Re: Openeeg-list Digest, Vol 98, Issue 3

On 07/23/2014 06:32 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Send Openeeg-list mailing list submissions to
> 	[email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openeeg-list
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	[email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	[email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Openeeg-list digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>     1. Reverse EEG (Nicolas Prat, PhD)
>     2. Re: Reverse EEG (Charles Z Henry)
>     3. Re: Reverse EEG (Raymond Chan)
>     4. Re: Reverse EEG (Bo?tjan Barbi?)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 20:09:30 -0600
> From: "Nicolas Prat, PhD" <[email protected]>
> Subject: [Openeeg-list] Reverse EEG
> To: [email protected]
> Message-ID: <[email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> In fact, this is not magnetic but purely electrical. Voltage gets
> conducted to the surface of the skull, registered by electrodes. The
> reverse route applies voltage to the skull, which gets conducted to the
> neurons and (this is the unknown part!) triggers a pattern that might be
> recognized and (re)activated.
> Seems like active electrodes are necessary for the recording phase and
> passive for the playback part. 100mv at the skull both ways.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:50:09 -0500
> From: Charles Z Henry <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Openeeg-list] Reverse EEG
> To: "Discussion of EEG hardware, software, training protocols,	NFB
> 	theory - for developers and users."
> 	<[email protected]>
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAPfmNOHau2AiggcEtqv=zgvw0zYzcjn9WX62qA9sjs3w1C5qaw@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> See... this is dangerous.  You might spend time developing your idea,
> but it's almost certainly not worth your time.
>
> Do not apply currents to your head.  Period.  Currents in the brain
> are the flow of ions across membranes.  They are not the same as
> currents in conductors.
>
> You could not hope to re-activate a pattern by applying voltages
> externally.  The pattern of activation is essentially lost in
> transmission.  EEG voltages are the sum of small dipoles that develop
> across dendrites from billions of neurons.  You're going from a
> very-high dimensional space to a low-dimensional space.  You can't
> re-create the details of the high-dimensional space from a
> low-dimensional space. Brainwave entrainment is possible--and there
> are some safe methods.  However, you will get nowhere close to
> inducing a repeatable, recognizable pattern.  Stimulating an area of
> the brain does not re-create its activity.  The temporal and spatial
> resolution of patterns of activation is much finer than what you can
> re-create from outside of the skull.
>
> If you're really into this idea, you should study a lot of cognitive
> neuroscience papers to learn the roles of regions of the brain in
> cognition.  You can't re-create a pattern of activation externally,
> but it is possible to influence the functioning of some regions of the
> brain (stimulate or inhibit).  This is an experimental science and by
> no means completely understood.
>
> Chuck
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Nicolas Prat, PhD
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In fact, this is not magnetic but purely electrical. Voltage gets
>> conducted to the surface of the skull, registered by electrodes. The
>> reverse route applies voltage to the skull, which gets conducted to the
>> neurons and (this is the unknown part!) triggers a pattern that might be
>> recognized and (re)activated.
>> Seems like active electrodes are necessary for the recording phase and
>> passive for the playback part. 100mv at the skull both ways.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
>> search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
>> Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
>> search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openeeg-list mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openeeg-list
>> Go to the above address to change your
>> subscription options, e.g unsubscribe.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 20:17:40 +0800
> From: Raymond Chan <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Openeeg-list] Reverse EEG
> To: "Discussion of EEG hardware, software, training protocols,	NFB
> 	theory - for developers and users."
> 	<[email protected]>
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAF1QwX9F9thc+B-i1V7L2xgtm5j8ahXvm4XhQ7q-1ub33Yaa4Q@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi Chuck,
>
> I agree with you 100% that we cannot hope to simply take the kind of
> reverse route that Nicolas Prat described to re-activate an EEG pattern by
> applying voltages externally. And I agree with you 100% on the reasoning
> why this reverse route is not possible.
>
> However, I do not agree with you that we should never apply a current to
> the head. Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulators (CES) have existed in the
> market for decades. The US FDA has been evaluating this modality for three
> decades and finally agreed to classify these devices as Class II on June 12
> this year because,
>
> quote,
>
> ?(FDA) has determined that there is sufficient information to establish
> special controls, and that these special controls, together with general
> controls, will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness
> for CES devices?
>
> unquote.
>
> Refer to FDA Federal Register #33712.
> Raymond Chan
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Charles Z Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> See... this is dangerous.  You might spend time developing your idea,
>> but it's almost certainly not worth your time.
>>
>> Do not apply currents to your head.  Period.  Currents in the brain
>> are the flow of ions across membranes.  They are not the same as
>> currents in conductors.
>>
>> You could not hope to re-activate a pattern by applying voltages
>> externally.  The pattern of activation is essentially lost in
>> transmission.  EEG voltages are the sum of small dipoles that develop
>> across dendrites from billions of neurons.  You're going from a
>> very-high dimensional space to a low-dimensional space.  You can't
>> re-create the details of the high-dimensional space from a
>> low-dimensional space. Brainwave entrainment is possible--and there
>> are some safe methods.  However, you will get nowhere close to
>> inducing a repeatable, recognizable pattern.  Stimulating an area of
>> the brain does not re-create its activity.  The temporal and spatial
>> resolution of patterns of activation is much finer than what you can
>> re-create from outside of the skull.
>>
>> If you're really into this idea, you should study a lot of cognitive
>> neuroscience papers to learn the roles of regions of the brain in
>> cognition.  You can't re-create a pattern of activation externally,
>> but it is possible to influence the functioning of some regions of the
>> brain (stimulate or inhibit).  This is an experimental science and by
>> no means completely understood.
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Nicolas Prat, PhD
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> In fact, this is not magnetic but purely electrical. Voltage gets
>>> conducted to the surface of the skull, registered by electrodes. The
>>> reverse route applies voltage to the skull, which gets conducted to the
>>> neurons and (this is the unknown part!) triggers a pattern that might be
>>> recognized and (re)activated.
>>> Seems like active electrodes are necessary for the recording phase and
>>> passive for the playback part. 100mv at the skull both ways.
>>>
>>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
>>> search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
>>> Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
>>> search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Openeeg-list mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openeeg-list
>>> Go to the above address to change your
>>> subscription options, e.g unsubscribe.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
>> search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
>> Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
>> search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openeeg-list mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openeeg-list
>> Go to the above address to change your
>> subscription options, e.g unsubscribe.
>>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:32:29 +0200
> From: Bo?tjan Barbi? <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Openeeg-list] Reverse EEG
> To: "Discussion of EEG hardware, software, training protocols,	NFB
> 	theory - for developers and users."
> 	<[email protected]>
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAJ0TdNJoCAA88BaxE-TyJdgJKOmuhjJnTsd+-ahRLEkgvfxd8A@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi group,
>
> FDA acceptance or not, there are hazards connected with prolonged use of
> CES. Many take FDA approval as a way to go for many things, but forget
> about how complicated form of creations we are and try simplistically mess
> with everything.
>
> The fact CES is effective can be viewed as the way of statin drug being
> effective. I am asking at what expenses? Imo the safest rote to improve
> brain work is through gentle chelation and nutrition regimen, combined with
> mental training such as EEG biofeedback. Dealing with emotional traumas
> that stored some damage is imo a way to best and fastest results, meanwhile
> TES can be used for a fix some situations, but not cure...
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>
>
>
> 2014-07-23 14:17 GMT+02:00 Raymond Chan <[email protected]>:
>
>> Hi Chuck,
>>
>> I agree with you 100% that we cannot hope to simply take the kind of
>> reverse route that Nicolas Prat described to re-activate an EEG pattern by
>> applying voltages externally. And I agree with you 100% on the reasoning
>> why this reverse route is not possible.
>>
>> However, I do not agree with you that we should never apply a current to
>> the head. Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulators (CES) have existed in the
>> market for decades. The US FDA has been evaluating this modality for three
>> decades and finally agreed to classify these devices as Class II on June 12
>> this year because,
>>
>> quote,
>>
>> ?(FDA) has determined that there is sufficient information to establish
>> special controls, and that these special controls, together with general
>> controls, will provide a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness
>> for CES devices?
>>
>> unquote.
>>
>> Refer to FDA Federal Register #33712.
>> Raymond Chan
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:50 PM, Charles Z Henry <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> See... this is dangerous.  You might spend time developing your idea,
>>> but it's almost certainly not worth your time.
>>>
>>> Do not apply currents to your head.  Period.  Currents in the brain
>>> are the flow of ions across membranes.  They are not the same as
>>> currents in conductors.
>>>
>>> You could not hope to re-activate a pattern by applying voltages
>>> externally.  The pattern of activation is essentially lost in
>>> transmission.  EEG voltages are the sum of small dipoles that develop
>>> across dendrites from billions of neurons.  You're going from a
>>> very-high dimensional space to a low-dimensional space.  You can't
>>> re-create the details of the high-dimensional space from a
>>> low-dimensional space. Brainwave entrainment is possible--and there
>>> are some safe methods.  However, you will get nowhere close to
>>> inducing a repeatable, recognizable pattern.  Stimulating an area of
>>> the brain does not re-create its activity.  The temporal and spatial
>>> resolution of patterns of activation is much finer than what you can
>>> re-create from outside of the skull.
>>>
>>> If you're really into this idea, you should study a lot of cognitive
>>> neuroscience papers to learn the roles of regions of the brain in
>>> cognition.  You can't re-create a pattern of activation externally,
>>> but it is possible to influence the functioning of some regions of the
>>> brain (stimulate or inhibit).  This is an experimental science and by
>>> no means completely understood.
>>>
>>> Chuck
>>>


