![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 23 of 23. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 18:29:41
OK. Now this freaked me out.
The instruction manual for the Thymatron ECT machine........
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&biw=1074&q=thymatron+high+voltage&meta=
It says: voltage is limited to 450 Volts!!
~Ed
Posted by linkadge on June 26, 2005, at 18:45:46
In reply to ECT - high voltage?, posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 18:29:41
I don't trust it nomatter what people say. I'd rather get in a car accedent.
Linkadge
Posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 20:45:51
In reply to Re: ECT - high voltage?, posted by linkadge on June 26, 2005, at 18:45:46
I find that amazing. Here, the mains electricity supply is 230-240 Volts and the ECT machine goes up to 450 Volts! Someone please correct me if I'm getting confused. My understanding of electronics is very poor :-S
~Ed
Posted by Nezirov on June 26, 2005, at 20:50:29
In reply to 450 Volt ECT, posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 20:45:51
No, you're not wrong. It is simply electrocution of the brain. No more, no less.
Posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 21:39:45
In reply to Re: 450 Volt ECT, posted by Nezirov on June 26, 2005, at 20:50:29
Well........some people certainly seem to benefit from it :-) Mr. Scott is doing extremely well. Other people wish they'd never had it.
~Ed
Posted by rod on June 27, 2005, at 1:57:50
In reply to 450 Volt ECT, posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 20:45:51
> I find that amazing. Here, the mains electricity supply is 230-240 Volts and the ECT machine goes up to 450 Volts! Someone please correct me if I'm getting confused.
>
> ~EdHi :-)
Well, "forget" about the voltage. the Current is the thing that matters.
But please dont think you can put your fingers into the elektrtical sypply.... this is not a good thing and will definately not help your depression....from http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2005/GinaCastellano.shtml
" Modern ECT machines regulate the current to keep it constant and thus the voltage may **vary up to a maximum**, typically 450 V, but is usually around half that level in most cases."
The voltage automatically varies to get a well defined current (depends on the resistance and capacitance of your skull, skin etc. ...)
'nuff saidRoland
Posted by ixus on June 27, 2005, at 6:49:55
In reply to 450 Volt ECT, posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 20:45:51
> I find that amazing. Here, the mains electricity supply is 230-240 Volts and the ECT machine goes up to 450 Volts! Someone please correct me if I'm getting confused. My understanding of electronics is very poor :-S
>
> ~EdHi Edek,
what is amazing for you? The voltage? Is it low or high in your opinion?
Actually if we consider safety, voltage is not dangerous, the most important is current which comes into the heart i.e. safe current is max 10 mA. It depends on resistance of your body (if electrodes are put to your hands) and voltage i.e. I = U/R.
However I don't know how it is if electrodes are put onto your brain. Certainly heart is not affected at all. What is the safe limit in that case, this is difficult to say as norms usually don't assume that current comes through your brain.
/ixus
Posted by Camille Dumont on June 27, 2005, at 9:23:30
In reply to Re: 450 Volt ECT, posted by Nezirov on June 26, 2005, at 20:50:29
> No, you're not wrong. It is simply electrocution of the brain. No more, no less.
Well, a brain is basically a bunch of electric jello to begin with. Thats how neurons function. Though there is no way in heaven of hell I would accept ECT, it does seem that for some people, in some circumstances, it can help.
Posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 11:15:48
In reply to Re: 450 Volt ECT, posted by rod on June 27, 2005, at 1:57:50
Hi Roli :-)
>Well, "forget" about the voltage. the Current is the thing that matters.
Sorry, I thought it was the voltage :-S
>But please dont think you can put your fingers into the elektrtical sypply....
I was shocked by the mains electric when I was little! Ouch, I nearly went into orbit!
>The voltage automatically varies to get a well defined current (depends on the resistance and capacitance of your skull, skin etc. ...)
I think they usually use 0.9A.
