medicalcondition:phobia

  • #Neurofeedback can zap your fears – without you even knowing | Aeon Essays
    https://aeon.co/essays/neurofeedback-can-zap-your-fears-without-you-even-knowing

    The problem with neurofeedback is in fact as old as #placebo itself. In double-blinded, placebo-controlled neurofeedback studies, neither the researcher nor the participant is aware of whether they are receiving a true intervention. When no one knows who is supposed to experience the clinical effect, the behavioural differences between placebo and neurofeedback intervention often disappear.

    Even more impressively (or disturbingly), it seems that the mind can change the brain by just thinking it might be undergoing an intervention . New studies showed that giving people ‘sham’ neurofeedback could have the same effect as the real thing. When people believed they were undergoing an intervention, they usually reported feeling that it had a noticeable effect. Sometimes, the brain activity in these individuals also began to show the brain being retrained as intended: not only would participants of sham-neurofeedback experiments report reduced chronic pain, for example, but their insulas (the region of the brain directly tied to the experience of pain) would show a reduction of activity.

    Since the early 2010s, neurofeedback has been fraught with this additional controversy. Researchers began to wonder whether all neurofeedback simply pertains to some deep, powerful capacity of the brain to change itself – and it needs no real technology to do it.

    The placebo studies raise the question of whether you can really disentangle the mind from the brain. The Hollywood blockbuster Inception (2010) plays with a similar idea: in the film, the hero (played by Leonardo DiCaprio) alters people’s thoughts by jumping into their minds as they dream.

    A new wave of research is focused on a brain imaging technique so similar that its advocates have called it ‘incepted neurofeedback’. These studies show it’s possible to implant thoughts into people’s brains without them being aware of it. In one case, researchers scanned participants to get a ‘baseline’ reading of their brain activity, and then subjected them to several days of neurofeedback training. When subjects saw black stripes on the screen, they were instructed to ‘somehow regulate [their] brain activity’ to make a grey circle in the centre of the screen get as large as possible. At the end, they got paid money depending on how successful they were. What they weren’t told is that the size of the circle was related to patterns of brain activation that corresponded to seeing the colour red.

    After doing this hundreds of times, people were asked what helped them get high scores. No one mentioned colours; some mentioned zebras, violent acts or performing in gymnastics tournaments. In subsequent tests, though, the participants were more likely to see the colour red when presented with an image than those who didn’t receive neurofeedback. Without even knowing it, the visual mark of ‘red’ had been implanted in their minds.

    #cerveau #mental

    • Using fMRI, researchers can create a map of an individual’s neural activity while thinking of a particular concept, such as ‘a spider’; by finding this brain pattern for people with phobias, researchers are then able to reduce the need for exposure during treatment.

      How? Armed with a trace of an individual’s pattern for ‘spider’, it’s now possible to give patients positive reinforcement when they manage to reduce activity in the areas of the brain that correspond to the experience of overwhelming fear of spiders. Crucially, we can do this without ever showing them any eight-legged nasties. Instead, using the cue of a circle or a pleasant tone, and the reward of watching it change shape or pitch, the person themselves finds alternative means of subduing neural activity in these regions. In this way, the brain begins to modify its own internal states, and the phobia will subside as if by magic.

      Not only is neurofeedback non-invasive; a number of high-profile research projects have also shown that it can be effective even when participants aren’t aware of the goal of the procedure. This new, unconscious reprogramming has far-reaching implications for research on human cognition, tapping into the crux of the mind-body connection, and opening up many new opportunities for novel clinical treatments. But it also has a potential dark side: the risk that neurofeedback could become a back-door for manipulating our brain states, without us even realising it.

  • Mayor of Reykjavik: Homophobes aren’t scared, they’re just assholes
    By James Park
    18 November 2012, 1:08pm Jón Gnarr’s assholes message is a simple one

    Jón Gnarr’s assholes message is a simple one

    The Mayor of Reykjavik, Jón Gnarr, a long time advocate of equality, has spoken out online at the protest yesterday in Paris against equal marriage rights for gay couples.

