
a constant aggressiveness in their first year
of life (Garzon, 1981). Isolated male mice
also show increased tendencies to fight after isolation (Crawley, 1975), and generally became more aggressive (Goldsmith,

H

8

1978).
Social isolation causes animals to consume alcohol and other drugs when available (Apter, 2006; McKenzie-Quirk, 2008;
Parker, 1974; Wolffgramm, 1991). Isolated
rats consumed 30% more ethanol than
grouped housed rats (Wolffgramm, 1991).
Similarly, isolated adult rats drank significantly more ethanol than paired-grouped
rats (Parker, 1974). Squirrel monkeys experiencing prolonged social isolation increased alcohol drinking, but this was only
true for male monkeys (McKenzie-Quirk,
2008).
Isolated animals have shown memory
disorders (Hock, 1988; Huang, 2011;
Voikar, 2005) and sleep disorders (Greco,
1989; Greco, 1990; Kaushal, 2012). They
also have higher risk of developing diseases (Karelina, 2009; Lyons, 1999; Watson,
1998).
The social isolation of adult animals can
also cause change in brain physiology and
anatomy. In isolated animals, researchers
have observed decreased opiate receptors
in the frontal cortex, striatum, hippocampus, and periaqueductal grey matter (Petkov, 1985) and changed norepinephrine
levels, compare to grouped housed animals
(Stolk, 1974). Isolated rats have shown less
BDNF protein in the hippocampus (Scaccianoce, 2006). Isolated of rats also showed
changes in the hypothalamic- pituitary adrenal axis (Serra, 2005).
There also seems to be different consequences of social isolation when it comes
to strain and sex. For example, social isolation had more negative consequences for
the “Wistar-kyoto” strain of rat, than the
“Flinders sensitive line” strain (Malkesman, 2006). There also seems to be some
sex differences (Brown, 1995).
Bibliography
Abramov, U., Raud, S., Koks, S., Innos,
J., Kurrikoff, K., Matsui, T., & Vasar, E.
(2004). Targeted mutation of CCK2 receptor gene antagonizes behavioural changes
induced by social isolation in female, but
not in male mice. Behavioural Brain Research, 155 (1), 1-11.
Ahmed, S. H., Stinus, L., Moal, M., &
Cador, M. (1995). Social deprivation enhances the vulnerability of male Wistar rats
to stressor and amphetamine induced behavioral sensitization. Psychopharmacology, 117 (1), 116-124.
Apter, S. J., & Eriksson, J. P. (2006). The
role of social isolation in the effects of alcohol on corticosterone and testosterone

levels of alcohol-preferring and non-preferring rats. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 41
(1), 33-38.
Araujo, N. P., Camarini, R., Souza-Formigoni, M. L. O., Carvalho, R. C., Abilio,
V. C., Silvia, R. H., Ricardo, V. P., Riberiro,
R. D., & Frussa-Filho, R. (2005). The importance of housing conditions on behavioral sensitization and tolerance to ethanol.
Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior,
82 (1), 40-45.
Arndt, S. S., Laarakker, M. C., Lith H.
A., Staay, F. J., Gieling, E., Salamons, A.
R., Klooster, J., & Ohl, F. (2009). Individual housing of mice - Impact on behaviour
and stress responses. Physiology & Behavior, 97, 385-393.
Berry, A., Bellisario, V., Capoccia, S.,
Tirassa, P., Calza, A., Alleva, E., & Cirulli,
F. (2012). Social deprivation stress is a triggering factor for the emergence of anxietyand depression like behaviours and leads to
reduced brain BDNF levels in C57BL/6J
mice. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37, 762777.
Breuer, M. E., McGinnis, M. Y., Lumia,
A. R., & Possidente, B. P. (2001). Aggression in male rats receiving anabolic
androgenic steroids: effects of social and
environmental provocation. Hormones and
Behavior, 40 (3), 409-418.
Brown, K. J., & Grunberg, N. E. (1995).
Effects of housing on male and female
rats: Crowding stressed males but calms
females. Physiology & Behavior, 58 (6),
1085-1089.Cheeta, S., Irivine, E., & File,
S. E. (2001). Social isolation modifies
nicotine’s effects in animal tests of anxiety.
British Journal of Pharmacology, 132, (7),
1389-1395.
Crawley, J. N., Scleidt, W. M., & Contrera, J. F. (1975). Does social environment
decrease propensity to fight in male mice?
Behavioral Biology, 15 (1), 73-83.
D’Aarbe, M., Einstein, R., & Lavidis, N.
A. (2002). Stressful animal housing conditions and their potential effect on sympathetic neurotransmission in mice. American
Journal of Physiology-regulatory Integrative and Comparative, 282 (5), 1422-1428.
Garzon, J., & Del Rio, J. (1981). Hyperactivity induced in rats by long-term
isolation: Further studies on a new animal
model for the detection of antidepressants.
European Journal of Pharmacology, 74 (4),
287-294.
Giacalone, E., Tansella, M., Valzelli,
L., & Garattini, S. (1968). Brain serotonin
metabolism in isolated aggressive mice.
Biochemical Pharmacology, 17 (7), 1315Rock

