rsnorman at mediaone.net
Tue Feb 29 17:22:29 EST 2000
The "totally ineffective" answer is about as good as you can get
given the generality of your question.
If you ask "what is the consequence of preventing a finger from
moving" the only possible answer is "you would lose the use of
that finger". You really can't get into all the different ways people
use fingers, not to mention all the problems you would have in
using adjacent fingers if their neighbor were immobilized.
The consequences of a synapse being immobilized depends
completely on the synapse that is involved, what cell, what
circuit, what neural pathway it is in. The consequence has nothing
to do with preventing the binding, it has to do with all the ways that
synapses are used.
Steve Palmer <spalmer at mdanderson.org> wrote in message
news:89gk5b$48i$1 at oac2.hsc.uth.tmc.edu...
> >It's a very broad question with a very simple answer. If
> >neurotransmitters are prevented from binding to their receptors, they
> >become totally ineffective.
> > -- Bill
> Of course. But the consequences of the NT being "totally ineffective" are
> radically different from one instance to the next.
More information about the Neur-sci