A new view from Pat Riddle... he is still using the gloves, now only every 3 days...but unsupervisedyoutu.be/7yDkcXkhsT4
Pat Riddle new video: A new view from Pat... - Cure Parkinson's
Pat Riddle new video
Clearly I'm going to have to figure out how to make one of these. Maybe I can talk my son into it for me.
Then mabey you can point in this directionyoutu.be/1PfsVjnPAuQ
Tthis guy has a whole series, code and wiring and all of the how to... does it work ? ...mabey
So far, I haven't seen reports from users of DIY gloves which match the results pat riddle is reporting, never mind those of Peter Tass. There is the potential, if done badly, of Reinforcing neuronal synchrony. Maybe some of the details don't matter. Maybe all of these projects will work just as well. But I don't want to spend time finding out the hard way which details are critical. So imitation not innovation. I want to get all the details right
What the diy projects lack are the brain scanners ..... but yeah, I have scanned the internet for defenit, positive reports, but found none....also I want to see more people and reports from the Stanford trials.... I feel a bit like Pat Riddle is changing his descriptions......but thats mabey due to his placibo phase ..... still, I have my doubts, that perhaps I am placing too much hopes onto this method
So which paradigm should we be striving to imitate strictly? — random vCR with 3 ON, 2 OFF cycles, mirrored hands and temporal jitter, for 2 x 2hrs/ day for 3+ months ? (which as you pointed out still leaves many parameters to be guessed, perhaps most importantly the stimulus amplitude/ intensity)
I fear that for the diy group, the missing brain scanner, makes it hard to discover the 'secret sauce'
Well, Tass and colleagues also have been mostly working without ‘brain scanners’. Their thinking has been shaped largely by computational modeling based on plausible assumptions and the tinkering with the vCR paradigm following behavioral observations.
The frequently shown ‘brain scan’ indicating the dissolution of pathological beta synchronization by vCR (eg, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/349... is based on a 3 month difference of pre - post vCR EEGs of a group of subjects— so it would not be helpful for tracking individual day to day progress.
In the absence of reliable brain markers, I think the best strategy is to track symptoms as systematically and objectively as possible (eg, by wearable devices).
hi Ethin,
Here is a good question to ask the scientists in question about much desired Pd biomarkers. And I quote
"Abnormal neuronal synchrony is a hallmark of Parkinson's disease (Hammond et al., 2007). Coordinated reset (CR) stimulation was computationally developed to cause an "unlearning" of pathologically persistent synchrony and synaptic connectivity, "
if it is that way why not use it as a non-invasive biomarker in the diagnosis and progression of PD ?
I suppose because it is not " a hallmark of Parkinson's disease."
However, if you show that it works with results that's fine.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articl...
I suppose you are right, Gio. Abnormal neuronal synchronization is a feature of PD, as it is of other conditions (schizophrenia, tinnitus, ..), but not _the hallmark_. So getting rid of the pathological synchronization does not get rid of PD, but may still ease some symptoms.
Ok but I was wondering why the EEG electroencephalogram and the 'pathologically persistent synchrony' are not taken into account by Neurologists for the diagnosis of PD as well as the other symptoms you cite.
The short answer: the diagnosis of PD by clinical (behavioral) signs is about as reliable and much easier/ cheaper than diagnosis by PET/ MRI/ EEG (where the only certain confirmation is postmortem ), plus : PD -> abnormal synchrony, but not necessarily: abnormal synchrony -> PD.
Nonetheless, hyper-synchrony may be an important aspect of PD and interfering with it could mechanistically reduce some symptoms (academic.oup.com/brain/arti..., but if and how vCR can achieve this is not certain at the moment. (Though of course I hope that is has some effect.)
Ethin , Thank you for answering me, let me say
An eeg costs 120€ a dat scan 800€, in this study I see a lot of use of correlation and DBS .
As you say : “PD -> abnormal synchrony, but not necessarily: abnormal synchrony -> PD “ is rather decontextualized,
what else causes abnormally persistent synchrony?
We could hypothesize that other types of brain injuries cause “abnormally persistent synchrony” or just the devil and the marketing directors know what else can cause them.
There is no doubt that DBS reduces some symptoms, but it is a bit invasive and is not the point under discussion here. What matters is the result and if it works it's true. I hope vCR works, but let's see the results.
We are all free to strive for what we like. I plan to start with 3 on 2 off RVS probably with jitter (which is what I've dabbled with so far). Other patterns are of interest but at this stage primarily for what they suggest about other parameters (like amplitude). The recent papers are also of interest for what they imply about different aspects of PD responding to different parameters both in an acute and sustained response.But those modern variants would not have been used by kanwar Bhutani and what he had is good enough for me.
In addition, fixed point of contact on fingertip, 4mm radius contact, 0.1mm indentation,0 5mm amplitude, 250hz sinewave, fast rise time, 100ms bursts and anything else I've forgotten
very exciting to see this! Keep strong! and please keep reporting ....