On Cyborgs, Singularities, and the 2045 Initiative

Oh, you vodka-soaked Russian bastards, what madness are you cooking up this time?

Dmitry Itskov, a mad Russian billionaire, has decided its high time humans cast off their mortal shells in favor of a sleeker, digital form. He believes its time we push our technology to the limits to create a method of immortality for the personality, a freeing of consciousness from the fleshy sac it’s currently attached to.

Itskov’s baby is the 2045 Initiative, a grand plan to create machines complex enough to house a human personality, paving the way for the technological singularity (rise of superintelligence through technology).

It’s like he’s never read his O.C. Bible. “Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind.” That ringing any bells, buddy?

The 2045 Initiative is comprised of four phases (avatars):

Avatar A (2020)

Using a brain-machine interface, a human will control a robotic human replica. While it’s not as impressive as killing someone with your brain, I suppose it’s something.

Avatar B (2025)

Okay, here’s where things start to get freaky. The second phase of Itskov’s plan involves planting a human mind into a machine at the end of his/her life, effectively granting him/her immortality. But this immortality will come at a terrible price- at this stage, emotions and personality will be lost in the transfer.

I’ve seen this before. Now, where was it…

OH YEAH. They’ve already done this shit on Doctor Who:

You will be upgraded.

A recurring baddie on the long-running British show are the Cybermen, machines who take humans and “upgrade” them by making them into emotionless robotic beings.

And Itskov wants to start them up here on Earth? WAY TO GO… wait, if it means a certain blue police box is going to appear on a street somewhere, I say fucking go for it. Robotize the masses, Itskov. I’d love to meet The Doctor.

Avatar C (2035)

At this point, Itskov figures we’ll have successfully created a computer model of human consciousness, so we’ll now be able to move a human personality (emotions, memories, and all) into a machine.

Oh yeah, that’s never ended badly:

Oh… it’s you.

Avatar D (2045)

The final stage of Itskov’s master plan is to free humanity completely from physical forms. Humans will be digital creatures, living online in a kind of hive mind, with individual personalities surfacing as holographic avatars to interact with the physical world.

…

…

Why?

I guess that’s my main question here. While I (like many people) have always been fascinated by the idea of downloading a human personality into a machine (along with the ethical quandaries surrounding such a notion), this final stage just seems ridiculous to me. Something you read about in a good (or utterly awful) sci-fi novel, ponder for a bit, then promptly dismiss.

Then again, if all this goes down, I could be a digital Kerrigan. And all you bitches can be my zerglings. Mwa ha ha.

…Mine is an evil laugh.

To be completely honest, I guess the final stage of the 2045 Initiative is so repulsive to me because it seems utterly impossible to create an internet-based “hive mind” scenario that still maintains the individuality of the personalities within it. There’s a reason every goddamn swarm/hive mind of sci-fi is comprised of unemotional, non-individualistic creatures- group/hive consciousnesses are essentially one consciousness. There can be no real individuality because every unit within the hive is just a piece of the same whole, a cog in the same machine. Personalities get in the way of this kind of collective consciousness, impeding the group (by daring to dissent or have new ideas) and never achieving the snap decisions and power of many individuals acting as one singular unit.

There is a power in collective consciousness, but it’s a power that comes at the cost of individuality. We see this scenario play out time and time again in the sci-fi world. Halo’s flood, Starcraft’s Zerg, Star Trek’s Borg, Doctor Who’s Ood… The list goes on.

Now, in fiction, we see a handful of these group conscious that allow for the retention of some individuality. But could such a thing occur in a digital world? When we are all electric signals, bytes of memory, moving around the globe through the same channels, exchanging information and interacting at unbelievable speeds… would there be any real way to preserve individual consciousnesses? Or would we all eventually merge into one collective, global consciousness, humanity becoming one massive superintelligence?

