Adult ADD: Many Children Maintain their Disorder into Adulthood

Posted by on September 8th, 2005 | Comments off

ADHD haunts children into adulthood, study shows

Psychological Association published research from Dr. Mariellen Fischer, a psychologist with the Medical College of Wisconsin. Her study was co-authored by Dr. Russell Barkley. The results of her 13 year study show that if AD/HD is left untreated in childhood, children will carry their disorder into adulthood.

For thirteen years they monitored 147 children with ADHD by age 7, comparing them with 76 neighbor children who didn’t have the disorder. About one third dropped out of high school. This seemed significantly high as none of the neighbor children dropped out. Leaving school is quite likely due to the public school system’s inability to accommodate the needs of ADHD students as well as ADHD student inability to learn coping skills which are seldom taught in school or at home.

Interesting data about adults with AD/HD in this study:

  • They are more likely than their peers to get fired
  • They are more likely to shun birth control and become parents by age 21
  • They are more likely to have higher credit card debt and fewer saving
  • They took medication for AD/HD as children, but few were being treated by their early 20s
  • They are more likely to start having sex a year earlier than classmates
  • 1 out of 3 had become parents by their early 20s vs. 1 in 25 of the classmates
  • They had less than half the savings of young adults they had grown up with and more debt

Dr. Fischer indicated that many children maintain their disorder into adulthood. The article is not clear whether this data was relevant to treated or untreated ADHD. However, clinical data suggests that perhaps 60% of ADHD children will carry their disorder into adulthood. This may be a conservative estimate.

While the data are compelling, the study is too small to conclude that ADHD alone causes these ill effects.

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

Genetics and ADHD ADD

Posted by on September 8th, 2005 | Comments off

Clearly, there is no current research (2005) that has determined that ADHD is genetic either partially or entirely. While empirical data suggest that a genetic link exists, research is still sparse as scientists primarily focus on childhood onset of the disorder with little research on adult AD/HD.

Andrea Chronis of the University of Maryland  has focused on AD/HD mothers and their performance as parents. In her study of 70 families with elementary-school-age children she found that:

  • Mothers of ADHD children are 24 times as likely as the average woman to have it
  • Fathers of ADHD children are 5 times higher than average to have it
  • The mothers often weren’t very involved with their children
  • The mothers had few skills to cope with their children
  • The mothers didn’t give praise or show affection regularly
  • Discipline was inconsistent
  • Most of their children also had ADHD

While Chronis’ research does not prove a genetic link, it offers strong support for the theory. And while poor parenting may exacerbate ADHD symptoms, it does not cause ADHD. Thus, the aforementioned poor parenting skills would likely contribute to worsening their childrens’ symptoms. This would lead one to think that parenting skills/counseling should be a primary consideration for families with ADHD.

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

Girls With ADHD and ADD Are Often Overlooked

Posted by on September 8th, 2005 | Comments off

Girls With ADHD Are Often Overlooked

HealthNewsDigest.com – August 29, 2005 (HealthNewsDigest.com) reports that ADHD likely affects 3% to 7% of the entire child population in the US. However, girls are frequently overlooked because they often do not display hyperactive symptoms.

When teaching at the elementary level, I found this particularly true. Girls with ADHD often were simply daydreamers with poor time management skills. While some did display the outward social and behavioral problems that their male peers did, it was not very frequent.

HealthNewsDigest.com is published by the American Psychological Association. I’ve cited bits of this report and am alarmed by its look and feel. It reads like an endorsement and advertisement for Adderall XR.

Their report, edited down:

The federal Food and Drug Administrations (FDA) recent nod to ADDERALL XR for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in adolescents aged 13 to 17 spotlights an underidentified and under treated population with this disorder, experts tell Health NewsDigest.com.

If left untreated, the symptoms of ADHD can have a profound effect on a child’s life, both inside and outside of a classroom setting.

For Janice Lowder, a quiet, well-behaved child, learning was always stressful.

“My husband and I hired a one-on-one tutor to help Janice with her studies. We also tried to help her, and all dreaded the nightly battle of completing a homework assignment. Janice would get so frustrated with her homework and the fact that she didn’t ‘get it,’ that she would cry,” said her mother Beth Lowder.

“By the time Janice reached the seventh grade, a nurse at her school suggested we talk to a doctor. Janice was diagnosed with ADHD and was started on treatment,” Beth explained.

“I knew my daughter just needed the right help,” said Beth.

