Time to worry about worrying!

In chapter eight of his book, The Ravenous Mind, Daniel Bor uses a Nobel laureate, John Nash, as an example of a person who has lost his balance on the  "seasaw of stress versus consciousness" (Bor, 2012)  Nash was driven to insanity that only plunged him deeper into his own mind.  Nash was a remarkable mathematician, professor, and a father whose level of stress probably caused him to strain his prefrontal parietal network.  With that part of his brain holding not functioning properly to hold back fear and paranoia, his amygdala took over his mind.  He saw conspiracies were there was none and basically was so anxious he was constantly in fight or flight mode.

With the increased stress of today's life, it is important that we use case studies, such as Nash's, and experimentation to further explode the effect of stress on the human brain.  For example, students now more than ever are being faced with high tuition, competition at school and in the work place, and family financial problems.  Their families are losing their health care coverage, or the amount of social networking sites is keeping them constantly on their toes, and to make it worse we've become so busy that we're sleeping less, eating unhealthier foods, and not letting out minds relax.  Whatever the stressing factors are, there are just so many of them today that our bodies are not used too.  Even after millions of years of evolution, we were not physically evolved to deal with the likes of these stresses.  Our ancestors never studied the same mathematical formulas for hours upon days like Nash did.  They weren't constantly bombarded with notifications on their phones or deadlines and due dates.

In his article, "Chronic Stress can Shrink your Brain," David Ropeik writes of how worrying too much, or stressing, can cause your brain to physically shrink.  This ties in with Bor's example that the brain can physically be altered due to the outside world causing it an emotion.  Nash's prefrontal cortex failed him from ove use and over abuse.  Ropeik writes of a study that was published in the journal Biological Psychiatry that asked participants of stressful events they've experienced, and of ongoing chronic stresses they're undergoing and then took all of their fMRIs.  The findings were shocking, but yet, still expected.  Participants who had experienced many stressful events had significantly smaller volumes in their medial prefrontal cortex.  Recent stressful events actually caused a slightly different pattern with two clusters of smaller volume at the medial prefrontal cortex and at the right insula.  Ropeik goes onto list other physical symptoms from the study, such as decreased medial prefrontal cortex, subgenual regions, and anterior cingulates from total stresses, and adding chronic stress to that, the orbitofrontal cortex was also affected.  As with Nash's worn out prefrontal cortex, all of these brain parts are associated with self-control, reasoning, judgement, and emotions.  Ropeik continues his articles with ways to reduce stress in order to avoid these mental impairments.  Our emotions can physically manifest themselves and cause greater distress in our lives.  We either need to start practicing meditation and relaxation as Ropeik, and many medical professionals suggest, or define stable lives for ourselves, which limit stress.  For example, students can turn to community college for education to reduce tuition bills, turn off their phones after a certain time, or even just go to bed an hour earlier.


Bor, D. (2012). The ravenous brain. (pp. 256-260). New York: Basic Books.
Ropeik, D. (2012). Chronic stress can shrink your brain.Psychology Today, Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/how-risky-is-it-really/201203/chronic-stress-can-shrink-your-brain

“Brain Training” and its Usefulness in Treating Schizophrenia.

In chapter 8 of Daniel Bor’s The Ravenous Brain, he talks about various mental illnesses (e.g. bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and autism) and how they’re related to consciousness and low working memory. In particular, Bor briefly discusses the topic of cognitive remediation, or “brain training” and how it has been shown to not only improve working memory, but alleviate some of the symptoms in those suffering from ADHD and schizophrenia (2012, p. 255).

The article “Treating schizophrenia: Game on” (Hayden, 2012) takes a look at research that was done by Michael Merzenich on brain training and its effect on patients with schizophrenia, and how he tried to gain FDA approval for the software he was using in the clinical trials. According to Sophia Vinogradov (who has already tested Merzenich’s software with schizophrenic patients), the goal of the treatment is “to improve fundamental neural processes so that the brain is freed to tackle higher-order cognitive demands such as working memory,” which may lead to better functioning in daily activities for those who suffer from schizophrenia.

Both Vinogradov and Merzenich found that after intensive training, there were improvements in global cognition; alongside other intervention programs, such as counseling and job placement, there was an improvement in the functioning of the patients that was evident six months after the training. But, it has also been shown that there is no difference between Merzenich’s software and other cognitive remediation approaches in relation to their effectiveness among patients with schizophrenia. In spite of this, it is my hope that other methods of treatment for schizophrenia and other mental illnesses will be researched so as to provide an alternative to the medicinal treatment of them, many that produce harmful and uncomfortable side effects and doesn’t improve the symptoms of the illnesses.

