tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post8848772427790896255..comments2024-03-14T23:52:09.893-07:00Comments on The Neurocritic: While I Was Away...The Neurocritichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-41381573875152596732012-03-30T12:45:22.939-07:002012-03-30T12:45:22.939-07:00Just got another one promoting the same spam url, ...Just got another one promoting the same spam url, on a different post. Many of these grammatically incorrect blog comments are from the Philippines these days. I hope the SEO sharks are paying the working spammers a decent wage, but I doubt it.The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-33077606453746611292012-03-30T11:16:59.431-07:002012-03-30T11:16:59.431-07:00I do love the rare spam comments that are so bad t...I do love the rare spam comments that are so bad they become good. They're why I still read every single spam comment on Neuroskeptic (5-10 per day now). Once in a long while they're so good I let them stay.Neuroskeptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06647064768789308157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-85699846655760778152012-03-30T10:26:22.083-07:002012-03-30T10:26:22.083-07:00Why thank you, "Vance Harrington," for t...Why thank you, "Vance Harrington," for that stern warning.<br /><br /><i>Forever Recovered</i>, you really need to rethink your SEO strategy...The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-63019659450120034862012-03-30T09:49:59.170-07:002012-03-30T09:49:59.170-07:00Many people don't consider marijuana and addic...Many people don't consider marijuana and addictive drug! They should probably reconsider that idea after they become addicted and allow the devastating gateway drug open the doors to a horrible future full of failure and you disappointing your family. Do you know someone who needs help <a href="http://www.stopyouraddiction.com/drug-information/marijuana/treating-marijuana-addiction/" rel="nofollow">treating marijuana addiction</a>?Vance Harringtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05181265818029923869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-15527854644325875652012-02-28T23:47:54.451-08:002012-02-28T23:47:54.451-08:00Anonymous of February 28, 2012 10:19 PM - Clearly ...Anonymous of February 28, 2012 10:19 PM - Clearly I missed the rollout of <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/107/35/15309.full" rel="nofollow">PNAS Plus</a> and the introduction of the <a href="http://www.pnas.org/site/misc/pnasplus_faq.shtml" rel="nofollow">Author Summary</a>. I only read the main article.The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-7233530759639356272012-02-28T23:35:32.515-08:002012-02-28T23:35:32.515-08:00Sam Wang's rebuttal to Keith Laws is reprinted...<a href="http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.com/2012/02/science-majors-are-from-mars.html?showComment=1330462276453#c3138816553877705348" rel="nofollow">Sam Wang's rebuttal to Keith Laws</a> is reprinted below.<br /><br />Keith Laws has made some factual errors here. Some replies, for the record.<br /><br />(1) It is incorrect that respondents viewed prosopagnosia as a memory disorder. They were not asked to make this classification. It is true that trouble recognizing faces was a survey item that encompasses both prosopagnosia, dementia, and other problems.<br /><br />(2) and (3) The reported prevalence of schizophrenia in the US population 7.2 per 1000. It is hard to know what to expect from students' relatives since they include both parents and siblings, the latter of whom are younger. But n=18 is not aberrant in any way.<br /><br />(4) Laws has no basis for this statement.<br /><br />(5) This is untrue. Comorbidities were implicitly included in the survey, which took the form of a checklist. Also, it is not clear what point is being made here.The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-88221935990566573772012-02-28T23:30:01.894-08:002012-02-28T23:30:01.894-08:00Prof Wang - You didn't address one of the majo...Prof Wang - You didn't address one of the major criticisms of your study. How did you verify the accuracy of the "psychiatric diagnoses" given by 18 yr old undergrads?The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-46126573532918213712012-02-28T22:19:55.589-08:002012-02-28T22:19:55.589-08:00Also, check the Author Summary for the article, it...Also, check the Author Summary for the article, it mentions Wernicke's area.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-80355861186903422232012-02-28T22:17:56.587-08:002012-02-28T22:17:56.587-08:003) Some of the quotes are a little over the top bu...3) Some of the quotes are a little over the top but, the result is interesting. The original press release gives more context:<br /><br />“Other researchers have found what we have, as well, which has caused a lot of controversy in the field as to where Wernicke’s area really is,” Rauschecker says. “This study provides a definitive, irrefutable answer.” <br />DeWitt agrees. “After the 1990s, the first decade of cognitive brain imaging, it was already clear to some researchers that the anterior portion of the superior temporal gyrus was a more likely site for word recognition. The majority of imagers, however, were reluctant to overturn a century of prior understanding on account of what was then a relatively new methodology,” he says. “The point of our paper is to force a reconciliation between the data and theory. It is no longer tenable to overlook or dismiss evidence supporting a central role for the anterior portion of the superior temporal gyrus in auditory word recognition.” <br /><br />http://explore.georgetown.edu/news/?ID=61864&PageTemplateID=295<br /><br />For comparison, look at this:<br /><br />Program#/Poster#: 837.1<br />Title: Reassessing the pathway for intelligible speech<br />Location: Room 25A<br />Presentation Time: Wednesday, Nov 17, 2010, 1:00 PM - 1:15 PM<br />Authors: *G. S. HICKOK; <br />Univ. California, Irvine, CA<br />Abstract: Sophie Scott and colleagues published an influential series of papers in the last decade, which described functional imaging experiments that contrasted various forms of intelligible and unintelligible speech stimuli. The primary finding from this work was that a left anterior superior temporal region responded preferentially to intelligible speech. This led to the view that the pathway for intelligible speech projects anterior from primary auditory areas within the left hemisphere. Here I will reassess the evidence for this view both from the perspective of the neuropsychological literature and from two new functional imaging studies using the same intelligibility manipulations to those in the Scott et al. experiments. The new studies found a bilateral pattern of activation that includes posterior temporal regions as well as anterior regions. I conclude that the pathway for intelligible speech is bilaterally organized with posterior temporal regions supporting lexical-phonological processing and anterior regions supporting higher-order integrative functions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-26854073807320361972012-02-28T12:54:28.844-08:002012-02-28T12:54:28.844-08:00In regard to Eric Charles's comment, the odds ...In regard to Eric Charles's comment, the odds ratios of our findings were between 2:1 and 3:1 for individual neuropsychiatric disorders, and over 20:1 for the compounded PRESUME score. These are large effects by any standard.