Hi,
thanks for this interesting discussion. And we do agree in so many points. You still, however are only looking at the brain. What about muscle physiology and the loss of motor units and neurons?

Another question:
All I am asking for is the scientific method be applied to stroke rehabilitation
So, you want a 'one problem - one treatment' rule

Psychologists who study survival say that people who are rule followers don't do as well as those who are of independent mind and spirit.
Should they ever be able to prove a scientic, 100% guaranteed treatment which links directly to the 'damaged area', will you follow it? Or will you be unruly and annoying - as this is part of surviving? Do you believe any research is ever going to be good enough for you?


Please also look at the logistics of a study. About 10 years ago I went to the Annual Scientific Meeting of the Stroke Society of Australasia. The last topic of the day was 'Research: when is enough enough'. The two gentleman on the podium (the Director of the Society and the Head of the Cochrane Stroke group) were unable to agree on the sample size of any Stroke related trial and compared Stroke trials to heart trials. Apparently, the trial to officially accept Aspirin as prescrition medicine included 25.000 patients and was considered a not large enough study.
We know these days that after a stroke, the harder you physically work and the more often you work, the better the results are. However, the sample sizes for these trials have been fairly small. Not because that's what they wanted to do, but because of the nature of the disease. After all, in most cases, Stroke is a consequent problem on top of an already established deficit. In the past, I had a young stroke client with a CO of 11%. All those people you have to exclude from studies.

There are so many more things we could go on about now. Aren't there? This is fun.
Have to go now,
cheers,
Fyzzio