I’m a bit unsure of what to do. I’ve currently been studying neuroscience for 2 years but I find myself more attracted to the clinical side of things and the brains relation to behaviour rather than pure anatomy/cellular neuroscience. I was wondering if it’s worth it to pursue a medical degree?

The thing is, I’m not that interested in the rest of the body so getting an MD will be hard. I’d love to do research on clinical subjects like MS/Schizophrenia but that seems like a hell of a gamble and also the detective side of figuring out diagnoses and each case being different ( instead of doing the same thing for years upon years in research ) seems a bit more interesting.

I was wondering if anyone has gone through something similar and what you did or if you have any advice for me at all, thanks !

Hi everyone!

Although I'm aware that the sub is heavily geared towards an American audience (I love you guys), I was wondering if there was anyone out there who has followed the career path in neuropsychology/neuroscience in Europe (mainly within the EU, but elsewhere would be interesting to know too) and could briefly explain their academic and professional journey.

In particular, I am very curious to know which are, according to you, the best places to study, what were your first work experiences and if you have ever worked in the clinical field (and if you did so abroad if you encountered problems with equivalence/recognition of the title).

Thanks in advance to everyone who takes the time to reply and have a great weekend!

I haven't studied any neuroscience or psychology at all, so it may be wrong, but this is my hypothesis. Though I don't really have any evidence to affirm this hypothesis into an actual theory.

Forgive me if this is not allowed; we could use some fun. If this isn't allowed, please point me in the correct direction. Thank you

Hello everyone! I’m worI'mg on my third novel and would love some input on a particular part of the book. I want to be as accurate as possible, but it won’t bwon't% accurate. Feel free to discuss, brainstorm, and have fun with it.

Context:
The setting is approximately 200 years into the future, so Human medical science would have evolved and advanced significantly. To what extent? We can leave that up to the imagination. What is known is that humanity can extend life beyond 100 years; the longest-living human at the time would be 215.

Cybernetics, while not widespread or mainstream, are possible.

Humanity cannot detect, upload, or download a human consciousness. However, several alien civilizations can be unknown to humans.

Humanity has the ability to regenerate tissues and bone, regrowing limbs and healing wounds in a matter of minutes or hours, but this ability is limited to simple damage. Organ regrowth is not possible. However, certain alien civilizations have the capability unknown to humans.

Bio-engineering is also yet to be possible by humanity. (Okay, sue me. I did my research wrong in book 1. This, however, is important for book 3) The context for this part, the scene describing Bio-engineering in Book 1

“Bio-engineering?”"John had never heard of that field before and grew more curious.

“Yes, sir, it’s not ma"nstream yeit'sor. Has anyone been able to produce anything successfully? However, it is the theory that it is possible to create programmable, repairable biological machines: some as big as, say, a Cruiser and some as small as a single cell. But in theory, if we could produce microbes to repair structures and control the growth of wildlife constantly, this exact process to preserve a city has been hypothesized. It’s just never been tested since we can’t produce the genetics yet.”

Tcan'toblem:

At the end of the book ", two characters were killed in combat. Blast to the head, completely obliterating one skull, while the plasma shot continued and hit the second, causing a gaping hole in the other—instant death.

When they were brought back to Earth, their heads had regenerated entirely when they reached the space station. No one knows how. My characters don’t know that the planet they died on was fldon'wasn'tbio-engineering type nanobots referenced above, created from a long-dead civilization. These bots had regenerated the tissues and regrown all, yes, all cells of the brain; however, there still was no life. That is until a robotic group, created by the same long-lost civilization that created the bio-engineered nanobots, started to download two consciousnesses into the soldiers who died.

Book 2 only mentions significant brain activity, off the charts. The current level of technology isn’t sensitive enough to even measure the levels of aisn'tty that is going on, nothing else.

Book 3: Four years later, the brain activity stops. This is where you guys come in. Help me figure this out with perfect medical jargon and plausible explanations.

Right now, two scenarios pop into my head.

A.) They are still in their beds, monitored by the average nurses making their rounds; when the brain activity stops, just dead stops. EEG shows 0, then BP, Pulse, and any other vitals you can think of, drops, tanks, zero zilch, all the monitors go off, just dead, everything like the brain forces the entire body to do a hard reboot. Nurses call what they need (a military hospital Space Station based on current modern-day- NATO structures), and those who scramble typically come by to try to do their life-saving techniques when suddenly, they breathe, open their eyes, and sit up, and two new people in different bodies.

or

B.) If more plausible, the brainwave activity slows to regular activity, and they wake up. It's much less dramatic, but I do not know if that wouldn't more believable or realistic. I don’t want to be wholly unrealistic or wrong, but it wouldn't be genuine. We are talking 200 years into the flow and this isn’t going to be 100%; I want to make it believable

It isn't; thanks for the advice. Let's see where this goes!

It is an EMG hat, not EEG. How does it simulate actual Force abilities?" What is it gathering information from, exactly?

