In class we discussed the neuroscientist's toolbox. Of the various tools neuroscientists use which do you find the most interesting? How does that tool work? What types of research questions can you ask using it? What research question would you ask if you had such a device? Are there any ethical issues realted to this technique?
Let me know if you have any questions about how to proceed.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was the most interesting for me to learn about during our class discussion. TMS is used with EEG or MEG. This tool temporarily disrupts the normal activity of the brain in a small area.
Neuroscientists use TMS to study the cognitive functions of the brain when certain areas are disrupted. The questions that researchers ask during a TMS can vary from having the subject sing a nursery rhyme or reading aloud. Researchers will have the subjects do these various cognitive functions in order to see how their brain is effected during a disruption (TMS).
If I was operating a TMS device I would ask the subject to say the ABC's since this seems like a very simple cognitive function. I would also ask subjects to say their own name and other personal information in order to research how this common knowledge is effected by short brain disruptions.
I don't feel like there are any ethical issues with TMS. According to the book & other research I have previously done, TMS is painless and the subjects do not feel the electrical currents or magnetic fields that pass through their brains. Also, there doesn't seem to be any harmful side effects of those who have experienced a TMS procedure. TMS is a safe tool that allows researchers to gather more information about the relationship between our brains & cognitive functions.
Of all of the neuroscientist's tools that we discussed on Thursday, I feel that the MRI and the fMRI are the most interesting for me. I don't think I can think of anything cooler than a giant hyper-cooled, superconductive magnet. Very simply, from what I understand, both the MRI and the fMRI function in the same way. It is a tube that generates a pulsing magnetic field. The pulsing of the magnetic field causes the hydrogen atoms in our body to line up. Once the field pulses a signal is sent to coils in the machine. The coils sends yet another signal to a computer which then processes the information retrieved. Each tissue is assigned a different gray-scale color based on the signal that is received by the machine. This allows radiologists to distinguish between the various organs and tissues in our body. The difference between an MRI and an fMRI is that people that undergo an fMRI are injected with a tracer. Then, the individual will be scanned once to determine a "normal" state of brain functioning. Then they are presented with some sort of stimuli to "excite" some portion of their brain and then a picture is taken of their reaction. The tracer will show up in areas of the brain that are activated by the various stimuli. Researchers can communicate with the brain this way. The kinds of things researchers would be likely to look for is the similarities and differences in reactions to the same stimuli in a large sample. It's likely that they would be able to determine a normal scan of a brain relative to the group and they would be interested in looking at the various reactions trying to determine whether or not similar areas are activated by any number of stimuli. So to put it in one line; researchers are likely to look for the differences in brain activity to various stimuli in a large number of people. Since my personal interests are in emotion, I would want to know how people react after someone had said something to them to try to invoke an emotion; whether it be fear, love, anger, joy, etc. To wrap up my findings on the MRI and fMRI I will discuss the ethical concerns (or in this case, lack thereof). As far as studies have shown, there is no known harm in the MRI and fMRI. It's not a radioactive device, there hasn't been any evidence of potential damage to pregnant women given an MRI, and as long as there's no magnetic objects anywhere near the range of the machine it appears to be completely harmless. This isn't ENTIRELY certain however because it is still a relatively new technology. There have been reports from people that have felt warm after the scan and people that received tattoos in the WWII era should be careful about receiving an MRI because of the metallic content in the tattoo ink.
