ADD Forums - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Support and Information Resources Community  

Go Back   ADD Forums - Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Support and Information Resources Community > SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSIONS, RESEARCH, NEWS AND EVENTS > Scientific, Philosophical & Theoretical Discussions > Open Science & Philosophical Discussion
Register Blogs FAQ Chat Members List Calendar Donate Gallery Arcade Mark Forums Read

Open Science & Philosophical Discussion This forum is for open discussion, encouraging new and unconventional ways of thinking, welcoming posts in any format

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-30-13, 09:40 AM
Dizfriz Dizfriz is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,114
Thanks: 15,830
Thanked 10,438 Times in 3,291 Posts
Dizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond repute
Mind/brain duality (moved from "Teeny-tiny brain" thread)

[MOD NOTE: This thread contains a side discussion of mind and brain originally begun in the "Researchers create a teeny-tiny brain" thread. - Namazu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by meadd823 View Post
- My peer response

I think the OP made it clear earlier she believes the mind is a function of the brain therefore ADD would be a brain thing to her.
The brain mind issue is an interesting one and on this thread, it seem to be presented as relevant to ADHD.

I am not arguing but simply looking at the issue.

I have not seen a good operational definition of "Mind". By operational definition, I mean a definition that allows scientists to measure this phenomenon in some way. The brain is easy, it is physical and good operational definitions abound on many aspects of the brain. That does not man that an operational definition of mind does not exist just that I haven't seen one. As this is not an area of study for me, I could have easily missed it is there was one available.

The problem is that without an operational definition or some way of measuring "mind", science cannot study it. This is important.

Those who contend that ADHD is a mind thing and not a brain issue would need to consider if the concept of mind is a scientific one or is it is more in the realm of a philosophical concept. This is also important.


Quote:
I like the way you asked it earlier

Originally Posted by SB_UK View Post "Maybe just a brief explanation of the relationship between this experiment and ADHD 'd help ?"
It is a good question. If you consider ADHD to be a product of the structure of the brain, then any research can result in a greater understanding of how the brain works. Remember, The Human Brain Project and Brain Activity Map Project are massive current attempts to understand better how the brain works. This is being done in this way because understanding how the brain works is considered as the best possibility for learning enough about its functioning so as to help work with mental disorders (not the only reason for the projects but it is a major factor).

The thing here is that most involved in the scientific aspects of mental disorders including ADHD consider them to be primarily involved with the structural and neurochemical aspects of the brain and how they come about.

Right now, this is the direction that is being taken. I do not know how to bring in the concept of mind into the picture. Perhaps someone can explain how we can address this using tools of science.

Please understand that I am not saying "mind" does not exist, I think it does. I personally think it of more of a emergent phenomenon of the brain than anything else. That is, however, just my thought in a subject where I have limited expertise.


Quote:
or more relevant - will some thing like this develop into the ability to eliminate people like us {ADDers} under the guise of a "cure"?
I am not sure I understand what you are saying Meadd. Do you mean that there is going to be some kind of medical pogrom wiping out all that are ADHD or do you mean that it is possible that the genetics/brain structure might be, in the future, modified in such a way as to eliminate ADHD at conception? The latter is possible and I don't think you meant the former. I just wasn't sure.

Quote:
I like the possibility of eliminating animal experimentation
I tend to agree for the most part but not totally (another subject for another time
Quote:
but I am not to sure about this making of a brain model either. If it has any practical application then it's a bit to close to a human brain for me - It's not that I do not trust science it's more like I do not trust humans.
The practical application is to gain understanding and knowledge. If we limit research only to those things that have immediate application then we will severely limit ourselves. Much of the important discoveries were from science intended to increase understanding and not for any immediate practical benefits. Usually the benefits come from work based on the "pure" research that came earlier. The work going on in epigenetics is a good example of it. Most of it does not have immediate benefits but will in the future. For example, it is leading to some exciting new insights into the treatment of cancer.

As far as trust goes, that is what good oversight is for and it is our job as citizens to pressure government assure this is being done. In the US and Europe, this is being done but I am not too sure about the rest of the world so it is definitely something to be aware of and to watch as it can be a real problem.

Interesting subjects, I decided to wade in with some temerity and we shall see how it goes.

