Slashdot Mirror


Humans Produce New Brain Cells Throughout Their Lives, Say Researchers (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Humans continue to produce new neurons in a part of their brain involved in learning, memory and emotion throughout adulthood, scientists have revealed, countering previous theories that production stopped after adolescence. The findings could help in developing treatments for neurological conditions such as dementia. Many new neurons are produced in the hippocampus in babies, but it has been a matter of hot debate whether this continues into adulthood -- and if so, whether this rate drops with age as seen in mice and nonhuman primates. Although some research had found new neurons in the hippocampus of older humans, a recent study scotched the idea, claiming that new neurons in the hippocampus were at undetectable levels by our late teens.

28 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. Oh man, that's a relief by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The recent article saying that we get no new neurons was causing me stress, which of course was killing my neurons, and thinking about that was causing me MORE stress.

    But now, a new article, with a much better claim!

    I feel the stress draining away, as new brain cells are born to replace the ones I lost last week.

    1. Re:Oh man, that's a relief by AndyKron · · Score: 1

      Isn't it nice when the news matches your expectations? To hell with facts, just make me feel good!

  2. Contradicting last month's study by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, this one contradicts last month's study saying that contrary to previous belief humans do NOT grow new neurons: https://www.npr.org/sections/h...

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/07/health/new-brain-cells-adulthood-study/index.html

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-the-adult-brain-really-grow-new-neurons/

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Contradicting last month's study by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      And furthermore, I always thought that people STARTED growing neurons after adolescence.

    2. Re:Contradicting last month's study by scottrocket · · Score: 1

      And furthermore, I always thought that people STARTED growing neurons after adolescence.

      Heh, took me a few seconds to stop being so literal, get the joke - gettin' old, I guess.

      Alternatively, to get smarter one could always pull a Canadian brain heist.

  3. Nice by nospam007 · · Score: 4, Funny

    So at age 72 we'll all be stable geniuses.

    1. Re:Nice by tsa · · Score: 1

      Based on my experience I'd say you need to be at least 120 years old to be a genius.

      --

      -- Cheers!

  4. NON-contradicting last month's study by epine · · Score: 4, Informative

    It doesn't actually contradict last month's study.

    This study demonstrates a lingering neuro-generative capacity (at the tissue level). The previous study demonstrates a paucity of neuro-generative reality (with a bias toward the functional view).

    Most old dogs are set in their ways, but some old dogs do indeed learn new tricks.

    Oh noes, CONTRADICTION, time to ostrich my head into the nearest dune.

    1. Re:NON-contradicting last month's study by RhettLivingston · · Score: 1

      Or actually read the studies.

  5. Use it or lose it by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Haven't I read at least a few articles that say keeping your mind active as you age can perhaps prevent age-related mental problems like dementia and Alzheimers?
    All makes perfect sense to me. You don't use your muscles, they atrophy, because there's no reason for your body to dedicate resources to something that's not being used; why should it be any different with your brain? Keep learning your whole life, keep yourself interested in something, and your brain will last as long as possible. Having a purpose in life, whether bestowed on you or of your own devising would probably help.

    1. Re:Use it or lose it by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Take the analogy further. Nutrition and genetics also play a role in musculature, dementia, and Alzheimers.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    2. Re:Use it or lose it by Daralantan · · Score: 1

      Somewhat similar, I saw a study recently about how they took 2 groups of older people. One group did strength training I believe, and the other just did various mental stuff. They found that the group that exercised was improving in their cognitive function while the other group stayed the same. Just keep everything about you active, don't couch potato to death.

  6. Maybe both are true? by schure · · Score: 1

    Maybe some people grow neurons and others don't?

  7. Not so clear cut by RhettLivingston · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the article:

    Dr Mercedes Paredes from the University of California San Francisco, an author of last month’s paper suggesting adults do not develop new neurons, said she was not persuaded. “For now, we do not think this new study challenges what we have concluded from our own recently published observations: if neurogenesis continues in the adult human hippocampus, it is an extremely rare phenomenon,” she said. “It boils down to interpretation of equivocal cells which we took extra steps to characterise extensively and showed not to be new neurons as they first appeared.”

    I would also note that this study's subjects were "between 14 and 79" and the previous study stated "only a few isolated young neurons are observed by 7 and 13 years of age". Thus, this new study finding little decline between 14 and 79 could be entirely accurate if the bulk of the decline was over by 14. It is an apples and oranges comparison.

    As an aside, I feel that there is a great argument forming for completing secondary education by 14 as we used to. We hurt ourselves by not getting more of our foundation in place during that more biologically capable time period.

    1. Re:Not so clear cut by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Heck, cut it to 8. At that age they're still small enough to fit inside chimneys.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:Not so clear cut by RhettLivingston · · Score: 1

      I somewhat agree and have both read books and seen real-world programs.

