Phantom Limb Syndrom in Nonamputees (yes this does happen)

Originally posted by Ordo
There are no such things as "phantom wings."

Phantom limb syndrome is due to the reorganization of higher order neurons in the sensory cortex after those cells die. Think of it as crosswiring, new input going to the same central processing area that used to service the now silent limb. Your brain then mistakenly interprets a new input because its going to an area previously assigned input from the now defunct limb.

You cannot physically feel sensory input from a strucutre you don't and never will have. Phantom limb syndrome can only occour after you lose sensory input from a physical structure. Your "phatom wing" is clearly a psychological projection on your part and its artificial for you to give it credibility by hijacking a factual medical condition.

Really...What about Disaccociative Identity Disorder? People with this believe they are other people, and in some cases other lifeforms; which could lead one to believe that they, are in some way, experiencing 'phantom wings.'

That would be a separate condition from "phantom limb syndrome" altogether.

Originally posted by Evilbigfoot
Really...What about Disaccociative Identity Disorder? People with this believe they are other people, and in some cases other lifeforms; which could lead one to believe that they, are in some way, experiencing 'phantom wings.'

DID, even among the percentage of psychologists who believe it is a legitimate syndrome, has nothing to do with phantom limb.

DID is an issue with identity and behavioural motivation, whereas phantom limb is perceptual in nature. Basically, DID would almost assuredly be in the lymbic-prefrontal areas (I guess I shouldn't speak so authoritatively) whereas phantom limb is within the somatosensory cortex. They connect, to be sure, but a person's personality shouldn't have such a strong impact that they would literally be able to form new structures within their somatosensory areas to represent the body parts they wished they had.

A better analog might be hallucinated or illusory touch experiences, that can originate in higher cognitive areas than perceptual issues. Believing you felt something on your arm does not necessarily produce the same experience as feeling something on the arm (though there are similarities)

[actually, thinking about this, LSD is said to cause colour perception of hues not found in the real world (and outside of the knee-jerk "oh, its drugs" answer), this could represent activation of sensory areas by drugs in ways that real-world phenomena can't/don't reproduce... this may connect beliefs and the somatasensory cortex, though obviously not in the "I have wings" way]

Originally posted by inimalist
...LSD is said to cause colour perception of hues not found in the real world...

Originally posted by Mindship
As I understand it, LSD inhibits the neurons which inhibit dreaming while awake. In a sense, dreaming volume gets turned up, integrates with waking awareness, and this produces quite a number of effects not found in the real world. The visual field on an LSD trip even seems to bear some similarity to the visual field in a lucid dream. Both involve input which "invade" the rational mind and its normal way of perceiving time, space, subject and object.

research on lsd, especially that of any worth, is scant at best, and is generally more of a clinical nature

however, it is currently theorized that lsd is primarilly active on a specific type of seretonin receptor in the thalamo-cortical pathway

I know little of dreaming, unfortunatly

Originally posted by dadudemon
I'm sure you took logic or even multiple logic courses. My problem with these is rejecting the swift "then Q" portions of the studies simply because of the environments, procedures, and variables used. It's possible that I put too much complexity to how the brain works. Well, that's probably a misnomer. Rather, I should say, I have a problem with making jumps without very small baby steps, proving and paving the way to the "then Q" conclusions in these studies.

lol, I actually just did 2 presentations for a prof in a seminar course I'm taking, and her comment was that I didn't have to just try to tear down all of the articles

Originally posted by dadudemon
Often, when thinking about alternatives, I disregard the null-hypothesis or secondary hypothesis because I'm hasty, arrogant, or both...not due to an ignorance of the proper way to set up a study. If were really designing experiments, I would setup them up properly. Since this is more of a casual conversation, I feel it rather unnecessary to mention things beyond the primary hypothesis in a casual conversation on a message board. Don't you agree that that kind of muddies up the discussion? Well, that was probably a stupid question because you do not believe that and you probably expect better out of me. I'll try to remember that the next time I suggest alternatives. I guess that takes care of the conflict: I apologize for trying to pass-off half assed ideas as alternatives.

not even, I'm just a pedant and my brain works in an incredibly linear fashion.

