Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Inclined Bed Therapy (IBT) How is everyone?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by englishvinal View Post
    Inclined bed therapy works....
    Haven't had a migraine head ache in months!... and shoulder pain of many years duration is now totally forgotten during the daytime.
    ..
    As for quackenwatch... you HAVE to be joking?... They are SO full it it.... I believe that they are paid to trash everything that does not feed doctors, hospitals and big pharma!
    That would be awesome news if this was a forum for people with migraines. Considering it is not, thanks for the pointless post.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by lakboy View Post
      For heaven's sake , plz don't use the word quackery , he is not charging money , neither you should call him a snake oil salesman, he does NOT selling anything.
      Has anyone charged you for the THOUSANDS of valid, peer reviewed, clinical trials that prove smoking cigarettes causes cancer, slows or blocks arteries and veins causing swelling, claudification, strokes and heart attacks? And yet you still smoke.

      In the many years this man has been 'studying' raised bed therapy not one valid, peer reviewed, clinical trial has been done. Yes, I am very cynical of someone who seems to believe so strongly in his theory and yet has not tried to raise any funds to prove raising a bed does anything. I can see how raising the head of a King size bed 6 inches on books could very well cause serious damage to my feet, my husband's or could kill my dog if the bed slides off the base when we turn or I transfer.
      Courage doesn't always roar. Sometimes courage is the quiet voice at the end of the day saying, "I will try again tomorrow."

      Disclaimer: Answers, suggestions, and/or comments do not constitute medical advice expressed or implied and are based solely on my experiences as a SCI patient. Please consult your attending physician for medical advise and treatment. In the event of a medical emergency please call 911.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by lakboy View Post
        He isn't selling anything , I just don't understand the negative views of SCI NURSE , if u have closed mind , then we do not get any where, remember the old researchers !
        What part of "Sales of his sloping bed have been sluggish and the former boiler maker has fought a constant battle to be taken seriously." makes you think he isn't selling anything?

        That quote is from an interview with Insight on YouTube that Andrew put up here:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3D7tBQfCxQ

        And here's a quote from an article by Andrew at this link:

        http://www.mindpowernews.com/GravityAndHealth.htm

        "Birth of a New Bed
        The inclined sleep therapy concept is now incorporated in a top quality bed, with a foot board built in, which is available under the name of Naturesway Sleep System, and is under application for a patent. The incline is built into the bed and takes away the risks that are inherent in raising a flat bed, which are:

        1.The difficulty of cleaning. 2. The lack of built in stability. 3. The stress put on beds designed for a horizontal position can break. 4. Mattresses can slip off the base of the bed. 5. Mattresses are covered with a slippery material."

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Andrew K Fletcher View Post
          Beatscookin: Your argument is interesting. What you are saying gets to the heart of why anything either I or anyone using IBT write here is ignored. Ignorance is bliss? Anecdotal evidence does not = no evidence at all.
          Actually, anecdotal evidence DOES = no evidence at all because of faulty logic as described here:

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

          Anecdotal evidence is often unscientific or pseudoscientific because various forms of cognitive bias may affect the collection or presentation of evidence. For instance, someone who claims to have had an encounter with a supernatural being or alien may present a very vivid story, but this is not falsifiable. This phenomenon can also happen to large groups of people through subjective validation.

          Anecdotal evidence is also frequently misinterpreted via the availability heuristic, which leads to an overestimation of prevalence. Where a cause can be easily linked to an effect, people overestimate the likelihood of the cause having that effect (availability). In particular, vivid, emotionally-charged anecdotes seem more plausible, and are given greater weight. A related issue is that it is usually impossible to assess for every piece of anecdotal evidence, the rate of people not reporting that anecdotal evidence in the population.

