TAG of the Week:
[Thank you to another HS320 genomic student for sharing this link]
As stated in the article, "Every dollar we invested to map the human genome returned $140 to our
economy — every dollar," the president said. "Today, our scientists are
mapping the human brain to unlock the answers to Alzheimer's."
As in most research project, scientists will study the brain of fruitflies and then other small animals. Once the technique is optimized, the human brain will be next. However, within a limited financial and resources allocation, can we really afford these multiple levels of effort to study the brain map? Or can we expect to have similar health benefits like our investment (i.e. our tax dollars) on the human genome map? Cures for Alzheimer's diseases, neurological diseases, and mental health illness can be possible by understanding the etiology, the connection between neurons (or lack of connections), and the topological effects. As we explored in class, with any 'novel investment' of a huge, ambitious project, we must consider some potential harms and unintended consequences.
As a tax-player citizens, what are questions that you'd like to ask the scientists undertaking this Human Brain Map, or concerns you'd like to express to this team?
NPR clip: Somewhere Over The Brainbow: The Journey To Map the Human Brain (dated Mar 31, 2013)
http://n.pr/XPX2Oo
I think Barack Obama's investment in the Human Brain Map Project is one that will not only return money to our economy, but pay humanity dividends that will forever invest in the future of science. The fact that Obama is granting scientists and researchers the money necessary to embark on a journey into the human brain shows his smarts and passion as a leader and to push this country/world to a better place. He has placed a strong emphasis on the engineering and science of this next generation and how crucial those areas are to the future of the world, so I think this is only following suit with his ambitions as a president. Whether or not our financial and economic resources allow for this kind of research we should at least attempt to unearth the neural networks of our brain. Anyone who fears that they will be directly or indirectly affected by alzheimer's or dementia will agree with me in saying that this research must be taking seriously and should be at the forefront of science.
ReplyDeleteI think one question that would be worth while answering is the genes that play a role in the development of different parts of the brain. I know we have biological markers that have described some of the story of how cells migrate and fuse together in parts of the brain, but the area still has quite a bit that is unknown. Another question that can be integrated with genomics is how to establish a database of these genetic markers that can help to treat people with brain diseases or even prevent them during their development. I think this brain mapping will be a great journey ahead and will require many health professionals to fully map and demystify the workings of the human brain.
I think that the Human Brain Map will have similar returns as the Human Genome Project, although over a longer period of time. The brain is extremely complex and a "map" probably would not be viewable like the genome - it will consist of many maps of neurological, biochemical, and electromagnetic pathways. Although abstract, these will be used the same way the completed human genome has been used: to identify molecular components, pathologies, and hopefully disease etiologies. When the project gets to this level in many years, breakthroughs will be made that will affect our lives, similar to how advances in the Human Genome Project were able to help Wartman. I think that this will be worthwhile, from both an economic standpoint and a health standpoint. Americans are skeptical of the government, but large-scale coordinated projects like this one (i.e. landing on the moon, the Human Genome Project) have been highly successful and I think good uses of taxpayer dollars.
ReplyDeleteI would like to ask the scientists involved in the Human Brain Map how long they think it will be, once the project begins, until major translatable medical breakthroughs occur. Humans are only living longer, so neurological diseases like Alzheimer's will become even more prevalent in the future. My biggest concern relates to private sector involvement in the project - who stands to benefit from it? Will there be a public vs. private mapping race like with the Human Genome Project? These concerns are small, however, and I believe that the ambitious project will be fruitful in the long run.
"People have been studying the brain fro centuries...The problem is that it's so complicated." - Some of my initial thoughts about human brain mapping project are exactly how Carl Zimmer responded, "You have to walk before you run." Brain mapping is the same idea as the human genome project and I disagree with the second person because we do have a problem in neuroscience. The complication in brain science is just that, it's brain science and all of what goes into neurosurgery is whatever the newest technology unfolds or what some surgeon has recently done. As Jeremy mentions this is going to take a long time, but I think our tax dollars are going to use if they are efficiently working on making tangible conclusions about brain mapping. We have already discovered the major parts of the brain and where lies most functions, but if we were able to do this on a map for individuals it would eliminate many side effects prior to surgery.