Since I have previously researched PET scans and fMRI scans I thought it would be nice to research a neuroimaging technique that I have not learned much about. I felt that an EEG test was the topic I wanted to focus on. I remember learning specifically in class that an EEG can record the time and location in which neural activity occurs in the brain. I also recall the creepy picture of the guy who was hooked up to an EEG. It seems like a complicated process with all the wires that have to be attached to a patient’s head. EEG is short for electroencephalogram and its most important use is to diagnose epileptic patients. Epileptics experience seizures and a seizure will record abnormal brain activity so this is why doctors sometimes perform EEGs. Recorded analysis of an EEG is printed out as either an EP or ERP which is known as either an evoked potential or an event related potential. Both types of potentials occur when the brain is reacting to a stimulus. According to WebMD, when completing an EEG a researcher may ask a patient to complete specific breathing patterns, or to look at a bright light that may continuously flash. Also, researches may want to record neural activity during your sleep. Falling asleep could be a difficulty and sometimes sedatives are needed. If I had such a device I would be interested in showing positive stimuli such as tempting food or negative stimuli such as a picture of rotten meat. My research question would be how the neural activity compares when a person’s motivation level is changed. I do not feel there are any important ethical issues that are raised when a person takes an EEG test. There is no pain felt during the procedure, and does not include any electrical stimulations as some people would assume. It can be helpful towards the person’s health as far as diagnosing goes and can also aid in finding out the stage of recovery a patient’s brain is in after their consciousness changes, and discover if a person in a coma is brain dead or not.
The following website helped me form my comment:
http://www.webmd.com/epilepsy/electroencephalogram-eeg-21508
This time around I picked the EEG. I picked the EEG because I already did a bit on TMS in the first week of assignments and I didn’t know much about the EEG so I thought I would learn more.
During the EEG electrodes are placed on different regions of the head (sometimes even in the nose). They are usually placed by glue but rarely there can be tiny needles on the electrode. The method depends on what they are trying to study. They may want the patient to be asleep or just have their eyes close. They usually want them to be still (but in one type of test, at least, they want them to move). The EEG works by detecting the different electrical activity in the brain. Different electrical activity happens at different ages, sleep/wake cycles, and can be influenced by medications and activity. It helps detect things like epilepsy, mental disorders, brain death, keep an eye on brain activity during surgery, tumors, sleep disorders, and other abnormalities. It even has some uses with mapping the brain.
If I had such a device I would focus on disorders such as Schizophrenia and substance abuse, to see if there were any differences in their brain’s electrical activity.
Because this method only observes what is happening in the brain there really isn’t much for risk to the patient in this case, the most there would be is causing a seizure while showing the patient bright lights or strobes (in some tests), which they are prepared for. Also, sometimes they are given anesthesia or sleep deprived for a night, which is easily remedied by having a driver present. So there really isn’t much for ethical concern here.
http://www.webmd.com/epilepsy/electroencephalogram-eeg-21508
Classroom Extension Week #3
I chose to write about the EEG. The EEG stands for Electroencephalography. The main purpose of the EEG is to read the electrical activity and calculate the frequency of the neurons firing within the brain. It is used over a time period of twenty to forty minutes. It is used mostly for cases dealing with Epilepsy. Epilepsy has been seen to cause problematic behaviors and can be onset due to coma, brain damage, tumors, strokes, etc.
To conduct an Electroencephalography, electrodes are placed on the scalp. Each area of the scalp is named and is known for certain specific things. The electric waves are measured to see what areas of the brain are being triggered. The EEG can be used to understand the purpose and use of the different areas of the brain through the EEG.
During EEG tests many questions come to mind. Is this procedure painful? Also, the brain can be triggered by a number of things, therefore, how do you know that the trigger is onset from the question or activity that you are giving the person at that time? Couldn’t there be other factors that come into play during the tests that are cause the neurons in the brain to trigger?
If I was conducting research with the EEG I would be very particular with the type of people I test it on. One main purpose of the EEG is to predict the onset of seizures and also to measure the brain’s electrical activity of a person with Epilepsy. But, the people diagnosed with these disorders are highly medicated. That plays a big role in the brain activity of a person. You need the person to be unaffected by any and all drugs to get accurate and reliable results.
There are two main ethical issues with the EEG. One would be the subject of pain. How do you calculate the amount of pain a person can take when everybody’s pain levels are so different. For one person taking an EEG, they might not find it painful at all, whereas, someone else might find it painful. Secondly, the majority of people having EEG tests done have disorders. How can we ask these people to take these tests when they might not be in the proper mind set to take them. For example, someone with seizures that decides to take the test…what if they have a seizure during the EEG? How do we know that the EEG didn’t cause the seizure. It just boils down to what triggers the neurons to fire.
