Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Overclock People's Brains

arshadk writes with this excerpt from the BBC about researchers at Oxford University who found that inducing a small current in a subject's parietal lobe boosted their capacity for numerical learning: "The current could not be felt, and had no measurable effect on other brain functions. As it was turned on, the volunteers tried to learn a puzzle which involved substituting numbers for symbols. Those given the current from right to left across the parietal lobe did significantly better when given, compared to those who were given no electrical stimulation. The direction of the current was important — those given stimulation running in the opposite direction, left to right, did markedly worse at these puzzles than those given no current, with their ability matching that of an average six-year-old. The effects were not short-lived, either. When the volunteers whose performance improved was re-tested six months later, the benefits appear to have persisted. There was no wider effect on general maths ability in either group, just on the ability to complete the puzzles learned as the current was applied."

26 of 314 comments (clear)

  1. sweet !! by ckeo · · Score: 5, Funny

    K... I just cut the cord off a lamp... somerone talk me through this O.O

    1. Re:sweet !! by ckeo · · Score: 5, Funny

      hmmm... maybe I should just suck on a 9 volt battery while I am studying :/

    2. Re:sweet !! by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Luckily for you there is two flavors available: Duracell and Energizer!

    3. Re:sweet !! by lazarus+corporation · · Score: 5, Informative
      From the first sentence of the summary at the top of the page:

      arshadk writes with this excerpt from the BBC about researchers at Oxford University who found that...

      As an Englishman I may be biased, but I think the BBC counts as a major news company.

    4. Re:sweet !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      How do you know what cat piss tastes like?

    5. Re:sweet !! by Reapman · · Score: 3, Funny

      This reminds me of that time you tried to drill a hole in your head....

    6. Re:sweet !! by Ster · · Score: 3, Funny

      This reminds me of that time you tried to drill a hole in your head....

      That would have worked if you hadn't stopped me.

  2. Uhhhh.... WHAT? by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    those given stimulation running in the opposite direction, left to right, did markedly worse at these puzzles than those given no current, with their ability matching that of an average six-year-old ... The effects were not short-lived, either. When the volunteers whose performance improved was re-tested six months later, the benefits appear to have persisted.

    What about the other sides, were the negative effects persistant? Did you just create a group of idiots? Is this legal?

    1. Re:Uhhhh.... WHAT? by jeffmeden · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The effect seemed to influence the learning process... IE when the current is applied in the correct direction the learning process takes place very quickly and when in the opposite direction it takes place very slowly. The subjects retested later showed they retained the learned skill, not the *ability* to learn that was afforded by the electrical stimulation.

      Of course, lacking any such mental enhancement my interpretation of this may be totally wrong.

    2. Re:Uhhhh.... WHAT? by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Funny

      The english-speaking participants then replied "Wakarimasen"?

  3. My old boss used to do this too...no biggie. by Pojut · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Back when I worked as a mechanic, the guy that owned the place and a buddy of his used to bring cars into the shop after hours, snort up a line of blow, and go to town. I once watched them pull a motor out of a Honda Civic in 15 minutes, surgeon style (one guy giving and taking tools/nuts/bolts, one guy using the tools to remove said nuts/bolts).

    No exaggeration. 15 minutes. It transcended bitchin'.

    1. Re:My old boss used to do this too...no biggie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      15 minutes for a Honda Civic? What is so hard about cutting a couple of zip-ties?

    2. Re:My old boss used to do this too...no biggie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      I once watched them pull a motor out of a Honda Civic in 15 minutes, surgeon style (one guy giving and taking tools/nuts/bolts, one guy using the tools to remove said nuts/bolts).

      No exaggeration. 15 minutes. It transcended bitchin'.

      Aside from the illegal drugs in your story, did you ever think that maybe what happens in surgery is just the most efficient method of doing things? When you don't need to fumble for your instruments, you generally can do things more than at 2x the speed thanks to not having to switch your focus from your job.

      If all you remove and install a given engine a few times, you get to the point where you know all the steps and know all the tools that you'll need. Even better if the helper knows the steps too. This is why surgeons work as fast as they do. Practice, practice, practice.

    3. Re:My old boss used to do this too...no biggie. by quacking+duck · · Score: 4, Funny

      Reminds me of a Top Gear episode where they discovered that changing out an engine of a car took less time than a group of women getting ready to go out for the evening.

    4. Re:My old boss used to do this too...no biggie. by shugah · · Score: 3, Informative

      That jeep was specially prepared for that demonstration.

      The "engine/transmission" unit must have a self contained fuel tank, battery, and coolant reservoir (radiator) and some sort of quick release engine mounts. There were no fuel lines and while one guy dropped the radiator in just before the hood went on, he didn't connect up any coolant lines. It was probably a 2-wheel drive jeep, to eliminate connecting the front differential. There must have been some sort of quick disconnect on the drive shaft U-Joint. There also must not be a floor or firewall in the jeep so that the shift linkage and accelerator pedal and throttle linkage could all be left attached to the engine/transmission unit.

      You could see a muffle hanging below the chassis, so the exhaust manifolds and header pipe must have just slid into some sort of receiver pipe (I guess it didn't have to pass CARB or EPA testing). Also unless there must have been some sort of multi-pin electrical harness connector or none of the lights would have been functional. The ignition switch was probably attached to the engine and accessible through the open floor / firewall.

      The Jeep has no brakes; there were no brake lines connected to the "body" unit (where the master cylinder would be). Likewise, steering linkage between body and the front suspension/axel must have had some sort of quick disconnect. Also, no heater, no windshield wipers/washers, no speedometer or guages of any type mounted on the dash (possibly on the engine/transmission unit).

