Everybody's Chance for "Mind Control"

Earlier this November Loyola's Neuroscience Society hosted a banquet and invited Emily Anthes, author of Frankenstein's Cat, to speak during it.  In Frankenstein's Cat Anthes discusses a variety of issues such as: cloning, prosthetics, and "mind control" and the ethics of it.  Recent breakthroughs in the field of neuroscience have allowed for some researchers to begin to design technologies that allow the brain of organisms, like beetles, to be hacked into and used to control their movements.  During her lecture at the banquet Anthes focused on this idea of "hacking" into the bugs brains and also the ethics of doing so.  She mentioned in her lecture, and her book, that a company now sells cockroaches along with a "brain hacking set" that any interested consumer can buy.  

The debate about whether these kinds of products are ethical or not rages on.  Those in support claim it is a great way to get the younger generation interested in neuroscience, while those who oppose claim we are taking away the organisms free will.  An interesting counter argument to this is proposed by Greg Gage in an NPR article.  He claims that this isn't controlling the insects mind but simply making them turn in a certain direction because they perceive a stimulus on that other side, similar to making a horse turn using reigns.

I think this is an important discussion those in the field of neuroscience and the general public need to be thinking about.  Although I agree that this type of technology is not "mind control", I still believe it is important to figure out where we draw the metaphorical line.  As with any big decision that needs to be made, pros and cons need to be weighed.  Anthes shows both sides in Frankenstein's Cat and discussed both in her lecture.  On one hand an insect could be used to spy on citizens and begin George Orwell's "Big Brother" government.  On the other hand, the bugs could be used to help in rescue missions.  The list of pros and cons continue to grow and it is important that both sides be heard.  I think Anthes does a great job of giving both sides of the story and allowing people to become educated on the costs and benefits of this new technology.  As with any new discovery, we must be cautious of its powers but not afraid to use it for the betterment of humanity.  Scientific journalists, like Anthes, help get the word out about these new developments in many fields and allow the discussion to begin on what is right and what is wrong.  I, for one, find there to be great benefits in a lot of these new developments, but think we should proceed with caution and make sure we know what we're doing.  In the end, what is most important is that every person can make a well educated, personal decision on what they believe is right and wrong in this rapidly developing "brain hacking" technology.  


Anthes, Emily. Frankenstiens Cat: Cuddling up to Biotech's Brave New Betasts. N.p: np., n.d. Print.

Staff, NPR. "What's Creepy, Crawly And A Champion Of Neuroscience?" NPR. NPR, n.d. Web. 28 Nov. 2013

New Technology Coming Our Way!

Emily Anthes came to Loyola University Chicago on Saturday, November 2nd to talk about her most recent book Frankenstein's Cat: Cuddling Up to Biotech's Brave New Beasts. I immediately became interested in learning about what scientists are currently researching and testing on. Emily Anthes reported to the audience about the scientists' work and I know that everyone was engaged. She talked about tapping into beetles brains and being able to navigate them. Then she went on to navigating mice and how scientists are able to stimulate certain neurons that would signal the mice to turn left or right. It was fascinating! 

After eating a delicious dinner I obviously researched more about biotechnology and found an article about how scientists accidentally found a gene that could be activated to regenerate cell growth. Lin28a is a gene that is silenced after a certain point in one's life. Scientists found that the Lin28a gene could be triggered back to its embryonic stage and cause a cascade of chemical reactions that generate energy. A scientist accidentally found this gene when he clipped off the toes and ears of mice as an identification technique and was surprised when they grew back. These scientists immediately became interested to find out if it could work on humans to grow limbs back but limitations are always present. By testing on mice, isolating genes, and incorporating technology into our studies, the young scientists and researchers of today can continue to achieve great lengths in the scientific world. Thanks to Emily Anthes talk, and after reading her book, I became very interested in learning more about this field of science and technology and finding out what experiment or idea could come true tomorrow.

URL: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=new-limb-regeneration-ins

How Would You Like Your Offspring

How would you like your offspring?

     

Ready-made to succeed

In Anthes’ discussion she touched base on genetically modifying our species in a sort of “upgrade” fashion, a process that leaves the individual with a heightened sense or leverage in an ability like let’s say creativity. What really got my stomach turning wasn’t the idea of a designer baby but the social outcomes that could arise from babies being designed to be genetically better than others and how readily this technology could become available if you could afford it. Why this made me uncomfortable was the possibility of elitist modifying their offspring to be extraordinary creatures while leaving those who could not afford to “upgrade” their children stranded to ride the wave of evolution. Natural vs. Artificial talent would become blurred and for a time could be very unfair to unmodified individuals as they compete for spots in a competitive job market or even just school in general. We all know what it’s like to sit next to that one person who studies the night before an exam and through some gift of god manages to score higher than you on it, the very test you studied for a week for. Now imagine that as an entire social class and it isn't hard to see how this advantage could lead to a large gap in social class.