By the tenth grade, Janice had improved from a C to a B student but homework was still challenging. In addition, she had low self-esteem and was embarrassed to take her medication at school. Her psychiatrist prescribed Adderall XR®, an extended-release formulation that enabled Janice to take her medication once a day at home.

With continued tutoring and medication, her grades improved.

“She came home from school one day and said, ‘Mom, I’m smart,’” said her mother.

A recent study presented at the American Psychiatric Association annual meeting showed that girls with ADHD demonstrated significant improvement in both behavior and attention with Adderall XR.

“The study suggests that girls with ADHD can benefit from Adderall XR and that this treatment will help them control symptoms all day while they are in the classroom, during after-school activities or doing homework with relatively few side effects,” said Joseph Biederman, M.D., professor of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School and Chief of Pediatric Psychopharmacology at Massachusetts General Hospital. “While ADHD in girls is becoming more recognizable it is still often overlooked, and there is a need for safe and effective treatments that will allow girls to interact more effectively with other children and adults, to concentrate in school and to focus on finishing tasks.”

I’d expect to find a more diluted version in Parents Magazine or Family Journal as an outright advertisement. Makes one wonder who wrote this? Shire Pharmaceuticals?

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

IEP: An ADHD ADD Student Right

Posted by on September 8th, 2005 | Comments off

To IEP or not to IEP that’s the $100,000 question!

MICHAEL BARBER of the Bradenton Herald reports that:

 The Manatee County school district has spent more than $100,000 in legal fees battling an attempt to get an 11-year-old boy with attention deficit disorder a special education plan, according to documents The Herald reviewed.”

Since the AD/HD boy has performed well academically and on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test, the school doesn’t believe it’s responsible to provide a special education Individualized Education Plan (IEP).

School officials argue that accommodating this student could set a costly precedent for the district and state by allowing thousands of other ADHD students to apply for special education plans.

Final arguments in the federal case were heard in Tampa on Thursday. U.S. District Judge James Whittemore is expected to render a decision in the next couple of weeks.

While I agree that this could precipitate a flood of AD/HD requests for accommodation, what’s more important here, students’ educations and well beings or money?

Every student has a right to an IEP.

It simply defines what goals and objectives will be used over the student’s academic year to achieve success. If some accommodations like computer software, lengthened test time, etc. need to be implemented, then do it. It is mandated and paid for by the federal government under IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act). It does require extra effort and perhaps even extra staff to write and implement the IEP.

“On Thursday, Superintendent Roger Dearing told The Herald the district had spent an estimated $50,000 on the case.

…Although exact legal fees the school district paid to the various firms were not available Friday, district records indicate the total figure spent on the case exceeded $100,000.

When asked whether he thought the $100,000-plus legal tab was worth it, Dearing was emphatic.

“Would you spend $100,000 to save $10 million?” Dearing asked.

Dearing said that there are more than 2,000 students in Manatee County schools who are ADHD and that special education plans can cost $5,000 or more. If all of those ADHD students applied for special education plans, the cost could be as much as $10 million per year.”

In order to save money, the school system is arguing that AD/HD is not covered by the IDEA.

School board members Larry Simmons and Harry Kinnan both said they did not like having to spend district money on costly court cases, but in this instance they thought it was the right thing to do.

“I think it’s an important enough case that we have to spend what it takes,” Simmons said. “It’s not about this particular young man or his mother. It’s about a potentially serious financial impact to the school district.”

Kinnan agreed.

“I think it’s regrettable the money can’t be marked for other things, but we’ve decided as a school district that it’s important to stop a precedent from being established,” Kinnan said.

“You have to weigh the implications for the school system if you don’t fight this case.”

Who is right? and who is wrong? seem to be moot questions. The question is, what is the best education for this child and what would a special education IEP provide that? If that answer is yes, then do the right thing. We’ll see what the courts say.

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

Training the Brain: Cognitive Therapy As An Alternative To ADHD Drugs

Posted by on July 25th, 2005 | No Comments

I have written for years that only by redefining ADHD can we address the problem through education and training. Finally, the movement is approaching mainstream as indicated in the article from Scientific American entitled, Training the Brain, Cognitive Therapy As An Alternative To ADHD Drugs.

It is interesting to note that the techniques mentioned in the article have been incorporated in the Play Attention cognitive tools for about ten years.

