Announcing the Cure for Parkinson’s Disease
Looking for doctors to try a new treatment and send observations
(Pardon the length of this document.  You cannot describe a useful brain
theory in a sound bite.)
Some theory (cont.) (Part 3)
This comes in 7 parts.  Do not apply any of this information without reading
all 7 parts.  Each part will have words at the end saying "continued in
 Parkinson’s Disease Cure’ Part [#]" for those whose servers might truncate
these documents.

Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................
...........................Part 1
Some of my theory helpful to understanding this
treatment....................Part 2
Some of my theory helpful to understanding this treatment
(cont.).........Part 3
The
Treatment...................................................................
....................Part 4
The Treatment
(cont.).....................................................................
.......Part 5
Why announce it this way on the
Internet?.............................................Part 6
Why approach Parkinson’s disease
first?................................................Part 7

Some theory (cont.)
Excitatory brain chemicals give sleep its value and are in the brain during
sleep in very small amounts.   It is only when the receptor sites are firing
cleanly without stopping (catharsis), or not firing at all (sleep) that the
exposure to excitatory chemicals has a chance of replacing the inhibitory
chemicals within the system or rather creating a changing sensitivity of the
site (more responsive to excitation over inhibition).
(Sedatives don’t aid sleep but, rather, create a greater need for sleep that
causes such change.  Sedatives only start sleep.  They add inhibition to the
system (slowing it down), but sleep is supposed to decrease inhibition of
the synapses during the night.  The inhibition added to the system with
sedatives must be worked off before the normal inhibition building up during
the day can be dealt with during that same sleep.  Too much sedative causes
so much need for sleep that the person goes into a coma or dies.)
Using medication to learn about the brain has created a lot of confusion.
There is an extremely large range of sensitivities throughout the brain.
Communication is from cell to cell and not from the some governing center
communicating by increasing chemical levels throughout the system.  Some
nerve sites are reactive to a very small increase in stimulant and will fire
very easily.  Other sites are so inhibited that massive amounts of stimulant
are required.  (If this were not true then a medication that wakes you up
would wake up every cell in the brain at the same time.)   Another factor is
that the nerve sites also have different sensitivities that lead to shutting
down again when the level of excitatory chemical is too high.
Here is what happens when you take a standard dosage of amphetamine,
methylphenidate or L-Dopa:
The levels of the brain chemicals created by the medication go through a big
rise and fall until the next pill is taken.  Because of the various
sensitivities each nerve site responds differently to a particular level of
the medication.  Some sites will respond well to a certain level of
medication and fire easily.  Some stressed sites will flicker and become
agitated because of a tendency to inhibition.  Some sites will not have
enough excitatory chemical present to produce a charge, but they will slowly
become more likely to fire (if that chemical level were consistent) as the
excitatory chemical present slowly produces a greater likelihood of firing.
Some sites will be overwhelmed by that stimulant level and stop firing after
sweeping inhibitory chemicals into the ion channel or increasing the
inhibitory chemicals sent to the site and to the inhibitory receptors due to
feedback communication beginning with the inhibited agitated fast cycling
firings being communicated back to the site through feedback loops.  As the
levels of stimulant rise even higher these overwhelmed sites will go through
slow withdrawal (on the cellular level) with gradual increases in
responsiveness to stimulant but go through quick short-circuits whenever
they fire because of the quick tendency to shut down again.
"On" that is followed more quickly by an "off" is an "off" decision
according to the language of the brain.  It communicates a delivery of more
inhibitory chemical than excitatory chemical in this case.
Because of these variations in response you have some cells that are firing
better, some going into a coma and not firing at all during medication
(becoming even further inhibited in the same way that a medication producing
inhibitory chemicals affects that part of the brain).  Some cells will be
going through withdrawal by not firing but using the greater amounts of
stimulant to increase the likelihood of responding to stimulation later.
All sensitivities are increased.  The tendency to be reactive to excitatory
chemicals increases or a tendency to be reactive to inhibitory chemicals
increases.  Contrasts are increased.  Patterns are deepened.  The medication
produces temporary relief but the illness becomes slightly worse (noticeably
worse over time).
The short-term response is an increase in functioning when the dosage is
right (perhaps only during a short period when the therapeutic range is very
narrow).  Some of this increase in functioning is due to increased
excitation but a good part of this immediate response will come from the
inhibition of some sensitive sites that become inhibited because of a
sensitivity to too much stimulant, so they stop firing rather than firing in
an agitated way and thus communicating agitation to other healthier parts of
the system.
As the medication arcs through its fluctuations in volume, one particular
nerve site will go through periods of not firing and becoming more
responsive to the medications and then will be firing pretty well and then
becoming overwhelmed and taking on inhibitory chemicals (which have a longer
half-life and are likely to hang around in the system after the medication
has been stopped) and as the medication subsides the responses are in the
reverse order but the therapeutic window has become a little bit smaller
because of the increase in inhibitory chemical which causes withdrawal
symptoms.
Doctors always prescribe too much stimulant.  (The other drugs only serve to
further stress the system but give an illusion of improvement when stress
synapses in the brain are stressed out of the ability to function as often.)
Stimulants as they are currently used increase the inhibition in the brain.
So when the person goes into withdrawal from amphetamines, the withdrawal is
very much like the withdrawal experienced by the person coming off of
"downers" because the withdrawal is still caused by reactions to increased
inhibitory chemicals as a result of the stimulant medication.
(The withdrawal from drugs experienced by a person as a whole is different
than what I’m explaining on the neurological cellular level because the real
withdrawal occurs with increasing ability to respond to stimulant created
during cellular sleep.  Tremor, agitation etc. are caused after the cell
removes some inhibition chemical and is able to fire again but has to go
through a period where the inhibition is too great to fire smoothly and so
it therefore switches on and off rapidly.  This is avoided if the synapse
can become reactive enough to the stimulant before being called into action
after sleep.)