Bor, D. (2012). The Ravenous Brain: How the New Science of Consciousness Explains Our Insatiable Search for Meaning. New York: Basic, 2012. Print.

Hayden, E.C. (2012). Treating schizophrenia: game on. Nature, 483(7387). Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/news/treating-schizophrenia-game-on-1.10126

Playing God

At the Loyola Neuroscience Banquet held on Satuday, November 2nd, 2013, author of Frankenstein's Cat: Cuddling Up to Biotech's Brave New Beasts, Emily Anthes, presented insight on animal cyborgs.  She explained how we can "hack" into animal's brains and use them for warfare, as spies, or for civilian application, such as search and rescue.  We have turned to animals in order to do these things because they power themselves, which allows for smaller sizes of "robots."  If we were to try to create our own little flying robot, the battery to charge it would be so heavy, it might not fly, or it would be too big.  UC Berkley was the first to implement the new strategy of cyborgs by experimenting with the flower beetle, an insect found in South Africa, which has a large enough size to carry the necessary machinery, and brains large enough to make mini "brain surgeries" an easier task.  So far they have gotten the insects to fly left or right, or stop and completely drop down from the air.  The goal is to fine tune them to be able to control the depth, degree, and altitude at which they fly at.  Experiments such as these have also been done on rats by implanting wires in their somatosensory cortex in order to create stimuli in order to get the rats to more a certain direction.  The rats are rewarded for following the seemingly natural stimuli by receiving impulses to their medial forebrain bundle, and thus creating a "feel good" response.

There is no doubt that these outstanding technological and neural advances will provide great benefit to human beings, but is it ethical?  Is it ethical for us to hijack another beings brain, one who has no say in the process?  Some can say higher organisms do have the right to lead their own lives, but at what extent would you let a human being suffer or risk being lost in destruction just so an animal can have freedom of choice.  Whose life is worth more?  Is there a distinction between instinct and mammal?  Of course, the pain that accompanies the brain surgeries on these animals is kept to a minimal by using anesthesia.

Not only can we hijack their brains to control their actions, but scientists today are also looking into giving organisms cognitive enhancements.  Neuroprosthetics are a way to stimulate cognitive areas of a brain in order to create a new or better way of "thinking."  In 2011, University of Southern California implanted a neuroprosthetic in the hippocampus of a rat and increased its score means test.  They also implanted a device in the prefrontal cortex of a Rhesus monkey and improved its memory.  They've also done experiments where they have increased mental performance simply by giving the organism cocaine.  Duke University even gave rats infrared vision detectability by creating a receptor that would take in infrared and stimulate their somatosensory cortex so that they would "sense" the infrared.

Many people aren't please with the way we are, in a sense, playing God.  Scientists have been doing so for a while now by manipulating different species, even manipulating humans, deciding who lives, who dies, cloning, manipulating genes, and now who gets extra senses or their will power taken away from them.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is an organization well known for their incredible devotion to animals, sometimes even to questionable extremes.  Recently an article written by Anita Hamilton in Time magazine, PETA's stance on the cyborg issue is clear, and of course, they oppose the new technology.  Hamilton humorously begins her article by commenting that, "People have done many terrible things to cockroaches in the name of fear: impaled them with a shoe, squashed them in a tissue, and water tortured them down the drain. Now People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is claiming that a government-funded neuroscience startup is doing terrible things to roaches in the name of education."  Hamilton writes on how PETA is trying to stop RoboRoaches, the cool roach kits that Anthes spoke about at the banquet dinner, from being produced.  Hamilton notes that PETA's concern are for the pain of the animals.  They don't believe it is right to mutilate or kill helpless, small animals.  But we need to keep in mind, if many of us found a beetle or roach in our homes, we would probably just kill it anyway.  So if we were to humor PETA's concern for a moment, is it ethical that we mass provide "victims" to consumers, only to have them be mutilated and killed?

Hamilton, Anita. "Resistance is Futile: PETA Attempts to Halt the Sale of Remote-Controlled Cyborg Cockroaches Read more: RoboRoach Cyborg Cockroaches Boycotted by PETA | TIME.com http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/11/01/cyborg-cockroaches-are-coming-but-not-if-peta-has-anything-to-say-about-it/
Anthes, Emily. "Animal Cyborgs." Loyola Neuroscience Banquet. The Neuroscience Society. Loyola University Water Tower Campus, Chicago. 02 Nov 2013. Keynote.

I Think, Therefore I'm Not

                Throughout Daniel Bor's The Ravenous Brain, Bor attempts to wrestle with the hot topic of consciousness.  From the philosopher Rene Descartes to cognitive neuroscience icon Michael Gazzaniga, the neuroscience of consciousness finds itself battling against the age-old belief in the individuality of awareness.  