“Recent studies support the notion that many children with ADHD have cognitive deficits, specifically in working memory–the ability to hold in mind information that guides behavior. The cognitive problem manifests behaviorally as inattention and contributes to poor academic performance. Such research not only questions the value of medicating ADHD children, it also is redefining the disorder and leading to more meaningful treatment that includes cognitive training.”

Salient issues raised by the author include:

1. The difficult decision by parents “To medicate or not? Millions of parents must decide when their child is diagnosed with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)–a decision made tougher by controversy.”
2. While medication may calm a student’s outward behavior, research shows that it does not increase cognitive ability manifesting in improved academic performance, social relationships, or defiant behavior over the long-term.
3. This has led scientists to research effective means of cognitive training as a substitute.

This is really a shift in our understanding of this disorder from behavioral to biological,” states Rosemary Tannock, professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto. Tannock has shown that although stimulant medication improves working memory, the effect is small, she says, “suggesting that medication isn’t going to be sufficient.” So she and others, such as Susan Gathercole of the University of Durham in England, now work with schools to introduce teaching methods that train working memory. In fact, working-memory deficits may underlie several disabilities, not just ADHD, highlighting the heterogeneity of the disorder.”

The article focuses on Dr. Torkel Klingberg of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden who trained around 40 kids with ADHD with a software program that addressed “working memory.” After more than 20 days of training parents reported that their children had greatly improved attention and lessened hyperactivity.

Klingberg essentially proved that cognitive retraining improved neurobiological function. This work has been underway with Play Attention since 1994. It’s good to see the paradigm shift beginning to happen.

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

Too much TV Lowers Tests Scores

Posted by on July 18th, 2005 | No Comments

This story is from HealthCentral.com. It is important to realize these data are from three recent studies all indicating the same thing: too much TV results in poorer educational performance.

Kids Who Watch Too Much TV Have Lower Test Scores

Reading, math scores and college education suffer, studies find.

By Steven Reinberg HealthDay Reporter

MONDAY, July 4 (HealthDay News) – The effect of television on children has been debated ever since the first sets were turned on.

Now three new studies find that too much tube time can lower test scores, retard learning and even predict college performance.

The reports appear in the July issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.

In the first report, researchers studied the effect that having a TV in a child’s bedroom can have on third graders. “We looked at the household media environment in relation to academic achievement on mathematics, reading and language arts tests,” said study author Dina L.G. Borzekowski, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Borzekowski and her colleague, Dr. Thomas Robinson of Stanford University, collected data on 386 third graders and their parents about how much TV the children watched, the number of TV sets, computers and video game consoles in the household and where they were. They also collected data on how much time the children spent using the different media, as well as the time spent doing homework and reading.

The researchers found that the media in the household, where it is and how it is used can have a profound effect on learning. “We found that the household media environment has a very close association with performance on the different test scores,” Borzekowski said.

“A child who has a TV in his or her bedroom is likely to have a score that is eight points lower on a mathematics test compared to a child who doesn’t have a TV in the bedroom,” she noted. These children also scored lower on the reading and language arts tests.

However, children who have access to a home computer are likely to have higher scores on each of the tests compared with children who don’t have access to a home computer, Borzekowski noted.

The reasons why TV has this negative effect are not clear, Borzekowski said. “When there’s TV in the bedroom, parents are less likely to have control over the content and the amount watched,” Borzekowski said. “They are also unable to know how early or how late the set is on. This seems to be associated with kids’ performance on academic tests.”

Borzekowski believes that content and the time the TV is on may be the primary reasons for its negative effect. “If the TV is in the family room, then parents can see the content of what children are watching,” she said. “Parents can choose to sit alongside and watch, or turn the set off. A simple and straightforward, positive parenting strategy is to keep the TV out of the child’s bedroom, or remove it if it’s already there.”

In the second report, Dr. Robert J. Hancox from the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand, and colleagues found, regardless of your intelligence or social background, if you watch a lot of TV during childhood, you are a lot less likely to have a college degree by your mid-20s.

In their study, the researchers followed 1,037 people born in 1972 and 1973. Every two years, between the ages of 5 and 15, they were asked how much television they watched. The researchers found that those who watched the most television during these years had earned fewer degrees by the time they were 26.

“We found that the more television the child had watched, the more likely they were to leave school without any qualifications,” Hancox said in a prepared statement. “Those who watched little television had the best chance of going on to university and earning a degree.”

