Following are examples of research projects we want to initiate. We are currently actively seeking funding. Donations are welcome. Please let us know if you may be able to help us move one of these projects forward.

Research Project 1: The Patient Perspective

Why?

To get on top of confusion between scientific positions on the one hand and information available through the media, Internet and "word of mouth" on the other hand.

How?

A survey: What do patients who went through a treatment with strong indicators for good to breakthrough results have to say? What do their parents have to say? - Example questions:

• How do they rate the results (1 - no improvement; 10 - complete breakthrough)?
• What was the medication before and after treatment?

Research Project 2: Assessment Centers

Why?

There are too many indicators for good to breakthrough treatments being available today.

Current research models appear to be too limited. Too many years go by with too little progress.

The "explosion" in mendel disorders demands fresh approaches.

How?

With complex systems, nature uses self-organization. The brain is a complex system as well.

Many things around us are based on self-organization: the monetary system, competition between companies, etc. – There are some rules behind them.

Let's design a self-organizing approach (or an "open research model") that makes the better treatments roll out of the system automatically.

Part 1: Create a few pilot assessment centers.

• Those offering accepted or alternative treatment are welcome. For alternative treatment, indicators for good treatment results are needed, and risks need to be equal to or lower than those for accepted treatment.
• Anybody within a "condition spectrum" for a mental condition is welcome. A strong suspicion is sufficient. A diagnose is not necessary. One spectrum could be learning difficulties and behavioral problems such as dyslexia, ADHD, ODD, autism and PDD-NOS.
  
• The clients are tested for applicability for the offered treatments. This is preferably done by those offering the treatment. Observe: the assessment centers do not make diagnoses. 
  
• All participants are treated with respect and objectivity.
• There are no marketing or sales activities within the assessment centers.

Part 2: Measuring the results

• From the parent/patient perspective: The short-term research project (project 1) is done prior to the start of work at the centres and then every six months.
• From the perspective of the assessment centres: Collect the simplest possible data with the highest explanatory value (for example, standard one-minute reading tests in the case of dyslexia).

Part 3: The treatment decision

• Clients are mentored by an independent advisor.
• The advisor presents the data from Part 2 and the Part 1 test results to the client in an understandable way, including whether a treatment is scientifically accepted or alternative.
• Advantages, disadvantages (such as losing a gift or a gift that may not develop) and risks of each treatment option are provided.
• The client selects the treatment based on the information provided.
• If the treatment doesn't deliver adequate results, the client can choose another treatment. Note: In complex dynamic systems, what may work well in a number of cases may not deliver results in another case.

Part 4: Fairness enablement

• A "watchdog" board is created from the different interest groups. Those who have experienced breakthrough treatment results as patient/parent are overly represented.
• The board ensures conflicts of interest are taken out of the assessment center as much as possible.
• It ensures every participant demonstrates respect and objectivity for other views and other treatments.
• It ensures every professional participant is treated fairly.
• It ensures the clients get the optimum information for their treatment decision.

Part 5: Cost

To determine, based on results, which treatment is most effective and, therefore, have the best treatment roll out of the system automatically, it is critical that there is no cost to the client. This includes the chosen treatment for the length of the treatment. (The actual treatment may take place outside the assessment center.)

Research Project 3: Switching Dominance

Why?

An important research gap: Can capacity management techniques be explored for the development of new treatments and the assessement of existing treatements?

How?

Switch a dominant eye, ear or another sense. Establish whether some activity has moved to the other hemisphere. Establish whether different long-distance connectivity is used. Observe: at least one of the therapies listed at On Mental health involves such a switch.

Important note:

With certain criteria, a switch can have serious risks; expert supervision is required.

Research Project 4: Neural Growth

Why?

An important research gap: Can neural growth create needed capacity?

How?

Establish whether extensive training, stimulating left and right-handedness, creates more long-distance connectivity and greater capacity between the two hemispheres and other parts of the brain.

Observe

• Stimulating neural growth appears possible with certain musical instruments - see "Music Builds Bridges in the Brain," ScienceNOW Daily News, April 16, 2008
• Unconventional treatments applying such training: Dore, INPP
• Other activities where this is trained: martial arts, dice stacking, skateboarding, etc.