[blindza] Fw: Brain That Changes Itself: into the abyss

  • From: "Jacob Kruger" <jacobk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "BlindZA" <blindza@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2008 12:33:30 +0200

This is a very long extract from a newish book, but a lot of it is relevant to various things like sensory substitution, brain entrainment, etc. etc.


Stay well

Jacob Kruger
Blind Biker
Skype: BlindZA
'...Fate had broken his body, but not his spirit...'

----- Original Message -----

Brain That Changes Itself: into the abyss.

Can a damaged brain change its own structure and learn to replace lost
functions? Conventional neuroscience once said no, but pioneers in the
field have achieved miraculous transformations. From his investigation
of their work, Norman Doidge tells the story of the perpetually falling
woman

Cheryl Schiltz feels like she is perpetually falling. And because she
feels like she is falling, she falls. When she stands up without
support, she looks as if she were on a precipice, about to plummet.
First her head wobbles and tilts to one side and her arms reach out to
try to stabilise her stance. Soon her whole body is moving chaotically
back and forth, like a person walking a tightrope in that frantic
see-saw moment before losing his balance - except that both her feet are
firmly planted on the ground, wide apart. When she tries to walk she has
to hold on to a wall, and still she staggers like a drunk.

For Cheryl there is no peace, even after she has fallen to the floor. I
ask her, does the sense of falling go away once she has landed? 'There
have been times,' Cheryl says, 'when I literally lose the sense of the
feeling of the floor… and an imaginary trapdoor opens up and swallows
me.' Even when she has fallen, she feels that she is still falling,
perpetually, into an infinite abyss.

Cheryl's problem is that her vestibular apparatus, the sensory organ for
the balance system, does not work. Soon after her problem began, she
lost her job as an international sales representative and now lives on a
disability allowance of $1,000 a month. She has a new-found fear of
growing old. And she has a rare form of anxiety that has no name.

An unspoken and yet profound aspect of our well-being is based on having
a normally functioning sense of balance. The balance system gives us our
sense of orientation in space. Its vestibular apparatus consists of
three semi-circular canals in the inner ear that tell us when we are
upright and how gravity is affecting our bodies by detecting motion in
three-dimensional space. One canal detects movement in the horizontal
plane, another in the vertical plane, and another when we are moving
forwards or backwards. The signals from the vestibular apparatus go
along a nerve to a specialised clump of neurons in the brain, the
vestibular nuclei, which process them, then send commands to our muscles
to adjust themselves.

I am with Cheryl, and Paul Bach-y-Rita, a leading pioneer in
understanding brain 'plasticity', and his team at a lab in the
University of Wisconsin Medical School. Yuri Danilov, a biophysicist,
ana­lyses data they are gathering. He says, 'Cheryl has lost her
vestibular system - 95 to 100 per cent.'

By any conventional standard, Cheryl's case is hopeless. The
conventional view sees the brain as made up of a group of specialised
processing modules, genetically hard-wired to perform specific
functions. Once one of them is this damaged, it cannot be replaced. Now
that her vestibular system is affected, Cheryl has as much chance of
regaining her balance as a person whose retina has been damaged has of
seeing again.

But today all that is about to be challenged. She is wearing a
construction hat with holes in the side and a device inside called an
accelerometer. Cheryl licks a thin plastic strip with small electrodes
on it, and places it on her tongue. The accelerometer and the tongue
strip are connected to a computer. This machine, a bizarre-looking
Bach-y-Rita prototype, will replace Cheryl's vestibular apparatus by
sending balance signals to her brain from her tongue. It could end her
nightmare.

In 1997, after a hysterectomy, Cheryl, then 39, contracted a
post-operative infection and was given the antibiotic gentamicin.
Excessive use of gentamicin is known to poison the inner ear structures
and can be responsible for hearing loss (which Cheryl does not have),
ringing in the ears (which she does), and devastation to the balance
system. But because gentamicin is cheap and effective, it is still
prescribed, though usually for only a brief time. Cheryl says she was
given the drug way beyond the limit. And so she became one of a small
tribe of gentamicin's casualties, known among themselves as Wobblers.