But how realistic is modifying our genes and tailoring mutations for a specific trait?

Easier than you think believe it or not, while traits are not based on single genes most of the time with enough digging we could uncover what and how these sequences of amino acids serve their functions. In an article by James Shapiro entitles “How Natural Genetic Engineering Solves Problems in Protein Evolution” he reviews the process of domain encoding. In the world of genetics it has been readily accepted that a single amino acid substitution is rarely associated with a change in function. James states that “how proteins changed their size, formed completely novel structures, or combined the capacities to bind multiple different molecules were difficult to account for on the basis of successive single amino acid substitutions. “(Shapiro,2012). Where the variation and function lays is in these sequences of amino acids called “domains”, what is interesting about domains is the fact that we can mix and match different ones to produce a new trait that either has a function similar to the whole of its parts or no function at all. In order for these domains to survive in nature however they needed to be beneficial to the organism but if the secrets to creativity and intelligence, even vision are traced to the domain level then it is possible that these “upgrades” may be plausible.

What about the little guy?

Anthes also made a comment about our duty as a species to help out other species that could not fend for themselves. So if we modify our species to excel past what was originally possible we have a duty to genetically modify the animals around us so that they can have a shot at this evolution highway. That’s all fine but what about the members in our species who still can’t afford modifications, don’t we have a duty to ensure that they too receive equal say and chance at these “upgrades”. What then happens to their children, will “upgrades” available to impoverished communities consist of last years model hand me downs or will winning a chance to have their children upgraded be like playing the lotto? In my opinion it is a really cool idea but with all the politics and chance for segregations and unfair treatment I feel like it’s not worth the hassle.         

Works cited

Shapiro, James A. "How Natural Genetic Engineering Solves Problems in Protein Evolution."The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 24 May 2012. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-a-shapiro/genetic-engineering_b_1541180.html>.

Art Kramer Talk: To the Future and Beyond

Art Kramer's talk was really good because it told us what I think society has known for years-- exercise is good for you!-- but he was able to present it with proof as well as theories to explain just exactly why you should be hitting the gym. What really struck me in his presentation, however, was the video of the lab near the end. His point was on showcasing the cognitive effects of high activity levels in children, but what I was fascinated by was the technology of virtual reality was actually being used in a lab! With the introduction of the Oculus Rift, a virtual reality headset, the gaming world had begun to take a turn towards more immersive game play, but now it could be used to help further science. Participants would be able to be observed in what would be either impractical or unethical settings, something that severely limited the realm of psychology and neuroscience. With virtual reality, variables in the situation would only be a matter of programming, giving researches strict control even in a more natural setting. With how fast the technologies available to researchers are advancing, I almost feel as if it's only a matter of time until the race for "which lab would be the first to use a holodeck" begins.

Emily Anthes Talk: Our Responsibility

In her talk about animal robotics, Emily Anthes, author of Frankenstein's Cat, brought up the ethical question of whether we as scientists, society, or even just as citizens of the animal kingdom owe it to other animals to share the power of recent advances in biology and technology. If we have the capability to improve the lives of other animals, is it our moral responsibility to do so? How far is its reach, to all animals, or only the species that we use in our experiments?

It's a nice idea in theory, the great, good, and gentle humans bestowing godly graces on the other, more unfortunate animals, a sort of universal marxism between all fauna of the planet-- but it's also complete fantasy. I don't think we owe it to use our discoveries to improve animal lives at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm not about to say all ethical guidelines to the treatment of animals, both inside and outside of the lab, should just be thrown to the wind, but we have to draw a line somewhere. It's one thing to try to better our own race-- we want that and we understand the consequences to some degree-- but to go out and play god among the other animals is foolish and impractical. By bettering one species we risk throwing the delicate balance of an ecosystem out of whack and by improving all species... well, what would be the point? The prey would be better at escaping the hunters, but the hunters are better at catching the prey. Also, implanting any biotech is out the window because good luck finding funding for that, let alone just the process of capturing every single animal. And for those who are sacrificed for research, while valiant, would have probably lived only marginally longer or shorter out in the wild; animals take advantage of other animals all the time. 

Really, we're just really better off left learning how to help ourselves first. 

Talk: Art Kramer

Exercise is a vital part of every human's lifestyle, or at least it should be. Even before birth, one's mother is encouraged to participate in light physical activity up to three times a week for her unborn child's benefit. As one grows older, he is in charge of his own health and exercise is continually strongly encouraged. However, with older age comes broken bones, arthritis, and difficulty doing activities one previously did flawlessly. But at this age, is exercise really that important?

