The goal of this blog is to write about and discuss current and interesting research in the field of neuroscience, in an easily readable and understandable way. Several university students from across Montreal will be blogging about their research and other topics throughout the year.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Scientific Cafe 2012: Brain Myths
The guest speakers were Dr. Ed Ruthazer (McGill; Montreal Neurological Institute), Dr. Natasha Rajah (McGill; Douglas Institute), Dr. Michael Fehlings (University of Toronto), and Dr. David Ragsdale (McGill; MNI). I'll provide a quick recap of the topics covered by each of the guests along with some of my own comments.
Dr. Ruthazer focused primarily on experience and perception, and how these originate within the brain. Recent advances in technology have allowed us to make incredible leaps in our understanding of perception; in particular, it's possible to reconstruct one's visual experience using imaging techniques, albeit with (currently) limited accuracy and resolution. As technology advances, it will increasingly become possible to reconstruct one's experiences through analysis of brain activity. Future technology may also lead to a complicated (but fascinating) ethical and philosophical issue: if consciousness is an epiphenomenon of brain activity, and we eventually become capable of producing sophisticated artificial 'brains', what are the consequences of producing artificial intelligence and sentience that mimics or rivals our own?
Dr. Rajah focused on myths related to memory. One common misconception is that our brains act as 'recorders' that faithfully encode events for subsequent accurate retrieval. However, work from Dr. Elizabeth Loftus and others has shown that our own memories are in fact rather fallible, in that memories can be modulated or even (in some cases) inserted, with the manipulated individual confident that their adulterated memories are both accurate and their own. In fact, stating that we believe something reinforces that belief, leading to false confidence in a fallible memory if it is declared often enough. Similarly, repressed memories are controversial in this field, with the general consensus being that traumatic events would normally be remembered to some extent, and that repressed memories are likely to be false memories. Finally, myths regarding memory loss in popular media can be misleading, as common misconceptions regarding amnesia are produced from inaccurate fiction.
Dr. Fehlings lamented the fact that there are very few examples of clinical neuroscientists or neurosurgeons in popular fiction (with Dr. Frankenstein, or his younger Mel Brooks equivalent, as rare examples). In the scientific world, however, we are rapidly gaining an understanding of brain regeneration and repair following injury. One example he mentioned is adult neurogenesis, which I've previously written about here, as well as the therapeutic potential of implanted neural stem cells. In closing, he stressed the importance of translational research, in which new insight into brain repair and regeneration gleaned from basic science is applied at a clinical level to patients of neurotrauma.
Finally, Dr. Ragsdale focused on more philosophical concerns related to neuroscience. In particular, if the mind is an epiphenomenon of brain activity, what is the mechanism by which this occurs? If our consciousness is a product of deterministic forces (i.e. underlying neurobiology and its features), do we actually have free will? One experiment exploring the latter described how the neural activity underlying a voluntary action actually precedes the conscious decision to perform the action by roughly a half-second. So if our brains are making our decisions for us, is free will an illusion? He concluded with the importance of creative thinking in neuroscience research, in that our understanding of our brain is still very incomplete, and so there is still lots of room for wild new ideas about the brain to lead to insight about ourselves.
If you couldn't make it to the event, I hope this provided a rough explanation of the type of topics covered. I would definitely recommend checking out any future Science Cafés, as they're stimulating and worthwhile events that make complicated topics accessible to a general audience.
Monday, February 14, 2011
Brains need love too
I recently saw the new ad campaign from the institute where I work (the Douglas Institute), ‘Brains need love too’. Seeing as the campaign touches on brain awareness-related topics (including the brain's involvement in psychiatric illness), as well as today being Valentine’s Day, I thought it deserved sharing. The video is extremely open-ended, with the actual message of the campaign open to the interpretation of the viewer, at least until they visit the campaign’s web site. Here are the initial interpretations I took away from it:
- Psychiatric conditions are neurobiologically based, as implied with the opening shots of brains labelled by psychiatric diagnosis. I’m assuming the reasoning behind this is that it has traditionally been believed that stigma against mental illness could be ameliorated in the general public if it was more widely known that mental illness is fundamentally due to the structure and function of the brain itself, as opposed to any personal weakness of afflicted persons themselves. Although it’s noble to attempt to combat stigma by replacing popular misconceptions with fact, however, recent studies showing that stigma against mental illness persists even in the face of improvement of the public’s understanding of the origins of mental illness sadly cast doubt on the effectiveness of this particular strategy.