    Sharing a link to online coverage of protest, Mr Gnarr posted the simple statement: “Homophobia is not a phobia. They are not scared. They are just a bunch of assholes.”

    On Saturday evening, between 70,000 and 100,000 people took to the streets of Paris to protest, as well as demonstrations taking place in the cities of Toulouse, Lyon and Marseille. Protesters carried pink and blue balloons, and rallied under signs saying, “pro-marriage, not ant-gay.”

    On 7 November, French President Francois Hollande’s government approved a bill to legalise equal marriage and allow gay couples to adopt.

    Yesterday’s protest included members of the Catholic church, as well as other advocates of “traditional” marriage and family rights.

    In Reykjavik, there was little opposition to the introduction of equal marriage when in 2010, the parliament unanimously passed legislation to change the law. It is the only country in the world to have introduced equal marriage legislation with no parliamentary opposition.

    In August, with just a week to go before the verdict in the Pussy Riot trial, Mr Gnarr donned a pink dress and danced to the band’s music on a float at his city’s gay pride festiv

  • AmalHanano
    The Trouble With Conspiracies

    To make my point I’d like to start with an absurd example, and then move on to lesser idiotic ones.
    Let’s say someone named AbdulRahman, (choosing my own name so as not to offend anyone else), had a phobia of people named Ahmed. AbdulRahman is “Ahmedo-phobic”. He absolutely mistrusts anyone named Ahmed, he is automatically suspicious when dealing with Ahmeds and believes them to be “bad” people. Now, AbdulRahman works in a company, and this company is looking for a new employee. AbdulRahman is part of a panel that interviews candidates for the job, one of whom is of course named Ahmed. As soon as he sees the name his guard is naturally up, and he is now looking for signs to discredit Ahmed. He will not readily admit to others that his reason for not trusting Ahmed is based purely on his name, because that’s just insane. So he looks for other reasons to back his decision not to hire Ahmed. The company doesn’t hire Ahmed in the end, because of AbdulRahman’s manipulations.
    A few months later, AbdulRahman chances on an articles that talks about an incident regarding fraud, and the fraudster mentioned in the article is that very Ahmed that wasn’t hired recently. AbdulRahman feels blessed, and more convinced about his phobia. He was right not to trust Ahmed.
    But of course, he wasn’t. Just in case you need me to make it clear, the reasoning behind not hiring Ahmed, behind not trusting Ahmed, was completely flawed. Stupid is too small a word for it.

    Moving on to the less (but still) stupid and more realistic examples. Say AbdulRahman was a racist who didn’t like black people. He rejected Ahmed because of his skin color and not because of his name, and later on felt more convinced about his racist belief when he discovered that Ahmed was indeed a thief.
    Of course, Ahmed being a thief is neither the result of his name nor his skin color. The reasoning is still erroneous, as most rational people would agree.

    What is the problem here? AbdulRahman’s racism or insane phobia is protecting him in this example from being conned. Yes, but that is merely by chance. His reasoning is completely flawed, it is not based at all on facts and logic, not based on the sayings and experiences of the person in front of him. It is based on entirely irrelevant traits.

    This also works with ideological positions, and ideological “predispositions”, as people of one ideology might be inclined not to trust people of an opposing ideology and judge based on that rather than a person’s own merits. If AbdulRahman were a socialist with a disdain for capitalists, and Ahmed wasn’t hired because of that, when Ahmed turns out to be to a thief his views on economics are irrelevant. Conservatives and liberals, Sunnis and Shiites, the examples goes on. If you come up with a conspiracy theory based on your ideology, and you construct the facts based on a view you are ideologically predisposed to see, if the conspiracy turns out by chance accurate, it doesn’t make your reasoning correct.

    If you’re judging by ideology rather than by facts and logic, you’re still like the AbdulRahman who hates all Ahmeds.

    http://absology.blogspot.fr/2012/06/trouble-
    with-conspiracies.html?spref=tw