I am interested in Positron Emission Tomography. I participated in a study at the University of Iowa Hospital my freshman year in which I was administered a PET scan. A pretty large needle was put in my right arm. I was told it was put into an artery (there was a much smaller needle in a vein in my left arm) and injected radioactive water. I was laying with my head in a large machine and a screen in front of my face. The screen showed little problems like "what is different about the two pictures" and I was asked to just answer them out loud into a microphone. It was interesting.
PET involves using a radioactive tracer that bonds to glucose. As the unstable tracer breaks down in emits positive particles called positrons. A large machine records the positron emission and provides a real time picture of approximately where and how much glucose is being used in the brain. I was asked to complete simple problems while being scanned so the researchers were probably asking what areas of the brain are involved in the process of problem solving. I would be interested in memory and the processing from short to long term memory. PET combined with a CT scan can give more precise information about location in the brain.
Ethically PET is acceptable for use although it is considered at least minimally invasive. The tracer is a radioactive compound and while radiation is in minuscule amounts in rare occasions it can possibly cause some small cell damage. Generally the benefits are considered to outweigh the risks.
forgot this
http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/positron-emission-tomography
I found the EEG (Electroencephalogram) most interesting, though, all of the ‘tools’ in a Neuroscientist’s toolbox are interesting. I chose the EEG based on the information it gives - time and location of brain activity. It is weird to think that we can put electrodes on the outside of the head or scalp and those will register brain use. It makes me think of Phrenology - in that brain seems to be closer to the head surface then it really is. Also, that this machine will make lines based on your brains activity as it is happening - the amount that is happening and where, based on what electrode picks up the information/signal.
There are a ton of research questions that can be asked using the EEG. One could find information about Epilepsy and see what areas of the brain are affected or have been affected by seizures. There has been research done on brain damaged people or those that are assumed to have Alzheimer’s disease. One could use an EEG for people in a coma to see what areas of their brain, if any, are still functional. With these people the EEG would show where their brain has the most damage or is least functional. With more trials the plasticity of the brain could be seen. Different areas of the brain may start to function while these nonfunctional/ dead spots were supposed to be active.
However, I would ask questions about brain lateralization and left/right handedness. We talked about this in class the other day and I am interested in the subject - it is something I can relate to. I am left-handed and I have a brother who is ambidextrous. I am curious if we would follow the same pattern of having the left side of our brain ‘control’ the right side of our body etc. In class it was mentioned that sometimes left-handed people do not follow this and their brain actually matches the side of body that it works with. This is interesting because I have heard that left-handedness is sometimes because of an injury or accident that has happened and the person is forced to become left-handed. That was the case for a close friend and me. I would also like to see how the brain works with people who are ambidextrous while doing tasks that they use opposite hands for. For my brother it would be eating with his right hand and writing with this left. What areas of the brain are working during these tasks?
I can not think of any ethical issues with the type of research that I would like to do with the EEG. There are ethical issues that could come from other areas of research. One that comes to mind is when looking at a coma patient’s brain. If there is no brain activity should we stop their care- knowing that they can never come back or be who they were before they were in a coma? On the other hand know what areas of the brain are not functional it could help. If we know that one area is not working but there are other areas known to compensate for that area - rehabilitation can be aimed at getting that person around that obstacle. An EEG can shed light on where exactly this person is having problems or why this person is having trouble. It has a the potential to tell a lot of information but with any medical advance there are areas that can push morals and ethics.
http://www.webmd.com/epilepsy/electroencephalogram-eeg-21508
I really think the MRI and fMRI is really interesting. The fMRI is the most intriguing to me. The fMRI uses a powerful magnetic field and types of radio frequency pulses to measure the change in blood flow related to neural activity happening in the body. What makes the fMRI really beneficial is the fact that it has such a low level of invasiveness. It doesn't expose the body to radiation and it is relatively easy to do.
