 |
 |
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.) Introduction (Part 1) 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 Introduction I’ve discovered a new medication treatment that has now been performed with successful results five times on different people. I believe I have discovered the cure for Parkinson’s Disorder. At this point the results can only be considered anecdotal, but the method I used to discover this treatment has me convinced that there could be no other way of solving this problem. No other treatment has come close to getting the results I’ve seen so far. The treatment only lasts for two or three weeks. At the end of this period the supposedly permanent neurological deficits have been enormously reduced or eliminated completely and this improvement has so far continued for several months while taking no maintenance medication. At this time I’ll be unable to give most of the steps of logic that have predicted the patient responses to this treatment. This theory is enormously complicated. It observes a consistent pattern in the rhythm of neuronal firings that relates mathematically to patterns in behavior. Is the time right for the first Unified Theory of the Nervous System and Behavior? A theory that can explain the observations of psychologists, behaviorists, psychiatrists, biologists... and bring them together? I believe I now have such a theory. Through noticing a previously unnoticed pattern of behavior in nerve cell firings that matches a consistent pattern in animal and human behavior, I believe I have discovered what is the "machine language" of the brain. It’s a type of complicated binary system that is coordinated throughout the body. I have spent the last year looking for data and observations that either support the theory or would show it to be flawed. Several times, while studying various approaches and theories of human psychology or biology, I was dismayed to find an argument that convincingly contradicted my theory. But I kept examining these road blocks and in each case it turned out that the basic clinical data supported my theory but the data had been misinterpreted (or interpreted in another seemingly valid way). A few small glitches in the theory have been corrected during this time. I am now ready to share these ideas. What I will show is that there have been many misinterpretations because the house of cards of current medical understanding is supported by assumptions of the accuracy of basic theories that turn out to be wrong. My theory could lead to enormous changes in current understanding and treatment, so it may encounter resistance relative to the amount of change suggested. Medicine finally has enough data to figure out the cure to various forms of mental illness. (It has only been possible for anyone to discover this theory in the past five years or so because various data links in the logic required to pull this information together are only now available due to recent technological advances and observations.) But, in a way, medicine is getting further from a cure rather than closer because of something I discovered with my theory: scientific method is flawed. Scientific method could never lead to discovering my theory. It is not possible. The theory has to somehow come first and then scientific method will be very useful in proving the validity of the theory. I can’t give you much of my theory in this document but I can quickly explain the flaw in scientific method: Most of the same behaviors and disabilities occurring in the many mental disorders can be observed over the course of time in drug and alcohol abusers. Depending on the dosages and the amount of time taking drugs or drinking, this person will experience problems with attention and focus, learning disabilities, paranoia, compulsive/obsessive behavior, delusions, sleep disorders, tremor, mood swings, loss of social understanding, loss of inhibition, memory problems... every type of problem that can also be the result of some particular psychological or neurological disorder. To recover from the long-term substance problem the person has to go through a period of withdrawal. During withdrawal the symptoms of the problem become much worse and other new symptoms appear making it a very painful experience in many ways. Some substance abusers seem to acquire permanent damage. After many years doing drugs or alcohol they clean up their act and go through withdrawal but continue to have many problems of functioning. (They "learn" to have a particular deficit because the process behind learning is also the process behind the effect these drugs have on a person and it is the process that requires withdrawal for recovery.) Perhaps they have lost their ability to have enough withdrawal. Let’s pretend a new cluster of symptoms is being witnessed in a group of people. They are distant, sometimes delusional, unfocused and sick. They miss social cues, they can’t sleep very well, they have tremors, are depressive and can be violent. Scientists and doctors spring into action and within 24 hours have done a complete study and have found a drug treatment that relieves all or most of the bad symptoms but has side effects. Stopping the treatment results in an even greater problem with the symptoms for some time so they are encouraged to keep taking the medication. Because of the success of this medication the disorder is labeled a biological disorder and one doctor gets to have his name put on this "new disorder" and a researcher who came up with the right medication gets published and nominated for some awards. The medication results infer that various functions of the brain that have improved are in need of more of the various