Hancox’s team found that watching TV at an early age had the most effect on graduating from college. “An interesting finding was that although teenage viewing was strongly linked to leaving school without any qualifications, it was earlier childhood viewing that had the greatest impact on getting a degree,” he said. “This suggests that excessive television in younger children has a long-lasting adverse effect on educational performance.”

In the third paper, Frederick J. Zimmerman and Dr. Dimitri A. Christakis from the University of Washington report that, for very young children, watching TV can result in lower test scores in mathematics, reading recognition and reading comprehension.

“We looked at how much television children watched before age 3 and then at ages 3 to 5,” Zimmerman said. “We found that for children who watched a small amount of TV in the earlier years, there was considerable beneficial effect compared to children who watched a lot of TV.”

For children aged 3 to 5, the effect was not as clear, Zimmerman said. “There were some beneficial effects of watching TV on reading, but no beneficial effects for math or vocabulary,” he noted. “The worst pattern was to watch more than three hours of TV before age 3. Those kids had a significant disadvantage compared to the other kids.”

Parents should follow the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation, which is no TV for children under 2, Zimmerman said. “Personally, I feel the cutoff should be children under 3, because there is just not any good content for children under 3.”

One expert believes that TV can have both positive and negative effects, but it all depends on what children are watching.

“Content matters,” said Deborah L. Linebarger, an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania, who co-authored an accompanying editorial. “Educational content has been found to be related to performance on school readiness tests, higher grades when they are teenagers, whereas, non-educational content tends to be associated with lower academic performance.”

Another expert agrees. “TV watching takes up space that could be used by more useful things,” said Dr. Christopher P. Lucas, a clinical coordinator at the Early Childhood Evaluation and Treatment Program at the New York University Child Study Center. “TV is not necessarily toxic, but is something that has to be done in moderation; something that balances the other needs of the child for healthy development.”

Lucas puts the responsibility for how much TV kids watch and what they watch squarely on parents. “The amount of TV watching certainly has a link with the reduced amount of time reading or doing homework,” he said. “The key is the amount of control parents have in limiting the amount of access. Get the TV out of the bedroom; be aware of what is being watched; limit the amount of TV watching.”

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

ADHD: An IEP (Individualized Education Plan) for ALL Students

Posted by on July 16th, 2005 | No Comments

Dr. Sydney Zentall from Purdue urges new techniques for teaching ADHD children. I agree wholeheartedly. However, the new techniques should be based on an IEP (Individualized Education Plan) that should be given to ALL students thus teaching to their strengths and strengthening their weaknesses. While advocating new teaching methods for ADHD students sells books, it is only a small portion of this nation’s massive education problem.

From United Press International:

New ADHD educational methods urged WEST LAFAYETTE, Ind., July 11 (UPI) – A Purdue researcher says teachers and parents need to learn new methods to help children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.

Fads and ‘how-to lists’ are more prevalent than methods based on educational research, said Sydney Zentall, a professor of special education and psychological sciences in Purdue’s College of Education.

But, she added, because students who have ADHD spend the majority of their time in general educational settings, it’s critical to get scientific information to the people who are going to help them learn how to live in society.

She said part of the reason for the scarcity of ADHD information in textbooks is ADHD has not been categorized as a disability in special education until recently.

Purdue News Service said Zentall is an internationally recognized authority on hyperactivity and ADHD. She developed a theory in 1975 called Optimal Stimulation Theory, suggesting hyperactive children might have a greater need for stimulation and would benefit from a more active learning environment.

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

Video Games Improve Reading Scores for Children with ADHD

Posted by on July 14th, 2005 | No Comments

Essentially, the researchers used a computerized dance program to stimulate neural pathways thus increasing attention and therefore reading comprehension. Another example of neuralplasticity.

The story from ABC News:

Get Out! Popular Dance Video Game Helps Kids with ADHD

The same video game that endlessly distracts kids from schoolwork may improve concentration and memory, according to a study on a small group of children with attention deficit disorder. Researchers found that playing Dance Revolution, the arcade hit from Japan where dancers try to match the steps of a gyrating computer animation, led to an intriguing boost in reading comprehension.

“We’re still in the beginning stages,” cautioned Tammy McGraw, an education specialist with the Appalachian Educational Laboratory and lead author of the study. “But if we can demonstrate that video games help, we can find solutions that do not require us to medicate children as much.”