I was listening to a recent episode of Inner Cosmos With David Eagleman: Why do brains become depressed? (Ep 48, Feb 2024, recently ‘rebroadcast’: https://eagleman.com/podcast/why-do-brains-become-depressed/). 

A quite interesting theory was advanced by Jonathan Downar. He calls depression the fourth F: after fight, flight and freeze mode there is 'fold'. He connects it to the mouse forced swim test (or behavioral despair test), and how it is sometimes advantageous to fold up, stop moving, and wait for help. 

Does anyone know more about this fold state, and how it differs from freeze? I can't find anything about it online (though I find a few mentions of ‘fawn’ and ‘flop’). The only source mentioned by Eagleman is the textbook Brain and Behavior, which he edited with Downar, but in the edition I have (2015) there is no mention of folding.

I mean to measure the firing of a specific neuron for an experiment without needing to cut the skin in anyway.

I’m aware that basically every action or perception will alter the brain in someway, but I’m talking about more so long-term or even structural neural plasticity. hopefully my question makes sense.

Okay so I am a BME masters student interested in BCI research but for my masters thesis, I am working on eeg data analysis in this neuroscience research group. I, however, have minimal programming skills (ridiculous given the state of the world, I know but in my defence, my background is in Basic Medical Science and I dropped out of medical school too so.. not too much on me). Anyway, minimal programming skills even though I have been teaching myself Python for a while now. It still feels like a lot to do complex stuff.

Back to the main point:minimal programming skills but interested in BCI research and doing my thesis in a neuroscience group and is going to end up doing eeg analysis. Which, really, i think is a great place to start from but I am a bit overwhelmed with what I am supposed to learn/know.

I see a number of tutorials from Mike Cohen to entire university catalogues on youtube but, which would anyone here just recommend? (seems like a ridiculous question? I know). Is it right to just stick with mathlab and put python to the side? Are there materials out there that (I am fully aware of cohen's essentials of neuroscience for matlab and ANTS series) that can help a newbie like me? Is it even right to do this or am I way over my head?

Thanks

one common vegan exception are mussels and oysters, as they're non motile and thus unlikely to have developed fear/pain/suffering in their minimal sensory systems.

barnacles are a common bycatch on these molluscs and so I was wondering if they were sentient.

note the order of magnitude of bycatch is probably less (?) than eating bread where the agricultural process probably kills a decent amount of insects and small mammals which are, I'm guessing more complex than barnacles.

Would love to see visuals and connect everything together, and see everything in action (potential) (Lol, had to)! Any YouTube channels or podcasts that have helped y’all better understand neuroscience? Thanks in advance!

The movie Get Out came out six years ago, but I just watched it. The "Coagula procedure" they show in the movie—could something like that actually be possible?

I know there hasn’t been any successful brain transplantation in human history yet. It would definitely be complex, but maybe not entirely impossible? If it ever happened, would the donor's consciousness be transferred to the recipient?

In the movie, they suggest that a small part of the donor’s brain has to remain in their own body to make the procedure successful. The recipient’s brain is then attached over this small portion, allowing two consciousnesses to coexist in one body, with the donor’s consciousness being limited and suppressed.

I’m aware that the plot is purely science fiction, but I’d like to hear from those in the neuroscience field: if brain transplantation ever becomes possible, whose consciousness would take over the body? And is it possible for two consciousnesses to coexist in one body?

For those who have pivoted To other fields what job paths have opened up for you with eeg?

What do the “dys” diagnoses have in common in terms of parts of the brain implicated? I notice overlap in expression of each. Do they have anything in common? I’m thinking about dyslexia, dysgraphia, dyspraxia, dyscalculia - thanks -

My notes say that “integration of post synaptic potentials must result in a potential of about -65mV in order to generate an AP” but then later on state the threshold is -55mV. I’m confused why this is. Is -55mV the target and -65mV is the minimum threshold to cause an AP?

Do they still have applications in specific, highly complex cases where imaging may not provide all the needed information or where direct access is critical?

A neural basis of choking under pressure

I am more interested in this work provoking exploration into the pathophysiology of depression and psychomotor retardation/leaden paralysis, motor deficits in autism spectrum disorder, and motor deficits in schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

The mammalian cortex seems to serve a universal role of complex information integration and sensory processing.

I remember reading this paper Single-neuron representations of odours in the human brain | Nature

and i also remember seeing areas like the visual association cortex and the primary visual cortex being recruited during predictions of non-visual stimuli that evoked associations to visual ones. Neural Pathways Conveying Novisual Information to the Visual Cortex - PMC

i've been thinking about this a lot. The piriform cortex was recruited when visual stimuli evoked associations to smell without having any olfactory stimulus coupled with it, despite it's typical associations with olfactory processing. Furthermore, the new FDA approved drug for social phobia, fasedienol, never enters the CNS and indirectly modulates the amygdala and downstream networks through indirect stimulation of the olfactory bulb.

Do non mammals also have this complex processing in their CNS?

The way i see the cortex, is that features of broad cognitive/ emotional/ sensory domains are processed contextually, and a single stimuli or cognitive information/ emotional context is distributed across various areas as features depending on some dimension which governs how the information is distributed across the cortex, and to a lesser degree the subcortical structures.

