Found this- Scientists make ADD breakthrough

I dont have it but i found this and i thought maybe you guys might like to know about it....

Study May Help Develop ADD Treatments
By LAURAN NEERGAARD, AP Medical Writer
Thu Mar 29, 5:09 PM

WASHINGTON - Spot a bear in the woods, and a different part of your brain will yell "pay attention" than if you were studying bears at the zoo. New research shows it takes one part of the brain to start concentrating and another to be distracted. This discovery could help scientists develop better treatments for attention deficit disorder.

"This ability to willfully focus your attention is physically separate in the brain from distracting things grabbing your attention," said Earl Miller, a neuroscientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He led the study, published in Friday's edition of the journal Science.

"Now we know these two things are separate, it raises the possibility that we can fix them independently," Miller said.

There are two main ways the brain pays attention: "top down" or willful, goal-oriented attention, such as when you focus to read, and "bottom-up" or reflexive attention to sensory information _ loud noises or bright colors or threatening animals.

Likewise, there are different degrees of attention disorders. Some people have a harder time focusing, while others have a harder time filtering out distractions.

Scientists knew that paying attention involved multiple brain regions but they did not know how, because studies until now have examined one region at a time.

Miller hooked painless electrodes onto monkeys to track how two key areas react together when the brain jumps to attention.

The monkeys were trained to take attention tests on a video screen in return for a treat of apple juice. Sometimes they had to concentrate, picking out, say, only the left-leaning red rectangle from a field of red rectangles; in the same way, the human brain picks a friend's face out of a crowd. Other times bright rectangles _ the attention-grabbers _ flashed off the screen at the monkeys.

When the monkeys voluntarily concentrated, the so-called executive center in the front of the brain _ the prefrontal cortex _ was in charge. But when something distracting grabbed the monkeys' attention, that signal originated in the parietal cortex, toward the back of the brain.

The electrical activity in these two areas began vibrating in synchrony as they signaled each other. But it was at different frequencies, almost like being at different spots on the radio dial.

Sustaining concentration involved lower-frequency neuron activity. Distraction occurred at higher frequencies. So, Miller concluded, scientists one day might find a treatment that essentially turns up or down the volume to boost attention.

The study provides the first good look at how these physically distinct brain regions interact to govern at least part of attention, said Dr. Debra Babcock, a neurologist at the National Institutes of Health.

"Once we understand how attention works, we'll understand how better to treat disorders of attention, and lord knows there are plenty of those," Babcock said. "This could, in the long term, help us devise therapies."

It makes evolutionary sense that these two types of attention would originate in different areas. Reflexive attention is a more primitive survival tool, while concentration is more advanced.

"If something leaps out of the bush at me, that's going to be really important and I have to react to it right away. Your brain is equipped to notice things salient in the environment," Miller said. "It takes a truly intelligent creature to know what's important and focus."

The government-funded work raises some logical next questions. For example, once the parietal lobe recognizes an attention-grabber, how does it evaluate what's important enough to focus on _ and thus signal other brain regions to join in _ and what was just a distraction that can be ignored?

It is the snap judgment that determines if a loud beeping is a fire alarm you should heed or just another car alarm down the street _ or if that bear down the trail is going to be a threat or is already ambling away.

"It's how your brain decides when it can just do a quick ... analysis and decides when it really needs to focus down," Babcock said. "We have a lot more to learn."

Huh? Too many big words!

I dont get it

I read it, but I had to keep re-reading certain lines so many times ... I just couldn't REALLY grasp the importance of it although I know it's in there somewhere. I just can't keep my focus on it.



no suprise for me tho...

I'm surprised that they are considering it a 'breakthrough'... I thought they knew that already.

But I guess they got a big govt. grant ;-)

People talk about top-down and bottom-up processing...

Top-down processing is processing that is driven from your brain. So... Imagining a snake is a top-down process (imagining is a top-down process). It can take a great deal of EFFORT to control your top-down processes such that you are thinking coherant lines of thought.

Bottom-up processing is processing that is driven from the environment. So... Seeing a snake out of the corner of your eye can result in your attention being drawn to it (your head turning so the stimulus is in clear view). Having your attention captured like that is an AUTOMATIC process that distracts you from the above activity.

So...

If the problem with ADD was that one is trying to think coherant lines of thought (solving a math problem or imagining something complex, for example) but ones attention is continually captured by other things in the environment (potential snakes and the like) then...

The study would be fairly interesting. It might be that you can 'mute' the environmental stimuli so they have less power to capture the attention. (This could help with specific phobias too perhaps).

But if the problem with ADD was that one can't think coherant lines of thought in virtue of being distracted by other thoughts (or other top-down processes) then the study would be a lot less relevant.

Claiming 'potential benefits to sufferers' is a great way to get funding for a grant on attention / consciousness :-)

lol i thought so too...but then again...i thought since i dont have ADD i would be at a disadvantage of knowing what they were saying!!! My bad...

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
InACorner said:
lol i thought so too...but then again...i thought since i dont have ADD i would be at a disadvantage of knowing what they were saying!!! My bad...

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Bwahahahahaha!!! Coffee spew!

im sorry
i was just trying to help

I know a few graduate students who have ADD. Having ADD doesn't preclude one from understanding scientific america style articles I can assure you of that ;-)

Though of course if you think it does then you are likely to not expend the effort to try and understand them and thereby... Not understand.

Oh, I just thought your reply was awesome, that's all ! I was getting ready to drink some coffee when I read it. It was a "bwahahahaha" at my expense .

Sign me,
Abuser of the Smilies!