Originally posted by dadudemon
In the topic at hand, you mentioned the primary researcher was transgendered. That presents a conflict of interest, does it not (Before you read farther, it probably doesn't, but keep in mind, I'm not nearly as knowledgeable in this area as you are. In full honesty, I could be speaking in complete arrogance...so read the rest of this paragraph with that in mind)? They teach people in college how to manage conflict of interest. To me, this smacks of more of a social motivation of the researcher to prove that it was biological from the start do to all of the skepticism and hatred that comes from the world around them. But, like I mention later, conflict of interest can be avoided with nice post-study work vis-a-vis peer review and results duplication. For me, the conflict of interest can be either financial or social. I'm sure you're not big on the latter, but those are red flags to me.

ok, but personal bias is what motivates all research programmes. People have a hunch and follow it.

The question would be, is it more probable that the bias in the researcher (though, no research has really been done, she wrote the article that the article you cited cites, where she mentioned her ideas to Ramachandran) was due to a) she actually never experienced phantom penis and thinks this might represent a biological link to transgender cognitions, or b) she is motivated primarily by the fact that she DID experience phantom penis and wants to hide it from the world by proposing new research that actually undermines science, the thing she has dedicated her life to.

Sure, b has a non-zero probability. It also has no evidence to support it. I think it is also worth mentioning that the "I need to hide the fact, from myself and even in abstract from the world, that I was ever a man" is not a psychology normally associated with transgender individuals. To assume this researcher would have this, and would be so motivated to hide it that she undermines something she has worked for years on is retarded.

If her results don't add up, we'll talk

Originally posted by dadudemon
Motivation towards specific outcomes should be expected. Peer review should reduce criticism, and duplication should all but eliminate it. But, in the end, is it really that conclusive? Is it even scientific to consider the results of a "biological mechanism" when the biological mechanism wasn't even directly measured but was, instead, measured through the word of the patients? Even phrasing the questions in certain ways and orders could possibly taint that type of pool. Peer review should pick up on that, but how well would they be able to do that? The subconscious is nearly impossible to measure, and knowing how one will react to those questions and controlling for things such as "unintentional suggestions" is nearly impossible to completely avoid. There are ways to present and order as neutrally as possible, I'm sure. There's probably even ways to try and "reset" the "sample", but you're definitely more familiar with that method of setup than I am. But me simply being aware of those should at least make you feel a tad better...knowing that I'm not a complete idiot. 😆

these are hypothetical complaints about research that has yet to be conducted

it is not an a priori reason to assume that there aren't somatosensory differences between transgendered individuals and other people.

Originally posted by dadudemon
If feel more comfortable with these types of studies when they've stood up to legitimate criticisms and they have also been vindicated with something more solid like an fMRI or MEG (not a CAT scan, like I originally suggest. I was just throwing 'brain scan" out there, but you obviously knew what I meant, thankfully) measuring the connections in the somatosensory cortex (That has a name but I can't remember what it's called...it's like crossmodal perception, but it is has more to do with brain having adjacent parts and overlapping so that touching, say, your hand creates a response on another part of your body (closer towards the eyes, but he squama frontalis), even the phantom limb.)

so would everyone. This doesn't support your dismissal of a genuinly valid theory a priori because "Transgendered people are motivated to undermine the scientific method, intentionally, for reasons of identity issues"

