neurofeedback
 

Hi All,

I recently had a QEEG done to measure the effectiveness of the PROSHI (a neurofeedback device) on my brain. We performed 6 minutes of baseline (pre PROSHI/without the PROSHI), 6 minutes with the PROSHI and 6 minutes post PROSHI in succession. The results were pretty amazing. The baseline reading showed that I had multiple coherence/phase relationship problems and high amplitudes of delta throughout my brain, which equates to having moderate brain damage. During PROSHI use, almost everything normalized, and some things even improved beyond normal. Post PROSHI, most everything held.

The person who conducted the QEEG, and is overseeing my therapy, is Dr. Victoria Ibric. She is a pioneer in the world of neurofeedback. I woud encourage anyone who is interested in improving to visit her website: www.nnrionline.com.

My apologies if this sounds like a commercial, I assure you that it isn't. My intentions for this post is to give encouragment to anyone who is considering doing neurofeedback. I am not able to post the results of my QEEG; however, if anyone is interested in viewing it, just let me know and I can email it to you.

Thanks.

I checked out the pROSHI (correct capitalization, pROSHI is a personal version of ROSHI). Sounds interesting. In doing further research. the EM (Electromagnetic Stimulation) part sounds a bit premature. The developer is changing the TESLA values of the EM as higher values have proved to be unacceptable.

I would suggest considering this modality carefully. Dr. Ibric is not a pioneer in this field by any stretch of the imagination. She did not start her work with it until 19992. The pioneers have been working with it since the 1970's. Those pioneers were just limited to use in their own clinics because computer based systems were still far to expensive for mass clinical application. Mr. Davis and other were just able to use the lowering cost of computers to bring the system to a wider and commercialized market.

The system she uses does not require her input as it is self-moderating. The software comes to her as a self-modulating system. Her only input is analysis of the QEEG maps before during and after for synchronicity, coherence, phase, etc. She uses Davis and Patton designed NeuroDynamic Activator™ system to analyze the waveforms.

Dr. Ibric claims this system to be non-invasive but she misuses the term non-invasive. The only non-invasive component is that the system does not mechanically penetrate the brain. It does penetrate the brain with electro-magnetic fields. It is these electro-magnetic fields that are believed to effect the treatment.

There are other neuro-feedback systems that do not use electro-magnetic fields to modify the brains waveforms.

The NeuroDynamic Activator™ system also uses light strobing to reward/punish the brain for proper/improper behavior. The authors of the software make no mention of whether this effect is limited to the visual processing or if it effects auditory processing and higher levels of executive functions.

As I sort through more of the papers and articles, I will attempt to report back to this forum.

I have done some more research on the pROSHI device called NeuroDynamic Activator. It has not undergone any FDA testing, study or approval. The manufacturer says that it is sold as a "relaxation device." I am unimpressed with the ROSHI Corporation. The inventor told me the first instruction for using the device is "go slowly."

The phone number on the ROSHI web site is unpublished and appears to ring to a home. The man who answered sounded like I woke him from a nap. The California Secretary of State reports that the ROSHI Corp with Charles Davis listed as the contact, has a suspended Corporate license.

You can buy the machine for home use for $1995. The therapists recoup their investment in about 20 therapy sessions.

There have been NO STUDIES about it long term effect whether positive or negative. There is another 'non-intrusive' device that attempts to effect the electrophysiological functions of the brain cells that has been FDA approved. It has a warning about use without a doctor's consent and that it can cause problems with people with a history of seizures.

So, consider the pROSHI system very carefully.

Caveat emptor, Let the buyer beware

Sorry you feel that way, the pROSHI has done some amazing things for brain injured individuals, including yours truly.

FYI:

Chuck does have a current and valid business license in CA, that information is incorrect and dated. It you think about it logically, how could be even sell his unit without a business license? Chuck is a pretty high profile person within the world of neurofeedback, don't you think he would have been by now?

Dr. Ibric has published her research with the pROSHI and brain injuries in the Journal of Neurofeedback.

