Re: disconnect & wideband squash ..

[Guest guest]

The Othmer's split their wide inhibit into two bands: 2-13 Hz and 14-30 Hz.

According to Sue Othmer, the 3 Hz reward band could be anywhere on the

spectrum ... starting at 12-15 Hz and decreasing if needing more calming and

increasing if inattentive, etc.

Mark Darling

disconnect & " wideband " squash ..

> In Pete's Level 2 notes on " Disconnect " he talks about training

> approaches including:

>

> " T3/T4 bipolar, wideband squash with specific frequency reward (Othmer) "

>

> Trying to make sure I understand what the " wideband " actually signifies

> (especially when coupled with " specific frequency reward " ).

>

> Can someone elaborate on this.

>

> (1) Should I assume " wideband " means " more than one frequency band " or

> " all meaningful bands " ?

>

> (2) Should I interpret the suggested protocol as T3/T4/g montage with

> one of the following:

>

> a) inhibit + reward

> inhibit + reward + inhibit

> c) windowed squash [summed inhibits] + reward

> d) inhibit (2-38) + reward [this doesn't make sense]

> e) other

>

> A specific example might help .. and how many targets would you use or

> would you simply AND everything to provide a single feedback.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Slight correction to this post: Sue Othmer utilizes 3 Hz reward

bands between 0-3 and 27-30, though she has indicated that the

majority of folks she has worked with require a rewards band closer

to 0 than 30. She also narrows the band to go lower, e.g; 0-1.5. I

see also she is now discussing breaking the wide band inhibit down

into a number of smaller bands that cover the whole spectrum, then

summing them together into one or two thresholds.

>

> The Othmer's split their wide inhibit into two bands: 2-13 Hz and

14-30 Hz.

> According to Sue Othmer, the 3 Hz reward band could be anywhere on

the

> spectrum ... starting at 12-15 Hz and decreasing if needing more

calming and

> increasing if inattentive, etc.

>

> Mark Darling

>

>

> disconnect & " wideband " squash ..

>

>

> > In Pete's Level 2 notes on " Disconnect " he talks about training

> > approaches including:

> >

> > " T3/T4 bipolar, wideband squash with specific frequency reward

(Othmer) "

> >

> > Trying to make sure I understand what the " wideband " actually

signifies

> > (especially when coupled with " specific frequency reward " ).

> >

> > Can someone elaborate on this.

> >

> > (1) Should I assume " wideband " means " more than one frequency

band " or

> > " all meaningful bands " ?

> >

> > (2) Should I interpret the suggested protocol as T3/T4/g montage

with

> > one of the following:

> >

> > a) inhibit + reward

> > inhibit + reward + inhibit

> > c) windowed squash [summed inhibits] + reward

> > d) inhibit (2-38) + reward [this doesn't make sense]

> > e) other

> >

> > A specific example might help .. and how many targets would you

use or

> > would you simply AND everything to provide a single feedback.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Starting to get the picture

:-[

So from my original email the following are possible answers:

Othmers: back to back inhibits + reward (but the reward overlaps with

the inhibits)

PVD: inhibit (squash) + reward (again reward overlaps with inhibit)

The pieces I still don't understand are:

How the overlapping reward works? .. why wouldn't I do a windowed

squash + reward in the window .. is it that it is just easier to change

the reward band since when you want to change it you don't have to

change the inhibits as well?

Why back to back inhibits .. is it that once you've met your

targets in either the lower or higher frequency ranges, the focus can

pass to the other?

Jane .. your answers provide very helpful info since they reference

Pete's protocols, give your practical experience and attempt to compare

two approaches .. many thanks

-

Jane Gurin wrote:

,

Mark's explanation is great.

Also, Pete provides a design, named 1C interhemispheric, to use in

this type of training. His is set up slightly different than Sue's in

that it has one inhibit set at 2-38 and then a reward band.

If you're working with a child, set the reward band at 10-23 and wiggle

it around from there. My son felt calming at 5-8 and some kids go down

to 1-3.

I've used both Sue's 2-14 and 14-38 inhibits and Pete's 2-38 inhibits

and didn't see a whole lot of difference in the results. But, as we

know, everyone's brain is different. So, try it out for yourself!

Jane

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone

calls.

Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

[Guest guest]

There is an abundance of free information regarding the Othmer protocal

that describes the evolution of their interhem. approach; just google

EEG newsletter, then look through the back issues. THe current issue

discusses exactly this topic.

