Report
on the Winter Brain Conference
Author: Dr. Siegfried Othmer
This
was the thirteenth Winter Brain Conference, the first in some
time without its own special T-shirt. The crowd was somewhat smaller
this year than in the past couple of years. This tends to happen
when the location stays the same for too many years, although
the Hilton was certainly a good host, and the local weather gods
were favorably disposed as well. The exhibit area was noisy and
boisterous again. The conference was significantly “privatized”
this year, with more training seminars booked before and after
the Conference. This took away some of the energy from the conference
itself, but it was nevertheless another opportunity to mix it
up with the other people who are thankfully pushing the boundaries
of this field. In that regard, this conference remains unique
for its accepting and inclusive ambience.
The Winter Brain Conference continues
with its traditional quirks: A Foundations Course that goes from
8 AM until 10 PM; plenary sessions that start before 8 in the
morning; a schedule that drags out for five days; and a prohibitive
admission fee that must discourage the casual attendee. The value
of the conference is surely equivalent to that of a training course,
but people may not know that when they have to commit their funds
and time; many others don’t start out with that level of commitment
to the field. The conference again paired the Winter Brain Conference
with StoryCon, so both sides of the brain were being engaged.
There was unfortunately no communal acknowledgement of the death
of Marjorie Toomim. So Hershel had to handle this himself. And
the after-dinner speaker this time was a comedian who tried to
engage us with irrelevancies. What a come-down after we had been
spoiled the last couple of years with Swami Beyondananda, and
after the national tragedy of our recent election.
Tom Collura led a panel discussion on
the first day on the projection or speculation for the next 100
years. My own contribution to that panel was to beg off on any
such projection of technology developments---technologists themselves
are notoriously bad at such things---but rather to project what
might happen as our current knowledge diffuses into the society
at large. These things happen much more slowly than the underlying
technology developments, and are therefore much easier to project.
The thrust of Tom’s presentation and mine were curiously similar.
Both of us even referred back to the early history of our field
with Hans Berger. My most “way-out” prediction was that science
would begin to confront the phenomenon of mental telepathy (which
had originally energized Hans Berger to pursue his search for
the EEG---a fact that he concealed until near the end of his life).
This phenomenon is clearly real, yet
it cannot fit into any of our current scientific constructions.
This could be as earth-shaking for the sciences as the Michelson-Morley
experiment was for cosmology. It is this very quality that keeps
scientists from taking this on. One cannot readily subject this
phenomenon to experimentation. It is nearly always observed in
a state of nature. Science may abhor anecdote, yet that is where
science often starts. As it happens, Tom Collura has in fact conducted
a relevant experiment in times past. The EEG of a psychic was
measured as he was making “guesses” about the identity of a card
in a stack of cards. The EEG was found to be distinctly different
on those occasions when his guesses were correct.
Analysis of the EEG pattern found it
to be explainable in terms of brief bursts of gamma (nominally
40 Hz) that repeat at a rate of seven times per second. Looked
at in the frequency domain, one sees signal bunching up at 7 Hz
and its harmonics (14 Hz, 21Hz, 28 Hz, etc.) with the amplitudes
of the harmonics peaking around 42 Hz. One must also look in the
time domain to see the full pattern unfold. (The write-up of this
work may be found on the Bulletin Board.)
This observation connects in a variety
of ways to our current preoccupations. First of all, it may be
recalled that Rodolfo Llinas has proposed that
a disturbance of the temporal coordination of gamma and theta
may be a primary cause of psychopathologies. That is to say, good
brain function depends on our getting this coordination right.
It has also been proposed that the Digit Span task of the WISC
is accomplished by embedding each element of the chain in successive
cycles of 7-Hz activity. Thus, coherent functioning of theta and
gamma rhythms could be the mechanism of working memory.
We also know that Val Brown has tailored
his training toward special treatment of 7 Hz and its harmonics.
He avoids inhibiting 7 Hz, by and large, and tends to reward the
higher harmonics of 7 Hz—particularly 14 Hz, 21 Hz, and 42 Hz.
