Substances triggering brain tumors (Parkinson)

fbonsignore at beethoven.com fbonsignore at beethoven.com
Mon Feb 14 12:12:07 EST 2005


kenneth collins wrote:
(snip)
>
> What you're talking about, above, is
> literally intervening within evolutionary
> dynamics that have been "perfected"
> over the course of billions of 'years'.

The meaning of Reason (read Alive and Human
in my threads), is that it *covers* Evolution.
We should be able to perfect dynamics according
to our own goals.

> So it's =Hard= to "perfect" them, more,
> in a a research effort that's bound to a
> 'time' course of relatively-few 'years'.
>
> And, because of stuff that I've discussed
> earlier in my replies to your posts, it's
> Dangerous to attempts such.
>
> This said, there's a version of what you've
> proposed that occurs naturally within nerv-
> ous systems. Molecular dynamics within
> nervous systems routinely dip-into their
> eons-old evolutionary-'engineered' molec-
> ular repetoirs to "try stuff" as a result of
> the 3-D energydynamics that occur with-
> in them.

We should be able to derive rules

> Overall evolutionary dynamics are literally
> guided by such -- because routine repro-
> ductive dynamics are "selected" as a result
> of such [of course, to varying degrees. Folks
> like me have a "snowball's chance in Hell"
> of ever reproducing because we run too-
> far-ahead in the sort of molecular-tuning
> that I discuss above, leaving us "too weird"
> to attract a mate :-]
>
> In my case, I do it so that others will mate-
> wisely :-]
>
> | from a
> | cognitive point of view, unnoticed by the conscious individual.
>
> Be-cause nervous systems are necessarily
> so tightly-integrated in their functioning, this
> is routinely rarely the case. Even coming
> down with the flu alter's consciousness.
>
> | We can
> | also rely on the neurones, as long as grwth is suffciently
controlled
> | and slow, to organize in the mechanical sense, without forming
lumps of
> | oxgen starved neurones (though a brain oxygenator can be further
used
> | as therapy). Of course, this kind of tretment would be reserved for
> | advanced age patients.
>
> Here, again, neuronal growth is, itself
> tightly-integrated within overall nervous
> system functionality.
>
> So doing what you've proposed will
> definitely simultaneously alter nervous
> system function in ways that are deleter-
> ious to overall nervous system function.
>
> But, if there's already structurally-em-
> bodied nervous system dysfunction, it
> is possible to eliminate such by driving
> nervous system trophic dynamics back
> to a 'normal state'.
>
> Doing so is =Hard=, though, for the
> reasons that I've been discussing.
>
> | Another path would be to attack specifically the proteins that
directly
> | inhibit the mitosis process, which again can be assumed as a
working
> | hypothesis that work in the same way in all cells.
>
> Be-cause of nervous systems' extreme-
> dynamicism, it's not so simple.
>
> Yes, there are 'stereotypical' molecular
> dynamics within nervous systems, but
> nervous systems 'just' do what will op-
> timize their global 3-D energydynamics,
> which includes continual "probing" with
> respect to "manufacturing" novel molecular-
> level dynamics.
>
> And it was to say =that= that I, smilingly,
> took up replying to the "Food for thought"
> that your posts constituted :-]
>
> | By identifying molecules trigering brain tumors (like nitrites),
oth
> | mre useful molecules should be `easily` found.
>
> This's is Possible, but it's =Hard= to do.
>
> But I encourage you to continue to think
> Daringly. Such is the wellspring of Pro-
> gress.
> 
> Cheers, Fabrizio,
> 
> ken [k. p. collins]




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list