Thanks Roli,
~Ed
PS. Sorry for being dumb :-S I don't know anything about electricity except V=IR.
Posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 11:28:08
In reply to Re: 450 Volt ECT » ed_uk, posted by ixus on June 27, 2005, at 6:49:55
Hi Ixie,
>what is amazing for you? The voltage? Is it low or high in your opinion?
Please excuse my ignorance. I thought it seemed very high.
I think I posted the wrong link before. Here it is....
http://www.mindfreedom.org/mindfreedom/shock/instruction_manual.doc
>Actually if we consider safety, voltage is not dangerous, the most important is current which comes into the heart i.e. safe current is max 10 mA.
The ECT manual says the current is 0.9 Amps.
'Current: 0.9 amp constant'
Kind regards
~Ed
Posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 11:30:52
In reply to ECT » ixus, posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 11:28:08
Posted by rod on June 27, 2005, at 11:54:42
In reply to Current » rod, posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 11:15:48
> Hi Roli :-)
>
> >Well, "forget" about the voltage. the Current is the thing that matters.
>
> Sorry, I thought it was the voltage :-SWell ed, its not a stupid question. since the higher the voltage, the higher also the current. thats why I used the quotes. 400 V is high, but you cant compare general power supply with an ECT device. And also you don't get a constant current with ECT. they use pulses. your brain does not get cooked.... or melted
> >But please dont think you can put your fingers into the elektrtical sypply....
>
> I was shocked by the mains electric when I was little! Ouch, I nearly went into orbit!
>me too :-/ wasn't very pleasant. strangely the fuse didn't work. It was me, who was falling from a chair and thereby forced disconnection ... ouch!
> >The voltage automatically varies to get a well defined current (depends on the resistance and capacitance of your skull, skin etc. ...)
>
> I think they usually use 0.9A.thats actually quite high. but anyway. it does not seem to cause any neurological damage. I cant back up this statement. A doctor (Professor) told me that ECT is actually one of the "healthiest" treatments of depression... And if you feel like crap afterwards, its likely not because of neurological damage (e.g. demyelination) but due to some other stuff that gets messed up or seizure like activity. He said its too complex to tell details (which I apparently would not understand anyway). And, no, I am not a real fan of ECT..
good bye
Roland
Posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 12:53:09
In reply to Re: Current » ed_uk, posted by rod on June 27, 2005, at 11:54:42
Hi Roli!
>you cant compare general power supply with an ECT device........
I know. I was just thinking that 450 Volts sounded high.
>And also you don't get a constant current with ECT. they use pulses......
That's true.
Apparantly, the old machines used a 'sine wave'. I'm not sure what it involved.
>me too :-/ wasn't very pleasant. strangely the fuse didn't work. It was me, who was falling from a chair and thereby forced disconnection ... ouch!
When I was little, I accidently stuck my fingers in a light socket........and there wasn't a bulb in.
The Thymatron ECT machine.........
STIMULUS OUTPUT
Current: 0.9 amp constant, limited to 450 volts, isolated from line current.
Frequency: 10 to 70 Hz in 10 Hz increments (to 140 Hz with “LOW 0.25” program)
Pulsewidth: 0.25 to 1.5 ms in 0.25 ms increments
Duration: 0.14 to 7.99 sec in increments of equal charge.
Maximum output: Standard maximum output across 220 ohms impedance, 504 mC, 99.4 joules. Output with double-dose option (where available) across 220 ohms impedance: 1008 mC, 198.8 joules.
Since you're an expert in electronics, can you explain this????
Thanks Roli :-)
~Ed
Posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 13:28:29
In reply to Re: Current » ed_uk, posted by rod on June 27, 2005, at 11:54:42
Hi Roli! (Do you prefer me to call you Roli or Roland?)
I was just talking to my dad about ECT. He's a electronics lecturer. He thinks 0.9A is very high current to pass through the body. Wouldn't it heat the brain up? Perhaps not, if it uses brief pulses?
