If I don't know why something works, can I say "MAGIC" and not lose credibility?

[IdaBriggs]

Or is that just going to make the heads of the "anti-woo" brigade explode?

I am working on the write up for the Project, and there is simply no explanation I have found that explains one of the things that keeps happening. (It has happened 27 times/doesn't happen except with the protocol, so it doesn't seem like a coincidence.)

My pharmacy connections tell me that what I am describing is not "normal", "expected" or "ever seen before." I have "rumors" that MAYBE a naturopath can explain the pattern, but I need something that is documented somewhere. Plus, *I* don't get it, so how can I explain it???

(The pattern is -- "Stop the protocol for one week, then re-start and get another BUMP in improvements for motor and cognitive issues." It makes no sense, but it keeps happening. )

I am starting to think "and then MAGIC happens" might make as much sense; if there are deficiency issues, then why would deficient stores be impacted by STOPPING and restarting bolus levels of supplementation?

Magic. Seriously, as good an explanation as any, right? This can't be science.

Plus, who reads these things anyways? Would anyone notice?

[Orrex]

1. Saying "it's magic" is the same as saying "I lack curiosity"

Someone in this thread will no doubt invoke the grossly over-invoked "Clarke's Law," but before we get to that point let's just say that calling something "magic" is a shorthand way of throwing up one's hands and saying "I lack the time, resources, or interest to figure this out."

That's not as much of an insult as it might sound, either. I lack resources to comprehend quantum mechanics, for instance, so I criticize no one for an honest failure to understand.

But calling something "magic" is just like saying "God did it" or "there are things that humans weren't meant to know." It's intellectually dishonest and, ultimately, somewhat lazy.

I know that you posted this in Teh Lounge, rather than in GD, and I understand why you did it, but it's still a serious question and deserves a serious answer.



If you can't explain this "magical" phenomenon after 27 trials, then it's time to bring in another pair of eyes.

[IdaBriggs]

8. I am curious, but time and resources are limited.

I am also interested. I appreciate the fact you aren't insulting me.

There is one specific child who is making this IMPOSSIBLE to ignore. (Keep in mind we stopped formally collecting data last summer.) This child was one of the "super fast / amazing response" kids; she went from being unable to stand (her legs wouldn't extend, plus lack of core strength) to standing erect, being able to use braces / using a gait trainer / using crutches. This was amazing for multiple reasons, including changing GFMS mobility levels. She also had other documented positive changes.

Then she seemed to "plateau", and after a few months they stopped following the Protocol. She went backwards a bit (normal with these kids when they have a growth spurt, even though she had been doing "growth spurt" without backward progress), but was still doing well.

About two weeks ago, her mom put her back on the Protocol, and now she's doing INDEPENDENT STEPS.

I have 26 other children who "stopped and started" over the course of the Project who saw the same "jump start" but this little girl is kind of blowing it all away. Plus, her mom keeps posting videos, which makes it harder to ignore.

And I have NO IDEA why "stop and start" gets the "bump" in improvement level. It was one of those "accident things" where one of the parents went on vacation / didn't take stuff for a week, then re-started, got a bump, then a bunch of the other parents tried it, too, and it did the same thing!

But this "walking independently" thing -- just bloody stunning. It is such a freaking spectrum, but it all seems to be the same issue - I am losing my mind! Lol!

I need other eyes. I'm MISSING something, and it is very frustrating. One of my "not in the Project" kids (who didn't respond - part of the 17%) is now responding to a different brand, and they say "take a break every two weeks" but ZERO idea why. Obviously stores need to be replenished when there is a deficiency issue, but WHY????

I forgot to be born omnipotent - or I don't remember if I was!

[Orrex]

21. Good luck with that omnipotence thing--I have quite a wish-list for you!

I can't presume to guess what might be causing the "bump" you describe, though it does indeed sound quite dramatic. I understand the constraints of limited resources, and I don't doubt that it's hugely frustrating.

I seem to recall from an earlier discussion that you'd presented preliminary data to research personnel of your acquaintance? Might they be inspired to take another look, in light of this apparently significant new development?


Whatever the ultimate findings might be, it sounds like you're studying something of considerable significance, so I'd hate for you to diminish it (or your efforts) by falling back on "it's magic," even in jest.


