Most Recent Links
Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, or subscribe to our mailing list, to receive news updates. Learn more.
By Dave Dormer, Transporting babies deprived of oxygen at birth to a neonatal intensive care unit in Calgary will soon be safer thanks to a new portable cooling device. The Foothills hospital is one of the first facilities in Canada to acquire one and doctors hope it will help prevent brain injuries, as reducing a baby's temperature can prevent damage to brain tissue and promote healing. The reduction in temperature is called therapeutic hypothermia, and it can help prevent damage to brain tissue and promote healing. (Evelyne Asselin/CBC) "The period immediately following birth is critical. We have about a six-hour window to lower these babies' temperatures to prevent neurological damage," said Dr. Khorshid Mohammad, the neonatal neurocritical care project lead who spearheaded the initiative. "The sooner we can do so, and the more consistent we can make the temperature, the more protective it is and the better their chances of surviving without injury." Since about 2008, doctors used cooling blankets and gel packs to lower a baby's temperature to 33.5 C from the normal 37 C for 72 hours in order to prevent brain damage. "With those methods, it can be difficult to maintain a stable temperature," said Mohammad. ©2016 CBC/Radio-Canada.
Keyword: Development of the Brain
Link ID: 22476 - Posted: 07.26.2016
By Ann Grisold, Oscar, 6, sits at the family dinner table and endures the loneliest hour of his day. The room bustles with activity: Oscar’s sister passes plates and doles out broccoli florets. His father and uncle exchange playful banter. Oscar’s mother emerges from the kitchen carrying a platter of carved meat; a cousin pulls up an empty chair. “Chi fan le!” shouts Oscar’s older sister, in Mandarin Chinese. Time for dinner! “Hao,” her grandfather responds from the other room. Okay. Family members tell stories and rehash the day, all in animated Chinese. But when they turn to Oscar, who has autism, they speak in English. “Eat rice,” Oscar’s father says. “Sit nice.” Except there is no rice on the table. In Chinese, ‘eat rice’ can refer to any meal, but its meaning is lost in translation. Pediatricians, educators and speech therapists have long advised multilingual families to speak one language — the predominant one where they live — to children with autism or other developmental delays. The reasoning is simple: These children often struggle to learn language, so they’re better off focusing on a single one. However, there are no data to support this notion. In fact, a handful of studies show that children with autism can learn two languages as well as they learn one, and might even thrive in multilingual environments. Lost in translation: It’s not just children with autism who miss out when parents speak only English at home — their families, too, may experience frustrating miscommunications. Important instructions, offhand remarks and words of affection are often lost in translation when families swap their heritage language for English, says Betty Yu, associate professor of special education and communicative disorders at San Francisco State University. © 2016 Scientific American,
By Andy Coghlan The final brain edit before adulthood has been observed for the first time. MRI scans of 300 adolescents and young adults have shown how the teenage brain upgrades itself to become quicker – but that errors in this process may lead to schizophrenia in later life. The editing process that takes place in teen years seems to select the brain’s best connections and networks, says Kirstie Whitaker at the University of Cambridge. “The result is a brain that’s sleeker and more efficient.” When Whitaker and her team scanned brains from people between the ages of 14 and 24, they found that two major changes take place in the outer layer of the brain – the cortex – at this time. As adolescence progresses, this layer of grey matter gets thinner – probably because unwanted or unused connections between neurons – called synapses – are pruned back. At the same time, important neurons are upgraded. The parts of these cells that carry signals down towards synapses are given a sheath that helps them transmit signals more quickly – a process called myelination. “It may be that pruning and myelination are part of the maturation of the brain,” says Steven McCarroll at Harvard Medical School. “Pruning involves removing the connections that are not used, and myelination takes the ones that are left and makes them faster,” he says. McCarroll describes this as a trade-off – by pruning connections, we lose some flexibility in the brain, but the proficiency of signal transmission improves. © Copyright Reed Business Information Ltd.