      So given that the Jeeps was specially designed to be taken apart and put back together in under 4 minutes, it is not surprising that team trained for that function were able to do so.

      --
      If you aren't part of the solution, then there is good money to be made prolonging the problem
  4. so many questions by cindyann · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Any observation or correlation to right-brained, i.e. left-handedness?

    How did the subjects perform with a slightly higher current?

    And when they cranked it to 11?

  5. Love the journal name... by lazlo · · Score: 4, Funny

    The findings are reported in the journal Current Biology.

    Awesome pun.

    --
    Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
  6. Re:you can do this with drugs too by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Informative

    Which drugs? Plenty of drugs taken in moderation can be sustained throughout a natural lifespan without damage. Very few drugs, especially those used longer than the last few generations, "burn out neurons" or cause any neuropathy of any kind, at active doses that aren't toxic. Alcohol is an exception. But heroin is not. All drugs temporarily "lower the potential" of neurons or raise them: otherwise they'd have no effect whatsoever. But so does eating too much food (or not enough), or habitual running, or having sex.

    Blanket statements about drugs are rarely meaningful enough to take as useful advice.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  7. Re:you can do this with drugs too by martas · · Score: 5, Insightful

    you can't improve upon the performance of your brain and your body without longterm tradeoffs

    i hate that kind of defeatist, "nature/god knows best" attitude. everything you have right now is thanks to people who believed they could do better than nature, and they did. yes, you shouldn't do lines of coke to be better at your job, because that is a hack. it doesn't mean we can't make ourselves truly better, without "overclocking" and burning out. a candle that burns twice as bright could burn out twice as fast, or it could simply be a fucking light bulb that lasts 5 years.

  8. Ridiculously Brilliant by HeckRuler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, these people are learning more about the brain BY screwing around with it. How else do you learn things? Unfortunately, we're missing the user's manual.

  9. Oldnews by durrr · · Score: 5, Informative

    This phenomena is quite well studied, and seems to be producing relatively linear effects. It was discovered in the 70's or so. It's refered to as transcranial direct current stimulation and just a few months ago there was a study on visual memory about the same.
    It's not really new and revolutionary, it's just that the previous studies haven't been able to be worded as "OMG BRAINOVERKLOCKING!" and thus haven't generated the same interest.
    http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/08/direct-current-stimulation-more-than.html

    1. Re:Oldnews by RockoTDF · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know it is well studied, I'm a neuroscientist. What I am saying is that we must not assume that the effects over time are the exact opposite in each direction.

      --
      There is more to science than physics!

      www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
  10. LASIK, high blood pressure, gene therapy... by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Crud, then, because I and a LOT of my friends have had LASIK surgery to correct my vision. It turns out god gave me bum eyes that focused everything slightly in front of my retina, and that fixed it pretty well with minimal, if any, long-term trade-off.

    My dad had high blood pressure. In spite of efforts to control it through diet and exercise, he foolishly took drugs to control it, thinking that he could improve upon his natural system to regulate it. He died a few years ago of bladder cancer. I'm not sure how exactly that was a long-term tradeoff since the doctors told us they were completely unrelated, but he seemed not to mind the short-term benefit of living a reasonably long time.

    Also, where exactly do we draw the line? I mean, some people run 10 miles or more a day; surely that can't be normal and can be considered a measure to "improve on what you have," and statistically, those people tend to live longer. Do we consider eating certain foods that contain substances shown medically to lead to longer and more healthy lives, or for that matter, avoiding natural foods that contain substances shown medically to be harmful (fat, cholesterol, etc.) to be trying to improve on what we have? Before long, we'll be living in a world where technologies such as gene therapy could prevent or significantly reduce conditions like Down's Syndrome, diabetes, Alzheimer's, etc. Should we avoid those as well?

    I suspect that this study is the first in a long line of research that may lead to exciting new therapies for people who might not be able to learn normally. And yes, if it's shown effective without significant side effects, it might be used much as LASIK is today, a method of improve on what we were given with little to no risk. Personally, I don't see much wrong with that. If you disagree, that's certainly your right, but I would ask that you not judge others, try to impinge on the freedom of others to make informed decisions regarding their own body, or worst of all, try to keep the research from happening that could potentially improve the lives of many people who are not able to function normally in society due to preventable or even curable disabilities.

    Just some food for thought.

  11. Re:Overclocking? by mehrotra.akash · · Score: 3, Funny

    How do you accidently overclock a PC??

  12. Re:you can do this with drugs too by Joe+Snipe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I like to phrase it like this:

    Drugs are like cheat codes on video games. They can be a lot of fun, and you might see and do things you wouldn't have been able to do otherwise. But then it starts to get boring, and playing without the cheat code starts to feel unsatisfying (or to difficult). Unfortunately you can't switch to a different video game because with drugs it's your life that you're playing.

    --
    Sometimes, life itself is sarcasm...
  13. Re:you can do this with drugs too by Beerdood · · Score: 3, Informative

    I think LSD is a decent example of what you could consider over-clocking. If you take a large amount (like 4 or more hits at once) your brain is in absolute overdrive and can certainly perform some functions better than others. And just like over-clocking a CPU you run the risk of burning out a few circuits and getting flashbacks and tracers later in life. This is the official term, and I've heard a few old hippies that claim to have this from too much use from too much use years ago

    --
    Global warming and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking number of pirates - Gospel of the FSM