<br /><br />In regard to the remarks quoted by Neurocritic, the statements by Keith Laws contain a number of errors. We address these errors on the Neuroskeptic site.<br /><br />Sam Wang<br />Princeton University.Sam Wanghttp://synapse.princeton.edunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-48061636033912575172012-02-20T15:46:39.010-08:002012-02-20T15:46:39.010-08:00Yes. We have also tried the 0.2 mg/kg bolus over 2...Yes. We have also tried the 0.2 mg/kg bolus over 2 minutes. A few of the patients did not find it as effective as the infusion.Zigshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11702516173987835066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-69920335379846215792012-02-19T23:15:24.157-08:002012-02-19T23:15:24.157-08:00Thanks. That seems to be the standard dose. I aske...Thanks. That seems to be the standard dose. I asked because I recently came across this paper, <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22020346" rel="nofollow">Using ketamine to model semantic deficits in schizophrenia</a>, which used a dose of 0.8 mg/kg per hour for 80 min. <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20686195" rel="nofollow">Glutamatergic theories of schizophrenia</a> have been around for a while...The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-61796521675424372012012-02-19T12:28:22.542-08:002012-02-19T12:28:22.542-08:00We have been using 0.5 mg/kg IV over 35-40 minutes...We have been using 0.5 mg/kg IV over 35-40 minutes. Some patients do well with 1 treatment every 3 or so weeks. For others, the effect lasts only a few days.<br /><br />I also saw that ketamine is used occasionally for migraines. Only 1 of the 8 people we have treated got migraines and it occurred after about 6 months of bi-weekly treatment. (This was a person with exceptionally treatment refractory depression and is not the norm in our clinic.) Again, the migraines stopped a couple of weeks after we held the ketamine treatment.Zigshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11702516173987835066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-24110599992391096472012-02-19T11:23:53.081-08:002012-02-19T11:23:53.081-08:00Zigs - Thanks for your observations. What sort of ...Zigs - Thanks for your observations. What sort of dosing schedule are you using at present? I think it's important to report the increased risk of migraines. I found a few papers on the use of ketamine for the treatment of migraine (e.g., <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8835616" rel="nofollow">Nicolodi & Sicuteri, 1995)</a>, but not about new onset migraines caused by ketamine.<br /><br />Eric Charles - A very belated thanks to you for your comments!The Neurocritichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08010555869208208621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-53471566878635758732012-02-19T09:29:58.272-08:002012-02-19T09:29:58.272-08:00I totally agree regarding that study of suicidal p...I totally agree regarding that study of suicidal patients treated with ketamine not having an adequate outcome measure. Another problem with studies of ketamine so far is that they have been administering the MADRS at 1 hour and 24 hours. This is meaningless as the MADRS is supposed to assess stability of symptoms of depression over 1 week.<br /><br />While I too am surprised by the rating scale score in that case report, it is important to recognize that scores on rating scales do not always correlate well with intensity of suffering and functional impairment. For example, someone can have very intense dysphoria and suicidal ideation, but only mild somatic symptoms and obtain a low score. They are best used for giving an estimation of symptom severity and following response to treatment. <br /><br />I have been using ketamine in our psychopharm research unit for select patients with a severe refractory depression who have failed many approved treatments. It works well and quickly for most people. It is much better tolerated than ECT and has not resulted in cognitive impairment (which we have been following in our patients). It does not give a "high" or euphoria the way that cocaine or heroin would. The experience is more of a "trip" which seems to be accompanied by a reduction in anxiety, tension, dysphoria and lassitude. Our limited experience indicates that it does not seem to be addictive in this population (though we have not given it to patients with a history of addiction). We tried a specially compounded nasal spray and got poor results compared to the IV treatment. The only long term side effect that we have seen is development of migraines, which stopped when the treatment was held for a few weeks. <br /><br />Hopefully, the many research studies underway will help determine the best dosing schedule, long term risks, and which patients may benefit most.Zigshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11702516173987835066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21605329.post-62963209955556542692012-02-07T12:47:55.146-08:002012-02-07T12:47:55.146-08:00Great post.
Regarding 1) I didn't know what ...Great post. <br /><br />Regarding 1) I didn't know what to make of the Ketamine reports when I started hearing them. Is that really the way pharmacology is going? If we are willing to put street drugs into people through an IV, why would ketamine be the first choice? I'll also bet that an injection of cocaine makes you less depressed. Probably quite a few hallucinogens as well. Odd stuff.<br /><br />Regarding 2) Did you see how small the effect were in those articles? I'm amazed they had anything to conclude. Certainly there were no demonstrations of general trends. <br /><br />Regarding 3) This was just silly. Every intro text book in every subject is wrong. The real question is whether they are wrong in a way that stunts the educational process. Seriously, who cares if a first year engineer in an intro psych class thinks Wernicke's area is three centimeters away from where it "really is". The only reason to be talking about that is because it is an example of brain-area specialization. All we want them to know is that brain areas are specialized to greater and lesser extents. <i>Even if</i> the critics are 100% right, it is still much ado about nothing.Eric Charleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17412168482569793996noreply@blogger.com