PDA

View Full Version : INTPs: how do you score on the Braverman Assessment?



baccheion
05-04-2017, 05:18 PM
How do you score on the second part of the following quiz: http://advancedpsychcare.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/braverman.test.pdf#page=7? Reply with the actual scores.

Sistamatic
05-04-2017, 06:22 PM
This system is a gross oversimplification of brain chemistry. It's like describing a symphony by stating which notes are played most often and then attempting to rewrite it with a note-specific volume knob that may or may not work.

You cannot diagnose a chemical deficiency in your brain with a bunch of qualitative personality questions, not even if there is a correlative relationship between those traits and a deficiency. It's more complicated than that. It's a good place to start, but this document implies a level of surety that is irresponsible. In addition, it attributes many potentially severe and life threatening conditions as physical issues associated with brain chemical deficiencies (which again it diagnoses in a purely qualitative way with questions that are often leading and more often, outright problematic in assumptions) and implies that a supplementation regimen is a way to treat them.

It takes a kernal of reality - the merely correlative relationship between certain mental tendencies and certain brain chemistry differences - and then proceeds as if this correlation is end-all, be-all definitive answer and builds a mountain upon that spurious foundation.

Dietary modifications can affect the chemistry of the body, including the brain, especially if they address a previously present deficiency. Addressing a deficiency can make a huge difference and whenever I suspect I have an issue, I have been known to attempt to address it with supplements, one at a time, and with much research.

I wonder if there is a way to take the test and have the results say that you are fine and need no adjustments.

All that being said, I am curious how people here would score on this test...you know, for the purpose of seeing if this test can reframe what we loosely call "INTPness" as a chemical imbalance that can be addressed with supplementation.

Edit: I did try...but every single question in here leads me to do research into the correlation between the chemical and the behavior and to want to list the alternate factors that could be involved....in other words, taking this test would take months and I would end up making an encyclopedia of violated assumptions. I'm guessing an enthusiast of the test would prescribe me a supplement to treat this malady, but I like being this way. I get it that it makes it hard to be around me sometimes, but I'm willing to accept that.

baccheion
05-04-2017, 06:41 PM
This system is a gross oversimplification of brain chemistry. It's like describing a symphony by stating which notes are played most often and then attempting to rewrite it with a note-specific volume knob that may or may not work.

You cannot diagnose a chemical deficiency in your brain with a bunch of qualitative personality questions, not even if there is a correlative relationship between those traits and a deficiency. It's more complicated than that. It's a good place to start, but this document implies a level of surety that is irresponsible. In addition, it attributes many potentially severe and life threatening conditions as physical issues associated with brain chemical deficiencies (which again it diagnoses in a purely qualitative way with questions that are often leading and more often, outright problematic in assumptions) and implies that a supplementation regimen is a way to treat them.

It takes a kernal of reality - the merely correlative relationship between certain mental tendencies and certain brain chemistry differences - and then proceeds as if this correlation is end-all, be-all definitive answer and builds a mountain upon that spurious foundation.

Dietary modifications can affect the chemistry of the body, including the brain, especially if they address a previously present deficiency. Addressing a deficiency can make a huge difference and whenever I suspect I have an issue, I have been known to attempt to address it with supplements, one at a time, and with much research.

I wonder if there is a way to take the test and have the results say that you are fine and need no adjustments.

There's NutrEval and genetic testing if you're wondering about deficiencies or imbalances. In this case, I'm just curious how other INTPs score. Therefore, what were your results?

Sistamatic
05-04-2017, 07:10 PM
There's NutrEval and genetic testing if you're wondering about deficiencies or imbalances. In this case, I'm just curious how other INTPs score. Therefore, what were your results?

See above edits.

Also, see this article: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2016/04/18/the-quackery-of-so-called-functional-medicine-making-it-up-as-you-go-along/ as it presents a good case for how I feel about functional medicine, including NutrEval.

The last line sums it up nicely:
What’s good about FM is not unique, and what’s unique about it is not good. My conclusion about FM is, in addition to Harriet’s, that it takes “making it up as you go along” to a whole new level, and that’s not a good thing in medicine.


Anyway, I think we've had this discussion before, where every piece of data I give you about myself results in you giving me long lists of things I should take to fix me (I'm not broken). Like I mentioned a single snp that I had and you went on to make long lists of supplemental recommendations that I don't want to take, and continued to try to talk me into it for a long time.

