A "smaller" Formal Challenge to =all= practicioners in Molecular Neuroscience.
I =think= I'm finally catching-on... folks're giving me a "test" of my
understanding of "molecular" stuff... why not? I have, after all, spoken out
=strongly= against the "drug-folks-back-to-'reality'" fashion that's been the
"rage" in Neuroscience ever since Neuroscience "decided" that the "thing to do"
was to emulate the "great success" of the WWII wartime Physics efforts... "big
science" in the vein of Vanavar Bush's _Pieces of the Action_, and all.
Only problem was that Neuroscinece turned its back upon the Neural Topology,
thereby, losing itself, in trying to "be Einstein" before, first having "been
Gallileo" and "Newton".
To "cut to the chase", if you care to, please show me how =any= "molecular"
stuff "violates" what's described in AoK, Ap9... or how it =possibly could=. I
give you the entirety of mollecular Neuroscience as the "domain" in which you
can search for a contradiction to that which is discussed in AoK, Ap9.
It would only give me Joy if you could find anything that meets the terms of
this Formal Challenge... will it give the Challenged folks Joy when they
cannot... "that is the question" (to quote the Bard, succinctly). K. P.
Collins
Hans E Heissler wrote:
> Hello,
> we are working on a project dealing with biochemical alterations in the
> brain during severe head injury. In some patients we've observed transient
> increases of interstitial glycerol/glycerine levels after administration of
> agents including glycerol. As there is no evidence for technical artefacts
> or procedural influences, we hope that similar effects have already been
> observed elsewhere.
>> We would greatly appreciate any kind of suggestions, information, or help.
>> Kathrin Koenig
>>koenig.kathrin at mh-hannover.de