Greetings!
~Ed
Posted by rod on June 27, 2005, at 15:06:51
In reply to 0.9 Amps » rod, posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 13:28:29
Hi Ed!
> The Thymatron ECT machine.........
>
> STIMULUS OUTPUT
>
> Current: 0.9 amp constant, limited to 450 volts, isolated from line current.
>
> Frequency: 10 to 70 Hz in 10 Hz increments (to 140 Hz with “LOW 0.25” program)
>
> Pulsewidth: 0.25 to 1.5 ms in 0.25 ms increments
>
> Duration: 0.14 to 7.99 sec in increments of equal charge.
>
> Maximum output: Standard maximum output across 220 ohms impedance, 504 mC, 99.4 joules. Output with double-dose option (where available) across 220 ohms impedance: 1008 mC, 198.8 joules.
>
> Since you're an expert in electronics, can you explain this????hehe LOL me an expert :-) hmmm but thanks for the kind words.
Ok, thats how I understand the text.
0,9 amps constant mean its a square wave. not a sine wave. sine wave wouldn't be constant.
frequency is clear? right?
As it produces a square wave, the current gets turned off and on, 10 to 70 times per second.Pulse Width, it the time, the current is turned on, before it gets turned off again. (most of the time its off, but it gets turned on 10 to 70 times per second for 0.25 to 1.5 ms)
The whole on off cycle comes in trains (trains of pulses) with a duration of 0.14 to 7.99 sec
The time between the trains isn't stated here. I guess it lies in the hands of the E-doc.
everything clear so far?
1 Coulomb = the quantity of electrons when a current of one ampere flows for one second. which is 6.241506 x 10^18 electrons. mC means 6.241506 x 10^15 electrons.
Coulomb is simply the unit for the quantity of electrons, the Charge. its unit is As (ampere seconds)
Joule means how much work it can do.
Let me activate my hypoperfused brain cell remainings and show you where this 99,4 joule come fromCharge Q = I * t => t=0,504/0.9=0.56 s (time t)
Power P=V*I, Work W=P*t => W=V*I*t (since V=R*I) W=I^2*R*t with above time and I=0.9 A and R=220 Ohm => W=0.9*0.9*220*0,56 = 99,792 joule voila :-P I guess the 0.392 joule difference get "used up" inside the machine (inner impedance. my "model" doesnt consider that)> Hi Roli! (Do you prefer me to call you Roli or Roland?)
Hmmmmm dont really care about that. Most friends call me Roli, but Roland sounds a bit more mature :-)
well then call me Roland> I was just talking to my dad about ECT. He's a electronics lecturer. He thinks 0.9A is very high current to pass through the body. Wouldn't it heat the brain up? Perhaps not, if it uses brief pulses?
exactly. I also think brief pulses are the key in not cooking your brain.
I once made a mistake with my Cranial Electro Stimulation Device and turned on a steady current of about 0.1 mA (0.0001 Amps) and within 2 seconds, ouch, the electrodes (the skin where they were attached) got really hot!
mfg :-P
Roland
Posted by ixus on June 27, 2005, at 15:14:29
In reply to 0.9 Amps » rod, posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 13:28:29
> I was just talking to my dad about ECT. He's a electronics lecturer. He thinks 0.9A is very high current to pass through the body. Wouldn't it heat the brain up? Perhaps not, if it uses brief pulses?
>
The current is high enough to damage your heart permanently but electrodes stick to ones head. This makes a huge difference.
In the above post you sent there is a max energy specified. This limits delivered energy (time). ECT is not thought to kill anyone :-)
/ixus
Posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 18:36:43
In reply to Re: 0.9 Amps » ed_uk, posted by ixus on June 27, 2005, at 15:14:29
Hi Ixie!
>The current is high enough to damage your heart permanently but electrodes stick to ones head. This makes a huge difference.