Of course, Itskov faces a great many obstacles on this path. Technology is currently not progressing at the rate he would like, and it’s going to take more than just his billions to fund this venture. Personally, I don’t think he’ll ever raise the necessary monies to push this plan along according to his timeline. But if the money is found and that major hurdle is no longer standing in his way…

I ask you, galleons, to think about this idea. What kind of man would even put forth such an idea? This man would:

Look at him, galleons. I’m pretty sure this guy’s a goddamn robot already. He’s a Cyberman in disguise, trying to make us all a crazy, digital consciousness to suit his alien creators. Look at those dead, soulless eyes.

DON’T LET HIM GET YOUR DELICIOUS HUMAN MEATS, WORLD.

Do Fish Dream of Electric Eels?

And now, because I’m a crazy loner who lives on her own, it’s time for a story about Sam’s fish.

Johnny spent all of yesterday building a bubble nest in the middle of the little ruin that graces his fishbowl. Now, The Professor does this regularly, but this was the first time I’d ever seen Johnny at the task. And boy, was that little guy determined. He was resolutely at the top of his bowl, little mouth gulping at the air as he made his bubbles. Nothing would distract him from his task, including me, trying to distract him (because I am an asshole). Not even feeding time could pull him from his duty. It’s like he knew that if he worked long and hard enough, I’d give him a lady Betta to make sweet, sweet fishy love to.

Unfortunately, Johnny learned what The Professor learned long ago- I am a withholding bitch who will not give them any ladiez. This morning, I wandered over to his bowl to find his magnificent bubble nest gone, destroyed in what I can only imagine was the rage-induced thrashings of a fish who realizes he’s wasted a whole day trying to woo a lady that will never come. Poor little guy.

At least, that’s what I assume he was thinking. Because I am not a fish and do not know anything about fish thoughts.

But while I am in the dark about fish thoughts, researchers at Japan’s National Institute of Genetics are not. Or, at least, they’re less in the dark. The group managed to capture the first video of a thought passing through a fish’s brain. Check it:

True, it’s probably not a terribly complex thought (but I can’t be too judgmental, seeing as my most recent thought was “Why the fuck is my lip bleeding?”), but it’s still freaking awesome. The researchers were able to capture this little thought using a super-sensitive fluorescent probe they created to detect neural activity, as well as a genetic probe that can be inserted directly into the neurons of interest. This two-pronged attack allows us to see neuronal activity at the cellular level.

Badass.

The thought pictured above occurred when the little zebrafish being observed was checking out a paramecium flitting around it. We don’t know what that thought was, but it was probably something along the lines of, “Mmm, lunch.”

This probe is just beyond cool. It opens new doors in neural studies, and it could potentially help us understand how connections between brain cells work together to produce thoughts. You get that? It could help us understand how thought works, not just in humans, but in animals as well.

And until then, it allows us to see a little fish thinking. And while the thought itself remains a mystery, it’s beautiful to watch it.

‘s not gonna help me understand Johnny or The Professor, though. Thankfully, their rage and spite comes across loud and clear.

This is Your Brain on Love

We all know that the emotion of love originates, not in the heart (or liver), but in the brain. The same is true of sexual desire (turns out, men are always thinking with just one head). But, strangely enough, no one has bothered to make a comprehensive map of exactly which areas of the brain activate for feelings of love and desire.

Until now, dear galleons.

In an international study involving scientists from both the United States and Switzerland, 20 separate studies that mapped love or lust in the brain using fMRIs (you know, monitoring brain activity while looking at sex-ay picture or pictures of significant others) were analyzed and compiled.

The result was the first complete map of love and desire, allowing us to actually follow how desire morphs into love within the brain. Despite the hideous phrase “making love,” sexual desire and love actually activate different (but related) areas of the brain. Ergo, we can still want to slam someone against a wall without wanting to walk down the aisle with them.

There are two primary areas in the brain that trace that path from wanton desire to actual affection- the striatum and the insular cortex (more commonly referred to as the insula). Now, the striatum is this funky bulbous structure inside the brain with a curling tail-like-bit (the purple structure in the following image):

The striatum is located deep within the brain, near the center (inside the forebrain). The insula, on the other hand, is located a little further out, folded between the temporal and frontal lobes. In the following frontal cross-section of the brain, you’ll notice the insula over on the right side of the image.

