[esnr] From Norway with commentary

  • From: "Gruzelier, John H" <j.gruzelier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <ESNR@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 09:46:27 +0100

Geir Ogrim is a neuropsychologist working with children and adolescents, and is 
head of a neuropsychiatric team in Ostfold, Norway. He is applying for a grant 
to conduct a randomised controlled trial on Q-EEG and NF with ADHD children. In 
a letter to me about this study he also added the following.
"About E-ISNR: If the organization develops in the direction you describe I 
really think we are on the right track!"
he further added,
 "In addition I would like to say that I hope a conflict with US can be 
avoided, and that a kind of organized collaboration will be possible.  
 We need to place Q-EEG and NF within scientific neuroscience. I have discussed 
NF with a leading Norwegian child psychiatrist and researcher. In his opinion 
the studies to be found on  the effects of NF when you search the MedLine do 
not hold an adequate scientific standard. " 
Best regards,
Geir " 
On behalf of the Board let me reiterate our view regarding i-SNR,  communicated 
to i-SNR on 1st March and subsequently, remains unchanged, despite their 
attemps to split us. 
Furthermore we are considering co-opting a member to the Board to act as a 
liason officer with i-SNR to help coordinate activities and to give prominence 
to our relationship with them.  
 On the 1st March we wrote (and this was followed up subsequently).


"At the outset please note that we plan to seek a close and "special 
relationship" with iSNR based on mutual support and benefits. " 


 "As I indicated we look to a very special relationship, the nature of which we 
will evolve between us.  We will consider giving I-SNR a showcase symposium at 
our meetings, giving discounts for both registration and DVDs of our 
presentations, with possible US rights of sale, etc.  Should we go so far as to 
set up a Journal then we could make reciprocal offers on subscription rates.  " 


However, we do not view this as an exclusive relationship, and will affiliate 
with other societies that 
        will advance our field and accelerate the process of validation of our 
        and expand our horizons as to 'best practice', by which I mean an 
eclectic adoption of therapeutic approaches for the benefit of the 
Let me give you one example of the latter from our recent research.  
We have just submitted for publication a study which set out to replicate our 
music results with dancers, but in addition to alpha/theta training which was 
successful with musicians, we also had one group receiving heart rate coherence 
training. Both approaches improved dance performance overall compared with 
controls. Importantly the two biofeedback approaches improved different aspects 
of dance, timimg in one case and technique in another.  The clear implication 
is that both approaches should be used with an individual participant.
John Gruzelier

Other related posts:

  • » [esnr] From Norway with commentary