I'm a bit confused about your 4th paragraph - are you talking about the pROSHI, or another nfb device because nothing the ROSHI corporation makes has been FDA approved? And yes, anytime you use flickering lights on the brain, you should always be careful of persons who suffer from seizures, so this is nothing new.

Your argument about the long term effects also doesn't have much weight. If you think about it, the long term effects of most of the drugs on the market are not known. Case in point: researchers are now afraid that long term use of ritalin will cause cardiovascular problems into old age. So, almost everything we do or put into our body carries the risk of not knowing what long term use will do to us.

The pioneer argument is very subjective, Mark. What you consider a "pioneer," I would consider a dinosaur who doesn't keep up with the latest technology. I will say this though, Dr. Ibric is considered an expert in the field of brain rehabilitation and neurofeedback. She is very well known and highly respected within the world of neurofeedback. She is one of the few who still conducts research on neurofeedback, she presents her research regularly at conferences and she is also a trainer to other professionals.

Chuck, and Dr. Ibric, have repeatedly shown that the pROSHI activates the pre frontal cortex, the area responsible for higher levels of thinking. The have also demonstrated that it acts to "clear up" the coherence and phase relationship problems a lot of brain injured people suffer from.

Mark, I understand that you are very skeptic and critical of "alternative therapies." In the future, I would ask that when I post something, if you don't agree with it, please just ignore my post and move on. I really don't like having to go back and correct your misinformation about the therapies I post on. I, being an ex-research scientist, would never post anything that I thought would endanger anyone on here. That is why I always post references people can contact - ie, Dr. Ibric - so they can have a professional evaluate them before they spend their money. Thank you, I appreciate it.

I did not say the Mr Davis did not have a Business license. He no longer has a Corporation license. He can not operated under a name the ends in Inc or Corporation or use a corporated format for his bookkeeping and taxes.

Anybody can sell just about anything without a corporate or business license. Their only requirement is to have a Sales and Use Tax Permit on file with the Calif State board of Equalization. Such permit has nothing to do with the validity of the product sold.

Mr David's web site says ROSHI Corporation. There is no such ROSHI Corporation anymore. The Corporation license was suspended.

As for Dr Ibric's credentials. She may do a lot of conference and seminar speaking, but she does not have much peer reviewed research published. The only peer work she has done is one study done with Dr Cory Hammond. I have talked with Dr Hammond. He has had some great successes with neurofeedback but acknowledges that his results are anecdotal, not part of a scientific study.

I have been researching QEEG for 8 years. Dr Ibric is definitely not a lead researcher in QEEG, nor a pioneer. The pioneers in QEEG and neurofeedback are Robert Thatcher, Ph.D., F. LaMarr Heyrend, M.D., C. Dene Simpson, Ph.D., Sam Barrs, PhD., a group of doctors at the brain institute at New York University and others. Dr. Ibric is a "johnny come lately."

I have never said it has not worked for YOU.

What specifically has it done for you, besides the coherence and phase relationship? What symptoms has it resolved? Has it improved your memory functions? Has it improved processing speed? How long do the effect last?

The FDA approved NFB Device has shown to cause these changes but the improvements do not last and require repeated sessions with the NFB device.

I did not say it does not work. For someone who claims to be a scientific researcher, you leave a lot of loose ends in your research on this issue.

I said to be careful.

If Dr Ibric is so good with this ROSHI machine, why doesn't she do the scientific studies to get it FDA approved? She has a long list of her presentations and papers. It totals 83 but only three are actually published articles and they don't report on ROSHI directly. The rest are presentations or promotions for the ROSHI device. She is great at promoting her own services and clinic. The ROSHI Journal does not count since it is an "inside" publication.

You say to stop criticizing your posts that I do not agree with.

I am criticizing your exaggerations and unsubstantiated claims.

There are plenty of neurofeeedback therapist who use active procedures where the patient work to direct the brain into using other areas better to balance the waveform. The ROSHI works without the patient's input. It is a passive system from the perspective of the patient. It does not teach the patient how to effect change.

