It was probably the only divulgational book about the topic available at the time. It did seem to contain valuable information.
Some people need a scientific sounding explanation before they’ll make any diet or lifestyle changes, so the material can still have a use. It’s just not a good source of scientifically accurate information about neurogenesis.
Probably so, but - while remaining of course based on academical articles - the perspective was that of a therapist - spendable information, not full caution. As said, it seemed to be the only work for the general public at the time.
> a scientific sounding explanation before they’ll make any diet or lifestyle changes
In a good basic commonsensical framework it's different: from e.g. "it seems that exercise also promotes some regeneration in the nervous system" follows "we have hints to value exercise even more". We most frequently work on hints, as that's what we most often only have.
I need to match this with e.g. some recent HN submission about the toxicity of some vitamines in the B group, making the abuse of supplement quite dangerous. Similarly, a prominent actress once declared her stroke an effect of extreme fitness regimes. So, you know, good commonsense... An extremist mentality applied to lifestyle (e.g. "Only/never eat butter, articles suggest") makes of science another miracles shop.
Environmental novelty is even know to be correlated with neurogenesis markers in mice, which is a confounding factor when trying to determine if novel mind-altering substances are producing neurogenesis through some novel mechanism, or the mere experience of shaking up their world with drugs is just another novel experience.
That said, this is a good example of a case where we have a lot of research suggesting that mouse neurogenesis studies don’t translate well to humans. See the other well-written comment above as well as the associated article for more on the topic.
Unfortunately “mushrooms cause neurogenesis” has been taken as a given by a lot of mushroom enthusiasts, podcasters, and new age fitness guru types.
... but genome and local cell environment is malleable, and it is quite likely that some combination of molecular signals could be found to induce it.
https://academic.oup.com/clinchem/article/67/2/351/6071463?l... (2020)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microchimerism#Fetomaternal_mi...
IIR, substantial and sustained fetal cell presence in the mother is often a sign that things are going wrong.
[0] https://www.thestudiesshowpod.com/p/episode-74-neurogenesis - There is a transcript available from this page.
hubernan did a good episode on this which i cant find, but the episode was about improving the rate of learning amd our brain. essentially he asserts that we seem to have a strong mechanism for brain growth in desperate circumstances, like hunting for food while very hungry. I will try to find and edit this comment
I seem to remember that they alledgedly induced neoneurogenesis.
robwwilliams•1d ago
1. What brain regions and neuron types?
2. What is the precise gain or turn-over of numbers of neurons per year?
3. What rates of change per year per type per brain region?
For humans we have essentially no hard data with which to address these three questions for structure or neuron type. Sadly this is also true for mouse with still shaky exception of the dentate gyrus and rostral migratory stream of one strain of mouse—C57BL/6J.
I still regard Pasko Rakic’s work as definitive—that in adult rhesus monkey females injected 4 to 6 times over several years with high levels of tritiated thymidine there is no evidence of adult neurogenesis in any brain region. Sure: proving the negative is a bitch, but these studies place a very low limit on levels of adult neurogenesis in primates—even in hippocampus. Meaninglessly low levels. And I have scanned this collection with Rakic.
The end of this review is on-the-mark: There are still very good reasons to be enthused about the POTENTIAL of adult neurogenesis. Being able to induce useful levels of adult neurogenesis would be a game changer. But reality and potential are different beasts.
IncreasePosts•1d ago
esseph•1d ago
smolder•1d ago
SubiculumCode•1d ago
FloatArtifact•1d ago
robwwilliams•1d ago
natpalmer1776•1d ago
What is the lifecycle of a neuron? Does it get replaced? Will a neuron, whose connections to the broader brain decayed or otherwise went away, continue to “live”?
I’ll go ask ChatGPT, but spare this rigorous community the unreliable answers to my passive interest.
natpalmer1776•1d ago