Describing exactly what it does is kind of complex, but I will take a shot at it. Obviously since this involves magnents... magnetic impulses pass through the body. A computer reads the impulses it recieves and interprets them to create an image. What happens in the body is the more complex part. The body has a hemodynamic response in which blood releases glucose to neurons at a greater rate in an active part of the brain than in an inactive part of the brain. Hemoglobin in blood has an oposing magnetic field when it has a greater amount of oxygen, therefore the signal will be different depending on the level of oxygen in the blood provided to the area, creating and image we can see (one that shows where brain areas are being more active).
With this procedure you can see the anatomy of the brain, determine which parts of the brain perform certain actions, help assess what affect a disease or something like a stroke has had on the brain, and use as a guide for a future surgery...helpful again because of it's low evasiveness. If I were doing some sort of research on this type of scan I would probably just want to localize on functions of the brain, mostly emotions or memory based on my interests.
As far as ethics, this type is mostly harmless. It does expose the person to radioactive chemicals and doesn't demand a lot from them either. I suppose you could feel claustaphobic in the machine, but as far as true ethics there is no real danger here.
I like fMRI's the best. Basically, how it works is that it is a PET scan on top of an MRI scan (two in one). The PET scan requires the use of a radioactive chemical that breaks down with glucose consumption in the brain, allowing scientists and doctors to detect the areas of most activity. MRI scans use the fact that each tissue of the brain, based on the specific alignment of neurons, has a unique magnetic property so hydrogens have a unique alignment. The MRI machine sends a pulse that puts all of the Hydrogens in a certain position and then measures how long the Hydrogens take going back to their original formation. It gives structural information more than functional information.
If the fMRI is used you get both input about where the activity is and how much activity there is. The way I understand it, they have to provide a certain stimulus for it to be of much use. So they stick the subject in the magnet and take a look at the resting activity in the brain and then ask them something or show them something and watch which area of the brain becomes active. So maybe you make the patient angry and observe that the areas around the amygdala light up.
The MRI part is non invasive and I do not think there are any ethical issues involved there. But the PET scan does require that injection. I don't think doctors would be employing it if it inflicted any real damage but there might be allergy issues involved.
I really find the MRI and fMRI to be interesting... the fMRI more so. to think that we can look at a brain in action and see what is firing away is awesome. The technical side of the whole process sounds like science fiction... you enter a huge tube to find yourself surrounded by super gigantic electromagnets and after twenty minutes of holding still and listening to loud swooshing and clicking noises someone in a room near you has fully inspected your brain and all its innerworkings. only a few decades ago this really would have been science fiction. my mom brought home a neat little cd her neurologists made for her of an MRI she had done and we got to check out her brain. I loved it! Its not everyday you get to check out your parents brains.
The electroencephalogram (EEG) is the most interesting to me because it is dealing with the activity going on in your brain. I think the fact that the activity is produce by neurons in the brain firing it is cool to think about, but really what made me the most interested with this one at first, was the fact that it looks crazy. Pictures of people getting an EEG look scary, even though that is not the case.
This test is done by a physician and typically lasts 1-2 hours. The physician will attach electrodes to the patients head with a type of paste to ensure that the electrodes will stay in place. The electrodes are all connected to a computer, which helps to map out the activity going on in the brain. The activity is actually shown with lines consisting of waves (the activity). Depending on what the physician is trying to measure they may ask you different things. WebMD gave the examples of looking at a light, going to sleep, or breathing deeply. There is no pain associated with EEG test and the only thing really stated about the paste is that you may have to wash it out of your hair afterwards (seems fairly harmless).
An EEG can be done for many reasons. The most common is typically if people are showing signs of being epileptic, it can confirm if they have epilepsy. If people are starting to show signs of dementia or losing consciousness it may be helpful. EEG is very helpful for sleep disorders as well as to tell if a person who is in a coma is brain dead. This test may help to distinguish if a problem a person is having is truly in the brain or if it may be another physical problem.