Now, you might not realize it, but the striatum is also evident on this image. Look for the caudate nucleus and lentiform nucleus- those are parts of the striatum. As you can see, the striatum and insula are located nearby one another.

That area, dear galleons, is the home of love and desire in the brain.

Now, some of you might be flaring your nostrils at me, sputtering about how the amygdala, widely known to be deeply involved in the processing of emotional events, wasn’t listed. Calm the fuck down. The limbic system (of which the amygdala is a part) actually works with the striatum, as does the cerebral cortex (which is where the insula comes in). Remember, the brain’s this complex, intricate system, and I’m just bastardizing it with my woefully inadequate words. Suffice to say, the striatum (the primary basal ganglia input center) is taking in information from places like the insula and the amygdala, okay?

So, love and desire actually activate very different sections of the striatum. See, the striatum is one of those big names in the reward system of the brain. It’s taking in information from the limbic system and cerebral cortex, information relating to pleasure and novelty. Now, when you’re feeling the need to ride someone until neither of you can walk, you’re using a section of the striatum that’s activated by things that are inherently pleasurable. Like food. And sex. But when your crazed rabbit humping starts to move into the realm of love, a different part of the striatum is activating. This is the part involved in behavioral conditioning and reward. Here, something (or someone) paired with one of those inherently pleasurable activities is given its own inherent value.

So yes, at first, it might just be about the sex. Or the conversation (What? Intellectual blokes are dead sexy). But eventually, if you are sexing up the same person again and again, or are spending night after night in exciting debates and conversations… well, then that person is going to develop their own inherent value. In your brain, they are now a source of pleasure.

And you, my galleons, find yourselves in love.

Because the striatum is so involved in the pleasure/reward system of the brain, it plays a strong role in drug addiction as well. As Jim Pfaus, co-author of the study, said, “Love is actually a habit that is formed from sexual desire as desire is rewarded. It works the same way in the brain as when people become addicted to drugs.”

Like it or not, it looks like Ke$ha had it right.

 

Do Zombie Mice Only Eat Head Cheese?

Oh, my poor, neglected galleons, do not fret. I am here once more, to spread the joys of science to you all.

This story is nearly a week old now, so it’s likely you’ve already seen a mention of it somewhere, but it’s really too interesting/important to not feature here.

Anyone who’s ever been subjected to any form of health questionnaire has probably been asked if they or anyone in their family has/had Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease. Creutzfeld-Jacob Disease, like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s,  is a degenerative, fatal neurological disease. At present, there is no cure for any of these diseases, and we are always working toward a breakthrough in winning the war against them.

A breakthrough we might just be on the cusp of, thanks to some intrepid scientists.

And mice.

See, humans are not the only creatures to suffer neurodegenerative disorders. We’ve all heard of mad cow disease (bovine spongiform encephalopathy), a neurodegenerative disease affecting cattle, but mice have their own as well- prion disease.

Before we talk about the study, we need to talk proteins. In neurodegenerative diseases, proteins mis-fold in a variety of ways. Misshapen proteins can no longer fit into neural soft locks, and these deformed proteins build up in the brain, causing things like the plaques found in Alzheimer’s brains and the Lewy bodies found in Parkinson’s brains. However, another thing these mis-folded proteins do is block a very important switch in the brain.

And here’s where our scientists enter the picture.

Researchers at the University of Leicester studied mice with prion disease, and they found, not only a mechanism causing brain cell death, but a way of stopping it.

A way that does not result in zombie mice, for the record.

See, when these proteins start mis-folding and building up in the brain, a defense mechanism is triggered. The production of new proteins is essentially “switched off” to prevent the brain from creating more and more wonkity proteins. Unfortunately, in diseased mice, scientists found that, as existing proteins keep mis-folding and building up, the jacked up proteins prevent the switch from turning back on. Which means the brain isn’t getting the proteins it needs to survive. Which leads to brain cell death.

The cause of brain cell death has eluded us until now, so just discovering the source is a big deal. But our scientists didn’t just stop at finding the source- they found a way to correct it. By going in and manually “flipping the switch” back so that proteins were being created, essential protein levels were restored and synaptic transmission was restored. Brain cells stopped dying. And even though only a small portion of their brains received this treatment, the mice lived longer.