Good luck with your continued research

[IdaBriggs]

29. The researcher seems to not be doing much that I am aware of.

Right now everything seems to be in "hold" mode until we (and that means "I&quot finish the stupid report so they can look at it / analyze it / examine our conclusions, etc. so they can pull pieces out and give them rigorous scientific examination, etc.

Until we put the data together in a meaningful way, it is a bunch of "neat anecdotes." Granted, we have 121 children seeing improvement with the same pattern doing the same things, etc. and can tie it all together in a meaningful way, BUT they could all be "lucky magical mutants!"

You know how it goes.

[siligut]

2. Sounds like simple adaptation to me

I gather you are dealing with living things? I agree with Orrex, using the term "magic" just says you are willing to be irrational.

So you have finished your project with great results, better than expected due to this phenomenon? Excellent, good work.

[IdaBriggs]

9. We finished collecting the data last summer.

We saw the phenomena, but one of the children is now doing "independent steps" after a "multi-month stop and re-start." When she started the Project she was not able to stand erect, and had appeared to "plateau" at walking with assistance.

Children with these conditions aren't supposed to change mobility levels in two weeks without other interventions. AND not all of them do, which adds to the confusion. I usually try to find stuff in the literature to explain or back up what we are seeing.

This "stop and start thing" -- I've got nothing.

(Except for a little kid walking, of course - lol! I probably shouldn't discount that!)

[siligut]

13. I understand now why you want to say "magic"

The little girl's improvement is wonderful and everyone involved must be elated. You are dealing with so much more than just the disorder that is the subject of your study. It sounds like motivation and hope may factor into your study too. When you say growth spurt, how old are these children? I am sure you know the child development stages.

Again, congratulations on your delightful success!

[IdaBriggs]

14. Everyone is definitely happy, but we all want to find out WHY.

"Luck" and "magic" can't be repeated; SCIENCE can.

We can repeat it (not always as dramatically as this little girl), but ZERO clue as to why.

We also have a section where we are theorizing that personality might play a role, with "risk takers" seeing more improvements than children who are "more cautious" - it is sort of like if you break your arm, and get into a habit of not using it, then your brain starts to "forget" to use it for normal activity until you "retrain it" when it is healed. We think some of the children who have more siblings / are more "risk takers" might be seeing more improvement simply because they are experiment/trying, which allows them to see their new skills/notice they are getting stronger, which means they start practicing more, which keeps the cycle going in a good way.

It is all very interesting. I am just stumped as to the stop/start thing.

[siligut]

15. OK, using the terms Naturopath and deficiency clued me in

You know many nutrients act as co-enzymes? If you supplement one and not the other, overtime you will lose effectiveness. You have to give us more details of your study, it sounds so marvelous.

[IdaBriggs]

30. "Supplement one and not the other..."

Part of the protocol involves taking high quality multi-vitamins in addition to the liquid micronutrients. Are you saying that we might be "not balancing" the co-enzymes deficiency issues?

PM me and I'll share contact info. If you have information on this, I *beg* to pick your brain!!!

[bemildred]

25. Yeah, sounds about like what I would expect.

Not that I have an explanation, but the pattern is kind of normal in learning/growing situations. Suddenly what you are learning gets learned and you know how to do it, like riding a bike. Suddenly you hit puberty and off you go.

[haele]

26. It may be that the plateau was a period where the brain and body began building bonds

and the renewal of the protocol was a "kick start" to get the progress moving.

If you don't have a sophisticated enough monitoring system that is tracking brain activity and possible chemical re-structuring during the plateau when they were off the original period of treatment, you don't know what the child's brain and body is actually developing during that down time.

I wouldn't say it's magic when it comes to treating children. There's a lot going on with them because their bodies are constantly changing and adapting to their physical situation and surroundings. Bio-chemical walls break down, and neurological linkages are still developing.

Just in casual observation of the kids in my household, children can make huge, unexplainable development changes just because "they're ready" - when body and brain comes into alignment. And there's a lot of research going on into how the brain repairs significant damage within itself after trauma.