- People are more than their labels, another anti-stigma message. Outside of its labelled container, the brain reveals it’s capable of experiencing life just like anyone else.
- Take care of your brain, not meant as an anti-stigma message but more of a suggestion that all of our brains, well, ‘need love too’. Speaking of which, Brain Awareness Week is coming up in the near future, so get involved if you need some spring brain-awareness-lovin’. I’m assuming the figurative message here is to be aware that your brain needs care, if not by skateboarding and psychedelic brain-tossing, then by nutrition, exercise, mental stimulation, paying attention to your mental and emotional functioning, and not-sniffing-glue-or-opening-doors-with-your-head-or-something. They’re pretty vague on this one.
Overall, it’s charming and cute, and I like the bold approach of using real (albeit calf) brains up-close and bloody to show that something that may seem disquieting to us (in this case, a bloody brain) is capable of experiencing cognition, emotions and the world around us. Similarly, although mental illness can be disquieting to those with a stigma against it, psychiatric patients are fully capable of these same experiences. Also, regarding the brain images, I feel obligated to point out that we’re talking about something we’ve all got, which is processing this sentence right now within your own head, and while you don’t necessarily have to realize how cool that is, you should at least try to get over your squeamishness over the look of your own brain. It is, after all, what ‘you’ really look like.
It’s a bit difficult to determine the overarching message of the campaign from the 62-second ad alone; it does seem to be necessary to go to the campaign website for clarification, where there’s a slightly vague description urging people to take care of their brains and, more usefully, a list of diverse resources for information on the brain as well as psychiatric disorders and treatment. However, despite this it’s a well-produced and genuinely endearing ad. So go love your brain.
-Ian Mahar
(Adapted from a post previously appearing here)
"Memory, Aging and Alzheimer's: When forgetting too much becomes a problem"
Unfortunately this is not the case for people suffering from an increasingly well-known disorder called Alzheimer’s disease, which severely impairs normal memory. Alzheimer’s is the most common example of a spectrum of disorders known as neurodegenerative diseases, all of which cause neurons to die off more rapidly than they would with normal aging. The prevalence of Alzheimer’s increases dramatically with age, rising from just 3% in those aged 65-74 to almost 50% among those 85 years and older.
Currently available treatments tend to focus on minimizing the symptoms of Alzheimer’s by compensating for the loss of neurons. Some of these therapies can be helpful, but scientists have not yet found a ‘cure’ for Alzheimer’s, i.e. a treatment that would actually slow or halt the neuronal loss. This is because it’s still not entirely clear why neurons die in Alzheimer’s, although thousands of laboratories across the world are bringing us closer to the answer every day. We can hope that several of the many promising therapeutic avenues currently under investigation by scientists in Montreal and elsewhere will one day provide an effective means of combating the disease for both present and future generations. (Andrew Greene, McGill University)
All are welcome to join us on Wednesday, February 23rd, at 7:00 pm at La Sala Rossa (4848 boul. St-Laurent, Montreal, QC, H2T 1R6) for an evening of questions and answers, as we discuss memory and aging with world-class experts Andrea Leblanc, Ph.D., Serge Gauthier, M.D., F.R.C.P.C., and Judes Poirier, Ph.D., C.Q. Refreshments will be provided. This is a free event! We hope to see you there!
for more information: http://sfn-montreal.ca/baw/cafe/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/event.php?eid=183243215043955
hosted by BAW Montreal as part of our 2011 Brain Awareness Week public events.
Thank you to our sponsors .
*** Our popular Science Cafés offer the public the opportunity to meet and discuss various topics in Neuroscience in an informal setting. These Cafés feature a Question & Answer with three to four guest panelists who are experts in their fields, snacks and entertainment. Our Cafés are always free thanks to our sponsors. ***