Equine Assisted World with Rupert Isaacson

Rupert Isaacson: Welcome
to Equine Assisted World.

I'm your host, Rupert Isaacson,
New York Times best selling

author of The Horse Boy, The Long
Ride Home, and The Healing Land.

Before I jump in with today's
guest, I just want to say a huge

thank you to you, our audience,
for helping to make this happen.

I have a request.

If you like what we do, please
like, subscribe, tell a friend.

It really helps us get this work done.

As you might know from my
books, I'm an autism dad.

And over the last 20 years,
we've developed several

equine assisted, neuroscience
backed certification programs.

If you'd like to find out more
about them, go to newtrailslearning.

com.

So without further ado,
let's meet today's guest.

Welcome back.

I'm your host Rupert
Isaacson, and I've got Dr.

Chantel Pratt with me today
who's a neuroscientist.

And as you know, in our work movement
method, horse Boy Method Tacking, we like

neuroscience because we tend to be working
with the brain and the nervous system.

So it's sort of logical for us to look to
neuroscientists who hopefully understand

about such things for mentorship.

So I'm excited to have Chantel on today.

Chantel's also a horse, woman
and has dived into that side

of neuroscience as well.

So we get to ask her some questions
about horses', brains but also about.

The interaction between a human brain
and what goes on with horses, because

those of us who are involved in
the therapeutic and equine assisted

world need to know these things.

And because the science is rapidly
developing all the time and changing,

we sort of rely on people like
Chantel to keep us up to snuff.

So Chantel, welcome.

Thank you for coming on.

Who are you and what do you do?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Thank you so much for having me.

You might have noticed that I laughed
a little bit when you said Dr.

Chantel Pratt.

It's true.

I am a doctor, but I'm also
a first gen college student.

My husband and I both were
raised by people with high school

educations and I still, I mean,
I think I got my PhD in 2004.

But it's still more often
than not someone's making fun

of me when they call me Dr.

Pratt.

'cause I've just crashed into a.

Hole with an ice cream cone
or something like this.

But nonetheless, yes, it is true.

And and I really deeply believe that
science is an important way for asking

and understanding these big questions
that at the end of the day feel

almost more ethereal or I was going
to say metaphysical, but like when you

were talking about myself as a horse
person and myself as a neuroscientist.

I thought like both of these are really
hard things to understand and I, I

just wanna start by say, I'm gonna
give you my credentials and what have

you, but I just wanna start by saying
that probably because of how long I've

been studying these things, and I'm
talking, looking at pictures of brains,

you know, doing the numbers you know,
working with baby and, and older horses.

And I have a huge amount of humility
and I, and I probably am much more

aware of all of the things I don't
know than the things I do know, because

these are really complicated questions
and really intense, immense goals.

So.

That being said I am a neuroscientist,
a psychologist, and a linguist at the

University of Washington in Seattle.

My research for over 25 years has been
looking at individual differences in

how the brain gives rise to the mind.

So I am a cognitive neuroscientist
by training, which is a fun thing

to say when somebody asks you at the
bar, because they either will leave

you alone, pretend to understand
what it means or ask the question.

But, you know, neuroscience is
a huge field and some people

are really, you know, trying to
understand it at the chemical level.

And some people are very interested
in the nervous system from the

neck down, the, you know, the, the
body and the spine and all of that

important stuff, vagal and et cetera.

And I have really been focused on the
sense-making aspects of the brain and.

Not just the sense-making aspects of the
brain, but how our individual biology

and experiences give rise to the way
that we connect the dots when we try and

understand the world and our place in it.

And this is huge.

You know, we were talking to, I
was, I started by saying I have a

lot of humility about this, but I
just wanna point out that our, our

brain is about 86 billion neurons.

It's one of the most, if not the most
complex systems studied by humans.

It's totally crazy to get into the idea
that your brain is studying itself.

So all of the limits we have in
understanding the thing are, you know,

it, it's, it's a closed loop system here.

But even though the brain is complex
and powerful, it's, it's finite

and it tries to understand and
operate in this infinite world.

This infinite world full of energy
that is constantly changing by

taking discreet bite-sized chunks of
information and then connecting the dots.

We're constantly trying to figure out
what's going on now based on what's

happened to us in the past, and
we're constantly trying to predict

the future, but we really don't
like our understanding of the now.

The past and the future is
just largely inferential.

It's largely connecting the dots
and people see, think, and feel

differently because they have different
brains and different experiences

that have shaped those brains.

Rupert Isaacson: Tell us about your
book and the studies that went into

that book because this is really,
seems to be at the heart of your

work is, is looking at individuality.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: And what that means.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: So yeah,
so tell us about it.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

My book is called The Neuroscience
of You, how Every Brain Is Different

and How to Understand Yours.

And, you know, the book was created
with the goal of helping people

understand themselves first and foremost.

I think you know, I've been arguing that
theories about how the brain gives rise

to the mind that are one size fits all,
which is the vast majority of research

that exists don't fit anyone very well.

It's just like one size
fits all T-shirt, right?

It's down to your knees or, or not.

And and importantly, I think in
that process of helping people

understand themselves, I hope I am
laying a foundation for, for helping

people to relate across differences.

So if we think that
there's one way to learn.

Well, if we think there's one way to
be intelligent, if we think there's one

style of decision making that is good,
we, we operate in this totally false

paradigm that makes us see differences
as better, better or worseness, right?

We, we, we naturally line
up like, oh, I'm smarter.

I'm better at math.

I have a good memory.

I am, and, and the truth is that the
human humans are social primates.

Our brains evolved to solve problems
collectively in groups, in small family

groups mostly, or small tribal groups.

Because of this and because their vast
power and because we can never understand

the infinite ever-changing world, these
differences are features, not bugs.

We, we, there are trade-offs in
the different ways that we can be.

And the book talks about things that
vary from introversion and extroversion

and how that's explained by our
dopamine reward system to whether

we are like strongly right-handed,
strongly left-handed ambidextrous.

And what this says about how jobs get
assigned to our two hemispheres, always

looking at trade-offs, always looking
at the match rather than saying, this

brain design is better or worse, looking
at what is this brain design well.

Well designed to do what is the
match between what I am asking

my brain to do and my natural
predispositions and the things I've

learned from my previous experiences.

So, I mean, I'm, I'm about, when we
get off this podcast, I'm going to

start week 10 of a class that I'm
teaching here at the University of

Washington with 30 undergrads who
have gone through the book, done a lot

of me, what I call me search, right?

Done a lot of tests to figure
out how their brains work.

And probably the thing that I'm
proudest about is to hear people move

from saying things like, I'm bad at
attention, or I'm bad at memory, or I'm.

This way and that way to saying
like, there's a trade off, or I know

that I'm better at this than that.

And just that the sort of self-acceptance
and awareness that comes from

understanding, from moving from a sort
of strength deficit idea towards thinking

about the match between the environment
and what you're asking your brain to do.

Rupert Isaacson: Of course, the
environments that we find ourselves in are

largely determined by economics, right?

Yeah.

And so the diversely,

express,

ishness of the human species,
which I presume must be

across all mammalian species.

Mm-hmm.

Presumably comes about because any
natural environment has an infinitude of.

Potential things that can happen.

Mm-hmm.

And you might be, you might
specialize, so you might be more

hunter or gatherer if you are.

Mm-hmm.

Within hunter gatherer, you
might be more, you might be more

running hunter or bow hunter.

Mm-hmm.

Or tracker.

Mm-hmm.

You might be more medicinal plant person.

You might be more really able to discern
between plants that almost look the same

as each other, doppelganger type plants.

Mm-hmm.

Or you might be the person that
can really get up well in the

trees and shake down the nuts.

So you could see, you could
definitely see why all of these.

This infinitude of brains would evolve.

Mm-hmm.

In any kind of, and I think

Dr. Chantel Prat:

more so, more so in, in
animals that exist in packs.

Right.

So I think that there are revolutionary
so I think that like, you know, I, this

is not a brain thing, but I, I always
compare the human brain to the pea

cocktail where it's like, okay, you can
say this pea cocktail is better or worse

than this peacock tail based on how long
it is or how colorful it is, or, you know.

So I think in like, less collaborative
animals, there probably are things

that are more adaptive than others,
but there are always differences.

Right.

I guess the way selection, selection
has unfolded for humans, you know, we

selected four differences for sure.

Rupert Isaacson: Right.

So we also have the ability
to pool our knowledge.

Right.

So

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Correct.

Rupert Isaacson: And make strategies.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: That seems to
be our, our biggest superpower.

We're sort of.

Victims of our own success perhaps.

Yeah.

But you could also see how we've arrived
in the kind of culture that you and I live

in at a point where economically now we've
almost specialized our environment to a

point where only certain types of brain
can thrive in an easy or straightforward

manner, and other types of brain

get undervalued.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: And for real reasons,
because within that more narrow economic

confine, indeed there are only like
these three or four types of brain that,

you know, really do well with that.

And all those other ones,
perhaps not so much.

And this leads us into, or
here's a, is a question.

Does this lead us into a
false set of assumptions?

About normality.

Mm-hmm.

And where we think normality is
being able to conform to that narrow

economic construct, whereas in
fact, that narrow economic construct

itself is, is an abnormality.

Mm-hmm.

In the sort of greater history of mankind.

Mm-hmm.

And therefore, we're actually
mistaken, but we're sort of

right and wrong at the same time.

And then if you come along with someone
like me who would say, well, my experience

of maths at school in the way that I was
taught means that I think I'm bad at math.

Later on when I had to homeschool my
son in math, I realized that being bad

at math was actually kind of a good
thing because it meant, meant I could

empathize with somebody who was No.

And, and I could, I could look at.

How to break things down.

So I had to understand it first, and
if I could understand it with the

difficulties I had, then there was perhaps
a sporting chance that he might Mm.

Or they actually turned out to
be better than me, of course.

But

I guess the question I'm asking is, do
you still feel in this day and age of

the recognition of diversity, which is
different to when we were kids, that the

sort of narrow idea of what's normal and
what's not normal and what's a, a good

brain and what's a bad brain, or has,
has that now not all broken down a bit?

Or am I just living under completely
false solutions because I work within

this field and think that people are
actually, are, are people still stuck

in these ideas of normal and, uh mm-hmm.

Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So there's two, two
things I want to address.

