Hi,

I'm in paris and I have tried Zengar with two different practitioners here for 10 and 2 sessions respectively.  Although I did think that there were some effects (I am looking to improve concentration and help with mild depression) I could not be sure that it was not a placebo effect and unfortunately, the practitioners were not able to describe in real terms how progress was being made.  One kept describing the graphs at the end of the session as "interesting" but could not elaborate.  The other admitted to not knowing what the various graphs and charts meant.  

Having read through a number of books on neurofeedback, I am very interested in "seeing" the changes in functioning on a screen and in a quantitative way.  I am however, quite certain that the current practitioners in my city are not going to be able to help me.  Is there anything I can do for myself?  I do not want to buy a system (too expensive) but would like to be able to interpret the data output.

 
   

Hi,

I'm in paris and I have tried Zengar with two different practitioners here for
10 and 2 sessions respectively.  Although I did think that there were some
effects (I am looking to improve concentration and help with mild depression) I
could not be sure that it was not a placebo effect and unfortunately, the
practitioners were not able to describe in real terms how progress was being
made.  One kept describing the graphs at the end of the session as "interesting"
but could not elaborate.  The other admitted to not knowing what the various
graphs and charts meant.

Having read through a number of books on neurofeedback, I am very interested in
"seeing" the changes in functioning on a screen and in a quantitative way.  I am
however, quite certain that the current practitioners in my city are not going
to be able to help me.  Is there anything I can do for myself?  I do not want to
buy a system (too expensive) but would like to be able to interpret the data
output.

 

I am extremely sensitive, not typical at all. Having had bad experiences with all sorts of therapies in the past, I would want to proceed very slowly and cautiously. I think I read that Zengar comes with preloaded sessions; does that mean it is kind of a one-size-fits-all?

BrainPaint, on the other hand seems very adaptable but proclaims the advantage of working at home to be that you can do many more sessions per time period than you would if you were making visits twice a week to a practitioner. But for myself I have never found doing more than usual of anything to be a good thing.

Hi Dean,


I now work with a doctor who at one time used EEG spectrum equipment until one
of her clients had an opportunity to experience the zengar equipment with me and
convinced her to hire me as the difference was profound. after 20 times with the
eeg spectrum she felt worse and after two times with zengar equipment she felt
considerably improved. Some of my clients in that office were previously getting
trained with EEG spectrum and now doing this type of neurofeedback. I had one
client(a 17 year old boy) that really liked EEG spectrum but after experiencing
zengar as so much better he convinced his mom to start training. his mom now
wantsdad and sister to start as well.Not one person in that office prefers EEG
spectrum BTW.
I have never had a problem with our having less research available(there is some
research)or the black box issue. out of many hundreds of people maybe a hand
full asked about research and those people still chose to do it when only
limited was available. It was not a deal breaker. If it works, it works. Just
using it one time is enough to see that it does.
this has been my experience.