Anytime as device is used for something beyond its published claims, I am concerned. The ROSHI is a "relaxation device," not a neurorehab device or Neurofeedback device. It purports to enable a Zen like relaxation. That sounds nice if you like Zen like relaxation. Some people can do that with YOGA.

I prefer to relax under my own control, not under the influence of a machine. True neurofeedback uses the patients' inputs to obtain the desired result.

I'm sorry Mark, I wasn't aware that you were the moderator of the forum and that I needed to substantiate all of my "claims" on here to you. Of course, I'm exaggerating. Mark, I am neither a practitioner or an owner of any medical device who is trying to solicit business on here. I am simply someone who has gone through many of the things people on here have gone through and I'm simply trying to help them out. So I don't see it necessary to substantiate the claims I make on here. Anyone who is interested in what I'm saying can simply inquire further, in which case I would gladly point them in the direction of qualified resources, or conduct the research on their own.

I'm sorry that you feel my posts are exaggerated and unsubstantiated. I ensure you that they aren't, I just don't have the time, nor do I have the desire, to substantiate everything that I post on here. Last time I checked, this is not a professional forum where we all need to dot our i's and cross our t's because we are giving professional advice.

I'll only address the pROSHI issue one last time. You are, again, incorrect on a number of levels. First, QEEG is a subset of neurofeedback. There is a distinction between QEEG and neurofeedback. QEEG is only a type of brain scan that doesn't administer any feedback at all. As you know, you simply put on the cap and it takes a brainwave scan of your head. By the way, not sure if you are aware of this or not, but the QEEG is a bit controversial and is not without its limitations -I won't go into those here, but you can spend the time researching them if you want to. Paradoxically, many professionals actually use the QEEG for research but don't believe in neurofeedback - this is a bit puzzling to me since one is derived from the other. Anyway, when I was referring to Dr. Ibric as being a "pioneer" I was exclusively referring to her being a pioneer in neurofeedback and not QEEG technology. Those guys who you mentioned are indeed pioneers in QEEG technology but I don't know where I would put them in the world of neurofeedback. My experience is that people like them are still stuck in the 70's and 80's and haven't kept up with the technology. If they do neurofeedback at all, they still do things the old way, which is not considered a bit archaic. But I digress.

Dr. Ibric doesn't get the pROSHI FDA approved because the FDA won't approve it. I don't know of any neurofeedback machines that are FDA approved. You mentioned one but you have yet to reveal its name. And as a side note, you seem to be very hung up on the whole FDA thing. I would caution you about this. The FDA is a corrupt government organization that is not devoid of controversy. I'm not going to substantiate this for you, but you can always research it for yourself. Try looking up how Ritalin got approved and actually, why neurofeedback isn't approved. It might surprise you.

If you understood the technology, you would understand that the pROSHI does indeed teach the brain how to function normally. Put simply, the pROSHI delivers flickers of light sequences set to the range of brainwave frequencies from 1-40Hz. The brain, being the ever plastic organ that it is, tries to lock onto the frequencies but fortunately, it can't because the frequencies are constantly changing in a random pattern. When this happens, the brain decides to default to its resting state. To do this, by way of blood perfusion, the brain will try to resolve any problems it has - coherence, phase relationships, abnormally high or low amplitudes, etc -. In other words, areas of the brain that aren't functioning correctly, the brain delivers extra blood to in order to correct the problems. This is why Chuck Davis (who is an engineer and not a practitioner) recommended to take it slowly for you because you can seriously stress your brain out if it isn't used to delivering oxygen to those areas of your brain. I've been using it since February and only now can I crank it up to maximum intensity for 30 minutes. A lot of practitioners will not only use the pROSHI as a stand alone device, but they will also add it to other therapies to augment their effectiveness. So, although the client isn't actively teaching the brain what to do, it is still learning how to act in a "normal" state. And, your comment about doing yoga to get the mind of a zen monk made me laugh. In order to get a mind like that, you would have to spend years developing your brain. The pROSHI allows you to do this in a number of months.

