Developments in connectomics and network neuroscience over the past 20 years have led to new ways of investigating communication in complex brain networks. In this Review, Seguin, Sporns and Zalesky discuss the current landscape of models of brain network communication.
Our gut microorganisms, collectively known as the gut microbiota, affect far more than digestion. Bacteria in our intestinal tracts influence brain activity — and even the likelihood of developing mental disorders. Decades of research have shown that a bacterially imbalanced gut can disrupt many systems in the human body, contributing to obesity, malnutrition and even cancer. In a study published May 10 in Nature, Stanford Medicine researchers and collaborators used an ingestible device to capture the diversity of microorganisms, viruses, proteins and bile in the small intestine.
The proof-of-concept results provide early evidence that there are more comprehensive ways to measure microbiota in the digestive system than current sampling methods — which mostly focus on stool — and shed new light on how resident gut microbes might contribute to human physiology and disease.
“This paper demonstrates a big leap forward in microbial detection and captures the living gut microbiota in a nutshell,” said co-senior author KC Huang, PhD, a professor of bioengineering and of microbiology and immunology, co-senior author with David Relman, MD, a professor of medicine and of microbiology and immunology. “Samples from current tools don’t fully represent what’s going on inside of us. But it’s all we’ve had — until now.”
I gotta admit although effective and innovative, it’s also kinda creepy.
Last year, Monash University scientists created the “DishBrain” – a semi-biological computer chip with some 800,000 human and mouse brain cells lab-grown into its electrodes. Demonstrating something like sentience, it learned to play Pong within five minutes.
The micro-electrode array at the heart of the DishBrain was capable both of reading activity in the brain cells, and stimulating them with electrical signals, so the research team set up a version of Pong where the brain cells were fed a moving electrical stimulus to represent which side of the “screen” the ball was on, and how far away from the paddle it was. They allowed the brain cells to act on the paddle, moving it left and right.
Then they set up a very basic-reward system, using the fact that small clusters of brain cells tend to try to minimize unpredictability in their environment. So if the paddle hit the ball, the cells would receive a nice, predictable stimulus. But if it missed, the cells would get four seconds of totally unpredictable stimulation.
The researchers suggest that they may have located the brain region where images are held during the moments we consciously perceive them.
During routine navigation in daily life, our brains use spatial mapping and memory to guide us from point A to point B. Just as routine: making a mistake in navigation that requires a course correction.
Now, researchers at Harvard Medical School have identified a specific group of neurons in a brain region involved in navigation that undergo bursts of activity when mice running a maze veer off course and correct their error.
The findings, published July 19 in Nature, bring scientists a step closer to understanding how navigation works, while raising new questions. These questions include the specific role these neurons play during navigation, and what they are doing in other brain regions where they are found.
During routine navigation in daily life, our brains use spatial mapping and memory to guide us from point A to point B. Just as routine is making a mistake in navigation that requires a course correction.
Now, researchers at Harvard Medical School have identified a specific group of neurons in a brain region involved in navigation that undergo bursts of activity when mice running a maze veer off course and correct their error.
The findings, published July 19 in Nature, bring scientists a step closer to understanding how navigation works, while raising new questions. These questions include the specific role these neurons play during navigation, and what they are doing in other brain regions where they are found.
And the right to freedom of thought enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is similarly open to interpretation. It was historically put in place to protect freedoms surrounding beliefs, religion, and speech. But that could change, says Ienca. “Rights are not static entities,” he says.
He is among the ethicists and legal scholars investigating the importance of “neuro rights”—the subset of human rights concerned with the protection of the human brain and mind. Some are currently exploring whether neuro rights could be recognized within established human rights, or whether we need new laws.
Her case highlights why we need to enshrine neuro rights in law.
In recent years, we’ve seen neurotechnologies move from research labs to real-world use. Schools have used some devices to monitor the brain activity of children to tell when they are paying attention. Police forces are using others to work out whether someone is guilty of a crime. And employers use them to keep workers awake and productive.
These technologies hold the remarkable promise of giving us all-new insight into our own minds. But our brain data is precious, and letting it fall into the wrong hands could be dangerous, Farahany argues in her new book, The Battle for Your Brain. I chatted with her about some of her concerns.
We need new rules to protect our cognitive liberty, says futurist and legal ethicist Nita Farahany.
A new way to understand where consciousness comes from and novel insights into subjective thought show that the hard problem of consciousness is worth persevering with.
A trial of donanemab, an experimental drug, found it modestly slowed the worsening of memory and thinking and worked better in patients at earlier stages and those under 75.
