[i've posted this in reply to my own post so that i can assure that it'll
not be removed from the board... it's probably still on the board, but i
couldn't find the original on the board, with all the header-switching, and
i don't care to reread msgs one-by-one. KPC]
i don't see where you get-off questioning my Honesty, or my Neuroscience,
Frank.
here is what i posted earlier [includes posts by Frank L.]:
________________________________________________
the incorrect view was solidly entrenched in the literature when i was in
'grad school' in 1975-6.
i definitely had it wrong in a 'comic book' i sent out, but don't recall
when i sent it out... (i did a 'comic book' in an effort to present the
ideas in a, hopefully, curiosity-invoking format).
i'd have to dig it out and reread it, but i think had it wrong in my 1980
paper, _Why: Human Behavior_ (which was the precursor to AoK, and treating
the hippocampi as a 'recorder' was the only major error that i recall as
being(?) in that paper).
[added in current msg: i'm going to get out the 1980 _Why..._ and see it the
error is in-there... will post one way or the other. KPC]
i had it right by the 'time' of my 1983 presentation at the Naval Research
Laboratory.
i'd have to check my papers to narrow it down more.
it might 'surprise' you, but i don't spend a lot of 'time' keeping track of
individuals who've 'borrowed' my work... and i'm not your 'research
assistant'. if you've a Q in Physics, which is what i've been working in for
the past decade, i'll be glad to provide refs.
i did what i had to do in Neuroscience. it's never been formally published.
i've thought more about my 'nausea' comments, the other night, and in the
past... it's 'just' a cop-out, 'dramatic' way of saying that i can say, with
certainty, that there will never be a Neuroscience paper with respect to
which:
1. i cannot redesign the experimental method, and make predictions that will
be verified.
2. or that i can demonstrate is incorrect.
by invoking the 'short-cut', 'nausea', i was just trying to convey the sense
of 'frustration' that i experience when i go in the Neuroscience stacks, see
all the disconnected stuff, know that it's all connectable, but 'there's no
use' in working to connect anything in it... because no one will listen, or
understand, anyway.
ken collins
flefever wrote in message <7n8os6$l7o at dfw-ixnews11.ix.netcom.com>...
>>Well, when DID you say the hippocampus was not for "storeing" memories
>and everybody else was saying it was. Was it in 1986? Before 1986?
>Can you ESTIMATE the date? What was the EARLIEST possible date? (i.e.
>when did you first start saying or writing this stuff?) How much
>longer DID everybody else persist in saying the hippocampus was for
>"storeing" memories? (can you name one or two of these people?)
>>F. LeFever
>>In <euMeIXA1#GA.274 at cpmsnbbsa02> "Ken Collins" <KPaulC at email.msn.com>
>writes:
>>>>beyond AoK, which was first circulated in 1986, i don't care to look
>through
>>my papers, Frank. I've preserved everything... anyone who wants to
>look can
>>see for themselves how the concepts developed.
>>>>i am certain that, when i started circulating AoK, it was as i stated
>in the
>>prior msg... to get folks in Neuroscience thinking-straight with
>respect to
>>it was one of the biggest battles i had to fight.... one doesn't
>easily
>>"forget" such, and the scars accumulated while doing it.
>>>>ken collins
>>>>F. Frank LeFever wrote in message
><7n677k$5j8 at dfw-ixnews16.ix.netcom.com>...
>>>>>>Just what was the date when you said the hippocampus doesn't store
>>>memories and everybody else said it did? (The theoretical statements
>of
>>>"the others" are publicly documented and dated; are yours?)
>>>[...]
>>>>>
____________________________________________________
Ken Collins wrote in message <#q3p8yX2#GA.276 at cpmsnbbsa05>...
>i knew it was glutamate all along, Frank, but glutamate was referenced in
>one of the refs i read in response to the work John's doing... so, since
>folks knew i was 'over-there', i didn't bother.
