Tough Case

[Guest guest]

Nick~

T/B ratio being more than or increasing to more than 2.0 (3.0 in young kids) can be a red flag but it also can be an indication of artifact if there was movement during EO/ task. If the ratio increases you may see an increase in theta at task or the beta may decrease, or both. Any of the increasing or decreasing is fine as long as the T/B ratio doesn't go much below 1.2 or above 2.0, keeping in mind artifact may be an issue (look for lots of blinking, twitching or shifting during EO or Task) . Hope this makes sense,

~

Tough Case

Sorry folks I misspoke:

I just realized that the RATIO T/B can INCREASE from EC->EO->TSK, if both T and B DECREASE as expected but B decreases more in each step.

Still not sure what it means. Is another way of saying it "B blocks more than T" or "B shuts off more than T" when you go EC-->EO-->Task in a normal brain? When it doesn't you have processing problems.

I also need to know if it is indeed a red flag for processing problems.

nick

[Guest guest]

Dear :

I get your point about artifacts but my question is really about what constitutes TLC assessment evidence for filtering or processing problems ---absent artifacts.

I was replying to an earlier posting from Fishel in which he cites a case (his son) where "reverse activation of the T/B ratios (they go down from EO/EC to Task) which puts him in the category of Processing problems".

I don't understand the notation "EO/EC to Task". What does this mean? What is EO/EC? I have never seen that ratio before.

I understand that T/B ratio has to be between 1.2 and 2.0, but is saying something quite different, namely that it is the DECREASE in the T/B RATIO during the three 1 minute segments EC-->EO-->TSK, NOT its absolute value, which is the important thing that suggests his son has processing problems. I just returned from the Level II Workshop and I don't recall Pete mentioning this "reverse activation" at all.

Did I miss something?

Nick

Duncan <karenduncan@...> wrote:

Nick~

T/B ratio being more than or increasing to more than 2.0 (3.0 in young kids) can be a red flag but it also can be an indication of artifact if there was movement during EO/ task. If the ratio increases you may see an increase in theta at task or the beta may decrease, or both. Any of the increasing or decreasing is fine as long as the T/B ratio doesn't go much below 1.2 or above 2.0, keeping in mind artifact may be an issue (look for lots of blinking, twitching or shifting during EO or Task) . Hope this makes sense,

~

Tough Case

Sorry folks I misspoke:

I just realized that the RATIO T/B can INCREASE from EC->EO->TSK, if both T and B DECREASE as expected but B decreases more in each step.

Still not sure what it means. Is another way of saying it "B blocks more than T" or "B shuts off more than T" when you go EC-->EO-->Task in a normal brain? When it doesn't you have processing problems.

I also need to know if it is indeed a red flag for processing problems.

nick

[Guest guest]

Nick~

I believe, from my understanding, its not that important whether the T/B ratio goes up or down so much but rather what the range is. (between 1.2 and 2.0) EC = eyes closed (1st min or assessment) , EO= eyes open (2nd minute of assessment) , task= happens in the 3rd minute of the assessment when one is asked to read or repeat a digit span etc..

activation or reverse activation is the direction the brain goes when one changes from one challenge to another. Actually, I would normally consider the T/B ratios to be reverse activating if they went up at task rather than down at task. ( no, you didn't miss something) I think Tim's concern is that his sons T/B ratio went up with eyes open and then drops so much at task that it now looks like a filtering issue in the frontal. After looking at the assessment, the reason the T/B ratio drops so much is because the beta amplitude (amplitude page) almost doubles at task in the frontal. In the central the T/B ratio drops but not as much as the frontal, the theta amplitude drops and the beta stays pretty much the same. I'd be inclined to think that eye blink or facial muscle tension during task may have something to do with the frontal ratios dropping so much.

~

Tough Case

Sorry folks I misspoke:

I just realized that the RATIO T/B can INCREASE from EC->EO->TSK, if both T and B DECREASE as expected but B decreases more in each step.

Still not sure what it means. Is another way of saying it "B blocks more than T" or "B shuts off more than T" when you go EC-->EO-->Task in a normal brain? When it doesn't you have processing problems.

I also need to know if it is indeed a red flag for processing problems.

nick

[Guest guest]

I would think reverse activation would be the theta/beta ratio going up at task. If we are dividing theta by beta,then the ratio increases as theta increases, which is the reverse of what you would expect at task. The ratio would also increase if beta goes down,that's a little more complex situation.

Foxx

-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of NICK MAMMANOSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:49 PM Subject: Re: Tough Case

Dear :

I get your point about artifacts but my question is really about what constitutes TLC assessment evidence for filtering or processing problems ---absent artifacts.

