Ken Collins KPaulC at
Thu Sep 16 17:58:38 EST 1999

first things first:

in 29 years, yours is the first msg of it's kind that i've received. so i
must 'celebate'... HURRAH!

i Acknowledge that i don't deserve the honor (IM-context-laden-O), inherent,
but Thank You, Dag, for 'just' Doing Science with me.

i can only comment briefly (below).

<dag.stenberg at> wrote in message
news:7rqkc8$d1$1 at
> Ken Collins <KPaulC at> wrote:
> > i'm not saying that these UF folks are deliberately augmenting' the
> > 'stereotype, ...
> > they don't give a clue to their '10 brain structures', which would've
> > the only thing that would've given me reason to explore further...
> > that they left such out.
> Here is the abstract of the original article:
> Biol Psychiatry 1999 Aug 1;46(3):374-82
> Cumulative effect of anatomical risk factors for schizophrenia: an MRI
> study.
> Leonard CM, Kuldau JM, Breier JI, Zuffante PA, Gautier ER, Heron DC,
> Lavery EM, Packing J, Williams SA, DeBose CA
> Department of Neuroscience, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA.
> BACKGROUND: Although schizophrenic and control subjects differ on a
> variety of neuroanatomical measures, the specificity and
> sensitivity of any one measure for differentiating between groups are
> low. This study investigated the cumulative effect of deviant
> brain structure on diagnosis. METHODS: Hemisphere and third ventricle
> volume and the normalized (Talairach) location of three
> association cortex sulcal landmarks were measured on high-resolution MRI
> scans in 37 male patients with schizophrenia and 33 male
> control subjects matched on age, handedness, and parental socioeconomic
> status. RESULTS: While there were few group differences
> on individual anatomical measures, the 10 variables reliably
> discriminated between the two groups when used in concert in a
> discriminant function analysis (F[10.59] = 3.6, p < .0009) with 77% of
> the subjects correctly classified. Five of the measures (left
> posterior cingulate, left inferior frontal sulcus, right sylvian
> fissure, and left and right halves of the third ventricle) correlated
> significantly with the discriminant function (p < .005). CONCLUSIONS:
> This is the first study to demonstrate that schizophrenics can
> be distinguished from matched controls on the basis of brain anatomy
> alone. The risk of schizophrenia may depend on the total
> amount of neural deviance, rather than on anomalies in a single
> structure or circuit.
> ------- end of abstract
> So they actually list five structures in the abstract.

comment: from this abstract, anyway, my earlier, knee-jerk, response is
inappropriate (was the online thing 'sensationalized'?). i ('of course')
agree that everything's 'evident' in the neural topology ('structure'), to
degree commensurate with the resolving-power of the experimental
methodology. (i've read the 2nd abstract, and will make further, correlated,
comments, referring back here, 'down-there'.)

but they don't give any gradient information, which is the important stuff
that i always look for first. gradients in distributions allow the features
to be carried through to other 'regions' and 'features, and allow everything
to be integrated overall. (i used to try to emphasize the need for such
gradient information, but i just 'stopped', publicly, because it 'hurt' too
much to never hear back ('unprofessional' of me, here, but i'm in my30th
hour of waking consciousness, so i'll 'degenerate' in this way. besides, i'm
an amateur :-) perhaps they considered such info to-detailed for the

further, more-general, comments at the end of the msg.

> For comparison, I enclose an abstract by Robert McCarley, summarizing a
> number of previous studies by his group and others:
> Biol Psychiatry 1999 May 1;45(9):1099-119
> MRI anatomy of schizophrenia.
> McCarley RW, Wible CG, Frumin M, Hirayasu Y, Levitt JJ, Fischer IA,
> Shenton ME
> Harvard Medical School, Department of Psychiatry, VA Medical Center,
> Brockton, Massachusetts 02401, USA.
> Structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data have provided much
> evidence in support of our current view that schizophrenia is a
> brain disorder with altered brain structure, and consequently involving
> more than a simple disturbance in neurotransmission.