>>my earlier ref to kainic acid was a reference back to a series of
>presentations i gave at Smith College back in the 80s.
>>excitotoxicity is excitotoxicity... the nervous system 'moves away from'
>such... glutamate is in-there, but it's normally well-controlled, except
>when lesions disrupt the intact mechanism, as in strokes or epilepsy.
>>all of this is in AoK, Frank, if you'd 'just' =Think=, instead of 'moving
>away from'...
>>...guess AoK's just a bit to 'exciting' for you to deal with :-)
>>K. P. Collins
>>F. Frank LeFever wrote in message <7nokep$cvf at dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>...
>>>>Maybe I should put it more simply: it is really not relevant whether
>>10% or 100% of all the known and unknown neurotransmmitters are "in"
>>AoK, implicitly or explicitly; the point is, you do not have the most
>>basic UNDERSTANDING of them, and by your foolish rush to say something
>>you thought was relevant demonstrated that you do NOT know WHICH
>>excitatory amino acid is involved in NATURALLY OCCURING neurotoxic
>>reacttions due to seizure, stroke, or mechanical trauma.
>>>>By now, you should have had time to look it ups. (NOT in AoK, of
>>course; but if you think it's in there, by all means look again; if you
>>find it, tell us what it is.)
>>>>F. LeFever
>>>>>>>>In <utVGgqy1#GA.421 at cpmsnbbsa02> "Ken Collins" <KPaulC at email.msn.com>
>>writes:
>>>>>>i stand on what i posted...
>>>>>>every neuro-active substance that exists, or which can be artificially
>>>synthesized, is thoroughly discussed in AoK.
>>>>>>K. P. Collins
>>>>>>F. Frank LeFever wrote in message
>><7ngk0i$j3e at dfw-ixnews14.ix.netcom.com>...
>>>>>>>>What a pathetic clutching at a pretense of knowing something:
>>>>"implicit", oh, yeah...
>>>>>>>>You would have been better off if you had left it implicit, but
>>>>NO-o-o-o: you had to throw in a word you had read somewhere (as
>>usual,
>>>>without understnding the context at all). At about the time you
>>>>stopped reading, kainic acid was all the rage for EXPERIMENTALLY
>>>>INDUCED lesions, but surely you MUST know (QUICK, re-read AoK, it
>>MUST
>>>>be in there SOMEWHERE--maybe next to the missing fornix section?),
>>MUST
>>>>know that when people are talking about ENDOGENOUS OVERPRODUCTION due
>>>>to seizure or stroke or trauma. they are talking about SOME OTHER
>>>>excitatory amino acid; one which is very important in normal
>>>>functioningf; indeed, one which is the neurotransmitter in perhaps
>>90%
>>>>of the brain's synapses (well, don't flame me if I am off by 1 or 2
>>>>percentt).
>>>>>>>>Enough hints? I won't say whatt it is until you've had a chance to
>>>>look it up and post it and say "I knew that!"
>>>>>>>>F. LeFever
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>In <uVk4xnk1#GA.252 at cpmsnbbsa05> "Ken Collins" <KPaulC at email.msn.com>
>>>>writes:
>>>>>>>>>>'excitotoxins'... chemically-induced rampant TD E/I(up, up)... as in
>>>>'kainic
>>>>>acid'.
>>>>>>>>>>it's all (implicit) in AoK, Frank.
>>>>>>>>>>ken collins
>>>>>>>>>>F. Frank LeFever wrote in message
>>>><7nd3lg$o5a at dfw-ixnews4.ix.netcom.com>...
>>>>>>>>>>>[...]
>>>>>>>>>>>Knowing personally someone who has played a very important role in
>>>>>>establishing the role of excitotoxins in hippocampal damage due to
>>>>>>seizure, and giving considerable attention to the role of
>>>>excitotoxins
>>>>>>(i.e. over-produced excitatory amino acid transmitters) in other
>>>>>>conditions (stroke, head trauma),
>>>>>>>>>>>[...]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