Originally posted by dadudemon
I don't know much about the penis phantom "limb", though. It's relatively new, to me. I am a small fan of Vilayanur S. Ramachandran MD, PhD, and he's literally the leading expert on phantom limbs. Dr. Ramachandran has been a pioneer of neuroscience and he was the one that inspired me to (almost) get into neurosience. It would appear, however, that Dr. Ramachandran believes that the brains of the male to female transgendered are hardwired for female genitalia.* Of course, he hasn't done direct research on it with things such as an fMRI, but, this goes back to what you and I had talked about in a previous discussion: the plasticity of the human brain. Were they born that way? Maybe..maybe not. Let's assume not, just to have something to discuss: if not, is it possible that the brain can actually re-wire itself based on the will of the individual? Is that conversation ringing a bell? If not, then are people ACTUALLY born as the wrong gender? Meaning, the brain is wired for one gender, and the body is born a different gender. If that's the case, then we should see a hereditary marker for this, right?

*http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2008/10/removing-the-phantom-penis.html

I think you are taking it a bit to literally. One of my criticisms with how you understand the brain would be in how absolutist everything is. Love is from X and lasts Y years because of Z. Sure, cool, I really don't want to get into it, but trust me, there is at least 79% more to that story that we haven't even thought about yet. Please trust me on this.

So, its not going to be the case that it is even a HUGELY significant portion of TS people who don't get the phenomenon, it might just be that there is less, and this might represent differences in somatosensory development. Is this genetic? does it come from neuroplasticity? is it a hormonal reaction? does it come from innoculous early developmental or social cues? all of these could be true and the somatosensory differences would be the result. There wont be a way to, with 100% accuracy, tell if someone is TS from somatosensory development (some cases may be easy, but without a doubt others will be impossible), nor are they proposing a single underlying cause of TS. Just saying that personal reports of TS people suggest they report phantom penis less than amputees and this might indicate developmental differences

Originally posted by dadudemon
Anywho, I should probably STFU and let the professional speak for a bit. Let me know your thoughts.

lol, let me know when they get here

Originally posted by Evilbigfoot
Really...What about Disaccociative Identity Disorder? People with this believe they are other people, and in some cases other lifeforms; which could lead one to believe that they, are in some way, experiencing 'phantom wings.'

Unfortunately...I haven't learned much psychiatry.

Originally posted by King Kandy
That would be a separate condition from "phantom limb syndrome" altogether.

But, what she is describing is not phantom limb syndrome.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, let me know when they get here

*has arrived* 😐

Originally posted by Ordo
But, what she is describing is not phantom limb syndrome.

Yes, but it would be much more related than DID is.

so, on the phantom penis:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18596839

(very disgusting images in the actual article)

so, these doctors performed a male-to-female surgery and the paitent experienced the phantom penis for about 6 months. However, once they removed certain musles, which flared in correlation with the experience of phantom penis (only errect sensation), the experience stopped. They conclude that phantom penis may be more related to reminants of muscle tissue from surgery rather than misfiting in the somatasensory cortex.

While phantom limb is assumed to be located in the parietal lobe, the input from sensory systems can't be ignored, and maybe there is more to the story in ALL cases, rather than just cortical misfiring. In any event, no scans were done, so we can't say what, but this does illustrate that it might not be the same thing at all.

lol, seriously, more people need to be doing this research

^^^cool...

however, since you have sensory input from the intrafusal muscle fibers, I dont see how that really contradicts current theory. Its still a re-organization of sensory input., regardless of whether it goes to the primary somatosensory cortex or not...and I think afferents form the intrafusal muscle fibers do...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes, but it would be much more related than DID is.

Since it has zero relation, I dont see how that is possible 🙁

Don't know/not saying anything about DID.

Originally posted by Ordo
Since it has zero relation, I dont see how that is possible 🙁

They're both the perception of a limb that isn't there. The difference is that phantom limb actually used to be there. I'd also cynically point out that without fail "otherkin" have cool body parts (wings, elf ears) rather than mundane ones . . .

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
T The difference is that phantom limb actually used to be there.

Exactly. These other-kin "appendages" were never there. Thus, this girl's phnomenon is more aptly termed "Imagined Limb Syndrome".