chemicals produced or triggered by the medication. Similar observations of other similar disorders makes this deduction become medical doctrine as the doctors now have no doubt that more of these chemicals are needed by the body to regulate these functions. (The medication results are creating the basic science theories... this leads to the medical community calling this a "biological disorder.") If the people with this new "disorder" were really experiencing heroin withdrawal (and it was somehow possible they didn’t know it), the drug that would be the most beneficial in relieving their terrible symptoms (albeit with numerous side-effects) would be heroin. The brain changes created by heroin would be tagged as important in regulating certain functions and its discovery as a great treatment to relieve the pain of people with the new disorder could lead to its being called a wonder drug. Of course we know that heroin does not help functioning. It damages a person. A state of health is not the state while on heroin, but the fastest way to improve the quality of life of somebody suffering heroin withdrawal is to give that person heroin. What if all improvement in mental functioning requires going through a period of withdrawal but something is stopping the withdrawal from occurring or is inhibiting the process that creates withdrawal? What if all drugs giving quick relief in the nervous system and/or requiring continued medication are really like giving heroin to treat heroin withdrawal? How could doctors logically deduce that a brain is suffering a need for more of a certain chemical if the medication providing an increase in that chemical has a "therapeutic range?" If the brain needs more it would show improvement with any increase in the chemical up to a certain point. (Heroin has a "therapeutic range.") What if the process that creates withdrawal is the same process creating placebo effect? (It is.) Both withdrawal and placebo effect create improvement of health. What if withdrawal and placebo effect are also a result of the same process that is behind the restorative power of sleep? (True.) If the discovery of a cure requires facilitating a greater amount of a missing or insufficient withdrawal, and we don’t know this yet, then scientific method will continue to lead us down many wrong paths of understanding as we try out medications to find those that show improvement for these conditions. Taking my theory out to its logical end I have discovered a new medical treatment. I have figured out how to amplify the placebo/withdrawal effect using an available class of drugs. These drugs can be quite safe and this treatment uses much smaller dosages than have been used until now. (The entire treatment uses medication costing a total of less than twenty dollars.) To pull this together I had to identify a mathematically understandable pattern in behavior that can be seen in micro terms at the cellular level. It involves new philosophy in various realms. I had to create a different perspective on all forms of mental illness and look for the consistencies and commonality in these problems in order to see how they are related instead of following the current trend of just looking for the differences in these problems. I had to explain sleep on the cellular level. I had to rewrite the DSM-IV in my head. I had to make projections about various behaviors and look for studies that would show the trends I was expecting. This has looked too good to be true so I was afraid of sharing this discovery until I’d spent a year trying to disprove my ideas. Sometimes I’d be dismayed to find roadblocks with medical observations that contradicted my theory but in each case I’d find that the basic observations in the studies and experiments were supportive of my theory and had been interpreted in the wrong way. This makes this work very difficult because a very large number of interpretations are presented as if they are facts. (Change is difficult.) It is not possible to follow the current method of testing medications on people and using those that offer improvement and then come up with a cure. Such a thing is not possible. You can’t cure anything using maintenance medication or a medication that has a therapeutic range. You can’t find a cure with any medication treatment that creates a noticeable change in perception in a short time or creates improvement in symptoms as the first result of taking the medication. You can’t find a cure to any neurological problem by trying out massive amounts of a substance on rats and looking for positive change (or absence of horrendous side-effects). It is not possible to cure anything having to do with the nervous system (just about all disorders) with medication unless that medication magnifies or enhances the process that creates withdrawal (the body’s own natural healing process). To get better you have to find a treatment that (temporarily) makes all of your symptoms get worse and a treatment that may even create other symptoms that had never before existed. To discover the right treatment you need to know that the process that creates withdrawal is the same process that occurs during sleep to give sleep its restorative value. This treatment requires the understanding that sleep occurs any time a cell is not firing. This treatment needs to be applied to enhance the withdrawal process which is to enhance the value of sleep and make this possible any time there are brain cells sleeping for any length of time (medication 24 hours a day). This is the same process behind placebo effect. (An important clue in helping you to understand the implications behind this discovery.) [CONTINUED in ‘ Parkinson’s Disease Cure’ Part 2]