Friday, October 15, 2010

What is your opinion of the Dynamic Neural Retraining Program?

What is your opinion of the Dynamic Neural Retraining Program?

  What is your opinion of the Dynamic Neural Retraining Program?
A:  From an integrated medicine standpoint, the Dynamic Neural Retraining Program (DNR) may be useful for some people with MCS as a complement to the work of Pall, Ziem, Miller, Bell, and others.  However, we must keep in mind that the DNR is only a partial explanation of MCS and is based primarily on anecdotal evidence. 


The DNR program only addresses some of the brain specific symptoms of MCS while completely ignoring many of the documented effects of chemical exosure. There is a large body of research on the biochemical injuries and abnormalities in MCS that the DNR program does not address.  Take, for example, acetyl cholinesterase inhibition that results from pesticide exposure, reduced perfusion that results from perfume exposure, impaired function of the cytochrome P450 liver phase 1 and 2 detoxification pathways, suppression of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis, increase of mast cells, nutritional deficiencies which account for symptoms, and porphyrin enzyme abnormalities.  None of these pieces of MCS is addressed by the DNR program.

For quite some time, Annie Hopper, the developer of the DNR, claimed DNR was a cure for MCS without any substantiation. In my opinion, it is deceptive and unethical to label the program a cure and to instill false hope in people for a fee.  I feel extreme caution is warranted based on the historical lack of honest, well-researched, and documented claims made by Hopper.. 


This does not mean the DNR program is not helpful.  There is some merit to these kinds programs for some people.  If I were to consider DNR, I would do so as a complementary approach to other therapies and treatments which address the biochemical abnormalities.

Blog Archive