ReplyDeleteOne question I would like to ask scientists undertaking this project is why fruit flies and how are they going to be able to convince the public of the relevance? Do we have predispositions to a certain map for the brain. For instance, would our brain be a compilation of our parent's brain or look even remotely similar because of genese? If so, this would further the argument that this project is relevant because we could map our parent's brains.
I think overall, it is a good idea, but financially, I'm not sure they it will give back the economy more than what we individually will pay. The story about how the Human Genome Project helped Lukas Wartman was inspiring and it does show benefits from the Human Genome Project. However, the idea of mapping the brain to provide these same benefits is hopeful, yet, like Michael Eisen said, "The problem is that while the genome was finite, the brain is really infinite because not only does it have 86 billion neurons ... [and] 100 tillion connections, but those connections are changing all the time." It is hard to see if there will be a benefit from mapping the brain at all. I agree very much with Eisen about how mapping the brain is so much harder because there isn't really a set or common goal that can be identified. It's a great idea and I wish I could support it. If I had the money to, I would definitely support it, but with so much uncertainty and with the financial burden this economy has, I'm not so sure this project should be carried out right now. Maybe sometime in the future. My biggest concern for this project really is how much benefit do they believe they can get from this? Is the brain actually so infinite that this project may not even be worth it? If they can tell me that they can discover something constant about human brains, then I might be able to see the benefit of one day being able to cure Alzheimer's and other neurological diseases. But I'm really concerned about how confident scientists are they this project will help bring that benefit.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a good investment to map the human brain. I think something that is important to consider is the cost that will be saved if a disease, like Alzheimer’s, is cured. An emotional cost will not only be allayed, but also a fiscal one. If less people need to be in nursing home and under constant supervision, that will save a lot of healthcare costs. Additionally, there is no telling what discoveries can be made through this project. We may learn of new causes of disease, new disease patterns, and new ways to treat these diseases. Although the cost may be high, I think the return and outcomes that will be seen as a result are worth it. A few questions I might ask to the team are, similar to what some other students said, about how long it will take until usable research is obtained.
ReplyDeleteI think that this is a very complicated decision to make. On the one hand, I agree with the idea that perhaps, you may never know when you finished mapping the brain or you may never actually finish mapping it. This project is also very costly, especially if its a multiple-step effort. But at the same time, if the brain can be mapped, it might be very beneficial. If certain diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s can be explained from the mapping of the brain it will be a great advancement in science. On the other hand, I don’t know how well these or any diseases can be explained since the connections are always changing. I just think that the benefits and risks have to be carefully considered before investing in such a huge and costly project like this. Even if they do get to map the brain, like someone in the article mentioned, they may not be able to interpret it. If they actually do decide to go through with this project and they do get to map out the brain, a lot of research has to be done before they even attempt to interpret what the mapping means. I guess the questions and concerns I would express to this team is that, what do you think the biggest benefits and risks are? Which do you think outweigh the other? Also, if the brain gets mapped, do you think that the changes in connections can affect how you interpret the brain or affect the explanations of certain diseases that are obtained from brain mapping?
ReplyDeleteThe brain is amazingly complex and it has been studied for centuries. I think that this project is a good idea and can be compared to the Human Genome Project. People will be displeased and critiquing this project when they hear of the government spending money to research fruit flies and smaller brains before human brains but I could not agree more with the scientist who stated that in order to understand our brains, “we have to walk before we can run” and I think this research is very important. I think that this big budget project will deliver and that the money invested will be worth it. I also think it says a lot that our government is willing to provide funds for such advanced scientific research.
ReplyDeleteThis project has overwhelming potential to go over-budget because of the extreme complexity of the brain, however I still think it is worth doing. With 85 billion neurons this project is certainly a challenge. My primary question for the scientist undertaking this project is how they will account for our brains constantly changing. To those who argue that this large scale approach will not work, I say that it is certainly worth a try and I think that this project has a lot of potential.
