The Bewilderness

Slaying the Dragons of Neurochemical disaster

The Paul Allen Institute for Brain Science has established an online 'Atlas of the Brain'. This map links the biochemistry of our most important organ with the underlying genetic interactions. The field is fast moving, as only four years have passed since an atlas of a mouse brain was completed.

It is hoped that the developing atlas will enable researchers to experience an exponential understanding of neural diseases such as Parkinsons or Alzheimers. The foundation of success is via the linkage of disease to its biochemical and genetic origin. But we shall see whether our mind remains 'Here Be Dragons'.

The Brain gives up its proteins

Science is always wondrous, because it represents an advance in what we know, allowing greater knowledge of ourselves and our world. Better minds than I have described the scientific frontier, mixing aesthetics and moral progress. Humility, awe and excitement are three common terms inscribed in their descriptions.

Sometimes, a surprising result will occur. Recently, Scientists at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute discovered greater commonalities between diverse neural illnesses through the phenomenon called postsynaptic density. This phenomenon is now considered to play a role in 130 diseases and could form one of the unifying features of neural structure.

So important is this new discovery that a new proteomic roadmap for charting diseases of the brain and their treatment could have been opened up. Even more hopeful is the role that these proteins play in cognitive behaviour; the mutation of which may lie at the basis of many behavioural disorders.

"The conservation of the structure of these proteins suggests that the behaviours governed by the PSD and the diseases associated with them have not changed much over many millions of years," said Grant. "It also shows that synapses in rodents are much more similar to humans than we expected showing that mice and rats are suitable models for studying human brain disease."

Another positive milestone on unravelling the roadmap of our brains.

Why you are wired to be miserable if you feel guilty about clutter

Sometimes, we have to read about the tricks that the mind and the world plays upon us before we can recognise these traits for ourselves. Did you ever mope around moaning about your lack of motivation? Why did I put such and such off? Or where did the impulse to buy that completely useless mathom ( (c) Tolkien) come from.

Here are three that I will be on the lookout for. The first is the throwaway society. Do you remember that phrase? Well, it works up to a point. But in order to throw away something, you have to touch it. And as soon as you touch a momento, come that initial reluctance, that hint of sentiment, and the clutter grows.

If the touchy-feely vibe is depressing enough for cynics like me, then what stimulates that impulse buy. What renders the rational mind halting lame? Well, the clue is there: Hunger, Angerness, Tiredness and Loneliness are the four horsemen that provoke retail therapy. Not so much HALT as pass GO and buy some useless artefact on the way.

And when you are surrounded by the clutter that your HALT mentality has bought, you will be on the path to meta-misery, that overwhelming wave of put off for as long as possible, because you feel too demotivated to act.

You are wired to be miserable, shop till you drop and enter the circles of hell. Smile :)

How to cure Scrooge?

It appears that assessing the risk of economic transactions is located in the amygdala. Those who lack this structure take far riskier decisions than those who still hold onto and retain their possessions. This is described as the 'fear of losing money'.

"Monetary-loss aversion has been studied in behavioral economics for some time, but this is the first time that patients have been reported who lack it entirely," says de Martino.

"We think this shows that the amygdala is critical for triggering a sense of caution toward making gambles in which you might lose," explains Camerer. This function of the amygdala, he says, may be similar to its role in fear and anxiety.

This is the economic contextualisation of evolved fear responses, adapted to the symbolic systems and representations of our culture. Is it also linked to miserly activity and hypochondria? We will be able to say that we can cure Scrooge.

Brain of a cat, not quite yet...

IBM have announced that, through a series of innovations, they are now able to model the cortical structure on a large scale. Though this does not replicate specific neuronal structures, the team state that they will be able to copy various patterns such as “sense, perceive, interact and recognise”.

The article is accompanied by speculation on how computational structures emulating neural structures will prove useful as the flood of data and connections continue to explode. The shorthand of 'brainchip' and computers at the level of cats may be more of a stretch. Though if we are at the level of a cat in supercomputing, this is a tremendous advance.

Neuro and its isms recast our world

Some more interesting research from the neurological front on the genetic factors underlying complex motor action.

The single nucleotide polymorphism, or SNP, is just one of millions of single-letter variations between humans’ genetic codes. This one occurs in a gene that produces a protein called brain-derived neurotrophic factor, which helps regulate the formation of new synapses, and the maintenance of old ones. BDNF plays a very important role in what’s called neuroplasticity, or the brain’s ability to rewire itself on the fly.

This is a strong advance in understanding the advantages and limitations of neuroplasticity, a feature that is no longer universally dominant in our neural structures. Although the headline points out that those lacking BDNF are more likely to suffer problems conducting complex motor skills, this is one study, not an overall picture.

Alongside this is a new condition for those who do not appear to have the sharpest tools in the box: dysrationalia, (Scientific American article is subscription only) a condition where individuals have high IQs but do not appear to be capable of rational thought. Speculative causes are cognitive miserliness (laziness) or the inability to structure a rational thought process (uneducated).

One cause of dysrationalia is that people tend to be cognitive misers, meaning that they take the easy way out when trying to solve problems, often leading to solutions that are illogical and wrong.

Another cause of dysrationalia is the mindware gap, which occurs when people lack the specific knowledge, rules and strategies needed to think rationally.

Perhaps there is a need to emphasize these situations in order to redress the balance of IQ tests. However, the medicalisation of these conditions will lead to lawsuits and victimhood. They always do.