But the brain is a very fragile organ. I would be very frightened to have ECT.
>ECT is not thought to kill anyone :-)
A few people die during/after ECT. Heart attack, stroke etc occur occasionally.
Yours,
~Ed
Posted by ed_uk on June 27, 2005, at 18:39:28
In reply to Re: 0.9 Amps » ed_uk, posted by rod on June 27, 2005, at 15:06:51
Hi Roland!
Thank you for your detailed explanation, I am very grateful. The calculations are extremely impressive :-)
Kind regards
~Ed
Posted by Mr.Scott on June 28, 2005, at 3:38:09
In reply to ECT - high voltage?, posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 18:29:41
Sorry to butt in, but I feel compelled to share my experience here.
My opinion is only based on my experience and therefore cannot be generalized. This much I 'still remember' :-)! It is however a strong opinion because I believe that for every vocal dissuader without a medical license (like Tom Cruise for instance), another person commits suicide or dies slowly from indulging in vices that bring only temporary relief.I would rather have ECT every other day for 4 straight weeks (I get it once a month) than take ANY marketed SSRI, Lithium, Depakote, etc. I would even take ECT over the controlled substances like benzos and stims (if I could roll back time) knowing that they can come back to haunt eventually if not well monitored and even then sometimes.
I spent a lot of time and energy (wasted) trying to find the perfect combo of toxic pills and never came close to feeling this stable. I was the pharmacies best customer and helped put many a psychiatrist's child through college, but my treatment resistant depression remained treatment resistant save for a few very brief periods in 12 years. Initial Prozac and Nardil reaction maybe 6 weeks.
If you have treatment resistant depression, I'd be sure to look into ALL the options...My identity as a wallower in self-pity coupled with a desire for half-measures and easy answers got me nowhere except into debt with a large mental health bill and nothing to show for it.
Whether you find help in ECT, Jesus, or Metallic Salts (LiC03) and canine urine extracts (early anticonvulsants)...my advice is to keep an open mind. Sometimes help comes from where you'd least expect it to come from, and for me eroding the stigma of where help might be lurking has been the longest and hardest journey.
A year ago I was a cocaine smoking, assaultive, weapon brandishing, angrily suicidal burden on everyone around me. I wanted to die and only because I failed once at it did I not try it again. I could only think of my Mother dying, so that I could kill myself after she was gone and spare her the final chapter in her miserable sons life. I suffered chronic anxiety and yet was tired all the time. I gained 40 pounds from meds, my cholesterol was double what it is today, and I felt life was a meaningless waste. Still I put on a suit and went to work every single day because I knew it was expected of me and as I stood waiting for the train, not a day went by I didn't wish I could have the courage to jump out onto the tracks in front of the trains that raced by.
I volunteered for outpatient ECT and it worked where drug trial after drug trial failed.
I just got into one of the top grad schools in the US, am making more money than I need, will propose in several months (should she still want me!), and I feel like the closest I ever felt to being the way I was pre-illness. Gone is the desire for any form of self-destruction be it suicide or drug use. I can actually look forward today and extract pleasure from helping other people. I volunteered at an animal shelter, and routinely help drug addicts/alcoholics. To say that...for me is truly mind boggling. I was the most selfish and self-absorbed SOB you would ever want to meet.Now I don't know... Perhaps my experience is unique...but the problems I have from ECT are nothing compared to the problems I had from the meds or the illness. I don't have any memory loss at all! I have an inconvenience that requires me to take a half day once a month.
Let me quote the fortune cookie I opened after a drug and alcohol binge that led to me taking this step (and others) that have led me to feel as I believe I was intended to feel. I keep it on my fridge.
"Idleness is the Holiday of Fools."