Keyword: Development of the Brain
Link ID: 22474 - Posted: 07.26.2016
By Lizzie Wade Neandertals and modern humans had a lot in common—at least enough to have babies together fairly often. But what about their brains? To answer that question, scientists have looked at how Neandertal and modern human brains developed during the crucial time of early childhood. In the first year of life, modern human infants go through a growth spurt in several parts of the brain: the cerebellum, the parietal lobes, and the temporal lobes—key regions for language and social interaction. Past studies suggested baby Neandertal brains developed more like the brains of chimpanzees, without concentrated growth in any particular area. But a new study casts doubt on that idea. Scientists examined 15 Neandertal skulls, including one newborn and a pair of children under the age of 2. By carefully imaging the skulls, the team determined that Neandertal temporal lobes, frontal lobes, and cerebellums did, in fact, grow faster than the rest of the brain in early life, a pattern very similar to modern humans, they report today in Current Biology. Scientists had overlooked that possibility, the researchers say, because Neandertals and Homo sapiens have such differently shaped skulls. Modern humans’ rounded skull is a telltale marker of the growth spurt, for example, whereas Neandertals’ skulls were relatively flat on the top. If Neandertals did, in fact, have fast developing cerebellums and temporal and frontal lobes, they might have been more skilled at language and socializing than assumed, scientists say. This could in turn explain how the children of Neandertal–modern human pairings fared well enough to pass down their genes to so many us living today. © 2016 American Association for the Advancement of Science
By Jessica Boddy Ever wonder what it looks like when brain cells chat up a storm? Researchers have found a way to watch the conversation in action without ever cracking open a skull. This glimpse into the brain’s communication system could open new doors to diagnosing and treating disorders from epilepsy to Alzheimer’s disease. Being able to see where—and how—living brain cells are working is “the holy grail in neuroscience,” says Howard Federoff, a neurologist at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., who was not involved with the work. “This is a possible new tool that could bring us closer to that.” Neurons, which are only slightly longer than the width of a human hair, are laid out in the brain like a series of tangled highways. Signals must travel down these highways, but there’s a catch: The cells don’t actually touch. They’re separated by tiny gaps called synapses, where messages, with the assistance of electricity, jump from neuron to neuron to reach their destinations. The number of functional synapses that fire in one area—a measure known as synaptic density—tends to be a good way to figure out how healthy the brain is. Higher synaptic density means more signals are being sent successfully. If there are significant interruptions in large sections of the neuron highway, many signals may never reach their destinations, leading to disorders like Huntington disease. The only way to look at synaptic density in the brain, however, is to biopsy nonliving brain tissue. That means there’s no way for researchers to investigate how diseases like Alzheimer’s progress—something that could hold secrets to diagnosis and treatment. © 2016 American Association for the Advancement of Science
Keyword: Brain imaging
Link ID: 22472 - Posted: 07.23.2016
By ANNA WEXLER EARLIER this month, in the journal Annals of Neurology, four neuroscientists published an open letter to practitioners of do-it-yourself brain stimulation. These are people who stimulate their own brains with low levels of electricity, largely for purposes like improved memory or learning ability. The letter, which was signed by 39 other researchers, outlined what is known and unknown about the safety of such noninvasive brain stimulation, and asked users to give careful consideration to the risks. For the last three years, I have been studying D.I.Y. brain stimulators. Their conflict with neuroscientists offers a fascinating case study of what happens when experimental tools normally kept behind the closed doors of academia — in this case, transcranial direct current stimulation — are appropriated for use outside them. Neuroscientists began experimenting in earnest with transcranial direct current stimulation about 15 years ago. In such stimulation, electric current is administered at levels that are hundreds of times less than those used in electroconvulsive therapy. To date, more than 1,000 peer-reviewed studies of the technique have been published. Studies have suggested, among other things, that the stimulation may be beneficial for treating problems like depression and chronic pain as well as enhancing cognition and learning in healthy individuals. The device scientists use for stimulation is essentially a nine-volt battery attached to two wires that are connected to electrodes placed at various spots on the head. A crude version can be constructed with just a bit of electrical know-how. Consequently, as reports of the effects of the technique began to appear in scientific journals and in newspapers, people began to build their own devices at home. By late 2011 and early 2012, diagrams, schematics and videos began to appear online. © 2016 The New York Times Company
Link ID: 22471 - Posted: 07.23.2016