comment: i agree re. 'structure', as above. (it's 'just' that 'structure'
deviating from 'norm', occurs as a function of experience. (if there were no
deviations from 'norm', it'd be 'norm'. can 'norm' be constructed from
experience? yes, but there will be evidence, both structural and behavioral,
of the 'norm'-'nonnorm'-'norm' round-trip. further correlated comments,

> review surveys 118 peer-reviewed studies with control group from 1987 to
> May 1998. Most studies (81%) do not find abnormalities
> of whole brain/intracranial contents, while lateral ventricle
> enlargement is reported in 77%, and third ventricle enlargement in 67%.

ventricular enlargement correlates with diminution of surrounding neural

in NDT, diminution of neural mass is attributed to 'normal' pruning,
minimization of circuit lengths (which two things often 'overlap'; 'pruning'
is in circuit-length minimization, and vice-versa; minimization of circuit
lengths can happen in the absence of 'pruning', however, through the
'simple' 'shifting' of a circuit to a route that's shorter (NDT attributes
heavy neural-glia involvement in these dynamics.). for an example that
exposes some of what's involved, consider the optic radiations. they seem to
follow a 'wasteful', 'non-minimal' route, going by a 'round-about' way, but
their routes 'just' assure the appropriate synchronization ('Type II' - like
gears in a clock. not like soldiers marching. (AoK, Ap5)) within projection
targets. if the routes were altered, synchronization of afferent activation
would decrease, and this would result in an increase in TD E/I. it's also
easy to see that the decreased synchronization would increase response
latencies because it would take the TD E/I-minimization mechanisms longer to
achieve TD E/I(min) within the relatively-disordered (desynchronized)
activation 'state'. these things would have further TD E/I(up) consequences
because the increased response latencies would result in the animal's being
injured more-often in scraps with other animals, and because of stuff
correlated with 'drives'. the increased response latencies would cause the
animal to become less competitive in gathering food. as a result, as is
discussed in AoK, Ap5 ("Infant's crying behavior example"), the decreased
food intake would result in more relatively-random activation being injected
into the supersystem via the 'reticular system'. and it goes on and on like
this. (this is a small example of how i approach all Neuro-analysis. it goes
right down to the ionic 'level'. i've got a large store of gradient
information (which is why i commented re. such, above), and given such, it's
a straight-forward thing to fit any new gradient information in. the
gradients (the neural topology) 'just' locks-in the new gradient information
in straight-forward ways, because the gradients must be consistent with
respect to overall TD E/I-minimization, circuit length minimization, energy
consumption minimization (note, the last requires an 'additional 'level' to
be carried through because it doesn't do to 'minimize' energy consumption to
a degree that decreases information-processing performance. such would
automatically increase energy consumption, because of the decreased
functionality, inherent (feedback from the environment upon manifesting
'inappropriate' behavior, etc.)) anyway, it's why i'm able to say this or
that with 'unseemly' certainty - the gradients 'talk' to me about the ways
they fit together. there's more, here, but i'm going to move on.

> The
> temporal lobe was the brain parenchymal region with the most
> consistently documented abnormalities. Volume decreases were found
> in 62% of 37 studies of whole temporal lobe, and in 81% of 16 studies of
> the superior temporal gyrus (and in 100% with gray matter
> separately evaluated). Fully 77% of the 30 studies of the medial
> temporal lobe reported volume reduction in one or more of its
> constituent structures (hippocampus, amygdala, parahippocampal gyrus).
> Despite evidence for frontal lobe functional abnormalities,
> structural MRI investigations less consistently found abnormalities,
> with 55% describing volume reduction. It may be that frontal lobe
> volume changes are small, and near the threshold for MRI detection. The
> parietal and occipital lobes were much less studied; about
> half of the studies showed positive findings. Most studies of cortical
> gray matter (86%) found volume reductions were not diffuse, but
> more pronounced in certain areas. About two thirds of the studies of
> subcortical structures of thalamus, corpus callosum and basal
> ganglia (which tend to increase volume with typical neuroleptics), show
> positive findings, as do almost all (91%) studies of cavum
> septi pellucidi (CSP). Most data were consistent with a developmental
> model, but growing evidence was compatible also with
> progressive, neurodegenerative features, suggesting a "two-hit" model of
> schizophrenia, for which a cellular hypothesis is discussed.
> The relationship of clinical symptoms to MRI findings is reviewed, as is
> the growing evidence suggesting structural abnormalities
> differ in affective (bipolar) psychosis and schizophrenia.