As we can see from the Collura work, as well as from all the event-related
potential work, it is not just a matter of the individual frequencies
but rather of their temporal coordination. It also does not make
sense to me to anoint any frequency as intrinsically good. Sometimes
7 Hz needs to be inhibited as much as anything else.
This topic leads directly to what was
the technical highlight of the meeting, namely Jay Gunkelman’s
treatment of the binding problem. He observes that shifts toward
activation of the ambient “dc” electrical potential occurs prior
to the initiation of planned movement, whereas the rise in synchrony
of gamma ensembles seems to take more than one cycle to achieve
after the relevant stimulus. Perhaps it is the shift in dc potential
that serves to organize ensembles over a large spatial scale on
the millisecond timescale. And perhaps the relative sloth by which
synchrony rises to observable levels indicates that gamma is not
even the binding frequency. Well, that is certainly grasping the
nettle.
As it happens, I am still struggling to
get my own thoughts in order on this topic, but I have at least
thought about this enough to be skeptical of Jay’s model. These
matters will not be easily settled. One dilemma is that dc potential
shifts can be both effect and cause. If we suppose that these
quasi-dc shifts arise strictly in consequence of neuronal firings,
once having occurred they also in turn influence the firing probability….
Another difficulty is that the dc shifts cannot be the whole explanation
for ensemble synchrony at millisecond timescales. Temporal coordination
is the business of neuronal networks, and thus we must understand
the phenomenon from within, not from without. It is the network
itself that begets synchrony.
Networks can fall into synchronous patterns
randomly, like the fireflies in Thailand, or they can do so in
a managed way. If they do so randomly, then the process goes to
the limit, and we have seizures. Jay is wrestling with the problem
of global synchrony of ensembles in the presence of transport
delays. DC shifts indeed could help to solve that problem. But
only a fraction of pyramidal cells are ever involved in the synchronous
activity that we measure at any one frequency. Another selection
criterion must be involved, and that one must be frequency-based.
It must be the bearer of the timing signature. The problem of
transport delays is dealt with by positing a centrally located
“beacon” that communicates to all cortical regions and serves
to synchronize and resynchronize the networks. That, of course,
is the role of our beloved thalamus.
The first evening there was supposed to
be a panel on the shadow side of neurofeedback: “Is there a Guantanamo
side to the neurotherapies?” The panel was to be led by John Fisher,
who did not make it to the conference. With the throng gathered
at the door facing the notice of cancellation of the panel, it
was collectively decided to proceed anyway. We started modestly
with discussions of what it means to give “informed consent” to
neurofeedback at a time when people have not a clue about how
fundamentally their reality may be altered by the experience.
We talked about the denial of negative effects that is still extant
within our field, and the ethical implications of that denial.
And I recalled for discussion an article
in the Economist that raised the ethical issues around emerging
neuro-technologies a year of more ago. If people are alarmed about
the implications of gene modification in plants and animals, they
should really be concerned about what is coming down the pike
with regard to neurotechnologies, said the Economist. They mentioned
things like improving IQ, etc., which we are already doing---and
proud of it. “The altered human is already here,” said Science
Magazine in the same vein. Perhaps there needs to be an ongoing
“devil’s advocate” role within our community to raise ethical
issues that in our collective zeal have been sidelined. It has
rarely worked out in the past to have professionals judge the
ethics of their own activities: Bloodletting; electro-convulsive
shock therapy; frontal lobotomies; insulin shock therapy; the
Tuskegee experiment; flooding; compulsory pharmacotherapy--- the
list of outrages goes on and on, probably nowhere more numerous
than in the field of mental health.
But the harder questions in the neurotherapy
arena concern its use to elicit information---hence the Guantanamo
in the title---and in the development and use of mind control
procedures. What are the ethical bounds on the “involuntary” eliciting
of information through mind alteration techniques? And what about
the flipside? If such mind alteration procedures are available,
why are torture methods even being thought about at all---even
in the “ticking-bomb” scenarios that Alan Derschowitz alludes
to in an effort to domesticate torture and make it palatable to
the squeamish among us?
What are the ethics around the training
by our government of cold-blooded operatives, their emotional
detachment secured by relentless rehearsals of the mission? What
about the ability to split personalities and to direct their actions?