1327.
Goldsmith, J. F., Brain, P. F., & Benton,
D. (1978). Effects of the duration of individual or group housing on behavioural
and adrenocortical reactivity in male mice.
Physiology & Behavior, 21 (5), 757-760.
Greco, A. M., Gambardella, P., Sticchi, R., D’Aponte, D., Direnzo, G., & De
Franciscis, P. (1989). Effects of individual
housing on circadian rhythms of adult rats.
Physiology & Behavior, 45 (2), 363-366.
Greco, A. M., Gambardella, P., Sticchi,
R., D’Aponte, D., & De Francisci. (1990).
Chronic administration of imipramine antagonizes deranged circadian rhythm phases in individually housed rats. Physiology
& Behavior, 48 (1), 67-72.
Karelina, K., Norman, G. J., Zhang,
N., Morris, J. S., Peng, H., & DeVries, C.
(2009). Social isolation alters neuroinflammatory response to stroke. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America, 106, 5895-5900.
Karolewicz, B., & Paul, I. A. (2001).
Group housing of mice increases immobility and antidepressant sensitivity in the
forced swim test and tail suspension test.
European Journal of Pharmacology, 415
(2-3), 197-201.
Kaushal, N., Nair, D., Gozal, D., Ramesh, V. (2012). Socially isolated mice exhibit a blunted homeostatic sleep response
to acute sleep deprivation compared to socially paired mice. Brain research.
Lasley, S. M., & Thurmond, J. B. (1985).
Interaction of dietary tryptophan and social
isolation on territorial aggression, motor
activity, and neurochemistry in mice. Psychopharmacology, 87, 313-321.
Lynch, W. J., Kushner, M. G., Rawleigh,
J. M., Fiszdon, J., & Carroll, M. E. (1999).
The effects of restraint stress on voluntary
ethanol consumption in rats. Experimental
and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 7 (4),
318-323.
Lyons, D. M., Wang, O. J., Lindley, S.
E., Levine, S., Kalin, N. H., & Schatzberg,
A. F. (1999). Separation induced changes
in squirrel monkey hypothalamic-pituitaryadrenal physiology resemble aspects of hypercortisolism in humans. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 24(2), 131-142.
Malkesman, O., Maayan, R., Weizman,
A., & Weller, A. (2006). Aggressive behavior and HPA axis hormones after social isolation in adult rats of two different genetic
animal models for depression. Behavioural
Brain Research, 175 (2), 408-414.
Martin, A. L., & Brown, R. E. (2010).
The lonely mouse: Verification of a separaVolume 2, Number 3

tion-induced model of depression in female
mice. Behavioural Brain Research, 207 (1),
196-207.
Martin, L. B., Glasper, E. R., Nelson, R.
J., & DeVries, A. C. (2006). Prolonged separation delays wound healing in monogamous California mice, Peromyscus californicus, but not in polygynous white-footed
mice, P. Leucopus. Physiology & Behavior,
87 (5), 837-841.
Matsumoto, K., Ojima, K., & Watanabe,
H. (1996). Neurosteroidal modulation of
social isolation-induced decrease in pentobarbital sleep in mice. Brain Research, 708
(1-2), 1-6.
McKenzie-Quirk, S. D., & Miczek, K. A.
(2008). Social rank and social separation as
determinants of alcohol drinking in squirrel monkeys. Psychopharmacology, 201
(1), 137-145.
Michel, A., & Tirelli, E. (2002). Effects
of the social conditions of housing through
testing on cocaine-induced contextual sensitization and conditioned locomotion in
C57BL/6J mice. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Chemistry, 26 (6), 1185-1191.
Miczek, K. A., & O’Donnell, J. M. Intruder-evoked aggression in isolated and
non-isolated mice: Effects of psychomotor
stimulants and L-dopa. Psychopharmacology, 57 (1), 47-55.
Nelson, M., & Pinna. G. (2011). S-norfluoxetine microinfused into the basolateral
amygdala increases allopregnanolone levels and reduces aggression in socially isolated mice. Neuropharmacology, 60 (7-8),
1154-1159.
Parker, L. F., & Radow, B. L. (1974).
Isolation stress and volitional ethanol consumption in the rat. Physiology and Behavior, 12, 1-3. Petkov, V. V., Konstantinova,