By Knvul Sheikh Although millions of women use hormone therapy, those who try it in hopes of maintaining sharp memory and preventing the fuzzy thinking sometimes associated with menopause may be disappointed. A new study indicates that taking estrogen does not significantly affect verbal memory and other mental skills. “There is no change in cognitive abilities associated with estrogen therapy for postmenopausal women, regardless of their age,” says Victor Henderson, a neurologist at Stanford University and the study’s lead author. Evidence of positive and negative effects of such hormone therapy has ping-ponged over the years, with some observational studies in postmenopausal women and research in animal models, suggesting it improves cognitive function and memory. But other previous research, including a long-term National Institutes of Health Women’s Health Initiative memory study published in 2004, has suggested that taking estrogen increases the risk of cognitive impairment and dementia in women over 65 years old. Henderson says one explanation for these contradictory findings may be that after menopause begins there is a “critical period” in which hormone therapy could still benefit relatively young women—if they start early enough. So in their study, which appears in the July 20 online Neurology, Henderson and his team recruited 567 healthy women, between ages 41 and 84, to examine how estrogen affected one group whose members were within six years of their last menstrual period and another whose members had started menopause at least 10 years earlier. © 2016 Scientific American
By Emma Bryce In 1999, neuroscientist Gero Miesenböck dreamed of using light to expose the brain's inner workings. Two years later, he invented optogenetics, a technique that fulfils this goal: by genetically engineering cells to contain proteins that make them light-responsive, Miesenböck found he could shine light at the brain and trigger electrical activity in those cells. This technique gave scientists the tools to activate and control specific cell populations in the brain, for the first time. For example, Miesenböck, who directs the Centre for Neural Circuits and Behaviour at the University of Oxford, first used optogenetics to activate courtship responses in fruit flies, and even make headless flies take flight - groundbreaking experiments that allowed him to examine, in unprecedented detail, how neurons drive behaviour. Gero Miesenböck: There was almost a "eureka" moment. As is often the case, you tend to have your best ideas when you're not trying to have them: suddenly I had this idea - which I must have been incubating for a long time, because I was thinking about manipulating neurons in the brain genetically to emit light so I could visualise their activity. Suddenly I thought, "What if we just turn the thing upside down, and instead of reading activity, write activity using light and genetics?" That was the real breakthrough idea, and then of course came the big challenge of having to make it work. Brains are composed of many different kinds of nerve cells, and they are genetically distinct from one another. To deconstruct how the brain works we need to pinpoint the roles these individual classes of cells play in processing information. Optogenetics uses the genetic signatures that define individual cell types to address them selectively in the intact brain - that's the "genetics" component. The "opto" component is to use these genetic signatures to place light-sensitive molecules that are encoded in DNA within these cells.
Link ID: 22469 - Posted: 07.23.2016
By NATALIE ANGIER Their word is their bond, and they do what they say — even if the “word” on one side is a loud trill and grunt, and, on the other, the excited twitterings of a bird. Researchers have long known that among certain traditional cultures of Africa, people forage for wild honey with the help of honeyguides — woodpecker-like birds that show tribesmen where the best beehives are hidden, high up in trees. In return for revealing the location of natural honey pots, the birds are rewarded with the leftover beeswax, which they eagerly devour. Now scientists have determined that humans and their honeyguides communicate with each other through an extraordinary exchange of sounds and gestures, which are used only for honey hunting and serve to convey enthusiasm, trustworthiness and a commitment to the dangerous business of separating bees from their hives. The findings cast fresh light on one of only a few known examples of cooperation between humans and free-living wild animals, a partnership that may well predate the love affair between people and their domesticated dogs by hundreds of thousands of years. Claire N. Spottiswoode, a behavioral ecologist at Cambridge University, and her colleagues reported in the journal Science that honeyguides advertise their scout readiness to the Yao people of northern Mozambique by flying up close while emitting a loud chattering cry. For their part, the Yao seek to recruit and retain honeyguides with a distinctive vocalization, a firmly trilled “brrr” followed by a grunted “hmm.” In a series of careful experiments, the researchers then showed that honeyguides take the meaning of the familiar ahoy seriously. The birds were twice as likely to offer sustained help to Yao foragers who walked along while playing recordings of the proper brrr-hmm signal than they were to participants with recordings of normal Yao words or the sounds of other animals. © 2016 The New York Times Company
By Tanya Lewis Scientists have made significant progress toward understanding how individual memories are formed, but less is known about how multiple memories interact. Researchers from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto and colleagues studied how memories are encoded in the amygdalas of mice. Memories formed within six hours of each other activate the same population of neurons, whereas distinct sets of brain cells encode memories formed farther apart, in a process whereby neurons compete with their neighbors, according to the team’s study, published today (July 21) in Science. “Some memories naturally go together,” study coauthor Sheena Josselyn of the Hospital for Sick Children told The Scientist. For example, you may remember walking down the aisle at your wedding ceremony and, later, your friend having a bit too much to drink at the reception. “We’re wondering about how these memories become linked in your mind,” Josselyn said. When the brain forms a memory, a group of neurons called an “engram” stores that information. Neurons in the lateral amygdala—a brain region involved in memory of fearful events—are thought to compete with one another to form an engram. Cells that are more excitable or have higher expression of the transcription factor CREB—which is critical for the formation of long-term memories—at the time the memory is being formed will “win” this competition and become part of a memory. © 1986-2016 The Scientist
