IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Neurogenesis

kenneth Collins kpaulc at earthlink.net
Thu Jan 6 01:31:34 EST 2000


i've 'stumbled' into a 'War'.

i =Hate= 'War', so i'll End it.

kenneth Collins wrote:
> 
> kenneth Collins wrote:

>[...]

> > neural genesis is =Necessarily= governed by the same mechanisms that
> > govern all non-neural-genesis trophic dynamics, so, except in instances
> > of organic damage (disease & mechanical lesions) it's flat-out
> > impossible for neural genesis to 'disrupt' anything.

why is neural genesis is =Necessarily= governed by the same mechanisms
that govern all non-neural-genesis trophic dynamics?

be-cause absent the rigorous governance of TD E/I-minimized
activation-dependence, neural plasticity is =IMPOSSIBLE=, be-cause the
only alternative means of achieving 'plasticity' would be through
so-called 'molecular markers' which would necessarily be
'genetically'-coded, which would mean that all experiential
possibilities would have to be 'genetically'-predetermined so that this
or that 'molecular marker' could be 'activated' so that the neural
trorphy it 'coded' could occur, which would mean that adaptability
('learning') could only occur on an evolutionary 'time'-scale, which
would mean that we'd all have to have huge, muscular bodies to carry
around our great block-heads, which would have to be block-head-large so
as to hold the cells that'd contain all of the 'molecular-marker' stuff
that'd be necessary to primitively 'encode' neural 'plasticity'
sufficiently with respect to the infinities with which the problem of
routine survival confronts us routinely.

and even with our greatly-cumbersome noggins, if anything simultaneously
novel and life-threatening occurred, 'humans' would be 'goners.

more on this 'War'-stuff below.

> while out on a job hunt this morning, i stopped into a good Library and
> read a bit.
> 
> one of the things i skimmed was "Functional integration of neural grafts
> in Parkinson's Disease", by R. A. Barker and S. B. Dunnett, _Nature
> Neuroscience_, vol 2, no. 12, Dec, 1999, p 1047.

whoops! that was the publication's synopsis-take on the actual research
article which is, "Dopamine release from nigral transplants visualized
in vivo in a Parkinson's patient", by P. Piccini, et. al., p1137.

my comments remain the same, except as noted below.

first thing, the use of tissue taken from Aborted Fetuses is UnEthical,
and UnAcceptable.

there's a biotech business opportunity in this for folks clever enough
to work donated stem cells into correlated nigral tissue, and that's the
only Ethical way in which the Sorrowful Needs of Parkinson's Sufferers
can be met.

Get to-it!

this 'moving away from' Truth that Human Life begins at conception must
be at an end, because it, simultaneously, 'moves away from' the
Excellent Rationale upon which Sanctions =all= Medical intervention.

think about it.

the Rationale upon which all of Medicine is founded is that it's OK to
do such and such because doing such and such will Save a Life.

this Rationale is what permits Researchers to hunt for, and discover,
treatments that Medical Doctors can use. It's what enables Surgeons to
cut into the Human body. it's what makes it Acceptable for a Patient to
receive Medical Intervention in the very stuff of her/his Life.

and the Destruction of Human Life is 'just' the opposite of this
Rationale which Underpins all of Medicine.

it's Clear-Cut.

Destroying Human Life simultaneously Destroys the Rationale upon which
all of Medicine is Founded.

is the Hippocratic Oath's Sanctioning 'Important'?

Look-and-See, it is, for without it, anyone can do anything to anyone,
and all they have to do is point-out the 'fact' that the State
'Sanctions' what they did because State'Sanctioned' Destruction of Human
Life is =all-inclusive= with respect to that which one 'human being' can
do to another Human Being.

"Yeah, but Medical Doctors are licensed"...?

the stuff of Medical License Derives =exclusively= in the Sanction that
is rigorously-coupled to the Saving of Life.

it's an either-or thing.

Sanction to Save Life be-cause Life is Saved, or none of either.

there's the Hippocratic Oath or the "hypocrit's oath, and Nothing
in-between.

for those who 'knee-jerk' with respect to such, think some more.

Human sexuality is Wonderous stuff that actually physically reconfigures
nervous systems in ways that bind a man and woman together so that, when
things get 'difficult', they can endure.

but when sex becomes 'trivial', such physical reconfiguration becomes a
"house divided against itself".

'casual sex' results in the dilution of the physical reconfiguration of
nervous systems that bind men and women, and Families, together.

"throw such out" for 'casual sex'?

such doesn't compute.

> this article discusses how it's been confirmed that, in one case, 10
> years after grafting of aborted-fetal tissue, the grafted tissue does
> possess synaptic functionality.
> 
> the tissue was transplanted unilaterally into one [putamen].
> since, as is discussed in AoK, Ap5, the basal ganglia are a supersystem
> configuration mechanism, transplant into them is correlated to the
> dynamics of supersystem configuration.
> 
> it would be interesting to know, in detail, about pre-transplant and
> post-transplant "memory" retrieval, and post-transplant functionality
> 'ramping', if any.

the article describes a 3-year 'ramping' [HURRAH+++***!!!]

