Humans Produce New Brain Cells Throughout Their Lives, Say Researchers (theguardian.com) 57
An anonymous reader shares a report: Humans continue to produce new neurons in a part of their brain involved in learning, memory and emotion throughout adulthood, scientists have revealed, countering previous theories that production stopped after adolescence. The findings could help in developing treatments for neurological conditions such as dementia. Many new neurons are produced in the hippocampus in babies, but it has been a matter of hot debate whether this continues into adulthood -- and if so, whether this rate drops with age as seen in mice and nonhuman primates. Although some research had found new neurons in the hippocampus of older humans, a recent study scotched the idea, claiming that new neurons in the hippocampus were at undetectable levels by our late teens.
Oh man, that's a relief (Score:5, Funny)
The recent article saying that we get no new neurons was causing me stress, which of course was killing my neurons, and thinking about that was causing me MORE stress.
But now, a new article, with a much better claim!
I feel the stress draining away, as new brain cells are born to replace the ones I lost last week.
Contradicting last month's study (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, this one contradicts last month's study saying that contrary to previous belief humans do NOT grow new neurons: https://www.npr.org/sections/h... [npr.org]
https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/07/health/new-brain-cells-adulthood-study/index.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-the-adult-brain-really-grow-new-neurons/
Maybe both are true? (Score:1)
NON-contradicting last month's study (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't actually contradict last month's study.
This study demonstrates a lingering neuro-generative capacity (at the tissue level). The previous study demonstrates a paucity of neuro-generative reality (with a bias toward the functional view).
Most old dogs are set in their ways, but some old dogs do indeed learn new tricks.
Oh noes, CONTRADICTION, time to ostrich my head into the nearest dune.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And furthermore, I always thought that people STARTED growing neurons after adolescence.
Re: (Score:2)
And furthermore, I always thought that people STARTED growing neurons after adolescence.
Heh, took me a few seconds to stop being so literal, get the joke - gettin' old, I guess.
Alternatively, to get smarter one could always pull a Canadian brain heist.
Re: That's the trouble with the reporting (Score:3)
With today's constant bombardment of reporting of scientific studies - many times dumbed down to be meaningless - we are getting to many mixed messages.
This is nothing new; it's just gotten somewhat worse over time. Traditional media companies used to have science-trained reporters and editors dedicated to science reporting, and even they sometimes got things wrong. Things got significantly worse when those positions were eliminated, but that happened a good 20 years ago now.
For well over a deacde we've been in the age of science-by-press-release where, basically, a scientist well write a paper, some PR flunky with no real understanding of it will put to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While being offtopic completely you seem to have a few errors in your post. Here let me help you with those.
I got a five-dollar bill that says when both terms of the highly successful Trump Administration are over, perhaps after he is laid to rest. It will be very doubtful that his kids, since they are rich already, will be coming out with any tell all books. But if they do they will tell what a loving and caring father he was. Got another five bucks that says his daughter will never say he sexually abused her in any way and it will be completely true
There, fixed that for you.
Re: (Score:1)
Low-quality bait
Lurk more. xD
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, not by best work. Way to obvious.
Nice (Score:5, Funny)
So at age 72 we'll all be stable geniuses.
Re: (Score:2)
Based on my experience I'd say you need to be at least 120 years old to be a genius.
Use it or lose it (Score:5, Insightful)
All makes perfect sense to me. You don't use your muscles, they atrophy, because there's no reason for your body to dedicate resources to something that's not being used; why should it be any different with your brain? Keep learning your whole life, keep yourself interested in something, and your brain will last as long as possible. Having a purpose in life, whether bestowed on you or of your own devising would probably help.
I've never actually read those studies (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Not so clear cut (Score:5, Interesting)
From the article:
Dr Mercedes Paredes from the University of California San Francisco, an author of last month’s paper suggesting adults do not develop new neurons, said she was not persuaded. “For now, we do not think this new study challenges what we have concluded from our own recently published observations: if neurogenesis continues in the adult human hippocampus, it is an extremely rare phenomenon,” she said. “It boils down to interpretation of equivocal cells which we took extra steps to characterise extensively and showed not to be new neurons as they first appeared.”
I would also note that this study's subjects were "between 14 and 79" and the previous study stated "only a few isolated young neurons are observed by 7 and 13 years of age". Thus, this new study finding little decline between 14 and 79 could be entirely accurate if the bulk of the decline was over by 14. It is an apples and oranges comparison.
As an aside, I feel that there is a great argument forming for completing secondary education by 14 as we used to. We hurt ourselves by not getting more of our foundation in place during that more biologically capable time period.
Re: (Score:2)
Heck, cut it to 8. At that age they're still small enough to fit inside chimneys.
Re: (Score:2)
Only a tiny fraction of the population completed much schooling back in the old days. If only the smartest 10% of your population is going to school, of course you're going to be able to teach them faster. The subjects that were considered important were also narrower back then.
There's no doubt that second languages should be taught at a younger age, though.
Re: (Score:2)
I somewhat agree and have both read books and seen real-world programs.
IMO, we teach the wrong way. It's not so much that we need to reorder subjects as to refactor them. But I would disagree that math and language are different. Math is just another language used to express things that build natively in the human mind at the same ages as spoken language. The degree to which we learn simple things like accurate determination of more/less, bigger/smaller, etc at toddler ages and before is directly related to
Re: (Score:2)
there is a great argument forming for completing secondary education by 14 as we used to. We hurt ourselves by not getting more of our foundation in place during that more biologically capable time period.
Sounds good on paper but it seems like the familial and social structures are no longer up to the task.
No wonder (Score:3)
new neurons in the hippocampus were at undetectable levels by our late teens.
Have our adults detect them. Next issue.
Grow a brain (Score:2)
So when you lose it to some idiot on a Internet forum and tell them to "Grow Brain" it is not so much an insult as it is a helpful constructive suggestion.
Fuck brain cells (Score:2)
To paraphrase Errol Flynn, "A man who dies with all his brain cells is a failure."
Anyway, I've got plenty. I figure I could lose 30-40% and still be smarter than the average jamoke.
Wasnt this the war on drugs (Score:1)
Here is an extensive commentary on the debate (Score:2)
Does your brain produce new cells? [theguardian.com]