Doubt Cast On Man Found To Be Conscious After 23-Year Coma
Remember that story about the guy who was supposedly revealed to be fully conscious (but physically paralyzed) and not in a 23-year coma? There are some serious concerns about the validity of that discovery, with some calling it bogus.
The problem lies in the main tool used to sniff out the man’s supposedly active brain, a technique called facilitated communication. Facilitated communication, in which a helper assists a physically disabled but mentally capable person to type out his or her thoughts, has been widely discredited for decades, after independent tests revealed that the technique is totally unreliable and often the result, conscious or not, of the assistant typing, not the patient. Basically, assistants would often pick up a patient’s hand and jam the patient’s finger into the keyboard, which I think we can all agree is not the most reliable form of communication.
If facilitated communication is part of this, and it appears to be, then I don’t trust it,” said Arthur Caplan, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s centre for Bioethics. “I’m not saying the whole thing is a hoax, but somebody ought to be checking this in greater detail. Any time facilitated communication of any sort is involved, red flags fly.
Ultimately, there is definitely more brain activity in this particular case than was first thought; the patient, Rom Houben, is able to indicate yes and no with a slight movement of his foot. But the elaborate, heartbreaking and eloquent notes he supposedly wrote through facilitated communication could well be totally bogus. [Wired]
- Next Post: Glorious Muppets’ Bohemian Rhapsody In Full High Definition YouTube Glory »
- « Previous Post: Remainders – Stuff We Didn’t Post (and Why)
Comments (AU Comments | US Comments)
couldn’t they ask him whether he wrote the notes and have him answer yes or no via foot movement?
I think it’s pretty likely this is the idiomotor effect in action, and that the facilitator is unaware that they’re actually typing the message. (like subconsciously moving a pointer at a seance).
An easy way to test this is by scrambling the keys on the keyboard, blinding the facilitator, and then having the patient type a message.
I agree, seems to be a clear cut case of the idiomotor effect. Facilitated communication? Please! Ougi board anyone?
I doubt the facilitator would go for not being able to see the keyboard – would probably say that the ‘vibe’ she gets from him is very subtle and needs to see the keys for it to work.
Another way to do a simple, blinded test would be to ask him a question when the facilitator is out of the room, bring her back and then ask him for the answer.