          A common way anecdotal evidence becomes unscientific is through fallacious reasoning such as the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, the human tendency to assume that if one event happens after another, then the first must be the cause of the second. Another fallacy involves inductive reasoning. For instance, if an anecdote illustrates a desired conclusion rather than a logical conclusion, it is considered a faulty or hasty generalization.[17] For example, here is anecdotal evidence presented as proof of a desired conclusion:
          There's abundant proof that drinking water cures cancer. Just last week I read about a girl who was dying of cancer. After drinking water she was cured.
          Anecdotes like this do not prove anything.[18] In any case where some factor affects the probability of an outcome, rather than uniquely determining it, selected individual cases prove nothing; e.g. "my grandfather smoked 40 a day until he died at 90" and "my sister never went near anyone who smoked but died of lung cancer". Anecdotes often refer to the exception, rather than the rule: "Anecdotes are useless precisely because they may point to idiosyncratic responses."[19]

          More generally, a statistical correlation between things does not in itself prove that one causes the other (a causal link). A study found that television viewing was strongly correlated with sugar consumption, but this does not prove that viewing causes sugar intake (or viceversa).

          In medicine anecdotal evidence is also subject to placebo effects:[20] it is well-established that a patient's (or doctor's) expectation can genuinely change the outcome of treatment. Only double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials can confirm a hypothesis about the effectiveness of a treatment independently of expectations.

          By contrast, in science and logic, the "relative strength of an explanation" is based upon its ability to be tested, proven to be due to the stated cause, and verified under neutral conditions in a manner that other researchers will agree has been performed competently, and can check for themselves.

          Comment


          • #50
            geesh, I wish this guy would stop posting here.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by beatscookin View Post
              Actually, anecdotal evidence DOES = no evidence at all because of faulty logic as described here:

              http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

              Anecdotal evidence is often unscientific or pseudoscientific because various forms of cognitive bias may affect the collection or presentation of evidence. For instance, someone who claims to have had an encounter with a supernatural being or alien may present a very vivid story, but this is not falsifiable. This phenomenon can also happen to large groups of people through subjective validation.

              Anecdotal evidence is also frequently misinterpreted via the availability heuristic, which leads to an overestimation of prevalence. Where a cause can be easily linked to an effect, people overestimate the likelihood of the cause having that effect (availability). In particular, vivid, emotionally-charged anecdotes seem more plausible, and are given greater weight. A related issue is that it is usually impossible to assess for every piece of anecdotal evidence, the rate of people not reporting that anecdotal evidence in the population.

              A common way anecdotal evidence becomes unscientific is through fallacious reasoning such as the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, the human tendency to assume that if one event happens after another, then the first must be the cause of the second. Another fallacy involves inductive reasoning. For instance, if an anecdote illustrates a desired conclusion rather than a logical conclusion, it is considered a faulty or hasty generalization.[17] For example, here is anecdotal evidence presented as proof of a desired conclusion:
              There's abundant proof that drinking water cures cancer. Just last week I read about a girl who was dying of cancer. After drinking water she was cured.
              Anecdotes like this do not prove anything.[18] In any case where some factor affects the probability of an outcome, rather than uniquely determining it, selected individual cases prove nothing; e.g. "my grandfather smoked 40 a day until he died at 90" and "my sister never went near anyone who smoked but died of lung cancer". Anecdotes often refer to the exception, rather than the rule: "Anecdotes are useless precisely because they may point to idiosyncratic responses."[19]

              More generally, a statistical correlation between things does not in itself prove that one causes the other (a causal link). A study found that television viewing was strongly correlated with sugar consumption, but this does not prove that viewing causes sugar intake (or viceversa).

              In medicine anecdotal evidence is also subject to placebo effects:[20] it is well-established that a patient's (or doctor's) expectation can genuinely change the outcome of treatment. Only double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials can confirm a hypothesis about the effectiveness of a treatment independently of expectations.