Meg


--- In neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com, Dean Smith <activemindandbody@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Val, thanks for your comments and I am starting to gather more information
to help me make a decision.  I spoke to john and Ian in australia who both use
your system and rave about it however they are both 3hrs away from me by plan so
I am finding it difficult to try your machine do you know of anyone who has
purchased one in melbourne?
>
> I agree with what you have said about how diagnosis is not useful with some
techniques as they don't work from a medical model (I do not work from a medical
model either), however that would not stop your group from doing studies that
are based on outcome measures and the like to show clinically once and for all
that your technology does what it states.  I just completed the eeg spectrum
training over the last 4 days to try and help me make up my mind, and I must
admit it seems quite good and that most neurofeedback works.  However I was a
little concerned about the reductionist thinking, use of QEEG and the subjective
placement of some of the electrodes.  But I found the presenter very open and
honest and he stated he has friends who use your system (and LenS) and report
it gets results but the lack of research and clear methodolgy for why it works
could be a problem.
>
> Dean
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Valdeane W. Brown, Ph.D." <valdeanebrown@...>
> To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, 14 November, 2009 3:06:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [neurofeedcommunity] Re: new to neurofeedback and confused
>
>  
> Dean,
>
> The user survey was done as a fairly standard survey so users reported their
experience via a standardized survey instrument that we developed using rating
scales, etc.  It’s all described in the actual survey document.  We really
aren’t that interested in traditional clinical research as what we do is not a
treatment of any specific disorder or condition.  The approach is completely
diagnostically agnostic: ie literally the exact same placement, targeting of
time-frequency events, and kind of feedback are without any regard to the reason
that someone is using the training.  The approach doesn’t care �" and can
not make use of �" diagnosis or presenting complaint as a basis for modifying
or implementing what is done during the training.  All of that kind of data is
as irrelevant to what NeurOptimal does, and how it works, as hat size �" of the
trainer!
>
> Now I know that can sound odd, esp to a health care practitioner, but that
really is the case for what we do.  Our approach and technology is unique,
it’s really that simple.  And no matter what any other system developed or
trainer says, no other system can do what ours can.  Understanding this
difference in perspective and technology is actually quite critical in assessing
whether or not NeurOptimal may be of further interest to you.  I hope that
helps some.
>
> val
>
>
> On 11/11/09 3:30 AM, "Dean Smith" <activemindandbody@ yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 
> > 
> >   
> >
> >Thanks val, with the user survey how was this conducted and has there been
much research done using neuroptimal for various conditions.
> >dean
> >
> >
> ________________________________
> From:valbrownusa <valdeanebrown@ gmail.com>
> >To: neurofeedcommunity@ yahoogroups. com
> >Sent: Sat, November 7, 2009 6:52:19 PM
> >Subject: [neurofeedcommunity ] Re: new to neurofeedback and confused
> >
> >  
> >In some ways the choice is fairly easy. If you want an easy to use,
essentially fail-safe system, that is diagnostically agnostic, works across the
range and is "fault tolerant" then there really isn't any question. NeurOptimal
by Zengar is the choice. If you haven't browsed our site -- www.zengar.com --
that could be a very good place to start.. You might also be interested in our
user survey and, of course, more specific questions can be addressed to
info@zengar. com <mailto:info% 40zengar. com> , as well as in the
zengapncp@yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:zengapncp% 40yahoogroups. com>  forum (which
you've also done).
> >
> >It is an interesting field and there are a lot of opinions out there but the
bottom line really is very simple and easy. I hope that helps.
> >
> >val
> >--- In neurofeedcommunity@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:neurofeedcom
munity%40yahoogr oups.com> , "activemindandbody" <activemindandbody@ ...> wrote:
> >>
> >> Neurofeedback is still very small in Australia but I have been watching the
research come out over the last few years and am impressed and the few guys who
use it in my home town (Melbourne) do rave about it. I had my QEEG done last
week to try and learn more and am doing the spectrum training in a few weeks and
have looked at the zengar system. But frankly still cannot see what all the fuss
is about not sure if I am missing something and am totally confused about what
system would be best.
> >>
> >
> >
> > 
> > 
> >   
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>      
________________________________________________________________________________\
__
> Win 1 of 4 Sony home entertainment packs thanks to Yahoo!7.
> Enter now: http://au.docs.yahoo.com/homepageset/
>

Did neurofeedback (brain biofeedback) make a difference in your life? For
better or for worse. What did you notice about neurofeedback?

 

Hi,

I am 29, suffering from chronic fatigue for two years now. Zengar training has helped me to cure my depression, but I still feel tiredand lack of energy.

Sometimes after NFB training I feel more energized, the second NFB training I will feel the same and then it s going down again, being tired and with migraine. I am doing NFB twice a week since August (I stopped my anti-depressant drug one month ago). I dont know whether I should take less trainings a week, or should I stop for a while?? ...

Thanks for your concerns,

all the best,

Anne from brussels

Hi,

I am 29, suffering from chronic fatigue for two years now. Zengar training has
helped me to cure my depression, but I still feel tiredand lack of energy.

Sometimes after NFB training I feel more energized, the second NFB training I
will feel the same and then it s going down again, being tired and with
migraine. I am doing NFB twice a week since August (I stopped my anti-depressant
drug one month ago). I dont know whether I should take less trainings a week, or
should I stop for a while?? ...

Thanks for your concerns,

all the best,

Anne from brussels

 

Ted,

Yes, I would expect that you will notice something within 6 - 8 sessions. LENS is good, but it, like anything else, won't do everything. Here's when it won't work:

If frontal Alpha is huge enough to be well above 17 uV
If there is residual infection, inflammation, or toxicity: these are medical issues.
If there is hypometabolism all across the brain with EEG amplitudes under 1 uV.

I would not wait 6 or 8 sessions, though. If the EEG doesn't change on a session-by-session basis, and you don't notice something within 3 sessions, please have the therapist contact me and send me your data. Maybe I can suggest something.

I'm not doing a lot now on the lists and will be able to respond to some other issues when I come back from Peru on the 24th of November.

