One of the things I did today was, since it was on my way, stop at my
favorite Library - to see if there was anything that I could post
that I've not already discussed that's in a published article [so
folks could 'translate', using the published article].
I found nothing.
It's 'hilarious' everything contemporaneous [except, of course, for
Neurochemical details] was already in NDT 20 years ago. I'm still at
least 20 years in folks' futures. [I'll gladly demonstrate this,
in-person, before fair witnesses.]]
I did find one article, though, that is just wrong, and needs to be
corrected. [I didn't take the ref because I don't want to negatively
impact anyone via what will be my 'hard' criticism. Get the gist of
it, and forget about the stimulating report. It doesn't matter as
long as its oversight is 'cilled-in.]
It was with respect to alcohol addiction.
The premise was that it all comes down to the interaction of two
types of synapses [deliberately letting it remain vague - 'unzipped
flies' are Painful for me], and that, through manipulating these
pharmacologically, alcohol addiction can be ameliorated.
The facts of experience were completely ignored.
Alcohol addiction happens in a way that's coupled to
experientially-defined and acquired [learned] 'payoffs'.
Any approach that doesn't address this experiential stuff will 'just'
muck things up.
That is, it's probable that the target synaptic types are involved in
generalized learning, not specifically with respect to alcohol
And, of course, folks don't want to interfere with generalized
I'm =Sorry= but I've got to 'take the gloves off', a bit, because
folks' 'disregard for 'learning' is =OFFENSIVE=.
"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!" [_Network_]
Folks have to Choose - do Neuroscience, or do
If folks Choose to 'disregard' learning, they Choose the latter, and,
I won't tell anyone what to do, but I do demand that they get the
hell out of the way.
Create some new 'wild-imaginary-nothingness' field, and do it to your
'heart's content - but get the hell out of the way of folks who want
to do Neuroscience.
Of course, I really don't want, or expect that, but, how can I say it
so as not to 'offend'?
Folks who disregard experientially-determined activation-dependent
learning just are not studying nervous systems, and are not doing
=Learning= is =inseparable= from Neuroscience!
Learn not to 'disregard' it.
You can't do =anything= in Neuroscience without integrating
experiential History within Analyses of experimental results.
Nervous systems modify themselves in activation-dependent ways.
Nervous systems =learn=
Discussion of experimental results which do not integrate learning
Do the work inherent in lifting your experimental Analyses up in this
K. P. Collins
"Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
"KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
news:rSEra.57996$cO3.3926701 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
| If anyone 'wonders', I took the day off, today. I felt the need to
| Live a little - crammed about 15 years' Living into this day [or at
| least tried to].
|| Nothing 'big-deal' - just a day, given over to what I so enjoyed in
| my Youth - following my 'heart' in the spring-'time' sunlight.
|| Many True Delights were had.
|| 'Course, now, I can either eat or pay my car insurance.
|| Don't really give-a-damn, either way.
|| Exploring that, too.
| "Schmitd! Schmitd! Ve vill build a Shapel!"
|| "KP-PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net%remove%> wrote in message
| news:nzEra.57976$cO3.3924508 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...| | [...]