Originally posted by Ordo
^^^cool...

however, since you have sensory input from the intrafusal muscle fibers, I dont see how that really contradicts current theory. Its still a re-organization of sensory input., regardless of whether it goes to the primary somatosensory cortex or not...and I think afferents form the intrafusal muscle fibers do...

depends on who you are talking to

from a neuroscience perspective, the origin in muscle vs cortex is huge, even if just from a theoretical perspective

A Canadian article that I couldn't get access to (it was also only a review, so no new data, no scans for sure), for instance, claimed that the phantom penis was specifically caused by crossed communication in somatosensory areas of the parietal cortex, which it appears may not be the entire story

from a more general biological view, the ideas are totally congruent, and the somatosensory mix-up theory would really only need to be modified in the slightest way

like I said, I'm a pedant

hi, i have phantom wings and tail. i thought i was the only one yes i can feel them not all the time i feel as tho theres an awareness about them

Wow. amazed by the amount of hatred from you all. we use the association with phantom limb because a proper term doesn't exist. and i'm pretty sure that you all are the "religious" type. so you WON'T like what I'm about to say. i've combined the creationist and evolution theories to a point that even the most stubborn "religious" don't deny that it makes sense. and this condition falls into my theories. we feel oddities that are not nor have not ever been there because they are recessive in our genetics. the nerve structure in these specific people may coordinate with previous generational traits. for the creationists, adam and eve were some sort of cellular devices. adam first then eve from him. they broke the bliss of self existance by combining and creating 2 others caine and able. caine being viral and agressive killed off able and began self replication. and so on ... til "corporal" forms were created. and from that we've kept evolving. and we haven't stopped. we're at a point that forced evolution is coming into play and our recessive genetics are kicking in, our ancestral genetics, the wings and tails, horns and tusks, ears and alterier limbs are the work of our genetics structuralizing our nervous system for the future or remembering the past. As I stated this Will bring much hatred toward myself but maybe it will enlighten a few others. I've many theories that I've discovered through my reworking of the production of man. including viruses, twins +, cancer, sids, and many other medical conditions associated with the cellular and genetic growth over time. feel free to contact me via youtube or facebook, i might get it on here or at my yahoo/gmail addresses by the same name.

I felt my phantom wings for the first time last night! I wasn't quite sure what it was at first... I felt a numbness in my back and then I felt like there was something heavy attached to my back... I shifted in my seat and felt the muscles in my back pull and strain from the weight... I continued to shift so I could see how it felt to move them. I was unable to get the sensation of moving them it was like my muscles were too weak. I then reached back and of course I already knew there was nothing there but it was instinct to reach back lol. So I sat there contemplating this... I told a friend about it before I went to bed and well, he didn't like call me nuts etc... so I decided to Google Feeling phantom wings!!! I found your post! I am a singer songwriter and am on a very enlightened path. I have had OBE and such but nothing like this lol. Anyway... I am not afraid to tell the world what I think and feel and believe! To keep it silent would go against what we are here to do... learn and share knowledge and experiences! I told the world today about "feeling" my wings. You are not alone! No I don't believe they are really there and no I can't see them but I have an idea of what they might look like based on how they felt to me. Look me up LIZZY BLONDE I can also change my eye color at will... this is real... I have had many see me do it and scared the shit out of a drunk stoned dude at a party once lol. I don't go around bragging or showing it off but I was drunk too and got a bit carried away with myself... let's just say I am much more careful with it now! Thanks for posting about this! Love&Respect-XoXoX-(LB 😱 💃

So, you take drugs and then feel like you have wings? Did you ever think that maybe the drugs where the reason, and not some mystical wings?

I feel phantom wings and I don't do drugs. I never said they were mystical. I just said they felt real though clearly they were not.

Originally posted by Lt_Champion
I feel phantom wings and I don't do drugs. I never said they were mystical. I just said they felt real though clearly they were not.

If they are not real, then how can you feel them? Is this some kind of synesthesia?

No clue, But I will let you know if I ever find out.