Keyword: Learning & Memory
Link ID: 22467 - Posted: 07.23.2016
Carl Zimmer The brain looks like a featureless expanse of folds and bulges, but it’s actually carved up into invisible territories. Each is specialized: Some groups of neurons become active when we recognize faces, others when we read, others when we raise our hands. On Wednesday, in what many experts are calling a milestone in neuroscience, researchers published a spectacular new map of the brain, detailing nearly 100 previously unknown regions — an unprecedented glimpse into the machinery of the human mind. Scientists will rely on this guide as they attempt to understand virtually every aspect of the brain, from how it develops in children and ages over decades, to how it can be corrupted by diseases like Alzheimer’s and schizophrenia. “It’s a step towards understanding why we’re we,” said David Kleinfeld, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego, who was not involved in the research. Scientists created the map with advanced scanners and computers running artificial intelligence programs that “learned” to identify the brain’s hidden regions from vast amounts of data collected from hundreds of test subjects, a far more sophisticated and broader effort than had been previously attempted. While an important advance, the new atlas is hardly the final word on the brain’s workings. It may take decades for scientists to figure out what each region is doing, and more will be discovered in coming decades. “This map you should think of as version 1.0,” said Matthew F. Glasser, a neuroscientist at Washington University School of Medicine and lead author of the new research. “There may be a version 2.0 as the data get better and more eyes look at the data. We hope the map can evolve as the science progresses.” © 2016 The New York Times Company
Keyword: Brain imaging
Link ID: 22466 - Posted: 07.21.2016
Ian Sample Science editor When the German neurologist Korbinian Brodmann first sliced and mapped the human brain more than a century ago he identified 50 distinct regions in the crinkly surface called the cerebral cortex that governs much of what makes us human. Now researchers have updated the 100-year-old map in a scientific tour de force which reveals that the human brain has at least 180 different regions that are important for language, perception, consciousness, thought, attention and sensation. The landmark achievement hands neuroscientists their most comprehensive map of the cortex so far, one that is expected to supersede Brodmann’s as the standard researchers use to talk about the various areas of the brain. Scientists at Washington University in St Louis created the map by combining highly-detailed MRI scans from 210 healthy young adults who had agreed to take part in the Human Connectome Project, a massive effort that aims to understand how neurons in the brain are connected. Most previous maps of the human brain have been created by looking at only one aspect of the tissues, such as how the cells look under a microscope, or how active areas become when a person performs a certain task. But maps made in different ways do not always look the same, which casts doubt on where one part of the brain stops and another starts. Writing in the journal Nature, Matthew Glasser and others describe how they combined scans of brain structure, function and connectivity to produce the new map, which confirmed the existence of 83 known brain regions and added 97 new ones. Some scans were taken while patients simply rested in the machine, while others were recorded as they performed maths tasks, listened to stories, or categorised objects, for example by stating whether an image was of a tool or an animal. © 2016 Guardian News and Media Limited
Keyword: Brain imaging
Link ID: 22465 - Posted: 07.21.2016
By Minaz Kerawala, For years, gamers, athletes and even regular people trying to improving their memory have resorted, with electrified enthusiasm, to "brain zapping" to gain an edge. The procedure, called transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), uses a battery and electrodes to deliver electrical pulses to the brain, usually through a cap or headset fitted close to the scalp. Proponents say these currents are beneficial for a range of neurological conditions like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, stroke and schizophrenia, but experts are warning that too little is known about the safety of tDCS. "You might end up with a placement of electrodes that doesn't do what you think it does and could potentially have long-lasting effects," said Matthew Krause, a neuroscientist at the Montreal Neurological Institute. All functions of the brain—thought, emotion and coordination—are carried out by neurons using pulses of electricity. "The objective of all neuroscience is to influence these electrical processes," Krause said. The brain's activity can be influenced by drugs that alter its electrochemistry or by external external electric fields. While mind-altering headsets may seem futuristic, tDCS is not a new procedure. Much of the pioneering work in the field was done in Montreal by Dr. Wilder Penfield in the 1920s and 30s. ©2016 CBC/Radio-Canada.
