Multiple Myeloma an incurable disease, but I have spent the last 25 years in remission using a blend of conventional oncology and evidence-based nutrition, supplementation, and lifestyle therapies from peer-reviewed studies that your oncologist probably hasn't told you about.
Click the orange button to the right to learn more about what you can start doing today.
“…only two of those had multiple studies, including at least one study of high quality–BrainHQ and Cognifit. And of those, just one had multiple high-quality studies: Mahncke’s BrainHQ”
Post-chemotherapy cognitive impairment (PCCI). That’s the fancy medical term for chemobrain. I formally identified that I had chemobrain years ago but I only began brain training with BrainHQ in late 2015.
While I can’t tell you my brain functions at 100% (I’ve been living with chemobrain for more than 20 years) I can tell you that my executive function, memory, facial recognition and others are much better than they were a few short years ago.
For those of you who have chemobrain and are wondering if our bachgrounds are similar, are my specifics. I underwent 6 rounds of a chemotherapy triplet called V.A.D from 3/95-8/95. I then underwent two rounds of high dose cytoxan in 9/95, and an autologous stem cell transplant in 12/95.
The article linked and excerpted below is correct. Posit Science aka BrainHQ exercises my brain daily with games. Games that appeared in my email inbox daily. Games that cost me a whopping $96 dollars annually. I get an email when Posit is going to bill me for another year of brain games. I always approve…
I have cut and pasted the photo below because that is the game called “double decision.” This game is particular is designed to reduce my risk of dementia. I have gotten really good at double decision.
I am a long-term multiple myeloma survivor of a MM cancer coach. I work to prevent my cancer from relapsing as well getting a treatment related secondary cancer by eating right, exercising, supplementing and more. I talk-the-talk and walk-the-walk.
Please scroll down the page, post a question or comment and I will reply to you ASAP.
““It would be very helpful to people to have this kind of resource–it’s challenging for a lay person to wade through the hundreds of scientific papers and figure out which brain training programs are evidence-based and which aren’t.”
Unfortunately, of the 18 different computerized brain training programs marketed to healthy older adults that were studied, 11 had no peer reviewed published evidence of their efficacy and of the seven that did, only two of those had multiple studies, including at least one study of high quality–BrainHQ and Cognifit. And of those, just one had multiple high-quality studies: Mahncke’s BrainHQ program...
As your visual system is continually challenged by these specific tests, your brain will adapt through a process known as neuroplasticity. “At its core purpose, the brain wants to resolve things. It is constantly moving from the particular to the big picture and back again,” Mahncke says. As the brain works to put the big picture together it goes through neuroplastic changes in order to do so (“neuro” = brain, and “plastic” = the ability to undergo structural changes).
These plasticity-based changes actually form new neuropathways in your brain–literally changing its shape. The new neuropathways can then be called upon to help you process stimuli beyond just the specific methods used in the brain training exercises. This is why brain training that results in neuroplastic changes works much better than simple memory “brain training” games, which may help you remember where, for example, the red card is hidden, but won’t help you remember the details from that last meeting with your client...”
“We searched PubMed, Google Scholar and each program’s website for relevant studies reporting the effects of computerized cognitive training on cognitively healthy older adults. The evidence for each program was assessed via the number and quality (PEDro score) of studies, including Randomized Control Trials (RCTs). Programs with clinical studies were subsequently classified as possessing Level I, II or III evidence. Out of 18 identified programs, 7 programs were investigated in 26 studies including follow-ups. Two programs were identified as possessing Level I evidence, three programs demonstrated Level II evidence and an additional two programs demonstrated Level III evidence…”
[…] Healing the Chemobrain of the long-term Multiple Myeloma Survivor […]Reply