Brain zap rouses people from years of vegetative state
newscientist.com
newscientist.com
edit:
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/man-in-coma-23-...
https://www.google.com/search?q=facilitated+communication+St...
It's shameful, really.
See also this article (about the 2010 'revelation'): http://www.csicop.org/si/show/fabricating_communication/
"At the beginning and at the end of our trials, we tried to make normal conversation with Houben, and the FC seemed to work perfectly fine, producing intelligible and sometimes even elaborate sentences. In one test, we asked the facilitator to leave the room while we showed Houben a large printed word, which we read aloud to him several times. The facilitator was then allowed to return and assist Mr. Houben in giving the word back to us. Although a well-formed word, the resulting answer was completely wrong. We tried the same test with a large and simple drawing, which yielded identical results. In another test, we shielded the keyboard from the facilitator’s view in the midst of an answer. Immediately, the typing changed into gibberish and soon halted completely"
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/11/28/coma-man-dr-ste...
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/adventures-in-old-age/20...
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_pacemaker
[2] http://medicalcenter.osu.edu/mediaroom/releases/Pages/Ohio-S...
(Spoiler: The patients, unfortunately, developed a tolerance for the treatment within a few months.)
The interesting part is that no one knows why it works as well as it has.
tDCS, and TMS, on the other hand, have barely measurable effects or widely variable effects, and no one has really figured out how to make them practical. Useful for all sorts of psych papers and hypothesis generation, though.
The group that's probably the furthest along is the Toronto group - they tend to be pretty liberal about where to implant electrodes, and are always looking for new indications to implant stimulators (i.e. generate new IP, etc). They were initially looking to stick the thing into the hypothalamus to control weight gain, since everyone in north america is overweight and there's a huge market.
Well, turns out when they turn the thing on, the guy suddenly remembers every sexual encounter he's had since puberty in vivid detail.
Hence the pivot to Alzheimer's, with at least 2 pilot studies done w/ ~40 subjects using the currently available Medtronic Inc devices, and a new biotech startup.
The effects so far are modest - essentially the subjects deteriorated but more slowly than expected. No one suddenly started remembering things like they could when they were younger...
> An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband’s contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind
If you ever end up in a persistent vegetative state, it's grueling for your family & loved ones. We now have the tech to keep you sort-of alive for many years, but it's not cheap, of course.
There have been ridiculous controversies in the US (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo_case for a good example) about families that have decided (with the support of medical professionals) to pull the plug after years of suffering... and there may be protests from the devout (because to some people, any action or explicit inaction that causes a life to end is murder), political interference all the way up to high levels, etc..
It's also somewhat sad that if it's time to give up on restoring a person to working order, the ways of doing that may be limited to somewhat slow & cruel methods (like removing a feeding tube) rather than more humane methods, due to the legal terrain.
There's a certain level of brain damage from which it's not possible to recover a functional person; it's hard to draw that line (see OP for emphasis on that), but it's a line that people in real life are obligated to draw on a regular basis.
If you make a living will that specifies that you do not wish to be kept on life support if your brain activity is below X for Y time (a bit of research required here), you can save the people you leave behind a great deal of heartache by not foisting the decision on them.
Coincidentally at the same time, I had to have my cat put to sleep. The vet came to my house, he received a single injection, and then he peacefully fell asleep in my arms without so much as a twitch. The entire process took not five minutes altogether. I know which way of dying I'd prefer, if it was my terminally ill body at stake.
Her parents wanted to keep feeding her while her husband fought to remove the feeding tube and prevent anyone from feeding her by mouth.
Conveniently for Michael, Terri was allowed to starve to death and he was free to spend whatever remained of the 2 million dollar medical malpractice judgement on himself, his new consort and their children.
I still don't know most of these details, and have forgotten most of what I learned at the time, and honestly that's for the better. It's none of my friggin' business, except that it highlighted some serious problems in the US legal system. And we could have learned about that problem without ever hearing the name "Terri Schiavo" or knowing anything about the personal lives of her & her family.
Until the problems are fixed (if they can be), it's important to make a living will. It shouldn't be left to your husband and parents (and the news anchors, and higher elected officials of your country) to battle each other over who has more right to say what should happen to your brainless body.