              By contrast, in science and logic, the "relative strength of an explanation" is based upon its ability to be tested, proven to be due to the stated cause, and verified under neutral conditions in a manner that other researchers will agree has been performed competently, and can check for themselves.
              can i get an amen?! lol
              "Smells like death in a bucket of chicken!"
              http://www.elportavoz.com/

              Comment


              • #52
                Interesting article on spinal cord injury and posture with lab rats: http://jp.physoc.org/content/590/7/1721.full.pdf+html
                Find us on Facebook using inclined bed therapy as a search term.
                sigpic

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by crypticgimp View Post
                  can i get an amen?! lol
                  < - - - part of your amen hallelujah chorus

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Andrew K Fletcher View Post
                    Interesting article on spinal cord injury and posture with lab rats: http://jp.physoc.org/content/590/7/1721.full.pdf+html
                    Interesting summary of the key points at the start of your link (I have added the bold):

                    [QUOTE]Key points

                    Locomotor training of rats held inan upright posture has been used recently to restore
                    locomotion after spinal cord injury. Our results show that the upright posture alone improves
                    locomotor recovery in spinal rats.

                    This improvement is reversed by the removal of cutaneous afferent feedback from the paw, showing that sensory feedback from the foot facilitates the spinal central pattern generator
                    (CPG) for locomotion.
                    QUOTE]

                    Hence, what your article says is that stimulation of the paw is necessary to maintain the improvement from locomotor traiining. What it clearly fails to say is that putting rats on a bit of an incline does them any good.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      "
                      the upright posture (Video 2) demonstrates that there is a dramatic effect of loading the hindlimbs. Rats with
                      complete spinal cord transections (Th9/10), when placed in the horizontal posture, responded to tail pinch with rhythmic EMG activity that was poorly coordinated, resulting in failure of plantar foot placement, prolonged extension and failure to produce a normal swing phase of the locomotor cycle (Video 1, Fig. 2
                      B , upper panel). When the same animal was placed in the upright posture, tail pinch led to sustained bouts of locomotion with successful plantar foot placement, weight support, and near-normal swing and stance phases of locomotion "

                      Clearly there is a potent affect from being in a more upright position. This might also be due to the load on the rats spine in this case closing the gap across the transected spine.
                      Find us on Facebook using inclined bed therapy as a search term.
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Andrew, you are very selective (to the point of being decpetive) in what you quote from the article. Here are just a few of the gaps you missed out:

                        When the animals in the upright posture were elevated so that the limbs were pendent, the well-developed rhythmic activity observed during foot contact with the treadmill belt in the upright posture disappeared

                        It seems that weight bearing is more important than the upright position in promoting stepping and if weight bearing is removed the positive effeccts disappear.



                        We conclude tha cutaneous afferents from the plantar surface of the foot are necessary and sufficient for the effects of the upright posture on restoration of locomotion in chronic spinal
                        animals

                        This means pressure on the foot, stimulating afferent nerve signal are "ncessary and sufficient" for the positive affects. Note the word upright mising form that conclsuion.


                        When locomotor training was combined with drug treatments what happened? This is an important question because combination therapies are the most promising?



                        Our results confirm that 8-OH-DPAT improves locomotion in the horizontal posture (Fig. 7A–H), but we found that when the animals were in the upright posture there was no significant change produced by the drug (Fig. 7I–P). In the horizontal posture trials, 8-OH-DPAT facilitated well-coordinated plantar walking, with very regular and sustained EMG bursts with characteristic alternating patterns (improved inter- and intralimb coordination)

                        I guess the fact that the horizontal position worked better is pretty inconvenient for your case; so that explains why you ignored these pages and quores ike the one below:


                        We have found, for example, that inspinal animals with transplants of fetal 5-HT neurons,the upright posture disrupted the improved locomotionprovided by the grafted neurons that could be observedin the horizontal posture.
                        This brings into question theutility of the upright posture model for studies on certaintypes of interventions for providing locomotor recovery after spinal cord injury.