My understanding is that Chuck had to list his device as a "relaxation device" for legal reasons. I am not sure on this, but it seems that he wasn't allowed to list it as a neurofeedback device because he would have been forced to go through a bunch of red tape, which he wasn't interested in doing. Again, this is just the rumor I heard and has I have not verified this with him.

The fact that you listed 4 people as the "pioneers" of neurofeedback leads me to believe that you really don't know what you are talking about. There are many more people who contributed to neurofeedback and QEEG technology than those 4.

You mention that you prefer to relax and under your own control and not under the influence of a machine. You have posted on here that you never tried neurofeedback, meditation, or any other type of mind relaxation technique. So, how do you know what you would prefer? Also, if you have never tried neurofeedback, how would you know what true neurofeedback is like. Depending on the protocol, it can be a very passive process in which you totally relax and allow your subconscious brain to do all of the work. There really is not work involved by the client at all.

I'm not on this forum to debate you on what does and doesn't work. I know from experience, and from the experience of thousands of others, that what I post on here does work. I'm not saying it will work for everyone, but it does some good for most people. In the future, any attempts to engage me in a debate will be ignored. If you want to be cynical about alternative therapies, then that is your business but please, let us who are looking for answers and are willing to try things to heal ourselves do so without you trying to police us. Like I mentioned before, you could always just ignore the posts you don't agree with. I know that I have done the same with a number of posts you have posted.

just a reminder that here at NeuroTalk we provide an open forum for all to feel free to discuss all aspects of their health and treatments

the only time we do draw the line is at the downright dangerous, or when people are trying to sell their products/services

as that is not the case here, it would be appreciated if the discussion could remain on topic related to the treatment and it's pros or cons rather than become personal about member disagreements about it. Disagreeing is fine, as long as it can be done agreeably and without negative personal remarks.

Each page of Neurotalk forums has this at the bottom
We credit our members with the ability to be able to make their own decisions on the various treatments they read about here, and consult with their physician about it. We therefore invite open discussion on all treatments, conventional and alternative.


the mission statement of these forums is stated in the opening of the guidelines
http://neurotalk.psychcentral.com/showthread.php?t=1293

thanks

Yes, I couldn't agree more. Thank you!

Proshi / lens
 

Hi,

Yes, I would be very interested if you could email your results to me. You can attach it to an email in neurotalk.

I am thinking of having a course of neurotherapy treatment called LENS, which uses a neurifeedback device (invented by someone called, "Len", conincidentally - It stands for Low Energy Neurofeedback System)

Does anyone know how PROSHI and LENS work and what are the similarities and differences between them?

Concussed Scientist

pROSHI uses a light signal into the optic nerve that is supposed to reprogram the brain.

LENS claims to use electro-magnetic waves at a power below that which is measurable to create an electric field change in the brain cells.

Both claim to be non-invasive yet they both also claim to cause an effect on the brain without the active participation of the patient. This is invasive. The ROSHI does it with non-contact light so it can be sold without FDA approval as long as it does not make medical claims. The LENS states that it uses the physical contact of the electrodes to stimulate the brain so the FDA says it requires study documentation.

Both developers and producers/sellers of the equipment and training offer very little information about how their equipment works. The FDA is concerned about the LENS system since it claims to send this electro-magnetic signal back to the brain by way of the electrodes used to measure the brain's function.

*edit*

Please keep one point in mind. neither of these systems has been subjected to serious double blind scientific study. There are many 'alternative' systems in use today that claim great results. What these systems do not have is the scientific methodology behind their claims. The most important study issue is the placebo factor. If the system does not perform better than the placebo tested, then it can be rationally thought that the improvements are a result of the placebo effect.

*edit* Neurofeedback is a subset of QEEG. QEEG can be used without neurofeedback. QEEG based neurofeedback needs the baseline QEEG before establishing a neurofeedback therapy plan. Not all neurofeedback is combined with QEEG. Some neurofeedback is based on a very limited amount (channels) of EEG/QEEG waveforms. Other neurofeedback does not even utilize QEEG/EEG waveforms aquisition.