Link ID: 22464 - Posted: 07.21.2016
You drift off to dreamland just fine but then something, a noise, a partner's tossing and turning, jars you awake. Now your mind races with an ever expanding to-do list of worries that you can't shut off. When the alarm buzzes, you start the day feeling grouchy and slightly dazed. Nearly six in 10 Canadians say they wake up feeling tired. About 40 per cent of Canadians will exhaust themselves with a sleep disorder at some point in their lifetime, studies suggest. It's common for people to wake up in the middle of the night. What's important is not to let it snowball, sleep specialists say. Our sleep cycles include brief periods of wakefulness but deep sleep makes us forget about these awakenings. "It's normal to have one or two a night," said Dr. Brian Murray, a sleep neurologist at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre and a professor at the University of Toronto. "It's when it's multiple that I worry." Sleep experts say if someone wakes up multiple times a night, it's a red flag. Chronic sleep problems are linked to heart disease, high blood pressure and some cancers. It can also affect hormone levels, which increases the risk of obesity and Type 2 diabetes, sleep specialists say. Julie Snyder of Toronto said she has stretches of days or weeks when she'll consistently wake up at 1:15 a.m., and again at 4 a.m. The broken sleep leaves her feeling short on patience. ©2016 CBC/Radio-Canada.
Link ID: 22463 - Posted: 07.21.2016
By David Levine Almost seven percent of U.S. adults—about 15.7 million people—are diagnosed with major depression disorder, according to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report that depression causes 200 million lost workdays each year at a cost to employers of between $17 billion and $44 billion. The statistics for anxiety disorders are not great either. The most common mental illnesses in the U.S., they affect 40 million adults age 18 and older, costing the economy more than $42 billion a year. In my twenties, I developed panic disorder. I failed to get better on most medications and therapy. As I reported in an article earlier this year, it took me years to find a medication that worked. Because it took me so long to be diagnosed and treated properly, I have always been interested in alternative treatments for depression and anxiety. Two years ago I attended two sessions at the World Science Festival on the use of electrical therapy to treat depression and anxiety. The first event was Spark of Genius? Awakening a Better Brain, a panel discussion moderated by ABC News Chief Health & Medical Editor Richard Besser. The panel discussed what is known about treating the brain and the ethical and legal complications of brain enhancement. (You can watch it online at the World Science Festival website.) The second panel, "Electric Medicine and the Brain" was moderated by John Rennie, former editor in chief of Scientific American His panel focused on the use of "electroceuticals," a term coined by researchers at GlaxoSmithKline to refer to all implantable devices being used to treat mental illnesses and being explored in the treatment of metabolic, cardiovascular and inflammatory disorders. © 2016 Scientific American
Link ID: 22462 - Posted: 07.20.2016
Davide Castelvecchi People can detect flashes of light as feeble as a single photon, an experiment has demonstrated — a finding that seems to conclude a 70-year quest to test the limits of human vision. The study, published in Nature Communications on 19 July1, “finally answers a long-standing question about whether humans can see single photons — they can!” says Paul Kwiat, a quantum optics researcher at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign. The techniques used in the study also open up ways of testing how quantum properties — such as the ability of photons to be in two places at the same time — affect biology, he adds. “The most amazing thing is that it’s not like seeing light. It’s almost a feeling, at the threshold of imagination,” says Alipasha Vaziri, a physicist at the Rockefeller University in New York City, who led the work and tried out the experience himself. Experiments on cells from frogs have shown that sensitive light-detecting cells in vertebrate eyes, called rod cells, do fire in response to single photons2. But, in part because the retina processes its information to reduce ‘noise’ from false alarms, researchers hadn’t been able to confirm whether the firing of one rod cell would trigger a signal that would be transmitted all the way to the brain. Nor was it clear whether people would be able to consciously sense such a signal if it did reach the brain. Experiments to test the limits of human vision have also had to wait for the arrival of quantum-optics technologies that can reliably produce one photon of light at a time. © 2016 Macmillan Publishers Limited
Link ID: 22461 - Posted: 07.20.2016
Ian Sample Science editor They were once considered merely lazy and adorable. But new research into the antics of the slow loris has revealed a wilder side to the docile creatures. Given the chance the innocent-eyed beasts will neck the most alcoholic drinks they can lay their paws on. The ability of the slow loris to seek out the most potent brew in reach was discovered by researchers in the US who wanted to know whether the animals favoured highly-fermented nectar over the less alcoholic forms secreted by plants in their natural habitats. As sugary nectar ferments in the wild, its calorie content rises, making it a potentially more valuable source of energy. In a series of tests with Dharma, an adult female slow loris, biologists at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire found that when presented with a choice of sugary solutions laced with different amounts of alcohol, the loris speedily settled on the most intoxicating. But while the animal was quickly drawn to the nectar substitutes, which contained between 1% and 4% alcohol, the slow loris displayed what the researchers describe as “a relative aversion to tap water”, which was used as a control. Dharma was not alone in her taste for drink. The scientists ran the same series of experiments with two nocturnal aye aye lemurs, a male called Merlin and a female called Morticia. Once again, the primates homed in on the most alcoholic of sugary solutions the researchers knocked up to mimic fermented nectar. © 2016 Guardian News and Media Limited
