. Back to Scenar Main Page

About Biofeedback in general

Bio-energetic techniques

Bio-energetic techniques

Well said---now if I could translate this into Texas red-neck lingo---(G. is so eloquent---I’m more of a Red-neck.  For those outside the US, DieHard is a popular brand of automobile battery.  Red-necks are dumb farmers/ranchers common in the South whose primary love in life is their truck and going fishing.  A recent Red-neck song tells the story of a wife who tells her husband she won’t be home if he goes fishing again.  His reply is, “I’m sure gonna miss her”.).

My pickem-up truck is sputtering and my lights are dimmy.   What’s ailing my baby?

1. Maybe my DieHard did and I am a-trying to run a 12 volt truck with a 6 volt battery = I need to put a charge on her.
2. Maybe I got grit in my fuel line and the gas can’t hardly get to the engine = I need to flush the sucker.

My body is sputtering and I feel really tired.  What’s wrong with me?

1. It could be that I am energy depleted and I need to charge up my system so it will have enough energy to heal = charge up the digital-nerve-pulse brain by using FV on the neck to send energy thru the cranial nerves that come out of the bottom of the brain and run thru the neck, use FV on the belly to charge up the second brain (enteric brain that makes 90% of the body’s serotonin), use FV on the spine to pump energy into the spinal cord/brain; use FV on the paraspinal area = the location of the autonomic ganglia.  You know the body is energy depleted if a few quick measurements along the spine or over the dysfunctional area are “nobody”, slow <20’s or almost all <20’s.
2. It could be that I have enough energy; I just can’t get it where it needs to go = correct the blockage in the current of injury -àacupuncture meridians -àbrain -à perineural nervous system -àlocal ionic capacitors -à light stored in DNA -à healing.  The blockages are usually some combination of decreased current of injury, decreased instructions delivered via the perineural system, reversed polarity in the local ionic capacitors.  Rotation of one capacitor over another reverses the polarity back to normal = rotating the SCENAR does the same while simultaneously using biofeedback to correct the current of injury/CNS instructions for healing pathways.-----or----- if you have three good batteries in your flashlight and one of them is put in backwards (reversed polarity), the flashlight won’t work.  Spin it around correctly and the light immediately comes on---da!

Back to top of Page

About Biofeedback in general

Hi Folks,

Some recent on-line discussion about biofeedback (definition, concepts, etc)
caught my eye and I thought I'd add a few comments.......

good things to you all and see ya'll(at least some of you) in Dallas next
week - I'll being doing an informal talk on this subject there

G. 

*************************

All complex systems rely on shared information.  The acquisition, management
and response to this information is ongoing and occurs continuously in the
moment.  This dynamic process is commonly referred to as "self-regulation".

In the mid and late twentieth century, attempts were made to expand natural
biological self-regulation using external technological devices.  The
fundamental quest was to use machines as extensions of innate biological
self-regulation and thereby improve the organism's ability to regulate
itself.  As technology rapidly evolved, the capability to interface with
biological functions became more successful.  What remained however was the
even greater challenge of determining the dynamics of interaction between
body and machine. What would be the best way of using a machine to improve
natural biological functions?

The term "biofeedback" appeared in the late 1960's at a time when most
facets of technologically assisted self-regulation were vague and
unexplored.  The earliest phase of biofeedback was theorized as a new
technological process based on the principles of unconscious conditioning
found in Behaviorism. Whether the previous models of conditioned behavior
could apply to biofeedback was an immediate focus of study and debate.
Shortly thereafter, another conceptual basis for biofeedback was
hypothesized that viewed the process as a possible Cognitive event.  These
two views of the fundamental biofeedback process, Cognitive and Behaviorist,
each present technologically assisted self-regulation in a special context.
The psychologically traditional Behaviorist model viewed biofeedback as an
extension of well founded, pre-existing Behaviorist "conditioning" dynamics.
The newer Cognitive interpretation of biofeedback interpreted the process as
a novel opportunity for body related "learning".

As history makes evident, the interpretation of biofeedback that gained
easier acceptance and eventual popularity was the Cognitive "learning"
model.  It is interesting to note in the following definitions of
"biofeedback" the distinctly dominant 'learning" oriented vocabulary that
currently so thoroughly saturates most references to biofeedback.

"The word 'biofeedback' was coined in late 1969 to describe laboratory
procedures (developed in the 1940ís) that trained research subjects to alter
brain activity, blood pressure, muscle tension, heart rate and other bodily
functions that are not normally called voluntary.  Biofeedback is a training
technique in which people are taught to improve their health and performance
by using signals from their own bodies."