One personality commits the deed, and the other personalities
are oblivious to the experience—a formula for the perfect state
crime. The Manchurian candidate lives. And finally, the ultimate
abuse of the power of mind technologies: trauma-based mind control.
The fact that this abuse gives offense to anyone of ethical sensitivities
is not in doubt. The more serious concern is that this phenomenon
has been with us now for some time, and it is not being addressed
by the society at large. Hence nothing is being done to prevent
the generational propagation of these horrid techniques.
The known fact that very low-level stimulation
is capable of altering brain function makes it possible to conceive
of modulated electromagnetic beams that can render localized populations
temporarily dysfunctional. The phased arrays to be built in Alaska
were ostensibly intended to communicate with our submarines at
extremely low frequencies, but they could equally well be used
to direct energy to a Fallouja when battle draws nigh and temporarily
incapacitate the locals. On the other side of the ethical equation,
if non-violent means of gaining control are available, would that
not be preferable to the destruction of the city that did occur?
In the emergence of the brain technologies, the ethical boundaries
remain indistinct.
Lewis Mehl-Madrona spoke on “The social
construction of Bipolar Disorder.” He is an American Indian shaman
whose family had conspired to have him walk in the ways of the
White Man, even though he was the descendant of medicine men.
He started down the path of medical school, but ended up returning
to his roots and acquainting himself with native methods of healing.
He spoke in detail of three classic cases of Bipolar Disorder
that had remained refractory to conventional medical and psychotherapeutic
management. They recovered with a combination of meditation discipline,
yoga, and lifestyle changes on a reservation, a kind of mental
institution au naturel. He then listed another seventeen
such cases that could not be discussed in the same detail but
told the same story.
One wonders just how much mental health
is being purchased with our $200 Billion annual expenditure on
prescription medications, and how much is being gained by our
being in thrall to the medical model of mental disorders. We are
certainly better off than we would be without the medications,
but are we better off as a society in mental health terms than
folks were one hundred years ago, when all we had was aspirin?
One could argue that the medications have allowed us to push the
envelope more, much like soldiers in WWI taking cocaine to help
them tolerate the long marches.
In any event, the work of Mehl-Madrona
and his staff simply expands the scope of the argument that there
are many pathways to improved self-regulation. There is an element
here of brain-training (yoga), of calming and of going to our
interior spaces (meditation), and of embedding in a healing community.
The result was an enlargement of the person’s zone of stability
along with a pace of living that did not provoke or exacerbate
instability. In essentially all cases, clients were able to become
medication-free as well as crisis-free.
Lou Cozolino was an invited speaker as
well at the conference. We have recommended his book (The Neuroscience
of Psychotherapy) for our training course ever since it became
available. I attended only one of his talks, but found one of
his narratives particularly helpful to our worldview. Cozolino
was working with a victim of PTSD who was frequently undergoing
flashbacks. These would occur in very precise sequence every time,
and take a predictable amount of time to unfold. Cozolino was
aware of imaging work that had demonstrated high levels of activation
in the right hemisphere during such events, along with hypo-activation
of Broca’s area. I would have been inclined to interpret such
hypoactivation as simply reflecting the fact that the person is
at such moments totally taken up by the experience, and is not
doing anything that would involve Broca’s area. Cozolino decided
to engage the person verbally in order to move him out of his
flashback experience. This was not helpful in the event, it turns
out, and had no lasting benefit for the incidence of flashbacks.
But later the person reported that subsequent
flashback experiences now included the words that Cozolino had
spoken to him. What better evidence could one want regarding the
nature of this experience? The traumatic event heightens our memory
acuity, and such acuity extends to everything that is perceived
at that moment—including one’s physiology. Victims become blotter
paper for experience at such times, and that includes in particular
their own internal milieu. The flashback experience so totally
replicates the original events that even the heightened acuity
of memory is brought forward into the present.
So we may readily grant the claim of the
false memory enthusiasts that memory is indeed malleable, but
we do so without giving up on the essential integrity of memory.
What is missing from the traumatic memory is a time signature.
Whatever co-occurs with the flashback may end up being incorporated
in the flashback and hence become part of the memory of the original
event. This vulnerability can be abused, as it has been in the
experiments by the Elizabeth Loftuses of this world; it can also
lead to unfortunate escalations of ostensible memory into the
realm of the bizarre on the part of overly zealous therapists.