Art Kramer strongly believes that old age is no excuse. He uses the example of Olga Kotelko to make this point. This 93 year old woman holds 23 track world records since she turned the ripe age of 75. Every day she participates in five hours of light activity and one hour of vigorous exercise. Of course, it is ridiculous to expect every senior citizen to have such a flexible schedule or the energy to endure it.

However, some exercise is encouraged for senior citizens, whether it be walking or weights. This does more than help the body, it helps the mind. Aerobic fitness has been linked to better functional connectivity and better cognition in general. In fact, more exercise increases one's brain volume incredibly, even at an old age. There was also an increase in activity in the hippocampus, caudate nucleus, and thalamus.

This just proves that it's never too late to care for your body. This increase in brain activity can be accomplished whether one is 35 or 75. You don't need to become Olga Kotelko to accomplish this either. Just a little bit of exercise every couple days will do the trick... Do it for your brain!

Emily Anthes Extra Credit

I was extremely excited about seeing Emily Anthes speak at the Neuroscience banquet, but perhaps not for the most obvious of reasons. Yes, I enjoy her writing, the topics she covers, the way she writes. I've really enjoyed reading Frankenstein's Cat and blogging about it for our Neuroscience Seminar, and I think she is extremely adept at making science easy to understand. That is her job, after all. However, what I was really interested to hear about, and luckily she spoke about it during the Q and A following the talk, was how she ended up in the career she is in. As a psych major and neuroscience minor who rarely finds myself drawn to the more "typical" careers in the field (research, etc.), it is always exciting to see someone who has stayed within the sciences, but found a unique and creative way to apply it. As college students we so often get hung up on what we should be doing, what most people are doing, or what we are expected to do. As a result we spend very little time thinking about what we want to do, what we love, and what we are passionate about. Emily Anthes did just that, when she discovered she wasn't cut out for lab work, instead of powering through, like so many students do, she sought out something she enjoyed more and made a new path for herself. I think that this should be a much more common topic of thought and discussion in the sciences. While the typical careers paths will always be popular and necessary, there are other ways to make yourself a place in the sciences, ones that are also necessary and should be getting more attention and praise. If we motivate more young people who are passionate about science, but perhaps not in a typical way, to go out and advocate for the sciences, perhaps as a writer like Anthes, or in other careers, they could do wonders for public opinion and acceptance of science, something that is sorely needed. Anthes did a good job reminding us that everyone has something to contribute, even if it's what is typical or expected. Sure, many science major ARE passionate about the typical paths, and that's great, but maybe if just a few of us follow our passions in different directions we can enter, or create, new and different career paths that can be equally as useful.

Emily Anthes: DRONES are a reality

The idea of drones has developed from the active imagination of scientist. No longer a distant goal but is reality. The government has taken advantage of these imaginations and used these drones to help the military in their various endeavors. However, these drones do not look like they are robots from the movie Star Wars,  but the designs are completely incognito. Instead of having noticeable drones flying over battle fields, scientist made the drones small and similar to insects. Which was very beneficial because not only are they hard to target but they are  easy to maneuver in small spaces. The purpose that they have been used is to spy on those across enemy lines. Or they are flown around corners ahead of soldiers, and they can know what lies before them.  Emily Anthes author of Frankenstein’s cat spoke on the negative sides that come along with a completely robotic drone. Since these drones were so small the batteries must be small and thus these drones are short lived. Thus DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, funded some researches that would find a better way to build these spy instruments. A professor from the University of Berkeley realized that the use of real life beetles would be better. He took advantage of the insects innate knowledge to fly, and knew the only thing that needed to be done was to find a way to manage their flight pattern. The best way to do this was to tap into the body’s control system, which was their nervous system. The motor and flight control of the brain was prodded with wires that would stimulate the neurons in these sections. When certain neurons were stimulated by remotes, an individual was now able to control the flight coordination of the beetles.  Amazingly science continues to progress and turn science fiction to reality. 

http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/future-drone-surveillance-swarms-cyborg-insect-drones 

The New Generation

Talk: Emily Anthes

                Today, the use of neuroscience to alter the means by which an organism operates is a very real possibility.  In her talk, Anthes explores how biotechnology is changing the future of our furry companions.  She attempts to uncover how we can use cloning to protect against endangered species, create prosthetics to help injured animals, and employ genetic engineering to create disease resistant livestock on farms.

                While Anthes' piece was a promising one, an article by Susanne Posel sheds light on another aspect of biotechnology.  The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) has a two billion dollar annual budget allocated towards research into creating a super solider as well as developing a synthetic police force.  Working on unraveling the human genome,  Posel claims that DARPA hopes to manipulate certain gene expressions.  DARPA was like to enhance the ability of military soldiers to regrow limbs lost in battle. 