I'm curious how the INTPs here score too, but in addition to the fact that I'm having trouble taking the test for the reasons stated in my above edit, I am also wary of presenting a score where you can see it because I don't want you to spend a bunch of time trying to tailor a treatment for me when I am not in need of one and have no interest in taking one. Other forum members may feel differently about it and that's their prerogative.

baccheion
05-04-2017, 07:38 PM
Edit: I did try...but every single question in here leads me to do research into the correlation between the chemical and the behavior and to want to list the alternate factors that could be involved....in other words, taking this test would take months and I would end up making an encyclopedia of violated assumptions. I'm guessing an enthusiast of the test would prescribe me a supplement to treat this malady, but I like being this way. I get it that it makes it hard to be around me sometimes, but I'm willing to accept that.

Just answer the questions. Obviously many things can cause the symptoms listed. I'm wondering if there'll be any trends and how everyone's scores line up with what they're experiencing.


See above edits.

Also, see this article: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2016/04/18/the-quackery-of-so-called-functional-medicine-making-it-up-as-you-go-along/ as it presents a good case for how I feel about functional medicine, including NutrEval.

The last line sums it up nicely:


Anyway, I think we've had this discussion before, where every piece of data I give you about myself results in you giving me long lists of things I should take to fix me (I'm not broken). Like I mentioned a single snp that I had and you went on to make long lists of supplemental recommendations that I don't want to take, and continued to try to talk me into it for a long time.

I'm curious how the INTPs here score too, but in addition to the fact that I'm having trouble taking the test for the reasons stated in my above edit, I am also wary of presenting a score where you can see it because I don't want you to spend a bunch of time trying to tailor a treatment for me when I am not in need of one and have no interest in taking one. Other forum members may feel differently about it and that's their prerogative.

If NutrEval, genetic testing, and questionnaires are removed as options, what's left?

Not what I'm doing here. I remember you said you were Val/Val at rs4680, which made me suggest things that lower COMT (that list is now EGCG and quercetin, with forskolin, vitamin C, and fish oil to round things out). You had some reasons for being against trying what I mentioned, and I remember stating disagreements more than trying to convince.

flurps
05-04-2017, 08:09 PM
Test needs radio buttons so it scores itself, too lazy to add up by hand

Sistamatic
05-04-2017, 08:21 PM
If NutrEval, genetic testing, and questionnaires are removed as options, what's left?



None of these things is removed as options. My issues with this questionnaire could be assuaged if the associated materials did not overstate things in a way that could be harmful. The questionnaire by itself is not an issue, it is the way the results are used to diagnose medical conditions that it cannot diagnose and to even suggest treatments for those conditions.

I have the same issue with "functional medicine" such as NutrEval. There is a discrepancy between the expressed level of efficacy of treatments and the evidence for that efficacy. I do not care if supplements are recommended and taken, what I do care about is a tendency to make implications that are confusing to the layperson about the efficacy of recommendations. The assessment document you linked is loaded with such implications.

I am a huge fan of genetic testing. I am not a huge fan of combining the result of a genetic test with so-called "functional medicine."

Questionnaires, nutritional evaluations, and genetic testing can all be extremely important components in health maintenance, but these same tools can be used unethically. The questionnaire you posted has a lot of potential for unethical or ignorant use that could lead to real harm.

baccheion
05-04-2017, 08:36 PM
Test needs radio buttons so it scores itself, too lazy to add up by hand

Add them in the browser address bar..


None of these things is removed as options. My issues with this questionnaire could be assuaged if the associated materials did not overstate things in a way that could be harmful. The questionnaire by itself is not an issue, it is the way the results are used to diagnose medical conditions that it cannot diagnose and to even suggest treatments for those conditions.

I have the same issue with "functional medicine" such as NutrEval. There is a discrepancy between the expressed level of efficacy of treatments and the evidence for that efficacy. I do not care if supplements are recommended and taken, what I do care about is a tendency to make implications that are confusing to the layperson about the efficacy of recommendations. The assessment document you linked is loaded with such implications.

I am a huge fan of genetic testing. I am not a huge fan of combining the result of a genetic test with so-called "functional medicine."

Questionnaires, nutritional evaluations, and genetic testing can all be extremely important components in health maintenance, but these same tools can be used unethically. The questionnaire you posted has a lot of potential for unethical or ignorant use that could lead to real harm.

You said you dislike tests like NutrEval, as "My conclusion about FM is, in addition to Harriet’s, that it takes “making it up as you go along” to a whole new level, and that’s not a good thing in medicine." Therefore, according to you, it would be off the table.

Why aren't you a fan of combining NutrEval and genetic testing? Genetic testing shows predispositions, and tests like NutrEval, as they show one's current state, nicely complement genetic testing results.

Faust
05-04-2017, 09:01 PM
I'm just curious how other INTPs score.