Best,

Len Ochs

-----Original Message-----
>From: TedF <tedfackler@gmail.com>
>Sent: Nov 14, 2009 1:44 PM
>To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] Question for Len Och
>
>Greetings Len!
>
>Last week I began using your LENS therapy. I have my 2nd session this upcoming Monday...
>
>I wanted to write to ask a couple questions about your system.
>
>First, I suffer from Major Depressive disorder; or moreso, super lower frequencies predominantly in the left hemisphere...Anyways, I've tried most everything: conventional Rx, traditional neurotherapy, Zengar, and of course, exercise/diet/etc.
>
>Because of a handful of reasons (that I won't get into now), I have about 3-4 weeks before I "have" to see a psychiatrist, and start on that carousel of trying to find a medication that works. Since I'm not super excited about that, I'm putting all my energy into finding an alternative method of successful treatment; i.e. trying LENS.
>
>My question is whether in 3-4 weeks (with 6-8 sessions) under my belt, whether I will be able to sense improvement or not? I know everyone's different, and really you can't speculate, but I wonder if I'm giving it enough time to sense a difference? I plan to do Mon/Fri sessions; and hope that in 3-4 weeks I'll know whether A) This won't work for me, or B) Some progress has been made. Any help on this....?
>
>Also, in "The Healing Power of NeuroFeedback" it's stated that neurofeedback is predominantly to help those with CNS disregulation...and while I think I understand that as brain-wave activity being out-of-whack and unbalanced, I wonder whether it applies to metabolic dysfunction in brains (depression, in this case, being a hypo-metabolised Left Prefrontal Cortex, etc.)?
>
>Also, while I assume that combining different modalities is ok, I wonder whether you have any opinion on the use of St. John's Wort while starting LENS? That's the position I'm in; using both, but wanted to check with you on whether combining herbal supplements + your therapy is legit?
>
>Thanks for reading this rather lengthy post.
>
>Ted
>

Ted,

Yes, I would expect that you will notice something within 6 - 8 sessions.  LENS
is good, but it, like anything else, won't do everything.  Here's when it won't
work:

If frontal Alpha is huge enough to be well above 17 uV
If there is residual infection, inflammation, or toxicity: these are medical
issues.
If there is hypometabolism all across the brain with EEG amplitudes under 1 uV.

I would not wait 6 or 8 sessions, though.  If the EEG doesn't change on a
session-by-session basis, and you don't notice something within 3 sessions,
please have the therapist contact me and send me your data.  Maybe I can suggest
something.

I'm not doing a lot now on the lists and will be able to respond to some other
issues when I come back from Peru on the 24th of November.

Best,

Len Ochs

-----Original Message-----
>From: TedF <tedfackler@...>
>Sent: Nov 14, 2009 1:44 PM
>To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] Question for Len Och
>
>Greetings Len!
>
>Last week I began using your LENS therapy.  I have my 2nd session this upcoming
Monday...
>
>I wanted to write to ask a couple questions about your system.
>
>First, I suffer from Major Depressive disorder; or moreso, super lower
frequencies predominantly in the left hemisphere...Anyways, I've tried most
everything: conventional Rx, traditional neurotherapy, Zengar, and of course,
exercise/diet/etc.
>
>Because of a handful of reasons (that I won't get into now), I have about 3-4
weeks before I "have" to see a psychiatrist, and start on that carousel of
trying to find a medication that works.  Since I'm not super excited about that,
I'm putting all my energy into finding an alternative method of successful
treatment; i.e. trying LENS.
>
>My question is whether in 3-4 weeks (with 6-8 sessions) under my belt, whether
I will be able to sense improvement or not?  I know everyone's different, and
really you can't speculate, but I wonder if I'm giving it enough time to sense a
difference?  I plan to do Mon/Fri sessions; and hope that in 3-4 weeks I'll know
whether A) This won't work for me, or B) Some progress has been made.  Any help
on this....?
>
>Also, in "The Healing Power of NeuroFeedback" it's stated that neurofeedback is
predominantly to help those with CNS disregulation...and while I think I
understand that as brain-wave activity being out-of-whack and unbalanced, I
wonder whether it applies to metabolic dysfunction in brains (depression, in
this case, being a hypo-metabolised Left Prefrontal Cortex, etc.)?
>
>Also, while I assume that combining different modalities is ok, I wonder
whether you have any opinion on the use of St. John's Wort while starting LENS? 
That's the position I'm in; using both, but wanted to check with you on whether
combining herbal supplements + your therapy is legit?
>
>Thanks for reading this rather lengthy post.
>
>Ted
>

Greetings Len!