Compiling a "Human Brain Map" is something that scientists I am sure had not even fathomed would ever be possible 100 years ago. Now, we are at least making advances as we have begun research on the brain, AND it is a hot topic for discussion. This is progress by itself. However, I certainly understand concerns from tax-paying citizens, especially with the unstable financial condition our country is currently in. The kind of thinking presented by Lukas Wartman, saying that we should "cross our fingers and hope," may not be the smartest move at the current time. That is not to say that he is absolutely on to something and we need to have more progressive thinking as this kind of research could potentially provide cures to such diseases as Alzheimer's.
ReplyDeleteOne must always be weary and observant of where their dollar is going and what it is going towards. This brain mapping does seem to be the next frontier for medical science/research. It is not something that should be shunned, but rather embraced and in my opinion, explored with careful examination and intense thought. In all, while this area must be researched, scientists and the government must also recognize the intense financial times the country is going through and adjust accordingly.
I would support a government effort to create a human brain map. Alzheimer's disease is one of the top causes of death in this country and mental illness, which is getting much media attention lately, needs more attention. While a project of this scope would cost a lot of money and use a lot of resources, I think the benefits are widespread for Americans. I would want to ask the scientists more about the overlap between the Human Brain Map and the Human Genome Map. I would want to make sure that we could not get this information from the research we have already done and that the benefits of compiling a Human Brain Map really were as critical and expansive as I think they are. I might also suggest waiting a few years until the economy is in better shape because while I think this is important, I do not think it is our number one priority right now. Personally, I think the government spends a lot of money on things that do a lot less good for the people of this country and I do think that a Human Brain Map would a very wise investment for this country and for this world.
ReplyDeleteI honestly don't know if we can really afford multiple levels of effort to study the brain map. Our health care system is weak enough, and I highly doubt it can support the weight of such efforts. I am also unsure if we can expect to have a similar benefit of $140 ROI for every $1 spent. That remains to be seen. I cannot make a prediction because I honestly do not know. But my hope would be at least a dollar-for-dollar match on each dollar spent. I am supportive of an effort to create a human brain map. Alzheimer's a a very common cause of death among the elderly. Finding a cure is imperative, and this Human Brain Map looks like it can get us there.
ReplyDeleteThe first question I would ask the scientists undertaking this Human Brain Map would be if there is enough money to carry out this project right now. It's no secret that the US economy is still weak. I would hate to see this project come to a halt due to lack of funding. I would rather this project be put on hold now until the economy shows significant improvement.
Overall, my hope would be that the cures to many mental illness can either be better understood or cured through this project. There is still so little that we know about the causes of disease. We know factors that contribute to someone developing these diseases, but not exactly the biological reasons. Knowing these reasons can lead to the creation of better treatment and/or medications.
As others have already mentioned, I am all for investing on research for mapping the human brain. I feel like in this case, the benefits outweigh the costs. Wartman’s fight against cancer, in the article, was very inspiring and is a good example of how investment in research can save lives. If the Human Genome Project can help save lives by mapping our genotypes, the benefits of mapping out the human brain can be infinite, knowing where a problem is starting and how to control it. It is especially crucial because our brain is our main control center of the body. In an economic sense, it is understandable why people may be resistant to this investment, since the human brain is so complex. However, a first step should be taken. There may be possibilities of treating incurable diseases like Alzheimer’s. This can save a lot of money and result in a healthier population. Then again, there is always that concern about knowing when the project would actually be considered complete. In that case, a lot of money would be spent without a final product.
ReplyDeleteAs a tax payer, I would want to ask the scientists about how they plan to go about this project, such as where they are planning to start from. Also, would it be a legitimate method by moving from work on fruit fly brains to human brains? There is a huge difference in complexity between the two, so it might not be the best way to make a comparison. I would also be curious about the ethical aspects, such as the privacy of the research subjects. Once a human map of the brain can be completed, there may also be concerns about discrimination between people with specific mappings, similar to discrimination due to genotypes. How would they tackle that issue? Overall, I believe that investing in this project would be a huge step in public health and can give us so many answers. I guess my suggestion would be to wait it out a bit longer however, so that scientists can get a better idea of the extent of the project before money is spent.
