You seem to have something to prove. I have nothing to prove to you. None of this has anything to do with the original post, nor my comment. However, a few things I noticed: 1. You don't even agree with what you post. "I actually lean towards your side of the argument on the grounds that these acceptance strategies are a bit bogus. A few steps removed from the real thing." 2. You agree on the definition of LTP. Therefore, you are agreeing that you originally mentioned LTP just to sound smart. LTP has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with stuttering. Nor is there any literature, nor would there be a meaningful interaction with LTP and stuttering. 3. Academics saying "I'm not qualified to answer because it's not my area of expertise." Does not mean all academics know nothing about stuttering. In fact, there are prominent researchers that are indeed doing great work. 4. I think its you that is overwhelmed by the literature. Its not easy to determine what is meaningful and what is interesting, but not so important. And you're grabbing anything interesting you find, and rolling with it. 5. "I am the community you say is so deserving." Are you saying that the stuttering community isn't deserving of answers and management strategies for their neurological disorder? 6. Understanding the abnormalities in the white matter connections are important observations, but don't provide anything meaningful that we can address. 7. The demographics of schizophrenia are 1% of the population. Stuttering is also 1% of the population. There is a mountain of research on schizophrenia, and thousands of researchers worldwide. Its not the prevalence. It's the urgency.