If your protocol can help clear some blockages that allow the health/development-related genetic potential in certain individuals to begin growing or fixing missing or damaged neurological linkages, more power to it!
But I don't think it's magic, I think it's a mix of the individual's reaction to the protocol, time, and the individual's ability to heal.

Good luck, and I hope you can reproduce the effects enough that you can figure out what's going on.

Haele

[Paulie]

3. If it happens routinely then it's explainable.

Same as in IT. If a computer problem is repeatable then it's repairable. Otherwise it's just noise.

Sounds a bit like a tolerance is built up, then withdrawal for a bit lets whatever receptor binding clear away and it works again. Maybe more regular withdrawal will make it more pronounced. Yay another grant to be written. Heh

[IdaBriggs]

10. Your explanation makes as much sense as any other I've got.

Although I was starting to fondly fantasize about the "Magic" thing!

My IT background is part of how I've been able to get this far; you should have heard me when one of the doctors tried to explain that "sometimes CP just goes away on its own" before children turn two, at which point I was flipping out with "and did you folks never think to INVESTIGATE WHY? Because I think *I* can explain it!" (and I very politely *didn't* call them nitwits!)

[rurallib]

4. I think "God did it" is the operable terminology.

[CanSocDem]

5. Placebo's are called "magic"...

...but they still work for no explainable scientific reason. But speaking of "...a lack of curiosity..." modern science hasn't spent very much time trying to discover the power of placebo's. They can't understand or won't acknowledge that you get what you expect.

That you personally are getting some response that 'you don't expect' is a sign that your belief system is under review. That usually leads to higher consciousness so don't be alarmed.

Intuition is your friend.



.

[Orrex]

6. Placebos are not called "magic" by any reputable agency

Intuition is a great place to start and a terrible place to finish.

[CanSocDem]

7. But they are...

...unexplainable from a scientific point of view and so are dismissed as being associated with the paranormal.

"Intuition is a great place to start and a terrible place to finish." Why would you say 'intuition is.... a terrible place to finish.'? Or are just being glib to further deflect from having to consider why "placebo's" work regardless of what they're called.


.

[Orrex]

17. Exactly what does placebo accomplish, in your estimation?

Despite your repeated claim, no reputable agency identifies placebo as "magic" or "as being associated with the paranormal."

It's a favorite go-to among alt-med fans, because they treat it like a magical sack from which all manner of miraculous cures can be drawn, when in fact its effects are much more limited than is commonly professed. Tell me exactly what effects you attribute to placebo, and I will work to address them. I'm not interested in guessing where you might place the goalposts.

I will, however, say this: placebo has never been conclusively shown to have any curative power except insofar as it mitigates (to some extent) a condition that seems indistinguishable from its symptom, such as headache, anxiety or insomnia. If you can provide any examples of placebo actually being shown to cure something, I invite you to do so.


I will also repeat my statement: intuition is a great place to start and a terrible place to finish. That is, a scientific theory that starts with intuition can be ground-breaking and revolutionary, while a scientific theory that ends with intuition is pretty close to useless. Give me five examples of robust scientific theories that offer, as their conclusion, some variation of "it's magic" or "it works by intuition."

[CanSocDem]

41. It reveals the lie of modern medicine.

It demonstrates that something other than the med-pharma industry can make us healthy.


http://www.wrf.org/alternative-therapies/power-of-mind-placebo.php

http://sydney.edu.au/news/84.html?newsstoryid=4504

"You don't need a sugar pill to create a placebo effect. Our research reveals that placebo effects can occur in routine medical practice across a wide range of medical conditions - and these effects can be therapeutically powerful. Clearly there is a great deal more to placebo than we previously thought."

The effects of placebo are many, ranging from the reduction of persistent pain to improvement of movement in Parkinson's disease patients. Placebo effects can make routine treatments of any kind more effective, and we can all be responders.

.............................................................................................................................................................

"Understanding how placebo works is one avenue for better understanding the physiology and psychology of the mind-brain-body interaction and how this may be harnessed to help sufferers of pain and other medical diseases," said internationally renowned pain specialist Professor Michael Cousins, head of the PMRI.


"Give me five examples of robust scientific theories that offer, as their conclusion, some variation of "it's magic" or "it works by intuition."

