I do not ask clients why they have come to see me. I tell them why they are seeking treatment. The level of precision of the ClinicalQ is such that, with experience, one can describe the client’s condition based exclusively on the brain wave data. Clients are usually stunned by the accuracy of the description of their condition. The therapeutic value of this method is substantial. The methods have been refined over the last 20 years to the point that clients usually do not elaborate on my description of their condition.

Imagine a client who has been to many clinicians. She has told her story many times and obviously has not had much success in getting relief from her condition; otherwise, she would not be sitting in my office. She is often angry, disillusioned, depressed, and feeling hopeless. Before she can start telling her tale of woe, I say, “Do you know what I do?” I explain that I look at how the brain is functioning. I am looking for areas of inefficiency in brain activities that are, in turn, directly related to symptoms. Once identified, I correct the brain inefficiency that in turn reduces symptom intensity. I then explain that I will be looking at a few spots on the brain. She will not feel anything; it is measurement only. After I collect the brain wave data, I will do some calculations and go over the results in detail to be sure that what the brain is telling me is consistent with her personal experience. This procedure can help to commit the client to treatment. Clients are impressed by the accuracy of the diagnostic procedures and gain optimism regarding the potential efficacy of the treatment.

Many “one-size-fits-all” practitioners, many of whom are not licensed to practice any healthcare profession, treat with relaxation-focused feedback protocols. Clients may have some benefit in the short term, in terms of feeling more relaxed, but seldom achieve relief from the causes of their difficulties. As Hammond (2006b, p. 32) has pointed out, “A ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach that is not tailored to the individual will undoubtedly pose a greater risk of either producing an adverse reaction or of simply being ineffective.” Hammond goes on to stress that anyone doing neurotherapy should be a bona fide licensed healthcare provider in the relevant jurisdiction. Hence, this book is written specifically for the licensed practitioner who wishes to add this technology to those available within her or his healthcare professional discipline.

One of my goals is to bring this effective set of therapeutic tools into the primary healthcare context so that clinicians have a broader array of options to treat many of the disorders seen on a day-to-day basis. I will describe, in precise detail, how one uses the ClinicalQ for client assessment and will show the data that validates the interpretative process. I will then proceed to describe, in detail, exactly how one does the various forms of neurotherapy to correct the conditions identified with the ClinicalQ. Neurotherapy offers the possibility to correct the problem at the source so the orientation in the treatment of some disorders like depression, for example, shifts from coping and symptom control to correcting the cause of the problem.

The term “neurotherapy” refers to a number of treatment methods that alter brain functioning. In this book we will examine many different methods for correcting brain wave anomalies. The core treatment method within this array is neurofeedback or brain wave biofeedback. All clinicians, by now, have at least a passing understanding of brain wave biofeedback. The procedure has been in use for over four decades with compelling evidence for the efficacious treatment of many disorders including epilepsy, ADHD, and depression. As we shall see, neurotherapy can be an effective alternative for the treatment of a very large array of disorders.

Neurofeedback is an operant conditioning procedure. When the brain is responding as desired, the client receives a rewarding stimulus. This can be a tone indicating positive changes in brain wave activity. The reward can also be icons moving on a computer screen so that an ADHD child, for example, is playing a video-like game with his brain. We can also create treatment preparations in which the child can keep an electric train moving with her brain. The “reward” in other words is a stimulus indicating success.

More aggressive treatment protocols include “braindriving” which is a treatment incorporating the classical conditioning processes. The classical conditioning of brain wave amplitude was demonstrated in the 1940s at McGill University in Canada by Herbert Jasper and Charles Shagass (1941). The basic preparation is to present an unconditioned stimulus contingent on brain wave activity such as amplitude. Thus, for example, when Alpha amplitude exceeds a training threshold, a flashing light is presented to the client’s eyes that ceases as soon as the Alpha amplitude drops below the training threshold. Flashing light is an unconditioned stimulus for Alpha amplitude suppression. Flash a light in someone’s eyes and Alpha amplitude drops. By making this process contingent on the Alpha EEG amplitude, lower amplitude can be conditioned. Much of this book will be focused on identifying the classical conditioning paradigm and the unconditioned stimuli that can be used for different brain waves at various locations.