Last week I began using your LENS therapy.  I have my 2nd session this upcoming
Monday...

I wanted to write to ask a couple questions about your system.

First, I suffer from Major Depressive disorder; or moreso, super lower
frequencies predominantly in the left hemisphere...Anyways, I've tried most
everything: conventional Rx, traditional neurotherapy, Zengar, and of course,
exercise/diet/etc.

Because of a handful of reasons (that I won't get into now), I have about 3-4
weeks before I "have" to see a psychiatrist, and start on that carousel of
trying to find a medication that works.  Since I'm not super excited about that,
I'm putting all my energy into finding an alternative method of successful
treatment; i.e. trying LENS.

My question is whether in 3-4 weeks (with 6-8 sessions) under my belt, whether I
will be able to sense improvement or not?  I know everyone's different, and
really you can't speculate, but I wonder if I'm giving it enough time to sense a
difference?  I plan to do Mon/Fri sessions; and hope that in 3-4 weeks I'll know
whether A) This won't work for me, or B) Some progress has been made.  Any help
on this....?

Also, in "The Healing Power of NeuroFeedback" it's stated that neurofeedback is
predominantly to help those with CNS disregulation...and while I think I
understand that as brain-wave activity being out-of-whack and unbalanced, I
wonder whether it applies to metabolic dysfunction in brains (depression, in
this case, being a hypo-metabolised Left Prefrontal Cortex, etc.)?

Also, while I assume that combining different modalities is ok, I wonder whether
you have any opinion on the use of St. John's Wort while starting LENS?  That's
the position I'm in; using both, but wanted to check with you on whether
combining herbal supplements + your therapy is legit?

Thanks for reading this rather lengthy post.

Ted

 
 
   

Thanks val, with the user survey how was this conducted and has there been much research done using neuroptimal for various conditions.
dean

---

From: valbrownusa <valdeanebrown@...>
To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, November 7, 2009 6:52:19 PM
Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] Re: new to neurofeedback and confused

  
In some ways the choice is fairly easy. If you want an easy to use, essentially fail-safe system, that is diagnostically agnostic, works across the range and is "fault tolerant" then there really isn't any question. NeurOptimal by Zengar is the choice. If you haven't browsed our site -- www.zengar.com -- that could be a very good place to start. You might also be interested in our user survey and, of course, more specific questions can be addressed to info@zengar. com <mailto:info%40zengar.com> , as well as in the zengapncp@yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:zengapncp%40yahoogroups.com>  forum (which you've also done).

It is an interesting field and there are a lot of opinions out there but the bottom line really is very simple and easy. I hope that helps.

val
--- In neurofeedcommunity@ yahoogroups. com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com> , "activemindandbody" <activemindandbody@ ...> wrote:
>
> Neurofeedback is still very small in Australia but I have been watching the research come out over the last few years and am impressed and the few guys who use it in my home town (Melbourne) do rave about it. I had my QEEG done last week to try and learn more and am doing the spectrum training in a few weeks and have looked at the zengar system. But frankly still cannot see what all the fuss is about not sure if I am missing something and am totally confused about what system would be best.
>


 
 
   

Once in a while the popular press catches up to or even anticipates what we in neurofeedback know to be the future.� One such book is Howard Bloom�s The Genius of the Beast, a prodigious, and optimistic, revisioning of science and history from the perspective of capitalism�s boom/bust, expand/contract cycles.� With a range spanning the big bang to our present economic convulsion, Bloom meticulously traces economies and human endeavor that follow lawful patterns of soaring heights and obliterating depths. These are traced in grand swaths through science, biology, human advances and suffering.

�

With what another reviewer termed: �science fiction in reverse,� the author marries historical parallels to present realities, demonstrating repeating resurgences brought about by reengineered imagination, fantasy, novelty seeking, borne of the necessity of change or die � a phenotypic shift.

�

He is an expert meme maker, and in elucidating capitalism�s role throughout history he forecasts neurofeedback�s future.� His description of capitalism at its best kept provoking me to say again and again: �That�s neurofeedback.�� �A secular genesis machine [the technology] triggering an evolutionary search engine [the brain and consciousness], leading to transcendence and a repurposing of life� is as terse a description of neurofeedback in its broadest terms as anything I�ve seen.