Dizfriz

Last edited by namazu; 08-30-13 at 11:05 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dizfriz For This Useful Post:
Abi (09-09-13), Amtram (08-30-13), meadd823 (09-09-13)
  #2  
Old 08-30-13, 11:44 AM
Kunga Dorji's Avatar
Kunga Dorji Kunga Dorji is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 4,370
Blog Entries: 2
Thanks: 1,544
Thanked 5,918 Times in 2,762 Posts
Kunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond reputeKunga Dorji has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizfriz View Post
The brain mind issue is an interesting one and on this thread, it seem to be presented as relevant to ADHD.

I am not arguing but simply looking at the issue.

I have not seen a good operational definition of "Mind". By operational definition, I mean a definition that allows scientists to measure this phenomenon in some way. The brain is easy, it is physical and good operational definitions abound on many aspects of the brain. That does not man that an operational definition of mind does not exist just that I haven't seen one. As this is not an area of study for me, I could have easily missed it is there was one available.

The problem is that without an operational definition or some way of measuring "mind", science cannot study it. This is important.

Those who contend that ADHD is a mind thing and not a brain issue would need to consider if the concept of mind is a scientific one or is it is more in the realm of a philosophical concept. This is also important.


It is a good question. If you consider ADHD to be a product of the structure of the brain, then any research can result in a greater understanding of how the brain works. Remember, The Human Brain Project and Brain Activity Map Project are massive current attempts to understand better how the brain works. This is being done in this way because understanding how the brain works is considered as the best possibility for learning enough about its functioning so as to help work with mental disorders (not the only reason for the projects but it is a major factor).

The thing here is that most involved in the scientific aspects of mental disorders including ADHD consider them to be primarily involved with the structural and neurochemical aspects of the brain and how they come about.

Right now, this is the direction that is being taken. I do not know how to bring in the concept of mind into the picture. Perhaps someone can explain how we can address this using tools of science.

Please understand that I am not saying "mind" does not exist, I think it does. I personally think it of more of a emergent phenomenon of the brain than anything else. That is, however, just my thought in a subject where I have limited expertise.


I am not sure I understand what you are saying Meadd. Do you mean that there is going to be some kind of medical pogrom wiping out all that are ADHD or do you mean that it is possible that the genetics/brain structure might be, in the future, modified in such a way as to eliminate ADHD at conception? The latter is possible and I don't think you meant the former. I just wasn't sure.

I tend to agree for the most part but not totally (another subject for another time The practical application is to gain understanding and knowledge. If we limit research only to those things that have immediate application then we will severely limit ourselves. Much of the important discoveries were from science intended to increase understanding and not for any immediate practical benefits. Usually the benefits come from work based on the "pure" research that came earlier. The work going on in epigenetics is a good example of it. Most of it does not have immediate benefits but will in the future. For example, it is leading to some exciting new insights into the treatment of cancer.

As far as trust goes, that is what good oversight is for and it is our job as citizens to pressure government assure this is being done. In the US and Europe, this is being done but I am not too sure about the rest of the world so it is definitely something to be aware of and to watch as it can be a real problem.

Interesting subjects, I decided to wade in with some temerity and we shall see how it goes.

Dizfriz
You know Dizfriz,
it is good to see you wading into these depths.

Despite the fact that we like to talk about "Mental illness" virtually none of the exponents of that model have ever ventured to define "Mind".

"Mind" is a very slippery subject, as "Mind" is the conscious agency that makes the observations upon which science depends.

All of science depends upon "information and "information" is not "information" unless a conscious being is informed by it.

This is a real catch 22.

Introspection is the only way to understand "Mind" and tat has been understood for thousands of years.

More to come
__________________
Science advances --one funeral at a time.

I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.

both by:
Max Planck: Nobel Prize 1918 for inventing quantum physics.

Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Kunga Dorji For This Useful Post:
Dizfriz (08-30-13)
  #3  
Old 08-30-13, 01:11 PM
Dizfriz Dizfriz is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,114
Thanks: 15,830
Thanked 10,438 Times in 3,291 Posts
Dizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barliman View Post

All of science depends upon "information and "information" is not "information" unless a conscious being is informed by it.
A small detail, admittedly pedantic : sometimes information does not need a conscious being involved. Shannon information as a good example involves information transmission and processing and does not need an interpreter.

