[quote]JohnnyBlaze wrote:
Tanizaki wrote:
Reread my first post again, brain surgeon. I never said anything about anyone being hard-wired.
You may not have said ‘hard-wired’, but the fact that you were comparing smoking-damaged lungs to drug-impaired cognitive function, draws an implied parallel between the structure of the lung and the structure of the brain. The lung is a fixed structure with multiple passageways and tubes. I was debunking your comparison. The neuronal circuits within the brain are not fixed in the same way as the bronchi and bronchioles within the lungs.
That having been said, if you were familiar with neuroplasticity, you would know that it has only been observed in the hippocampi and the olfactory area of the brain. You might have learned that if you had sources above medterms.com
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, wooooohaaaaa. You ripped that straight from Wikipedia, I know because I found the sentence where it says that. Sure, there’s nothing wrong with a bit of plagiarism in the forum, as this is not a full-on academic environment. Everyone does it from time to time.
The only thing is, you did not comprehend the information correctly- it says “The evidence for neurogenesis is restricted to the hippocampus and olfactory bulb.” Not neuroplasticity. Ooops, huh? Somebody made a big booboo.
If you’re going to rip information off the net, at least make sure you understand what it means and get the facts straight before presenting them. It looks pretty bad when you’re trying to act of superior intellect and make a major mistake like that.
It just shows that you don’t really understand what neuroplasticity is. I just mentioned a whole paragraph, referenced to a perfectly credible source, where it says that an entire hemisphere can take on the functions of a damaged hemisphere by forming new connections through the ability of neuroplasticity, and you go and say that neuroplasticity only occurs in the hippocampus/olfactory area - mixing up the term with neurogenesis. Sorry, but that is LAME.
If neuroplasticity, the ability to adapt and change, were limited to only two areas of the entire brain, how do you think that thinking, learning and acting on novel information would even be able to occur? We’d be just like factory assembly robots, and would unable to change, or adapt to different circumstances and new environments or learn new languages.
Eat any good books lately?
Books? Don’t get me started on books. I’m one of those individuals who actually reads for FUN. You have no idea how many books I have read. I eat books for breakfast. When I was a kid, I used to read the encyclopaedia just for kicks.
You may wish to review, among others:
Adult neuron survival strategies - slamming on the brakes. SC Benn and CJ Woolf. (2004)
A Role for HSP27 in Sensory Neuron Survival. Lewis, Mannion, et al. (1999)
What is the functional role of adult neurogenesis in the hippocampus? Wiscott, Rasch, et al. (2004) (this one has some particularly good passages summarizing neurogenetic research in general.
Now, not all of this might be available free online. You might actually have to go to a library.
Now, what’s the bet that you just googled for books on “neurogenesis”, or did a search on a library site with your student account and posted up a few relevant titles, to make yourself sound all superior and book-learned? I was asking for specific passages WITH the reference - not just a list of references. References are not evidence.
Anyway - As if I’d go to a library and start pulling up books, just to participate in an online debate with some random anonymous dude on the internet? I save the effort of real research for more important things. What I can find on the internet is sufficient to deal with the likes of you.
Please see above regarding the limited nature of neurogenesis. The brain and lungs have very limited reparative abilities, and the brain’s have only been observed in two areas, as I have already named.
I’ve already pointed out your mistake above. Neurogenesis isn’t the only mechanism by which the brain can adapt to new stimuli or repair any damaged functions. Not just that, but neurogenesis can also occur in the caudate nucleus.
Even FURTHER more, in your first post, you criticized a man for thinking that possible deterioration of his brain cells could be repaired after marijuana use, saying that “marijuana mostly affects areas for memory formation and retention”, and that there is nothing he can do to restore it. Guess which area of the brain is responsible for memory formation and retention? The hippocampus. So now you are contradicting yourself by pointing out neurogenesis occurs there and that the brain does have reparative abilities in the area.
Research is even showing that new neurons in the hippocampus DO survive when new skills are learned. For them to be incorporated into the brain, they become connected to other neurons, and begin to receive support in the form of blood and nutrients.
Lastly, calling me “Sherlock” doesn’t work because he was a detective, not a doctor or even a scientist. You should have tried calling me something like “Quincy” or “Dr. Cliff Huxtable”. Do you like Coke, Kodak film, and Jell-O pudding pops?
I don’t know how clued on you are, but as you should be able to observe, I am not American. I am not familiar with “Quincy” or Jell-O pudding pops.
Sherlock was the first thing that came to mind, and in my opinion it fit perfectly fine. Holmes made deductions and presented them to others as elementary. That is what you have been doing here as well. Except, at least Holmes was correct with his deductions - I called you Sherlock in a tongue-in-cheek way because unlike him, the things you deduce and present as elementary facts are not correct.
The blunders you have made here on this site show that you are not the sharpest tool in the shed, no matter how intellectually superior you try to make yourself out to be. You are just a tool - in the slang sense of the word.[/quote]
ahhahahahahaha!!! I LOVE IT!!
JohnnyB, I would like to shake your hand mate.
Quite possibly the greatest intellectual ass-kickin of a troll I have ever seen on this site. Kudos to you my man…you really handed that plagiarist intellectual-wannabee’s ass to him.
Tanizaki is probably in the process of creating a new username at this moment.
Fantastic thread by the way…just wandered into it now.
I have always loved MOdafinil. It is my version of a “morning coffee”…200mg works good for me with 400mg being REALLY good…although it can sometimes cause me insomnia. The 400mg dose can be expensive though…expecially since I can no longer get the raw powder from china ultra-cheap. Workin on it though. With Moda I feel much more alert, confident and WAY more motivated. On higher doses I get a massive thirst for knowledge and literally jump onto amazon.com and order all sorts of books on random subjects I would never usually be interested in or have the motivation to read (I just have to take another large dose to actually read them though…lol)
Tried piracetam…never got much out of it to be honest.I will likely try the oxiracetam now that this thread has reignited my interest in the subject.
I reckon I may try a stack like the one bushy outlined earlier.
Is anyone else really looking forward to the arrival of ampakines, such as CX717??? Stuff seems like it is set to take the cognitive enhancement world by storm!
