{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024829298572315334, 'fraction_numerical': 0.025450031036623216, 'mean_word_length': 5.248062015503876, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
100 Years of psychopharmacology

During the early decades of the 19th century, Philippe Pinel made Paris one of the first centres of a recognizably modern clinical psychiatry. His work was continued by Esquirol and amongst Esquirol’s pupils was a psychiatrist, who is little known nowadays, Joseph Moreau de Tours. Moreau de Tours’ studies with hashish were published in Paris in 1845 (Moreau de Tour’s, 1845). In some respects they can be considered the first scientifically planned psychopharmacological experiments (Carlsson, 1990; Jaspers, 1913; Baruk, 1992). There was considerable debate about what if anything the effects of taking compounds such as hashish, alcohol or the opiates might reveal about psychological functioning. On the one hand authorities such as William James (James, 1902) proposed that the ecstatic states experienced on centrally acting compounds might reveal useful information about the constitution of human nature in one of its most intimate aspects. A more cynical view of the same was taken by Henry Maudsley, to the effect that the production of apparently religious ecstasy by such drugs indicated that there was no more to any supernatural seemings than natural causes (Maudsley, 1897). More generally, however, the central effects of exogenous compounds were discussed under the heading of the effects of poisons by most authors (see Jaspers, 1913/1963). The tradition of considering such studies in terms of poisoning, with the implication that findings from this source could reveal little about the mind or spirit of man, arose in part from the strict Cartesian division