                        When you cite an article that is essentially about locomotor training and imply that it is supportive of inclined bed therapy you are taking a big risk that somebody may actually read thearticle and realise that its conclusions are not at all supportive of your case. The conclusions are much more about the effects of recptors on the feet than on upright posture:



                        Our results also suggest that the potent effects of afferent input from the sole of the foot should be considered when designing interventions for the restoration of locomotion after spinal cord injury in humans.

                        There is some support for load bearing exercise in an upright posture from your article but nothing that suggests that simply being inclined a bit, without load-bearing on the feet is of any benefit to a spinal-cord injured rat. You are right that it is an interesting articlle. You are wrong if you think it has any relevance to your inclined bed therapy.



                        Every time you revisit CareCure you achieve nothing apart from reminding us that you are clutching at straws.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Too many years ago on this very forum, I asked Dr Wise Young how cerebrospinal fluid circulates? My question was very specific in asking what exactly is the driving force? I added we know the heart has nothing to do with SCF flow and we also know that respiration and posture play an important roll.

                          The following paper identifies a density difference between the ascending limb and descending limb of the spinal fluid flow. http://neurores.org/index.php/neuror...cle/view/77/81

                          My argument for spinal cord recovery using posture alone is that tilting the bed can not only assist the csf circulation, but also provides the stimulus and guidance required for nerve re-growth. The paper relies on Brownian motion, but this is not required for circulation to occur when there is a density difference due to temperature and evaporation from the respiratory tract. The following video shows how density changes inside soft walled tubing affects the internal pressures. It also shows how adding salt solution to one side induces a return flow. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNJHChtHklg
                          Last edited by Andrew K Fletcher; 05-06-2013, 08:20 AM.
                          Find us on Facebook using inclined bed therapy as a search term.
                          sigpic

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            &quot;. . .you keep avoiding the difficult questions by making excuses&quot;

                            Originally posted by Andrew K Fletcher View Post
                            Too many years ago on this very forum, I asked Dr Wise Young how cerebrospinal fluid circulates? My question was very specific in asking what exactly is the driving force?
                            Just to be clear, here is what Dr. Wise Young has said in past postings on this subject.

                            From 2003 thread, Dr. Young - Andrew Fletcher's thread:
                            https://www.carecure.net/forum/showt...+fletcher+andy

                            "Andrew,

                            I am honestly trying to understand your theory but cannot. It makes no sense to me and I have a Ph.D. in biophysics. There is no vapor pressure in the spinal cord. It is continuous column of fluid in a closed system. There is also active transport of both fluids and solutes in cells that are many times greater than gravity.

                            While I am trying hard to keep an open mind concerning the possibility that the orientation of the body may be helpful in improving function, I am very skeptical about your claims of recovery. If what you say is true, almost everybody would be cured because most people stay upright most of the day.

                            More important, I don't understand why you are having so much trouble proving your claim. It should be very easy to gather a group of people and convince them to sleep with their beds inclined for 3 months, get a group of unbiased and experienced clinicians to examine them, and report the results. "

                            "The problem with your theory is that you keep avoiding the difficult questions by making excuses. I say this without rancor but simply to suggest to you that this is why most scientists cannot accept your theory. A theory that has many excuses is a weak theory.

                            Wise"

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Try replying to the paper I just posted and avoid using diversionary tactics. It clearly states Gravity is responsible for driving the cerebrospinal fluid circulation because of density changes in the CSF ! This was my point when I asked Wise how CSF circulates. I stated specifically that I didn't need to know where it runs from and to. Just the driving force explanation. I knew when I asked the question that no one knew the answer. Now according to this paper we do !
                              Find us on Facebook using inclined bed therapy as a search term.
                              sigpic

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by beatscookin View Post
                                From 2003 thread, Dr. Young - "It should be very easy to gather a group of people and convince them to sleep with their beds inclined for 3 months, get a group of unbiased and experienced clinicians to examine them, and report the results. "
                                Wise"
                                Andrew, if you believe so much in your theory why haven't you done what Dr. Young suggested 10 years ago?

                                Without scientific proof IBT will never be taken seriously.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X