Source: Association for Applied Psychophysiology & Biofeedback

"...the technique of using equipment (usually electronic) to reveal to human
beings some of their internal physiological events, normal and abnormal, in
the form of visual and auditory signals in order to teach them to manipulate
these otherwise involuntary and unfelt events by manipulating the displayed
signals. This technique inserts a person's volition into the gap of an open
feedback."
 
 Source: A Textbook of Biological Feedback, Human Sciences,    1981

To understand the rapid rise to prominence of the "learning" model one must
appreciate the fact that Behaviorism in general was sliding out of vogue in
academic circles at the time that biofeedback emerged.  In good part and
simply put, the Behaviorist view of biofeedback was just not "sexy" enough
for this new and exciting form of technology.  The 1960's and early 1970's
was a time of dramatic claims in human potential coupled with a cultural
trend towards new ideas and Eastern philosophy.  Although well-conducted
research supplied ample evidence for the "conditioning" process in early
biofeedback, the attraction to an interpretation based on conscious
mediation was too tempting a prospect to abandon.

There is also second reason why biofeedback became predominately interpreted
as a "learning" process.  To adequately explore the "conditioning" model
would have required that scientists have access to a level of technology
that did not yet exist at that time.  The technology of the 60's and 70's
was pre-digital and lacked the interaction speeds for real biological rate
interactions.  Solid-state technology with processors capable of matching
biological speeds were but a fantasy.  Consequently, although the premise
was evident, there was no technology to permit the exploration of the
"conditioning" model beyond the preliminary stages.

To summarize, the "learning" model of biofeedback gained early and enduring
prominence over the "conditioning" model basically for two reasons: 1) the
"learning" model was philosophically more appealing at the time and 2) there
was not adequate technology to explore the biological based potentials of
the "conditioning" model when biofeedback was initially developing.

To be clear, both interpretations of biofeedback dynamics have merit and can
each be developed with positive results.  One approach does not negate the
other.  In fact, there is great promise in the benefits of hybrid forms of
biofeedback that grow out of the blending of "learning" and "conditioning"
views.  Matured versions of the conventional "learning" model of biofeedback
remain a positive and steadily growing category of health care.
Twenty-first century technology also presents us with the unique and timely
opportunity to re-visit the founding features of biofeedback theory and
expand upon an evolved view of the "conditioning" model.  It is critical to
appreciate that both conceptual approaches to biofeedback as well as their
technological expressions have merit.  It is unfortunate if those able to
newly explore and develop the "conditioning" model fail to appreciate the
great efforts and successes that have been suffered and enjoyed by the
applications of the conventional "learning" model of biofeedback.  It is
also equally unfortunate if those comfortable in the "learning" model do not
recognize the early roots of biofeedback in Behaviorism and do not encourage
the technological and theoretical evolution of the "conditioning" model.
Although a few decades old, the use of technology in self-regulation is
still in its infancy.  We cannot afford to limit ourselves to any
theoretical position at this early stage.  The exciting promises of the
1970's concerning biofeedback have yet to be realized.  Perhaps it is the
continued exploration of "learning" and "conditioning" that will finally
yield an approach to biofeedback that will affect the life of every person
at a level equal to the telephone and television.


It may be of interest at this time to review a few of the fundamental
principles relating to biofeedback with a special focus on features related
to the "learning" model and the "conditioning" model.  The points listed
below are introductory at the most basic level but still serve as an
indication of some of the rich areas of exploration associated with
biofeedback in all its forms.

1) Awareness
The issue of awareness at first seems simple.  Awareness is "knowing that
you know".  Awareness is commonly associated with the "learning" model so
much that it is also referred to as the "Awareness Model".  However on
deeper inspection it becomes apparent that "awareness" is not necessarily a
synonym of "consciousness" or being "awake".  Most people can testify to be
"aware" that they are dreaming when asleep and also to be unaware and "lost
in a day dream" while awake.  There are numerous examples of a kind of
"biological knowing" of events that are completely unknown to the conscious
verbal mind as well as having no connection with any of the five senses.
Well-controlled experimentation has cast doubt as to the validity of the
assertion that the awake, conscious and aware condition upon which
"learning" biofeedback is based is as fundamental as is asserted.