[Guest guest]

http://www.eeginfo.com/newsletter/vol5_issue14_clinical.htm

http://www.eeginfo.com/newsletter/vol5_issue12_clinical.htm

Above are 2 great newsletters that explain what Sue does.

~

Re: disconnect & " wideband " squash ..

There is an abundance of free information regarding the Othmer protocal

that describes the evolution of their interhem. approach; just google

EEG newsletter, then look through the back issues. THe current issue

discusses exactly this topic.

[Guest guest]

,

One thing to be clear about here is the difference between one-channel (bipolar

interhemispheric training) and two-channel (windowed squash).

In the bipolar one-channel, when you inhibit, you don't necessarily reduce the

amplitude: you decrease the difference between the two sites. In the two

channel, you are training to actually reduce the amplitude of the two sites,

though not necessarily training their relationship.

So in the bipolar, you are telling the whole EEG between the two sites you are

training to become more alike in amplitude (inhibiting) while asking a specific

band to become more different (rewarding). The argument is that you may be

affecting coherence or phase relationships between the two sites.

In the windowed squash, you aren't actually training down and up at the same

time anywhere in the band. The window is left " open " to " allow " amplitudes to

increase at a particular frequency, if the brain wishes. Everything else is

being rewarded for becoming quieter.

One of the things I like about the 2-channel designs is that you can actually

see what is happening at the two sites, whether they are increasing or

decreasing amplitudes--even how their coherences are being affected--while this

is simply not possible with the bipolar montage.

Certainly Sue and many others swear by the results of the bipolar montages, and

I have the greatest respect for her and the work she and Siegfried have done to

open up our field--often against a LOT of resistance. I stopped teaching the

interhemispheric montage, because I found lots of people (trainers) had a hard

time identifying the " sweet spot " frequency, especially when people (clients)

weren't particularly good at reporting. Besides, I figure if you want to learn

that technique, learn it from Sue herself.

Pete

>

> From: Grigglestone <davidg@...>

> Date: 2006/05/16 Tue AM 10:21:22 EDT

>

> Subject: Re: disconnect & " wideband " squash ..

>

> Starting to get the picture :-[

So from my original email the following are possible answers:

Othmers: back to back inhibits + reward (but the reward overlaps with the

inhibits)

PVD: inhibit (squash) + reward (again reward overlaps with inhibit)

The pieces I still don't understand are:

How the overlapping reward works? .. why wouldn't I do a windowed squash +

reward in the window .. is it that it is just easier to change the reward band

since when you want to change it you don't have to change the inhibits as well?

Why back to back inhibits .. is it that once you've met your targets in either

the lower or higher frequency ranges, the focus can pass to the other?

[Guest guest]

Just a foot note to this post; I haven't used this protocol on more

than a handful of people, and myself. But in these cases, though

finding the sweet spot can be very difficult, you can guide yourself

to it by watching the trend lines. I graph both wide bands and the

reward frequency. When you do hit the sweet spot they all come down

and smooth out. It's really quite remarkable when you see it.

>

> ,

>

> One thing to be clear about here is the difference between one-

channel (bipolar interhemispheric training) and two-channel (windowed

squash).

>

> In the bipolar one-channel, when you inhibit, you don't necessarily

reduce the amplitude: you decrease the difference between the two

sites. In the two channel, you are training to actually reduce the

amplitude of the two sites, though not necessarily training their

relationship.

>

> So in the bipolar, you are telling the whole EEG between the two

sites you are training to become more alike in amplitude (inhibiting)

while asking a specific band to become more different (rewarding).

The argument is that you may be affecting coherence or phase

relationships between the two sites.

>

> In the windowed squash, you aren't actually training down and up at

the same time anywhere in the band. The window is left " open "

to " allow " amplitudes to increase at a particular frequency, if the

brain wishes. Everything else is being rewarded for becoming quieter.

>

> One of the things I like about the 2-channel designs is that you

can actually see what is happening at the two sites, whether they are

increasing or decreasing amplitudes--even how their coherences are

being affected--while this is simply not possible with the bipolar

montage.

>

> Certainly Sue and many others swear by the results of the bipolar

montages, and I have the greatest respect for her and the work she

and Siegfried have done to open up our field--often against a LOT of

resistance. I stopped teaching the interhemispheric montage, because

I found lots of people (trainers) had a hard time identifying

the " sweet spot " frequency, especially when people (clients) weren't

particularly good at reporting. Besides, I figure if you want to

learn that technique, learn it from Sue herself.