I am aware of the difference in scale. I am not so sure that the pattern 
is lost in the transmission though. There might be "some" degree of 
information that is being preserved. A metaphor for that would be a pot 
of white paint and a drop of black paint in the middle. Stir 10 times 
one direction and 10 times in the reverse direction. You'll see the 
black drop recreating itself. Not exactly as it was, but to some extent. 
All information is not lost.
I believe (this is just one theory among many but that's the one I 
believe in) the brain works through pattern recognition: not all 
information is stored in the dedicated area (visual occipital etc...) 
but is encompassed/enfolded in a pattern running across the entire 
brain. The brain is a complete master at pattern recognition. That's why 
some tiny details sometimes bring back entire memories for example. You 
see that a whole lot in psychotherapy.
A stimulus of any type applied anywhere through perception or otherwise 
will activate a pattern search and "if" there is some information left 
from the volume conduction, it just might stimulate the reactivation of 
the type of patterns that produced the oscillation initially.
This is just an idea... Certainly not a fact. But I don't think it can 
discarded on theoretical grounds. As you say: this is "by no means 
completely understood."
Intensity-wise, I don;t think that increasing the potential above what 
it was when it was recorded would bring anything. Might even take 
something away... And why would a current be harmful in one direction 
and not the other?

Nick--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to 200,000 lines of code with a free copy of Black Duck
Code Sight - the same software that powers the world's largest code
search on Ohloh, the Black Duck Open Hub! Try it now.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/bds