The first is about this particular
economic, the definition of good

being based on what makes money
or what functions in the way

we've set up Western societies.

Mm-hmm.

And then you started to
answer the question by talking

about teaching your sons.

I think it starts in education.

I think the big problem is
actually how education is set

up, not how industry is set up.

And I think that our
educational systems are largely.

Set up.

I mean, it just boggles the mind because
education is set up from a time in which

only the teacher had the knowledge and
like, you know, you're supposed to sit

and sit still and listen because you
have to transfer in this laborious way,

knowledge from one brain to another.

And we're so far, we've, we have evolved
as a society, not as a brain, because

where the brain is coming from, written
language is still new and hard, right?

So when you think about chat, GPT and
all this stuff, like we've come so far,

but yet we still have this model in
which kids are supposed to sit still

and passively absorb instruction.

And that is so far from how any brain
evolved to learn and problem solve.

That I think you know, the challenges
when it comes to value and what

we value start much earlier
than, than in the economic cri.

Rupert Isaacson: Right.

And you talk, there is a correlation
between that and industry, right.

Because of course, making
kids sit down, shut up and

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Behave

Rupert Isaacson: was part of preparing
them to go work in factories,

Dr. Chantel Prat:

sit in front of a Yes.

Sit in front of a computer and,

Rupert Isaacson: yeah.

Yeah.

So I mean, does not one create the other?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes, but not necessarily.

I think what, and I think both to
your question about where are we

now, I think both are, coming to
understand and appreciate differences.

Mm-hmm.

For different reasons.

So like I would argue,
and, you know, I do.

So, I am on the advisory board for Ariana
Huffington, who founded the Huffington

Post, has a company called Thrive Global,
and it's about wellness in the workplace.

And we're creating a training there
about diversity in the workplace

and specifically about the benefits
in decision making that come when

you have different brains with
different backgrounds at the table.

So I think I would argue that
there is an economic advantage to

considering many different brain types.

To having people who think, again, as
we evolve to think and make decisions

in groups, to valuing people with these
different brain types at the table.

And when you create work environments
that support different kinds of thinkers

and deciders, and you incorporate
their ideas, you also create products

that work for more kinds of thinkers.

Mm-hmm.

So there, and, and and so I think we are
at a sort of turning point where, you

know, I, I've been spending more and more
time with C-level execs who understand.

That diversity is not only about sitting
around a table with people who look

different than you and think the same.

That's not it.

That's not the magic sauce.

It's sitting around a table with
people with different experiences and

different brain types that they can
bring into this decision making space

and learning how to appreciate these
different perspectives and find something

that will work well for more people.

That there are a lot of
advantages in that space

Rupert Isaacson: is industry
actually now Refinding the

hunter-gatherer model because
industry itself has become so diverse.

You know, it used to be.

Mm-hmm.

A factory was sort of a factory and it ran
with an assembly line and you know, you,

and it's now looking very, very different.

And in a few years, robots
will do all that anyway and.

Are we at the point now this interesting
point where we're returning to a sort

of hunter-gatherer economy, but that's
post-industrial, where we actually

now suddenly realize, oh my gosh,
yes, we do need to create products

for all these different brains, but
this is actually, again, quite new

within the, since the Industrial
revolution, things were more homogenized.

Yeah.

Interesting that, that you're there.

What, what do you say?

You're working with
these CEOs and so forth.

What are they saying about this
and what are they, and then how

are they able to make their work
environments possible for Yeah.

People with these different brains.

That's not just lip service saying,
well, we're gonna hire Right.

So people Right.

Exactly.

Gonna hire so and so.

Exactly.

But they're gonna just go
and shred paper or whatever.

Yeah, exactly.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Exactly.

And so I think that that's,
that's the real work.

So your, your vision of returning
to hunter gatherer is quite

interesting because that's
the work is that, naturally.

I think because of the way that
we understand one another, there's

all this really interesting social
neuroscience work that shows that if

we're in the wild and we're moving
around choosing our friends, we

choose people who work like we do.

Like you can predict.

They did this crazy fascinating study
on an island in South Korea where they

created a social network of like 700
villagers and then stuck them in a scanner

and measured their brain connectivity
and showed that you could predict who

would be friends with whom based on how
similarly their brains were wired, and

that this explained, you know, friendships
above and beyond things like age.

Politics, personality, so long
as they live close enough to

have come into casual contact.

When we're choosing people to spend time
with, we choose people who work like us.

And I think that's because our sort of
default to mirror neurons and so forth

and so on, allows us to make easier
intuitive inferences when somebody

works like us now in the workplace.

I think that often how this
translates is when they say somebody

is not a good fit culturally.

Like there are all these kind of like code
words when you're in hiring and you might

say it's not a good fit for the culture
or, and I think that that's a feeling that

comes when the person you're interviewing
has a different brain, a different

thinking, feeling, behaving style.

And I also think that we are more likely
to think someone who comes up with

the same solution as we do is smarter.

Because you can understand that solution.

You agree with it.

And so you're like, oh yeah, this
is a great person I have on my team.

It's like duplicating Triplicating
myself, cloning myself.

And so people need concrete
examples and evidence.

It's hard.

It's certainly harder to create
communication styles to create

management systems that go away from
assumptions about how people think,

feel, and operate towards, you know,
more personalized, individualized

spaces that support these differences.

And they need concrete examples for how
this is gonna make them money, right?

And how the decision making will look.

'cause it's not gonna feel.

Like, oh, this is great.

You're brilliant.

I love you.

It's gonna feel weird.

Like, and so that's where I think
the, my book has helped give some

kind of engineering examples.

Like, this is how brains work.

These are the weaknesses that are
associated with all these kind of fast,

instant, probabilistic decision making.

This is what you're missing.

And so getting people to feel
curious about the brain across

the table that is saying something
that you might think is asinine

or doing something that
you might think is asinine.

That's, I think, the magic and the secret
sauce, because every brain does things

that they think are perfectly reasonable.

Every brain, every single brain
is moving through the world trying

to find good things and avoid
bad things based on their, their

engineering and their experiences.

So instead of thinking, why is this
idea asinine, asking questions about

how that person got to that place.

Is this kind of opening
experience for sort of,

you know, sort of reconceptualizing
better or worse, right or

wrong with what am I missing?

Yeah.

What is this person
highlighting that I missed?

Rupert Isaacson: I just wrote down,
I just wrote curiosity underlined.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes.

It's curiosity is the magic.

It's my favorite thing that I
learned about in writing my book.

And it's the secret sauce I think.

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah, I agree.

And I, you know, without
curiosity, there's no innovation.

Without innovation, there's no
long-term thriving economically.

Right.

Because conditions change.

So one has to, whether it's in hunter
gatherer context here, there could be

a drought, there could be some natural
thing that causes the shifting of changes.

Mm-hmm.

Natural resources.

Mm-hmm.

Obviously market forces, you
know, we're seeing some disruptive

market forces going on as we as,
as we speak here in March, 2025.

It's an interesting time.

Oh, boy.

If you're not curious, I mean, yeah.

How can you, how can you
thrive in these things?

Right.

I want to bring you back though,
to, you talked about mirror neurons.

Mm-hmm.

Mirror neurons are something which
you hear a lot of people talk about.

Mm-hmm.

But I've got a, I've just caught a
neuroscientist on the end of my screen.

Tell us exactly what neuro,
what, what mirror neurons are.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Well, I can tell you exactly how they
were discovered and then I can tell

you about the ambiguities of them.

Right.

So a mirror neuron.

At its core is a neuron in the
brain that responds, that is both

involved in generating an action in
the person themselves and when they

observe someone else doing an action.

So it was first discovered in
Italy in a monkey lab where they

were actually trying, so they had
electrodes in this monkey's brain

and they were doing they were, you
know, I don't know, putting fruit.

On a tray in front of the monkey.

And what they wanted to see is
like what part of the motor cortex

executes a specific grabbing response.

So there's a lot of motor pro, a lot
of brain is involved in just motor

programming and what they found, so
they had, you know, these motor cortex

neurons isolated for this monkey's hand.

And what they found was the experimenter
who was a human, by the way.

Obviously, I guess, I
mean, would be really cool.

I

Rupert Isaacson: should be surprised.

I mean, it

Dr. Chantel Prat:

would be really cool to have monkeys.

But anyway, it was a human, that
Italian monkeys, no, that exactly.

They're very social and very, very smart.

But the, when the human put like
the, you know, the fruit, the treat

on the tray, they used the same
grasp, the same motion that they

were trying to study in the monkey.

And they found these neurons started
firing these neurons that were supposed

to be for motor programming started
firing when they saw someone else.

Do the action that they
are supposed to do.

So we know that there are populations
of neurons in the human brain that

are both involved in the per, it's
really important for language.

For instance, there are neurons in,
around, in and around the sort of speech

bro's area that will listen to speech
sounds and they sort of activate the

motor plan that would create those
speech sounds and that helps them

understand where, where are the brain?

Are

Rupert Isaacson: these located

Dr. Chantel Prat:

mostly in the frontal cortex?

So they're mostly in the, I would
say, both sides of the frontal cortex.

Now what happens is, I think so, so
the criteria for something to be a

mirror neuron specifically is that
I both generate a behavior and.

I respond when I see other
people doing that behavior.

Okay.

And, and that's, and so like, you know,
in the original research on animals,

we had an you know, an electrode
in the brain and we were really

specific about what was going on.

Now there's, I think that the research
has gotten fuzzier because when

you're looking at human brains and
you don't have electrodes in them,

there are a lot of parts of the brain
that do a lot of different things.

And so, you know, the mirror I, to
the best of my knowledge, mirror

re neuron research has become
controversial in some areas.

So like, one of the things that I think
is quite evocative is the idea that mirror

neurons are involved in empathy and and.

One of the reasons I think this
is evocative is how hard it is to

just, is empathy a single thing?

How hard it is to define empathy, how hard
it is to catch a brain being empathetic.

And so usually when they study, you
know, you have to think about this.

If you're thinking about flow or like
creativity or things that are really

cool that we actually wanna understand.

If we can't time it to the precise
millisecond, if we can't catch it

in action, if we can't cause it, how
sure can we be that we're studying it?

So with with empathy, often what
they do is watch somebody get hurt.

It's like a physical pain, empathy,
and it, and then you're looking at

like, activation in the sort of somatic
somatosensory areas and you know.

Similar.

