I see a lot of posts of folks here bemoaning how ADD is not accepted by society as something legit.

Will we get to a point where some kind of neuro-scanning such as fMRI (or something more advanced which hasn't been fully developed yet) will become common, and one can simply look at it for a diagnosis, almost like seeing what's wrong with your car's engine?

In a few years AD/HD will probably have more names and types that are specific... I am a classic hyperactive so the majority of research on it is based on it's initial discovery (Accidently giving hyper children Dexedrine in 1937)

... if you had a computer running - some browser aimed at here (ADDF) - and somebody ran into the room and picked you up and jumped outta' your window (with you).
And then somebody else ran into the room and stole your monitor (shortly thereafter).
(and then returned to put a
'don't move this computer or connect up a monitor'
sign on the door into that room.

Would it be difficult -?-
... using any tool for monitoring actual flow of electrical impulses at the 'chip' level - to work out the software which the individual had been using (that's you)
- and what he'd been using it for (that'd be to party online).

To make the problem simpler for the guy with the ittsy bittsy teensy weensy electrodes - we could stipulate that 'chip' flow readings could be taken whilst you ...
*(carried back into the room with your monitor)*
- however -
- although both connected up -
... cunningly obscured (both) beneath a big black blanket
- which doesn't let *any clue* out (relating to your activities under the blanket with the Internet :-) )
- and with a sign on the outside (of the blanket):
'no peeking'

--- ---

Real difficult to use this approach to work out that 'browser aimed at ADDF' was the activity keeping you away from the darkness.

Much easier to just plug a monitor in.

And then to look at the level at which the thing we were trying to define - was intended to work.

So - if ADD is a condition of the mind and the mind is capable of thought - then we should be looking at the mind's behaviour and not the pattern of firing - though this is not to state that neurotransmission should not be examined.

I'd love to have some magic helmet which we could stick on - and which'd give us a reading on the number of neurones which have been excited into activity (with time) - correlated with the actual behaviour of that individual at those times.

eg exercise, reading etc ... with some kinda' non confounding method of recording whatever the individual is thinking about - when it's not externally obvious -
but that kinda' seems kinda' hard.

So - the last bit'd have to wait.

Perhaps though - exposing individuals to material of increasing abstraction -
that'd be another way.

:-)

heya! just hit #1 ... but the idea is similar 'cept I want more than 16.
Sadly I think I have 17 neurones in my head - and so this 16-headed chappy can't quite handle the complexity :-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brain Res Brain Res Protoc. 2002 Apr;9(2):122-9.
Recording and marking with silicon multichannel electrodes.
Townsend G, Peloquin P, Kloosterman F, Hetke JF, Leung LS.
Department of Computer Science, Algoma University College, Sault Ste. Marie,Ontario, Canada.

This protocol describes an implementation of recording and analysis of evoked
potentials in the hippocampal cortex, combined with lesioning using multichannel
silicon probes. Multichannel recording offers the advantage of capturing a
potential field at one instant in time. The potentials are then subjected to
current source density (CSD) analysis, to reveal the layer-by-layer current
sources and sinks. Signals from each channel of a silicon probe (maximum 16
channels in this study) were amplified and digitized at up to ... ... ...
PMID: 12034331 [PubMed]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In English - you stick a funny hat on your head with 16 wires coming out - each connected to an electrode - which are then (all 16) - plunged deep into your brain. Then you waggle them about (each in turn) - until they find a neuron to measure - and then you think deep thoughts about how painful it'd be when the next version of silly hat with 256 electrodes is released ...

.... the pain of that imagnation impedes any thought on v3
oh my!
A redefinition of pain.

ouchy pouchy.

:-)

In English - you stick a funny hat on your head with 16 wires coming out - each connected to an electrode - which are then (all 16) - plunged deep into your brain. Then you waggle them about (each in turn) - until they find a neuron to measure - and then you think deep thoughts about how painful it'd be when the next version of silly hat with 256 electrodes is released ...

.... the pain of that imagnation impedes any thought on v3
oh my!
A redefinition of pain.

ouchy pouchy.