ScienceInc. would never admit to a lack of understanding when it comes to phenomenology. Only true believers, bereft of any 'curiosity', would accept half-baked scientific explanations rather than stray into the realm of metaphysics or the paranormal. Fortunately for the world, there are fewer and fewer everyday.

Ask your mom. Do your own homework.


.




.

[Orrex]

42. I love it when alt-med zealots tell me to do my homework

In every case, it tells me at least three things:

1. They don't understand the point they're claiming to make (true in this case)
2. They can't back up their claims (true in this case)
3. They don't understand the point they're trying to refute (true in this case)

As an added bonus, you invoke the standard ad hominem swipe of "ScienceInc.," which reveals your own impenetrable anti-science bias. Not that this bias invalidates your arguments; your arguments do that all by themselves.

Since you didn't actually answer my questions, I see no point in helping you shit all over IdaBriggs' thread. You're welcome to attempt the discussion elsewhere.


I will now sit back and wait for you to pull your standard trick of declaring victory by failing to recognize that you don't know what you're talking about. Have at it.

[CanSocDem]

43. Somebody had to do it...(eom)

[Major Nikon]

35. Are you trying to suggest Witch Doctors are not reputable?

[IdaBriggs]

11. Part of this is definitely "problem solving / training skills" (aka intuition).

It is one of the reasons I have been having a problem with the "it works 83% of the time, with measurable degrees of difference" while the medical community has been concerned that the number is TOO HIGH.

Duh! Every programmer knows that the correct bug-free answer is 100% -- we just have to do a better job of identifying the variables impacting the program!

I don't have all the answers yet. It is very frustrating. But I like your thinking...thank you!

[magical thyme]

12. a few decades ago when I worked in hi-tech, the techies had a standard cartoon

to explain this sort of thing.

It basically consisted of a series of steps, mathematical sequences, or whatever, to develop whatever. And inevitably, there is a step drawn like a sunburst and labeled, "and then a miracle occurs" followed by the rest of the steps.

A humorous way to portray such things which happen in the world of applied science. There are times when we just don't know quite what is happening. We may be looking in the wrong place, or not have instruments sensitive enough to measure, or whatever.

And there are medicines that, when it boils down to the molecular level, we just don't (yet) know quite how they work. I was just reading about one the other week -- I think in my MLT continuing ed...

I am curious now. What is this "Project" and this "protocol" that you are studying?

[jakeXT]

16. You beat me to it

[magical thyme]

18. thank you!!!! The picture speaks a thousand words...

[IdaBriggs]

20. I LOVE IT!

Maybe I can put it on the front page of the write-up?

Okay, I'm getting slap-happy!

[IdaBriggs]

19. I've seen that cartoon! I had a PM who used to have it up --

good catch!

This is the Preemie Growth Project (www.preemiegrowthproject.org); it appears that failure to thrive, certain forms of cerebral palsy, sensory processing and a few other things are actually caused by correctable micronutrient deficiencies. We've identified five common causes of the deficiency (prematurity, maternal deficiency, malnutrition, in utero exposure to teratregens, and absorption issues), common symptoms (one or combination - Failure to Thrive; Developmental, Cognitive and/or Communication Delays; Neuromuscular Issues: Hyperspastic and/or Hypotonic Symptoms, “Brain Bleeds”, CVI, Clonus, Microcephaly; Sensory Processing Issues; Lack of Appetite; Chronic Constipation; Strabismus, Etc.), and correction levels (oral bolus dosing) for infants and children.

The speed of correction of the symptoms varies depending on the age of the child at correction (younger respond faster), level of deficiency (measured differently for premature infants and children), age at which correction begins, etc. 4 out of 5 children respond, and the pattern is very specific: usually a "bowel change", followed by an increase in appetite/weight gain, then changes in spasticity/increase in core strength, followed by extremity changes. We have one documented "clonus disappeared" (that was a fun day!), a bunch of CVI responding to visual stimulation, microcephaly children with increased skull size, and several strabismus resolving without surgical intervention in infants; sensory issues (including for an autism only subset) for those children who respond are usually diminished by six weeks, with most of them 'gone' by week sixteen. Oh, and the "chronic failure to thrive kids" -- 74% of them are no longer in that category within 90 days.

