A way to train the brain:
Scientists take a systematic look at the benefits of neurofeedback
By Jerome Burne
FINANCIAL TIMES
LONDON, July 11 Sitting at a desk on the 10th floor of Charing Cross hospital, Tobias Egner appears to be relaxing with a curious computer game. Shapes keep changing on the screen but there is no mouse or keyboard. Instead, wires trail from different points on his scalp.
IN FACT, he is working hard at an activity that most people can keep up for only about 20 minutes. Dr. Egner, of the department of cognitive neuroscience and behavior at Imperial College London, is improving his memory and attention by changing his brain waves. Three leads attached to his earlobes and the top of his head connect to a device that monitors his brain activity. The raw data is fed back on a screen so that Dr. Egner can see how his brain activity affects the shapes on the monitor.
We tell users: Just let the feedback guide you be relaxed but focused, says David Vernon, his colleague.
Studies already show that neurofeedback, as the process is known, could be an effective form of drug-free treatment for alcoholics, epileptics and children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.
John Gruzelier, who runs the cognitive neuroscience and behavior laboratory at Imperial, is one of the few U.K. researchers in this field. In the United States, neurofeedback therapy has grown fast, mainly among parents of ADHD children looking for a non-drug treatment.
Neurofeedback is based on the fact that our brains produce electrical waves of different frequencies (hertz) that can be recorded with an electroencephalograph. Each is broadly associated with a particular mental state. Beta waves, the fastest, are 15 Hz to 18 Hz, alpha waves 12 to 15 Hz and theta a leisurely 4 to 7 Hz. Beta is linked with day-to-day alertness, alpha with relaxation and theta with imaginative imagery, although too much theta can cause problems for instance, inducing a dreamlike state that makes concentration difficult.
In the 1960s, researchers found that first animals and then people could learn to produce different types of brain waves at will, using feedback, such as a light or a tone. Then a chance observation found it was possible to prevent an epileptic fit, which involves a slow wave of theta rolling across the brain, by learning to produce sensorimotor rhythm (SMR) waves, a particular sort of slow beta wave found in a brain region known as the sensorimotor cortex.
Children with ADHD show a different pattern of inappropriate theta they go into slow theta at just the time they need beta to concentrate and so benefit from learning how to stay in beta. There are about five good studies supporting this, says Professor Gruzelier. The kids IQ goes up and so does their ability to attend [to] and comprehend tasks. A big randomized trial is under way at Northwick Park hospital in London.
One form of neurofeedback, the Peniston protocol, has had dramatic results in helping recovering alcoholics. This concentrates on producing a particular frequency where relaxing alpha waves turn into even slower theta.
But anybody can benefit. Professor Gruzelier ran a study two years ago in which he showed neurofeedback could significantly optimize performance of high-achieving students at the Royal College of Music by encouraging theta waves. His team took videos of students in performance and had them rated by independent experts.
Groups of students were allocated to different therapies including aerobics, Alexander Technique, mental skills training and neurofeedback. After two years the students were filmed again and assessed. All those in the neurofeedback group had improved, some by 50 percent, in stylistic accuracy and interpretative imagination. The number of incidental errors also fell significantly.
This year, Professor Gruzelier, who believes applications are unlimited, published a paper that showed that people trained to increase both SMR/beta and theta in combination improved both attention and memory. There is also the attraction that the process looks safe, non-addictive and effective.
Further tests are needed to confirm this, Professor Gruzelier cautions, but if neurofeedback can positively influence the cognitive performance of healthy individuals, it opens up the possibility that such treatment may be beneficial for those suffering from cognitive deficits.
© The Financial Times Ltd 2003. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial Times.
Major Problems With the Vaccine Procedure
By Bronwyn Hancock Vaccination Information Service
We have all been repeatedly told that vaccination is both safe and protective of children against dangerous diseases. Many parents upon learning of adverse effects realize that their trust has been betrayed--that vaccines are not safe at all. However, it is common for them to continue to trust that vaccines are effective and that the diseases they purportedly prevent are dangerous. This creates a terrible dilemma for these parents, who end up feeling that either way they are taking a risk.
However, with more investigation increasing numbers of parents are discovering that nature is not so cruel as to force such a difficult dilemma on them. The full reality is that not only do childhood illnesses (provided they are properly managed) have a priming and maturing role in immune system development rather than being dangerous to unvaccinated children, but also vaccines have never prevented any diseases. Other factors have clearly been responsible for the declines that have occurred, and the very toxic and invasive nature of vaccines that causes the observed adverse effects also makes them counterproductive for their very purpose of protecting against diseases.
Rather than discussing the statistical evidence, false assumptions and misinterpretations relating to the myth of vaccination effectiveness, which are covered by various books and Web sites, what is far less widely known, and what I will cover here, is the actual effect that vaccines have on the immune system, which causes them to be counterproductive.
I must give credit for my awareness of this to Dr. Viera Scheibner, who is arguably unsurpassed in her width of knowledge and depth of understanding of the vaccination issue, having studied over 100,000 pages of medical research on the subject. Having worked closely with her over a number of years, I have read much of the most revealing research that she has uncovered.
There are two main causes of the problem: the toxic nature of the ingredients in vaccines and the invasive form of delivery.
