I’ve spent the past 2 days participating in a workshop at the National Institutes of Health titled “Harnessing Neuroplasticity for Human Applications”. You would probably have enjoyed – and learned from — listening in on these discussions. The participants at this meeting (including many top American gurus and practitioners in neuroplasticity) outlined the state or current research and application, identified gaps in our understanding and impediments for making progress, tried to list obvious therapeutic targets, and considered how more powerful and effective multiplidisciplinary teams could be organized to develop new tools to help neglected medical populations. Different panels reported to the larger group on issues of 1) child health, disease & brain injury; 2) addiction and psychotic illness; 3) brain injury or stroke; and 4) normal and pathological aging.
Meetings like this are both highly encouraging, and substantially discouraging. On the encouraging side, the progress and wisdom of the leaders in this scientific field are rapidly growing — and a growing number of top-level scientists and clinicians are now focussed on the development of this science and the delivery of its fruits out into society. It was also encouraging to see that, slowly but surely, NIH officials are beginning to understand that a medical revolution for neurological and psychiatric medicine — and human health — is now underway.
On the discouraging side, this field is still highly undisciplined, approaching plasticity issues in a myriad of piecemeal ways, still arguing about the fact or power of plasticity in adult brains, still suffering from limited communication between scientists and clinicians in different disciplines (real reading, for scientists, must be at an all-time low), and currently delivering very little of real practical use from the laboratory out to the ‘real world’ of clinical medicine. One problem is a lack of standardized, generally-agreed-upon measures of performance improvement and outcome success in malady and malady. Another problem is the persistent limitation of perspective by which plasticity is defined by scientists in terms of an isolated process(es) in an isolated brain location(s), by a lack of understanding of fundamental science in one neuroplasticity camp, by a lack of understanding of clinical science by the other, or by the reliance in studies of a simple behavior assuming that correcting it equates with overcoming a dysfunction of injury. Plasticity changes complex brain SYSTEMS. Alas, not very many scientists or clinicians yet operate with the grandeur of it all firmly in mind.
Still, I’m hopeful. The NIH is finally beginning to get is act together, in this field. Increasingly, it’s supporting a much more effective multidisciplinary team approach, which is required to accelerate the development of practical aids that can help people in need. It would appear to be interested in supporting more multiple-site outcomes trials for new therapies that promise to benefit the autistics and schizophrenics and depressives and MCIs and TBIs and the thousand-and-one other classes of citizens who could benefit from this science. The Europeans are a little ahead of us, in getting their act together in this field, but we Americans can more than compete, if the admininstrative forces in our Washington health institutions and our great commercial resources can really get this going.
For all you folks out there who want to give Uncle Sam a prod, to assure that they come through, let your Congressperson and Senator know that neuroplasticity research and treatments are important for you and your family, and let the Directors of the Child Health (Dr. Duane Alexander), Aging (Dr. Richard Hodes), Mental Health (Dr. Thomas Insel), Drug Abuse & Addiction (Dr. Nora Volkow) and Neurology (Dr. Story Landis) Institutes of the National Institutes of Health know that this is one of the most hopeful initiatives that has come down the pike in many a moon!
Dr. Merzenich:
I’m embarrassed by your cheerleader-science.
Your emotive, marketing, money-seeking campaigns to sell CD disks (specific computer games/exercises) at $300-$500.
Your lack of objective scientific studies done over the long term.
Your use of your name, status, reputation, and work done in other fields, to product-peddle and cheerleader-science,.
Your use of the QVC infomercial channel to sell your Posit Science CD’s, where trinkets, exercise devices and emotive ploys, and other of the worst-of-the-worst products are peddled to desperate people, and very sadly, many senior citizens. QVC is one of the largest Tv retailers in the world. You paid them masses of money to peddle your product there. A massive product for them are CD’s for endless things.
Your anxiety, fear engendering ploys and arguments.
http://merzenich.positscience.com/?page_id=143
Bottom of page:
“On your own, you are unlikely to find ways to exercise that machinery as efficiently as with a clinically proven program.” Not one thing a person can do without your computer CD? Not one? Absolutely pathetic, one illustration of all I mention here.
Your total neglect, of discussing any possible limitations and any possible criticisms to your “technology”. Even the greatest academic professionals in history, for example, spend considerable time receiving and responding to, and learning from, criticisms. None are so arrogant to say there is nothing wrong with their work.
You’re cry of “brain plasticity revolution” is a cry from pseudo-science. Truely effective treatments need not be sold on the USA’s largest infomercial TV program, QVC. Nor do they need the advertising, marketing wars you wage.
‘Brain plasticity’ is largely only a newly spun term.
‘Plasticity’ when used to refer to brain processes, is very unscientific. It’s a metaphorical, vague term, trying to make an illustration that brain processes are similar to plastic processes. Not so, in fact. Say we have a piece of plastic. Some can be melted, molded, etc. But you can’t change the structure unless you physically add something. The term ‘Brain Plasticity’ is more aptly used for Neurosurgery and Psychosurgery.
You view Brain Plasticy as almost a panacea. An almost endless list of conditions, ailments, disorders, diseases. PTSD, Autism, Schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s, Recovery from brain trauma, Aging……. Then, to catch the biggest part of the public, you claim it’s for everyone else, especially seniors, wishing to exercise their brains.
You don’t do anything to the “machinery of the brain”. Your brain plasticity campaign is a response to the abject poverty of neuroscience to treat PTSD, Autism, etc. You just ended your career in academics, and you did nothing to treat any of the major neurological illnesses, and now you’re embarked on a money-making scheme to use your name to peddle CD computer programs, and then tell everyone it’s THE way.
In response to the poverty of neuroscience, you had to find another way. Your way is one step away from Psychotherapy. They think you can change your psychological-makeup through Psychotherapy – the neural connections etc. Just as you do. You had nothing else, and brain-plasticity is all that’s left.
Your underhanded focus on money-making is an atrocity.
Your in’s with medical organizations is disgusting.
Your 100% speculate millions-dollar a year funded science projects are disgusting. 100% based on hope. You’ve done zero for autism, yet you secured a 100% speculative science-initiative with the largest US autism organization Autism Speaks.
At Wikipedia there was a proven lie about you, second paragraph http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Neuroplasticity&direction=prev&oldid=283497930#Michael_Merzenich :
“He also developed a series of “plasticity-based computer programs known as Fast ForWord, which were of tremendous assistance for autistic children and those with severe receptive/expressive language impairments.”
False. As you know. So this was removed recently when the editors of Wikipedia were informed. Updated article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroplasticity#Michael_Merzenich
You would do well to spend at least some time discussing any limitations to Brain Plasticity, limitations to your Computer Programs, responding to scientific criticisms, stop portraying Brain Plasticity and Posit Science as panaceas, stop using your name and influence to make money, stop using QVC.
Let people tell their doctors and other people about your “product”. This is how things go. If it’s medically important, you should not need to pay mass money to QVC Infomercial Tv to peddle it and suck the blood of desperate, lonely, suggestible people. Doing this to trusting seniors is a social atrocity.
Past Merzenich blogs:
–Criminals issues.
–Poorly treated children.
Here’s a moral solution. $800,000 so far donated by Dr. Ben Carson to children and young adults in need. http://carsonscholars.org/
Photos of Ben, and awards
http://www.healthoc.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=89:gifted-hands-the-ben-carson-story&catid=13:medical&Itemid=98
Something to overcome their limitations — buy their way out of their situations and into education.