People Twitter

5266 readers

2892 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a tweet or similar
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

499

Genius at work (i.imgur.com)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

74 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Correlation within the current human species only, there was development other than just size from ancient history that you aren’t accounting for.

If you’re talking about the 10% myth, I wasn’t referring to that, but there are documented cases including at least one person missing most of their brain from a long-term condition where the brain filled with fluid, leaving a thin perimeter of brain matter, and they were otherwise still fully functional except for weakness in one leg. A total mystery, and provided proof that the brain can rewire itself and doesn’t need most of its volume to function correctly, and suggested evidence that the brain uses what’s needed, but that most of it isn’t required.

edit:

https://qz.com/722614/a-civil-servant-missing-most-of-his-brain-challenges-our-most-basic-theories-of-consciousness

Note that while it does say he was of below average intelligence but not mentally disabled, that’s not the point. The point in me providing this here is that losing most of his brain over time didn’t affect the intelligence he naturally had, or affect other brain function, so he was fully functioning and normal as far as anyone was concerned until he went to check what was going on with his leg. Providing proof that most of the brain probably isn’t needed, and possibly redundant to compensate for loss.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

A single case is not proof and you should know this. It’s an outlier. A substantial majority of people with brain damage have affected function in some form or another. If you can show a statistically significant number of cases I may consider your evidence.

More specifically to your example, they showed an impact to their functioning. In addition a neurosurgeon commented: “The patient was not missing brain, but because the skull is a fixed volume, it cannot expand to accommodate increased pressures so the brain instead gets pushed outwards by the fluid and compressed.”

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

A single case is not proof and you should know this. It’s an outlier. A substantial majority of people with brain damage have affected function in some form or another.

No shit, not sure what part of "documented cases including at least one person" you didn't understand, but I only provided the most extreme example. Further, most people with brain damage didn't experienced it from a condition that slowly happened over time where the brain could adapt. Most happen from malformation where the brain was never in a healthy state to begin with, or from immediate traumatic injury where it wouldn't have had the time to adapt to it, and nobody expects that it would.

Also, I said “provided proof that the brain can rewire itself”, not that it will. There is a difference between what I said and your interpretation of my statement.

More specifically to your example, they showed an impact to their functioning.

Other than the leg symptoms, not according to the article I linked:

In theory, the frontal, parietal, temporal, and occipital lobes in the brain control motion, sensibility, language, vision, audition, and emotional and cognitive functions. But those these regions were all reduced in the Frenchman. He did not, however, suffer significant mental effects, suggesting that, if an injury occurs slowly over time, the brain can adapt to survive despite major damage in these regions.

It says the regions of the brain were reduced, but not his function, feel free to quote the exact phrases that say otherwise in significant fashion where he didn't present as normal other than the leg issue.

or from the Lancet article:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(07)61127-1/fulltext

The leg weakness improved partly after neuroendoscopic ventriculocisternostomy, but soon recurred; however, after a ventriculoperitoneal shunt was inserted, the findings on neurological examination became normal within a few weeks. The findings on neuropsychological testing and CT did not change.

Which addresses the leg symptoms improving, and that his relatively normal neuropsychological results didn't change.

From you:

In addition a neurosurgeon commented: “The patient was not missing brain, but because the skull is a fixed volume, it cannot expand to accommodate increased pressures so the brain instead gets pushed outwards by the fluid and compressed.”

This quote does not appear to be found in the original article or any that are linked from it, but regardless his brain was severely impacted as you can see from the brain images in the Lancet entry, yet he had no significant effects from it. Whether the brain was missing or quished into an tiny area makes no difference at all, he should have had severe symptoms but didn't.

If you can show a statistically significant number of cases I may consider your evidence.

Fuck off. I don't care if you're willing to consider anything, I'm not writing a dissertation here. I'm not going to go around and build a portfolio to make you happy. Go try being amazed at something that the best neuroscientists don't understand.