I think that questioning his motives based on the arguments put forward and equating anything not paid for and published in a high line journal as, by definition, unworthy of support are both bad mistakes. I take Dr. Hallowell’s recommendation as an act of intellectual courage. To be on the front lines and forthright enough to describe the raw results of his work on the frontier of new developments is exactly why so many people find his books and input so valuable.

The reason that many programs (like Learning Breakthrough, which I represent) have difficulty assembling the compelling types of research that many readers would obviously like to see, is that there are INCREDIBLE financial expenses and resources required to gain widely accepted scientific publication. The pioneering efforts of some promising approaches like LBP have unfortunately taken place without such support and, as with Frank Belgau, under some difficult (although committed) circumstances.

It turns out that sometimes profound benefits lie behind remarkably simple neurological barriers. Nailing down exactly why is important. It is not however an excuse for ignoring credible observations that are as of yet unexplained. Frank Belgau and Ned Hallowell may well be ahead of their time. Bright minds often are. Dr. Hallowell always points out the weaknesses and areas for study when he reviews something and, like other pioneers, is use to the arrows. Learning Breakthrough is a credible alternative offered at Hallowell Centers and MANY other therapeutic clinics around the world. There is a no nonsense practicality to the material on our web site and an unconditional 30 day return policy that one would not expect from a high pressure, prey on the “desperate” operation the likes of which was intimated about LBP in the argument above.

We look forward to being able to share results of independent, objective research when it is developed and will continue to demonstrate cost effective value for our clients until that time.

Thank you.

I write as someone who personally benefited from both of your books on ADHD, came to fist learn of this program through your website, and as someone who may very well purchase this product despite the following:

When you used the words “seen enough anecdotally…,” I trust that you didn’t really mean that you had based your enthusiastic recommendation upon truly anecdotal information. If you have, I recommend a quick perusal of miracle cures that saturate the internet generally, and ADHD chat sites specifically. I believe that instead, you probably meant “…observed enough, even in the absence of controlled studies…” But even that more sympathetic reading is scarcely better.

You only mention the need for more research in passing, as though that this hasn’t been done already is merely a formality. I can’t respect this. Given placebo responses, (and responses that aren’t placebo, but caused by extraneous factors, like time spent focused on the issue with an otherwise busy parent), given the variety of learning disabilities that overlap (but the points of distinction between which may be very material when it comes to the efficacy of treatment), given the vagaries of precise diagnosis which always exist but which makes the paucity of numbers and the absence of consistent criteria still more of a factor, given the difficulties of extrapolating between age groups and between different cerebellar stimulation programs (the Dore method was the one with which you cited family experience in Delivered from Distraction), I wonder how you can conscientiously give such an unqualified recommendation.

If, as you wrote, cerebellar stimulation exercises have been used clinically for 30 years, the dearth of research should only call its efficacy, and perhaps even the sincerity of those making claims as to it’s efficacy, into question. In the absence of controlled studies, it remains in the same scientific netherworld as Brainwave Entrainment, Homeopathy, and other pseudo-scientific treatments. At the very least, the length of time it has been in use, of itself proves nothing. This principal, in a nutshell, distinguishes the respective appeals of science and folklore. (As my wife is of Moroccan descent, with strong family ties. You can believe me that I’ve had occasion to reflect on that issue).

This is not to say that ironclad research need exist before you bring a treatment to wider attention. Even in the absence of proof of its efficacy, I appreciated your willingness to include Omega-3 in Delivered from Distraction, as that recommendation was delivered with far clearer caveats. It benefited me because it served to further place, and I believe correctly place, the claims made as to the benefits of Omega-3 above those made for many other dietary supplements which are also held to treat ADHD. Also differentiating that recommendation, I believe that internationally, several controlled studies demonstrating Omega-3′s efficacy antedated it, in the comparably short while since Omega-3 had been widely recognized, and recommended, as a potential treatment for ADHD.

As I mentioned, I may, in the end, purchase this product, not because of what was included in your recommendation, but because, relying upon your good name and trusting in your sincerity, I hope that more careful observation was behind it than was specified. (Absent your recommendation, claims as to the efficacy of Brainwave Entrainment are far more convincing, with immediate and verifiable physical responses registered, but which, alas, have never been demonstrated to continue).

Having only recently been diagnosed in early middle age, having had my life severely impacted throughout, I can nonetheless clearheadedly face that the above is the sorry calculation of a patient anxious or even desperate to improve. And while it would be patently phony of me, even if only as a rhetorical flourish, to suggest that my purchase might be made absent any apprehension that it might not work, I wonder how many of those afflicted are just as anxious or desperate, and for that reason risk being misled by an unsubstantiated, or only partially substantiated, claim.

As an ordinary patient sorting through the extraordinary assertions routinely made by promoters and adherents of various respective treatments, I am perhaps in a better position than you are to judge that your recommendation would have only been distinguished by more forthright criteria, or more sensible limits.

That said, if better evidence in support of this product exists, than appears either here or on the Learning Breakthrough website, would you please provide it.

Thank You.

I was at the Brain and Learning Conference last week where you gave a fantastic and inspirational speech.

I would be delighted of you considered giving a speech for parents of ADHD children in IReland.

If it could be linked with another trip to Europe it would obviously reduce cost as cost will be a major consideration.

So, if we are positive to the suggestion, please let me know and also please advise me of the likely fee.

Kind regards,

Philip O’Callaghan