While this is only the beginning of lengthy research, these scientists just blew the door open to a whole new avenue of neurodegenerative research. Because what is truly incredible about this study is, not just the discovery of the source of brain cell death and a method of stopping it, but the fact that, while these neurodegenerative diseases may have different triggers, it looks like they may be acting through a common mechanism to damage cells. Which means this study is not just a potential step in the direction toward one cure, but a base for cures for a broad range of neurodegenerative diseases.

Badass, no?

Training Your “GoldenEye”: The Impact of Video Games on Brain Activity

There’s an ongoing (mostly unsubstantiated) idea that violent video games lead to increased violence in children and adults. There’s no solid, empirical evidence backing up these claims, just circumstantial correlations here and there. Indeed, the purported cases of video games causing increased violence could just as easily be turned around to argue that individuals with dispositions of a certain sort might be more drawn to violent games. And, in either case, the “evidence” does not hold true for all gamers (or even a majority).

And so, while uptight matrons battle pasty-skinned nerds over the moral implications of violent entertainment, few have bothered to really study any other impact of video game play on the brain. We gamers boast that the rapid button clicking and finite joystick control give us superior hand-eye coordination, but is that rooted in scientific fact?

Turns out, a recent study out of the University of Toronto has found a solid link between playing first person shooters and enhanced activity in certain areas of the brain.

A team led by psychology professor Ian Spence had 25 test subjects (individuals who did not play video games) attempt to detect a target object among a sea of distractions in a wide visual field while their brain waves were recorded. Of these 25, 16 went on to play an unidentified FPS for ten total hours (in one or two hour sessions), while the control group of nine played some casual puzzle game for the same amount of time.

After their ten hours were over, all subjects once again performed the visual attention task while their brain waves were recorded.

The results?

Subjects who played the FPS performed far better on their second visual attention task, and their brain waves also displayed significant changes. The control subjects, on the other hand, showed no significant changes in visual attention or brain waves.

“After playing the shooter game, the changes in electrical activity were consistent with brain processes that enhance visual attention and suppress distracting information,” said Sijing Wu, one of Spence’s PhD students.

This is the first solid demonstration that playing video games (even for a mere ten hours) can actually change brain activity. And visual attention, the focus of this particular experiment, is important in one’s day-to-day life, from driving a car to avoiding obstacles when walking through a cluttered or crowded room.

Seems video games do impact the lives of the players, though not through the flipping of a violence switch in their brains.

Obviously, this research requires further study. It will be interesting to see how other types of video games (not just FPSs) impact the brain. Would a sword-and-shield game generate similar activity to a shooter? And what about RTSs? How long does it take the increased visual attention activity to slide back to how it was before, and does regular gaming maintain and/or solidify these changes within the brain? And is there a cap to how much FPS gaming can impact these areas of the brain, or does increased difficulty/variety of games allow one to increase this activity level still further? Does brain activity change between single player gaming and the often more complex task of multiplayer interactions?

Questions, questions. One thing’s for certain: I look forward to seeing us delve deeper into the neuroplastic changes gaming brings about.

…I also volunteer as a test subject.

You Encounter a Doorway of Disrememberance- Make an Intelligence Check Now

Scenario:

You are busy working on a paper for class when you realize you are thirsty. Glancing around, you see there isn’t a delicious, thirst-quenching beverage to be found. O, woe is you. Thankfully, the kitchen is just down the hall. You get up from your desk and stride purposefully out of the room. Man, you are going to get so much work done once you grab that glass of tea. You’re going to dig right in, finish scanning that article on table manners during the reign of Alexander the Great, and then you are going to write a seriously bitchin’ paper about feast etiquette and entertainment in Macedonia. Seems an odd topic for a paper, but your professor has always seemed a bit off. Then again, after 30+ years of teaching, maybe she’s just tired of seeing the same shit again and again. Maybe she’s trying to switch things up to save her sanity. That would make sense- if you had to read the same papers year after year, you’d probably try a different tack as well- oh, look, the kitchen. You walk in and…

…

…

Shit, fuck, and damn, just what the ever-loving hell did you come in here for?