Given the complexity of mammalian social behavior and higher intelligence, i'd assume the ability to integrate complex information and distribute stimulus features across different networks/ to reduce processing demands/ physiological needs is a necessity.

Do reptiles and animals without high intelligence also have this way of processing, or are the cortical areas of something like the green anole more limited in how features of different environmental stimuli are distributed across regions?

Can CNS neurons repair themselves from typical damage? Surely they can.

I know it is commonly accepted that they cannot regrow their axons once severed (it seems this is what is meant by not being able to "regenerate"), but surely CNS neurons can regenerate cellular structures just like any other cell from normal wear and tear and cellular metabolism, such as from cell membrane damage, myelin sheath damage, oxidative stress, etc.

I mean if they can grow new synapses (synaptogenesis), surely they can repair their own cellular structures like any other cell can?

And also why is it so hard to find any literature on this? Also why does every article not specifically define what "neuron regeneration" is, when it seems like they are referring specifically to a neurons ability to regrow their axons. Surely this would cause confusion?

See also my question on stackexchange:

https://psychology.stackexchange.com/questions/30639/cns-neuron-regeneration

I've been reflecting on the profound intensity of religious or divine ecstasy, and I can't help but notice how vastly it surpasses even the highest moments of joy we experience in everyday life, and I really wonder how this immense magnitude of happiness is even possible from a neurological perspective.

Think of some of life’s most treasured experiences: falling deeply in love, accomplishing a hard-earned goal, or savoring moments that fill you with awe and gratitude. These experiences are truly amazing—they can light up our lives and bring deep satisfaction. But here’s the thing: when you compare these everyday joys to the experience of religious ecstasy, they suddenly feel small, like they're missing something fundamental.

It’s as if the joys of everyday life, as wonderful as they are, are like holding a million dollars. That’s an incredible amount, right? But if you would then get a billion dollars, a million suddenly pales in comparison. The million dollars still holds value—it’s still incredible—but the magnitude of a billion changes your entire perspective on what’s possible. In a similar way, the ecstasy found in divine experience is so overwhelming, so vast, that even the most intense joys of life seem minor by comparison.

To me, this says something about the potential of the human experience. There’s a sense that religious ecstasy is not just "more joy" but is, instead, something qualitatively different. It reaches depths and heights that redefine what we think we know about happiness and fulfillment.

Here are 3 quotes from the novelist Dostoevsky, who has had ecstatic experiences as part of his epileptic seizures:

"I felt that heaven descended to earth and swallowed me. I really attained God, and was imbued with him. All of you healthy people don’t even suspect what happiness is, that happiness which we epileptics experience for a second before an attack."

"I experience such happiness as is impossible under ordinary conditions, and of which other people can have no notion. I feel complete harmony in myself and in the world and this feeling is so strong and sweet that for several seconds of such bliss one would give ten years of one’s life, indeed, perhaps one’s whole life."

"You all, healthy people, can’t imagine the happiness which we epileptics feel during the second before our fit... I don’t know if this happiness lasts for seconds, hours or months, but believe me, I would not exchange it for all the joys that life may bring."

How does is the reward system able to encode this huge magnitude of happiness? I have read that there is frequency coding that encodes the magnitude of a reward but neurons have maximum firing frequency so at some point the brain just can't physically encode greater happiness. So how does it work?

There is some research on the neural basis of ecstatic epileptic seizures, implicating the anterior insula in this phenomenon but I couldn't really find research about how exactly it is encoded.

I've been exploring ways to bring more nature into my indoor space to improve mood, and I’m considering a ceiling wallpaper with a blue sky. This got me thinking: is the color blue actually beneficial or detrimental to mood?

On the one hand, blue is a natural color, especially in the sky and water, which likely signaled a safe environment during human evolution. Being under a clear blue sky often feels calming and peaceful.

But on the other hand, the color blue is commonly associated with sadness or even depression (“feeling blue”), and I'm curious if this association affects our actual response to blue in the environment.

Is there any research or insight into how the color blue influences mood? Does the context—like an expansive blue sky vs. other uses of the color—change its psychological effect?

I'd love to hear your thoughts, especially if anyone has seen studies or research on this topic!

If someone's eyes were severed from the optic nerve while under anesthesia (the person wasn’t told their eyes would be removed), would they be able to comprehend that they lost their eyes or their ability to see upon waking up? Given that complete severance means there would be no visual input-not even darkness-how might they come to understand that they can no longer see? Would they feel like something is missing or wrong with themselves? Would they remember being able to see before hand?

Please lmk if there is a better subreddit for this question

Thank you!

The term "suffering" is rarely used in neuroscience literature. Which neuroscientific terms describe "suffering" best? Here are some examples:

• negative emotion
• pain
• negative affect
• negative valence
• unpleasantness
• aversion

What do you think which term fits best?

I want to identify the neural correlates of suffering in order to minimize it in severely suffering individuals.

Edit: By suffering I mean both mental and physical suffering.