handdator

Visa fullständig version : Skulle du donera din hjärna?


Exdiaq
2014-04-08, 20:57
gjPi9KQWFjE



Here’s Why You Should Donate Your Brain to Science

Scientists may have made a major breakthrough in understanding the biology of autism. But a crucial part of the scientific process is replication–having other scientists repeat the experiments and confirm the results. In this case that may not happen for a very long time.

It isn’t that scientists don’t want to or don’t know how to. It’s because they don’t have enough brains.

“We have so little to study, it’s just egregious,” said Thomas Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health. People don’t line up to donate brain tissue like they do for other organs or blood, Insel wrote on his blog a few months ago. One reason might be squeamishness, he suggested: “Perhaps because identity, our sense of self, resides in our brains, not our kidneys.”

Another factor may be that signing up to donate your brain takes a bit more initiative than just merely checking the organ donor box when getting your driver’s license. Whatever the reasons, the recent autism finding illustrates why it matters.

Last week, scientists reported they’d found something very strange in the postmortem brain tissue of autistic children: tiny patches of the cerebral cortex where the neurons weren’t neatly arranged in layers as they normally are. The study used brain tissue from deceased autistic children (drowning was the most common cause of death–autism itself doesn’t shorten the life span).

The scientists who led the study believe it may be an important discovery. Other researchers worry the patches could be an artifact. Everyone agrees that replicating the study is crucial, but the sad truth is that’s going to be really, really hard to do.

In fact, the researchers used all of the tissue that met their criteria in two of the biggest brain banks with tissue from autistic children (the tissue had to be extremely well-preserved to work with the molecular labeling methods they used). The grand total? Twenty-two samples: 11 from autistic kids, 11 from non-autistic kids of a similar age.

“This was pretty much the ‘universe’ of possible high quality brain tissue from critical regions in very young autistic and control cases,” said Eric Courchesne, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego and a leader of the study. “We still have blocks here in preparation for the next experiments, but elsewhere there may not be much left.”

Scientists studying autism and other brain disorders have only a few good tools at their disposal. Any scientific technique has pros and cons, but sometimes there’s no substitute for studying human brain tissue.

Brain imaging methods like MRI scans can show gross abnormalities, but they’re far too coarse to reveal abnormalities at the cellular and genetic level like those described in the new paper. If a person has massive brain loss from something like Alzheimer’s disease, an MRI scan can pick that up. Otherwise, it’s a lot trickier. Brain scan studies on autism, for example, have been hard to sort out.

Unlike MRI scans, lab animals can be incredibly useful for genetic and cell-level studies, but it’s not always clear how well they match human diseases, especially for neuropsychiatric conditions. It’s been exceedingly difficult, for example, to genetically engineer mice that reasonably mimic the symptoms of autism.

Many scientists are excited about a newer approach to studying brain disorders that involves taking skin cells from a patient and converting them into stem cells that can be turned into neurons. That’s exciting because it gives scientists a chance to experiment with neurons from real human patients. But even that strategy has limitations. For example, getting those lab-raised neurons to organize themselves into the complex cellular architecture found in a whole brain is well beyond what’s currently possible. For some studies, that may not matter. For others, it almost certainly does.

None of those methods–brain scans, animal experiments, or reprogrammed stem cells–could have revealed the type of abnormalities reported in the recent autism study. But now it’s going to be difficult to verify that the findings are real.

“The problem is, they have looked at just about all of the biologically suitable tissue that’s available for study,” said Robert Hevner, a neuroscientist and neuropathologist at the University of Washington. Hevner is skeptical about the findings, but says he’s keeping an open mind and would like to see it followed up. He’s not optimistic though. “It’s going to be a very hard study to try and replicate,” he said.

One of the two autism brain banks used in the study is run by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. It contains 43 brains from people with autism and no other complicating conditions. The other, the Autism Tissue Program, has 170 brains. Those numbers may not sound so bad, but keep in mind that researchers usually can’t use just any piece of brain tissue–they want to examine the bits they think are most affected by the disorder they’re studying. If they need tissue that has been preserved well enough for molecular studies, their options are even more limited.

Even worse, autism researchers suffered a major blow in 2012, when a freezer malfunction at Harvard in 2012 compromised 147 brains, about a third of them from people with autism.

A quick and dirty calculation using the CDC’s newly-released autism estimates (now up to a startlingly high 1 in 68 children) with the 2010 Census count of kids under 18 (72 million), suggests close to a million children could be living with the disorder. Of course most of them are ineligible for this kind of study because they’re living, and some families will never go in for brain donation. But still–the discrepancy between the number of people with the disorder and the number of brains available for study is enormous.

The severity of the shortage varies across conditions and across age groups, says Michelle Freund, a program officer at NIMH. “There’s probably not a shortage of tissue from people with Alzheimer’s disease,” Freund said. “There’s certainly a shortage of healthy controls across the lifespan,” she said. The shortage is especially acute for tissue from children and people with less common disorders.