On the other hand, nothing of this kind would be possible but
for the facilitation by an original traumatic event! The original
trauma establishes the template for both the heightened memory
acuity and for its availability subsequently in therapy. In fact,
we take advantage of this in alpha-theta training, which can be
modeled in its application to trauma as a technique of memory
modification, one in which the event memory is gradually severed
from physiological memory.
Les Fehmi presented on his method of rewarding
synchrony in his five-channel measurement by means of a discrete
reward at the alpha frequency. Every cycle of the summed signal
that exceeds threshold leads to a discrete reward that is timed
so as to arrive in visual cortex just when the next cycle of the
alpha wave appears. This is the equivalent of pushing on the swing
every time its comes your way. The phase of the feedback signal
has to be carefully adjusted, and this differs with each person.
The phase of the reward signal is optimized to yield the response
that feels most comfortable to the trainee.
The approach clearly works, and yet it
stands in considerable contrast to our own approach, which attempts
to put the feedback somewhat in the background of awareness by
making it gentle and unobtrusive. Qualitatively we obtain the
same experiences, but with synchrony training there is more explicit
guidance of the process. It would be trivial to move toward the
sum of P3 and P4 signals instead of using Pz with the available
equipments that support our preferred kind of alpha-theta training,
NeuroCybernetics and BrainMaster. Two-channel synchrony already
captures the majority of the advantage gained with five-channel
synchrony. Les Fehmi also offers a preamplifier that conditions
the signal for subsequent processing with a single-channel system.
Finally, Les has developed a complete analog system that offers
neurofeedback in the old-fashioned way. There has been many a
time that I have had second thoughts about the path we took to
developing the new instrument entirely with software. There is
probably still a niche for the analog system, and Les is exploiting
it. I look forward to hearing more.
Barbara Fisher and Janice Thurber presented
on Reactive Attachment Disorder. What stuck with me was their
juxtaposition of trust and control or power. The lack of trust
in the safety and reliability of relationships that characterizes
the RAD child translates to a need to control events and relationships
absolutely.
Karl Pribram spoke on the last day about
the Dragons of Eden that were supposed to reside in the nether
parts of our triune brain, having been tamed by the moderating
influence of our primate neocortex. Alas, the story does not fit.
It is not alligators that conspire to wipe out the alligators
in the neighboring bayou. The better story is that cortical function
crucially determines whether we are Islamists duty-bound to slay
the infidels, or Irish Catholics duty-bound to take up arms against
Protestants and vice versa. The better story is that birds show
us the highest development of the reptilian brain (if indeed such
a hierarchy makes sense at all), and they don’t fit the mold of
a particularly aggressive tendency. Here we have species without
an elaborate neocortex, yet their niches in life resemble our
own more than is the case for most of our mammalian relatives.
There is aggression, sure, but also familial devotion, collective
child-rearing (acorn woodpeckers), and even life-long monogamy.
But even now the story is incomplete.
Positing our species’ propensity toward violence in the neocortex
is only a modest improvement on the earlier theory that blames
our primitive ancestral brain. We do battle, or inhibit doing
so, with our whole brains. None of the decisions on the pathway
to war are localizable to any particular part of the brain. Dysfunction
may be causally localizable. Function is not. Circuits that promote
aggression must be matched in any species with the architecture
to inhibit that aggression—a story that goes back to Konrad Lorenz.
Our enormous present capacity for love and affection found its
evolutionary origins in that original inhibitory circuitry. What
started out as a threat gesture, the baring of teeth, became transmogrified
into the positive gesture of a smile. And we smile with our whole
brains. When we do not, it is usually detectable.
In closing, I want to cover briefly what
is happening on the instrumentation front. Val Brown exhibited
his system with the G-Force display in which a commercially available
program is used to merge engaging graphics with information derived
from music and from the EEG. Sue Dermit Brown has migrated even
more toward the use of an inhibit-dominated strategy, with the
result that the experience of the training is completely gentle
and comforting. It is truly velvet glove treatment, with no forced
march into self-regulation. I welcome the trend toward more dynamic
and EEG-responsive displays, even though I have no idea about
what the contingencies are even though I experienced the training
myself. The G-force graphics seem to be non-recurring, so one
is led from one engaging display to another. The brain does not
ask much in this regard. A little novelty goes a long way.