Suddenly one day she discovered that she could not stand without
falling. She would turn her head, and the whole room would move. Finally
she got to her feet by hanging on to a wall and reached for the phone to
call her doctor. Hospital doctors did various tests - they poured
freezing-cold and warm water into her ears and tilted her on a table.
When they asked her to stand with her eyes closed, she fell over. It was
then that a doctor told her, 'You have no vestibular function.' Tests
showed she had about two per cent of the function left. 'He was,' Cheryl
says, 'so nonchalant. "It looks like a side-effect of the gentamicin."
Why in the world wasn't I told about that? "It's permanent," he said.'

Because the link between Cheryl's vestibular apparatus and her visual
system is damaged, her eyes cannot follow movement smoothly.
'Every­thing I see bounces like a bad amateur video,' she says. Although
she cannot track moving objects with her eyes, her vision is all she has
to tell her that she is upright. Our eyes help us know where we are in
space by fixing on horizontal lines. Once, when the lights went out,
Cheryl immediately fell to the floor. But vision proves an unreliable
crutch for her, because any kind of movement in front of her - even a
person reaching out to her - exacerbates the falling feeling. Even
zigzags on a carpet can topple her by initiating a burst of false
messages that make her think she is standing crookedly.

'Let's begin,' Danilov says, adjusting the controls. Cheryl puts on the
hat and closes her eyes. She leans back from the table, keeping two
fingers on it for contact. She does not fall. She lifts her fingers from
the table - and starts to cry. The sense of perpetual falling has left
her for the first time in five years. Her goal today is to stand, free,
for 20 minutes, with the hat on, trying to keep centred.

The jerking has stopped, and her brain is decoding signals from her
artificial vestibular apparatus. For her these moments of peace are a
miracle - a neuroplastic miracle, because somehow these tingling
sensations on her tongue are making their way, through a novel pathway
in the brain, to the area that processes balance.

'We are now working on getting this device small enough so that it is
hidden in the mouth, like an orthodontist's mouth retainer,' Bach-y-Rita
says. 'Then someone like Cheryl should be able to wear the apparatus,
talk and eat without anyone knowing she has it.'

'It's time,' Danilov says, turning off the machine. Cheryl removes the
tongue device and takes off the hat. She gives a big grin, stands free
with her eyes closed, and does not fall. Then she opens her eyes and,
still not touching the table, lifts one foot off the ground, so she is
balancing on the other.

'I love this guy,' she says, and goes over and gives Bach-y-Rita a hug.
'I feel anchored and solid. I don't have to think where my muscles are.
I can actually think of other things.' She returns to Danilov and gives
him a kiss.

The first time they tried the hat, Cheryl wore it for only a minute.
They noticed that after she took it off, there was a 'residual effect'
that lasted about 20 seconds, a third of the time she wore the device.
Then Cheryl wore the hat for two minutes and the residual effect lasted
about 40 seconds. Then they went up to about 20 minutes, expecting a
residual effect of just under seven minutes. But instead it lasted
triple the time, a full hour.

Cheryl starts clowning and showing off. 'I can walk like a woman again.
That's probably not important to most people, but it means a lot that I
don't have to walk with my feet wide apart now.' 'What is amazing,'
Danilov says, 'is that after some time on the device, she behaves almost
normally. It is the recovery of the vestibular function.'

A few days later an email for Bach-y-Rita arrives from Cheryl, her
report from home about how long the residual time lasted. 'Total
residual time was: three hours, 20 minutes… The wobbling begins in my
head - just like usual… I am having trouble finding words… Swimming
feeling in my head. Tired, exhausted… Depressed.' On the other hand,
three hours and 20 minutes after only 20 minutes on the machine is a
residual time 10 times greater than the time on the device. She is the
first Wobbler ever to have been treated, and even if the residual time
never grows longer, she could now wear the device briefly four times a
day and have a normal life. But there is good reason to expect more,
since each session seems to be training her brain to extend the residual
time. If this keeps up...

It did keep up. Over the next year Cheryl wore the device more
frequently to get relief and build up her residual effect, which
progressed to multiple hours, to days, and then to four months. Now she
does not use the device at all and no longer considers herself a Wobbler.

In 1969 the science journal Nature published a short article that had a
distinctly sci-fi feel about it. Its lead author, Paul Bach-y-Rita,
described a device that enabled people who had been blind from birth to
see. All had damaged retinas and had been considered untreatable. The
Nature article was reported in the New York Times, Newsweek and Life,
but perhaps because the claim seemed so implausible, the device and its
inventor soon slipped into relative obscurity. Accompanying the article
was a picture of a machine - an old dentist's chair with a vibrating
back, a tangle of wires and bulky computers. The whole contraption
weighed 400lb.