Because these are "chronic" issues, and the changes usually occur pretty quickly (infants can respond in as little as 24-72 hours, with floppy babies seeing some amazing results), the "dramatic bumps" for the children get attention, especially in the cognitive and mobility areas, which is why the "take a break, get a bump" is a big deal.

Except I have no idea WHY that "take a break, get a bump" is happening!!! I mean, bolus dosing makes sense when dealing with deficiencies / attempting to build / create stores, BUT....

Sorry! Probably way more information than any sane person wanted to know! If you want more info, PM me and I'll send you my contact info. There is A LOT we don't know, and this is still really in the beginning stages -- we've been collecting data so we can get "the real researchers" to do the appropriate scientifically rigorous studies; mostly I just stumbled into this, and it has taken over my life! I just need to put the final stuff together about the 271 children (only solid data on 162 ) we tracked through last summer. In theory, this is the *EASY* part, but I am finding it...challenging.

Plus I could be totally wrong - maybe it *IS* magic!

[magical thyme]

24. fascinating...

The sequence of improvement makes sense to me. Impaired absorption can be a result of the other listed causes, as well as a cause in itself. Either way, correcting the deficiency will first improve absorption, since the deficiency is corrected as the nutrient passes through the gut. Once absorption is improved, the bowels will improve. Improved bowels will lessen abdominal distress, allowing normal appetite to return. Simultaneously, corrected absorption enables the needed nutrients to reach the rest of the body, which as various systems heal, at least some of which will also stimulate appetite.

Are you also saying that taking a break in dose, then re-dosing, leads to a noticable bump in improvement, as compared to continuous dosing?
I can think of a number of possibilities. If supplementation is continued in one group, and on a "start/break/restart" schedule with another group, are longer term milestones reached by the two groups in the same timeframes? In that situation, the group with continual supplementation may be progressing steadily, but in smaller and less noticeable increments.

With groups that are continually supplemented, are the doseages lower than for groups with start/stop/restart? It may then have to do with having to reach optimum levels of the missing micronutrients for healing to occur.

Growth tends to occur in spurts naturally, with other activities going on in between, so it could have to do with that timing.

[IdaBriggs]

27. "...as compared to continuous dosing? ..." YES. We only have data for this group

starting from June 2012, and collected it through last summer (2013), so I don't know about the long term goals -- we were busy being in shock over what was happening. (The "chronic failure to thrive" stuff was a *big* deal, while the mobility issues were so dramatic it was almost easy to overlook the cognitive/communication changes.) Different children saw different changes, and I think I might have already mentioned some of what we believe influenced the rate of changes. ALSO, 17% saw ZERO benefit - but we might have some answers on that, thanks to one of the moms who is now seeing some changes on a different brand....(but I'm not collecting data formally anymore - argh!).

ON EDIT: And why wouldn't CONTINUOUS DOSING work better? Except maybe it doesn't? And I don't know WHY!!!! END EDIT

And yes, the pattern makes sense to me, too, for exactly the reasons you describe, with the added bonus of the "zinc" issue -- zinc deficiency is known to have the "lack of appetite" as one of its primary symptoms, so as that becomes corrected, we expect the increased appetite, which means if they are able to absorb more of what they are missing *and* the chronic constipation so common with this group is being corrected (which means they stop associating eating with discomfort) -- well, everything you said!

Plus we *have* to get these kids off of Miralax; unfortunately, due to the chronic constipation, they are on it for years, despite the fact the FDA recommends healthy adults use it for a maximum of 7 days *because it interferes with the lower intestines ability to absorb micronutrients!* <-- and this is me banging my head on the OMG-how did THAT get missed?

All of the dosages were the same initially; later we had parents try "increasing" the dosage, and this also seemed to stimulate the "bump" in changes. I would have to look at the notes, but I think some "lowered and raised" -- maybe only two? (I'm at work, and notes aren't easily available.) Another thing that has been amazing has been the fact these children start seeing *normal* growth patterns -- they start eating like teenage boys (humorous, but accurate), then gain muscular weight, then see an increase in height. The original "Neighbor Girl" went from 44 pounds (age 9) to 50 pounds in approximately six weeks, and by sixteen weeks weighed 52 pounds, and was three inches taller (plus, not confined to a wheelchair), and documented cognitive improvement included being able to remember the alphabet/spell, while her hands went from "frozen/unable to use" to "completely normal" during the same time period.