Thought Tech is close to offering the
features we would like to see included in the Infiniti suite.
They are already offering frequency-shifting and adaptive thresholding.
A two-channel display is needed, since we are all headed in that
direction. And we would like to see the incorporation of our Alpha-Theta
module. I had not appreciated the fact that the Procomp Plus is
available with the new Infiniti software for $1,750, which is
in the same ballpark as the BrainMaster.
J&J has made the first overture in
the direction of a two-channel display with a rectangular graphic
that also shows some history in a kind of comet tail effect as
the rectangle grows and diminishes. They are also implementing
a more sophisticated auto-thresholding scheme, one that moves
rapidly when it is far from the end-point, and much more slowly
once the final endpoint is approached. They have abandoned the
two-channel C2-mini amplifier in favor of a four-channel unit
with higher specifications. That has pluses and minuses for us.
The two-channel unit was fully adequate for our purposes, and
the new one is more expensive. The new unit also interfaces with
the BioExplorer software.
The Mind Media folks were there from
the Netherlands. They exhibited a variety of remote-capable EEG,
EMG, and GSR units, along with sets of active electrodes that
contain preamplifiers at the head end, before one ever gets to
wiggly wires that can introduce movement artifacts into the EEG
signal. We will be evaluating the active electrodes at our office.
Simply reducing the effects of gross movement on the EEG measurement
should be welcomed by anyone working with autistic or ADHD kids.
Along with the impedance meter featured at the EEG Support booth,
we have here two straight-forward methods of improving our clinical
effectiveness.
Len Ochs did not have a booth, but during
the pain panel he talked about his new photonic stimulator, a
device using infrared LEDs for application to pain management
and wound healing. He is currently going into manufacture on the
devices, but Sue and I both availed ourselves at the conference
of Len’s services with the prototype photonic stimulator that
Len had brought with him.
BrainMaster showed off their new wide-band
software, as well as the enhanced interface to BioExplorer. Significantly,
BrainMaster is back in business with the tactile interface, and
they offer the least expensive option for doing EEG-based photic
stimulation. BrainMaster and BioExplorer have both implemented
the Lissajous display for work in the phase domain with two-channel
training.
Hershel has expanded his offerings with
a new derived measure for his HEG training. The most attractive
way to go in that regard, if one does not already have Thought
Technology instrumentation or BrainMaster, is to use the Pendant
offered by Bruce McMillan together with the BioExplorer software.
Bruce has a Pendant for Hershel’s nIR HEG, one for Jeff Carmen’s
pIR HEG, and one for two-channel EEG, all at very favorable pricing,
considering that he is not yet in mass production.
I was pleased to see the return of the
undulating bed that we had at one or two of the Clinical Interchange
Conference some years back in Santa Ynez. The exhibit was next
to Chuck’s booth with the personal ROSHI, so a ride on the undulating
bed with a CD and headphones, and with visual stimulation from
the personal ROSHI, was not to be missed. People might think of
this unit for an alpha-theta chair, or simply as a prelude to
alpha-theta. I failed to ask about pricing.
Finally, there was a lot of excitement
at the EEG Support booth because of the new hardware offerings,
the QIKtest and the impedance meter. It appears that the QIKtest
found a receptive audience. With regard to the impedance meter,
people still have to be convinced that they need one at this price.
Fact of the matter is that there is considerably more electronics
in our impedance meter than in an entire BrainMaster or Procomp
amplifier.
There was also the obligatory seminar
in the Jacuzzi late at night, the hike into the local Indian canyons,
and forays into the downtown watering spots. All in all, it was
another energizing experience that will carry us through another
year. Finally, I want to remind folks that the affordable way
to do this conference is to purchase admission a year in advance,
that is to say now. Prices are at less than fifty percent of the
admission price at the door next year. It is unlikely that after
13 years Rob will alter his pricing policies for the conference.
So this remains the best way to go.
|