                One of the most controversial topics that Posel addresses in the Department of Defense's hope to "enhance" a soldier's ability to "kill without care or remorse, show no fear, fight battle after battle without fatigue and generally behave more like a machine than a man".  A lot of this research is dependent upon understanding the wiring of the human brain and manipulating it to create desired affects.  This research is being furthered by Jonathan Moreno, professor of bioethics at Pennsylvania State University.  The Pentagon has provided 400 million dollars to this research. 

                Posel's article highlights many possible advancements in biotechnology, but it also poses many possible ethical obstacles.  If the technology for these types of modifications  is fully developed, what kinds of moral barriers will result when there is an attempt at actually implementing this technology?  The risk of battle is a great one, but it seems that these changes are rather invasive. 

Sources:

                 Anthes, Emily. Frankenstein's Cat: Cuddling up to Biotech's Brave New Beasts. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Print.

                Posel, Susanne. "DARPA Continues Human Experiments to Create Human Super Soldiers."Www.occupycorporatism.com. N.p., 25 Sept. 2012. Web.

Treat the Brain Like Muscle

Talk:  Art Kramer on the neural effects of exercise. 

                Like Art Kramer,  writer Rebecca Bragg believes that physical exercise improves mental and neurological function throughout all stages of life.  This is founded on the theory that exercise triggers a kind of "domino effect" that starts with the release of chemicals that support increased blood flow.  In turn, this causes the brain to perform more efficiently in a multitude of ways.  

                In her article What Does Exercise Do to the Brain?, Bragg breaks her argument into four sections.  The first section analyzes how physical exercise protects against neurological damage.  Research has shown that people who exercise regularly may be at a dramatically reduced risk of contracting serious disabling brain diseases.  Published in the 2006 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine, a six year study involving 1,740 adults showed that those who exercised three or more times a week had a 40% lower risk of Alzheimer's disease. 

                In her second section, Bragg argues that physical activity enhances the ability to learn and remember by triggering the creation of new neurons in the brain.  Carl W. Cotman of the University of California at Irvine found that cognitive improvements in rats who had unlimited access to running wheels lasted for seven days after they stopped exercise.  He also found that improvements in memory and learning ability in animals that exercised everyday and animals that exercised on alternate days were the same. 

                In her third section, Bragg discusses how physical exercise can help alleviate depression, anxiety and other mood disorders.  One study, conducted by the Southwestern Medical Cneter in Dallas found a reduction of approximately 50% in symptoms of depression among adults age 20 to 45.  These subjects participated in a 30-minute aerobic workout three to five times a week. 

                In her last section, Bragg addresses the theory that physical exercise allows for the reversal of age-related brain impairment.  While protecting against neurological disease, a series of studies published in October 2008 edition of British Journal of Sports Medicine suggested that exercise may even reverse some of the age-related damage to learning and memory.   The lead author of this piece was actually Art Kramer.  Although the claims made by this study remain controversial, it generated worldwide media interest. Kramer reports that they can "safely argue that an active lifestyle with moderate amounts of aerobic activity will likely improve cognitive and brain function, and reverse the neural decay frequently observed in older adults".

                Sources:

                Bragg, Rebecca. "What Does Exercise Do To The Brain?" PositScience. N.p., 12 Dec. 2012. Web.

Art Kramer extra credit

On November 21^st, 2013 Art Kramer presented the effects that physical activity has on the brain.  He began his presentation by discussing two types of knowledge. Fluid knowledge is greatly portrayed in our working memory while crystalized knowledge involves recalling information from our long-term memory.  Art Kramer introduced the audience to Olga Kotelko who did not start exercising till her mid seventies. One study that Kramer talked about assessed the effects of exercise.  Animals either had access to a running wheel or they didn’t.  They were measured using electrophysiology and histology. The results showed an increase in neurotrophins, enhanced synaptogenesis, and enhanced angiogenesis. From these results we could see that exercise does positively influence cognition.  Another study Art Kramer mentioned was one about walking helping cognition.  The study included three hundred forty nine healthy women that were fifty-five or above.  Although this study as well as the other studies mentioned by Kramer was correlational they all seemed to show signs that physical activity does have an effect on cognition.  Kramer mentioned “ People get hurt because they don’t lift weights and tend to fall, break their hips and end up in nursing homes”. Kramer showed us a clip that studied how participant’s multi task in the real world.  This study pointed out that the ones to make better multi tasking decisions were those who were more fit.  His PowerPoint addressed “fitness intervention can increase the brain volumes that normally decline with age”.(Kramer) Overall everyone can benefit massively from exercising.  You are not only helping your body but also your brain.