>

> Pete

>

> >

> > From: Grigglestone <davidg@...>

> > Date: 2006/05/16 Tue AM 10:21:22 EDT

> >

> > Subject: Re: disconnect & " wideband " squash ..

> >

> > Starting to get the picture :-[

>

> So from my original email the following are possible answers:

>

> Othmers: back to back inhibits + reward (but the reward overlaps

with the inhibits)

> PVD: inhibit (squash) + reward (again reward overlaps with inhibit)

>

> The pieces I still don't understand are:

>

> How the overlapping reward works? .. why wouldn't I do a windowed

squash + reward in the window .. is it that it is just easier to

change the reward band since when you want to change it you don't

have to change the inhibits as well?

> Why back to back inhibits .. is it that once you've met your

targets in either the lower or higher frequency ranges, the focus can

pass to the other?

>

[Guest guest]

,

When the Othmers first started with this protocol several years ago there was much discussion on the EEG Spectrum list about how could you be rewarding and inhibiting a band at the same time?

The suggestion was that the inhibits were inhibiting any sudden large excursions in amplitude across the entire spectrum, while the reward allowed for the rewarding of consistent rhythmic activity in the specific band you are targeting.

There was more to it than that, but that was the guts of the discussion at the time.

Mark Darling

Re: disconnect & "wideband" squash ..

Starting to get the picture :-[ So from my original email the following are possible answers:Othmers: back to back inhibits + reward (but the reward overlaps with the inhibits)PVD: inhibit (squash) + reward (again reward overlaps with inhibit)The pieces I still don't understand are:

How the overlapping reward works? .. why wouldn't I do a windowed squash + reward in the window .. is it that it is just easier to change the reward band since when you want to change it you don't have to change the inhibits as well? Why back to back inhibits .. is it that once you've met your targets in either the lower or higher frequency ranges, the focus can pass to the other?Jane .. your answers provide very helpful info since they reference Pete's protocols, give your practical experience and attempt to compare two approaches .. many thanks- Jane Gurin wrote:

,Mark's explanation is great.Also, Pete provides a design, named 1C interhemispheric, to use in this type of training. His is set up slightly different than Sue's in that it has one inhibit set at 2-38 and then a reward band.If you're working with a child, set the reward band at 10-23 and wiggle it around from there. My son felt calming at 5-8 and some kids go down to 1-3.I've used both Sue's 2-14 and 14-38 inhibits and Pete's 2-38 inhibits and didn't see a whole lot of difference in the results. But, as we know, everyone's brain is different. So, try it out for yourself!Jane

Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min.

[Guest guest]

A little more timely info ... this was just on the EEG Associates listserver

from Sue Othmer:

I am doing entirely 1-channel bipolar training. It is clear that we are

thereby asking the brain to work on its regulation of the timing and

coordination of actiivty between two sites. We are not asking for an

increase in amplitude. I would argue that we have never been doing amplitude

training. I think this was a faulty model that has caused problems in

thinking about and doing NF. The slight changes in amplitude in the training

band represent movement in the moment toward the signals being more

different from each other. They could be more different in amplitude, but we

believe the difference signal is more responsive to momentary differences in

phase. This is a dynamic signal that is responsive to the challenge of NF.

We are exercising control, not fixing deficits.

We always cover the entire frequency band of interest with either wide

inhibits or multiple inhibits. If the brain did noticeably increase the

amplitude within the training band, the inhibits would kick in. We are, of

course, looking at the difference signal with the inhibits as well. Any

large increases in amplitude that occured synchronously at the two training

sites would be subtracted out and ignored by the inhibits. We have actually

done quite well inhibiting on the difference signal, but this is why we are

interested in moving to two-channel sum and difference training. We will

then be able to inhibit on both the sum and difference signals, while

continuing to reward on the difference.

Sue

Re: disconnect & " wideband " squash ..

>

>

> There is an abundance of free information regarding the Othmer protocal

> that describes the evolution of their interhem. approach; just google

> EEG newsletter, then look through the back issues. THe current issue

> discusses exactly this topic.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Regarding Pete's comment: >Besides, I figure if you want to learn that

technique, learn it from Sue herself.

You can reach Sue at 818-373-1334. She does phone consultations for a

very reasonable fee.

Jane