�

In those who succeed in emerging from some end game of often catastrophic proportions, the crush of adversity and constraint triggers a search for new meaning, a new sense of direction, a conversion established in new structures. Bloom masterfully connects ecologic, economic, biologic, political, scientific, religious, and cultural upheavals in spellbinding details that counterpoint the ultimately human transformations inherent in those cycles.�

�

It is really the human story he tells in terms such as �saturated intuition� of pop culture, �tuned empathy� that discovers new possibilities, then pulls inward to create structures that work. Fission and fusion, expansion and contraction, boom and bust are ever-swinging pendula from which he derives ultimate hope for our present condition. �He parallels the boom of neonatal neurons, many, many of which are eliminated to structure survival based on experience, with the unbridled proliferation of credit default swaps and attempts to rein them in. �

�

The book is a compelling perspective on the cycles that have gotten us to where we are, and a hopeful prospect for a future in which neurofeedback could be the centerpiece. �Neurofeedback could be the secular genesis machine that rapidly, efficiently, pervasively, and expansively propels humankind forward in ways similar to great discoveries of the past like cities, soap, the printing press, the internet, all of which democratically unleashed explosive human potential in those with access to them, benefitting many who don�t.

�

�

While all this may seem bombastic and over-reaching to those still trying to prune what�s �wrong� using neurofeedback, or don�t train themselves, any training that gives information to the brain about itself brings change we have no way of measuring or even conceiving.� Aside from quantifiable shifts in brain activity, these changes are shown in the transformed lives of those who have participated in neurofeedback, something else we cannot yet measure with much certainty.��

�

In any event, Bloom�s The Genius of the Beast is a book that could be an optimistic glimpse backward from our neurofeedback future yet to be written, and a map to that possible future.

�

Alan Bachers

 
 
   

Val,
How much energy is used to detect line noise in the TT and the Z-amp?  I believe that some energy goes down the wires to detect impedence in other systems.
Gary Ames

--- In neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com> , "Valdeane W. Brown, Ph.D." <valdeanebrown@...> wrote:
>
> The best descriptor for what is now called the LENS approach is its original
> name: EEG-Driven Stimulation or EDS.  The fact is that, no matter how low
> the level, the mechanism is “invasive” in that the process puts energy into
> the tissue.  Hence, changes in the EEG are detected and then those changes
> “drive” the quality of the stimulation used.  In this sense LENS is
> philosophically the same (or similar to) the operative principle of using
> ANY form of stimulation to induce a change.  Whether or not the exact
> mechanism for that effect is known or accepted is irrelevant; it is in any
> event and “invasive” stimulus that is “put into” the CNS.  This reality has
> another consequence to it which is that it is clearly not information that
> is being conveyed to the CNS because, information can be conveyed in various
> forms.  In other feedback system, for instance, the user has at least a few
> choices as to what kind of audiovisual format will be used to convey the
> information that is fed back to the CNS.  Various beeps, or songs, or visual
> elements such as bar graphs, linegraphs, movies, etc, etc might be used to
> similar, if not exactly the same kind, of training effect.  This is simply
> not the case with LENS or any other stimulation-based system.  In those
> systems the stimulation must be crafted precisely in order to have its
> effect.
>
> val
>
>
> On 11/9/09 6:19 AM, "Len" <lochs@...> wrote:
>
> >  
> >  
> >  
> >    
> >
> > TMS is magnetic measured in Teslas; the LENS is electromagnetic field measured
> > in watts/cm2.
> > TMS works with a heavy magnetic field moving and releasing electrons in their
> > shells; nobody knows what the LENS mechanisms are as the power of the LENS is
> > trillionths of the power of TMS.
> >
> > TMS is a one-way stimulation with no measurement or two-way interaction with
> > the brain.  The LENS is a feedback system with measurement of the EEG
> > affecting what returns to the client -- although the LENS is not feedback in
> > any sense that many others would recognize or accept.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Len -- from Lima, Peru this morning.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >> >From: TedF <tedfackler@... <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com> >
> >> >Sent: Nov 7, 2009 2:18 PM
> >> >To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
> >> <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
> >> >Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
> >> >
> >> >Are these modalities similar?
> >> >
> >
> >  
> >    
> >
> >
>

 
   

Val,
How much energy is used to detect line noise in the TT and the Z-amp?  I believe
that some energy goes down the wires to detect impedence in other systems.
Gary Ames