Sources:

Kramer, Art. “Taking a Hike: Train your Body, Enhance your Mind and Brain.” PowerPoint presentation. Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL. 21 Nov 2013 

Yesterday Arthur Kramer came in to talk about the effects of exercise on the brain. He started off the lecture by explaining the mass amounts of research and funds he is doing, which would make anyone jealous yet envious. He then proceeded to tell us about his famous research involving exercise and its effects on the brain. His studies looked at people of all age groups ranging from the elderly to the very young and they all seemed to have a positive correlation between exercise and intelligence. In the elderly they examined aspects of white matter and grey matter in order to determine the individual intelligence of the elderly. They measured the level of their crystallized intelligence,  and fluid intelligence, the capacity to think logically and solve problems.  Although there is not much of a known reason behind the fact, and there are a lot of correlational reasoning behind different aspects of physical activity, it showed that both forms of intelligence improved over a six month period of those who walked more often then those who did not. Arthur Kramer also examined the benefits of exercise of those suffering from degenerative brain disorders such as Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's. They found that in every disease that they studied, they showed improvement in cognitive activity after a period of exercise after a year.
The next series of tests he talked about involved young children. Their set up to test the children was impressive in the aspect that it analyzed logical reasoning in a fun way that kids would enjoy. In order to do this, the neuroscientists  set up three screens set up around a self moving treadmill. The screens then projected three different angles of a street, a frontal view, right view, and left view. the children were then instructed to try to make it across the street without getting hit by a "car". They found that the children who exercised more often were more likely to make it across the street. It wasn't because the more athletic children were faster runners. The children generally made better decisions when they had the health benefits of exercise. Although there are many aspects to the human brain that we do not understand yet,  there should not be any denial that exercise helps cognitive functioning for all individuals.

Working on Working Memory

In The Ravenous Brain, author Daniel Bor explores the depths of consciousness; how it may be explained within the brain, its great abilities, and its limitations.  Bor relates consciousness with attention stating that, "what I attend to is what I'm conscious of" (Bor pp. 112), while what we do not attend to falls to the unconscious mind.  Our ability to take this vast amount of information in, attend to it and filter it into the few parts we choose to be conscious of is an amazing feat, one that our brain has an astounding ability for.  We use our attention to "filter the billions of pieces of information streaming into our senses... into a maximum of three or four conscious items" (Bor pp. 135).  While this may seem limiting, it has shown to be extremely beneficial.  Being able to focus on these few items allows us to "boost" our processing of each attended item and to analyze them in a variety of ways.  As Bor explains, our initial filtering of information into our attention is often called "working memory."  Our working memory, as explained earlier, appears to be quite limited, with only a few objects capable of being in conscious attention at a time.  A study by Steven Yantis suggests that working memory may be limited to only 4 conscious items.  Also surprising is that this number appears to be the same in monkeys and in newborns (Bor pp.137).  So is our working memory really so unimpressive that monkeys and newborns can fill it with just as much as we can?  What all of this talk about limitations doesn't explain is just how good we are at attending to those few objects in our consciousness.  Bor give the example of the color red.  If we see a plain red wall our attention goes to it and our signal of "red" gets boosted.  "Non-red color-coding neurons may be suppressed" along with some of our other senses possibly allowing the red wall to grab all of our attention (Bor pp. 139).  Okay, so this isn't very impressive, we can look at a red wall and really know that it is red, that's not giving much support to the impressiveness of our working memory.  Thankfully, Bor continues this example with the object now being "Angelina Jolie on the big screen... wearing a red dress" (Bor pp. 139).  This object has what Bor calls an "internal hook" to it which the brain can "latch onto."  Once we see Angelina Jolie and her red dress all information related to her becomes activated: Brad Pitt, her previous roles, how she speaks, and again that she is wearing a red dress.  This information seems to instantly come to us and it does simply because we have given our attention to Angelina Jolie in a red dress.  Now that is a much more impressive feat for working memory.  As Bor continues he explains that some studies have tried to improve our working memory, and some methods are quite efficient at doing so.  Chunking, for example, allows a person to "chunk" groups of information together so that they only have to remember those groups rather than the entire set of information.  For example remembering 630-847-773 (all Chicago-land area codes) is much easier than remembering each individual number.  While discussing this idea Bor briefly mentions the "World Memory Championships."  This is a truly incredible event, and Joshua Foer, wrote a great book, Moonwalking With Einstein, about how he trained his working memory in preparation for America's Memory Championship.

Joshua Foer quickly finds out what we already know, that our working memory is extremely capacity limited.  Being a good journalist though, he continues working for his story and trains hard to become a "mental athlete" and improve his performance in a variety of mental, mostly memory, tasks.  Foer, like so many of us, plateaus in his performance and realizes what Bor explained throughout chapter 4, attention is consciousness, or in Foer's case, attention is better performance.  As proof of this Foer and most mental athletes adopt of method of performing with earmuffs, and blinders to focus their attention solely on what's in front of them.