***

We’ve all been there. You walk into a room and promptly forget why you are there in the first place.

In fact, it’s such a common occurrence that I’m honestly surprised there’s been so little research into it. Then again, the subjects of memory and forgetting have been leading neuroscientists and psychologists on a merry chase for years. And without a solid, reliable foundation in an area, why would anyone bother studying some tiny, mostly insignificant facet?

But as more and more is learned about how our brain operates and processes memories, there is more call for studies that branch out into the minutiae of the subject. So it was really just a matter of time before someone decided to take a closer look at doorway amnesia (actually called location-updating effect).

That someone was Gabriel Radvansky, a professor of psychology at the University of Notre Dame. He conducted a series of three experiments to study the doorway amnesia dilemma.

Experiment 1

This experiment took place in a variety of virtual environments (some of which, according to one article, were “similar to what users would see in the game Half-Life“- while I’m not going to go out of my way to attempt to determine the veracity of this detail, I think picturing Half-Life environments will be more fun for us, dear galleons, and so we’re going to assume it’s true). Subjects moved between two virtual rooms, exchanging an object on a table for an object on a different table. They also performed the same task in a single room, where they never had to pass through a doorway. Subjects were asked to remember objects they carried while moving between spaces and to recall items currently being carried or recently put down.

Result: Subjects forgot more after walking through a doorway than when moving the same distance across a room.

Experiment 2

This experiment took place in the real world (IRL, OMG). Subjects took items from a table and concealed them in boxes. They either moved across a room or traveled the same distance but passed through a doorway. Again, subjects were asked to remember objects they carried while moving between spaces and to recall items currently being carried or recently put down.

Result: A replication of the virtual experiment’s results. Subjects forget more when passing through doorways than when they don’t have to pass through them.

Experiment 3

Finally, to test if there were environmental factors at work, an experiment was performed that looked at whether information learned in one environment is retrieved better when the retrieval occurs in the same context. Namely, if returning to familiar rooms (having a series of doorways that circle back to the original room) could help the subjects recall what they previously forgot. Once more, subjects were asked to remember objects they carried while moving between spaces and to recall items currently being carried or recently put down.

Result: Didn’t matter if they returned to familiar environments- the subjects were still more likely to forget things if they had to pass through doorways.

***

So, what is it about doorways that seems to trigger these little bouts of forgetting?

“Entering or exiting through a doorway serves as an ‘event boundary’ in the mind, which separates episodes of activity and files them away,” Radvansky said.

It’s like when you are playing a video game, running from Area 1 into Area 2. When you hit the boundary in Area 1, you have your sword out. The loading screen pops up. When you start out in Area 2, your sword is suddenly sheathed again, even though you never put it away. The mind works like that. You walk out of Room 1 with the memory of what you are going to get in your mind. But there’s a brief little loading screen between Room 1 and Room 2. A moment where certain aspects of the mind reset. And so, when you enter Room 2, sometimes you find you’ve forgotten what you were out to get. Just like in the video game, you have to pull your sword (memory) back out again. It might not take long, but it’s a bit of a hassle.

That “loading screen” moment is your brain doing a quick adjustment to your changing environment. Kind of like hitting the refresh button on your browser (…I should probably stop with the similes, ja?). Certain parts of Room 1 are compartmentalized in your memory as belonging solely to Room 1. These aren’t needed in Room 2 (which is defined as separate by the doorway boundary). But sometimes that compartmentalization is a bit off, and the mighty need for a cup of tea that you had in Room 1 is now solely the province of Room 1 in your mind. When you passed through the doorway, your brain hit refresh and the compartmentalized things from Room 1 were minimized and a window for the compartmentalized things for Room 2 opened.  Unfortunately, in Room 2, that cup of tea is deemed unimportant.

I mean, your parched throat is saying otherwise, but it’s taking your memory a moment to catch the glitch in that refresh process. Meanwhile, you’re hovering awkwardly in the kitchen, swearing under your breath and glancing around, hoping something will pry that stupid memory free and-

THERE IT IS. YOU WANT A GODDAMN CUP OF TEA.