--- In neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com, "Valdeane W. Brown, Ph.D."
<valdeanebrown@...> wrote:
>
> The best descriptor for what is now called the LENS approach is its original
> name: EEG-Driven Stimulation or EDS.  The fact is that, no matter how low
> the level, the mechanism is �invasive� in that the process puts energy into
> the tissue.  Hence, changes in the EEG are detected and then those changes
> �drive� the quality of the stimulation used.  In this sense LENS is
> philosophically the same (or similar to) the operative principle of using
> ANY form of stimulation to induce a change.  Whether or not the exact
> mechanism for that effect is known or accepted is irrelevant; it is in any
> event and �invasive� stimulus that is �put into� the CNS.  This reality has
> another consequence to it which is that it is clearly not information that
> is being conveyed to the CNS because, information can be conveyed in various
> forms.  In other feedback system, for instance, the user has at least a few
> choices as to what kind of audiovisual format will be used to convey the
> information that is fed back to the CNS.  Various beeps, or songs, or visual
> elements such as bar graphs, linegraphs, movies, etc, etc might be used to
> similar, if not exactly the same kind, of training effect.  This is simply
> not the case with LENS or any other stimulation-based system.  In those
> systems the stimulation must be crafted precisely in order to have its
> effect.
>
> val
>
>
> On 11/9/09 6:19 AM, "Len" <lochs@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > TMS is magnetic measured in Teslas; the LENS is electromagnetic field
measured
> > in watts/cm2.
> > TMS works with a heavy magnetic field moving and releasing electrons in
their
> > shells; nobody knows what the LENS mechanisms are as the power of the LENS
is
> > trillionths of the power of TMS.
> >
> > TMS is a one-way stimulation with no measurement or two-way interaction with
> > the brain.  The LENS is a feedback system with measurement of the EEG
> > affecting what returns to the client -- although the LENS is not feedback in
> > any sense that many others would recognize or accept.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Len -- from Lima, Peru this morning.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >> >From: TedF <tedfackler@... <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com> >
> >> >Sent: Nov 7, 2009 2:18 PM
> >> >To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
> >> <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
> >> >Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
> >> >
> >> >Are these modalities similar?
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

A reminder that this group operates according to principles of nonviolent
communication.

Moderator

1. The original name of your system was EDS, meaning EEG-Driven Stimulation.  That’s true isn’t it?
2. Your system responds to changes in EEG that are of interest to your program by specifically crafting stimuli to send back down the sensors.  That’s true isn’t it?
3. In that sense the system is “invasive”: cf, “2. involving puncture of the skin <no> or insertion of an instrument <not a physical instrument> or foreign <yes> material <force> into the body <direct effect not mediated as information>...” No matter how minute, the stimuli that you give via RF are “foreign” to the body and need to be specifically crafted moment by moment, when given — “no substitution allowed” to gloss the slogan on some diner walls.
   

 
 
   

Val,

Seriously, though: talking with you about the LENS is like talking to a Northern European or Brit in the 15th century who didn't believe that black swans exist.  The conversation wouldn't and couldn't have been worthwhile.

I'm pleased to say I hear wonderful things about your system and wish you the best of everything.

Warmly,

Len

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Valdeane W. Brown, Ph.D." <valdeanebrown@... <mailto:valdeanebrown%40gmail.com> >
>Sent: Nov 9, 2009 9:33 AM
>To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>
>The best descriptor for what is now called the LENS approach is its original
>name: EEG-Driven Stimulation or EDS.  The fact is that, no matter how low
>the level, the mechanism is ³invasive² in that the process puts energy into
>the tissue.  Hence, changes in the EEG are detected and then those changes
>³drive² the quality of the stimulation used.  In this sense LENS is
>philosophically the same (or similar to) the operative principle of using
>ANY form of stimulation to induce a change.  Whether or not the exact
>mechanism for that effect is known or accepted is irrelevant; it is in any
>event and ³invasive² stimulus that is ³put into² the CNS.  This reality has
>another consequence to it which is that it is clearly not information that
>is being conveyed to the CNS because, information can be conveyed in various
>forms.  In other feedback system, for instance, the user has at least a few
>choices as to what kind of audiovisual format will be used to convey the
>information that is fed back to the CNS.  Various beeps, or songs, or visual
>elements such as bar graphs, linegraphs, movies, etc, etc might be used to
>similar, if not exactly the same kind, of training effect.  This is simply
>not the case with LENS or any other stimulation-based system.  In those
>systems the stimulation must be crafted precisely in order to have its
>effect.
>
>val
>
>
>On 11/9/09 6:19 AM, "Len" <lochs@... <mailto:lochs%40earthlink.net> > wrote:
>
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>    
>>
>> TMS is magnetic measured in Teslas; the LENS is electromagnetic field measured
>> in watts/cm2.
>> TMS works with a heavy magnetic field moving and releasing electrons in their
>> shells; nobody knows what the LENS mechanisms are as the power of the LENS is
>> trillionths of the power of TMS.
>>
>> TMS is a one-way stimulation with no measurement or two-way interaction with
>> the brain.  The LENS is a feedback system with measurement of the EEG
>> affecting what returns to the client -- although the LENS is not feedback in
>> any sense that many others would recognize or accept.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Len -- from Lima, Peru this morning.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >From: TedF <tedfackler@... <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com>  <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com> >
>>> >Sent: Nov 7, 2009 2:18 PM
>>> >To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>>> <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>>> >Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>>> >
>>> >Are these modalities similar?
>>> >
>>
>>  
>>    
>>
>>
>

