The BSA site http://www.stammering.org/pagoclone.html
tells us, ‘Indevus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. announced results from a phase II trial of pagoclone in 132 adults with persistent developmental stuttering, with 44 receiving the active compound at low doses, 44 at high doses, and 44 receiving a placebo. Objective fluency improved (videotaped and scored by independent raters blinded) and so did subjective assessment scores (made by the participants in the trial). They were measured twice before the start of the trial, after 4 weeks and again after 8 weeks of treatment. 55% of the pagoclone treated patients had improved at week 8 compared to 36% of placebo treated patients’.
Now, if this is accurate: of 100 PWS who take pagoclone 55 will improve overall but 36 would have improved anyway ( placebo response ) leaving 19 who will benefit from pagoclone. This means that it is half as good as a placebo 19/36.
Bear in mind the placebo doesn’t have side effects.
Am I missing something? Or how do people get lauded for bad science, never mind arithmetic?
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Monday, July 30, 2007
Old Joke
The last post was obviously a poor retelling of an old joke.
But as with many jokes it harbours an uncomfortable truth: how we set ourselves up determines to a large extent how we interpret what happens to us and how we behave in those states of affairs we meet continually each day.
The meaning and significance we give to events makes a difference and the fact that we give them their meaning means we can reinterpret events - not change how we remember what happened but re-evaluate, not through rose-tinted spectacles.
Bad things and bad people are just that: what matters is that their influence on us is appropriate to a particular time in our life and doesn't continue to dominate our thinking.
How did we learn to keep away from open flames when we were young and how do we think about fire now?
But as with many jokes it harbours an uncomfortable truth: how we set ourselves up determines to a large extent how we interpret what happens to us and how we behave in those states of affairs we meet continually each day.
The meaning and significance we give to events makes a difference and the fact that we give them their meaning means we can reinterpret events - not change how we remember what happened but re-evaluate, not through rose-tinted spectacles.
Bad things and bad people are just that: what matters is that their influence on us is appropriate to a particular time in our life and doesn't continue to dominate our thinking.
How did we learn to keep away from open flames when we were young and how do we think about fire now?
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Hammer
The other night I had a particular job to do in the house which needed a hammer. I thought of my neighbour, whom I get on well with: I know he has a hammer of just the right size. But I put off going round as I don’t really like borrowing things. Time moved on and eventually came to the point when I just couldn’t put it off any longer.
As I walked around to his door I thought:
I’m sure he will let me have the hammer after all I loaned him things before.
But he didn’t get round to giving me back the spanner I loaned him and he might feel bad about that now.
But I only want the hammer for a short time.
But he might think I won’t bring the hammer back just after I’ve finished with it.
But it is a new hammer and he might not have used it himself yet.
But he might want to use the hammer and I will feel stupid if he says ‘No’.
He will feel embarrassed if he has to say ‘No’
But I will have made him embarrassed and he will resent me for it.
We have been good neighbours but this might end it
And so on……………………
As you can imagine I was becoming more and more emotional, embarrassed, anxious and ashamed that I had to ask to borrow something and didn't have it myself. Self righteousness came into it too.
So, when I got to his house he opened the door and said a smiling ‘Hi!’
I told him he could keep his damned hammer and where to put it.
As I walked around to his door I thought:
I’m sure he will let me have the hammer after all I loaned him things before.
But he didn’t get round to giving me back the spanner I loaned him and he might feel bad about that now.
But I only want the hammer for a short time.
But he might think I won’t bring the hammer back just after I’ve finished with it.
But it is a new hammer and he might not have used it himself yet.
But he might want to use the hammer and I will feel stupid if he says ‘No’.
He will feel embarrassed if he has to say ‘No’
But I will have made him embarrassed and he will resent me for it.
We have been good neighbours but this might end it
And so on……………………
As you can imagine I was becoming more and more emotional, embarrassed, anxious and ashamed that I had to ask to borrow something and didn't have it myself. Self righteousness came into it too.
So, when I got to his house he opened the door and said a smiling ‘Hi!’
I told him he could keep his damned hammer and where to put it.
Monday, July 23, 2007
Speech Devices
What do these things do? Well it seems they delay us hearing the sound of our voices and so interrupt the feedback we normally expect. This upsets the applecart and we speak differently. I say we speak differently because although they disrupt the PWS and so make it harder to keep up the self monitoring that goes with stammering, DAF machines also lead those who don’t stammer to speak stammeringly.
I know someone who took part in an undergraduate experiment with a DAF machine. He saw how others stammered and decided to ignore the feedback and keep talking. He didn’t stammer. The lecturer was upset.
We attend to novelty because the world becomes more interesting or less safe.
By attending to something other than what we normally attend to we behave differently.
If we don't want what we have always got then we have to behave differently.
I know someone who took part in an undergraduate experiment with a DAF machine. He saw how others stammered and decided to ignore the feedback and keep talking. He didn’t stammer. The lecturer was upset.
We attend to novelty because the world becomes more interesting or less safe.
By attending to something other than what we normally attend to we behave differently.
If we don't want what we have always got then we have to behave differently.
Saturday, July 7, 2007
Feelings
We use our feelings to monitor how we are in the world.