NTD's position re. volume decreases in specific conditions such as
'schizophrenia' derive in elevated 'randomness' (see 'zone of randomness',
AoK, Ap4), which is elevated TD E/I, and which more-strongly activates the
TD E/I-minimization mechanisms. as is discussed in AoK, pretty-much
throughout, the TD E/I-minimization mechanisms 'just' eliminate any
extraneous neural activation that they can eliminate without imposing TD
E/I(up) upon the supersystem. because 'random' ('stochastic') neural
activation is non-information-containing information, 'random' activation is
acted upon strongly by the TD E/I-minimization mechanisms, 'eliminating' it
(shutting it down), robustly. when the 'randomness' is 'eliminated',
however, the 'normal' trophic mechanisms which enable microscopic circuit
modifications, in an activity-dependent way, become 'abnormally' relatively
inactive. no trophic 'push' extended relatively-enduringly, and neural mass

now, go back to the beginning of this discussion with an awareness of how
'randomness' can be generated, experientially, within the nervous system.
(i've gone over the basics repeatedly in our News Group, and discussions and
examples are distributed throughout AoK. it's important stuff.) impose
'abnormal' 'randomness', enduringly, and sure as Sun rises in the morning,
'schizophrenia'-like dynamics follow. it's all explained in AoK.

i'll end with a seemingly-self-serving 'editorial' Plea. Neuroscience must
rally-round and get things straightened-out re. this stuff because the
suffering of folks who 'stumble' into relative-'randomness' experience
horrible stuff, needlessly - the effect is, literally, something like having
the Life 'sucked-out of one. (and please, i know of this stuff only because
i've been a 'good soldier'. to do the research, i had to push myself hard.
in the midst of such, i learned about things in the 'zone of randomness'
just because i had to go-there to get to the understanding. i routinely take
notes at all such 'times' so that the Treasure in-they will not be wasted.
all the notes are preserved, for any researchers' study.

i can Honestly say that, although i routinely come up against Jackass stuff,
and routinely address it for what it is, and although i'm often tired to the
'point' of exhaustion (as i am presently), and although that shows, how
could it not?

one must just do what needs to be done, regardless, because there are folks
who need what one can do. therein exists Obligation.

finally, although, i'm routinely 'hammered' by 'armchair psychiatrists',
anyone who care to look will see that, 'when the chips are down', i'm the
kind of guy you want by your side. i just don't 'break'. get 'angry' and
'stubborn' and 'frustrated' and, in solitude, i weep, but i just don't

what i also don't do is 'fake' anything. i don't 'suck-up', and i don't
'curry favor'. it's a character trait that i've chosen. get rid of Falseness
because it's 100% Waste.

so i'm not 'fancy', but 'when the chips are down', i do what needs to be

my preference, in Science, is to stand alone, because i've just seen too
much of folks 'moving away from' Truth for trivial reasons involved in
'gaining acceptance'.

but if one 'moves away from' Truth, to the degree that one does so, one
ceases to actually Exist as a Human Being... one becomes something of an
'automaton'. i'll not have such.

why all this?

you'd be 'surprised' to hear how so many folks 'react' to a guy just doing
what needs to be done. the dynamics are thoroughly treated in AoK

end of my comments.

K. P. Collins

> --
> So there has been a lot of data before the new study, but the authors of
> the new study mainitain that theirs is the first to be able to diagnose
> schizophrenia from anatomy alone - with statistical methods - correctly
> in all of 77% of their material...
> --
> Dag Stenberg

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list