request good review article

K C Cheng kccheng at
Sat Nov 7 18:34:43 EST 1998

Stephan Anagnostaras wrote:
> =

> In article <36410139.1B3F at>, postoffice.idirect.c=
om wrote:
> =

> > Ying, Yang;, 7 wrote:
> > > =
> >
> > > =B3o=ACO=A4@=AB=CA MIME =AE=E6=A6=A1=AA=BA=A6h=B3=A1=A5=F7=B6l=A5=F=
> > C
> > >  =
> >
> > > Does anyone know some good review article for studying memory in
> > > molecule/protein level? Please give me some information. I ill very=

> > > appreciate.
> > > =
> >
> > > I did medline search for several weeks, but I cannot find it.
> > Re above:
> > Review articles on memory at the protein/molecule level were very com=
> > earlier, in around 1970's.  However, since RNA was found to give =
> >
> > inconsistent results,  such articles are no longer as prominent. =
> >
> > Because molecules cannot account for memory and its necessary
> > functions,  it would be futle to seek out such references.  Soon, my
> > full collection proving memory to be electromagnetic particles will b=
> > out on video.  Now I have 33 hours of it, still counting.   Of course=
, I
> > cannot prove it all on the web.  However,   I guarantee that I have
> > proved it.  You can see some introductory articles  on my webpage, cl=
> > on  Cheng Review I:1,  I:2, I:3, I:4, etc.  Hopefull, these videos ca=
> > be soon out for public use.  But, it's a lot of work and it takes mon=
> > to publish.  Please be patient.  =
> >
> > kccheng =BEG=ABa=B8s
> >
> =

> You're wrong about this, flat and simply. New protein synthesis is clea=
> required for the long term stability of memory.  This is clear, for
> example, in the CREB mutant mouse, which learns just about anything, an=
> then forgets it within a few hours. Plus there are literally hundreds o=
> studies examining the role of protein synthesis inhibitors (or RNA
> synthesis inhibitors). In contrast to your claim, these studies are qui=
> consistent to the fact that inhibition of protein synthesis blocks the
> long term stability of memory.  These studies are easy to replicate,
> anyone who does learning and memory animal work can do one in a week or=

> two.
> =

> Now as far as costing money to publish, this isn't really true either,
> unless what you're publishing isn't worth publishing except maybe on "e=
> hosting"
> =

> Cheers,
> Stephan
Re above:
Protein or RNA is like neurons to learning. If  protein synthesis is
inhibited,  as you claim, long term memories may become unstable, just
like taking away neurons would impair memories. But, these are only
macro-units containing memories,  not memories themselves.  =

Further, earlier studies showed that sometimes RNA content was even
lower ater learning than before.  How can you account for such? =

Memories reduce RNA content?
In the mutant mouse, how did it acquire memory for a few hours?  What
were memories before the end of those few hours?  Perhaps protein
systhesis stabilizes some cell structures for memories to be further
accessible in the future.  But as you say, still you have not said
memories are RNA molecules.  What is memory then?
What stores memories is not "what is memory."
It is untrue that what's published is right, and not published is
wrong.  Are you telling me Darwin is right?  or the Young-Helmholtz
Theory of colour vision is right?  I have overthrown them both and will
have these published soon too.

-- =

kccheng =BEG=ABa=B8s

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list