Usually uncomfortable feelings are the ones we attend to and think about more. Because we associate discomfort with being unsafe the feeling remains until it is replaced by a sense of safety. And feelings arise instantly.
We use our feelings to supervise what and how we are doing and we pay attention to them rather than ask, ‘Ah, what is that feeling about?’ and then respond in the world to that state of affairs.
If we think of our feelings as feedback then we can use them to explore our thinking on what is going on for us more objectively. But if we get lost in the intensity of our feelings then they become overwhelming and the world becomes unsafe, we get to the flight, fright or freeze reaction. The feeling becomes the issue not the state of affairs and distracts us from the world as it is and puts our focus on ourselves.
We cannot trust our feelings. If you think you can: then remember the people you met that you liked and later came to know better and disliked. Did you trust your feelings, or intuitions at the time? Were they trustworthy. What about the opposite scenario?
Using a journal to explore our feelings is good because it objectifies the issues.
Usually uncomfortable feelings are the ones we attend to and think about more. Because we associate discomfort with being unsafe the feeling remains until it is replaced by a sense of safety. And feelings arise instantly.
We use our feelings to supervise what and how we are doing and we pay attention to them rather than ask, ‘Ah, what is that feeling about?’ and then respond in the world to that state of affairs.
If we think of our feelings as feedback then we can use them to explore our thinking on what is going on for us more objectively. But if we get lost in the intensity of our feelings then they become overwhelming and the world becomes unsafe, we get to the flight, fright or freeze reaction. The feeling becomes the issue not the state of affairs and distracts us from the world as it is and puts our focus on ourselves.
We cannot trust our feelings. If you think you can: then remember the people you met that you liked and later came to know better and disliked. Did you trust your feelings, or intuitions at the time? Were they trustworthy. What about the opposite scenario?
Using a journal to explore our feelings is good because it objectifies the issues.
Sunday, July 1, 2007
The Listener
Folk who speak stammeringly also listen and as listeners we need some attention too.
When someone is speaking to me:
I need him to speak in short simple sentences that I can relate to easily. Out with longwinded complicated sentences with lots of subclauses. It is hard enough in print but very difficult to keep up with in speech. Simple past present and future tenses will do nicely.
I need him to speak at a rate that allows me to put my thoughts about what he is saying in some sort of context. When people are nervous they often speak too fast.
I need a little thinking time between sentences.
I need to hear clearly what the person is saying and for him not to mumble. Most people mumble when they are not sure of themselves.
I need to see the speaker’s mouth moving. We lip read more than we think. I also need him to keep his hands, cup or drinking glass away from his mouth. We tend to cover our mouths when we are nervous.
I need him to face me, otherwise I can’t hear him and may be unaware that he is speaking to me.
I need him to articulate as clearly as they can manage so that I can distinguish words and sentences.
Now, I know that someone stammering might be doing all of the above and, if that is so, I will be able to make out what he is saying. I won’t have to feel I need to ask for a repeat: ‘Sorry. I didn’t catch that?’
Don’t take my word for it. Ask yourself what you need as a listener. Use the news or interviews to investigate what you need: not what they are giving you – not the content but the delivery. Good newsreaders will be trained to think in terms of the audience’s needs and to find ways to meet them.
When I am trying to listen to what someone is saying and he mumbles, the first thing I think is that I have missed something. I want to hear him and I can’t. I am confused: and being confused feels very uncomfortable.
Deep or quiet voices can be particularly difficult for me to make out.
Now, I know that real people, rather than actors, don’t choose to stammer but we are all listeners and although PWS will know the difficulties of speaking, as listeners they can appreciate the hearer’s needs too.
When someone is speaking to me:
I need him to speak in short simple sentences that I can relate to easily. Out with longwinded complicated sentences with lots of subclauses. It is hard enough in print but very difficult to keep up with in speech. Simple past present and future tenses will do nicely.
I need him to speak at a rate that allows me to put my thoughts about what he is saying in some sort of context. When people are nervous they often speak too fast.
I need a little thinking time between sentences.
I need to hear clearly what the person is saying and for him not to mumble. Most people mumble when they are not sure of themselves.
I need to see the speaker’s mouth moving. We lip read more than we think. I also need him to keep his hands, cup or drinking glass away from his mouth. We tend to cover our mouths when we are nervous.
I need him to face me, otherwise I can’t hear him and may be unaware that he is speaking to me.
I need him to articulate as clearly as they can manage so that I can distinguish words and sentences.
Now, I know that someone stammering might be doing all of the above and, if that is so, I will be able to make out what he is saying. I won’t have to feel I need to ask for a repeat: ‘Sorry. I didn’t catch that?’
Don’t take my word for it. Ask yourself what you need as a listener. Use the news or interviews to investigate what you need: not what they are giving you – not the content but the delivery. Good newsreaders will be trained to think in terms of the audience’s needs and to find ways to meet them.
When I am trying to listen to what someone is saying and he mumbles, the first thing I think is that I have missed something. I want to hear him and I can’t. I am confused: and being confused feels very uncomfortable.
Deep or quiet voices can be particularly difficult for me to make out.
Now, I know that real people, rather than actors, don’t choose to stammer but we are all listeners and although PWS will know the difficulties of speaking, as listeners they can appreciate the hearer’s needs too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)