I personally think it would be very interesting to use an EEG during finals week to see the brain activity for students and to see how that compared to a normal week of school. I think it would be interesting to know if there was a lot more activity going on in the brain in finals week, due to the fact that the student has so much going on.
Other questions a person could ask involve just seeing what part of the brain was damaged after certain events, a lot of research with epilepsy and area of brain damage could be looked at, research with memory diseases (dementia, and Alzheimer's) could be looked at, and sleeping patterns and brain activity could be a research topic. Really anything involving brain activity could be used. There could be a general study where different stimulus’s were brought in front of the person being tested and they could measure see the brain activity for each one.
As mentioned early there is no pain associated with EEG and it is a harmless process. Therefore, the only ethical situations I could foresee would be if doctors did not receive consent from a family to do an EEG of their family member in a coma. Other aspects that would be unethical with would along those same lines. Especially with Alzheimer's and dementia cases because the patient themselves may not want the procedure if they do not understand or are confused, but the family may push for it.
In my opinion fMRI is probably the most interesting technique among all the neuropsychological tools.
I vote for it, as being the so called on-line research method it enables studying processes taking place in brain. I think it is absolutely fascinating opportunity to investigate brain functioning, detect the zones activated during different cognitive operations.
I certainly never had an opportunity to work with fMRI, but if I could… I would probably be focused on localizing different areas of the brain and mapping it with the correlated functions. What is more important, it can help us not just detect the “language area”, for example, but to see how “emotional area”, “memory area”, “motor area” are connected during the speech production.
I would like to share with all of you an interesting web link. This is a webpage of a Cambridge researcher Martin Monti, whom I met at the NYI-St. Petersburg school of Cognitive linguistics and Culture in 2009.
Martin presented us his work mostly connected with the vegetable state patients based on fMRI technique. His research was concentrated on the possibility to define the actual thinking process in a brain of a person, who has no connection with the world at all, except through fMRI. I am still impressed with presented results and encourage you to visit his web page and read more about it.
Another aspect that Martin shared with us was a series of experiments on localizing “Math” and “logic” in brain. The team did it by giving participants tasks on logical and calculating questions. Some other were used to filter the vision activity, emotional, motor activity and other non-related processes. I was more than happy with the results, as it appeared to be according to the study that calculating and logical thinking are not that much related, although there is some overlap at the same time.
I do not see any ethical problems that might occur with fMRI method. In Martin’s work, on the contrary, you can see obvious positive effect of using this method.
Sorry, that is the link:
http://www.mrc-cbu.cam.ac.uk/people/martin.monti/
I find the MRI scan to be the most interesting. A MRI involves locating the densities of hydrogen atoms in the brain using electromagnetic power. This scan identifies the active areas of the brain because these areas have increased blood flow to them. I also find fMRI scans to be interesting as well. These show the same results, however, in a much faster fashion, allowing the recording of faster cognitive functions.
Many research questions can be asked using this type of scan, for starters, pretty much anything dealing with the location of a certain thought. Researchers can also find out which areas of the brain are being used for certain tasks.
If I were a researcher with his technology I would probably ask a question similar to the topic I wrote about in the divergence activity last week. I was really interested in the research being done with the fMRI to determine which locations of a building a participant had seen before based on the activity in different parts of their brain.
There are huge ethical issues related to using this technique for these purposes. There is debate about whether or not law enforcement will be able to use this technique for incrimination in the courts. Personally, I think this type of evidence should eventually be able to be used once more research has been done. I think of it along the lines of giving a DNA test which can be used against the accused in the courts.
What I found to be the most interesting was the PET scan. It allows one to almost target the brain. By injecting a radioactive tracer circulated into the blood it narrows down biologically active molecules. What occurs is the machine traces the beta decay; which in essence really didn’t mean a lot to me in till I fully understood what was happening. What occurs in beta decay Is the removal of an electron into antiparticle what some may call antimatter. This exact antiparticle is known as a positron. The positron travels through the body losing its kinetic energy allowing it to slow down and meet up with an electron. This process is called electron-positron annihilation, when the electron and positron collide they create a gamma ray. This gamma ray is a high frequency short wave length which is then detected by the scintillator. A scintillator is the device on the machine that can detect scintillation which is an illuminating light produced by the ionization of electron-positron annihilation, which is then detected by the PMT. The PMT is really sensitive to light thus enhancing the image. And through that process we have a PET scan. I think this whole process of bursting of electrons and antimatter, well in rather simple terms is pretty damn cool.