Joshua Foer during his training. Photograph: Christopher Lane

This exemplifies the importance of attention on our working memory and consciousness.  What is truly amazing is the capacity mental athletes push their working memory towards.  By the end of the book Foer sets, what was then, the American record for memorizing an entire deck of cards with the time of 1 minute and 40 seconds.  While this sounds incredible, the world record is now below 30 seconds. Memorizing decks of cards is just one of the many tasks these mental athletes excel at, yet Foer admits that his life is still filled with forgetting keys and in the grand scheme of things memorizing phone numbers and book quotes are no longer necessary or life altering improvements.  What Foer and all mental athletes do show us and what Bor attempts to explain, is that even with a very limited working memory, we are capable of utilizing this information in an unimaginable variety of ways and using that related information to expand our memory greatly.     

Bor, Daniel. The ravenous brain: how the new science of consciousness explains our insatiable search for meaning. New York: Basic Books, 2012. Print.

Foer, Joshua. Moonwalking with Einstein: the art and science of remembering everything. New York: Penguin Press, 2011. Print. 

Together With Feeling

What are emotions?

Webster defines emotions as “a conscious mental reaction (as anger or fear) subjectively experienced as strong feeling usually directed toward a specific object and typically accompanied by physiological and behavioral changes in the body”(Merriam-Webster online, emotion) . Bor uses the example of a pig squealing in distress as a response to a pain to question what consciousness entails.  Could this reaction to a specific stimulus be interpreted as fear and as a result can it be concluded that the pig is consciously aware of its own fear?  Skeptics as described in the book would refer to this behavior as “purely a behavioral response that the animal was programmed to make…[that] there is not necessarily any conscious life [in the reaction]”(Bor, 198). ”  

What defining trait then gives us rights over conscious emotion and as  a result separates us from pigs?  

Many would argue that this defining characteristic is a direct result of our highly specialized brains. These areas in the frontal lobes in particular have been believed to house our conscious awareness of emotion and as a result any animal that lacks these developed cerebral areas are assumed to be incapable of experiencing consciousness. It seems then that we are forever destined to ride this roller coaster of emotion alone thanks to our uniquely developed brains. Wait am I forgetting something, oh right we have a very special relative who shares about 99% of our DNA and as a coincidence also has a similarly structured brain. Could great apes be our emotional partners in this tango for two!

So Chimps are capable of conscious emotions?

It would seem so, in fact in a scholarly journal written by Weiss and colleagues it was revealed that not only can chimps and orangutans show emotion, they also go through phases similar to what humans experience during midlife crisis! In their research they studied 508 great apes of various ages in captivity and thorough modified human evaluation guides for midlife crisis were able to evaluate and determine that these great apes experience “this U-shaped pattern or “midlife crisis”… impl[ing] that human wellbeing’s curved shape is not uniquely human and that, although it may be partly explained by aspects of human life and society, its origins may lie partly in the biology we share with great apes”(Weiss et al. 2012). The apes were evaluated by their trainers on a scale that measures their Well-being using a four-item questionnaire rating the degree to which the apes were in a bad or good mood, how much pleasure they got from social situations, and how successful they were in achieving their goals. From their data they were able to create a graph depicting the strong U shape associated with midlife crisis around chimps ages 27-28 which corresponds to humans about 45-50 years old.  (I do not own the right to the graph so I cannot post it here but the paper is in the works cited)

Okay so they go through midlife crisis how is this a conscious emotion?

It is a gateway into the mind of great apes, it is clear that we share a good deal of our DNA and this example helps us wrap our heads around the possibility of sharing emotions with our closest living relatives. Bor tells of mother and child who were separated shortly after Olympia was deemed unable to feed her child. Six weeks later mother and child were reunited, the mother was ecstatic to be given back her daughter and with open arms eagerly awaited he child to embrace her. Tragically the child by this point was unable to recognize her mother and clung to her foster parents as the mother was left in dismay. Soon however she realized that her child did not recognize her, in her best attempt to make the child comfortable in her presence she arranged the room so as to invite the child to come over and greet her. However her attempts failed and she was left to ponder why her child no longer wished to be in her presence. Undeterred the mother tried numerous times to “calm the baby and once again make her embrace [the] arms [of] an inviting [parent]” (Bor, 197) She even went as far as to pretend to leave the room in an attempt to get a response from her child, to which the child responded by rushing to the door distressed by her mother leaving again eventually feeling comfortable enough to embrace her mother. This is the story of Olympia and her daughter Hebe, two chimpanzees who live in Monkey world, Dorset England. Olympia although distressed by her infant’s rejection made every attempt to make her child feel comfortable and safe. She not only expressed goal oriented behavior but was also able to personify and interpret her baby’s actions as fear and insecurity. I would argue this to be a highly conscious action and nothing less than a mother’s genuine love and desire for their infant. These similarities towards human behavior may be a result of similar DNA and brain structure or it could be housed in an area that has yet to be discovered, one thing is for sure in my mind however, and that is that chimpanzees show behaviors remarkably similar to those that humans express when they consciously reflect on others emotions.    