The brain is an utterly amazing, fascinating thing… but it’s not without its little hiccups. Like location-updating effects.

Orgasmic Remap: Neuroplasticity and Phantom Limbs

“You wanted to make damn good and sure I’d never be able to turn over in bed again without feeling that body beside me, not there but tangible, like a leg that’s been cut off. Gone but the place still hurts.” ~Margaret Atwood

The phenomenon of phantom limbs in amputees (…this is the second time this week I’ve discussed amputation, and I honestly don’t know why) is fascinating, but rather commonplace. Both a strange, frequently painful, sensory experience and a romantic notion surrounding the pain of parted lovers, the phantom limb concept is one we’re all familiar with.

These ghostly limbs usually appear in the empty space the missing limb used to take up, but sometimes, the limb appears somewhere else. Like a phantom hand attached to a cheek. And sometimes, even if the phantom sensations are located in the correct area, they can be… a bit off.

Like experiencing an orgasm in your missing foot, for instance.

Phantoms limbs themselves (and the oddities mentioned above) are the result of a form of neuroplasticity called cortical remapping. Cortical remapping is what happens in the brain after an accident or trauma. It’s the reason people with brain damage can relearn functions of movement, memory, and language- the brain forges new neural pathways and creates a work-around system. And after the trauma of a lost limb, the brain can start the remapping process for the lost sensory information.

But sometimes, the remapping can have some curious effects. Like a hand being remapped onto the corresponding cheek, with sensations felt on the cheek also being felt on the phantom hand.

Why is that?

The cortical homunculus is, basically, the brain’s map of the body. A graphic anyone with so much as an Intro to Psych background is familiar with, it depicts grossly distorted body parts along the corresponding portion of the brain responsible for movement and sensory functions:

As you can see from our little homunculus here, the portion of the brain that corresponds to the hand is next to the portion that corresponds to the face/cheek. This is why, when sensory information ceases for a hand (due to its untimely separation from the body), remapping can cause a neighboring area to essentially step-in and fill the void. In this case, that’s the cheek (note that it can also be the arm). And so, the phantom sensation is now felt in the usurping region- the cheek.

This becomes more evident in folks who lose a foot. Because the foot and the genitals are side-by-side on our creepy little diagram, the sensory gap left by the missing foot can be remapped so that the genitals step in. In kind of a reverse from the last example, where the missing limb appears grafted on the usurping region. Here, the usurping region simply fills in for the lost sensation from the limb.

And then, as dear ol’ Rama can tell us, we get our phantom orgasms:

An engineer in Florida reported a heightening of sensation in his phantom lower limb during orgasm and that his experience actually spread all the way down into the [phantom] foot instead of remaining confined to the genitals: so that the orgasm was much bigger than it used to be.

You know, people will do a lot of stupid things to achieve the ultimate orgasm (autoerotic asphyxiation comes to mind…). Which makes me wonder if, given the information that an amputated foot may lead to more intense orgasms, more people might start wantonly chopping their feet off.

I’m just saying, if word gets out, it might be a safe bet to invest in the prosthetics business.

Obliviscor

“Memory cannot be defined, but it defines mankind.” ~Ghost in the Shell

“Until the process is fully completed, memory remains vulnerable to disruption.” ~Larry Squire and Eric Kandel, Memory: From Mind to Molecules

Where would we be without our memories? Our memories shape us, comfort us, teach us, trouble us. From them, we grow and love, we visit old friends and travel the lands of our past. They are our time machines, our instruction guides.

Scientists have been studying memory and the brain throughout human history, attempting to discover the inner workings of our marvelous minds. But sometimes, in order to see how something works, we have to first observe how it doesn’t.

In 2007, Professor Joseph LeDoux of New York University decided to do some research with rats (those furry mainstays of the science world) on the subject of memory erasure.

It was very Eternal Sunshine of him.

In LeDoux’s experiment, rats were trained to associate two musical tones with a mild electrical shock. As a result, whenever they heard either of these tones, they would brace themselves for the shock.