Like you see somebody get hit
with a ball or something and you

look for like the feeling of pain.

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: They get hit in the army.

Clutch your arm, right?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Right.

And you I do, I definitely feel, yeah.

You know, that's why I, like, we have,
I, I probably shouldn't talk about this,

but like we have a divide in my family
about nut shot videos and whether or not

they're hysterical, I like feel it, I
don't, obviously don't have testicles,

but like I feel the pain from those so
viscerally that I can't, they're both

Rupert Isaacson: painful and funny.

I'd say that they're both right.

But my husband

Dr. Chantel Prat:

and my daughter think they're
hysterical and will cry and just

watch like endless snapshot videos.

So I'm like, okay, is that something
different about our mirror neurons?

Like, I don't know.

It certainly crosses gender.

So, I don't know what's going
on there, but, but that's a very

specific kind of empathy, right?

So I, you know, to the extent that
that generalizes to cognitive pain, you

know, to emotional pain I don't know.

But, but the, you know, when it comes to.

How we understand one another
and how we understand our horses.

I think this is fascinating 'cause
the, you know, the idea is that

mirror neurons is kind of a way of
understanding through simulation, right?

Like, I watch you do an action, the part
of my brain that would execute that action

activates and I think ow or whatever, you
know, but I think this is why we're drawn

to brains that work like ours in the wild.

'cause this isn't mirror neurons
are intuitive, instinctual.

It's, it's not learned.

It's why little kids cover their
eyes and think they disappear.

You know?

This is our, the easiest way of
understanding one another, I think.

And so.

If you and I have totally different
wirings and I'm watching you behave,

and I'm simulating it, and I'm thinking,
this is asinine, my brain is different.

So when my brain walks through, thumbs
up, when my brain walks through, what

it would be doing in that case, and I
have all these different priors and I

have all these different wirings, and
I think that makes no sense whatsoever.

Then it's like stepping into
shoes that are a different, you

know, walking a mile in someone's
shoes that are a different size.

So that's where I think the, the more,
what Paul Bloom, I think, wrote a book

called Against Empathy, a, a Case for
Rational Compassion, where he talks

about understanding in this more what we
call theory of mind way, which is a more

abstract clue based use the information
to reverse engineer somebody else.

And I think that kind of theory of
mind understanding is not as warm,

it's not as a effective effective,
but it allows you, I think to

understand people who work differently.

Than you do, like you might and,
and with the horses, I think it's

interesting to, to consider how
much we're feeling with a horse and

getting it wrong because the horse
has a different experience than we do.

Yeah.

Versus using the bits and of,
you know, the bits we've learned

about how horses work to kind of
rationalize what might be going

Rupert Isaacson: on just
quickly, just to beat the, the

dead horse on mirror neurons.

Mm-hmm.

I, am I correct in, in thinking that
a mirror neuron is not just a mirror

neuron that a mirror neuron does?

Lots of, might do other things, might
have other jobs it does as well.

Of which the imitation

Dr. Chantel Prat:

right

Rupert Isaacson: thing, it's
just one function, but they could

equally do other things as well?

Or is it dedicated?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I don't know the answer to that.

So I think that I mean they
have at least two jobs.

One would be executing
the behavior in you.

Mm-hmm.

Like you don't only, so I guess maybe
that answers your question, that

part of the brain in the monkeys
is firing when they're trying to

grab a, a, a grape, whether they're
seeing someone else do it or not.

So it is involved in social imitation
and learning, but it has a, a

primary job in controlling your body.

Rupert Isaacson: So if we're involved in
the sort of therapeutic writing end of

things, which obviously a lot of people
listening to this show are what I presume

that trying to optimize people's mirror
neuron development would be a useful

thing because it helps them to learn how
to thrive in a confusing world by kind

of learning which behaviors to emulate.

Mm-hmm.

What's the best.

Advice that you would give to somebody
working in Sayan equine assisted

field who wanted to help somebody
optimize their mirror neurons?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Do optimize them for other people or,

Rupert Isaacson: well, for both.

I mean, 'cause I should imagine cross
species, if you are, if you talk

to a lot of autistic people, for
example, they'll say, well, it does

feel like I'm dealing with another
species when I'm dealing with you.

Mm-hmm.

So whether I'm dealing with a
horse or whether I'm dealing with a

neurotypical human, whatever that is.

And then similarly for neurotypical
humans, when they're dealing with

people on the spectrum, it can
feel like dealing with, it can feel

like dealing with another species.

And this is where the
communication breaks down.

So how can we help ourselves
out neurologically Yeah.

As the practitioners so that we can help
our, our, if you like, service users.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

So my instinctive response is that.

To the best of my knowledge, and I will
admit that I'm not an expert in this,

the mirror neuron system is pretty

I'm so hesitant to use the word innate,
but I guess what I would say is I would

sca rather than trying to train the
mirror neuron system per se, I would

be trying to train explicit behaviors.

Like if the mirror neuron system is
working atypically, because this is

something you see in, in infants.

You see them imitating facial expressions.

You, this is something
that's been milestones,

Rupert Isaacson: et cetera.

Those milestones are not happening, right?

Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right, right, right.

So, I mean, it, it, it's either been
unfolding or not unfolding typically

up until the point of intervention.

So, you know, my, what I would be
doing is making the things that

might be implicit to us explicit.

To the learner.

I think that that's a more
tractable learning technique.

Right.

Put that in

Rupert Isaacson: terms that somebody
walking around an arena with a

kid on a pony in Staffordshire

Dr. Chantel Prat:

mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: On a Tuesday night.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So you want them stand and

Rupert Isaacson: put into practice.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So again, is, are we trying
to get them to understand the

pony or the, the instructor?

Rupert Isaacson: That's a good question.

If you're in the equine assisted
field, or if you're considering

a career in the equine assisted
field, you might want to consider

taking one of our three neuroscience
backed equine assisted programs.

Horseboy method, now established
for 20 years, is the original

Equine assisted program specifically
designed for autism, mentored by and

developed in conjunction with Dr.

Temple Grandin and many
other neuroscientists.

We work in the saddle
with younger children.

Helping them create oxytocin in their
bodies and neuroplasticity in the brain.

It works incredibly well.

It's now in about 40 countries.

Check it out.

If you're working without horses,
you might want to look at movement

method, which gets a very, very
similar effect, but can also be

applied in schools, in homes.

If you're working with families, you can
give them really tangible exercises to do

at home that will create neuroplasticity.

when they're not with you.

Finally, we have taquine
equine integration.

If you know anything about our
programs, you know that we need a

really high standard of horsemanship
in order to create the oxytocin

in the body of the person that
we're working with, child or adult.

So, this means we need to train
a horse in collection, but this

also has a really beneficial
effect on the horse's well being.

And it also ends your time conflict,
where you're wondering, oh my gosh, how

am I going to condition my horses and
maintain them and give them what they

need, as well as Serving my clients.

Takine equine integration aimed
at a more adult client base

absolutely gives you this.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Because for the pony, like I would say,
do you notice what his ears are doing?

Like, what do you think that means?

You know, and how about how does that
look compared to this Pony's ears?

Like, you know, what
can we learn from this?

And like with the instructor or with, you
know, Billy, you could say like, you know.

When you said, Hey, shut up, or
whatever just happened, like,

you know, what did you notice?

You know, you know, did you see this
thing and you can like point out and now

Rupert Isaacson: what if, what if the per,
that all sounds highly reasonable, and now

what if the person doesn't have the kind
of brain that can receive information in

that way, sort of top down instruction.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

So what if they're, what if they're
like severely autistic or mm-hmm.

Away with the fairies in whatever way,
and you want to help to bring them into

this type of empathetic cognition.

Mm.

So that, not so that they can be
changed, but just so that they

don't get their ass kicked mm-hmm.

Too heavily by the world that they're in.

How could we, what, what, what are some
things that spring to mind for you?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So the thing that, to help kickstart that

Rupert Isaacson: process,
theory of mind effectively.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

The thing that makes sense to me,
based on my understanding of the

brains of people with autism is that
you've got a, the thing that you want

them to learn about, you've gotta
restrict distracting information.

So you would need to simplify
the world to the extent that

you could make the learning item
of interest the most salient.

So I hear you saying like, I'm on a
horse and I, and my brain is not verbal,

or it's not programmable in this way.

And part of that is because you're
the, you know, the things that they pay

attention to are not as predictable as
the things that we pay attention to.

Like, you can you in a neurotypical,
individual, you can, there are

certain things like social cues,
like language, like faces that take

priority a lot of times over things
that would be very salient for someone

with autism, like repeated motion.

Of course.

That's, you know, that's what we're
working toward by, or like, machines,

anything that's predictable is something
that might help attract their attention,

which is kind of the exact opposite of the
noisy, chaotic human face and, and voice.

So I guess, and I'm sure people have
done this because it seems obvious the,

the learning should be happening
in a situation that is as free

from other kinds of distraction
as possible to make the, the.

The cue, you know, so when I think of
mirror neurons, I think of a match between

what you're seeing and what you're doing.

And to the extent that such a thing
could be trained you would want

to just eliminate every, every
other kind of as many other kinds

of distracting things as possible.

So I, I've, I've read about, for instance
vocabulary development in autism.

And it's fascinating because, you know, in
a typically developing brain, mom can take

a pen and go point to it and say, pen.

And there are all these, you're
listening to mom's face, voice the point.

There are all these social
cues that point you to this.

The attention on this object
and, and a typically developing

kid with autism is like.

Listening to the finger, the butt,
the way the socks feel, and the shoes,

like you might learn any amount of this
sensory information might be capturing.

Right.

Your attention.

Rupert Isaacson: You know, it, it,
it's really interesting when I was

first having to get involved in this
'cause I had to 'cause of my son.

There was,

and there still is a belief
among some people that say

a wall with art on it or something
like that would be too distracting.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm.

Rupert Isaacson: And then, and so
people would be working in these

really very sterile environments.

Mm-hmm.

White walls, frankly depressing.

Aesthetically.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: But I found of
course, going out into nature.

With my

Dr. Chantel Prat:

kid.

Mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: Opened everything up.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes.

And that makes,

Rupert Isaacson: and there were multiple
distractions, but those distractions

seemed to work for us, not against us.

Mm-hmm.

So my question with that is,

Dr. Chantel Prat:

oh, this is a good, this
gives me a good idea.