A normal EEG is based on 14 channels. QEEG usually uses 18 to 24 channels and sometimes up to 64 channels. 18 to 24 is usually the limit of the equipment used in neurofeedback. More channels are used just for research and/or diagnostic efforts.

<QEEG is only a type of brain scan that doesn't administer any feedback at all. As you know, you simply put on the cap and it takes a brainwave scan of your head. By the way, not sure if you are aware of this or not, but the QEEG is a bit controversial and is not without its limitations>

The controversy about QEEG is based on one article written in 1997 by a nay-sayer neurologist and published in the American Academy of Neurology and American Clinical Neurophysiology Society's (AAN/ACNS) paper "Assessment of Digital EEG, Quantitative EEG, and EEG Brain Mapping," edited by Dr. Marc Nuwer.

This nay-sayer article has been soundly refuted by scientific method and by analyzing the data used to substantiate the negative position as not meeting scientific method standards.

There is a very good refutation of this negative article at http://neuro.psychiatryonline.org/cg.../full/11/3/401

The peer reviewed articles supporting QEEG and true QEEG based neurofeedback exceed 15,000 so far.

QEEG has also been under conflict with the FDA because practitioners were making medical claims without having the credentials to diagnose and treat. The Lexicor system was targeted by the FDA for this problem.

LENS and ROSHI/pROSHI are not QEEG based neurofeedback. They use very limited waveform information. That does not mean that there is never a positive result. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Just the relaxation component of the two therapies can be very useful.

Arthroscopic knee surgery often finds no damage that is repairable but still effects great improvement. The reason is it causes the patient to slow down and focus on letting the knee heal.

The same can be true for many therapies including neurofeedback and biofeedback. If the patient is learning relaxation techniques during the therapy, they have accomplished a great part of the improvement. Placebo effect adds to the improvement and the therapy may add to the improvement.

I have gone through a number of phases of relaxation depths over the years. I have observed that many PCS/MTBI survivors have refused to accept the value of true relaxation as a lifestyle. They refuse to modify their environment and behavior thus keeping their stress levels at their historical levels.

Life is an activity for participants. If you do not choose to participate in your own recovery, recovery is harder to achieve.

If you choose to try any of these alternative therapies, just go into the therapy with your eyes open. Accept the costs and consequences associated with these therapies.

If you are strongly belief influenced, then you may be more successful. Some people are not receptive to hypnotherapy because of mental rigidity, others receive suggestion very easily. The same holds true for many alternative therapies.

Much to consider
 

:confused: Thank you to both dominant participants for this vigorous exchange. Living out in the sticks, I hadn't even heard of these alternative approaches.

I'm going to consider everything I've just read. However, I'm skeptical by nature. As much as I want a cure, I know there are a lot of people out there hoping to profit from our misfortune and desperation. On the other hand, I must acknowledge that my TBI can make my thinking rigid, and not close myself to new and/or contrary ideas.

The only thing that is clear to me is that I need to learn a lot more about my condition and its possible treatments. Of course, memory and attention problems make that a bit difficult. I am amazed by the capacity of some TBI posters to research and write long, organized missives. What did you guys do before you were injured?

Hockey,

I have been dealing with my life changing injury since 1965. Since 2001, I can no longer drive, nor work gainfully, so I have a lot of time to spend sitting at the computer. Early on, I was slowly putting together a Workers' Comp claim and later a SSDI application. It took three years to get SSDI and I never did get anything out of Work Comp because I was unable to find an attorney to take an MTBI case on a contingency fee.

In 2001, there was very little good information on-line. so I spent a small fortune on books.

I graduated from high school with honors and intended to go on to dental school to become an orthodontist. I quickly learned that my brain injured mind would not be able to compete successfully to a spot in dental school.

I kept having decompensations (relapses) that severely affected my ability to memorize school work and focus during the stress of tests. I had a similar experience in 10th grade when I had a bad decompensation. It took 18 months to recover from the effects of heading the ball at soccer practice.