Our researchers then used a drug called U0126, which was already known to cause limited amnesia, on the rats when playing only one of the musical tones.

After treatment with the drug, the rats would not brace themselves upon hearing the treatment tone, but would still brace themselves when hearing the second, demonstrating only one memory had been deleted.

Though, of course, scientists are looking more at using this research for treating post-traumatic stress disorder and less for erasing memories of your crazy ex-girlfriend.

***

In a recent study led by Theodore Berger of the USC Viterbi School of Engineering and Sam A. Deadwyler of the Wake Forest Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, scientists have found a way to turn memories on and off. Like flipping a switch.

The research team had rats learn to press Lever A instead of Lever B in order to receive a reward. Deadwyler’s group recorded changes in brain activity between the two major internal divisions of the hippocampus (subregions CA3 and CA1), where short-term memory is converted to long-term memory.

They then drugged the rats, blocking the neural interactions between CA3 and CA1. This prevented the rats from being able to form long-term memories.

And this is where Berger’s team comes in. They developed an artificial hippocampal system that duplicates the patterns of CA3-CA1 interactions.

When they activated the electronic device, long-term memory capability was returned to the drugged rats.

“Flip the switch on, and the rats remember. Flip it off, and the rats forget,” Berger said.

…Science be crazy.

In Which Science Discovers How to Churn Out Plenty of Brain Matter to Keep the Forthcoming Zombie Horde Satisfied

Apologies for the lack of substance lately, dear galleons- I promise to get back on a more normal schedule of posting (i.e. more sex and science).

As you are well aware, I have a soft spot for genetics research. Beyond the fact that it is utterly fascinating, I think it can be traced back to a good friend of mine from TASP who wanted to be a geneticist (and awakened my inner genetics geek).

Which doesn’t matter, really. But we are going to be talking about genetics today, so… huzzah?

Over at Lund University in Sweden, a group has successfully created nerve cells from human skin cells. Which isn’t exactly a new development- stem cell researchers have been turning skin cells into pluripotent stem (IPS) cells, which they’ve proceeded to convert to things like nerve cells, for some time. What’s unique about this latest research is that the Swedish group never created IPS cells. Instead, they managed to reprogram a mature skin cell directly into a nerve cell.

Which is all kinds of cool.

Beyond my geek squee (see this and this), there are reasons this is important. First (and probably rather obviously), this cuts out the use of any form of stem cell in the cell reprogramming game. Using mature cells cuts out the ethical dilemmas posed by research using embryonic stem cells. But skipping that stem cell stage may have an additional (less well-known) benefit: it could prevent the risk of tumors forming at the transplant site. Certain stem cells have the annoying habit of continuing to divide and form tumors after transplantation. This has been a major hindrance to stem cell research, one which could vanish with this new method of cell transmutation.

So, how did our researchers go about morphing skin cells into nerve cells? What they actually did was go in and activate a certain gene in connective tissue cells (fibroblasts). Doing this was enough to switch the skin tissue cells over to certain types of nerve cells.

But wait, there’s more!

By activating two more genes within the skin cells, the research team actually managed to change those fibroblasts into brain cells. Specifically dopamine brain cells, the type of cell which dies in Parkinson’s disease. Naturally, that means this process could prove to be instrumental in creating transplantable replacement dopamine cells from a patient’s existing skin cells (it is presumed that specifically designed cells originating from the patient would be better accepted by the body’s immune system than cells from donor tissue). Scientists also expect brain cells created in this manner could be used as disease models in research on various neurodegenerative diseases.

“This is the big idea in the long run. We hope to be able to do a biopsy on a patient, make dopamine cells, for example, and then transplant them as a treatment for Parkinson’s disease,” says Malin Parmar. Parmar is continuing the research, hoping to develop more types of brain cells using this new method.

While we await further study on how these new cells survive and function within the brain, it’s still an incredible breakthrough. The more we learn about the specifics of the genetic code, the more we are able to do with it and the more impressive research like this is going to get.

Of course, the greater the genetic game, the greater the ethical dilemmas. And the greater the risks. I mean, we all know how this goes. It starts out all fine and sciencey, and the next thing you know, this is happening.