From: peterson_at_d...
Date: 2001-06-08 18:34:01
--- In buildcheapeeg_at_yahoogroups.com, "lucas darten" <ljdarten_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Moritz v. Buttlar" <info_at_baltic-microsolutions.de>
> To: <buildcheapeeg_at_yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, June 08, 2001 4:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [buildcheapeeg] Re: Liability issues, etc.
> > Thatīs also the reason why I didnīt want to call it openly an EEG
device.
> This
> > name could confuse people to use our device like an EEG and use
it for
> > declaring somebody braindead (in the worst case). If we call it
EEG, we
> canīt
> > say itīs not a medical device and it doesnīt need certification.
There are
> also
> > lots of rules especially about medical measurement devices
regarding
> > calibration and so on. To avoid confusion about the goal our
device was
> > designed for, we should maybe not use the term EEG.
> >
> It seems to me that there would be no problem saying it is a
nonmedical EEG
> device. That is after all, what it would be. It would be like
thermometers
> you buy in the store, I believe some of them say they are not a
medical
> device or something like that.
>
> I think the real problem is when you refer to it as a neurofeedback
device.
> Because that implies you are using it for feedback training, where
eeg only
> implies that it shows your brainwaves to you.
So it's a nonmedical EEG device that you can couple with brainwave
training software at your own risk. Just as herbs are nutritional
supplements that you can use for specific health benefits at your own
risk.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:30 BST