                In Chapter 5 of The Ravenous Brain, Bor effectively reduces consciousness to "a physical process generated by brain activity" (Bor, 158). The conscious mind is nothing more than the conscious brain.  To put it simply, changes in the brain by way of various factors result in changes to consciousness.  According to Bor, today's most serious theories center on consciousness as a "particular flavor of dense information transmission across a large cortical network" (Bor, 187).  While Bor thoroughly acknowledges non-physical theories of consciousness, he like many others, believes in a "precise neural signature of consciousness" (Bor, 187).

                In Krishna Andavolu's article, Consciousness Is Just Your Brain Making a Model of Itself, Princeton neuroscientist Michael Graziano supports the notion that our brains simply "make models of the world around us and our bodies" (Andavolu) in order to make sense of our senses. These models are sketches of the world that serve an evolutionary purpose.  Our brains are exceptionally good at making models.  Both Bor and Graziano essentially argue that the consequence of proficient model-making is what we've come to understand as consciousness, "the ungraspable I, the magic sauce of Being that defines our essential humanness" (Andavolu). 

                In addressing the concept of consciousness, Graziano believes that many scientists are simply asking the wrong question.  In assuming that  consciousness has a "magical inner feeling", experimentation begins under the uncertain illusion of magic.  Rather, both Graziano and Bor believe that the better question arises from understanding the adaptive advantages of consciousness.  Referring back to Graziano's model approach, the brain attributes the property of awareness to itself because that's our way of monitoring the fact that our brain is paying attention to an object. In essence, our awareness of a piece of fruit, and our awareness of ourselves are the same thing. 

                Graziano believes that in the next 100 years,  there will be a device "that can scan the brain in enough molecular detail to stimulate or recreate data in artificial hardware".  Because people are obsessed with living forever, he believes in the ability to create some sort of "electronic afterlife". He also believes in  potential "virtual playgrounds" whereby people can put themselves into a simulated world.

                While the neuronal interactions that generate consciousness are still far from understood, I believe that much of the difficulty in understanding consciousness is socially constructed.  Reducing consciousness to a neural mechanism appears to dethrone the individuality of thought.  As a "consciousness machine" (Bor,177), to what extent do I really exist?

References:

Bor, Daniel. The Ravenous Brain: How the New Science of Consciousness Explains Our Insatiable     Search for Meaning. New York: Basic, 2012. Print. 

Andavolu, Krishna. "Consciousness Is Just Your Brain Making A Model of Itself." Vice(2013): n. pag. Print.

               

                

PVS: Hope for Recovery

In chapter 7 of Daniel Bor's The Ravenous Brain, he explores disorders of consciousness with regards to brain damage. Many patients who have been in serious accidents and experience massive head trauma are left in a coma. If the unconscious state lasts for more than a year, then the patient is considered to be in a permanent vegetative state, or PVS. For most people, the infamous case of Terri Schiavo comes to mind whenever the topic of PVS comes up. Daniel Bor also references her case as very ethically complicated. 

Despite the sophisticated brain imaging techniques available to modern science, it was surprising to learn that the key diagnosis factor is purely based on eye activity. "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 signs of awareness, then he is in a vegetative state"(Bor 225) explains Bor. Patients can be misdiagnosed and if the person is diagnosed as vegetative it can be difficult to tell whether or not the patient is making progress towards a minimally conscious state. It becomes nearly impossible to define movements or utterances as true awareness or as simply random reflexes. Of course it is possible for a patient to recover from PVS, however the longer it persists, the less likely recovery becomes. 

In her article Withdrawal of Artificial Nutrition and Hydration for Patients in a Permanent Vegetative State: Changing Tack Catherine Constable argues that "we commit a worse violation of autonomy by continuing ANH [artificial nutrition and hydration] when the patients wishes are unknown." She believes that unless the patient explicitly expressed their wish to be kept on ANH prior to being unconscious, it should not be assumed that they would wish to be kept in the vegetative state. Although keeping patients on ANH is considered ethical by many current medical and religious standards, she argues that it should actually be the opposite. "More likely than not, the maintenance of ANH as a bridge to a theoretical future time of recover goes against the best interests of the patient. Her argument stands better in the case that future recovery seems grim. 

My interest on this issue was truly grabbed by the last few statements of the chapter in which Bor touches on a deeply ethical problem. In the case of patients who are able to recover even partially from PVS, he suggests that "they would be disturbingly reborn...with most of their old memories, skills, and personalities wiped out" (Bor, 234). This statement also challenges the benefits of recovery from PVS. If a patient miraculously recovers, the differences in their personality and abilities are sure to be life altering for themselves and their families. What would a person faced with this reality choose for themselves? Is it right for their families and doctors to decide for them when there are no other options? 

