Why Become a NeurOptimal® Neurofeedback Trainer?

When you purchase and receive your NeurOptimal® Neurofeedback System, you can begin helping people the next day.  With most of the traditional neurofeedback systems today, they are modeled on the “reward and inhibit” or entrain and migrate (push and pull) approach, there is a lot of training and certification that have to be accomplished before you can even begin to work with clients.  I was recently told that it can take 6 months to receive a Biofeedback Certification International Alliance (BCIA) certification.

One has to learn many protocols in order to be able to know how to manipulate a  person’s brain to change in positive ways and it takes years of training and experience to  be able to help in a meaningful way based on what  honest practitioners tell me.  This can include side effects that the client will experience and sometimes these experiences are not so pleasant.  I know because I have had calls from practitioners of various other neurofeedback approaches (EEGer, Brain Paint) who realized that they were making the clients situation worse rather then helping.  They had heard the NeurOptimal did not cause side effects and were inquiring about possibly purchasing a NeurOptimal System through our NeurOptimal® Representative division at Boulder Neurofeedback.

Drs. Val and Sue Brown developed NeurOptimal on the shoulders of the traditional neurofeedback approaches based on advanced physics and advance digital signal processing  used for Doppler Weather and military ballistic’s guidance systems. Val virtually owned, operated, was certified and taught most of the major neurofeedback systems that are used in the field today. He is one of the most technically and math driven experts in this field.  But he insisted in his presentations at the neurofeedback and biofeedback conferences that the field was using an obsolete, linear physics and math orientation, also called reductionist science and math. He proved that the underlying principles did not match what current non-linear physics and math understands about how the human brain functions, though very few understood or got what her was pointing to.

This is how NeurOptimal was born. The Brown’s saw that rather than using a snapshot (QEEG, or so called ‘brain map’) of the brain’s function at some point in the past, to determine how to get  it to change, why not mirror back to the brain complete information about it’s perturbation activity and through the Orienting Response, allow the brain to advance its own agenda! We know it is completely capable of doing this through the science of Neuroplasticity and the work of Dr. Karl Pribram, among others.  Val Brown also saw that the traditional field’s use of Shannon mathematics was not as sophisticated as using Fourier Transforms and Gabor processing which NeurOptimal utilizes. Shannon math throughs out 96% of the signal: NeurOptimal capture and utilizes 96% of the electrical signal, not to mention NeurOptimal’s use of in-line de-noising which no other system has.  We do not have to be concerned about environmental noise affecting the training outcome for the client.

This statement below is by Dr. Alan Bachers, who has used most of the neurofeedback approaches in the field today, runs a Neurofeedback Foundation, teaches most of the Zengar Institute certification courses, and was an original member of the Cleveland Clinic where neurofeedback got its beginnings.  He was on the original item writing committee for BCIA certification curriculum.

“Val Brown (Ph.D.), who gave quite a few of the early courses for AAPB (Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback) and ISNR (International Society for Neurofeedback and Research) and, I (Alan Bachers,Ph.D.) who was on the original item writing committee for BCIA (Biofeedback Certification International Alliance) and gave a number of the early national exams, have elsewhere attested  to the nearly complete irrelevance to what we do in NeurOptimal® of the expensive BCIA curriculum and onerous supervision requirements that lead to the now several BCIA certifications.

In all my years I have never seen that BCIA certification led to insurance reimbursement or not having it led to denial of reimbursement. The curriculum is really a Tower of Babel of material those currently at the top of the organizations force applicants to learn, believing that their approach is the most important to learn. This results in a hodgepodge of divergent, often conflicting material dealt by often contentious leaders. Those conflicts, as Val noted above, run deep and long within the organizations and change with leadership – really ownership of the franchise. (We’ll be seeing just this in the states as convulsions of change permeate our lives in the U.S. with new “leaders.”)

However, if one is doing work that requires me to make decisions about how to push a brain around (reward or inhibit they say) various frequency ranges, at various scalp sites based on snapshots of instants of brain activity acquired in a QEEG from months ago, SOME rationale needs to be present. Hence all the courses. Fortunately the CNS is robust enough to be able to take the various “hints” of protocols to make adjustments that “work” for it – eventually – after tapping here or over there in many sessions. That’s why I say that (usually) ANY neurofeedback is better than no neurofeedback (especially in highly experienced hands) but that I find NO to be much easier to administer, faster in attaining results that last longer and continue build on each other long after sessions are concluded, have fewer side or unintended effects, and is generally enjoyable for both the trainer and trainee. NeurOptimal assumes that given ongoing information about what it has just done from 0.001 to (soon) 64 Hz, an individual central nervous system will far more efficaciously make its own optimizations across the entire range of human experience as the non-linear dynamical system of systems that it is, than anything we might cobble together to try to push or pull it over here in a scientifically specious linear model that all but ignores what the rest of the brain is doing beyond the site and narrow frequency ranges being implemented.”

Dr. Alan Bachers, Certified Master NeurOptimal® Trainer

Let us know if we can answer any questions for you. That is what we are her for.