Neurofeedback and autism

Just wondered why the NHS is advising against Neurofeedback when there are research articles saying it is very beneficial to autistic people?

http://publications.nice.org.uk/autism-cg170?utm_source=Linx+295+-+12+September&utm_campaign=linx295&utm_medium=email

http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/29/72/94/PDF/Kouijzer_et_al_2008_Auth.pdf (for instance).

I would have thought if it was a question of cost it wouldn't mention it at all as not many people have heard of neurofeedback and to my knowledge it's not even available on the NHS.  It appears to be listed along with potentially harmful therapies such as chelation.  Just wondered why.

Parents
  • You are missing the entire point of what I said.

    This thread is specifically about neurofeedback, not vaccines.  Evidence/information is relevant to people it's not about what's included or not in vaccines in any one country (and thimerosal is not the only additive people need to be wary of).  The information was not inaccurate.  It was given so that people learn to gain an open-mind and not automatically believe everything the authorities tell them.  However, this is totally irrelevant in this particular thread.  You clearly have an axe to grind - and you're not grinding it on me.

    I haven't asked why the NHS are not funding it, again you have misunderstood.  I have asked why they specifically advise against it when there is no proof it doesn't work (or is harmful) any more than there is proof that it does.

    I have not advocated anyone pay for anything.  I have merely asked a question.  Which you are clearly not qualified to answer and digress from.

    When you have found and read all the research, then you can come back and pick holes in it as to whether it is self-funded, peer reviewed or whatever - instead of merely speculating and offering supposition in argument.

Reply
  • You are missing the entire point of what I said.

    This thread is specifically about neurofeedback, not vaccines.  Evidence/information is relevant to people it's not about what's included or not in vaccines in any one country (and thimerosal is not the only additive people need to be wary of).  The information was not inaccurate.  It was given so that people learn to gain an open-mind and not automatically believe everything the authorities tell them.  However, this is totally irrelevant in this particular thread.  You clearly have an axe to grind - and you're not grinding it on me.

    I haven't asked why the NHS are not funding it, again you have misunderstood.  I have asked why they specifically advise against it when there is no proof it doesn't work (or is harmful) any more than there is proof that it does.

    I have not advocated anyone pay for anything.  I have merely asked a question.  Which you are clearly not qualified to answer and digress from.

    When you have found and read all the research, then you can come back and pick holes in it as to whether it is self-funded, peer reviewed or whatever - instead of merely speculating and offering supposition in argument.

Children
No Data