Since then, I have learned how to pace myself and research without overloading my brain. I spent my life saving seeking a proper diagnosis and possible treatment.

I have learned that contrary to what the neurologists say, very few PCS/MTBI sufferers ever recover fully, less than 10%. Even they will have small deficits under stressful circumstances. Those who do best after PCS/MTBI do so because they have accepted their injuries and learned how to work around their limitations, work with their limitations, and basically adapt their lives to their present condition.

I have also learned that very few physicians have a true understanding of the long term prognosis from PCS/MTBI. Just because the patient does not show up in their office after a few weeks or months does not mean they recovered fully.

My wife can look back at our 29 years of marriage and identify all of my symptoms and setbacks, now that she fully understands PCS/MTBI. Before, she just considered me to be one who got irrational or moody or whatever. Now, she can identify my struggles by the look in my eyes.

For me, writing on the computer is just about my only way of communicating. I have such poor short term and immediate memory skills (bottom 5% to 12% of the population) that I get all mixed up trying to talk at length. When I am on the computer, I can reread what I have typed to keep track of my thoughts. My IQ is still very much intact and in the top 2% of the population. This is the only way I can utilize my intelligence and knowledge.

As one who has spend almost $30,000 of my own money ( plus a fair share of my health plans money too) trying the various diagnostic and therapy systems, I have put my own money where my mouth is. I have developed a keen sense of how the charlatans present their programs. With 40 plus years experience with head injury caused dysfunctions, I can quickly identify the symptoms and causes.

The biggest lie about head injury is "'give it time, you will get better." Those who do not spontaneously get better over the first few weeks or months will most likely be prone to long term dysfunctions and decompensations.

I learned in 1976 that I needed to limit stress in my life. I have turned down opportunities to make BIG money because I knew the stress load that came with the opportunities.

Yet, I provided for a family of five in one of the most expensive places to live in the US, San Jose/Silicon Valley, CA where houses cost two to three times as much as the rest of the country. And, I did it without my wife having to work. My wife finally started working in February 2009 to supplement my meager SSDI check.

All this to say, I have paid my dues. I know what I am talking about. I been there, done that, even wrote a report about it.

Hi Hockey,

Glad to hear that you learned something about the alternative therapies. In case you were wondering, a lot of the therapies I have mentioned have been around for years. Neurofeedback, which has been proven scientifically to work for brain injuries, has been around since the 1970's. One of the reasons why neurofeedback was never accepted by the medical community is because everyone thought the brain didn't have the capacity to change. Only recently, with the discovery of brain plasticity (the ability to grow new neurons and change the physical/chemical makeup of the brain) is the medical community beginning to accept neurofeedback as a viable treatment (As a side note, it is comical to the neurofeedback community that scientists have only recently discovered brain plasticity since neurotherapists have been telling the medical community for 20 years that the brain has the ability to change and heal itself). Other therapies that I have mentioned have also been proven to work in studies done in Europe and Asia.

If you do decide to pursue neurofeedback or any other therapy, you should be very skeptical of the therapists. The therapies work, but they are only as good as the person administering the therapy. Make sure that the therapist has extensive experience treating persons with head injuries as we can be a bit more difficult to treat than the non-head injured population. You should also be aware that there really isn't a "cure" for head injuries (at least not yet, but maybe in 5 years or so there will be), just as there aren't cures for a lot of diseases that plague mankind. However, your goal is to get yourself to a point where you can function in society again. I myself am attending graduate school this fall. However, even though I was able to get myself to a point where I could handle graduate school, I will still need accommodations to get through, such as getting more time to complete tests, sometimes having an extra day to turn in assignments, tape recording lectures, etc...but, I digress.

So, good luck in your quest to heal yourself. Remember, scientists have studied the placebo effect and discovered that it actually works, so keep a positive attitude.

Hello Concussed Scientist,

I rather like that name since I was a scientist myself a few years back. Regarding the differences between the pROSHI and LENS, well I could be typing all day to tell you that. However, I'll give you a very quick and simplified version on the differnces.