The research questions that can be asked of this in my opinion are limitless. With this scan coupled with a CT X-Ray one can create a 3-4 dimensional images. With this we can further explore actual images of the brain. This would allow us to view the workings of the brain. And with this new knowledge we would be able to narrow down certain aspects of the brain. Maybe by showing images to a pedophile we would be able to locate where their sex drive occurs. And throwing back to lobotomies we could possibly cut out that particular brain part. I don’t think I really need to mention the obvious ethical issues with this idea. Overall I think PET scans are great way of mapping out the brain, narrowing down what makes us tick.
The electroencephalogram, EEG, is by far the most interesting of the tools neuroscientists use. The EEG records the electrical activity in the brain through neurons firing in the brain. Usually 16-25 metal electrodes are placed on the scalp, held in place by a sticky paste. These electrodes are connected by a series of wires to a recording machine. The electrical impulses are converted by the recording machine into little wavy lines that are interpreted by the physician.
EEG's are usually performed in order to help diagnose epilepsy and determine what kind of seizures someone is having. It has also been used in diagnosing or examining those in comas, those with possible tumors, head injuries, or any other abnormal changes in body chemistry affecting the brain.
The EEG can be used to research further into epilepsy or degenerative diseases like Alzheimers. The main purpose of the EEG is to look at brain activity so it would be very easy to find more research topics by looking at subjects that need to be looked at more thoroughly in that area. It could also be used to look at sleeping problems or during surgery to monitor brain functioning.
There shouldn't be any ethical concerns about using the EEG since it's a safe practice. The only significant problems experienced have been with people with seizures going into shock after being exposed to flashing lights sometimes used.
The tool that holds the most interest to me is definitely the positron emission tomography. PET scans fascinate me mainly because they can be combined with a CT scan to show anatomy and functioning.
A PET scan works by injecting a radioactive tracer, usually something the body can metabolize, which emit positrons. These emissions are recorded and used to create images. This important for research because a PET scan is a fairly non-invasive and safe method to see how the body is functioning in real time.
If I were able to use a PET scan to conduct research I would like to learn more about complex processes such as decision making. I am specifically interested in how the human mind processes the world from perceiving stimuli to making decisions.
PET scans do carry a small risk of cellular damage, but this risk is typically overshadowed by its benefits. As with many medical scans, fear of enclosed spaces can add an extra challenge for physicians.
http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/positron-emission-tomography
Unlike an MRI, an EEG (electroencephalography) simply reads what electrical impulses the brain is emitting when its neurons fire. For this reason, I think the EEG is the most interesting "tool" cognitive neuroscience uses.
An EEG is a machine that uses sensors on the scalp to pick up the electrical signals neurons use when they decide to "fire", or go into action. It measures the amount and the speed of the neurons "action."
EEG's are used extensively with unconsciousness, especially studying sleep and coma patients. We are aware of the different stages of sleep due to EEG's. Doctors determine the chances of a person recovering from a coma, or diagnosing "brain death" with the help of a EEG.
I think sleep studies are fascinating. I think its interesting to know how the brain slows down when going to sleep. With insomnia patients, the brain does not slip into a lower action; interrupting sleep. If given a chance, I would study why the brain in insomnia patients has such trouble falling into slower waves.
The EEG is noninvasive; there is no potentially harmful chemicals or radiation. The only threat is an allergic reaction to the paste used to attach the sensors. However, when diagnosing "brain death," their is always an ethical consideration of "pulling the plug."
http://www.talkaboutsleep.com/sleep-disorders/archives/intro.htm