To Cijadrachon (was Re: none)

F. Frank LeFever flefever at ix.netcom.com
Wed Oct 21 00:01:21 EST 1998


Markkus--

Normally I would not download such a long post, especially if the
heading included some reference to you-know-whom, but after reading
Dag's comment I decided I owed it to you to read it if you invested
that much time and effort!  I think she's too far gone/too invested in
a role which gets her more attention than a straightforward telling of
what little she actually knows would.  (re "straightforward": her
ability to write English varies sharply from time to time, and perhqps
not just in synch with LSD episodes: I think she fuzzes it up when
trying to impress us with smatterings of neuroanatomical terms,
throwing out a few handsful in hopes that we will read into it more
coherent connections than she is actually capable of.)

I am puzzled, however, by your statement that the first
neurotransmitter was discovered c. 25 years ago, by accident. Can you
clarify?

I am old enough to remember when acetylcholine, which was found at the
neuromuscular junction, was beginning to be verified as a central
nervous system neurotransmitter (and I believe that this part of the
discovery process was not accidental)--more like 40-50 years ago.

Dopamine and noradrenaline were at best the stuff of speculation, as I
recall, but verification of CNS roles as true neurotransmitters
proceeded at an accelerated pace.

And then the gut stuff (serotonin), and then---!!!

Life was so much simpler then.  Depending on what one calls
"neurotransmitter" (cf. "neuromodulator"), what have we--20? 30?

Frank


In <70hg3m$l54$1 at oravannahka.Helsinki.FI>
dag.stenberg at helsinki.nospam.fi writes: 
>
>Markus Collins <markus at fastcat.ml.org> wrote:
>...
>> Anyway, I just gave a lecture to an undergraduate
>> seminar of BIOL 315 (cellular biology), and I'm
>> feeling particularly "teacher-like" right now,
>> and that's probably why I wasted 15 minute typing
>> up this response.
>
>It was a wonderful response anyway, and all in your honour that you
>bothered.
>
>> Anyway, like the few other researchers on this
>> newsgroup has said, even though the noise-to-signal
>> ratio is now too low, I will hang around and
>> talk to other open minded people.
>
>That is good, too.
>
>Dag Stenberg
>




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list