Some symptoms of various forms of mental illness are actually a result of a
withdrawal process in effect and if we treat these symptoms we are getting
in the way of healing by stopping the withdrawal from occurring.
Some forms of mental illness are created by a breakdown in the process
behind withdrawal.  Parkinson’s disease is caused by a diminished ability
for withdrawal caused by too little "resting stimulant level" or by a
massive increase of inhibitory chemical throughout the system for a long
enough period of time to overwhelm the system’s ability to diminish that
inhibition (post-encephalitic Parkinsonism).
Allergies must be understood as another part of my theory important in
putting together the right treatment.   I will not go into this too much
right now except to say that allergies are "learned" responses.  Allergies
are created in the same way that an association is made.  Allergies do not
cause these disorders, but in any case in which a disorder has progressed to
an extreme (or with any disorder that in itself is an extreme problem) the
allergy will become a problem delaying recovery as the brain becomes more
and more sensitive to this additional stress.
People need to be screened and allergens avoided during the treatment and
for some time after the treatment.  Foods that are commonly eaten must be
avoided, especially all foods that have been in the patients habitual diet
during times of extreme illness as the brain has been developing
associations between these foods and the state of the person while eating
them (or being exposed to allergens in that person’s atmosphere).  It is
best to stay away from all dairy and wheat unless that person has never
eaten those foods (unlikely).
(This probably explains why some coma patients have recovered when they were
taken off life support so that they could die.  Taken off their intravenous
food supply they woke up after a few days of withdrawal because they were
allergic to something in the food supply and that allergy was just enough to
keep them from emerging from the coma.  In neurological terms, the coma
patient is the most sensitive of them all to additional stress.  Every
source of nutrition given to coma patients in this country is dairy.)
(Yes, this treatment will probably work for many coma patients who do not
have too much brain damage.  If it works these people will be particularly
lucky because they will go through most of their withdrawal while being
asleep.)
Because of the way the brain communicates using electricity, it is possible
to improve the functioning in a greater part of the brain by reducing the
functioning in a small part of the brain.  So far there has been no medical
procedure that does not get at least part of the results from reducing the
functioning (inhibiting) some part of the brain.  The way all medications
are used currently gets results in very much the same way as surgery to
remove lesions, lobotomy, sleep deprivation, shock therapy and
self-medication through illegal drugs and alcohol.  The fastest way to see
improvement is to remove parts of the brain or add stress to the parts of
the brain that are the most stressed so these parts are no longer
functioning, and other parts of the brain take over.  But these techniques
always diminish the functioning of some other cells in the brain that were
working just fine.  Remove the part of the brain that was causing the
seizures, for instance, and the person will be functioning much better in
many ways but will have lost some memory and functioning with the cells that
were lost along with the problem cells.
(This is a perfect natural biological system because it makes it possible
for the brain to forget trauma and numb itself so that we don’t just collect
and retain various pains until we die.  In order to forget something, some
connection has to die or stop working.)
(A seizure is a form of incomplete withdrawal caused by a cell trying to
fire a continuous charge and unable to get past an agitated (inhibited)
state of sensitivity to further inhibition.  This cell teaches other cells
to behave in the same way.  A rapid cycling of firings communicates a
greater amount of inhibitory chemical throughout the system leading to
blackouts or coma.  Seizures are not caused by too much dopamine but by a
problem with a feedback loop of information caused by too much inhibition
and too much sensitivity to all chemicals in the brain.  The brain struggles
to create a continuous charge but the site flickers between on and off no
matter how much excitatory chemical is sent to the site.   The feedback loop
communicates inhibition back to the site originating the seizure, so that
site is unable to complete the withdrawal.  A seizure is a "no" that can’t
be changed to a "yes" without a change in the originating site’s sensitivity
to the different chemical messengers.)
Discovering the language of the brain has required a lot of information that
has only been recently available because of new technology.  But this has
really been an age of technological ignorance in a way.  It is as if the
English were trying to understand the language of the French and had no idea
of where to look, but they had enormous technological resources.  So they
are examining everything.  The specialists are looking at the positioning of
the right arm during various sounds and activities and noticing trends in
upward arm activity during the K sound more than other sounds and concluding
that the upward arm movement is important in future understanding of the K
sound and its implications.  Other specialists discover a trend in saliva
delivery with the production of the S sound and start to draw implications
that the amount of saliva is the clue to understanding the French language
and stay with that thesis until "disproved" which is impossible until the
real answer is discovered.  Other specialists have a complete understanding
of the chemical properties of that saliva and start to see trends of change
in chemical composition of that saliva during certain activities and
therefore develop theories about chemical communication among the French
(which makes their own field of discipline favored as the key to
understanding the French).  There are many areas of study at their disposal
and most studies on the French project have nothing to do with vocal sounds
at all but they all discover some little bit of information.  One researcher
becomes famous for his "proving" that the French smell different than the
English.  Because of the popularity of this theory among the English, the
French Smell Project gets the most funding.  A mountain of similar data is
accumulated and, using trends and statistics and studies, all scientists are
able to contribute some bit of knowledge about the French, but they still
don’t understand the language.  They know so much and they know nothing.
The solution was simpler than they’d thought but because of the mountain of
data they were considering, they were no longer even able to get close to
the answer because of all of the theories and information they were
considering.  A simpler solution was possible, but nobody was "specialized"
in studying the sounds the French were making in relation to their actions.
[CONTINUED in ‘ Parkinson’s Disease Cure’ Part 4]