I was replying to an earlier posting from Fishel in which he cites a case (his son) where "reverse activation of the T/B ratios (they go down from EO/EC to Task) which puts him in the category of Processing problems".

I don't understand the notation "EO/EC to Task". What does this mean? What is EO/EC? I have never seen that ratio before.

I understand that T/B ratio has to be between 1.2 and 2.0, but is saying something quite different, namely that it is the DECREASE in the T/B RATIO during the three 1 minute segments EC-->EO-->TSK, NOT its absolute value, which is the important thing that suggests his son has processing problems. I just returned from the Level II Workshop and I don't recall Pete mentioning this "reverse activation" at all.

Did I miss something?

Nick

Duncan <karenduncan@...> wrote:

Nick~

T/B ratio being more than or increasing to more than 2.0 (3.0 in young kids) can be a red flag but it also can be an indication of artifact if there was movement during EO/ task. If the ratio increases you may see an increase in theta at task or the beta may decrease, or both. Any of the increasing or decreasing is fine as long as the T/B ratio doesn't go much below 1.2 or above 2.0, keeping in mind artifact may be an issue (look for lots of blinking, twitching or shifting during EO or Task) . Hope this makes sense,

~

Tough Case

Sorry folks I misspoke:

I just realized that the RATIO T/B can INCREASE from EC->EO->TSK, if both T and B DECREASE as expected but B decreases more in each step.

Still not sure what it means. Is another way of saying it "B blocks more than T" or "B shuts off more than T" when you go EC-->EO-->Task in a normal brain? When it doesn't you have processing problems.

I also need to know if it is indeed a red flag for processing problems.

nick

[Guest guest]

Dear Foxx:

This is getting into algebraic hair splitting but there are other situations in which the T/B ratio might increase at task:

a) Both T and B INCREASE but T increases more than B

Both T and B DECREASE but B decreases more than T

In any case my big question is: is this part of the Level II workshop that I missed? I have no notes relating to reverse activation based on the T/B ratio's change at task and its relevance to Filtering vs. Processing. Since we are dealing with a ratio it doesn't seem to me to be a very precise way of distinguishing between them -- too many variables changing.

It might explain Tim Fishel's uncertainty about his son's "diagnosis".

Since I have you on the line, so to speak, I have a silly question : Can you (or anyone)explain why the general rule is that amplitude goes down during the assessment as you go from EC -->EO--> TSK. What happens in the brain when we open our eyes or begin a task like arithmetic or reading?

I would think the brain gets "busier" and amplitudes would go up.

Nick

Foxx <foxx@...> wrote:

I would think reverse activation would be the theta/beta ratio going up at task. If we are dividing theta by beta,then the ratio increases as theta increases, which is the reverse of what you would expect at task. The ratio would also increase if beta goes down,that's a little more complex situation.

Foxx

-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of NICK MAMMANOSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:49 PM Subject: Re: Tough Case

Dear :

I get your point about artifacts but my question is really about what constitutes TLC assessment evidence for filtering or processing problems ---absent artifacts.

I was replying to an earlier posting from Fishel in which he cites a case (his son) where "reverse activation of the T/B ratios (they go down from EO/EC to Task) which puts him in the category of Processing problems".

I don't understand the notation "EO/EC to Task". What does this mean? What is EO/EC? I have never seen that ratio before.

I understand that T/B ratio has to be between 1.2 and 2.0, but is saying something quite different, namely that it is the DECREASE in the T/B RATIO during the three 1 minute segments EC-->EO-->TSK, NOT its absolute value, which is the important thing that suggests his son has processing problems. I just returned from the Level II Workshop and I don't recall Pete mentioning this "reverse activation" at all.

Did I miss something?

Nick

Duncan <karenduncan@...> wrote:

Nick~

T/B ratio being more than or increasing to more than 2.0 (3.0 in young kids) can be a red flag but it also can be an indication of artifact if there was movement during EO/ task. If the ratio increases you may see an increase in theta at task or the beta may decrease, or both. Any of the increasing or decreasing is fine as long as the T/B ratio doesn't go much below 1.2 or above 2.0, keeping in mind artifact may be an issue (look for lots of blinking, twitching or shifting during EO or Task) . Hope this makes sense,

~

Tough Case

Sorry folks I misspoke:

I just realized that the RATIO T/B can INCREASE from EC->EO->TSK, if both T and B DECREASE as expected but B decreases more in each step.

Still not sure what it means. Is another way of saying it "B blocks more than T" or "B shuts off more than T" when you go EC-->EO-->Task in a normal brain? When it doesn't you have processing problems.

I also need to know if it is indeed a red flag for processing problems.

nick

[Guest guest]

OK. Your explanation makes sense.