Okay.

Keep going.

Rupert Isaacson: Okay.

Is, is this is this because a,
those distractions didn't have a

bad sensory effect because mm-hmm.

They're the distractions that
our organism is set up for.

Mm-hmm.

I mm-hmm.

You know, the wind, the, the
light, the trees or whatever.

Mm-hmm.

So therefore they're
not really distractions.

Mm-hmm.

They're just sort of our habitat.

Mm-hmm.

And then do our brains that
automatically respond better to those.

And then the other thing was, of
course, it was all in, in movement.

And that brings me back to mm-hmm.

What you were saying earlier about
with factories and, and schools.

The brain didn't evolve.

To learn and problem solve
that way sitting still.

So I wanted, so I made a
little note to myself, say, ask

about movement and the brain.

So nature movement.

Okay.

And then what I would do, of
course was look for what seemed

to motivate him from the, that's

Dr. Chantel Prat:

exactly what I wrote, I wrote,

Rupert Isaacson: and then
just go in that direction.

That's exactly right.

And the reason I did it though, mm-hmm.

Was not because I was intelligent.

The only reason I did it was because
I'm not intelligent and because I know

that I'm not intelligent in that way.

I went for mentorship from Temple
Grandin who told me to do that mm-hmm.

As an autistic person.

Mm-hmm.

So I, as a journalist went, well, she's
autistic and she's successful, so she

must know what she's talking about.

So therefore I will do what she says
because that just seems rational.

And I did and it worked.

Mm-hmm.

But I, yeah, I definitely found
that following what other, what

sometimes behavioral therapists
would've called distractions, I

found were not distractions at all.

Mm-hmm.

They were motivators.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

That's right.

Rupert Isaacson: Right.

That's right.

So, so what's going on
with there, with the brain?

And

Dr. Chantel Prat:

so there's some, my gosh, like there
is a person here at UW called, his

name is Gregory Bratman, and there's a
team that are studying nature wellness

interactions and in so many different
ways sort of nature and mental health.

And like the first thing that I
thought about when you were talking

about walls with no art and versus
nature is this idea of soft.

One of the things that seems to be
true is that when we are in nature,

we are inherently softer in our focus.

We are more like the horses, right?

Mm-hmm.

Like we have this wide picture, and
I do think that that's very settling.

It's restorative.

Mm, for the nervous system, right?

Because we also have something
called like attentional fatigue.

And I think, you know, as you were
talking about the white walls and, and

things like this, I thought, okay, what
is, how do you get from distracting

to like stressful amount of pressure
in one area, which will then fatigue

your brain and your nervous system?

And I think this kind of soft
focus which you also get, we know

this is true from moving, right?

You, the rhythm, rhythm of walking
relaxes the nervous system and it opens

up creativity and opens up like the
ability to think and reason and learn.

So that's the first thing is that
this is, is that the, the way we

focus in nature, we need to be aware,
we need to be alert, we need to know

where we're putting our feet, which
is kind of cool and interesting.

But the, we're not necessarily
hyper-focused on something

that will fatigue the brain.

We have a, a, a kind of broader
awareness, which seems to be from

a mental health point, restorative.

And you're right, that's,
that's how we are meant.

We, we are animals.

And that is how we are meant to exist.

It is, and I think it's in this space of
normal value what's good and what's bad.

I, I worry so much about how removed
we are from how, how many things

that we think are bad about our
brains that are just absolutely the

way that we are designed to exist.

Our brains have not.

Evolved nearly as fast as our society.

The pressures that our
society has put on them have

Rupert Isaacson: what?

What do we think is bad about our brains
that, that we could be wrong about?

I think

Dr. Chantel Prat:

a attention is the biggest thing.

Like, you know, my students like, and I
think that this is a great, I also wanna

talk about your, your question about do we
think we've diversity is accepted or not?

I think it depends.

Attention is a huge thing.

Like many, many people, like you're,
you are saying I'm not intelligent, but

I think that's because you have a very
specific idea of intelligence that's like

sitting in front of books like I am right
now and digesting things and, you know,

and remembering them when they have like,
no tangible purpose in your real life.

Or like, you know, how, how well did you
absorb numbers on the chalkboard when

someone gave it to you without a context?

And, and when it comes to, I just think
that there's a very straightforward way

that your brain defines intelligence.

Your brain defines intelligence
as learning the things that will

move you through the world and
help you find good things, period.

Right.

And so having the ability to like
undergo six hours of class a day

for 25 years of your life before you
finally get a job where you make money

and can then buy the good things is
like not, that's not very natural.

That's a lot of delayed gratification.

Right.

So, I'm completely, I'm, I
am, I'm thinking about nature.

What, what did you ask me?

What's it, the brain, well, well,

Rupert Isaacson: that you
talked about attention.

So, yeah.

Attention.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So a lot of people feel they hate, like
I I, at the beginning of this class, I

would hear my students saying, I hate.

A DHD.

Do you know how many of my, like in
my students, I'm at the University of

Washington, it's widely considered one of
the 10 bus public schools in the world.

Mm-hmm.

I think that could be changing,
but and so these students are at

the top of what society would call
high functioning intellectual.

And I probably have about 25% of
the students in my class, this

upper division, like neuroscience
class with diagnoses of A DHD.

And I think there's
something in that, right?

So either we can say, and, and if
you look at incidents of A DHD,

it really depends on the country.

It depends on the time period.

It, it could be something
that's increasing because of,

you know, digital stimulation.

It could be something that's di being more
widely diagnosed because of awareness.

But the fact is that one in four.

Students have this diagnosis means
that it's not rare, it's not atypical,

and it also means it can't be bad

Rupert Isaacson: of a thing.

Right.

Otherwise it can't that, that
bad of a thing getting into

University of Washington.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Exactly.

Exactly.

And in some ways but, but, but the
students will say, I hate that.

And then I say, okay, well
let's talk about the opposite.

Do they say why

Rupert Isaacson: they hate it, by the way?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I think they hate, well, they, they
will say like, I don't know why I

can't be motivated to sit and do
something for a long period of time.

Okay.

Or how, or or that I then get hyper.

You know, they're aware that they
also get hyper-focused and like

down a rabbit hole for something
that they say like wasn't important.

And so one of the things that we've
learned in my class is like, when

you are, you know, what widely.

In both this kind of economical world and
in the classroom, what's widely considered

valuable or good is the ability to pay
attention according to some goal, right?

Like I am, I'm telling you, pay
attention to what I'm saying.

'cause we're on a podcast right now
and that means whatever, or you know,

I'm telling you, pay attention to your
homework or I'm telling you, pay attention

to dropping your heels or whatever, right?

And the ability to, but like.

When people are paying, paying attention
first, it's expensive for everyone.

That's why it's called
freaking paying attention.

It uses the frontal globes.

When you're paying attention, what
you're actually doing is you are

overriding everything you've learned
from trial and error experience.

Oh, that's interesting.

Okay.

So like everything you've
learned about how to stay alive,

how to find the good things.

Mm-hmm.

You can override that to now focus
on a specific piece of the world

and ignore the other pieces of the

Rupert Isaacson: world.

Mm-hmm.

For a specific outcome.

Right.

For

Dr. Chantel Prat:

a specific outcome.

It, it costs a lot from an energetic
perspective and you are literally

distorting the world as it is,
and you are less likely to see

something that you're not expecting.

Rupert Isaacson: Right.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So, you know, if you don't have someone
with a DHD in your, a hunter gatherer

group and you happen upon a cave with
eyeballs popping out of it, you're dead.

Yeah.

You're over here counting blueberries
like you're supposed to and see how

many are in the basket or whatever, and.

You're not even seeing
the eyeballs in that cave.

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah, no, absolutely.

And that, that's always been my
thought about a DHD is that, you

know, having, having lived with hunter
gatherers you can see how the human

brain has to be able to operate in
effectively multiple parallel universes.

Correct.

And at the same time hyperfocus.

Mm-hmm.

And at the same time allow
itself to be distracted.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

And isn't it convenient if you
have different people who are

good at those things and can
communicate with one another?

Rupert Isaacson: Right.

Right.

So you can defer to, you are better
at the blueberries than I am.

So when it comes to blueberries,
I'm deferring to Chantal.

So then maybe I can give Chantal the
chance to go down the blueberry rabbit

hole because we'll benefit from that.

And I'll watch out for bears.

While she's doing that because she
knows more about blueberries than I do.

When it comes time to do the thing
that I'm good at, she'll do the

same, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

But, and then, you know, the, the
need to change on a dime and pivot.

Mm-hmm.

So if you're hunting conditions change
like that, the wind changes or the animal

hunts you back, or you realize mm-hmm.

Another animal was hunting you while
you're hunting or whatever it is.

And so if you can't then pivot very,
very fast, well you can't get food.

So, you, one I've often wondered
when people talked about A DHD,

like, is, does a DHD, why is
there a deal on the end of it?

Why is it a disorder and a deficit?

Mm-hmm.

So it's only a disorder and a
deficit, presumably if it no

longer fits the economic model.

So That's right.

Yeah.

And in

Dr. Chantel Prat:

fact, the diagnostic criteria, I talk
about this from time to time because

I study attention and attentional
differences in the lab, and there are

a number of tests you can do about
distractibility focus goal, you know,

orienting all the, you can break it
into a million different boring tasks.

There's no criteria.

There's no, if you get
this score, you have a DHD.

It is not, that's not
how you get diagnosed.

You get diagnosed

Rupert Isaacson: objective.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

It's if you, yeah.

Is this, is this impairing your
ability at home work or whatever.

Right.

In context.

Rupert Isaacson: Okay.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So that's about functionality.

It's not about typicality.

Rupert Isaacson: Well, right.

And then that depends on what's
being valued at home, presumably.

Correct.

So if, if the home culture is
that, I as an 8-year-old boy should

Dr. Chantel Prat:

sit, still

Rupert Isaacson: behave
like a Philadelphia lawyer.

Yes.

You know.

There might be a small percentage
of boys that can do that at eight.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: But if
you're not one of them,

Dr. Chantel Prat:

then you start to feel like there's
something wrong with a dysfunction.

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah.

Then it means that we've
gotten very narrow in

Dr. Chantel Prat:

mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: What we perceive as
an economically viable thing, right?

Yes.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: Instead of, yeah.