By Fernando Bermudez

E., & Grachovoska, T. (1985). Changes in
brain opiate receptors in rats with isolation syndrome. Pharmacological Research
Communications, 17(6), 575-584.
Ricardo, V. P., Frussa-Filho, R., Silvia,
R. H., Lopez, G. B., Patti, C. L., ZanierGomes, P. H., Araujo, N- P., Lima, A. J. O.,
Carvalho, R. C., Kameda, S. R., & Abilio,
V. C. (2005). Effects of social isolation on
aging-induced orofacial movements in rats.
Physiology & Behavior, 86(1-2), 203-208.
Rilke, O., May, T., Oehler, J., &
Wolffgramm, J. (1995). Influences of housing conditions and ethanol intake on binding characteristics of D2, 5-HT1A, and
benzodiazepine receptors of rats. Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior, 52 (1),
23-28.
Rodgers, R. J., & Cole, J. C. (1993). Influence of social isolation, gender, strain,
and prior novelty on plus-maze behaviour
in mice. Physiology & Behavior, 54 (4),
729-736.
Sachser, N. (1986). The effects of longterm isolation in physiology and behavior
in male guinea pigs. Physiology and Behavior, 38 (1), 31-39.
Sanchez, M. M., Aguado, F., SanchezToscano, F., & Saphier, D. (1995). Effects
of prolonged social isolation on responses
of neurons in the bed nucleus of the stria
terminalis, preoptic area, and hypothalamic
paraventricular nucleus to stimulation in
the medial amygdala. (1995). Psychoneuroendocrinology, 20 (5), 525-541.
Scaccianoce, S., Del Bianco, P., Paolone,
G., Caprioli, D, Modafferi, A. M. E., Nencini, P., & Badiani, A. (2006). Social
isolation selectively reduces hippocampal
brain-derived neurotrophic factor without
altering plasma corticosterone. Behavioural Brain Research, 168(2), 323-325.
Scalera, G. (1992). Taste preferences,
body weight gain, food and fluid intake in
singly or grouped-housed rats. Physiology
& Behavior, 52 (5), 935-943.
Schenk, S., Gorman, K., Amit, Z. (1990).
Age-dependent effects of isolation housing
on the self-administration of ethanol in laboratory rats. Alcohol, 7 (4) , 321-326.
Serra, M., Pisu, M. G., Floris, I., & Biggio, G. (2005). Social isolation-induced
changes in the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in the rat (2005). Stress, 8 (4),
259-264.
Shoji, H., & Mizoguchi, K. (2011). Aging-related changes in the effects of social
isolation on social behavior in rats. Physiology & Behavior, 102 (1), 58-62.
Stolk, J. M., Conner, R. L., & Barchas,
9

J. D. (1974). Social environment and brain
biogenic amine metabolism in rats. Journal
of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 87 (2), 203-207.Suomi, S. J., Eisele,
C. D., Grady, S. A., & Harlow, H. F. (1975).
Depressive behavior in adult monkeys following separation from family environment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 84
(5), 576-578.
Survjit, C., Irvine, E., & File, S. E.
(2001). Social isolation modifies nicotine’s
effects in animal test of anxiety. British
Journal of Pharmacology, 132, 1389-1395.
Thorsell, A., Slawecki, C. J., Khoury, A.
EL., Mathe, A. A., & Ehlers, C. L. (2006).
The effects of social isolation on neuropeptide Y levels, exploratory and anxietyrelated behaviors in rats. Pharmacology
Biochemistry and Behavior, 83 (1), 28-34.
Uylings, H., Kuypers, K., Diamond, M.
C., & Veltman, W. (1978). Effects of differential environments on plasticity of
dendrites of cortical pyramidal neurons in
adult rats. Experimental Neurology, 62 (3),
658-677.
Watson, S. L., Shively, C. A., Kaplan, J.

R., & Line, S. W. (1998). Effects of chronic
social separation on cardiovascular disease
risk factors in female cynomolgus monkeys. Atherosclerosis, 137 (2), 259-266.
Weinstock, M., Speiser, Z., & Ashkenazi,
R. (1978). Changes in brain catecholamine
turnover and receptor sensitivity induced
by social deprivation in rats. Psychopharmacology, 56 (2), 205-209.
Wolffgramm, J. (1990). Free choice
ethanol intake of laboratory rats under different social conditions. Psychopharmacology, 101 (2), 233-239.
Wolffgramm, J., & Heyne, A. (1991).
Social behavior, dominance, and social
deprivation of rats determine drug choice.
Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior,
38 (2), 389-399.
Zhuravliova, E., Barbakadze, T., Zaailishvili, E., Chipashvili, M., Koshoridze,
N., & Mikeladze, D. (2009). Social isolation in rats inhibits oxidative metabolism,
decreases the content of mitochondrial KRas and activates mitochondrial hexokinase. Behavioural Brain Research, 205 (2),
377-383. ●

Notice
Please do not send articles or letters to third parties to be forwarded
to Rock as it only delays receiving
them and adds to the workload of
those asked to do the forwarding.

Ed Mead, Publisher
Rock Newsletter
P.O. Box 47439
Seattle, WA 98146

FIRST CLASS MAIL