Research supported by the National Institutes of Health has identified brain patterns in humans that appear to underlie “resilient coping,” the healthy emotional and behavioral responses to stress that help some people handle stressful situations better than others. People encounter stressful situations and stimuli everywhere, every day, and studies have shown that long-term stress can contribute to a broad array of health problems. However, some people cope with stress better than others, and scientists have long wondered why. The new study, by a team of researchers at Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, is now online in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. “This important finding points to specific brain adaptations that predict resilient responses to stress,” said George F. Koob, Ph.D., director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), part of NIH and a supporter of the study. “The findings also indicate that we might be able to predict maladaptive stress responses that contribute to excessive drinking, anger, and other unhealthy reactions to stress.” In a study of human volunteers, scientists led by Rajita Sinha, Ph.D., and Dongju Seo, Ph.D., used a brain scanning technique called functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to measure localized changes in brain activation during stress. Study participants were given fMRI scans while exposed to highly threatening, violent and stressful images followed by neutral, non-stressful images for six minutes each. While conducting the scans, researchers also measured non-brain indicators of stress among study participants, such as heart rate, and levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, in blood. The brain scans revealed a sequence of three distinct patterns of response to stress, compared to non-stress exposure.
By Maia Szalavitz When a family member, spouse or other loved one develops an opioid addiction — whether to pain relievers like Vicodin or to heroin — few people know what to do. Faced with someone who appears to be driving heedlessly into the abyss, families often fight, freeze or flee, unable to figure out how to help. Families are sometimes overwhelmed with conflicting advice about what should come next. Much of the advice given by treatment groups and programs ignores what the data says in a similar way that anti-vaccination or climate skeptic websites ignore science. The addictions field is neither adequately regulated nor effectively overseen. There are no federal standards for counseling practices or rehab programs. In many states, becoming an addiction counselor doesn’t require a high school degree or any standardized training. “There’s nothing professional about it, and it’s not evidence-based,” said Dr. Mark Willenbring, the former director of treatment research at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, who now runs a clinic that treats addictions. Consequently, families are often given guidance that bears no resemblance to what the research evidence shows — and patients are commonly subjected to treatment that is known to do harm. People who are treated as experts firmly proclaim that they know what they are doing, but often turn out to base their care entirely on their own personal and clinical experience, not data. “Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew,” which many people see as an example of the best care available, for instance, used an approach that is not known to be effective for opioid addiction. More than 13 percent of its participants died after treatment,1 mainly of overdoses that could potentially have been prevented with evidence-based care. Unethical practices such as taking kickbacks for patient referrals are also rampant.
Rachel Ehrenberg The brain doesn’t really go out like a light when anesthesia kicks in. Nor does neural activity gradually dim, a new study in monkeys reveals. Rather, intermittent flickers of brain activity appear as the effects of an anesthetic take hold. Some synchronized networks of brain activity fall out of step as the monkeys gradually drift from wakefulness, the study showed. But those networks resynchronized when deep unconsciousness set in, researchers reported in the July 20 Journal of Neuroscience. That the two networks behave so differently during the drifting-off stage is surprising, says study coauthor Yumiko Ishizawa of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital. It isn’t clear what exactly is going on, she says, except that the anesthetic’s effects are a lot more complex than previously thought. Most studies examining the how anesthesia works useelectroencephalograms, or EEGs, which record brain activity using electrodes on the scalp. The new study offers unprecedented surveillance by eavesdropping via electrodes implanted inside macaque monkeys’ brains. This new view provides clues to how the brain loses and gains consciousness. “It’s a very detailed description of something we know very little about,” says cognitive neuroscientist Tristan Bekinschtein of the University of Cambridge, who was not involved with the work. Although the study is elegant, it isn’t clear what to make of the findings, he says. “These are early days.” |© Society for Science & the Public 2000 - 2016.
Link ID: 22457 - Posted: 07.20.2016