> because the basal ganglia are supersystem configuration mechanisms,
> which function in accord with global TD E/I-minimization, NDT holds that
> there should've been an observable 'ramping-up' to TD E/I-minimized
> supersystem configurations, as what was intact within the supersystem
> (AoK's term for the collection of 'systems' that is the nervous system)
> exerted its 'biological mass' (AoK, Ap5) upon basal ganglia neural
> activation 'states'.

the article describes a 3-year 'ramping' [HURRAH+++***!!!]

> such would gradually bring the transplanted tissue's functioning 'up to
> speed' relative to organically-'normal' (non-operated) tissue, as the
> 'normal' 'state' is converged upon ('replicated'), as is discussed in
> AoK, Ap9.

the article describes a 3-year 'ramping' [HURRAH+++***!!!]

but the above was not the stuff of the 'War'. i came across that stuff
in the same issue of _Nature Neuroscience_, in an article, "Development
of ocular dominance columns in the absence of retinal input", by J. C.
Crowley and L. C. Katz, p1125.

it's not my 'War', but, on reading the article, it became
immediately-clear to me that there is a 'War' that's been going-on, of
which i was unaware before reading this article. (Most of why i've not
allowed myself to read in the Neuroscience stacks has been because i
wanted to give folks the opportunity to get things sorted-out without
interference from me.)

the Authors argue (=my= summary) that evidence they've accumulated, via
the elimination of retinal inputs, supports the view that the formation
of ocular-cominance columns in visual cortex 'must' be mediated by
'molecular markers' because, after the elimination of retinal inputs to
the lateral geniculae, the formation of the ocular dominance columns,
nevertheless occurs relatively 'normally', 'and so', it 'cannot be
dependent upon activation-dependence'.

for those who want to check it out, see the discussion of the superior
colliculus on p189ff of _The Human Nervous System_, by R. Nieuwenhuys,
J. Voogd, C. van Huijzen, Third Revised Edition, © 1978-1988,
Springer-Verlag, ISBN: 0-387-13441-7. (see, also, the rest of this fine
text.)

visual, auditory, and somatosensory activation is all
topologically-mapped in the superior colliculi, which project to the
Pulvanar (thalamus), which projects to the lateral geniculate and to
primary visual cortex (areas 17, 18, 19).

the superior colliculi also project to several brain stem reticular
nuclei, which, as is discussed in AoK,  through relays, elevate TD E/I
globally, to the cerrebellum, and down to spinal levels from which
activation flows back to thalamus to cortex, with TD E/I-minimization as
is discussed in AoK.

now, for folks who still have the little QBASIC Information Calculus
program that i posted a while back, fire it up and study the
relative-motion dynamics of the 2nd Derivative.

these relative-motion dynamics, which are discussed as 'sliding fields'
in AoK, Ap6, are the stuff through which the cortical 'columns' (and
'stripes') are formed =throughout= cortex.

so, even if visual inputs are eliminated, whenever there's sound or
somatosensation, nerual activation occurs in the superior colliculi
that's relayed to the visual cortex.

destroy the superior colliculi, and you'll still get cortical 'columns',
all via activation-dependent trophic dynamics.

all of this, and much more, is discussed in AoK. See Ap6 in particular.

what's my 'point'?

folks who don't 'bother' to learn the integrated functioning of the
Neuroanatomy produce B. S.

with respect to this 'Nurture/Nature' stuff, Carla Shatz and her
Colleagues got it Right.

the 'War' is Ended.

K. P. Collins

[P. S. why am i so Offensive? it's simple. since 1980, i've been able to
do the same with any B. S. 'neuroscience' article that i came across in
the stacks. i've been =Really= Trying to be Gentle, never breathing a
word with respect to such, beyond what's already clearly-stated in AoK,
in the Hope that folks'd just meet with me, in some quiet place, so that
i could communicate the understanding to them with respect to their
specializations. but all that's happened is that Jackasses have
Run-Amok, heaping-up more and more B. S., while the folks who are
supporting Neuroscientific endeavor through their Taxes, have been left
waiting and wanting, and being Ravaged.

the whole Stupidity involved is epitomized in an Editorial that appears
in the same issue of Nature Neuroscience: "Stockpiling PhDs for the new
millenium", p1039, which actually advocates encouraging students to
'move away from' Neuroscience.

Truth is, the Future of Humanity =NEEDS= every good mind that can do,
and wants to do, Neuroscience, and if folks'd just do Neuroscience
instead of 'stockpiling' B. S., there'd be funding enough to reward all
that can, in fact, do Neuroscience.

after all, we must "Teach the Children Well", and that's a
forever-needing-to-be-renewed Obligation.

i =Apologize= for my Offensiveness. Further Delay is Unconscionable.

this said, I found, while spending some hours with the Dec., 1999 issue
of _Nature Neuroscience_, which is the only issue of the publication
that i've ever looked into, that it is the best such publication that
i've encountered, and, within my means to get to a copy of it, plan to
study it routinely for my foreseeable future.

so, folks should come to terms with the globally-integrated functional
Neuroanatomy, and eliminate the B. S., or i'll Fulfill my Obligation to
Science, and do the latter for folks.

how can a man, that no one will even talk to, do things in any other
way?

should i have written this msg without pointing out the B. S.?

that's what i've been doing for 29 years, isn't it?

Yes.

All the while being forced to Watch as Innocents have been Ravaged,
while folks upon whom they rely 'seek profits' and produce B. S.

"Enough." (Yitshak Rabin)

Me Too. K. P. Collins]




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net