The game McGraw and her colleagues tested is a far cry from the gang violence found in Grand Theft Auto or the bloody martial arts action of Mortal Kombat. There isn’t even any bumping or grinding. Available for such popular home gaming systems as Sony’s PlayStation II and Microsoft’s Xbox,  Dance Revolution involves stomping on four large buttons to a danceable beat in what educators describe as a mix between Twister and Simon Says.

McGraw, who presented her findings at a recent Digital Games Research Association conference in Vancouver, Canada, said that she first got the idea to study the game after seeing a long line outside a mall. Following the endless convoy of adolescents, McGraw was surprised to find what everyone was waiting for: a chance to shake it against a virtual dancer.

McGraw had recently read about research suggesting visual and rhythmic stimulation could improve reading and attention. Perhaps, she thought, this emerging theory about learning could be matched with the latest video game craze.

“There are a lot of ways to help kids read better,” said McGraw, adding that few children find them interesting. “Kids naturally gravitate toward video games.”

As part of the study, McGraw and colleagues recruited 62 sixth graders who suffered from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). First, the children were given a series of reading tests. Half the kids were then instructed to play Dance Revolution for about an hour a week. The other children continued with their normal routine.

Just to ensure that no parent was taken aback by the unusual educational aid, McGraw said they chose the Disney version of the game, which includes a dancing Mickey Mouse and songs by Chubby Checker.

Three months later, the kids took the same reading tests again. The scores were largely the same for both groups, but those who played Dance Revolution did slightly better with so-called receptive coding skills, the ability to immediately recall a word or series of numbers. This type of testing indicates greater focus and attention, a key issue for children with ADHD. The more times the kids played the game, the better they did.

“This was the real hot spot,” said McGraw. By quickly matching their movements to visuals and music, children who play Dance Dance Revolution seem to strengthen the areas of the brain that are necessary for better memorization, McGraw explained. Since the game is exciting, these skills are more easily improved.

McGraw hopes to press ahead with her research to find a broader educational role for Dance Revolution, as well as other video games.

“Everyone is playing them,” she said, “And it’s something schools can afford.”

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

He Is Still a Typical Teenager

Posted by on July 10th, 2005 | Comments off

The following story is from the Scotsman.com. Pay particular attention to the section where ADHD, Asperger’s Syndrome, and dyspraxia are described; they are notably different than our perceptions in the States.

The Lost Boy Who Found Happiness

MAIRIONA MCINALLY-KIER

LAST week it was my son’s 13th birthday. We’d barely finished breakfast but he was already on the back lawn, punting a new football back and forth while keeping up a lively running commentary on his imaginary match. And at the weekend, he will host his football party at the local five-a-side club.

No different from any other 13-year-old boy, you might think. Except that all this would have been unthinkable six years ago. Ball skills of any kind were beyond him, he was having problems completing or even starting tasks at school and had great difficulty relating to his peer group.

As a result, his self-esteem was in his boots, he felt himself to be friendless and he was miserable much of the time.

We knew our child was bright: his vocabulary and general knowledge were impressive, his reading age was way above his actual age, and his ability to memorise poetry, song lyrics and times tables was staggering. He was articulate and unfailingly polite. Yet, night after night, he tearfully struggled through his homework, knowing what he wanted to write but unable to commit it to paper. It was as though there was a disconnection between his brain and his hand.

His teacher said that she’d never seen a child like him. She only just managed not to call him lazy but he was so slow at everything, from changing for PE to starting any task in his illegible, awkward scrawl. The learning support teacher was called in and noted that he was unusually disorganised, hesitant in many of his actions and had problems with sequencing. However, as he was clearly not dyslexic, she couldn’t help any further.

By this stage our child was chewing the cuffs of his blazer, shredding his skin with his nails and banging his head with his fist or against walls “to make it work properly”. Our happy-go-lucky toddler had turned into a child who was shunned by others, left out of games because he was clumsy, over-loud and couldn’t be relied upon to catch or stop a ball. Fortunately, the new school year brought with it a new teacher whose first degree was in psychology (and who is now an educational psychologist). Within days she called us and asked us to get him tested, and by the end of that term we were told that our child was dyspraxic with a notable visual-motor dysfunction and accompanying ADHD, an assessment later agreed by the NHS.

Often found to co-exist with dyslexia, ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder) or Asperger’s syndrome, dyspraxia is thought to affect about ten per cent of the population to some degree, with boys being four times as likely as girls to suffer from it.