NIMH recently launched NeuroBioBank, a project that aims to get more tissue in the hands of more researchers. It provides funding to five brain banks to create a standardized register of tissue samples and establishes rules for sharing them. The agency expects to add one or two more brain banks to the network this year and hopes to continue to expand it, Freund says.

So how do you go about donating your own brain?

Checking the organ donor box on your driver’s license isn’t enough. You have to sign up with a specific brain bank. NIMH maintains a website for potential donors interested in registering with one of the five brain banks participating in their NeuroBioBank program. Patient advocacy groups often maintain lists of brain and tissue banks (and in some cases even run them themselves, as with the Autism Tissue Program, which is expected to relaunch soon as the Autism Brain Net). Googling “brain donation program” plus the particular disorder and/or institution you’re interested in should get you started.

It’s up to you, of course. By all means make the most of your brain while you’ve got it. But when the end inevitably comes, why let such a precious resource go to waste?

Länk (http://www.wired.com/2014/04/donate-brain-science)

4623
2014-04-08, 21:05
Orkar inte titta eller läsa. Men är det efter min död så inga problem.

Herr Oberst
2014-04-08, 21:07
Orkar inte titta eller läsa. Men är det efter min död så inga problem.

Före då?

Red Apple
2014-04-08, 21:08
Japp.

4623
2014-04-08, 21:16
Före då?

Varför skulle jag det?

Herr Oberst
2014-04-08, 21:48
Du valde själv att skriva det inte var några problem efter din död, så då blev jag väl lite nyfiken på om det åtminstone var något du kunde överväga pre mortem.
Eller ja, mest ironiserade jag väl över det där tillägget men... internet är internet

Blaine
2014-04-08, 22:03
Varför skulle jag det?

Om vi ser det så här då: du lever just nu, men din hjärna plockas ut trots att du lever, vilket per automatik leder till tillståndet död. Skulle du donera den då?

XXXL
2014-04-08, 22:17
Skulle inte de här bli nån sorts form av dödshjälp?

ARMSTARK
2014-04-09, 06:24
Jag skulle göra det men forskarna skulle nog känna sig lurade.

likt
2014-04-09, 07:14
Borde inte vara frivilligt.

CalleP
2014-04-09, 07:34
Borde inte vara frivilligt.

Det är väl klart att det ska vara frivilligt hahaha?

Alfers
2014-04-09, 08:03
Har donationskort i plånboken och är registrerad på donationsregistret, står att dom får ta vad dom vill.

likt
2014-04-09, 08:49
Det är väl klart att det ska vara frivilligt hahaha?

Varför ska någon kunna ta del av välfärden utan att (helt utan ansträngning) bidra till den efter förmåga? Jag kan tänka mig någon slags kompromisslösning där man måste göra ett aktivt val för att inte donera hela sin kropp, och där människor som gör det inte heller får donationer vid behov. Absurt att religiösa föreställningar är standarden.

Exdiaq
2014-04-09, 12:45
Varför ska någon kunna ta del av välfärden utan att (helt utan ansträngning) bidra till den efter förmåga? Jag kan tänka mig någon slags kompromisslösning där man måste göra ett aktivt val för att inte donera hela sin kropp, och där människor som gör det inte heller får donationer vid behov. Absurt att religiösa föreställningar är standarden.

Ska alltså bara gälla arbetslösa som inte betalar någon skatt?

likt
2014-04-09, 13:12
Ska alltså bara gälla arbetslösa som inte betalar någon skatt?

Nej, eller hur menar du då? Att man ska kunna köpa sig fri? Det tycker jag låter som en jättedålig idé.

Jag tänker att man kan kräva vissa saker av medborgare i en välfärdsstat, och det gör man ju också. Man tar ju i nuläget inte bort folks välfärd när de bryter samhälleliga överenskommelser, men man bötfäller och fängslar dem. Kraven måste stå i proportion till individens förmåga (man kan inte kräva att svårt sjuka människor ska arbeta och betala skatt), men man kan heller såklart inte kräva att personen bidrar med 100% av sin förmåga (annars blir ju samhället ett arbetsläger). I någon utsträckning blir det alltså frivilligt att bidra till välfärd. Att donera sin kropp är dock något som kräver absolut noll ansträngning, och som inte har några konsekvenser för individen, och då tycker jag det är rimligt att ha det som ett absolut krav.

eternallord
2014-04-09, 13:24
Är väl rimligt att man i dagens statliga sjukvårdssystem ska ha som krav att mottagare av donerade organ också själva ska vara på donatorlistan.

Tricce
2014-04-09, 14:29
Till rätt flicka skulle jag donera mitt hjärta dock....... /end klyscha :d

Latissimus Dorsi
2014-04-09, 14:40
Borde inte vara frivilligt.

Du skojar

likt
2014-04-09, 14:45
du skojar

nä.

4623
2014-04-09, 15:00
Du skojar

Hur var det med att läsa allt?