So diversity, you talk about diversity
and one and one, one thinks about

it as diversity of people, diversity
of brain types, but there's also

diversity of economics, right?

Surely Yes.

You know, we need multiple skill
sets, people with multiple correct.

Skill sets.

Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

And, and, and Temple Grandin
is big about she is so, you

know, tuned into that as well.

And like, we're under training for really
important skill sets when we had dinner.

Two weeks ago she said that her new
passion is going around looking at

all the certificates everywhere in
the world that have not been checked,

like the elevator certificates.

Yes, she does.

And I was like, I don't like
elevators to start with.

You're not helping me at all.

She's like, they're everywhere like you.

She came, she

Rupert Isaacson: came and spoke at the
conference that we did in September, and

she, the first thing out of her mouth when
she got on the floor, she says, I just

checked the elevator coming up here and
it's out of date by, and we're like, okay.

All using the stairs.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Yeah.

Comforting.

Comforting.

But hey, awareness is, is key

Rupert Isaacson: indeed.

What part of the brain, just quickly
about attention, what part or parts

of the brain govern attention?

Hmm.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So I would say the attention is a, an
interaction between the frontal lo?

Well, it depends on the kind, right?

So there's natural, or I
call it organic attention.

Some people call it distractible.

But I love it because squirrel
is, you know, that's the kind

of prototypical distractibility.

But hey man, squirrel
is an organic attention.

That's thing.

Well, squirrel is

Rupert Isaacson: also edible.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah, right.

I mean, why wouldn't, I mean, you
know, that's why wouldn't I look at

Rupert Isaacson: sport?

I might be able to eat it in
a hunter gatherer context.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Or you might be able to
make friends with it here.

Theyre, or maybe it's
going quite aggressive.

Steelers of lunches might
be your competition.

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

So there's two things.

One is that you have a frontal
lobe that holds the goal in

mind if you're paying attention.

And two is that you have these basal
ganglia, which are my favorite parts

of the brain, which are the the
dopamine rich reward centers that

learn based on previous experiences,
where to find the good things.

Now, the basal gang, my husband has a,
a, a really cool computational model

about this called conditional signal
routing, which by the way, we found was

working quite differently in autism.

And the idea is that when you have a
goal, the frontal lobe can help change

the rules for what good looks like, right?

So like if you know, you know, ice cream
is good and so, and you feel hungry

and there's ice cream, you're like,
this is a high probability reward.

But if you're like.

Energized enough to hold in mind that
you wanna live to be 100 and that

you haven't eaten any vegetables.

The frontal lobe can tell the basal
ganglia, Hey, like right now, actually

fiber, things that grew from the
planet are good in a, like, in a

way that aligns with these goals.

And you can, and you can
make a different decision.

Rupert Isaacson: So it's, so is your
basal ganglia, your impulse and your

prefrontal cortex, what you're talking
about there, that that could override that

impulse for kinda to change what's good?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

Kind of.

I think that basal ganglia are
a lot smarter than just impulse.

I think they're at any, given the
frontal lobe gets all of this, I think

of the frontal lobe, like the CEO that
gets all of this credit for making

decisions, but the basal ganglia are
already filtering behind the scenes

based on your previous experiences to say
this information is pretty particularly

important for making your decision.

Rupert Isaacson: Where are they located?

The basal ganglia right

Dr. Chantel Prat:

in the middle of the brain.

Rupert Isaacson: Why
are they called ganglia?

Right.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I don't know.

I think that means multiple.

They, yes.

I think I would imagine them like,

Rupert Isaacson: like octopus alien,

Dr. Chantel Prat:

we had a, we had Halloween costume

Rupert Isaacson: type.

Yeah.

With Dangly

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Dang things.

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

We had a Halloween costume collective.

We were called the Basil Gang.

I think it means multiple ganglion.

I think it's a thing, but
I don't honestly know.

And then there's this, so it seems
also within this frontal and then

in inner basal ganglia system,
there's also a left and right.

Ideas, and I think this
is super interesting.

The left seems to be more goal focused
and predicting the future, whereas

the right seems to be more focused on
the now and noticing abnormalities or

things that move and so forth and so on.

So, for instance, there's a, a
disorder called the visual neglect

or hemis hemifield neglect.

If you get damage in the in the right
hemisphere, the left hemisphere can still

kind of like figure out what's going on.

But if you miss the noticing
hemisphere, you might just like

ignore an entire half of your body.

So there's this different kinds of
awareness in the two hemispheres,

which is quite interesting.

And if you have people bisect a line, so
we did this in my class, just give a, give

people a bunch of lines and have 'em draw
a a line where you think the middle is.

You can get and, and then measure
how close you are to center.

You can get some idea of whether you
have this more or you know, if your

right hemisphere, if your right, if
the line is to the left of center,

it means that your left hemisphere
is driving your noticing more.

And if the line is to the right,
you can, you can say that you

have like a more organic brain.

So a DHD people are more, are
more driven by the right side.

Okay.

Rupert Isaacson: Okay.

And we live in a bit of a left
brain society, so therefore Yeah.

Therefore they've, it's
a disorder suddenly.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right.

Whereas, but it,

Rupert Isaacson: in another culture
it would be a, a a, an asset.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right.

Exactly.

And I think that that applies to a lot
of different skill sets and a lot of

different ways of being that we're,
you know, sort of under appreciating.

And you know, going back
to your question about I.

The first question, which I feel like I
never fully answered about, are we, where

are we at in the acceptance of diversity?

I love that neurodiversity is searched
for four times more frequently on

Google now than five years ago.

I, I think that there is a general
awareness that probably one in

five people have some kind of,
what, what will be diagnosable

as atypical brain organization.

And I love, you know, these stickers
that say neuros spicy and this kind

of acknowledgement that I think that
there is a general increase of awareness

and a general increase in people
claiming that they're neurodiverse,

you know, like making it public.

Having the neuro spicy sticker.

And understanding that this is not
a personality deficit, this is just

the way my brain works, is kind of a
claiming, stepping into that recognition.

However, I think there's work to do,
number one, I think that, that, that

understanding that this is not like
a personal weakness or a deficit,

this is just the way my brain works.

I think that there's room for that in the
typically developing population as well.

I think, like I said with my
students, people who hate, don't

understand why they're distractible,
don't understand why they're not

motivated to do boring things, don't
understand why they forget forgetting.

This is important for
learning as remembering.

Like I just think there are a lot
of things about our brain designs

that we really, that we perceive
as character flaws because of

this kind of societal value of a
particular thing that's very abnormal.

And I think there are certain.

Labels that are more popular than others,
like a DHD is so metal and rock and roll

and yeah, I'm neuros spicy, but like
when I talk to people who are on, who

have autism spectrum disorder, many of
them don't wanna be the person on that

panel or don't want their employers
to know about it and are worried about

being stigmatized and are worried, you
know, so like, it, it's, I don't think

we're there yet when there's like a
cool disorder and a not cool disorder.

And, and again, I think that nor
I just think the work comes to

it with normalizing differences.

We're all different and people with.

Asper or an autism spectrum disorder
label are just as different from

one another as people without it.

Like, you know, so assuming that
that per that label lets, you know,

oh, I'm gonna, I don't know, like
people make very weird assumptions.

And when they want me to talk about
neurodiversity in the workplace, they

want me to say something like, eye
contact is aggressive or like that.

It doesn't, it's not true for everybody.

Or like, not everybody thinks
in pictures, not everybody.

This, you know, there's, there's diversity
within and, and between these labels.

So I think normalizing differences
and rethinking about deficits as of

just a mismatch between the thing
that we're asking our brain to

do and what our brain is good at.

And to your point, strength
building, working with the nature

of our brains, working with the
things that we're passionate about.

'cause literally no one.

It gets lit up by doing
boring things no one does.

And that takes us back to curiosity.

Do you know that when
your brain feels curious?

It is.

First of all, it requires safety.

You cannot feel curious
when you're not safe.

And when your brain feels curious,
it emits dopamine in anticipation

of an information rewarding.

The same interesting basal
ganglia that looks for food.

Treats the human brain treats
information as a reward when it's

something you're curious about.

And when that dopamine comes online, it's
dopamine is something that is not actually

for reward, it's for motivating learning.

So it motivates you to work and it re,
your brain gets rewired more quickly.

So I guess like when you started
talking about your son and then you

said you worked with what motivates him?

My second answer to that person
who's got a kid on a pony is

learn about that kid's what?

Lights them up and put it into that.

We, there's, so there's a study that
was actually done in, I think it was

Nigeria that's so brilliant and so easy.

They were teaching kids math and
they gave them, and this was like

secondary school math, and they gave
them a 10 minute interest survey.

Where do you like to shop?

What do you buy?

Who are your friends?

What's your name?

And then they did this math
instruction where they personalize

the problems or, so yeah, Rupert
went to the store to buy whiskey.

IPA.

Yeah, there you go.

An IPA and and you know, and
then you do the math in that.

And of course you, and I know this because
we're parents the kids who had a a, the

math wasn't taught differently at all.

It was just taught in a context that
the kid cared about, which meant that

you get curiosity kind of by periphery.

Sure.

And they learned more.

And so this is like, in my writer's group,
I had a friend tell me, you're like one of

those moms who puts vegetables in dessert.

'cause I'm curious about the
brain and I don't wanna be.

I'm like, yes.

That's the secret sauce.

Rupert Isaacson: It's interesting.

We have a whole thing within horse boy
method of movement method of, of before.

We see someone trying to, as you
say, get as much info as we can.

Mm-hmm.

And we want to know all the
motivators we want to know Yeah.

If they're into Pokemon, well,
what aspect of Pokemon, you know?

Yeah, yeah.

Who are the characters?

What are the, you know, and we'll,
we'll tailor it all around that.

Yes.

Yeah.

But also what, what do they hate?

Yeah.

And we find that that's as
important too, so, oh yeah.

That's sensory, right?

So mm-hmm.

They hate this sense, so we're gonna great
these things, we can, that's back, perhaps

back to your point about distraction.

Mm-hmm.

We can then try to eliminate as
much as possible those smells, those

noises, those characters, those types
of things from the environment that

we are gonna work in, so that mm-hmm.

And if we then maximize the things
that are the motivators, well then

presumably we've got a better chance.

But one thing I, I often see with
in the therapy world, sadly, is

a lack of curiosity and mm-hmm.

I think within the horse world, this
can be particularly endemic, sadly.