I feel a little silly, you know? --- splitting hairs when Tim's family is dealing with such heavy issues with their child. I do hope all of this "digression" helps him see his way clear to a firm assessment.

I still raised a question with Foxx-- maybe you could chip in, too. Just why is the brain activated in the way it is eg. amplitudes go down from EC->EO-->TSK . Why is this the "direction the brain goes" as you put it?

Duncan <karenduncan@...> wrote:

Nick~

I believe, from my understanding, its not that important whether the T/B ratio goes up or down so much but rather what the range is. (between 1.2 and 2.0) EC = eyes closed (1st min or assessment) , EO= eyes open (2nd minute of assessment) , task= happens in the 3rd minute of the assessment when one is asked to read or repeat a digit span etc..

activation or reverse activation is the direction the brain goes when one changes from one challenge to another. Actually, I would normally consider the T/B ratios to be reverse activating if they went up at task rather than down at task. ( no, you didn't miss something) I think Tim's concern is that his sons T/B ratio went up with eyes open and then drops so much at task that it now looks like a filtering issue in the frontal. After looking at the assessment, the reason the T/B ratio drops so much is because the beta amplitude (amplitude page) almost doubles at task in the frontal. In the central the T/B ratio drops but not as much as the frontal, the theta amplitude drops and the beta stays pretty much the same. I'd be inclined to think that eye blink or facial muscle tension during task may have something to do with the frontal ratios dropping so much.

~

Tough Case

Sorry folks I misspoke:

I just realized that the RATIO T/B can INCREASE from EC->EO->TSK, if both T and B DECREASE as expected but B decreases more in each step.

Still not sure what it means. Is another way of saying it "B blocks more than T" or "B shuts off more than T" when you go EC-->EO-->Task in a normal brain? When it doesn't you have processing problems.

I also need to know if it is indeed a red flag for processing problems.

nick

[Guest guest]

Tim,

If the theta/beta ratio goes down at task, especially if it goes into range,

that would suggest that processing may not be the primary issue. You might

check to see if there are specific areas where this doesn't happen. Also worth

looking at whether the the left side ratios are better and activate more

strongly than the right, as they should.

Pete

>

> From: " timfishel " <.Fishel@...>

> Date: 2005/08/01 Mon PM 12:44:17 EDT

>

> Subject: Re: Tough Case

>

> A bit more clarification would help me out. As Nick called it

a " red flag " , is a " reverse activation " a " red flag " for a

processing type problem? Specifically, Jake tends to go from EC of

2 to 3 followed by a task range of 1 to 2. Drops are from a range

of about 1/2 to 1 whole point. His C4 SMR is in the range of 10.

Am I likely dealing with a processing issue?

Tim Fishel

[Guest guest]

Nick,

This is a delayed response, has been sitting in my drafts.

I do not think your question is silly at all. And I'd really like others to chime in on this one.

As I understand it, high amplitudes are created by cells within a frequency band firing at the same time. I'm not sure what this is called, phase or synchrony? For frequency bands, such as alpha and theta, usually driven by subcortical regulators that affect cortical cells over a wide area, higher amplitudes would be expected when nothing much else is going on. High coherence is also expected.

However, the higher frequency bands, the betas, are in limited cortical areas, so amplitudes are lower. Also, if we are thinking and processing information efficiently, different small sets of cells are doing different things and thus are not firing together. Low amplitudes are often a sign of the brain operating effectively. That's why in most cases you would not uptrain high frequencies. And why you might see them go down at task.

Foxx

-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of NICK MAMMANOSent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 8:36 AM Subject: RE: Tough Case

Dear Foxx:

This is getting into algebraic hair splitting but there are other situations in which the T/B ratio might increase at task:

a) Both T and B INCREASE but T increases more than B

Both T and B DECREASE but B decreases more than T

In any case my big question is: is this part of the Level II workshop that I missed? I have no notes relating to reverse activation based on the T/B ratio's change at task and its relevance to Filtering vs. Processing. Since we are dealing with a ratio it doesn't seem to me to be a very precise way of distinguishing between them -- too many variables changing.

It might explain Tim Fishel's uncertainty about his son's "diagnosis".

Since I have you on the line, so to speak, I have a silly question : Can you (or anyone)explain why the general rule is that amplitude goes down during the assessment as you go from EC -->EO--> TSK. What happens in the brain when we open our eyes or begin a task like arithmetic or reading?

I would think the brain gets "busier" and amplitudes would go up.

Nick

Foxx <foxx@...> wrote:

I would think reverse activation would be the theta/beta ratio going up at task. If we are dividing theta by beta,then the ratio increases as theta increases, which is the reverse of what you would expect at task. The ratio would also increase if beta goes down,that's a little more complex situation.