Ingredients, the Injection Process and the Result
At the bottom of this article is a brochure that summarizes the subject and starts with a list of the ingredients in vaccines. In respect to these, first there are those that are poisonous by their very nature regardless of how they are administered such as formaldehyde, mercury, aluminum compounds, phenol, acetone and antifreeze. It is well established that such poisons, even on their own, are immune system SENSITIZERS. This means they make the immune system more sensitive, or less able to cope appropriately with foreign substances that it encounters.
Then there are other ingredients such as animal organ tissue and blood that our bodies would not have a problem with IF they entered the body orally because our digestive system breaks down foreign proteins, unusable in that form, into their constituent amino acids, which are then absorbable and useable by the body.
However, our immune systems have not been designed to deal with foreign proteins being injected. In fact the injection of any foreign substance is well known to suppress the immune system, and vaccination is no exception.
Effects
The immune system becomes derailed and confused, and often even when these proteins subsequently are encountered by a natural portal of entry (e.g. through the digestive system or lungs), the immune system reacts. This of course is what is known as an allergic response. One manifestation of this, asthma, kills over 10,000 people annually in the United States.
Other effects include more serious "atypical" forms of the targeted diseases and a reversed ratio of T4 and T8 cells that characterizes a host of modern immunodeficiencies including autoimmune diseases, cancer (now in the young), chronic fatigue syndrome and AIDS. All of these conditions were unknown before the vaccination era. (See accompanying brochure for a more complete list of vaccination effects.)
Bypassing Vital Defenses
Another problem with the injection process in respect to any viruses and bacteria that are being administered is that very important outer levels of defense are bypassed, giving them deep access into the body to cause damage. Hence, for example, the now well known finding of the vaccine strain of the measles virus in the gut of a significant proportion of autistic children.
It has also been found that animal, bacterial and viral DNA, when injected, can be incorporated into the recipient's DNA. No wonder vaccination has been linked to cancer, particularly considering vaccine ingredients even include animal cancer cells (used for the culturing of viruses because they continue to multiply).
Some Babies Just Cannot Cope
Some babies lose the battle against the invasive toxic assault of vaccination in hours, days or weeks. If the parents are "lucky" it is diagnosed as cot death, or if an organ fails it is classified simply as failure of that organ (e.g. kidney failure). However, if injuries such as subdural hematomas or retinal hemorrhages are found, the parents (or other care-giver) find themselves falsely accused of murder in the form of "shaken baby" syndrome.
Vaccine-Induced Antibodies Do NOT Indicate Immunity
What causes confusion to many medical doctors is that part of the sensitization reaction to vaccination is the production of antibodies. This is falsely equated with the opposite, intended effect, which is to bring immunity. The aluminum compounds are even included for this very purpose (as "adjuvants") to artificially force the production of a significant number of virus-specific IgG antibodies, because the immune system does not naturally produce them (in significant levels) on demand by injections.
However, the IgG antibodies thus produced only show that there has been exposure to that virus. Their presence does not mean immunity. The secretory IgA antibody, which does NOT get produced by injections because injections bypass the outer level processes of the immune system, has been found to be a far better measure of immunity.
This is why contracting tetanus, the well known way being by a deep puncture wound, which is just like an injection, does not bring immunity. The result is even said to be "sensitization" to tetanus in the future. Immunity can develop, however, if the bacteria enter via the natural portals of entry, often without the person even being ill with it. When it comes in through the natural portals of entry it is also in its aerobic form, which does not produce the neurotoxins that cause the characteristic tetanus symptoms such as locked jaw and tetanic spasms.
The fact that some children do not have noticeable adverse effects to vaccination does not mean that for them the procedure is beneficial, it is just that we have great variations.
Chronic fatigue syndrome: new evidence for a central fatigue disorder.
Clin Sci (Lond) 2003 Apr 23
Georgiades E, Behan WM, Kilduff LP, Hadjicharalambous M, Mackie EE, Wilson J, Ward SA, Pitsiladis YP.
Considerable evidence points towards a prominent role for central neural (CNS) mechanisms in the pathogenesis of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), a disorder characterised chiefly by persistent, often debilitating, fatigue.
We wished to characterise circulating profiles of putative amino acid modulators of CNS serotoninergic and dopaminergic function in CFS patients at rest, during symptom-limited exercise and subsequent recovery.
Twelve CFS patients and eleven age- and sex-matched sedentary controls, with similar physical activity histories, underwent ramp-incremental exercise to the limit of tolerance. Plasma amino acid concentrations, oxygen uptake (Vo 2) and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) were measured at rest, during exercise and recovery.
Peak oxygen uptake (Vo 2peak) was significantly lower in the CFS patients, compared to controls. RPE in the patients was higher at all measured time points, including rest, relative to controls. Levels of free tryptophan [free Trp];the rate-limiting serotoninergic precursor, were significantly higher in CFS patients at exhaustion and recovery, whereas concentrations of branched-chain and large-neutral amino acids (BCAA and LNAA, respectively) were lower in patients at exhaustion and, for [LNAA], also during recovery.
Consequently, the [free Trp] : [BCAA] and [free Trp] : [LNAA] ratios were significantly higher in CFS patients, except at rest. On the other hand, levels of tyrosine, the rate-limiting dopaminergic precursor, were significantly lower at all time points in the patients.
The significant differences observed in a number of key putative CNS serotoninergic and dopaminergic modulators, coupled with the exacerbated effort perception, provide further evidence for a potentially significant role of CNS mechanisms in CFS pathogenesis.
|