I'm not trying to offend anyone. Nor am I trying to be an ECT prophet who claims one size fits all... but it does irk me that people will willingly take pills that have been around for less than a decade, some of which don't even have relevant indications for what they are prescribed for, develop obesity and diabetes as a result, feel numb and impotent and then be content to whine about the various shortcomings without seeking further knowledge and treatment. And in doing so critique that which they have no personal experience with or in-depth knowledge of. We all saw Jack Nicholson in 'One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.' You can get the same effect with any of the meds now being promoted at your local psychiatrists office.
Maybe ECT in my neighborhood is different from ECT in yours. I don't know... And if it was forced on me I'd resist just as I'd resist antipsychotics or a loading dose of Depakote to quiet me down.
Just do what you gotta do to feel right in the head...whatever that is. It's worth anything to get back on the ride of life!
Scott
Posted by ed_uk on June 28, 2005, at 5:01:10
In reply to Re: ECT, posted by Mr.Scott on June 28, 2005, at 3:38:09
Dear Scott,
I'm not trying to stigmatise ECT. I'm very pleased that you're benefitting from it so much :-) In fact, it's quite fantastic. You really are like a different person - in a good way :-)
I have known people to benefit greatly from ECT, you are one of them :-) I have also known people who've been severely damaged by it.....lost massive chunks of memory etc.
I hope I haven't offended you. I started this thread because I wanted to understand the technical aspects of ECT........current, voltage, charge etc. I must admit I was rather surprised that they used 0.9A!
Yours
~Ed
PS. Please keep posting :-)
Posted by Sebastian on June 28, 2005, at 19:13:48
In reply to ECT - high voltage?, posted by ed_uk on June 26, 2005, at 18:29:41
you can have a high voltage and low current. Not that harmfull to humans.
Posted by Mr.Scott on June 29, 2005, at 23:14:16
In reply to Re: ECT » Mr.Scott, posted by ed_uk on June 28, 2005, at 5:01:10
Ed,
I'm sorry if I seemed overzealous. I was not reacting to your posts at all. I just want to encourage an open mind in the treatment of mental illness. It's serious stuff and it kills people every day and ruins the lives of so many that stigmatizing anything of potential value (again not that you were, is a bad idea in my mind). I wish I'd found my personal solution earlier, but thought that ECT was a final indication I'd never get better.
Again...if I offended you, it was not my intent. Although I wouldn't mind having a word with Tom Cruise one on one and try to set that guy straight! He publicly critiscized Brooke Shields for taking Paxil for Postpartum Depression, and routinely calls foul on anyone who uses psych meds. He should only walk a mile in the shoes of those who suffer instead of encouraging people to believe spirits in volcano's are the answer to our problems. Then again...I'm sure a few people have been helped by scientology as well...
It would hardly be my first choice however when in a 6 month episode where my thoughts would gravitate so low as to contemplate which firearm is best for completing suicide! Volcano's are cool and all...But I don't think there is much research advocating them for clinical depression.I advocate whatever works, and I try not to be dogmatic about what does and doesn't. I do however know others who have received ECT without side-effects. One guy going on two years now who know takes Seroquel and Wellbutrin ever since his series of 8 Unilaterals and has never gotten depressed again.
Scott
:-)
Posted by ed_uk on June 30, 2005, at 10:18:38
In reply to Re: ECT » ed_uk, posted by Mr.Scott on June 29, 2005, at 23:14:16
Hi Scott,
>I just want to encourage an open mind in the treatment of mental illness.
Me too :-)
>.......stigmatizing anything of potential value.........
Sorry, I really didn't intend to stigmatise it. I promise :-) I can see that it might have come across that way though. I was a little shocked at the current used.....but I wasn't trying to stigmatise those who have ECT.
Personally, I wouldn't feel differently about anyone because they were having ECT. But that's
just me........I don't really have any prejudices RE mental health probs and their treatment.>Again...if I offended you.......
You didn't :-)
>He publicly critiscized Brooke Shields for taking Paxil for Postpartum Depression, and routinely calls foul on anyone who uses psych meds.
He's an idiot!
Kind regards
~Ed
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.