Scientists Identify Genes Activated During Learning And Memory 56
Researchers have theorized that certain genes must be activated to alter neuron activity inside the brain for learning and memory to take place. Finding and cataloging all the genes involved in learning is a formidable job. Scientists have now developed a computational approach to provide a rapid way to identify the likely members of this sought-after set of genes.
That's all fine and dandy... (Score:5, Interesting)
... but I do hope no-one's looking forward to some sort of treatment which would drastically improve our memory, except maybe as a way to diminish symptoms of Alzheimer's or similar diseases.
Much as I've always wanted a btter memory, studies conducted on the few people with truly eidetic memory showed that while they indeed had nearly perfect recollection, they also lacked the ability to discriminate between important and unimportant, though I still have my doubts as to what is the cause of which.
What if.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Temporary memory boost? (Score:3, Interesting)
Mixed feelings (Score:5, Interesting)
On the other hand I can't help but feel like unlocking the secrets of the mind will inevitably lead to the obsolescence of the everyday human. Granted, we're still a long way off from creating super smart people with the flick of a switch but one day it will happen. We've already seen the creation of super strong rats and the like (too lazy to find links). The brain is quite complex however and chances are some mad scientists somewhere are bound to created a more than a few scrambled melons before striking success.
With each new discovery of the human genome we inch closer to fully understanding it. Once we have a complete grasp there are bound to be those who wish to further the species with "unnatural means". I would argue that we would only be speeding what would otherwise take thousands of years to take place (although there are certainly no guarantees we'll ever get much smarter as a whole). If survival of the fittest is the name of the game, and why would we not want further generations to be the best they can be? I suppose that can be answered by any number of sci-fi flicks, but Hollywood seems to paint a grim picture of genetically modified people as if they automatically become evil, or at least have the chance of snapping and turning evil at any moment. I see no reason we can't eventually re-create the likes of a Da Vinci. The only problem is that this type of work doesn't benefit an individual because he would be contributing to his own demise, the end of "natural" humans. If something that at least somewhat looks/acts/feels like a human makes it off this planet and onto other worlds I'd be happy knowing we lived on in at least some form.
This is nothig new (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyway, according to the article, the work was done by an undergraduate student and it probably was good research but nothing news worthy. These kinds of press releases don't really do anyone (not the author, the scientific community nor the reader) any justice.
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:3, Interesting)
I would disagree with this point, however. I think we do recreate Da Vinci's every day of every year. But most of these guys don't look right, don't get the right opportunities, are born to parents who don't give a stuff, are born into poverty, etc., etc..
But what if you could, hypothetically, re-create Da Vinci? He might mature, apply his enormous intellect to his creation, realise that the optimum characteristics required to survive our murky world are stupidity and aggression, successfully argue in court that you purposefully set him at a disadvantage and sue you out of existence.
Re:Temporary memory boost? (Score:3, Interesting)
My grandmother swears by amphetamines; she used to use them to prepare exams in med school.
That was before they were illegal, of course... yet even today she says she doesn't know why they're illegal, for she'd used them and she's quite fine.
Her liver condition certainly has nothing to do with that.
Luckily, she dropped out; with that kind of attitude, it's a damned good thing she never graduated.
Re:Mixed feelings (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not arguing that Da Vinci wasn't brilliant. But in today's society, would he even be noticed? We have more geniuses than ever, and as such, they are less noteworthy than ever. In Da Vinci's time, it was dangerous and difficult to be a genius. Being different was a lot harder back then, and if you should come up with an idea that was against the local religion, you would probably die. Now if you go against the grain, you merely get screamed at, screamed with, and get a lot of publicity. Not necessarily in that order.