Comments on: Brain & intelligence

By: pconroy

pconroy — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 07:45:05 +0000

CalebZ,

Well if that's the case, then a study of MS (Multiple Sclerosis) patients should tell us something, as they suffer from a decrease in myelination right?

If this decrease affects the brain in the same way it affects various nerve connections in the rest of the body, then that should be a valid test.

By: CalebZ

CalebZ — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:49:55 +0000

I’m wondering, since the study shows that myelination leads to higher intelligence, can fish oils boost the amount of myelination?

By: Pat Shuff

Pat Shuff — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 10:32:31 +0000

It doesn't fit the narrative so it doesn't exist.

We only see what we know. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

The g Factor/Jensen covered this territory.

By: free thinker

free thinker — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:09:26 +0000

I can’t understand why no one is interested in commenting on this. This is the signature for the “major gene” for intelligence that Volkmar Weiss always said must exist. It does, and finding it will change everything.

By: John

John — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 02:10:05 +0000

Interesting comment on the New Scientist site in relation to this study:

“Gould Is Turning In His Grave

Tue Mar 17 20:35:24 GMT 2009 by Jack Crane

As a scientist, I was outraged by Stephen J. Gould and other scientists particularly at Harvard that knew full well that a large portion of intelligence was inherited, but purposely misled the public by attacking IQ and other related work (e.g., Gould’s the Mismeasure of Man). As long ago as the 1980s, there was a clear correlation between the physical size of a brain (as measured carefully by NMR) and IQ. Twin studies were overwhelmingly clear that genetics was at least 50% responsible for our intelligence. I always felt that Gould, Lowenstein and others were the New Creationists. They refused to accept what science was discovering. They also used their power as scientists to attack evolutionary psychology which has become one of the new revolutionary fields in science. Even today in the university community in which I work, I find a large portion of the faculty (even scientists) horrified at any discussions involving intellectual inheritance or evolutionary psychology. One Dean told me once that “We have to save the children from this knowledge”. Kudos to New Scientist for reporting all the news. But don’t expect anyone inside the University Community to accept it.”

http://www.newscientist.com/commenting/browse;jsessionid=088D307BDC3F1D1B68EA2D3B822A72F0?id=mg20126993.300&page=3

By: TheRedBaron

TheRedBaron — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:16:26 +0000

The image in the paper looks kind of crazy:
http://www.loni.ucla.edu/~thompson/HARDI/PDF/cing7.jpg
(!)