If this theory is correct, then correcting the deficiencies for preemies/IUGR babies should *prevent* some of the neuromuscular issues commonly identified as "cerebral palsy". The first "floppy baby" started at 9 months, weighing 12 pounds, meeting NO milestones - ten weeks later he weighed 22 pounds, took his first steps, and currently has no CP symptoms. Right now these *identified* deficiencies are addressed by TPN in the NICU, but what we are seeing is that the correction has to be given ORALLY (obviously when they can have formula/breast milk) - it looks like substituting 10% of one daily feeding with these supplements (liquid! and opinionated on which for the babies/not so much for the kids) should begin the correction for the deficiencies....altho infants over 10 pounds should take more -- still working on the stupid write-up.... Sigh.

[magical thyme]

31. that it needs to be oral suggests to me

that the gut needs the first repair. Once it is healed, then the rest of the body can begin in earnest.

Delivery via IV means the nutrients are going everywhere except the lining of the intestine, or that they are gone by the time the blood supply reaches the intestinal lining.

Giving it orally means that once they've passed through the stomach, they go first to the lining of the gut, so the bulk of the nutrients are available to the intestinal lining.

Not only is absorption than improved; elimination of waste also improves. And once the gut has the nutrients it needs, the extra goes into circulation to reach the rest of the body.

[IdaBriggs]

32. ^== Yes. I think one of the reasons this hasn't been solved BEFORE

is that the neurologists weren't reading the gastroenterology textbooks (and vice versa). Both sides seem to think the systems aren't interconnected.

TPN has a place, but this correction *must* be done orally.

ON EDIT: and if you keep writing this well, I'll happily pull you into helping with the write-up!

[Duer 157099]

34. "And why wouldn't CONTINUOUS DOSING work better?"

Because sometimes the body needs time to adjust to the change, and in the adjustment, recalibrates how it functions in some way. So, sometimes the stop/start sequence works better than continuous.

In the same way that more isn't always better, intermittant can also be better than continuous.

[petronius]

22. No, you can't say "magic". You say something like "critical questions still

remain unanswered in the area of XYZ. Pending the results of further inquiry, we anticipate (insert hugely important result here)." And then you put the whole thing in a grant proposal...

[IdaBriggs]

28. Okay, I love the "critical questions still remain unanswered" -- but

I don't want to do a grant proposal because it is ruining my fantasy of "at last, as soon as I finish this stupid write-up, I can be DONE NOW!!!"



But I have *a ton* of "needs further inquiry!" stuff...

I need minions, dammit! Minions who like writing this crap up! Who can also research until their eyes bleed....and who do what I tell them to!

Ah, my fantasy life! It is kicking into high gear! Chocolate, and a hot tub, and minions ....

[zonkers]

23. Of course there is Magic -- just ask the Insane Clown Possee...

[Duer 157099]

33. What is the p-value?

Ok, seriously. What is the CI?

[struggle4progress]

36. It's better to choose a scientific-sounding word

Q: Why do bananas fit so neatly in the human hand?
A: This is known to be due to magnetism

[frwrfpos]

37. .

[frogmarch]

38. Call it Quantum Magic and

you'll be okay.

[trof]

39. This is known as 'PFM' and it happens all the time.

Pure Fucking Magic

[orleans]

40. ???

Penny: Okay, so Kim the night manager went on maternity leave, and her husband’s name is Sandy, right? So get this, her replacement is a woman named Sandy whose husband’s name is Kim.

Leonard: Wow!

Penny: I know. What are the odds?

Sheldon: Easily calculable, we begin by identifying the set of married couples with unisex names. We then eliminate those unqualified for restaurant work, the aged, the imprisoned and the limbless, for example. Next we look at…

Leonard: Sheldon! it’s an amazing coincidence, can we leave it at that?

Sheldon: I’m sorry. Ooh, Penny, it’s as if the Cheesecake Factory is run by witches.
http://bigbangtrans.wordpress.com/series-3-episode-03-the-gothowitz-deviation/

on edit: big bang theory s3e3

[Arugula Latte]

44. It works with religion, so why not magic?