 

Can these similarities be the product of solely mirror neurons? It has to be more than that in my opinion.  

Works Cited

Bor, Daniel. "Being Bird-Brained Is Not an Insult." The Ravenous Brain: How the New Science of Consciousness Explains Our Insatiable Search for Meaning. New York: Basic, 2012. 195-216. Print.

"Emotion." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 14 Nov. 2013. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/emotion>.

Weiss, A., J. E. King, T. Matsuzawa, and A. Oswald. "Evidence for a Midlife Crisis in Great Apes Consistent with the U-shape in Human Well-being." Evidence for a Midlife Crisis in Great Apes Consistent with the U-shape in Human Well-being. PNAS, 22 July 2012. Web. 10 Nov. 2013. <http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/11/14/1212592109.full.pdf html>.

Infant Awareness and Effect of Outside World

In chapter 6 of The Ravenous Brain, Bor talks about brain enhancement of infants and when they are mentally aware of the surroundings around them. The debate revolved around whether the infant awareness occurs before birth or after birth. The fact that a fetus is kicking and moving in the mother may mean that it is active, but does it mean that it is conscious and aware of life? Even at the end of pregnancy, a fetus is extremely responsive to the outer world, which is why people believe that the pre-birth existence is still considered being conscious.

Bor believes, however, that true awareness occurs after birth, especially in the two months that follow it. This can be seen by observing the behavior of the infant. When his daughter was growing up, he found that her awareness of the world was proved by her sudden series of hiccups due to her surprise of the world. During her third month, she began to laugh. This signified her realization and consciousness.

Bor also brings up the question of whether the events that occurs to the mother affect the baby’s brain. The most obvious example of this would be the use of alcohol and cigarettes during pregnancy, and how it would affect the baby’s condition. But in the article, “Newborns Gain From Mother's Pain... In The Gym: Exercise During Pregnancy Enhances Babies' Brain Development,” Matthew Mientka believes that when pregnant women exercise, it enhances the development of the baby. If the mother does a moderate workout for twenty minutes about three times a week, it results in a healthier brain for the child. To prove this, an experiment was done with two groups of pregnant women. In one group, the women were instructed to exercise moderately for twenty minutes, three times a week. The group was directed to not do any exercise. When the babies were born, an electroencephalography was done for each of the babies in the ages of 8 to 12 days. It was found that the babies born from the mothers that were physically active “have a more mature cerebral activation, suggesting that their brains developed more rapidly.”

Feeling Stressed? Play more video games.

It's a chilly Tuesday morning and you're stuck waiting for the walk signal. You're running late for your 8:15 Cognitive Neuroscience class, but unfortunately the light it taking its sweet time about changing.   You look both ways and don't see any cars coming from either direction, so you quickly hustle across the street. Suddenly there's a loud screech, a few even louder honks, and a flash of bright yellow; a step or two more and you would have been completely bowled over by a speeding taxi. On Thursday you are sure to wait for the signal, but as you take your first step onto the crosswalk your heart speeds up, your palms grow sweaty, and you can hear the blaring of a car horn in your mind. Your reaction is so bad that you have to completely change your route to class for the rest of the semester.

Your decision to jaywalk the first time was life threatening, but by all accounts you should have been safe the second time-- so why did you experience a similar reaction? In The Ravenous Brain, Daniel Bor contributes this phenomenon to our propensity towards "chunking". What was helpful in organizing our environment before now becomes maladaptive in the hands of an overactive amygdala. Our memories become linked together certain emotions, so that recollection of that memory can trigger the linked emotion. Similar experiences are "chunked" together so that sometimes, when our previous memories re similar enough to current stimuli, the linked emotion can be triggered. Usually our prefrontal parietal cortex can override this emotional response with rationality, but when the trigger exceeds appropriate activation, the amygdala can be a hard beast to tame. This leads to anxiety and stress even in safe, non life-threatening situations. New memories are linked with the trigger emotion, old memories are reinforced, and it's all packaged up together in our brain, waiting for the next similar experience so that it can start the cycle all over again.

We approached the subject of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in class, which is caused by this maladaptive chunking-- and possible ways of getting around the mechanism of linking the memories and emotions of negative experiences. Drugs could work, but they present a number ethical and logistical problems. So how about Tetris? That's right, as in match-all-the-blocks-together Tetris. A new study suggests that playing a game of Tetris for 10 minutes after a traumatic within 6 hours of experiencing the event helps reduce the number of flashbacks, as well as the potential clinical symptoms associated with flashbacks (read as: stress). 

So, how does it work? The Tetris hypothesis is built on two theories: first, that memories of trauma are based on sensory-perceptual images with visual and spatial components, and second, that visual cognitive tasks compete for resources with these images. So playing Tetris interferes with the encoding of the traumatic memories. It doesn't erase them completely (so that voluntary memory remains and you can remember that last time you tried to jaywalk, you nearly got killed), but weaker recollection of the memories leads to a less active amygdala, and less stress.