 
   

 
 
   

Val,

Seriously, though: talking with you about the LENS is like talking to a Northern European or Brit in the 15th century who didn't believe that black swans exist.  The conversation wouldn't and couldn't have been worthwhile.

I'm pleased to say I hear wonderful things about your system and wish you the best of everything.

Warmly,

Len

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Valdeane W. Brown, Ph.D." <valdeanebrown@... <mailto:valdeanebrown%40gmail.com> >
>Sent: Nov 9, 2009 9:33 AM
>To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>
>The best descriptor for what is now called the LENS approach is its original
>name: EEG-Driven Stimulation or EDS.  The fact is that, no matter how low
>the level, the mechanism is ³invasive² in that the process puts energy into
>the tissue.  Hence, changes in the EEG are detected and then those changes
>³drive² the quality of the stimulation used.  In this sense LENS is
>philosophically the same (or similar to) the operative principle of using
>ANY form of stimulation to induce a change.  Whether or not the exact
>mechanism for that effect is known or accepted is irrelevant; it is in any
>event and ³invasive² stimulus that is ³put into² the CNS.  This reality has
>another consequence to it which is that it is clearly not information that
>is being conveyed to the CNS because, information can be conveyed in various
>forms.  In other feedback system, for instance, the user has at least a few
>choices as to what kind of audiovisual format will be used to convey the
>information that is fed back to the CNS.  Various beeps, or songs, or visual
>elements such as bar graphs, linegraphs, movies, etc, etc might be used to
>similar, if not exactly the same kind, of training effect.  This is simply
>not the case with LENS or any other stimulation-based system.  In those
>systems the stimulation must be crafted precisely in order to have its
>effect.
>
>val
>
>
>On 11/9/09 6:19 AM, "Len" <lochs@... <mailto:lochs%40earthlink.net> > wrote:
>
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>    
>>
>> TMS is magnetic measured in Teslas; the LENS is electromagnetic field measured
>> in watts/cm2.
>> TMS works with a heavy magnetic field moving and releasing electrons in their
>> shells; nobody knows what the LENS mechanisms are as the power of the LENS is
>> trillionths of the power of TMS.
>>
>> TMS is a one-way stimulation with no measurement or two-way interaction with
>> the brain.  The LENS is a feedback system with measurement of the EEG
>> affecting what returns to the client -- although the LENS is not feedback in
>> any sense that many others would recognize or accept.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Len -- from Lima, Peru this morning.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >From: TedF <tedfackler@... <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com>  <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com> >
>>> >Sent: Nov 7, 2009 2:18 PM
>>> >To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>>> <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>>> >Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>>> >
>>> >Are these modalities similar?
>>> >
>>
>>  
>>    
>>
>>
>

 
   

Val,

Seriously, though: talking with you about the LENS is like talking to a Northern
European or Brit in the 15th century who didn't believe that black swans exist. 
The conversation wouldn't and couldn't have been worthwhile.

I'm pleased to say I hear wonderful things about your system and wish you the
best of everything.