The LENS is an advanced form of feedback that introduces a small magnetic current into your brain -about the strength of your wristwatch. It finds the frequency that you are good at producing and introduces that frequency into your brain - usually it is the alpha frequency. For reasons I don't understand because I don't have a math or physics background, your brain begins to change and the EEG normalizes. The LENS is probably the best neurofeedback device to treat brain injuries. If I had a practioner in my area, I would definitely spend the money to go there. Also, it requires a lot fewer sessions, so you save some money as well. Make sure your practioner has a lot of experience though, this is very complicated technology. http://www.ochslabs.com.

The pROSHI is also considered an advanced form of neurofeedback, and is considered one of the best therapy techniques for brain injuries as well. You simply put on photo stim glasses that introduce different frequencies into the brain and the brain attempts to lock on one of the frequencies. It can't, so it then goes into a restful state. Again, this is an over simplified version of what really happens. It is called dissentrainment. I have one of these and I like it because it is very convenient to use. I can use it wherever I am. So, if I have a decompensation episode, I can pull it out, use it for about 30 minutes, and I'm right as rain. The only caveat is that it does take your brain a long time to lock in the changes. So, you may have to use it for a year or two before your brain does finally lock in the changes. However, until then, the changes usually last for about 15-20 hours. The pROSHI has also been proven to normalize EEG from QEEG tests that were taken while it was being used.

neurofeedback
 

mhr4 *edit* says
<You should also be aware that there really isn't a "cure" for head injuries (at least not yet, but maybe in 5 years or so there will be),>

There is no such science to show that we will be able to repair head injuries. The stem cell research for head injuries is finding many problems. The brain in far more complex that a kidney or skin tissue. This science is decades away.

*edit*

I have steps I take to quickly recover from a decompensation. Some times, I can recover in a short time (hour or two). Other times, the decompensation is far more complex and will take more time (days). I have learned how to moderate my environment so that I rarely have the complex decompensations.

The pROSHI is working on a very narrow part of the brain that is accessible through the visual pathways. Modifying the waveform in these pathways have not been shown to modify the waveform in the other brain pathways. As she says, It only works for 10 to 20 hours. The developer claims it just causes a relaxation of the aberrant waveforms.

If you read about the ROSHI and pROSHI and the web site http://www.neurodynamicactivator.com...es/Page345.htm
you will see that the description is 'Excerpted from “Handbook of Neurofeedback” By James R. Evans, Phd '

It talks more about the EM stimulation (Electro-Magnetic) that the light therapy. The pROSHI does not use any sort of feedback technique. It has a chaos oriented program if light timing that has not connection to any realtime QEEG waveforms.

*edit* If you have the money to spend, maybe it is worth a try. $1995 is a good chunk of change.

The pROSHI is a preset system. The therapist does nothing to modify its function for a brain injured patient.

I still take great exception to the claim that LENS and ROSHI/pROSHI is "non-invasive." When the system creates the stimulus by light or EM means, that is invasive. Where is the line separating ECT (electro convulsive shock therapy) from EM stimulating therapy?

Even Davis has admitted that the EM stimulation caused some undesired side effects. I am confused when he connects EM to light as in "Light of EM waves ae presented to the client in a standardized complex (adaptive) mode as mentioned earlier for purposes of entrainment/disentrainment."

Further, he states "Therefore, the pROSHI uses the very advanced concept that the brain itself can become its own neurofeedback device, correcting its own internal errors, given the proper external (proprietary) neurostimulus."

This proprietary claim is confusing. Why is it not patented or protected by US "trade secret" provisions. Sounds like a very low tech company is making some very high tech claims.

Conscious active patient neuro-feedback is non-invasive because it requires the conscious effort of the patient to effect the waveforms. This is a very common form of neurofeedback. It helps the patient to recognize the improper wave forms and adjust, by conscious effort, the focus of the brain. The patient trains using the QEEG brain mapping system and learns how to moderate (reduce) the over powered wave forms by/and increase the underpowered wave forms.