Make sure the people who need to know understand roughly what you want, and who you trust to make decisions on your behalf about palliative care, life-prolonging treatments, etc.. Google has lots of advice, free templates, etc..
Wikipedia says Terri was brain-dead for 15 years before she finally died. I don't think I know anyone who'd want their body kept alive that long. I know I would not.
Saying that Ms. Schiavo was "brain dead" is an inaccurate description. Terri was severely brain damaged. She was in a persistent vegetative state. She exhibited a profound loss of brain mass. She would have never recovered but she wasn't brain dead either.
Brain dead people don't react to their mother's voice. Terri did. Brain dead people don't track moving object. Terri did.
It's not like she was on life support. They gave her food and water through a tube. She breathed on her own and her heart beat on its own without any external assistance.
She wasn't allowed to die; she was starved to death and again, that makes me angry.
There was apparently 6 hours of video that her parents cut down to about 6 minutes that seemed to show her reacting to her mother; but the judge who watched the whole thing didn't have that impression (and the majority of the doctors evaluating it also said she was in a typical persistent vegetative state).
Maybe she did have enough brain left to occasionally have some low level of awareness? I can't pretend to know.
But if I were in that state, I would certainly not have wanted to be kept alive as long as she was; I would want to be euthanized. Perhaps you would not, and I certainly don't know what Terri would have wanted.
But that's my point, really -- people have different ideas on how to make these decisions, and it shouldn't have been left in the hands of her husband, family, etc..
If my wife wants to move on with her life -- remarry, whatever -- and I'm in a state like Terri Schiavo was, I sure as hell don't want it to be her decision whether I live or die, based on vague memories of what I've said in the past. I'd far rather my wishes were clear, and she could let me go with as little trauma as possible.
Sure, it's possible this line of research could lead to recovery, but the idea that the brain is "on pause" while in a persistent vegetative state and would be capable of returning to normal function is probably not reality.
Keep in mind TDCS isn't a fancy brain machine interface that's intelligently interacting with neurons, it's just dumb direct current that's being sent into tissue...
I think the overall line of research certainly is worthwhile pursuing, just that this specific tDCS project may be being overhyped in just how much it means...
Consciousness is a subjective phenomenon. That's what makes it impossible to study directly, without relying on reports. And that's what separates it from those _relatively simple_ interactions which we can model and study experimentally.
Physical causation in on one side of the deep. Phenomenal experiences are on the other side.
Good read: Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness - http://consc.net/papers/facing.html
My migraines almost completely vanished, but more importantly I had the cognitive energy to do things that had been impossible for many months, such as programming and playing my musical instruments. I had to take it slow at first, but the difference amantadine made was truly remarkable.
It's not fully understood how this drug works, especially considering that it was originally used as an anti-flu medicine. Furthermore, my understanding is that it was no longer used in treating Parkinsons. But it's one of the few drugs that seems to have an effect in people suffering from post-concussion syndrome. A cousin of mine who also suffered from pretty serious post-concussion syndrome likewise had good results with amantadine.
It should be noted that the use of amantadine is controversial in concussion treatment. From what I've heard, some patients don't get much benefit, and the effects tend to wear off over time. Also, it caused me to have problems with insomnia, which were mostly addressed through sleep hygiene and melatonin. But I thought that I'd share my experience here, as this experience helped me to understand just how physical our mind is, and how there are likely a variety of avenues for helping the brain when it is damaged.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2014/02/23/di...
> Guillaume Herbet and colleagues describe the case of a 45 year old man in whom electrical stimulation of a particular spot in the brain “induced a dramatic alteration of conscious experience in a highly reproducible manner.”
Basically, when they zapped a certain point in his brain, it sent him into some kind of dream state. Very interesting.
Alternatively, the treatment is administered (or not) by a second doctor in another room who can't communicate with those in the room.
Did you actually read the article?
"Some recovered the ability to communicate"
Anyway, this article is not about ECT, but transcranial direct current stimulation. tCDS is a completely different concept that uses much lower voltage, applied continuously in the direction of neuron activation, to promote activity and possibly growth. It's been used by healthy individuals to try to boost cognition, and it's certainly exciting to hear it may have real therapeutic indications as well.