Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: Ideal TLC assessment

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Hi List mates,

Could we also see an example of a child "normal"- maybe around age 10 and another at age 5 or 6?. Thanks a bunch,

Sheila

Ideal TLC assessment

Hello,Could Pete (or anyone) provide an idealized TLC assessment, or perhaps more usefully, an assessment or assessments of "normal" folks that fall with "correct" TLC assessment ranges across the board? It would be helpful to see what these look like to get an idea of what the TLC training approach is aiming for.Luke

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Luke~

If you are using one of the newer versions of the assessment, the assessment

shows what is in the normal range by showing numbers in black, all the

numbers in blue or red are out of the preferred range.

~

Ideal TLC assessment

> Hello,

>

> Could Pete (or anyone) provide an idealized TLC assessment, or perhaps

> more usefully, an assessment or assessments of " normal " folks that fall

> with " correct " TLC assessment ranges across the board? It would be

> helpful to see what these look like to get an idea of what the TLC

> training approach is aiming for.

>

> Luke

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Huh - Isn't this totally counter to Pete's philosophy? There is no

normal, there is only what you are and what you want to change.

If you mean what would be values that would cause no blue or red

numbers, that should be fairly easy to reverse engineer.

-

Luke Vicens wrote:

> Hello,

>

> Could Pete (or anyone) provide an idealized TLC assessment, or perhaps

> more usefully, an assessment or assessments of " normal " folks that fall

> with " correct " TLC assessment ranges across the board? It would be

> helpful to see what these look like to get an idea of what the TLC

> training approach is aiming for.

>

> Luke

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

The fact the TLC Assessment labels certain values as too high or too low

implies that there is a range of values which are just right. I'd rather

not spend the time reverse engineering them if Pete could provide them.

Grigglestone wrote:

> Huh - Isn't this totally counter to Pete's philosophy? There is no

> normal, there is only what you are and what you want to change.

>

> If you mean what would be values that would cause no blue or red

> numbers, that should be fairly easy to reverse engineer.

>

> -

>

> Luke Vicens wrote:

> > Hello,

> >

> > Could Pete (or anyone) provide an idealized TLC assessment, or perhaps

> > more usefully, an assessment or assessments of " normal " folks that fall

> > with " correct " TLC assessment ranges across the board? It would be

> > helpful to see what these look like to get an idea of what the TLC

> > training approach is aiming for.

> >

> > Luke

> >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Yes, I see many values that are labeled red or blue, but without median

values and standard deviations for " normal subjects " or at least a

definition of the ranges, it's difficult to tell whether these colored

values are marginally out of range or way outside the norm. If such

information were available, it would be easier to prioritize issues to

train.

Luke

Duncan wrote:

> Hi Luke~

> If you are using one of the newer versions of the assessment, the

> assessment

> shows what is in the normal range by showing numbers in black, all the

> numbers in blue or red are out of the preferred range.

> ~

> Ideal TLC assessment

>

>

> > Hello,

> >

> > Could Pete (or anyone) provide an idealized TLC assessment, or perhaps

> > more usefully, an assessment or assessments of " normal " folks that fall

> > with " correct " TLC assessment ranges across the board? It would be

> > helpful to see what these look like to get an idea of what the TLC

> > training approach is aiming for.

> >

> > Luke

> >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Luke

Several things come to mind as I read your posts. 1) Over time as the TLC

assessment evolved there was " more or less " a natural order of training,

doing the " TONE " issues first. My assumption has always been (Pete correct

me if I get some things wrong), that the midbrain has such an effect on

everything else, while the strictly cortical processes (if there really is

such a thing) do not, of sense to start there. Then the trainer might move

on to Filtering and Processing issues (some of these may disguise themselves

as parts of the other).

2) The assessment has two parts, and the subjective part is based on the

client's own experience of the world. Definitely important in the selection

tree for training sites, and protocols.

3) Much of the assessment is based on the interrelationship of each of the

brain areas, also very important because when you " shift " one part of the

brain it certainly impacts the others.

4) The client's experience while training must also be considered. For

example, some folks get hyper from standard beta training, even though the

objective and possibly subjective might indicate beta training, some folks

just don't tolerate it well.

QEEG is a normed data base and based on data review of thousands of brains.

However since the brain is quite plastic, and the Q represents only one

point in time, to use it as an absolute, may or may not be helpful (unless

of course you're Jay Gunkleman). However, many of my colleagues who I hold

in very high regard swear by them.

All that being said, if you look on the " analyze " page of TLC for instance

(also as pointed out, the blues and reds) you will find some norms.

For instance beta coherence higher than 40 should be worked with... so you

might infer that if it was 41, it might be less important than if it was 75.

I'm not sure I would buy into that. The short of this, to me, is that the

brain is very fluid, and many aspects other than norms must be considered.

It's rather like (uh oh here comes the

cliché) a quantum or holistic assessment must be done.

Best of everything

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I agree with Luke that it would be very helpful to include a definition of the ranges in addition to the colored numbers. Perhaps that will be included in the next TLC assessment update.

~Betsy

Ideal TLC assessment>>> > Hello,> >> > Could Pete (or anyone) provide an idealized TLC assessment, or perhaps> > more usefully, an assessment or assessments of "normal" folks that fall> > with "correct" TLC assessment ranges across the board? It would be> > helpful to see what these look like to get an idea of what the TLC> > training approach is aiming for.> >> > Luke> >> >> >> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...