Author: dlende

Eat Hearthy

The new Four Stone Hearth carnival is up, covering some of the best in the four fields of anthropology, over at Hominin Dental Anthropology (say that five times fast, and you’re a real anthropologist). It has a nice chronological theme, starting with a discussion of meat eating among Neanderthals, some pseudo-science on our cousins the Hobbits, ritual and habitation in a Neolithic archaeology site, and other archaeological themes. Then some disease in the Renaissance, the general intelligence vs. social intelligence debate, and finally us.

All worth a look, but given the theme of this blog, the stand-out would be the general vs. social intelligence debate over what accounts for the evolutionary increase in human brain size. So check that out over at Professor Olsen’s.

Wednesday Round Up #8

General

Robert Sapolsky, A Natural History of Peace
Foreign Affairs full-text article: humans, like most primates, make their own peace

Michael Gazzaniga, Are Human Brains Unique?
We’ve got big brains. So what?

Michael Wesch, Anti-Teaching: Confronting the Crisis of Significance
Pdf article bringing together Wesch’s work with digital ethnography, blogging, and participatory research with students—highly recommended

Carl Zimmer, The More We Know about Genes, The Less We Understand
The power of robust regulation: gene networks take the day

Nikhil Swaminathan, Can the Brain Be Rebooted to Stop Drug Addiction?
Brain pathways, neural plasticity, and searching for a reset switch

Arthur Caplan, Intelligent Design Film Far Worse Than Stupid
“Ben Stein’s so-called documentary ‘Expelled’ isn’t just bad, it’s immoral”

Happiness

Sue Halpern, Are You Happy?
New York Review of Books piece on the recent batch of happiness pop sci books

Continue reading “Wednesday Round Up #8”

Jeff Lichtman’s Brainbows

Take a genetically-engineered mouse and add color. That is what Jeffrey Lichtman, Jean Livet, and Joshua Sanes have done. Start by inserting genes that turn neurons fluorescent hues of yellow, red and cyan. Then add some more DNA that randomly expresses those three genes. Presto, rainbow brains.

As a Harvard Science piece reports, “By activating multiple fluorescent proteins in neurons, neuroscientists at Harvard University are imaging the brain and nervous system as never before, rendering their cells in a riotous spray of colors dubbed a ‘Brainbow.’ This technique… allows researchers to tag neurons with roughly 90 distinct colors, a huge leap over the mere handful of shades possible with current fluorescent labeling.”

So many colors in something as complex and elegant as a neuron produces striking images, and I have included many here. These images also permit the study of fields of neurons, from the life course of one neuron to the patterns of connections between neurons. Hence the emerging field of “Connectomics” which “attempts to physically map the tangle of neural circuits that collect, process, and archive information in the nervous system.”

I stumbled across Lichtman’s images in two publications recently. Harvard Magazine features his work, along with five other Harvard scientists, in this month’s feature article, Shedding Light on Life: Advances in Optical Microscopy Reveal Biological Processes as They Unfold. The magazine also provides an online collection of short video clips called Lights! Microscopes! Action! Across the Charles River, MIT’s Technology Review features Lichtman’s work as one of its Ten Emerging Technologies of 2008, complete with an accompanying video featuring Lichtman.

Continue reading “Jeff Lichtman’s Brainbows”

Savage Minds & Department of Defense’s Plan for Academia

Savage Minds, the blog of “notes and queries in anthropology,” has an important post on “Camelot Revisited: The Department of Defense’s New Plan for Academia.” Robert Gates, Secretary of Defense and former university professor, wants to buy our research and shape it to military uses.

As the post says, “His goal is not to further the overall body of knowledge within academic disciplines, but to increase the military’s stock of knowledge about ‘the countries or cultures we [are] dealing with.’ And by ‘dealing with’, he doesn’t mean tourism.”

Why object? Besides the pernicious skewing of free inquiry (funding matters to researchers and university administrators alike), there is a more important argument: “it treats humans—their lives, their culture, their behavior—as means to an end. This is not knowledge for knowledge’s sake, not by a long stretch. It’s not knowledge for the betterment of humanity. It’s not even knowledge for the satisfaction of human curiosity. It’s knowledge for the achievement of strategic goals—goals that are set and grow out of particular political interests, not the priorities of anthropology and the other social sciences. Goals that take a particular status quo—US imperialism, to put a blunt point on it—as desirable, necessary, and even natural.”

Don’t think the military will do such a thing? They certainly are learning how to work the media, as the New York Times reports in Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand. Now they have a plan for academia too.

A Times Trifecta

Well, actually a double trifecta. The Science and the Health sections online (Tuesday publication) are all neuroanthropolicious.

John Schwartz’s article The Body in Depth covers the work of David Bassett, professor of anatomy and dissection. Even better, we get an online sampling of his dissections on human cadavers, Body Works but without the hype. eHuman will have the entire Bassett collection online (pay to download), with a sample and some accompanying audio here.

Christine Kenneally writes When Language Can Hold the Answer, describing a new way to the old Sapir-Whorf debate: “In stark form, the debate was: Does language shape what we perceive, a position associated with the late Benjamin Lee Whorf, or are our perceptions pure sensory impressions, immune to the arbitrary ways that language carves up the world?” Kenneally points to the role of objects, to brain function and color perception, and spatial processing as new ways to attack the old debate. One nice quote: “By giving us a framework for marshaling our thoughts, language does a lot for us,” Professor Gentner said. “Because spatial language gives us symbols for spatial patterns, it helps us carve up the world in specific ways.”

John Tierney’s piece This Time He’ll Be Breathless covers the magician David Blaine’s physical and mental training in his soon-to-be-successful attempt to break the world record for holding one’s breath. Even without moving and having breathed pure oxygen, 16 minutes sounds like a lot to me! Tierney describes well the mental approach and the embodied expertise, familiar themes for this blog, in accomplishing such a feat.

At 60, He Learned to Sing So He Could Talk is a great story by Karen Barrow on Harvey Atler’s recovery from a stroke. Using “melodic intonation therapy,” Atler learned to draw on the language/musical parts of his right brain after damage to the Broca area in his left hemisphere. In other words, singing helps the brain adapt after a stroke, recapturing language skills.

Continue reading “A Times Trifecta”

The Sugar Made Me Do It

Neuroscientifically Challenged had a great post awhile back, Every Sweet Hath Its Sour, reporting on research that basically equates modern, processed food with drugs.

Why? As the Duke Health news release tells us, “Researchers at Duke University Medical Center have discovered that the brain can respond to the calorie content of food, even in the absence of taste.” An even better title summarizing this research is “Tasteless Food Reward.”

This March 2008 Neuron paper “Food Reward in the Absence of Taste Receptor Signaling” by Ivan de Araujo, Albino Oliveira-Maia and colleagues shows that high-calorie food can directly reinforce the mesolimbic dopamine system. This result overturns that common assumption that what we eat relies on conditioned preference, pairing taste with the ingestion of a particular substance, say, cops and their donuts. This assumption has been used to great effect in evolutionary medicine research—we evolved in a fat-, sugar- and salt-limited environment, and today our evolved tastes drive our excessive consumptions of fast food in the modern world.

Now the modern situation appears even more dire, for calories alone can also reinforce food consumption, at least in mice “which lack the cellular machinery required for sweet taste transduction.” The Tasteless Food Reward editorial by Zane Andrews and Tamas Horvath tells us that “de Araujo et al. show that mice lacking functional ‘sweet’ taste receptors (trpm5−/−) develop a preference for sucrose by activating the mesolimbic dopamine-accumbal pathway, solely based on calorie load.”

Continue reading “The Sugar Made Me Do It”