      IMO, we teach the wrong way. It's not so much that we need to reorder subjects as to refactor them. But I would disagree that math and language are different. Math is just another language used to express things that build natively in the human mind at the same ages as spoken language. The degree to which we learn simple things like accurate determination of more/less, bigger/smaller, etc at toddler ages and before is directly related to our later math success. In other areas, it has been shown that early experience with sports corresponds directly with later ease in picking up basic physics. Our mind works as a whole and rich early experiences make a difference in later abstract thinking capabilities.

      I see it more as we should fill them with "vocabulary", "symbology", or just seeing, experiencing, and manipulating things until they are around 10 and then hit hard on the grammar side of the equation (whether it be the grammar of spoken language, math, science, or whatever). This takes maximum advantage of the younger mind's remarkable ability to soak up everything it is exposed to.

      I am familiar with a K-12 program with a bit more than 300 students that uses an approach like this (including your language thoughts as they start latin in kindergarten) and gets all of their students through the typical college-prep subject matter by 10th grade. They then follow a more independent type of study for their remaining years - sort of research like. Their college acceptance rate is in the 98th percentile range and they still have a top-rated athletic program. A major downside is that it is best that they go through this system from k thru 12 because it is so out of alignment with our traditional system. That means parents are constrained from moving for those years.

    3. Re:Not so clear cut by fredrated · · Score: 1

      there is a great argument forming for completing secondary education by 14 as we used to. We hurt ourselves by not getting more of our foundation in place during that more biologically capable time period.

      Sounds good on paper but it seems like the familial and social structures are no longer up to the task.

    4. Re:Not so clear cut by Gavagai80 · · Score: 1

      Only a tiny fraction of the population completed much schooling back in the old days. If only the smartest 10% of your population is going to school, of course you're going to be able to teach them faster. The subjects that were considered important were also narrower back then.

      There's no doubt that second languages should be taught at a younger age, though.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
  8. No wonder by CSMoran · · Score: 2

    new neurons in the hippocampus were at undetectable levels by our late teens.

    Have our adults detect them. Next issue.

    --
    Every end has half a stick.
  9. Grow a brain by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

    So when you lose it to some idiot on a Internet forum and tell them to "Grow Brain" it is not so much an insult as it is a helpful constructive suggestion.

  10. I've never actually read those studies by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    does more activity lead to less mental problems or do less mental problems lead to more activity? I'm not even sure how you could control for that.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:I've never actually read those studies by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Having to deal with too many other humans seems to be what causes mental illness, if the news of the past few years is any indicator.

  11. Fuck brain cells by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    To paraphrase Errol Flynn, "A man who dies with all his brain cells is a failure."

    Anyway, I've got plenty. I figure I could lose 30-40% and still be smarter than the average jamoke.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  12. Re: That's the trouble with the reporting by c6gunner · · Score: 2

    With today's constant bombardment of reporting of scientific studies - many times dumbed down to be meaningless - we are getting to many mixed messages.

    This is nothing new; it's just gotten somewhat worse over time. Traditional media companies used to have science-trained reporters and editors dedicated to science reporting, and even they sometimes got things wrong. Things got significantly worse when those positions were eliminated, but that happened a good 20 years ago now.

    For well over a deacde we've been in the age of science-by-press-release where, basically, a scientist well write a paper, some PR flunky with no real understanding of it will put together a press release, and then reporters will either publish that press release verbatim or put their own spin on it. It's a game of broken telephone, played by people who are hard of hearing.

    This process is further undermined by quacks (like, for example, Seralini) who skip the science part entirely and publish misleading press releases straight to the media before their "research" has been vetted by the scientific community. And reporters don't care because bad science generates just as much interest from readers as good science (if not more).

  13. Re:Puzzled scientists find exception to rule by jwhyche · · Score: 1

    While being offtopic completely you seem to have a few errors in your post. Here let me help you with those.

    I got a five-dollar bill that says when both terms of the highly successful Trump Administration are over, perhaps after he is laid to rest. It will be very doubtful that his kids, since they are rich already, will be coming out with any tell all books. But if they do they will tell what a loving and caring father he was. Got another five bucks that says his daughter will never say he sexually abused her in any way and it will be completely true

    There, fixed that for you.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  14. Re:Puzzled scientists find exception to rule by jwhyche · · Score: 1

    Yeah, not by best work. Way to obvious.

    --
    I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
  15. Wasnt this the war on drugs by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1

    Where people would suggest that folks dont grow knew brain cells after frying them on drugs... you know the whole egg and frying pan thing. Isnt that where it started. It never sounded right.

    --
    [($)]
  16. Here is an extensive commentary on the debate by fygment · · Score: 1
    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.