A congenitally blind person - someone who had never had any experience
of sight - sat in the chair, behind a large camera. He 'scanned' a scene
in front of him by turning hand cranks to move the camera, which sent
electrical signals of the image to a computer that processed and then
conveyed them to 400 vibrating stimulators on a metal plate in the chair
back resting against the blind subject's skin. The stimulators
functioned like pixels, vibrating for the dark part of a scene and
holding still for the brighter shades. This 'tactile-vision device', as
it was called, enabled blind subjects to make out faces and shadows, and
distinguish between objects that were close and far away.

Everyone who used the clunky machine had a remarkable perceptual
experience, as they went from having tactile sensations to 'seeing'
people and objects. With a little practice, the blind subjects began to
experience the space in front of them as three-dimensional. It was one
of the first and boldest applications of neuroplasticity - using one
sense to replace another - and it worked.

Yet it was ignored because the scientific mind-set at the time assumed
that the brain's structure is fixed, and that our senses, the avenues by
which experience gets into our minds, are hardwired. This idea, which
still has many adherents, is called 'localisationism'. Almost alone
among his colleagues, Bach-y-Rita rejected localisationism. Our senses
have an unexpectedly plastic nature, he discovered: if one is damaged
another can sometimes take over in what he calls 'sensory substitution'.
By discovering that the nervous system can adapt to seeing with cameras
instead of retinas, Bach-y-Rita laid the foundation for retinal implants
that can be surgically inserted into the eye.

Unlike most scientists, who stick to one field, Bach-y-Rita became an
expert in many - medicine, psychopharmacology, ocular neurophysiology
(the study of eye muscles), visual neurophysiology (the study of sight
and the nervous system) and biomedical engineering. He speaks five
languages and has lived in Italy, Germany, France, Mexico, Sweden and
throughout the United States. After becoming a physician, he gave up
medicine and switched to basic research. He asked questions that seemed
to defy common sense, such as, are eyes necessary for vision, or ears
for hearing? When he was 44 years old, he returned to medicine and began
a residency in rehabilitation.

Unassuming and cerebral, Paul Bach-y-Rita is of Spanish and Jewish
ancestry and grew up in the Bronx. He was 4ft 10in when he entered high
school because of a mysterious disease that stunted his growth, and was
twice given a preliminary diagnosis of leukaemia. He was bullied, and
developed a high pain threshold. When he was 12 his appendix burst and
the mysterious disease, a rare form of chronic appendicitis, was
properly diagnosed. He grew eight inches and won his first fight.

Speaking at home in Madison, Wisconsin, he told me, 'I can connect
anything to anything. We see with our brains, not with our eyes. When a
blind man uses a cane he sweeps it back and forth, and has only one
point, the tip, feeding him information through the skin receptors in
the hand. Yet this sweeping allows him to sort out where the door jamb
is, or the chair, or distinguish a foot when he hits it, because it will
give a little. Then he uses this information to guide himself to the
chair to sit down. Though his hand sensors are where he gets the
information and where the cane "interfaces" with him, what he perceives
is not the cane's pressure on his hand but the layout of the room:
chairs, walls, feet, the three-dimensional space. The receptor surface
in the hand becomes merely a relay for information, a data port. The
receptor surface loses its identity in the process.'

Bach-y-Rita determined that skin and its touch receptors could
substitute for a retina, because both the skin and the retina are
two-dimensional sheets, covered with sensory receptors that allow a
'picture' to form on them.

It is one thing to find a new data port, or way of getting sensations to
the brain, but another for the brain to decode these skin sensations and
turn them into pictures. To do that, the brain has to learn something
new. This adaptability implies that the brain is plastic, in the sense
that it can reorganise its sensory perceptual system.

If the brain can reorganise itself, simple localisationism cannot be a
correct image of the brain. Serious localisationism was first proposed
in 1861 when Paul Broca, a surgeon, had a stroke patient who lost the
ability to speak and could utter only one word. No matter what he was
asked, the poor man responded, 'Tan, tan.' When he died, Broca dissected
his brain and found damaged tissue in the left frontal lobe. Sceptics
doubted that speech could be localised to a single part of the brain
until Broca showed them the injured tissue, then reported on other
patients who had lost the ability to speak and had damage in the same
location. That place came to be called 'Broca's area' and was presumed
to coordinate the movements of the muscles of the lips and tongue. Soon
afterwards another physician, Carl Wernicke, connected damage in another
brain area further back to a different problem: the inability to
understand language. Over the next 100 years localisationism became more
specific as new research refined the brain map.