That aside, I understand your points and don't particularity disagree. My main issues on the subject of mind is that while I feel it is likely a real thing, I don't know if science can address it at this time for the reasons I gave.

It is a fascinating subject and getting your mind wrapped around mind is a tricky task at best.

Dizfriz
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Dizfriz For This Useful Post:
Abi (09-09-13), Amtram (08-30-13), Kunga Dorji (08-30-13)
Sponsored Links
  #4  
Old 08-30-13, 04:02 PM
Dizfriz Dizfriz is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,114
Thanks: 15,830
Thanked 10,438 Times in 3,291 Posts
Dizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK View Post
So - if ADHD is something to do with mind, then organoid has nothing to do with ADHD ?

Philosophy and Psychology 'd baulk at the idea that they're reducible to brain.

They're reducible to logic which it isn't possible to reduce to neurone.
Can you provide an operational definition of "Mind" so it can be studied?

Dizfriz
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dizfriz For This Useful Post:
Amtram (08-30-13), SB_UK (08-30-13)
  #5  
Old 08-30-13, 04:33 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 20,150
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,099
Thanked 6,421 Times in 4,675 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dizfriz View Post
Can you provide an operational definition of "Mind" so it can be studied?

Dizfriz
The thing that is required to think abstractly which separates human beings from animals.
__________________
'IGNORE' FUNCTION BEING USED - 11 entries
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-30-13, 04:38 PM
SB_UK SB_UK is offline
 
 

Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: -
Posts: 20,150
Blog Entries: 20
Thanks: 6,099
Thanked 6,421 Times in 4,675 Posts
SB_UK has disabled reputation
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind
Quote:
The main questions regarding the nature of mind is its relation to the physical brain and nervous system.
If this is the main question relating to the nature of the mind
- then all people should hold two options in mind - and that is that it is or isn't.

I can't imagine a mechanism by which the mind could be a direct property of brain
- but as a distributed property of brains is imaginable.

If we simply imagine the power of the Internet on a dumb terminal versus a dumb terminal working without an internet connection
- then we've a model for mind - which is appealing.

The networked dumb terminal becomes capable of so much more than it can all on its lonesome.
__________________
'IGNORE' FUNCTION BEING USED - 11 entries
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-30-13, 04:44 PM
Dizfriz Dizfriz is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,114
Thanks: 15,830
Thanked 10,438 Times in 3,291 Posts
Dizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK View Post
The thing that is required to think abstractly which separates human beings from animals.
Wouldn't it be simpler to say that you do not have an operational definition of mind?

Dizfriz
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dizfriz For This Useful Post:
Amtram (08-30-13)
  #8  
Old 08-30-13, 04:47 PM
Dizfriz Dizfriz is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 4,114
Thanks: 15,830
Thanked 10,438 Times in 3,291 Posts
Dizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond reputeDizfriz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SB_UK View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind
If this is the main question relating to the nature of the mind
- then all people should hold two options in mind - and that is that it is or isn't.

I can't imagine a mechanism by which the mind could be a direct property of brain
- but as a distributed property of brains is imaginable.

If we simply imagine the power of the Internet on a dumb terminal versus a dumb terminal working without an internet connection
- then we've a model for mind - which is appealing.

The networked dumb terminal becomes capable of so much more than it can all on its lonesome.
I am not sure but it sounds like you are talking about a group or collective mind. If so Wow!

Dizfriz

Last edited by Dizfriz; 08-30-13 at 05:09 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Dizfriz For This Useful Post:
Amtram (08-30-13)
  #9  
Old 08-30-13, 04:59 PM
mildadhd mildadhd is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Two
Posts: 10,917
Thanks: 1,268
Thanked 852 Times in 630 Posts
mildadhd has disabled reputation
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

I actually encourage the "whole story".

And would love for people to explain how the genetics factors work with the environmental factors.

But instead the information keeps being expressed as either/or.

Which is impossible in regards to development of BrainMind/MindBrain.

Does that make sense?


Peripheral
__________________
"When people are suffering mentally, they want to feel better -- they want to stop having bad emotions and start having good emotions." (-Temple Grandin)

Last edited by namazu; 08-30-13 at 10:55 PM.. Reason: to keep on topic of this thread
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 08-30-13, 05:27 PM
mildadhd mildadhd is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Two
Posts: 10,917
Thanks: 1,268
Thanked 852 Times in 630 Posts
mildadhd has disabled reputation
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Anyway, I have started a new thread.