More research needs to be conducted into investigating the possibility of visual cognitive tasks like Tetris as a means of easy, non-invasive stress moderators, but the implications could be very promising, especially given the fast-paced, stressful modern world that we all live in. And honestly, who hasn't felt totally zen after playing a few minutes of Tetris?

(( The article for the research referenced in this post can be found here: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0004153 ))

Conscious or Just a mass of cells?

What are the criteria to consider a person conscious?  Is it to understand and possess the ability to make speech? Or to have one’s eyes open? These questions become relevant when determining if a person is in a coma or vegetative state. Daniel Bor, author of The Ravenous Brain, states that “if a patient is entirely unconscious with eyes persistently closed, then he is in a coma. If he has some form of sleep-wake cycle, and sometimes opens his eyes, but shows no sign of awareness then he is a vegetative state.”  This differentiation was the determining factor in the Terri Schavio case of 2005. This well-known controversial situation gained national review. The family fought to keep their daughter on life support proclaiming that they saw a spark of life in her. While the husband requested numerous of times to remove life support and allow Terri to die. Many people began to choose sides of the debate if Terri Schavio, Permanent vegetative state patient, should have her feeding tubes removed and pass away. Many argued that Terri was still aware of pain and laughter and claimed her facial expressions would change with the conversations that occurred around her. On the other hand, people stated that she had lost her person hood and her cognitive ability; she was not a person anymore but just a working mass of cells.

                The idea that permanent vegetative state patients were unaware of their surroundings was the prevailing thought until there was a new finding in Canada.  Professor Adrian Owen from the Brain and Mind Institute of Western Ontario found that not all PVS patients were unaware. Using the fMRIs and PET scans, research showed that Scott Routley, who was in PVS for 12 years, showed that he still possessed cognitive ability. He was told to think of walking through his house to answer a question with yes and to answer a question no he was told think that he was playing tennis. By looking at the different parts of the brain that were activated as he thought about these different processes, he was able to answer that he was not in pain and many other questions. “Scott has been able to show he has a conscious, thinking mind. We have scanned him several times and his pattern of brain activity shows he is clearly choosing to answer our questions. We believe he knows who and where he is,”stated Professor Adrian Owen. Many are hoping that this is a sign for a brighter future, and a new way to communicate to those that are unable to.

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9672252/Patient-in-vegetative-state-able-to-communicate-he-is-pain-free.html

http://www.blogsforterri.com/archives/2007/03/doctor_said_ter.php

Bor, Daniel. Ravenous Brain. New York: a member of the Perseus books group , 2012. Print. 

The Fragile Edge of Awareness

In Chapter 7 in Bor’s “The Ravenous Brain,” Bor explores the vegetative state, what he calls “living on the fragile edge of awareness.” He talks about how when a patient is in a vegetative state, there are all kinds of problems one can run into. First, he questions the fact if they are even conscious. Furthermore, if so, how conscious are they? And then there is also the issue of time. How long is a family expected to wait until they let their loved one go? He gives the painful example of Terri Schiavo, who’s heart had stopped and was in a coma for a while before entering a vegetative state. What ensued was about 15 years of back and forth arguing about whether she should be kept alive or let go. All this stemmed from the fact that no one knew if she was conscious or if she would ever even reach a point of consciousness and wake up from what seemed an indefinite slumber. 

Now, people are trying to figure out how to tap into the world of a person in a vegetative state. Researchers in the University of Cambridge recently conducted a study to try and figure out just that. They used EEG on 21 patients considered in the vegetative state or minimally conscious as well as 8 healthy volunteers. The participants were shown a bunch of different words while asked to attend to either the word “yes” or “no.” They did this in a span of 30 minutes, so the researchers would be able to see whether the patients were able to attend to the correct target word.

Their findings were interesting, to say the least. They found that one of the patients the doctors labeled as being in “the vegetative state” was not only able to filter out the unimportant information, but hone in on the words they were being asked to pay attention to, proving he really was not in a vegetative state, and was even conscious.  Before I read any other findings they had, that in itself, was significant to me; it’s very demonstrative of how inconsistent and uncertain current methods are for determining who is considered in the vegetative state. Aside from that unique finding, they saw that, overall, people considered minimally conscious or vegetative state might be able to direct their attention to the sounds and world around them; they showed an ability to pay attention and even follow commands. They hope that this finding, further studies, and progress, will eventually aid in such individuals communication with the outside world as well as better understand what is labeled as a person in a “vegetative state.” 

This scan depicts patterns of the vegetative patient's electrical activity over the head when they attended to the designated words, and when they when they were distracted by novel but irrelevant words. (Credit: Clinical Neurosciences)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131031110558.htm