Slashdot Mirror
Is Neurostim Becoming a Reality?
destinyland writes "There is a current mass market for 'cognitive enhancement' products — and arguments about the black market potential for neurostim. 'The same neurostim device that uses electric impulses from a brain implant to treat people with Parkinson's Disease can be tweaked by a few millimeters and pulse rates to make cocaine addicts feel like they are high all the time... Mix the glamour of surgical self-improvement with the geekiness of high-tech gadget fetishism and you have a niche cosmetic neurostim market waiting to be tapped...'"
If I recall correctly, yes. There was some work on electrical stimulation on spinal injury patients, and one slightly wrong setting would give women orgasms. Oops. :) The doctor is selling the device, now named "Orgasmatron", for women who can't climax. Of course, it costs a fortune, but hey, for mind blowing orgasms on demand, some people would pay for it.
I've known some women who report similar results with a "TENS" unit. That's external stimulus, but the same idea. I have a TENS unit for my back, and it creates a pretty weird sensation. Well, unless you consider involuntary muscle movements normal. I don't know what the placement of the electrodes is, for an orgasm. I know what makes my back feel better though.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
You might want to look into serotonin enhancers.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Admittedly far from expert, I still don't believe, there currently exist drugs giving "exact same" effect as the device described in the book. Nor can they exist even in theory, I think, because all chemicals have to be delivered indirectly (through blood) and thus will always a) have side-effects; and b) wear out. Their wearing out means, the user would have to "wake up" to replenish, thus giving him a chance to come to his senses.
The device in the book works on the brain directly and can work forever — as long as electricity (and hot water) are available in the house...
"Controlled" by whom? Very few of the users currently experiencing the effects would willingly stop. That's the whole point of the book, actually...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
(usually of the clubbing type)...
???
I know people on slashdot don't get out much, but presuming that everyone who does are mindless zombies is a bit much, don't you think?
You mean like this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/651892.stm
-- I really need to bleed off some of this
Let's just start with part of the headline material:
" 'The same neurostim device that uses electric impulses from a brain implant to treat people with Parkinson's Disease can be tweaked by a few millimeters and pulse rates to make cocaine addicts feel like they are high all the time..."
This (and TFA) is from "James Kent is the former publisher of Psychedelic Illuminations and Trip Magazine. He currently edits DoseNation.com, a drug blog featuring news, humor and commentary."
Hardly your neuroscience expert, or even much of an educated amateur. Educated enough to be dangerous to his own reputation perhaps. We can hope.
Where Mr. Kent goes wrong is in thinking the stimulator used for Parky's can stimulate other parts of the same structure (within a "few millimeters), the Substantia Nigra, which produced dopamine which is also released in cocaine use, and that this is the reward center, so that doing so makes one feel high.
The common misconception is based on the "reward" aspect, and confusion of cause and effect with respect to drug use. The reward system operates in the manner of conditioning or learning, in that its output helps to produce the association between a behavior and a reinforcer. Let's just assume for maximum illustration that the reinforcer here is a cocaine high. We have the drug taking behavior, and we have the cocaine high resulting. The dopamine system puts on the brakes with respect to ongoing seeking/investigating and lets the organism maintain focused attention on the object that produced the positive feeling -- it makes reinforcement possible. Note that it does not cause the high, the reinforcer does that. There are many reinforcers that can make learning occur, and most of them do not cause any sort of high. Just because cocaine causes a release of dopamine does not mean this is the source of the high. No, this is the source of the powerful reinforcement that causes addiction to start. Dopamine does not act as a "reward", it allows a reinforcer to do so effectively regardless of any psychotropic effects. It is the cascade of various neurotransmitters that causes the high. Evidence of this is found in the effect of pramipexole (Mirapex) on people. It is a selective dopaminergic and does not cause any high. But it does (at a high enough dosage) cause obsessive/compulsive use and behaviors much as an addiction and related activities.
Moving a Parky's stimulator will not produce a high, but it might produce the problems related to addiction.
I've previously pointed out the lack of facts in h+ articles, and the preponderance of fiction. This article starts out with the latter. Check the rest of it for yourself to see if there are any reliable facts actually taken from known science, or whether they are other common misconceptions put to service to fill white space.
As for cognitive enhancing drugs, amphetamines and such are behavior boosters, not capable of producing long term cognitive enhancement, unless by enhancement one means seeking more of the same. Cognitive enhancing drugs (nootropics) have been around for over 50 years. The first, hydergine, is the red headed step child of the man who called LSD "My Problem Child", Albert Hoffman. There are many such drugs in use throughout the world except for the US where they are allowed only in the cases where they will not help -- severe progressive dementia. In contract with the very lucrative drugs typically used as congitive enhancers, nootropics have very little side effects or interactions.
In the cases where cognitiion enhancement is possible, anything related to intoxication is contraindicated and counterproductive. Confusing "reward" with getting high, when it is intended only to related to learning reinforcement is key to understanding this. It is also key to determining whether the source is intent on getting smart or getting high, because the latter refuse to give up on the misconception.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Why do you think that you are qualified to give an opinion on drugs when you don't seem to know the difference between cocaine and heroin? Although they are both class A drugs they are at opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to their effect on users. Trainspotting would have been a very different film if it was about a bunch of Scottish coke fiends. I'm curious as in most other domains in life opinions not backed up by any solid experience in the area would be seen as largely superficial.
Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php