Hardly needs to be said, its your only function on the forum.

flurps
05-04-2017, 09:17 PM
Add them in the browser address bar.
How about no, scott

Sistamatic
05-05-2017, 12:00 AM
Add them in the browser address bar..



You said you dislike tests like NutrEval, as "My conclusion about FM is, in addition to Harriet’s, that it takes “making it up as you go along” to a whole new level, and that’s not a good thing in medicine." Therefore, according to you, it would be off the table.

Why aren't you a fan of combining NutrEval and genetic testing? Genetic testing shows predispositions, and tests like NutrEval, as they show one's current state, nicely complement genetic testing results.

It's not the fact that the data is gathered that is unethical, it's the way that people are manipulated with said data once it is gathered and the way they are manipulated into spending money on that data in the first place. If you get a 23andme test for 199, they don't recommend that you buy stuff based on your results. NutrEval, on the other hand, is a nearly 1000 dollar test that can only be ordered by a doctor, but you can shop for it online and possibly even get your insurance to pay for it (or you might get stuck with the bill when they don't because they are wise to the scam while you are not). Their website conveniently points you to a doctor in your area who will order that test for you. (https://www.gdx.net/product/nutreval-fmv-nutritional-test-blood-urine)That doctor then gets the results and points you in the direction of places to spend money on supplements that may or may not make you feel better about a whole host of ill defined ailments. And if you think that doctor isn't getting kickbacks, then you aren't paying attention. NutrEval is part of Genova diagnostics. See "The commercial laboratory hall of shame" section of this article.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/bogus-diagnostic-tests/


We are not told the name of the laboratory that Kerry used for the “provocative urine test,” but it was likely Doctor’s Data, Inc. (DDI), a company with a long history of dubious offerings. DDI and another company, Genova Diagnostics (GDX), formerly the Great Smokies Diagnostic Laboratory, sell such bogus tests as hair analysis, urinary amino acids, “intestinal permeability,” “DNA oxidative damage assay,” and various “comprehensive panels” that generate reports explicitly or implicitly calling for “detoxification” schemes, “supplements,” “nutriceuticals,” or “bioidentical hormones,” which participating practitioners are only too happy to provide. Doctor’s Data is proud of its close ties with such PPOs as the ACAM and DAN!, and like GDX is a “supporter” of the ACAM.

Genova also has a cozy relationship with naturopath Michael Murray, a long-time shill for “natural remedies” and co-editor of the Textbook of Natural Medicine, previously discussed here. One of Genova’s former divisions was BodyBalance, which peddles “test kits” directly to consumers ostensibly to measure minerals, hormones, “antioxidant reserves,” and “the body’s natural safeguard for optimal sleep, mood and cell function — melatonin” in saliva, hair, or urine.

Oh, and there are plenty of websites out there where you can conveniently upload your raw genetic data from a reputable dna lab in return for a customized shopping list of expensive shit you need to feel well.

The evil scientist side of me sort of wants to let Darwin take over in all of this. Fuck it, if you aren't able to spot a scam, then get scammed. But the larger more pita side of me has to go and give a shit.

Does anyone know of a supplement that will let my evil mad scientist side take over and spare me all this giving of damns?

Edit: Oh, holy crap, I found one...and it's otc. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160510084257.htm I'm gonna totally take this for funerals from now on.

baccheion
05-05-2017, 02:22 AM
Hardly needs to be said, its your only function on the forum.

?


It's not the fact that the data is gathered that is unethical, it's the way that people are manipulated with said data once it is gathered and the way they are manipulated into spending money on that data in the first place. If you get a 23andme test for 199, they don't recommend that you buy stuff based on your results. NutrEval, on the other hand, is a nearly 1000 dollar test that can only be ordered by a doctor, but you can shop for it online and possibly even get your insurance to pay for it (or you might get stuck with the bill when they don't because they are wise to the scam while you are not). Their website conveniently points you to a doctor in your area who will order that test for you. (https://www.gdx.net/product/nutreval-fmv-nutritional-test-blood-urine)That doctor then gets the results and points you in the direction of places to spend money on supplements that may or may not make you feel better about a whole host of ill defined ailments. And if you think that doctor isn't getting kickbacks, then you aren't paying attention. NutrEval is part of Genova diagnostics. See "The commercial laboratory hall of shame" section of this article.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/bogus-diagnostic-tests/



Oh, and there are plenty of websites out there where you can conveniently upload your raw genetic data from a reputable dna lab in return for a customized shopping list of expensive shit you need to feel well.

The evil scientist side of me sort of wants to let Darwin take over in all of this. Fuck it, if you aren't able to spot a scam, then get scammed. But the larger more pita side of me has to go and give a shit.