According to the Dyspraxia Foundation, it is “an impairment or immaturity of the organisation of movement. This affects the way in which the brain processes information, resulting in messages not being properly or fully transmitted. Associated with this there may be problems of language, perception and thought”.

As far as we know, children and adults with the condition are wired up slightly differently to what we consider as the norm. Why this should be is still subject to research but it is likely that there are multiple causes. For some, metabolism and diet are implicated, particularly the manner in which essential fatty acids are broken down. It is thought that some children simply do not get enough of the right kind of movement practice while they are babies. Others believe that some children retain primitive reflexes and fail to develop postural reflexes.

Getting a diagnosis is a struggle. As parents, we expect teachers to recognise the condition, but many are not trained to do so. Even if children are referred by their schools, there are simply not enough paediatric occupational therapists and educational psychologists to go round. Assessment waiting lists are long. We know that we are very fortunate to have been able to fund private therapy to help our child. Without it, I doubt he would be the happy 13-year-old he is today.

In the years since that initial diagnosis, we’ve relocated to Glasgow, where our child now attends a private school that recognises his specific learning difficulties but does not diminish its performance expectations. Instead, it accommodates interventions to help him. He uses a writing slope, sits near the front of the class and uses a computer to complete assignments. He used a scribe for several of his S1 exams, an experiment deemed so successful that he’ll use one for most exams in future.

He still has his difficult days but, as he put it at breakfast on his birthday: “That’ll be my hormones!”

In other words, he has what is recognised as a specific learning difficulty, but he is still a typical teenager.

Mairiona McInally-Kier is a volunteer co-ordinator with the Dyspraxia Association in Scotland. For more information, visit www.dyspraxiafoundation.org.uk

This article:

http://www.scotsman.com/?id=817462005

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF

ADHD: Retrain the Brain

Posted by on April 14th, 2005 | Comments off

Scientific American, Ocotober 2004 reports that learning retunes the brain, so that more cells respond best to behaviorally important sounds. The researchers also maintain that training responses also depend on the experiences and training of the listener. Even a little training can quickly alter the brain’s reactions. This contradicts previous brain theory that held until about 10 years ago that tuning was “fixed” for each cell in the auditory cortex. The scientists’ studies on contour, however, made them suspect that cell tuning might be altered during learning so that certain cells become extra sensitive to sounds that attract attention and are stored in memory. The retuning was remarkably durable: it became stronger over time without additional training and lasted for months. These findings initiated a growing body of research indicating that one way the brain stores the learned importance of a stimulus is by devoting more brain cells to the processing of that stimulus.

While this research confirms current knowledge about brain reorganization (neuroplasticity) during learning, their research also found that “the pattern of a melody matters: processing in the auditory system is not like the simple relaying of sound in a telephone or stereo system.” For many years scientists have held that certain sites are responsible for reading, listening, etc. But researchers have found that listening, especially to music, “But in recent years we have begun to gain a firmer understanding of where and how music is processed in the brain, which should lay a foundation for answering evolutionary questions. Collectively, studies of patients with brain injuries and imaging of healthy individuals have unexpectedly uncovered no specialized brain “center” for music. Rather music engages many areas distributed throughout the brain, including those that are normally involved in other kinds of cognition. The active areas vary with the person’s individual experiences and musical training. The ear has the fewest sensory cells of any sensory organ–3,500 inner hair cells occupy the ear versus 100 million photoreceptors in the eye. Yet our mental response to music is remarkably adaptable; even a little study can “retune” the way the brain handles musical inputs.”

Localization is the foundation for fMRI and other imaging techniques in that many fMri proponents claim to be able to locate 6 – 8 different types of ADHD via analysis of these scans. If non-localization is true, i.e., the brain processes using a variety of modalities, subcortical as well as cortical tissue, then the superficial images exposed via fMRI may be a dead end as they can only reveal tiny pieces of a very large puzzle.

The bottom line is: The brain can be retrained to overcome learning disabilities, cognitive impairments, ADHD, etc. What we now know is that this is done over a vast network in the brain that encompasses many other minor and major networks. You could think of retraining as the confluence of several telephone companies coming together to in order to overcome a limitation. Each has its own network and substructure but can become bigger and stronger (overcoming their respective limitations) by merging with the other network (think AT&T and Cingular). In the brain, this is done over a wide area of networks – not locally in distinct surface areas as superficial brain imaging might indicate.

Print Friendly Print Get a PDF version of this webpage PDF
« Previous Entries
Next Entries »