Warmly,

Len

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Valdeane W. Brown, Ph.D." <valdeanebrown@...>
>Sent: Nov 9, 2009 9:33 AM
>To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>
>The best descriptor for what is now called the LENS approach is its original
>name: EEG-Driven Stimulation or EDS.  The fact is that, no matter how low
>the level, the mechanism is ³invasive² in that the process puts energy into
>the tissue.  Hence, changes in the EEG are detected and then those changes
>³drive² the quality of the stimulation used.  In this sense LENS is
>philosophically the same (or similar to) the operative principle of using
>ANY form of stimulation to induce a change.  Whether or not the exact
>mechanism for that effect is known or accepted is irrelevant; it is in any
>event and ³invasive² stimulus that is ³put into² the CNS.  This reality has
>another consequence to it which is that it is clearly not information that
>is being conveyed to the CNS because, information can be conveyed in various
>forms.  In other feedback system, for instance, the user has at least a few
>choices as to what kind of audiovisual format will be used to convey the
>information that is fed back to the CNS.  Various beeps, or songs, or visual
>elements such as bar graphs, linegraphs, movies, etc, etc might be used to
>similar, if not exactly the same kind, of training effect.  This is simply
>not the case with LENS or any other stimulation-based system.  In those
>systems the stimulation must be crafted precisely in order to have its
>effect.
>
>val
>
>
>On 11/9/09 6:19 AM, "Len" <lochs@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> TMS is magnetic measured in Teslas; the LENS is electromagnetic field
measured
>> in watts/cm2.
>> TMS works with a heavy magnetic field moving and releasing electrons in their
>> shells; nobody knows what the LENS mechanisms are as the power of the LENS is
>> trillionths of the power of TMS.
>>
>> TMS is a one-way stimulation with no measurement or two-way interaction with
>> the brain.  The LENS is a feedback system with measurement of the EEG
>> affecting what returns to the client -- although the LENS is not feedback in
>> any sense that many others would recognize or accept.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Len -- from Lima, Peru this morning.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >From: TedF <tedfackler@... <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com> >
>>> >Sent: Nov 7, 2009 2:18 PM
>>> >To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
>>> <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>>> >Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>>> >
>>> >Are these modalities similar?
>>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Val,

I'll treasure this response forever.  I can find no meaning in your words.

Len

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Valdeane W. Brown, Ph.D." <valdeanebrown@...>
>Sent: Nov 9, 2009 9:33 AM
>To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>
>The best descriptor for what is now called the LENS approach is its original
>name: EEG-Driven Stimulation or EDS.  The fact is that, no matter how low
>the level, the mechanism is ³invasive² in that the process puts energy into
>the tissue.  Hence, changes in the EEG are detected and then those changes
>³drive² the quality of the stimulation used.  In this sense LENS is
>philosophically the same (or similar to) the operative principle of using
>ANY form of stimulation to induce a change.  Whether or not the exact
>mechanism for that effect is known or accepted is irrelevant; it is in any
>event and ³invasive² stimulus that is ³put into² the CNS.  This reality has
>another consequence to it which is that it is clearly not information that
>is being conveyed to the CNS because, information can be conveyed in various
>forms.  In other feedback system, for instance, the user has at least a few
>choices as to what kind of audiovisual format will be used to convey the
>information that is fed back to the CNS.  Various beeps, or songs, or visual
>elements such as bar graphs, linegraphs, movies, etc, etc might be used to
>similar, if not exactly the same kind, of training effect.  This is simply
>not the case with LENS or any other stimulation-based system.  In those
>systems the stimulation must be crafted precisely in order to have its
>effect.
>
>val
>
>
>On 11/9/09 6:19 AM, "Len" <lochs@...> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> TMS is magnetic measured in Teslas; the LENS is electromagnetic field
measured
>> in watts/cm2.
>> TMS works with a heavy magnetic field moving and releasing electrons in their
>> shells; nobody knows what the LENS mechanisms are as the power of the LENS is
>> trillionths of the power of TMS.
>>
>> TMS is a one-way stimulation with no measurement or two-way interaction with
>> the brain.  The LENS is a feedback system with measurement of the EEG
>> affecting what returns to the client -- although the LENS is not feedback in
>> any sense that many others would recognize or accept.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Len -- from Lima, Peru this morning.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >From: TedF <tedfackler@... <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com> >
>>> >Sent: Nov 7, 2009 2:18 PM
>>> >To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com
>>> <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>>> >Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>>> >
>>> >Are these modalities similar?
>>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

 
 
   

TMS is magnetic measured in Teslas; the LENS is electromagnetic field measured in watts/cm2.
TMS works with a heavy magnetic field moving and releasing electrons in their shells; nobody knows what the LENS mechanisms are as the power of the LENS is trillionths of the power of TMS.

TMS is a one-way stimulation with no measurement or two-way interaction with the brain.  The LENS is a feedback system with measurement of the EEG affecting what returns to the client -- although the LENS is not feedback in any sense that many others would recognize or accept.

Best,

Len -- from Lima, Peru this morning.

-----Original Message-----
>From: TedF <tedfackler@... <mailto:tedfackler%40gmail.com> >
>Sent: Nov 7, 2009 2:18 PM
>To: neurofeedcommunity@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neurofeedcommunity%40yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: [neurofeedcommunity] LENS neurofeedback vs. TMS
>
>Are these modalities similar?
>