pcslife,

As stated on the first web site, there are two forms of neurofeedback, passive and active. Mary Esty actually is mistaken. There is only "brain training" neurofeedback which she uses. The passive modality she also uses is neurotherapy.

The east coast therapist community has been trying to redefine passive neurotherapy as neurofeedback. LENS is not a form of neurofeedback. It has legal limitations per its exempt status from the FDA. A further correction is calling LENS non-invasive. It is invasive due to its claims to apply electromagnetic fields to the brain. That artificail stimulation from outside the brain is invasive.

The 'brain training' neurofeedback has a good history. LENS has a controversial history. Since it has been ruled 'exempt' by FDA standards as per the application from Len Ochs, it is not held to the reporting of adverse events an fully studied and FDA approved modality is subject to.

So, it would benefit the PCS/mTBI community if brain training neurofeedback was not combined with the passive neurotherapies such as FNS/LENS.

The risk of adverse events from brain training is very low to non-existent where the frequency and risk of adverse events from passive neurotherapy not reported except in anecdotal comments. Some of those adverse events have been severe, such a seizures, etc.

As I read Mary Esty's web site, I am appalled at the double speak.

She promotes FNS and its later version, LENS for treatment of TBI with the statement: "An NIH-funded study of neurofeedback treatment for mild/moderate brain injury appears in the June 2001 issue of the Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation. "

The abstract of that articles follows:
<Objective: To conduct a preliminary experimental evaluation of the potential efficacy of Flexyx Neurotherapy System (FNS), an innovative electroencephalography (EEG)-based therapy used clinically in the treatment of traumatic brain injury (TBI).

Participants: Twelve people aged 21 to 53 who had experienced mild to moderately severe closed head injury at least 12 months previously and who reported substantial cognitive difficulties after injury, which interfered with their functioning.

Design: Participants were randomly assigned to an immediate treatment group or a wait-list control group and received 25 sessions of FNS treatment. They were assessed at pretreatment, posttreatment, and follow-up with standardized neuropsychological and mood measures.

Results: Comparison of the two groups on outcome measures indicated improvement after treatment for participants' reports of depression, fatigue, and other problematic symptoms, as well as for some measures of cognitive functioning. Most participants experienced meaningful improvement in occupational and social functioning.

Conclusion: On the basis of these results, FNS appears to be a promising new therapy for TBI and merits more extensive evaluation.>

Oddly enough, the "more extensive evaluation" has never been done on either the FNS system nor the newer LENS system.

I am for the most part, impressed with the web site information provided by The Neurofeedback Center of Virginia. They properly present the modalities they offer. Unfortunately, they repeat the errors of LENS and ROSHI but it appears they do not use these controversial systems. They do properly limit the use of ROSHI as a relaxation enhancing treatment only. They do not mention the same limitations of the LENS system.

I think you best chances for improvement will come from the latter clinic.

pcs, when you combine alcohol and Xanax in the same sentence <When I ....have a glass or two wine, when I am on Xanax etc., I tend to ignore my symptoms.> I was concerned. Glad to hear you are off the Xanax.

My best to you.