You have such a fun way of describing things.



I see a lot of posts of folks here bemoaning how ADD is not accepted by society as something legit.

Will we get to a point where some kind of neuro-scanning such as fMRI (or something more advanced which hasn't been fully developed yet) will become common, and one can simply look at it for a diagnosis, almost like seeing what's wrong with your car's engine?

Yea that is the bloomin problem with science they think every thing is a car engine. . . .I have no problems with their data however many times their interpretations leave a lot to be desired.

I look in the mirror I see me and look at you and see what isn't like me . . . .and conclude that what makes you different than me must be disordered.

Must place man in box. . . . .prevent mind flight.

Let me put it another way using some one else's words

THINKING ABOUT LEARNING (http://wwwcsi.unian.it/educa/pedagogia/ahj-10co.html)

Perception is a filtration process by which we choose to attend to certain parts of our sensory input and to ignore others. This filtration is controlled by our long term store where we decide on importance, interest and attention, based upon previous experience and knowledge. If something interests us or seems to be important, we pay attention to it. We also add to our perception, ideas and associations borrowed from previous experience.

This means that no two people will necessarily interpret the same input in the same way because we each have a different set of experiences recorded in our long term store.

{So is this machine going to also record my long term memories, my emotions what about my emotions about my emotions, will it tell me what makes me tick?}


Working Space is where the filtered input goes for processing. This space has two functions: to hold information and to process it into an understandable form. It compares the input with material stored in long term store looking for connections which will make sense of the input. If a fit is found, the student says, "That makes sense". If, however, a fit is not found, the information may be rejected and forgotten or it may be "bent" to make it fit. This is where wrong ideas and misconceptions have their origin. The wrong chemistry we see in exam papers probably begins here.

There is one further complication about Working Space; it is of limited capacity. There is a limit to how much information we can store and process at a given time. There is also a trade-off to be done. If we have to hold a lot of information, we have little or no space left for processing it. Similarly, if we have a lot of processing to do, we cannot hold much. This is obvious in a lecture in which information is coming so fast that there is no chance to process it at the time. The Working Space is totally occupied with sending messages from the senses to the student’s pen. This is why student’s notes are often inaccurate, because they cannot process the incoming information and so fail to see mistakes.

{I would love to let him barrow my brain for a day, it would probably give him a head ache too.}

There is one further complication about Working Space; it is of limited capacity. There is a limit to how much information we can store and process at a given time.

{wanna bet he should live life minus a filter, it all process weather you want it to or notttttt = okay so this could explain why I have a working memory like a coffee filter but it hardly explains why I have the long term memory of an elephant. I have remembered thing written in post I read over a year ago. My mind remembers pretty much what it wants, it never seems to consult my brain}


Long-term store or Long-term memory is a vast store of information inter-linked in huge association networks. The store contains information of two kinds; Semantic knowledge which is shared by most people, and is usually second-hand. Examples would be "Rome is the capital of Italy", "The boiling point of water is 100°C". The other material which is stored is Episodic and is made up of personal knowledge and experience. It is personal and may differ widely from person to person. It contains likes and dislikes, beliefs and prejudices, interests and aversions. . . . .***End Quote

Hmm but long term memory taste like a smores. . . .

The point being {besides I read a lot of SB post} . . . . . will they ever be able diagnosis me like a car engine by hooking me up to some diagnostic computer. . . .gee I hope they are willing to learn my name first. In SBenes - the car engine can run like a well oiled machine but the scenery can still be crap. .

Well it change the general perception about ADD. . . . .hmmm my opinion is that for some perhaps it may however we must remember we are talking about a society that believes second hand smoke in restaurants is a public health hazard while mega tons of toxins and pollutants released for decades could not possibly be having an ill effect upon the planet. . .it was going to warm up any way . . . . {short answer no}.

I am a classic hyperactive so the majority of research on it is based on it's initial discovery (Accidently giving hyper children Dexedrine in 1937)

Wow did you know we only make up 6-9% of the ADD population {see what I mean}. . . . .there is hope for you yet- :p !