Operational definition of "MindBrain", "BrainMind" so it can be studied

I hope you participate.

Eveyone's environmental and genetic (and more) insights opinions are welcome.

Hopefully people can agree to disagree, and not cry foul if they don't like what they hear. (including me)

Instead present facts to back up their positions.


Peripheral
__________________
"When people are suffering mentally, they want to feel better -- they want to stop having bad emotions and start having good emotions." (-Temple Grandin)

Last edited by namazu; 08-30-13 at 10:56 PM.. Reason: fixed typo
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 08-30-13, 06:00 PM
mildadhd mildadhd is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Two
Posts: 10,917
Thanks: 1,268
Thanked 852 Times in 630 Posts
mildadhd has disabled reputation
Re: Scientists have grown a teeny-tiny brain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunacie View Post
Goodness! Thoughts and the 'mind' are associated with the brain.
Feelings and emotions are generally associated with the heart.
Is any of that correct? Proven? Will we ever know for sure?

Lunacie,

Do you mind (no pun intended) if I post your quote to discuss in my new thread?

I won't without your permission.

Peripheral
__________________
"When people are suffering mentally, they want to feel better -- they want to stop having bad emotions and start having good emotions." (-Temple Grandin)
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-02-13, 05:09 PM
qinkin's Avatar
qinkin qinkin is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: midwest of US
Posts: 2,221
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 1,275
Thanked 828 Times in 630 Posts
qinkin is a name known to allqinkin is a name known to allqinkin is a name known to allqinkin is a name known to allqinkin is a name known to allqinkin is a name known to all
Re: "The Problem with Neuroscience. . ."

Interesting how you could link to the print page to avoid ads, Amtram.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ginniebean
I don't subscribe the the brain "is" the mind entirely. I aso don't think science can say anything with authority about our interior world of thoughts and emotions. The only authority of my interior experience and world is myself. I have observed and conducted many of my own experiments about my interior self and have found very objective things about myself. These may not apply to others.

I am skeptical ofi scientific pronouncements of authority in domains that can't be studied using the scientific method. Religion, philosophy, art, etc.. defy the scientific method. Many scientists and fans of science denounce what it cannot understand.

What makes 'sense' to a materialist may not make the least bit of sense to someone who investigates the subjective interior world which makes up more than half of our lives.

The backlash against neuroscience is fueled by fear, and it is foolish imo. We'll suffer for it. I prefer to balance science and wisdom, and I think it's something of a lost art.
O really? Do you read a lot of books on spirituality? ... In what way do those things defy science? Philosophy is integrated into scientific method, so I think you are confused.


Quote:
Originally Posted by SB
- but the fundamental causal basis to psych- condition is in psych- without need for neuro- and the fundamental causative basis to neuro- condition is in neuro- without need for psych-.

The only reason that neuro- dominates over psych- is that it's so much easier to work with stuff you can prod.
Just because u say it's easier, doesn't mean it is. You're just not seeing tons of relevant stuff. U seem to kinda be making stuff up as well with regards to how things actually work in science.

ADHD was a scientific discovery, so..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-09-13, 01:51 AM
meadd823's Avatar
meadd823 meadd823 is offline
Super Meowaderator
 

Join Date: May 2004
Location: address unknown
Posts: 20,843
Blog Entries: 38
Thanks: 6,810
Thanked 15,344 Times in 6,093 Posts
meadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond reputemeadd823 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Mind/brain duality (moved from "Teeny-tiny brain" thread)

Let me try that again - Objects are closer than they appear - \ It not so because SB says so it is because there is evidence suggesting that scarcity effects us mentally

Scarcity changes how we think

Scarcity captures us because it is important, worthy of our attention, but we cannot fully choose when our minds will be riveted. We focus on scarcity even when we do not want to. We think about that impending project not only when we sit down to work on it but also when we are at home trying to help our child with her homework. The same automatic capture that helps us focus becomes a burden in the rest of life. Because we are preoccupied by scarcity, because our minds constantly return to it, we have less mind to give to the rest of life.