Studies with persons fully "unconscious" clearly demonstrate conditioned
responses to stimuli as well as levels of apparent cognitive influence that
could be described as learning.  'Knowing" or attending to information in a
meaningful way may not always require the conscious state we typically
associate with the verbal, analytical mind.  As such, the "unconscious"
aspects of a person may be fully capable of maintaining "awareness" at such
a level so as to permit a biofeedback process capable of enhancing
self-regulation without conscious attention.  "Conditioning" based
biofeedback is not dependent on a conventional state of conscious awareness.

2) Mediation
In a feedback system, information must be able to get from point "A" to
point "B".  This transfer requires a "connection" or "bridge".  Mediation is
a kind of informational bridge.  In "learning" biofeedback, the "conscious"
mind is considered the mediator.  The initial information comes from the
"unconscious" body and is measured by the device.  The device shows the
"conscious" mind through a set of sensory symbols that something is
happening.  The "conscious" mind then acts in relation to the symbols and
creates an effect in the "unconscious" body.  The loop is completed from
"unconscious" body to "conscious" mind to "unconscious" body again with the
"conscious" mind acting as the mediator of the process.  The manner or
mechanism by which the "conscious" mind acts as mediator is unknown.

In "conditioning" biofeedback, the "conscious" mind is not considered the
mediator.  The "unconscious" aspects of self-regulation are extended to
include the role of mediator.  The device acts as a technical connector
meaning that the information flows from the "unconscious' body to the device
and back to the "unconscious" body without needing the attention of the
verbal, analytical mind.  The adjustments to the information are controlled
by an internal determination innate to the self-regulating system itself.

3) Conscious & Unconscious
There is absolutely no consensus as to what constitutes "consciousness" and
all of its aspects including "conscious" and "unconscious".  Far too often,
"conscious" is thought to mean "aware" and "unconscious" to mean "unaware"
or "non-conscious".  "Learning" biofeedback recognizes that numerous
attitudinal states penetrate the "conscious" waking condition and that the
biofeedback process requires an adept mastering of an alert yet relaxed and
open frame of mind in order to proceed positively in the "training".   Most
typically, visualization processes are used to activate the changes
necessary.  It can be said that in "learning" biofeedback, one uses
visualization to make the changes and the biofeedback signals as a measure
of how well you are doing.  One is not so much seeking to alter the signals
as much as explore internal states and using the signals as an indirect
inference as to how effective your visualizations are.  Attention to the
signals instead of your internal state is a sure way of not succeeding in
your session of ìlearningî biofeedback.

In "conditioning" biofeedback, there is no reliance on maintaining any
particular state of mind.  In fact, Behaviorism has shown that positive
changes do occur without the subject even knowing that the changes are being
encouraged.  The device is not designed to present symbolic signals to the
sensory components of the "conscious" mind.  The device generates and cycles
signals in such a way that the self-regulation responds in a knowing yet
"unconscious" manner.

4) Volition & Will
The phrase most commonly associated with "learning" biofeedback is
"voluntary control of involuntary processes".  The premise is one based on
"will" and "determination" exercised on command.  Upon investigation, the
"volition" is paradoxical in that the harder you try the more you fail.
Consequently, two forms of "volition" are recognized - active volition and
passive volition.  Active volition is typical of a decision to do something
combined with the sustained effort to actualize the goal.  This style does
not work in "learning" biofeedback.  In order to succeed, one must shift
into a new way of doing.  It is a kind of letting go or giving up.  Being
there but not paying too much attention.  This impossible to describe
condition is normally termed passive volition.  One notices when signals
shift secondary to their internal state.  The "will" is to watch and not
want -  yet accept.

"Conditioning" biofeedback, because of not relying on "conscious mediation"
does not require the subtle state shift from active volition to passive
volition.

SUMMARY

The "learning" model of biofeedback although the most popularly recognized
form is not the only form of biofeedback.  From its earliest conception,
biofeedback has considered the "conditioning" principles of Behaviorism to
be applicable to the biofeedback process.  Circumstances surrounding the
philosophy, culture and technology of the late 60ís and early 70ís, allowed
the "learning" model of biofeedback to flourish both conceptually and
technically.  Recent new developments in digital, computer based technology
along with a philosophical shift in the appreciation of complex systems
behavior has created an opportunity to revisit the "conditioning" based
principles as applied to biofeedback.  When considering biofeedback, not
only may we speak of "learning" and "training" but we may also speak of
"conditioning" and "shaping".

Biofeedback in general remains one of the most promising approaches to a
safe enhancement of self-regulatory processes.  As a healing science and
art, it is still in its early stages with much exciting growth ahead.  An
open mind to the evolution of concepts and technology is the only guarantee
of a positive future in biofeedback.

Back to top of Page