Fwd:Re: Non-lethal weapons acting via external manipulation of the Central
rsnorman at mw.mediaone.net
Fri Dec 4 21:08:37 EST 1998
F. Frank LeFever wrote in message
<747l40$qj6 at dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>...
>In <7462j1$fa0$1 at denws02.mw.mediaone.net> "Richard Norman"
><rsnorman at mw.mediaone.net> writes:
>>>Re: Non-lethal weapons acting via external manipulation of the
>>>Why not use a radio wave tuned to neurotransmitters causing a seisure
>>The problem is that the dopamine frequency is perilously close to the
>>GABA frequency, so that the response would be uncertain.
>>Also, the peptides require such a complex blend of frequencies as to
>>be beyond current radio technology. ;-)
>Can you clarify? What do you mean by dopamine "frequency" and GABA
>If you are indeed referring to some line of research which has eluded
>me, please supply some references. I AM aware of a study on ELF
>effects (i.e. not radiofrequency range) on--? 5-HT, I believe.
>F. Frank LeFever, Ph.D.
>New York Neuropsychology Group
Sorry to confuse you. But I have been so annoyed by the lack of real
science in so much of what I see on a newsgroup supposedly devoted to
neuroscience that I tried my hand at a little sarcasm (indicated by the
little emoticon I included).
It is possible that any physical stimulus might somehow indirectly
a neurotransmitter level. That is a far cry from "a radio wave tuned to
neurotransmitters". The notion of a "dopamine frequency" is the
logical consequence of this tuning. You are right, it makes no
I assumed by comments were so outrageously silly that they could
not be taken seriously.
More information about the Neur-sci