>> On Tue, 06 Apr 1999 13:49:40 -0400, Michael Edelman <mje at mich.com>
> >> Volume 11 : Number 4 : Article 1
> >> (Journal of Scientific Exploration)
>> Sheesh, this journal titles takes the cake.
>> >> .... Analysis of their EEGs revealed
> >> that all subjects entered voluntarily into an hyperaroused trance. In
> >> this state, they maintained a condition of muscular relaxation and
> >> immobility while their EEGs exhibited high frequency (beta) activity
> >> at all 19 electrode sites, but with maximum activity at the prefrontal
> >> and adjacent loci.
> >Translation: They were awake.
>> Huh? I don't get. Didn't the abstract say they had Beta wave activity?
> Doesn't that indicate a trance which mimics a sleep state? What does
> what you say have anything to do with it?
>> >> Inspection of the EEGs from the
> >> prefrontal/frontal sites revealed intermittent trains of rhythmic,
> >> approximately 40 Hz activity, attaining very high amplitudes, at
> >> times exceeding 40 microvolts. This activity was distinct in
> >> morphology and frequency from faster, usually concurrent activity,
> >> probably attributable to scalp muscle discharge (EMG). Analysis of
> >> 40 Hz, midline scalp activity, statistically controlling for the effects
> >> of EMG, revealed significantly more 40 Hz activity in trance than in
> >> baseline (p < .006). Also, the dominant alpha frequency increased
> >> during trance (p < .01). Both EEG findings suggest the occurrence
> >> of a state of hyperarousal. There was no evidence of epileptiform
> >> discharges in our data or clinical indications of possible epilepsy.
> >> Also, there was no brain activity suggestive of psychopathology,
> >> particularly schizophrenia, nor were there clinical indications of
> >> psychopathology.
> >What does that all say? Nothing. There is absolutely nothing unusual or
> >pathalogical in these findings...except for the lies. The "subjects" are
> >compared to "baseline"- but there's no baseline data. They're comparing the
> >subjects to population averages, which is meaningless.
>> I do not understand what you mean here. I don't think baseline meant
> 'control' (and even if it did, there are such things as controls of
> normal subjects you know). Although this is not clarified in the
> abstract, I think baseline here meant when compared to the EEG
> recordings when not in trance.
>> >In other words, this is all nonsense couched in terminology to impress the
>> Probably, but your criticisms aren't sound either.
Indeed! I suggest getting the whole article and checking it out. They
used some bonafide instrumentation, in this test,
/ \ .-. .-. / \
/ \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \
-/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\--
RoshiCorp at ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ /
\ / `-' `-' \ /