Mm-hmm.

That we horsey people are quite
bossy and quite opinionated.

Mm-hmm.

And we don't like change.

Mm-hmm.

So we hate admitting that maybe
we need to rethink something or,

you know, we'll usually dial on
nail of how we've always done it.

Mm-hmm.

And obviously that's not massively helpful
when we are dealing with our horses.

It tends to make us stuck.

But of course, if we're then trying
to take a therapeutic approach, that

lack of curiosity is going to shoot
us in the foot fairly massively.

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

Presumably that lack of curiosity
can't be really endemic because

humans are curious apes.

Mm-hmm.

So here's a question.

Do we have curiosity trained out of us?

Mm-hmm.

And can we retrain it?

Yes.

And what part of the brain do
we need to target for that?

And how?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm.

So.

There are sort of state and
trait differences in curiosity.

Some people are more curious
by nature than others and there

are also different kinds of
curiosity or perceptual curiosity.

People who wanna feel things.

Mm-hmm.

And epistemic curiosity,
which blows my mind.

It's, it's strange as much as it's true of
me, that people wanna know things, wanna

know that jellyfish could essentially be
eternal 'cause they can like go, you know,

go back a stage developmentally, it's
like, how will that ever help me in life?

But it's so fascinating, you know,

Rupert Isaacson: because
it makes you optimistic.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

You're like, oh, somebody can do it makes
you, it generally, generally optimistic,

Rupert Isaacson: which means you
assume better outcomes, which

means you probably will get them

Dr. Chantel Prat:

right.

And so there in the jellyfish example
you have highlighted, where curiosity,

like where does it come from and
can we, is it trained out of us?

Absolutely.

Yes.

I think, and depending on the
discipline, sometimes it's very explicit.

Like, don't ask questions, do what I say.

And, but we, I think we know the recipe.

I think there's a pretty
good recipe for curiosity.

And and my favorite is a model
by Gruber and Ranana Char.

Char and Ranana was one of my
professors in grad school, and

it's called the PACE Model.

So it's easy, PACE.

So number one is predict.

So, if you think you know the answer,
if you think you know what's right,

you're not going to be curious.

Right?

It's, and that's like to that
point of we get stuck in mm-hmm.

In habits.

If something surprises us if something
doesn't go as planned or we find

ourself in a new situation, that's
where we have the first opening.

That's where I think, like for me,
like humility about what I don't

know, keeps me like always curious.

So, so prediction, failure
is the first trigger.

It needs to be something you
don't know everything about.

But also if it's something you
know nothing about, you're probably

also not curious 'cause you're
trying to make connections.

You know, you wanna integrate everything,
everything into your knowledge of

the world and your place in it.

Then the, the important part, I think
is the assessment number two, am I safe?

You know, and if you're a hunter gatherer
and you find something unexpected, if

you make a wrong turn on Google and
you find yourself in the wrong place,

if you're in a situation and your
conversation is not going as planned,

the question is, am I physically safe?

Am I psychologically safe?

And I think this is something
that corporations haven't been

spending enough time with when
it's like, best answer, right?

This, you know, it's like in order to make
people feel curious, it's not like, be

curious and be the best or you're fired.

Like, that just doesn't, you know,
that kind of like environment

does not promote curiosity.

So in the training out of curiosity,
it's like how do we treat answers that

are different than what we wanted?

Are we like, no, that's not right.

Are we focusing on deficits or are
we like, oh, tell me what, you know,

what made you think about that?

Like, where did that come from?

What do you know that
led you to that answer?

So psychological and physical
safety are precursors.

You need to ha be in a place
that you can't predict.

You need to think.

You don't know the answer.

You need to feel safe.

And then once, once your brain has
sort of, gone through those two

steps, you experience curiosity.

And the point of curiosity
is to motivate exploration.

That's the E.

So curiosity, explore.

And what's beautiful about this is
you know, I would say these first

two predict and assess are what, what
my trainer, Gabby Nora, who I love,

calls getting your horse or yourself
into the learning frame of mind.

I.

You know, they've got, and I think
it's true of your, of your kids, your

students, you want to do the work
first before you do anything to get

them into the learning frame of mind.

They've gotta feel safe,
they've gotta feel engaged,

Rupert Isaacson: gotta build relationship.

The environment's gotta be right.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yep.

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

And then you have this curious
learner who will learn, who

will the rewire more period.

Like if I gave you 10 questions,
I asked you trivia questions

and I asked you, which are you
the most interested in learning?

And then I gave you the
answers to the all 10.

You will learn, you'll remember the
ones that you were most curious to

learn better because your basal ganglia
has said, this is interesting to me.

This is an information reward
and it's predicting a reward.

It's motivating you then like, one of my
favorite studies actually had people risk

electrical shock to learn a magic trick.

Rupert Isaacson: Wow.

Because there is, I would do that.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah, exactly.

So would I, and there is this
aspect of curiosity where it is

potentially dangerous, right?

When, when you're in the unknown, and
especially with perceptual curiosity and

trying drugs and things like this, right?

It's like there's often
a risk reward benefit.

And when we're curious,
we're super motivated to find

information and we'll do work.

Well, we also know

Rupert Isaacson: that,
that we can't avoid risk.

So we need to, like, if you hunt
and gather, it's risky, right?

So right.

Being on planet earth is risky.

So we need to dance with risk.

We need,

Dr. Chantel Prat:

right?

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right.

And so that, that curiosity in
this, in this in this study, the

more curious they were to learn the
magic trick, the more likely they

were to take a risk to get a shock.

Like, okay, it's a 20% risk.

Okay, it's a 40% risk.

Like when do you say.

How, no, I don't really care
about the magic trick that much.

Right?

But what was inter, but that basal
ganglia, that filtering part of the

brain that's sending information
to the frontal lobe that I said

is smarter than just impulse.

Rupert Isaacson: Right?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

When people took a risk for a electric
shock, the basal ganglia turned down the

volume on the part of your brain that
might simulate what the shock feels like.

It turned down connectivity to the hand.

Rupert Isaacson: The basal
ganglia has that power.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes.

It has inputs from everywhere in the
brain and then it sends repetitive

things to the frontal lobe.

It turns up or turns down the world.

That's the kind of filtering.

Interesting.

So, so when it's like, no, we really wanna
know this, like I think that this magic

trick is really important and we're not
gonna think about what the shop would

feel like when you make this decision.

So.

You know, it's, I mean,
it's a major motivator.

So in your learners, I think and,
and of course like, you know, back to

our idea about what's gone wrong in
schools and what goes wrong in horse

training, I think all the time too.

It's like, if you make this thing
feel incompetent, wrong, threatened,

if you, you know, if a, if a, if one
of those eight year olds who doesn't

wanna sit still and be like, behave
like a lawyer already thinks there's

something wrong with them, they already
feel threat in these environments,

Rupert Isaacson: right?

We

Dr. Chantel Prat:

have, we've, we've already shut down
the curiosity that makes learning not

only fun, you know, I think to your
specialty, I think something that

is like completely overlooked is.

We're meant to learn to
find the good things.

And like learning has taken on this
serious, you know, whether it's learning

to ride horses or learning to do math,
it's taken on this serious reputation,

which is in and of itself antithetical
to how we were designed to learn.

We are designed to learn.

Learning is supposed to be fun.

We're supposed to like, the fact
that we feel excited about something

is our brain's way of saying, we
think this is gonna be useful.

We think this is gonna be interesting,
we think this is gonna be important.

And so everything else created equally.

Something you do to make learning
fun will also make it more effective.

Rupert Isaacson: If you're a horse
nerd, and if you're on this podcast,

I'm guessing you are, then you've
probably also always wondered a little

bit about the old master system.

of dressage training.

If you go and check out our Helios Harmony
program, we outline there step by step

exactly how to train your horse from
the ground to become the dressage horse

of your dreams in a way that absolutely
serves the physical, mental and emotional

well being of the horse and the rider.

Intrigued?

Like to know more?

Go to our website, Helios Harmony.

Check out the free introduction course.

Take it from there.

Talk to us about the relationship
of movement with this and

Neurotrophins, BDNF and so on.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

This is a little bit farther out of my
area of expertise, but I do know that

we evolve to solve problems on the go.

Right.

So moving the body, again is something
that regulates the nervous system and puts

us into a state of alertness that helps
us focus on what it is we're learning.

The challenge then becomes presenting
information while walking or presenting

information, and then going to
move through the world to cogniti.

Well, what's

Rupert Isaacson: interesting with
that is, is so for example, the

two other languages that I sort
of speak are French and German.

I learned them on horseback.

So I'm balancing, I'm problem solving.

That makes

Dr. Chantel Prat:

perfect sense.

Got

Rupert Isaacson: the, yeah.

The BDNF is going the, that brain
derive neurotrophic factor thing.

But also I'm motivated to be there.

Yes, I wanna be on the horse, right?

And I'm motivated to learn this
vocabulary about horses because I'm

just intrinsically interested in it.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right?

Rupert Isaacson: If I was,

Dr. Chantel Prat:

that's right.

If

Rupert Isaacson: I was a cooking guy, I'd
wanna be moving around a kitchen, right?

Mm-hmm.

Learning the same thing.

But it seems to me that movement.

You, you, you've talked a lot
about the difficulties of sitting

still in a DHD and mm-hmm.

Want on the go.

So

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I think movement also changes.

You know, you get fatigue.

You, you know, if you have the
same exact perspective, if you're

doing the same task, you're wearing
out the parts of your brain.

You're using up neurotransmitters.

That's, you know what I mean?

So I think like movement
cognitively and movement physically

changes your perspective.

You're

Rupert Isaacson: neurotransmitters.

That's interesting.

Okay.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

It's kind of like a a, that's

Rupert Isaacson: brain
fatigue effectively.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Correct?

Yeah.

Yeah.

It's kind of like, I mean, we don't have
camera flashes so much anymore, but kind

of like in the olden days you used to see
a camera flash and you have a blind spot.

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

For a second.

That's temporary, but you've
like run those those neurons out.

Of neurotransmitters, temporary.

It was like a really intense,
focused in one part of the

brain or one part of the retina.

And it can't work anymore.

It's like, whew.

It has to wait to rebuild
and, and get going.

So, I mean, I think we have biological,
energetic needs in our brains, and

whether we're sitting still or cognitively
focusing on one thing, I think we

also fatigue those, those networks.