Bach-y-Rita came to doubt localisationism while in Germany in the early
1960s. He had joined a team that was studying how vision worked by
measuring with electrodes electrical discharges from the visual
processing area of a cat's brain. The team fully expected that when they
showed the cat an image, the electrode in its visual processing area
would send off an electric spike, showing it was processing that image.
And it did. But when the cat's paw was accidentally stroked, the visual
area also fired. And they found that the visual area was also active
when the cat heard sounds.

Bach-y-Rita began to think that the localisationist idea of 'one
function, one location' could not be right. The 'visual' part of the
cat's brain was processing at least two other functions, touch and
sound. He began to conceive of much of the brain as 'polysensory' - that
its sensory areas were able to process signals from more than one sense.

Over the next few years Bach-y-Rita began to study all the exceptions to
localisationism and began to argue that 'a large body of evidence
indicates that the brain demonstrates both motor and sensory
plasticity.' One of his papers was rejected for publication six times by
journals, not because the evidence was disputed but because he dared to
put the word 'plasticity' in the title. Yet Bach-y-Rita persisted and
began, in a series of books and several hundred articles, to lay out the
evidence for brain plasticity and to develop a theory to explain how it
might work.

The origin of Bach-y-Rita's understanding of brain rehabilitation lies
in the dramatic recovery of his own father, the Catalan poet and scholar
Pedro Bach-y-Rita, after a disabling stroke. In 1959 Pedro, then a
65-year-old widower, had a stroke that paralysed his face and half of
his body and left him unable to speak. Paul's brother George, now a
psychiatrist in California, was told that his father had no hope of
recovery and would have to go into an institution. George, then a
medical student in Mexico, brought his paralysed father from New York,
where he lived, back to Mexico to live with him. At first he arranged
rehabilitation for his father at the American British Hospital, which
offered a typical four-week rehab. After four weeks his father was still
helpless and needed to be lifted on and off the lavatory and showered.
'Fortunately, he was a little man, 118lb, and we could manage him,'
George says.

George knew nothing about rehabilitation, and his ignorance turned out
to be a godsend, because he succeeded by breaking all its rules. 'I
decided that instead of teaching my father to walk, I was going to teach
him first to crawl. We got kneepads for him. At first we held him on all
fours, but his arms and legs didn't hold him very well, so it was a
struggle.' As soon as Pedro could support himself somewhat, George got
him to crawl with his weak shoulder and arm supported by a wall. 'That
crawling beside the wall went on for months. The only model I had was
how babies learn. So we played games on the floor, with me rolling
marbles and him having to catch them. Everything we tried involved
turning normal life experiences into exercises. We turned washing up
into an exercise. He'd hold a pot with his good hand and make his weak
hand - it had little control and made jerking movements - go round and
round, 15 minutes clockwise, 15 minutes anticlockwise.' The
circumference of the pot kept his hand contained. The regime took many
hours every day, but gradually Pedro went from crawling to moving on his
knees, to standing, to walking.

Pedro struggled with his speech on his own, and after about three months
there were signs it too was coming back. After a number of months he
wanted to resume writing. He would sit in front of the typewriter, his
middle finger over the desired key, then drop his whole arm to strike
it. Eventually he learnt to type normally again.

At the end of a year his recovery was complete enough for Pedro to start
full-time teaching again at City College in New York, working there
until he retired at 70. Then he got another teaching job at San
Francisco State, remarried, and kept working, hiking and travelling. He
was active for seven more years after his stroke. On a visit to friends
in Bogotá, Colombia, he went climbing high in the mountains. At 9,000
feet he had a heart attack and died shortly after. He was 72.

I asked George if he understood how unusual this recovery was so long
after his father's stroke and whether he thought at the time that the
recovery might have been the result of brain plasticity. 'I just saw it
in terms of taking care of Papa. But Paul, in subsequent years, talked
about it in terms of neuroplasticity.'

