In the Matter of Carrot Neurotechnology, Inc., File No. 1423132 #00038

Submission Number:
00038
Commenter:
Marcello Maniglia
State:
Outside the United States
Initiative Name:
In the Matter of Carrot Neurotechnology, Inc., File No. 1423132
Dear FTC Staff, I'm Marcello Maniglia, Post Doctoral Researcher at CerCo, Toulouse (CNRS, France) and I'm writing you concerning Professor Seitz case. I'm a vision scientist and I work with visual training paradigms similar to the ones Prof. Seitz is using in his app. Specifically in my case, visual improvement as a product of visual trainings has been the main topic of my Ph.D thesis, and currently I'm applying a similar paradigm in individuals with central vision loss. In 2011 I published a paper in a peer-reviewed journal showing improvements of peripheral vision in normal-sighted subjects who underwent to a visual training similar to the one Prof. Seitz uses, plus another paper with clinical population (patients with Age Related Macular Degeneration) is under revision in another peer-reviewed journal. A growing number of evidence is pointing towards the idea that visual trainings do produce visual improvements, and different clinical population can (and in fact, already did) benefit from them. The scientific community is by this time aware of the positive effects of simple trainings on visual abilities, so much that recently I co-edited a Research Topic on Frontiers in Psychology on this very topic, with the participation of Prof. Seitz and other relevant vision scientists 'here the link http://journal.frontiersin.org/researchtopic/2347/learning-to-see-better...). Professor Seitz is a well known and highly competent scientist with a broad range of interests and his papers have been published in renowned, peer-reviewed scientific journals and cited by numerous researchers. I'm afraid that this case would create a problematic precedent in what seems to me a natural attempt to bring potential benefit-inducing techniques outside the doors of scientific labs, discouraging any further attempt to share with the public what is confined to basic research but might be of general benefit. I hope you would reconsider your action against Prof. Seitz in the light of what me and other scientists think about this situation. Sincerely, Marcello Maniglia, Ph.D.