A question re LTP (was a dyslexic mistake should be LTP) during opioid-mediated or (otherwise mediated) consciousness-cancelling anaesthesia

Peter Fellin for.spam.reasons.peel.away.until.only.fellin.remains at one.net.au
Mon Dec 21 00:09:13 EST 1998

Even if you don't understand what I am writing and end-up drawing obviously
intolerant, "toilet-humourless" (at least) and prematurely conceived
conclusions, at least it encourages me that the concepts I have contrived
seems to find an associational route to the back of your mind where they
obviously evoke (if not provoke) "something" ---- as they are intended to.

You may of course try to shoot me down from my self-satisfied complementary
and as far as I have seen entirely science-aligned umbrella position of
understanding (i.e. understanding mainly but not only how we humans on the
whole are, and how we evolved to be this way).

But if you are going to succeed (in principle at least) then you have to aim
intelligently and with factual ammunition.

Be my guest. :-)

P.S. By the way, I use "memorisation changes" in a loose or generic sense;
and am using it to refer almost any relevant aftermath (such as permanent
sensitisation or LTP) of Specific (or easily specifiable) Hibernation
Imploring Type (life-)Situations (but barring broken limbs and the like).

F. Frank LeFever wrote in message <75kca7$sis at sjx-ixn5.ix.netcom.com>...
>No point reading the article if you're going to blur the distinctions
>between single-cell studies and whole-brain studies.  Even if one were
>to equate LTP and "memorization" (which would be a serious error in and
>of itself), gating inputs to a single cell is similar to what you
>suggest for the whole brain only on a metaphorical sense (and maybe not
>such a good metaphore at that).
>There are, of course, the demonstrations of procedural learning and/or
>both classical and operant conditioning in amnestic patients, who learn
>with no memory of learning, but that is on a different level of
>description and FAR, FAR from the phenomenon you describe.
>Surely you must know this.
>Are you SHITting us again?
>F. Frank LeFever, Ph.D.
>New York Neuropsychology Group
>In <367c9ba8.0 at pink.one.net.au> "\"Sir Knowitall\""
><for.spam.reasons.peel.away.until.only.fellin.remains at one.net.au>
>>"Sir Knowitall" wrote in message <367c99df.0 at pink.one.net.au>...
>>>Hello all!
>>>I can remember having read one science-journal report about a
>>>laboratory experiment that found that a single neuron was able to
>>>memorisation changes towards "Long Term Potentiation" as a result of
>>>impact of signals from ONLY one out of two or more of the types of
>>>excitatory fibres that it was targeted by, even while the other
>type(s) of
>>>excitatory fibre-input was pre-synaptically gated (i.e. artificially
>>>as part of the experiment).
>>>My problem is that I have forgotten, and can not find my most likely
>>>permanently lost scribbled-down notes about, precisely what was
>>>where and by whom.
>>>Can somebody who knows please re-supply me with answers to who did
>>>experiment or a closely similar experiment, and when and where was
>>>result published?
>>>[This reference would go towards further supporting/substantiating
>>>notion (already backed by other less nitty-gritty observations) that
>>>memory/learning imprints can accumulate whilst the individual in whom
>>>experience is being recorded is kept unconscious by his/her own
>>>pre/sub-consciously self-regulatory gating reflexes.
>>>It is of relevance to the transformation (or as if "putting") of
>>>Hibernation Imploring Type (life-)Situations" into a correspondingly
>>>specific insidious states of "Conditioned-in Unconsciously Retained
>>>type) Stressors Effecting (Spin-off-)Symptoms".]
>>>Thanks in advance,
>>>Peter F

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list