Rupert Isaacson: Makes perfect sense.

So one of the challenges of working
with children who have been diagnosed

with one thing or another thing mm-hmm.

Is I find twofold, one, and I wanna ask
you some questions around this because

I think a lot of people listening
will be having these challenges too.

Mm-hmm.

First challenge.

You have a kid that's been
told they need therapy.

I have never yet met a
kid that wanted therapy.

I've met lots of kids
that would like to play.

Mm-hmm.

I've met lots of kids that would
like to do interesting stuff.

Mm-hmm.

I've met lots of kids that would like to
have fun, but I've never had a kid walk

up to me and say, you know, Rupert, what
I really would like today is some therapy.

Mm-hmm.

And so if I'm saying to a kid who's
a developing brain, day in, day

out for a decade, you need therapy.

Let's go to therapy, let's go
to the therapy session now.

Oh, it's time for your
such and such therapy.

It's not that the therapy's a bad, it's
just that it's sending a message to

the kid that they need therapy at all.

Mm-hmm.

Which has to be not a confidence giver.

Right.

That's the first thing.

The second thing, of course, is
that if attention where we began and

the value placed on
sitting still to learn.

Even though it may not be natural mm-hmm.

Gets to a point where you then say
to the child, not only do you need

therapy, but you need drugs, we're going
to alter your brain with these drugs.

And then indeed, if you stop taking those
drugs, there will be a negative effect.

'cause there'll be some
sort of withdrawal.

Mm-hmm.

And then the child's in front of
me, how much of this child authe,

authentically am I dealing with?

How much am I dealing with the medication?

Mm-hmm.

How much or how little is
that medication blocking the

authentic experience of the world?

The, of the brain's ability to process.

Mm-hmm.

Information.

Some would say, well, it's the medication
that's allowing him to process.

And others would say, no,
actually it's blocking.

And the child's sort of an innocent in it.

They're just sort of

Dr. Chantel Prat:

mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: Trying to get through.

And then you have perhaps that
child grows up and is medicated

till the day they die and is never
experiencing the world without that.

Mm-hmm.

I'm not necessarily anti-medication in
terms of if you're in a crisis, I mean,

shit, you need an antibiotic, right?

Mm-hmm.

But what I find alarming about
behavioral modification medications is

that there's never an exit strategy.

It's not like an antibiotic that
they say, take this for 10 days,

and then when the symptoms go away,
you know, stop taking it or you'll

wipe out your gut floor or whatever.

They just say, no, stay on this
stuff for the rest of your life.

Effectively, there is no, I, I've
never heard of anyone being given the

exit strategy when they're put on.

So that's the brain
and the nervous system.

Mm-hmm.

That's the thing that you are
working with in your field.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: If we give
a, a kid that's having trouble

sitting still a drug to sit still,

what, what does that do
to the developing brain?

Do we even know?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I would say some.

We know something, but
probably not enough Uhhuh.

And, you know, I have one thing
we know, I guess one thing we

know for sure is that they, drugs
do not work well for everybody.

Mm-hmm.

And what does it mean to work well again?

Right.

This is, again, compared, I think that
there's a lot in what you're saying.

One is like, how do we involve the
children in these decisions about.

Interventions, whether they be therapeutic
or behavioral and, and like, does the, are

the parents just overwhelmed and they need
the kid to function in the society that

they've been born into and they're hoping
for the magic pill that suddenly makes

the kid look like the neighbor's kid.

Right.

Yeah.

Which I think almost never works.

And what is the, how does
the kid feel about this?

I think it's quite interesting because
in particular receiving a diagnosis

and then the interventions that occur
accordingly from a like self sense of

self perspective, it seems different when
it happens in childhood and adulthood.

Rupert Isaacson: Absolutely,
a hundred percent.

And I've met plenty of adults that
want wanted therapy 'cause that seems

to be an adult sort of decision.

Adult self expression.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

And adults that get diagnoses,
and they're not crushed by it.

They don't feel other, they
feel relieved and they're like,

oh my gosh, now I have a plan.

Right.

And I, you know, there's like a, a,
a, a way moving forward and I think,

you know, for a lot of these drug
interventions, there are adaptations.

Like your brain does always, whether,
you know, whether it's antidepressant

or whether you're taking Ritalin or you
know, or you know, anti-anxiety meds.

Like it's, you are intervening with
this neurochemistry and your brain

will try to adapt accordingly.

It will try and move
around that system mm-hmm.

In ways that like create,
adapt adaptations and tolerance

and and so forth and so on.

So, you know, some kids do feel a lot
better on, they feel better, I think.

Like, I guess I wanna know how you feel
and do you feel better and do you feel

better able to meet the demands of your
day on these medications or do you not?

And is that coming from the kid
or coming from somebody else's

definition of what it means to be good?

And are we sort of like, like is this
akin to like, we're modifying our, our

children to fit into this like, cookie
cutter template of, of what normal means?

So for me, I think understanding
how the kids feel, but also this

identity around being labeled, you
know, to our point of other and

being told that there's something
wrong and that you need to fix it.

I think I would love to
see, kids involvement.

And what, what is it that you
would like, what do you find easy?

You said you asked the kid what
they like and what they hate.

What is it that you find easy, right?

What is it that you find hard?

Is there anything you'd
like to get better at?

Rupert Isaacson: Well, right, I mean,
that's the first question is usually

is what do you feel like doing?

Yeah.

Yeah.

And I've, I've got some
intel about what you like.

I've sort of set a few things
up, but you might want that

one, you might want that one.

You might want that one.

And it might be completely
different to what I think.

So as much as possible, if you can
answer me, I'd, I'd love to know.

But we never call, if someone
comes out to a horse boy place, for

example, we never call it therapy.

It's a play date.

It's always a play date.

You, you, that's cool.

You're coming.

And, and

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I'm sure it actually is too.

Rupert Isaacson: Well, it has
to be, otherwise it won't work.

But it, it, I, it's just we realized
very early that to even use the word

therapy was kind of depressing, you
know, for a lot of, a lot of the kids.

But the.

Doesn't mean what you do
can't be very therapeutic, but

that's not the kids' problem.

That's sort of up to us to sort of
deliver under the table if you like

Dr. Chantel Prat:

it.

It's funny that you said play date
because I had this aha moment for my

own self and with my own horses and,
and I think this is relevant because

in both of these cases, I think
you have to think about short-term

learning and long-term learning.

Yeah.

And it's kind of like, I don't
wanna use the battle in the war.

Right.

But like, are you learning how to do X
but also learning that you are broken?

Rupert Isaacson: Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

And not good enough and you know
this, or are you learning how to

work with the grain of your nature?

Learning how to.

You know, be successful with
the tools that you have.

And, and how does that change
your, your sense of self?

And I, you know, this is the thing
that, it's just so sad to think

that like by kindergarten, kids
already have a sense of, do I fit in?

Am I good in school?

Does my teacher like me?

And how much that scales up to what they,
you know, again, to curiosity versus

threat to trying, like, nobody tr I
have yet to meet a person who is super

excited to try something that they're
quite sure they're gonna be crap at.

Right.

So like, it just, yeah.

Well,

Rupert Isaacson: particularly
if you feel that you might be,

there might be some adverse
reaction to being crap at it.

Yeah.

Like, it being crap is fun.

It's like, I'm gonna try
and jump off this face.

Yeah.

That's fun.

Yeah.

I'm gonna land on my ass like a jackass.

That's funny.

And then laugh your ass off.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: But,

Dr. Chantel Prat:

so I had this when I was working
with my, my horses the other day.

I had this just new idea of success.

'cause I'm thinking about the long term.

I'm not, for me, I don't really
care if I can, you know, ride a high

school dressage test ever with them.

But I am quite curious to see
what I can learn to do with them.

And then I thought like, my idea
of success is that every training

feels like a play date with mom.

Right.

Because I think that that
sets me up for the long term.

Like, if, if the only thing my
horse learns is that learning

is fun, then what can I not do?

Rupert Isaacson: Right.

Exactly.

Exactly.

And if I do find that it's stressful for
me or the horse, can I change it somehow?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right.

Rupert Isaacson: You know?

And, and what are the
options for changing it?

Can the person who's teaching me.

Do it another way.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right.

Rupert Isaacson: If not,
do I need another teacher?

Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

And I think that it's important in
this space to acknowledge that it's

always a little bit stressful to
be doing something you don't know.

Rupert Isaacson: Well, not, yeah.

So is all stress it's a little bit
necessarily bad because No, exactly.

Right, because Exactly.

And, and there can be
fun involved in stress.

I'm just thinking about myself if
I'm, I like to cross country jump,

so if I'm heading in a cross country
jump, I'm always shitting myself.

'cause I've had some bad wrecks.

I know what can happen.

And but I love it.

So I've got my sympathetic nervous system
going, but it's also excited and kind

of, maybe that's basal ganglia, Uhhuh

Dr. Chantel Prat:

uhhuh.

Rupert Isaacson: And it's
quite, 'cause you remember

Dr. Chantel Prat:

all, all the times that you, you
made it more than you wrecked.

Rupert Isaacson: Exactly.

And it's just such good crack, you know?

Yeah.

So all of those things come together where
there's a trade off between the fear.

And the curiosity and
the excitement and so on.

But if it were to go beyond a certain
point, like if you were to put me at

a fence that I just know I'm not gonna
get over, you know, then well sure

there'd, there'd be no enjoyment in it.

Or if I felt that there'd be some
really adverse shaming or something.

If, if I, if I didn't make it or if I
backed away from it, maybe that one,

that would be more like my upbringing if
I said, oh, just not feeling it today.

So I, I was pushed to go at fences.

The culture was to be kind
of brave, but not wise.

So I learned that, and my fear of
being censored as a coward overrode my

knowledge that I probably would wreck
and I probably should back away the, the

conditions were not right for whatever.

And I was more afraid of the
judgment that would come.

You know, so, but that comes back a little
bit to my mind, to the drugs thing because

if it, if I'm seeing an overwhelming
number of kids who are on these drugs,

it's not like, oh, it's just one or two.

Because it's not just the kids
that come to me, it's like

half their classmates or more.

Mm-hmm.

It's so many.

And at that point, you're going,
do they just, every single kid

that's on actually need, like what?

Like so many, like this percentage
how do we survive as a culture

at all before this then?

Mm-hmm.

