----- Original Message ----- From: Tim Shearon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Bill/Hank/et al <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 1999 1:54 PM Subject: Re: Research explains lithium's dual anti-manic- anti-depressive effect > Ron- > In the interest of "good scientific practice" Interesting term: "Good" - positive group opinion of the value of something. "Scientific" - a way of knowing. "Practice" - usual and normal. A normal way of knowing the group opinion. > how about an occasional bit > of info critical of the position (simply martialing evidence will allow any > of us to overwhelm any student with any position. . . ). Ok, how about this. I am currently having difficulty understanding oral pain in burning mouth syndrome (BMS). Pain in Correlational Opponent Processing is viewed as discrepant signals on multiple channels. Therefore, oral pain should in principle be understandable with a Correlational Opponent Processing approach. http://www.the-scientist.library.upenn.edu/yr1999/feb/let2_990215.html The "good scientific practice" views this BMS phenomenon which normally occurs in postmenopausal women who have bizarre psychological problems. This approach has not been useful to the victims of what I view as an interesting neurological processing error. There is no visible pathology and the pain can be very intense. The pain of being told that you are psychological sick does not relieve the problem. Linda Bartoshuk reports that "these patients are virtually all supertasters with damage to the chorda tympani nerve. In the lab we have shown that anesthesia of the chorda tympani causes increases in perceived burn of capsaicin on the contralateral tongue." Bartoshuk suggest that taste normally inhibits oral pain and when taste is damaged it leads to an intensification of oral pain and pain phantoms. The contralateral report reminds me of an opponent process but I have not been able to grasp the logic to my satisfaction. Taste is a global processing system with information coming in from both sides of the tongue and being integrated into a single collective evaluation. If half of the signal is blocked sugar, sour, and bitter will double in reported strength according to Bartoshuk. Salt, however, will be reported as being one half as strong. All are understandable from a Correlational Opponent Processing approach. The question then is why would changes in hormonal level, damage to the chorda tympani nerve, and a person being a supertaster vector them toward oral pain. In Correlational Opponent Processing all system are weighted into a collective memory acting as a filter to future experiences. The slight change in processing caused by hormones and damage to the chorda tympani nerve are discrepant source of information relative to the weighted past, but is this sufficient to generate intense pain? Mild pain maybe, but not intense pain in my opinion. ((related topic view at your own risk: pain picture at http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/~peprbv/pain.html )) Bartoshuk (1994) reported that miracle berries would cause acids to taste both sweet and sour. Kalat reported mixing miracle berries juice with acids and drinking them until he and a friend had burned their mouths. The miraculin molecule has no taste. Logic says that this experience can not exist. Because of this, I can not help wondering if habutuation of the supertasters to 6-n-propylthiouracil would reduce their pain. > Surely you aren't > just trying to sell us on a position without thinking critically about it > :) Without disagreement we have dogma. Without selling we have no products. The market place determines what ideas people will or will not buy. Wrong ideas or fads sell very well in a bored market of ideas. Correlational Opponent Processing is boring if you understand some fundamentals: What goes up must come down. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. It is in the world of illusions that Correlational Opponent Processing gets the customer's attention, because the same explaination seems to apply on multiple sensory systems. (Forgive me if that seemed more abrupt than is civil. I just spent 2 hrs > grading / commenting on research proposals for honors projects and reading > groups and the common thread running through all of them was the lack of > contradictory analysis or response to critical input/analysis. Interesting. When I lecture my students get frustrated with me because I usually will not give a definite answer to any question. I use "the data suggest", or "this may be true" alot in my explorations of various topics. >Maybe I'm > the one being to sensitive in my comment to Ron but if I'm going to offer > this info to students I cannot do so with out presenting them some > contradictory analysis.) Actually, Tom, thank you for motiving me to respond. Ron Blue > Tim S. > > > >More support for Correlational Opponent Processing? > > > > http://www.news.wisc.edu/wire/i071598/lithium.html > > > _______________________________________________________ > Timothy O. Shearon, PhD > Albertson College of Idaho > Department of Psychology > 2112 Cleveland Blvd > Caldwell, Idaho > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 208-459-5840 > > >