References: 

Bor, D. (2012). The Ravenous Brain: How the New Science of Consciousness Explains Our Insatiable Search for Meaning. New York: Basin Books, 2012. Print

Constable, C. Withdrawal of Artificial Nutrition and Hydration for Patients in a Permanent Vegetative State: Changing Tack. Bioethics, 26. 157-163. 

Our Awareness

Daniel Bor’s book The Ravenous Brain energetically argues that awareness, or consciousness, is a production of elaborate information processing.  Bor describes the deep evolutionary roots of consciousness.  The very complex human brain with its billions of neurons and connections has roots that can be traced back to the beginnings of life on earth.  Through trial and error, our consciousness evolved to what it is now. 

In the introduction of the book, Bor says: “There is nothing more important to us than our own awareness”.  This statement becomes undeniable when we think about what we consider a meaningful life to be. Brain death rather than cardiac death is what we consider to be the end of a person.  Until recently, it was though consciousness could not be studied because of its complex and seemingly subjective nature.  Bor claims that the scientific study of consciousness is possible because the brain and the way it processes information is what enables our awareness.  Brain damage and mental illnesses often result in a change in consciousness, which supports the argument that our awareness is no more than the functioning of neurons. 

I recently read a book written by a journalist named Susannah Calahan titled Brain on fire: My month of madness.  In this book she describes her experience with a newly discovered neurological disease.  She has no memory of the month she was hospitalized, but since she is a journalist, she created this book by piecing together information she gathered from friends and family.  She experienced hallucinations, mood swings, confusion and seizures.  After having gone to several doctors and having been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, and alcoholism, she was diagnosed with anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis.  It is caused by an autoimmune reaction against NMDA receptors in the brain.  This receptor helps neurons communicate.   

Calahan writes:  “The break between my consciousness and my physical body was now fully complete. In essence, I was gone. . . . This was the beginning of my lost month of madness.”  The harmonious functioning of the brain is what enables consciousness.  Disruptions to these processes can cause inexplicable changes to awareness.  Studying diseases like Calahan’s can better the understanding we have of consciousness and the way our brains produce it.  Bor’s argument that consciousness is nothing more than the functioning of the brain is supported by cases like Calahan’s where awareness is lost because of a disruption to the normal functioning of the brain. 

Bor, D. (2012). The ravenous brain:how the new science of consciousness explains our

insatiable search for meaning. NewYork: Basic Books.

Cahalan, S. (2012). Brain on fire: My month of madness. New York: Free Press.

Lamas, D. J. (2013, 5 27). When the brain is under attack: A new disease at the

crossroads of psychiatry and neurology could help in the understanding of psychosis. The Boston Globe. Retrieved from http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-wellness/2013/05/26/when-brain-attacks-newly-discovered-disease-can-mimic-psychosis/dyixxnwdHJJIUITsNYJC3O/story.html

Arbaclofen

            The chapter that struck me the most in Daniel Bor’s The Ravenous Brain was chapter 8. In this chapter, Bor discusses autism and the over consciousness.  He points out that “autistics have an overabundance of awareness, and all their symptoms are merely their way of dealing with this supercharged consciousness”(Bor 239).  I thought to myself what it would be like to have a supercharged consciousness and how would I be able to deal with this.  There have not been a lot of successful drugs developed for treating autism. Bor does point out one drug called arbaclofen that seemed to have shown results dealing with the autistics consciousness.

            I came across an article in Time magazine that discussed a study that was done with arbaclofen to see if there would be improvements with common symptoms of autism such as social withdrawal.  So how does this drug work?  “The drug works by acting on the brain’s GABA-B receptors and decreasing elevated activity of a neurotransmitter called glutamate”(Szalavitz). As Bor mentioned autistics have a high level of glutamate flowing through their brain that prevents the gamma-amino butyric acid from firing. You might ask yourself why is this important? If there is an overabundance of glutamate in the brain this can cause tissue damage in the brain, as well as provoke an “overwhelming sense of consciousness”(Bor 242). This over consciousness prevents a lot of autistics from maintaining social interactions with others. The study that was done with arbaclofen showed improvements in the social behaviors of the participants with Fragile X syndrome.  This new drug can help pave the future for those with a supercharged consciousness. 

Resources:

Bor, Daniel. The Ravenous Brain: How the New Science of Consciousness Explains Our Insatiable Search for Meaning. New York: Basic, 2012. Print.

Szalavitz, Maia, and Maia Szalavitz. "The First Drug That Could Help Social Withdrawal in Autism." Time. Time, n.d.