If this is like such a problem that
we gotta have all these medications

that, like how do we possibly
come up with internal combustion

engine or anything, you know?

Yeah.

Or the wheel.

Mm-hmm.

But we did.

Mm-hmm.

And in, in other parts of the world
where they don't have those things or do

those things, why are they not all just.

You know, failing because
they're not right.

Yeah.

Mm-hmm.

So we must be creating, therefore,
a society where things that are not

disorders are perceived as disorders.

Right.

And, and

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I also think also a, a society where
we're looking for easy fix and magic fix.

And I think right, there's a com, you
know, whether you're selling someone

eye cream or a pill for their kid
that, you know, at the root of this is

a belief that you're not good enough,

Rupert Isaacson: which comes
back to not safe, right?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Mm-hmm.

Mm-hmm.

Rupert Isaacson: So the subject
of drugs brings me to something

else I'd like to ask you about.

So, states have altered consciousness.

Mm-hmm.

So we know that altering the
consciousness is actually part

of the human species thing.

We've been doing it.

A long time.

It seems not just by taking mushrooms and
ayahuasca, but also in those places of the

world where those things don't grow, where
there are no psychotropics, you know,

repetitive dance to go into a trance, to
go into an alter state of consciousness.

Mm-hmm.

So presumably states of altered
consciousness actually can

be very good for the brain.

Mm-hmm.

And presumably some forms of them can
be less good for the brain, but it seems

that the brain actively seeks this out.

Mm-hmm.

And that it's, it functions as
part of our healing systems.

Mm-hmm.

Do you know much about what parts
of the brain are involved with that?

With the seeking out of altered
states of consciousness and.

What parts of the brain
seem to benefit and so on.

Have you

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

An

Rupert Isaacson: idea.

Can you talk an to us
a bit about that idea?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I have an idea and I'm
also looking at the clock.

'cause my class starts in 20 minutes.

I'm gonna tell you though.

Rupert Isaacson: Okay.

And this is really, this could be
the first of two or even three.

Yeah.

Oh my gosh.

Have we got a lot more ground to cover?

And I haven't even begun to
ask you about horses yet.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes.

Rupert Isaacson: Horse brains.

Yes.

Let's do it.

So we've gotta get there.

So listeners, we will
get to all that stuff.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes.

But today we're going

Rupert Isaacson: to do
what Chantel has time for.

Okay.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes.

Thank you.

So, okay.

So I think.

First and foremost, perceptual curiosity.

Right?

I think that the same reason we look
for different exper tastes, sensations,

perspective, and so forth in the
real world gives us a perspective

and broadens our sense making.

Makes sense.

So that's what, what draws us to it.

But I just read this paper that I am
kind of obsessed with that's about

dreams and and it's, it, you know, some
of the people in my lab didn't like it

'cause it uses AI and computers as a,
as a way of explaining why we need this.

So you're like, what's
the healing benefit?

So, the idea with the dreams
was that we take our sort of

narrative story structure.

The part of the brain would be
called the default mode network.

It's kind of where our mental model
of the world and our place in it

resides after, you know, hundreds
of thousands of memories and facts

and learning and personal narrative
settle into this default mode

network, which is where we store.

The way we understand is that

Rupert Isaacson: located in a
particular geographic area of the brain.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

The whole, it has, it's located in pretty
much all lobes of the brain, but yeah,

it's kind of in the central parts of
the brain, the temporal lobes and these

parts of the brain turn on when you mind
wander, turn off when you're on, on task.

So, and they're, you
know, very characteristic.

You can, I could tell your brain from
my brain easily by looking at our

sense-making kind of default mode network.

So the idea is that
when we dream, we take.

You know, the reason dreams are kind
of like fantastical and, and like

they have like combination of things
that are just normal and things that

are like totally weird, but they're
always story-like, because your

brain is trying to avoid overfitting,
which means I've sampled a lot of

experiences over and over, but there's
this space in between that is unknown.

And so I might make a wrong conclusion
because I haven't gone there.

And what I, I think I find this
just so evocative, this idea that,

well, when you sleep, your brain
puts noise into that story system

to help you explore the in-between.

Like have you ever had a dream where.

You're hanging out with your son and
you're like walking through the forest

and everything is totally normal, except
your son is actually not your son.

Like the person doing business.

As this person, you're, you're perfectly
willing to accept that this person is

ex, although they're like the wrong
gender, the wrong age, it's just

like a completely different person.

Yeah.

So they're like, it's like you have
known actors and agents, but they

get all scrambled up and then you
just tell a story and your brain

goes through this set of experiences.

So I, I believe that like, some of our
hallucinogenic experiences, not only

are they like increasing plasticity
with serotonin, but they're also like,

you know, they're, they're exploring
the in-between these, they're allowing

you to experience something maybe you
couldn't ever really experience here.

Rupert Isaacson: Got a question?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: You just said something.

Why so why does serotonin
increase plasticity?

I.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

It's a great question.

We don't know, but we know that the
that these, a lot of the hallucinogenic

drugs that seem to have mood
rehabilitation affects work on serotonin.

What we don't know is like

Rupert Isaacson: silvan
or psilocybin rather.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes, yes, yes.

Yeah, exactly.

But we don't know why, like
serotonin re-uptake inhibitors,

like antidepressants.

We don't know why they don't make you
hallucinate, why they don't have the

same kind of like learning effects.

Oh,

this is my alarm.

Just telling me I have a couple

Rupert Isaacson: minutes.

Okay, well that is our pause mode.

And

Dr. Chantel Prat:

that, I mean, so that is
like, so it blows my mind.

Like I said, it's only a theory, but this
is, to me, these two things make sense.

The desire to see, feel, experience,
different things and that these

altered states of consciousness
to some extent, depending on your

own, the adventure you've chosen,
allow you to experience things.

You couldn't.

Really experience in this world.

And that like dreams, there's
this idea of what you learn

allows you to predict the future.

But we have, we tend to sort of
have similar experiences over

and over, and that, that leads to
something called overfitting where

you develop like, superstitions and
you've like correlated two things

together that aren't really related.

And so your, your meaning model likes to
like, let me just inject repeated thoughts

Rupert Isaacson: becoming beliefs, right?

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah, yeah,

Rupert Isaacson: yeah.

Interesting.

So, and it's interesting
your point about why Yeah.

Why doesn't the artificial serotonin
take thing work in the same brain

smic way as the real mm-hmm.

Thing.

'cause I guess 'cause it's
not the real thing, you know?

I think

Dr. Chantel Prat:

so,

Rupert Isaacson: and I guess mother nature

Dr. Chantel Prat:

gave us those magic
mushrooms for a reason like

Rupert Isaacson: oxytocin, right?

You know, a shot of oxytocin.

Gotten through the natural ways is wow.

And give Pitocin through the nose.

Bring down some breast, breast milk.

But it won't make you feel That's right.

Eureka.

No.

Yeah.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: We're clever monkeys,
but I guess nature's always best.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Right, right.

Rupert Isaacson: Listen, there's so
many more questions and I wanted to get

into the quantum aspects of the brain.

There've been some interesting
studies in the last year on this.

I wanted to get your take about
the microtubules within myelin

and all that stuff, and I wanted
to go into the horse brain.

Thing people talking about and

Dr. Chantel Prat:

how we understand horse brains.

Right.

Well, we'll have to do part two.

Rupert Isaacson: So let's do part two.

So yes, we will ask if horses have
prefrontal cortexes or, and if they don't,

why do they seem to behave as if they do?

And we, we'll, I want to
ask all these questions.

I'm sure that the listeners
want to hear them.

So shall we reschedule a part two?

Yes, please.

And then what We don't get to that.

We'll do an part three.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Yes.

And then what we don't get to that.

We'll do an part four

Rupert Isaacson: super.

When

Dr. Chantel Prat:

I come to live with you in Spain,
I don't know if you're with us

that well, there is also drive day,

Rupert Isaacson: Coming up horse boy
Drive Day in Ireland, August 9th to 11th.

Just put it in your diary.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Oh my gosh.

Rupert Isaacson: A big old piss up.

At Kco, which is the big horse
boys center, just outside Dublin.

We'll be camping out and

Dr. Chantel Prat:

it would be like the real
life aver version of our Irish

singing in the lobby of the uk.

Rupert Isaacson: That will be it.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Oh my gosh.

Yeah.

Yeah.

With some brain starts and some ponies.

Some actual ponies.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Oh, that'll be so cool

Rupert Isaacson: there in the field.

Yeah.

So.

Also for listeners, if this is,
if you're listening to this before

August, 2025, it will be August
9th to 11th Horse Boy Tribe Day.

You can find out on our website.

All the really cool people will be there
m Cool because of who they are and what

they do and they're worth talking to.

Hopefully Chantal Pratt might join us.

If not, she'll come down to Spain
where other listeners can join us too.

Alright, listen, thank you so much.

The neuroscience of you right?

Is the book that people need
to pick up and the exam will

be during our next podcast.

So, you know, just memorize
pages one 50 to 2 25.

You should be fine.

Okay.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

But only if you feel curious about it.

Rupert Isaacson: I'm gonna read it.

Brilliant.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

Dr. Chantel Prat:

Thank you.

See, I will see you next time soon.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

Rupert Isaacson: We'll, we'll take

Dr. Chantel Prat:

care.

Rupert Isaacson: We'll book
it for the next few weeks.

I hope you enjoyed today's
conversation as much as I did.

If you like what we're doing here,
please do like, subscribe, tell a friend.

It so helps us to get this valuable
work done and the message of

Equine Assisted Stuff out there.

And if you're interested in more
conversations, you might want to check

out I'll live free ride free podcast.

And if you'd like to support the
podcasts, please go to rupertisakson.

com and click on the Patreon link.

If you're a professional in the equine
assisted field or considering a career

in the equine assisted field, you
might want to check out our three

certification programs, horseboy
method, movement method, and taquin.

Equine integration.

You can find all of those over
on new Trails learning.com.

And finally, if you want to check
out our cool rock and roll themed

merch back on rupert isaacson.com,

please click on Shop.

You'll find all kinds
of fun goodies there.

And if you're looking for a way to spend
time until the next podcast, you might

want to consider reading the books that
kicked all this off The Horse Boy, the

Long Ride Home and The Healing Land.

So see you next time on Equine Assistant.

world.

Join us for the adventure.