Pedro's body was brought to San Francisco, where Paul Bach-y-Rita was
working. In those days, before brain scans, post-mortems were routine
because they were one way doctors could learn about brain diseases, and
about why a patient died. Paul asked Dr Mary Jane Aguilar to perform the
autopsy. 'A few days later Mary Jane called me and said, "Paul, come
down. I've got something to show you." There, spread out on the table,
were slices of my father's brain on slides.

'I was feeling revulsion, but I could also see Mary Jane's excitement,
because what the slides showed was that my father had had a huge lesion
from his stroke and that it had never healed, even though he recovered
all those functions. I was thinking, "Look at all this damage." And she
said, "How can you recover with all this damage?"?'

When he looked closely, Bach-y-Rita saw that his father's seven-year-old
lesion was mainly in the brain stem - the part of the brain closest to
the spinal cord - and that other major brain centres in the cortex that
control movement had been destroyed by the stroke as well. Ninety-seven
per cent of the nerves that run from the cerebral cortex to the spine
were destroyed - catastrophic damage that had caused his paralysis.

'I knew that meant that somehow his brain had totally reorganised itself
with the work he did with George. We didn't know how remarkable his
recovery was until that moment, because we had no idea of the extent of
his lesion, since there were no brain scans in those days. When people
did recover, we tended to assume that there really hadn't been much
damage in the first place.'

His father's story was first-hand evidence that a 'late' recovery could
occur even with a massive lesion in an elderly person. His father's
'late recovery' triggered a career change for Bach-y-Rita. He turned his
attention to treating strokes, focusing on late rehabilitation, helping
people overcome major neurological problems years after they had begun,
and developing computer video games to train stroke patients to move
their arms again. And he began to integrate what he knew about
plasticity into exercise design. Traditional rehabilitation exercises
typically ended after a few weeks when a patient stopped improving, or
'plateaued'. But Bach-y-Rita, based on his knowledge of nerve growth,
began to argue that these learning plateaus were temporary - part of a
plasticity-based learning cycle in which stages of learning are followed
by periods of consolidation. Though there was no apparent progress in
the consolidation stage, biological changes were happening internally,
as new skills became more automatic and refined.

Bach-y-Rita developed a programme for people with damaged facial motor
nerves, who could not move their facial muscles and so could not close
their eyes, speak properly or express emotion. He had one of the 'extra'
nerves that normally goes to the tongue surgically attached to a
patient's facial muscles. Then he developed a programme of brain
exercises to train the 'tongue nerve' (and particularly the part of the
brain that controls it) to act like a facial nerve.

These patients learnt to express normal facial emotions, speak and close
their eyes. Thirty-three years after Bach-y-Rita's Nature article,
scientists using the small modern version of his tactile-vision machine
have put patients under brain scans and confirmed that the tactile
images that enter patients through their tongues are indeed processed in
their brains' visual cortex.

Cheryl Schiltz has not been the only one to benefit from Paul
Bach-y-Rita's strange hat. The team has since used the device to train
50 more patients to improve their balance and walking. Some had the same
damage Cheryl had; others have had brain trauma, stroke or Parkinson's
disease. Bach-y-Rita's importance lies in his being the first of his
generation of neuroscientists both to understand that the brain is
plastic and to apply this knowledge in a practical way to ease human
suffering.

When Cheryl's brain developed a renewed vestibular sense - or blind
subjects' brains developed new paths as they learnt to recognise
objects, perspective or movement - these changes were not the mysterious
exception to the rule but the rule: the sensory cortex is plastic and
adaptable. But our brains also restructure themselves in response to
input from the simplest tools, too, such as a blind man's cane. The
brain is a far more open system than we ever imagined, and nature has
gone very far to help us perceive and take in the world around us. It
has given us a brain that survives in a changing world by changing itself.

Extracted from 'The Brain That Changes Itself', by Norman Doidge
(Penguin), published on August 12 and available for £9.99 from Telegraph
Books (0870-428 4112; books.telegraph.co.uk)

Source URL:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/main.jhtml?xml=/health/2008/07/26/sm_brain126.xml




To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to seeingwithsound-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
with "unsubscribe" (without the quotes) in the subject line. To subscribe
again, send a blank e-mail to seeingwithsound-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"subscribe" in the subject line, and next reply to the confirmation mes
----------
To send a message to the list, send any message to blindza@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
----------
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to blindza-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
with 'unsubscribe' in the subject line
---
The 'homepage' for this list is at http://www.blindza.co.za

Other related posts:

  • » [blindza] Fw: Brain That Changes Itself: into the abyss