Foxx

-----Original Message-----From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of NICK MAMMANOSent: Friday, July 29, 2005 8:49 PM Subject: Re: Tough Case

Dear :

I get your point about artifacts but my question is really about what constitutes TLC assessment evidence for filtering or processing problems ---absent artifacts.

I was replying to an earlier posting from Fishel in which he cites a case (his son) where "reverse activation of the T/B ratios (they go down from EO/EC to Task) which puts him in the category of Processing problems".

I don't understand the notation "EO/EC to Task". What does this mean? What is EO/EC? I have never seen that ratio before.

I understand that T/B ratio has to be between 1.2 and 2.0, but is saying something quite different, namely that it is the DECREASE in the T/B RATIO during the three 1 minute segments EC-->EO-->TSK, NOT its absolute value, which is the important thing that suggests his son has processing problems. I just returned from the Level II Workshop and I don't recall Pete mentioning this "reverse activation" at all.

Did I miss something?

Nick

Duncan <karenduncan@...> wrote:

Nick~

T/B ratio being more than or increasing to more than 2.0 (3.0 in young kids) can be a red flag but it also can be an indication of artifact if there was movement during EO/ task. If the ratio increases you may see an increase in theta at task or the beta may decrease, or both. Any of the increasing or decreasing is fine as long as the T/B ratio doesn't go much below 1.2 or above 2.0, keeping in mind artifact may be an issue (look for lots of blinking, twitching or shifting during EO or Task) . Hope this makes sense,

~

Tough Case

Sorry folks I misspoke:

I just realized that the RATIO T/B can INCREASE from EC->EO->TSK, if both T and B DECREASE as expected but B decreases more in each step.

Still not sure what it means. Is another way of saying it "B blocks more than T" or "B shuts off more than T" when you go EC-->EO-->Task in a normal brain? When it doesn't you have processing problems.

I also need to know if it is indeed a red flag for processing problems.

nick

[Guest guest]

Group,

I need some recommendations for a 50-year-old female patient who has failed to significantly recover from MVA injuries. 99% of my patients eventually respond to our form of chiropractic care and massage, but after a few months, she has not. She continues to have HA's, sporadic dizziness & nausea, neck pain, midback pain, and low back pain all without radiation, numbness or tingling.

I have referred her to Dr. Finn in Woodburn for brain injury evaluation and treatment and even for some physical therapy. Any type of physical work on her body (adjusting, massage, exercise) seems to aggravate her symptoms. She is very frustrated and feels like she is going to be like this forever.

I may send her out to try acupuncture, but I feel like I'm running out of options for her.

As far as diagnostic imaging goes - only x-rays so far, which showed nothing atypical.

I am thinking of sending her out for further diagnostic testing such as MRI of the head, neck and thoracic spine? Not sure if this would help answer why this woman continues to hurt... any thoughts? What would you do?

Looking for suggestions,

Jamey Dyson, D.C.

Salem

[Guest guest]

Hi Jamey,

Sounds like her sacrum and occiput are working together..remember the primary respiratory mechanism. My suggestion would be to blockthe pelvis and reset the occiput. If you are unfamiliar with that, send her out for a short referral to Eliz Guimot or Jackie or (I believe) Jpyce McClure also does that type of corrective work.

Sunny

Sunny Kierstyn, RN DC Fibromyalgia Care Center of Oregon 2677 Willakenzie Road, 7C

Eugene, Oregon, 97401

541- 344- 0509; Fx; 541- 344- 0955

From: jcaadyson@...Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:49:56 -0800Subject: Tough Case

Group,

I need some recommendations for a 50-year-old female patient who has failed to significantly recover from MVA injuries. 99% of my patients eventually respond to our form of chiropractic care and massage, but after a few months, she has not. She continues to have HA's, sporadic dizziness & nausea, neck pain, midback pain, and low back pain all without radiation, numbness or tingling.

I have referred her to Dr. Finn in Woodburn for brain injury evaluation and treatment and even for some physical therapy. Any type of physical work on her body (adjusting, massage, exercise) seems to aggravate her symptoms. She is very frustrated and feels like she is going to be like this forever.

I may send her out to try acupuncture, but I feel like I'm running out of options for her.

As far as diagnostic imaging goes - only x-rays so far, which showed nothing atypical.

I am thinking of sending her out for further diagnostic testing such as MRI of the head, neck and thoracic spine? Not sure if this would help answer why this woman continues to hurt... any thoughts? What would you do?

Looking for suggestions,

Jamey Dyson, D.C.

Salem

Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. Get it now!