Two studies that display the practicality of neural research in different ways, though as with anything concerning the mind, we sometimes recast earlier ideas in new moulds. that is not always necessary.

Political brainfodder

Matthew Taylor, Chief Executive to the Royal Society of Arts and a former adviser to Tony Blair, recently wrote an article in the magazine, Prospect, on the political potential of new developments in behaviourial economics, neuroscience and related disciplines. Such an enterprise is always difficult, in so far as new research is often part of an expanding research programme and questions are not fully answered. Therefore, one should be careful in the enthusiastic application of such results to the political arena.

Taylor's article marries the politics and selected research results, with section headings such as the Social Democratic brain and the Conservative brain. Without citing too much detail, the aim of the article is to describe and promote this research as a source of justifications for policy and power:

Much of this research makes good reading for social democrats. By highlighting our psychological frailties and the way these contribute to market epidemics, behavioural economics makes a powerful case for regulation, paternalism and measures to promote feelings of security. Nor is this the only encouragement for the traditional left.

The vision that Taylor pictures of mankind as a social being, who requires constraints and direction through social institutions and norms is the danger that the contemporary amateur interpretation of scientific results will conclude. Homo oeconomicus is circumscribed by the explorations of rationality undertaken by neuroscience and social Darwinism, but the disciplinary failure of the social sciences, the tabula rasa, is erased from the historical backdrop, as this draws attention to their total failure. A neoliberal dominance in our understanding of the human is conjured up to allow the entry of this new legitimation.

Given that there is no consensus on human nature, merely a greater understanding of our predispositions and controversy over how they relate to the social sphere, is it not arrogant to presume that existing political ideas have the key to unlock the controversial interplay of the social and the inherited. Such interventions in the past have proved disastrous, as the race science of the twentieth century demonstrates. Caution is a watchword here.

The byproduct of this article and talk is the realisation that neither the Tories or Labour can articulate moral arguments and are reduced to tagging their miserable ideas on to the emergent exploration of human nature for the sheen of scientific authority. Economists and intellectuals working in these disciplines are seduced by the consultation of those in power and turn towards the exercise of application in a political sphere.

This article is a useful reminder of what both parties share. Drinking from the same well via 'libertarian paternalism' or behaviourial economics, we begin to see the outlines of a commonality in approach, though there are differences in institutional and political implementation. Neither approach from Labour or the Tories is a friend to freedom.

Speech pathways not so new under the scalp

Understanding speech has become more comprehensible with MRI studies on human brains and equivalent examinations on rhesus monkeys. The pathways, moving from lower to higher functions, have now been partially mapped. Two pathways are identified as involved in the complex analysis of sounds and their subsequent interpretation into speech. The pathways follow a similar journey to sight.

The study also casts some doubt on the unique nature of speech in humans:

What is so interesting to Rauschecker is that although speech and language are considered to be uniquely human abilities, the emerging picture of brain processing of language suggests "in evolution, language must have emerged from neural mechanisms at least partially available in animals," he says.

"Speech, or the early process of language, is well modeled by animal communication systems, and these studies now demonstrate that primate auditory cortex, across species, displays the same patterns of hierarchical structure, topographic mapping, and streams of functional processing," Rauschecker says. "There appears to be a conservation of certain processing pathways through evolution in humans and nonhuman primates."

A familiar story: nature conserves and builds upon what is already in situ. 

Scanning precision impacts mental health

There is an improvement in the construction and implementation of clinical trials for mental health.

In a workshop on biomarkers, pharmacogenetics, and pharmacogenomics, Michael Henry, MD, of Caritas St Elizabeth’s Medical Center in Boston, indicated that technological improvements in scanner design, along with increasing understanding of neuropathophysiology, “offer an unprecedented opportunity for utilizing brain imaging techniques to improve the precision of clinical trials.”

Henry foresees the application of technologies such as MRI, PET, and single photon emission CT to reduce diagnostic variability in study populations, measure drug penetration of target sites, and establish biomarkers of therapeutic efficacy. Although imaging in clinical trials is most common in cardiology and oncology, Henry noted its recent use in trials of agents for dementia, depression, and psychosis.

This is good news, illustrating the continuous improvement and positive feedback between scanning technology and genetics. The conference highlighted a number of promising research programmes resulting in more accurate and precise diagnosis and drug treatment..

Neurorisk

Risk science is a joke after the events of the last year. Few forecast the turn of events where all players found themselves struck by a system lockdown. The response of the governments has been feeble. wresting political figleafs and greater powers from the downturn. New institutions will not provide any more insight into the causes of this financial crisis or the next one, and will probably end up exacerbating the recession.

One possible idea that is beginning to restructure our understanding of risk is the potency of behavioural blind spots: a hardwired inability to understand the probability of particular events. This has the potential for further work in neuroscience and neuroeconomics. This is the realm of Andrew Lo, Professor at MIT Sloan School of Management. Whilst we are unable to determine the causes, we should be careful about legislating for solutions: at best, there is room for limited reform - but some argue that risk should take centre stage:

In my view, there’s something fundamentally wrong with current corporate-governance structures and the language of corporate management. We just don’t have the proper lexicon to have a meaningful discussion about the kinds of risks that typical corporations face today, and we need to create a new field of “risk accounting” to address this gap in GAAP.

Risk can be a recipe for inaction: understanding your risks leads to paralysis. The development of the precautionary principle is a fine example of this foolish caution. However, at the moment, we have not even achieved understanding.