Scarcity does something similar to our mental processor. By constantly loading the mind with other processes, it leaves less “mind” for the task at hand. Scarcity directly reduces what we call bandwidth—not a person’s inherent capacity for thinking and understanding but how much of that capacity is currently available for use.


We tested this idea on sugarcane farmers. (The study, conducted with the economist Anandi Mani and the psychologist Jiaying Zhao was published this week in Science.) These farmers receive their income in a big lump, all at once at harvest time. This means the same farmer is rich in the months after harvest and poor in the months before harvest. We then examined the same farmer’s bandwidth at these particular times of the year. Instead of comparing rich and poor people, we’d be seeing how the same person behaves differently when tight for cash and when flush with cash. We measured two components of the farmers’ bandwidth: “executive control” (our ability to manage our cognitive activities, including planning, attention, initiating and inhibiting actions, and controlling impulses) and “fluid intelligence” (the ability to think abstractly and solve problems independent of any specific learning or experience).


In other words, the same person was measured as less intelligent and more impulsive when he was poor, compared to when he was rich. And the effects were large. The postharvest farmers got about 25 percent more items correct on the fluid intelligence test, which corresponds to about nine or ten IQ points.

~Underlining in source added by me~

Aren't these the same EF Barkley always refers to ADDers as lacking?

- Maybe the notion that ADD is effected by inequality isn't so damn crazy after all.
__________________


Follow ADDForums on Twitter & Facebook

Last edited by meadd823; 09-09-13 at 02:08 AM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to meadd823 For This Useful Post:
sarek (09-14-13)
  #14  
Old 09-09-13, 12:37 PM
Amtram's Avatar
Amtram Amtram is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Toms River, NJ
Posts: 10,509
Blog Entries: 10
Thanks: 20,928
Thanked 17,515 Times in 7,316 Posts
Amtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond reputeAmtram has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Mind/brain duality (moved from "Teeny-tiny brain" thread)

Nobody is arguing against "affected by." It's "caused by" and "prevented by" that have no evidence backing them up.

I was reading an article last week on epigenetics, which of course I didn't bookmark, that said that we put too much emphasis on "environment" when we're talking about changes to genetic expression. He said that the real factor is "experience" - because no two people in the same environment are going to experience it in the same way. (Talking about emotional factors, not chemical ones, obviously.) If you're in a particularly negative emotional/social environment, and you experience it in one way, it can influence your gene expression, but if you experience it in a different way, it can have no impact on it at all.
__________________
"Living well is the best revenge." G.B. Shaw
"I'm easily swayed by robust scientific evidence." Amtram
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Amtram For This Useful Post:
Dizfriz (09-09-13)
  #15  
Old 09-09-13, 12:41 PM
Lunacie's Avatar
Lunacie Lunacie is offline
ADDvanced Forum ADDvocate
 

Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: south-central Kansas
Posts: 17,811
Thanks: 17,853
Thanked 23,849 Times in 11,036 Posts
Lunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond reputeLunacie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Mind/brain duality (moved from "Teeny-tiny brain" thread)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amtram View Post
Nobody is arguing against "affected by." It's "caused by" and "prevented by" that have no evidence backing them up.

I was reading an article last week on epigenetics, which of course I didn't bookmark, that said that we put too much emphasis on "environment" when we're talking about changes to genetic expression. He said that the real factor is "experience" - because no two people in the same environment are going to experience it in the same way. (Talking about emotional factors, not chemical ones, obviously.) If you're in a particularly negative emotional/social environment, and you experience it in one way, it can influence your gene expression, but if you experience it in a different way, it can have no impact on it at all.
Chemical factors can also come into play. I dread going to our local mental
health clinic, not because of the people (they're wonderful), but because
they have a plug in air freshener in the entry way and I'm very sensitive to
chemical scents. They affect me mostly in emotional ways, but strong
scents can also make me physically weak. And some cause migraines.

No one else there seems to have this sensitivity to chemical scents, so
they don't experience the environment the same way I do.
__________________
ADD is not a problem of knowing what to do; it is a problem of doing what you know.
-RUSSELL A. BARKLEY, PH.D.


As far as I know, there is nothing positive about ADHD that people can't have w out ADHD. ~ ADD me
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lunacie For This Useful Post:
Amtram (09-09-13), Dizfriz (09-09-13)
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) 2003 - 2015 ADD Forums