Does anyone know of a supplement that will let my evil mad scientist side take over and spare me all this giving of damns?

Edit: Oh, holy crap, I found one...and it's otc. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160510084257.htm I'm gonna totally take this for funerals from now on.

Sure, there may be ethical issues. On the other hand, the recommendation of 23andme and NutrEval is more directed (by me) toward those curious about such things. I suppose it depends on how it's presented.

kari
06-20-2017, 10:52 PM
Test needs radio buttons so it scores itself, too lazy to add up by hand

Results: high GABA deficiency

kari
06-20-2017, 11:34 PM
Dopamine ------------ 27
Acytelcholine ------- 30
GABA ---------------- 11
Serotonin------------ 16

Dopa def ------------- 8
Acetyl def ----------- 5
GABA def ------------- 8
Sero def ------------- 8

flurps
06-20-2017, 11:40 PM
Results: high GABA deficiency

https://image.slidesharecdn.com/fragments1-090926080311-phpapp02/95/sentence-fragments-16-728.jpg?cb=1253953291

AntisocialENTP
06-20-2017, 11:48 PM
I'm a sucker for quizzes but I don't really understand this one as many of the question are reworded and than asked again and again in each quiz section.

Also, there are reason for these quirks (some of which are completely normal and possible productive) that have nothing to do with chemical deficiencies.

like the question: I have had a craving for cocaine, amphetamines, or Ecstasy T:F

If I would say this was true all it would prove is that I have an addiction issue (thankfully this one was False). This addiction starts normally but peer pressure or reckless attitude. Fallowed by dependency.

baccheion
06-21-2017, 02:27 AM
Dopamine ------------ 27
Acytelcholine ------- 30
GABA ---------------- 11
Serotonin------------ 16

Dopa def ------------- 8
Acetyl def ----------- 5
GABA def ------------- 8
Sero def ------------- 8

Is the second part with or without nootropics/supplements?

kari
06-21-2017, 03:13 AM
Is the second part with or without nootropics/supplements?

With. Here's what I've been on for about a year now, in a very non-regimented fashion (some supps being cycled):

Omega 3
Astragalus
Curcumin
L-Carnitine
Astaxanthin
B-complex
Magnesium
Caffeine in the form of black coffee every morning
Camellia sinesis catechins

Madrigal
06-21-2017, 05:40 AM
Hardly needs to be said, its your only function on the forum.

I thought all of us wondered how INTPs score... :D

Anyway, I can't relate to any of the deficiencies. At a time when I was depressed a lot, the dopamine deficiency got closer to descrbing me. But I can't say any of those are me.

Catoptric
06-21-2017, 07:53 AM
http://www.brainoptimization.com/Braverman/


Dominant Nature


Dopamine Score:
32

Acetylcholine Score:
38

GABA Score:
34

Serotonin Score:
24


Either the poll doesn't go high enough, or I broke the test? Again, it should be the same test? I also realize I might take a different criteria from what the test is actually asking (the heuristic of value assessment.)

Edit: Apparently at the bottom of the first page's results, a 'Part 2' section is available and is much simpler.


Biochemical Deficiency


Dopamine Score:
5

Acetylcholine Score:
7

GABA Score:

8

Serotonin Score:
10

baccheion
06-21-2017, 10:15 PM
With. Here's what I've been on for about a year now, in a very non-regimented fashion (some supps being cycled):

Omega 3
Astragalus
Curcumin
L-Carnitine
Astaxanthin
B-complex
Magnesium
Caffeine in the form of black coffee every morning
Camellia sinesis catechins

How would you score before supplements? Also, do you take curcumin with piperine? What about liposomal curcumin (longvida optimized curcumin extract)? I don't think curcumin crosses the blood-brain barrier unless taken in liposomes.


I thought all of us wondered how INTPs score... :D

Anyway, I can't relate to any of the deficiencies. At a time when I was depressed a lot, the dopamine deficiency got closer to descrbing me. But I can't say any of those are me.

What scores did you get?

QuickTwist
06-22-2017, 01:43 AM
Not INTP so not going to vote, but:

Dopamine: 11
Acetylcholine: 17
GABA: 8
Serotonin: 13

Like others have said, I don't think this is valid as a brain chemical deficiency "test".

kari
06-22-2017, 08:39 AM
How would you score before supplements? Also, do you take curcumin with piperine? What about liposomal curcumin (longvida optimized curcumin extract)? I don't think curcumin crosses the blood-brain barrier unless taken in liposomes.




Yes with piperine. The curcumin supp I take is very good, very high bioavailability. Not liposomal. Don't know how I'd score before. Pretty sure Ive taken the test before I started supps tho