[ Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
From: Cristóbal
Date: 10 Oct 2009
Time: 05:41:10 -0500
Remote Name: 80.58.205.44
My dear friend, you say: "I do not understand what you mean by treatments as a whole are ineffective", if you can read this: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/salud/servicios/contenidos/aetsa/pdf/Executive%20SummaryTartamudez_def.pdf This is the abstract of a magnific work, whis is this -in spanish-: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/salud/servicios/contenidos/aetsa/pdf/Tartamudez_def2.pdf You write: "it does increase fluency". I am not sure that therapy "really" increase fluency, because there is a very important effect, which explains why the patient improves his health (in this case: fluency). I am talking about placebo effect, whenever you can read this: Meaning, Medicine And The 'placebo Effect' Daniel E. Moerman Cambridge University Press - 2002 So, I conclude that stuttering technniques are not effective at all. All the other indirect changes that you mean, can be reached in self-help groups, as for example, "structuring of the environment". You say: "There are theories of etiology which say that genetics are a key component of the onset of stuttering". What do you mean with this? What are we going to do with the genetics of a stutterer? Be careful, my friend, The prusian surgeon named Dieffenbach (1851) thought that stutterer´s problem was the tongue, so he cut part of it and some of them died, and of course, he didn´t cure any stutterer. Read: http://www.mnsu.edu/comdis/kuster/history/bgoldberg.html And if the key is in genetics, what are they going to do with our genetics? Destroy them? Destroy our genetics?. Science has made many mistakes, as for example, lobotomy: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/articles/moniz/index.html For example, electrosocks for homosexuals...: http://santitafarella.wordpress.com/2008/08/15/would-james-dobson-approve-electroshock-therapy-for-homosexuals/ And so on. Be careful with genetics. If we have an increased level of dopamine, what do you do with that? Can you change it? how? If you change that, does stuttering disappear? I don´t think it disappears, because there are many causes of stuttering, and they interact chaotically. Not linear. And the chaotic functions are hardly predective. The chaotic model is the best -and of course, very pesimistic- model, because it shows the imposibility of modifying the causes. Whenever you have time, read about this model: http://tap.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/7/3/373 http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/199305/chaos-comes-psychology You write: "I am just wondering if you could please discuss how you would completely demedicalize stuttering which the current research that is going on today". Well, we have many other "pathologies" which right now is trying to be demedicalized, as autism, tourette syndrom or some mental disorders: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurodiversity Other "pathologies" were demedicalized in the past, and of course, many others will be demedicalized in the future, as stuttering. When? Well, when stuttering researchers discover that the causes of stuttering are inamovibles, then they will say: what do we do with them? If we can not change their brain or neurons, do we kill them or do we accept them? They will have to accept us, and them, stuttering will be tranfluency. They will say: We were wrong: stuttering is not a mental disorder, is a human expression of diversity because they have another constitution of the brain, their brain work in a different way (neurodiversity). Thanks for your interest. Cris