Finding a good neurotherapist with extensive experience with QEEG based neurofeedback for brain injury is important. Most neurofeedback is oriented for the ADD/ADHD student or the athlete trying to maximize his performance. The malfunctioning brain requires a variety of patient efforts to bring the improper wave forms into proper function, if it can be done. Some brains have damage that is not repairable because the usable neural pathways are limited.

Think of the brain's neural pathways like an 88 key piano keyboard. Just to simplify things, I will use simple numbers. 22 keys are the auditory pathways. 22 keys are the visual pathways. 22 keys are the tactile (touch) pathways. 22 keys are the cognitive (thinking) pathways. If any of those keys are damaged, the brain will try to use underused keys from a neighboring pathway system. If the eyes do not work, all of the visual keys become available. This is how the blind get such highly developed auditory and tactile skills. This reassignment of pathways is called neuroplasticity.

The ability of the brain to 'grow' or 'heal' damaged pathways is still not understood. Some believe that the underused pathways that get redirected to another system manifests as healing or regrowth. This is a presumption. The fMRI (functional MRI) studies show increased metabolism is previously low metabolism areas. This could be new growth, new growth, healing, or just underused brain cells getting put into greater service by the brain.

Most neurofeedback tries to encourage these underused pathways to become more functional (rewired). Some people have a greater reserve of underused neural pathways and can quickly turn on these underused pathways. The studies show that this 'rewiring' can happen in as little as 24 to 48 hours.

One of the problems neurophysiology scientists are trying to understand is the suicide tendency of neural pathways. They have observed that right after a brain injury, the fMRI may show weak metabolism or perfusion in a specific damaged area. After some time has elapsed. the damaged areas appear to have shut down. They attribute this to tRNA (transmitting RNA tells cells how to function along a chain of cells) being released that target the malfunctioning cells and pathways to shut down (die). It appear that a margin of weak cells around the more seriously damaged cells also shuts down.

This is the focus of early intervention with stroke victims. Restoring perfusion (blood flow) to the damaged area can lessen this shut down mechanism and lead to better recovery potentials. Even then, rehabilitation therapy is often required to force signals along the weakened pathways or around the damaged pathways based on the concept of neuroplasticity.

Will stem cells help with this problem? The jury is still out. The blood brain barrier gets in the way of getting the stem cells to the damaged areas. If they can program stem cells to grow the vascular structures and brain cells as they would in an infant or small child, this may be possible. It is a long way off. Currently, they are just trying to get stem cells to grow in the brain without causing damage.

btw, I have about a six inches stack of the abstracts of the leading QEEG/neurofeedback studies.

Remember, It is your money to burn by your own choice.

OK Mark, well that is just your opinion. Ya really have got to lay off my postings though. I am getting really tired of having to correct your misinformation. I find it interesting that you are so quick to dismiss therapies you yourself haven't even tried. I mean, you spend 10 minutes researching the pROSHI and all of a sudden you are an expert on the subject? Give me a break.

And we all get that you don't believe in alternative therapies or stem cell research for head injuries. That's fine, no one is forcing you to do these therapies or believe in them. But for everyone else who has done these, and had them work, or who believes in them, let them be. Two things I learned from being a researcher is that we know very little about the nervous system, and that there are two sides to almost everything. There are research articles that have shown stem cell therapy to be very useful in head injured rats and articles that have shown it to be useless. The same goes for the other therapies I have listed, and others have listed as well.

I don't understand why you think it is necessary to nit pick just about every post that I make. My only goal here is to offer people information and choices as objectively as possible. I let them decide whether or not they want to do it by researching it themselves. You act as though this is a scientific forum and we are all trying to show how smart we are, or are trying to advertise our own products. Believe me, I've been on these and this is usually what happens between two people. Well, I'm not interested in doing that. This will be the third time I have asked you to please stop doing this. Again, if you don't believe in the therapy, please just ignore it and move on. I mean really, this is getting ridiculous.