I honestly have no specific questions to the scientists or the team of this Brain Mapping project. It is obvious that this project is still in its conception-phase and they cannot possible answer any questions regarding outcomes they have hardly begun to touch upon. What I mean to say is, there is no way to know what is unknown; clearly the reason they want to undertake this massive project is because we know so little about the brain. As the article described, of our 85 billion neurons, 1’000 are used at a time. In other words, we know absolutely nothing in the grand scheme of things. I think it is absolute both necessary and exciting that a massive project is being organized to look into the brain. I think it time that more effort be put into this organ that is our reason for being- it is the reason humans are who they are, it is what distinguishes us from every other creature on the planet. I think it is sad that it has to be a bureaucratic issue whether this project can get adequate funding or not. I completely disagree with someone like Eisen of UC Berkeley who claims they shouldn’t even try mapping the brain because it is “far too complex.” It is precisely BECAUSE it is complex that we are way past due studying the brain. Alzheimers is rampant in the world today along with Parkinsons, ALS and many other degenerative neurological disorders. Although we are living longer, the survival of our brain sometimes lags behind the rest of our bodies.
ReplyDeleteIt is imperative that a study like this finally gets done. As in Wartman’s case, gene mapping can have incredulous results: through mapping he basically cured his own cancer- the answer was right in front of him because science had found a way to read the language of our genes. It blows my mind that there is any question whether something similar should be started in the brain. The United States spends billions on foreign affairs and war- not to make this political, but it would be nice if Washington could put the same emphasis into a project like this that impacts every single one of us. The problem I feel is that it is hard for some people to want to put money into something that does not have immediate results. As they stated in the article, the Brain Mapping Project will not have immediate satisfactory results. However, after maybe another 20-30 years they could have life-altering revelations that could save a few million of us one day.
As a citizen of the United Sates, I believe that investing in scientific inquiry is one of the best investments our nation can make. If the promise of improving the livelihood of those suffering from disease or improving the quality of patient care is not enough incentive to justify investing in such causes, the positive impacts on the economy should propel us to action.
ReplyDeleteScientific research creates jobs in several fields beyond just lab scientists. The creation of jobs such in fields such as manufacturing, raw material production, engineering and media propel our economy. I believe that scientific advancements not only raise the standard of living for society in practical means (ie automobiles or computers) but also push the boundaries of what is considered acceptable level of human suffering when dealing with disease management. I hope that the Human Brain Map could offer relief to those suffering from many diseases and raise the standard of care, while also push the scientific community worldwide to do the same in many fields. The United States is lagging behind others in the international community in regards of scientific innovation, which is primarily a result of decreased importance of scientific education in schools and lack of federal research funding.
Therefore, I believe that President Obama’s decision to invest in the Human Brian Map will far outweigh any costs from the standpoint of both the human condition and the economy. I fear however that we will see a few small powers monopolize both the economical and informational outcomes of this study. We have seen such monopolies of power arise in the Human Genome Project, such as Myriad Genetics. I hope that no for-profit company will then capitalize on the influx of federal funding and then utilize their findings for private monetary gain. I tried to do a bit of research, but could not find any information regarding a provision or protection against this type of activity in the new Human Brain Map project. I hope that the fruits born of this scientific endeavor will be shared among the scientific community and delivery justly to the global population.
I really like how Eva talks about scientific research creating jobs and raising the standard of living. It is clear that she definitely took time to consider the benefits this project would have on various aspects of society!
DeleteAlthough it is most certainly a risk to invest in another project as large as the human genome map, the human brain map is similar in many ways and is definitely something worthwhile. Diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's alone cost several hundreds of billions of dollars per year, which is unquestionably more than the $3 billion put towards the 10 year human genome project.
ReplyDeleteI believe that we could expect to have similar health benefits to those gained from the human genome map. In the article, Carl Zimmer states that: "while the human genome was finite, the brain is really infinite because not only does it have 86 billion neurons… [and] 100 trillion connections, but those connections are changing all the time." I disagree; I believe that they are very comparable when you consider the epigenome - the part of the genome that is altered by environmental factors and is constantly changing. The idea of the epigenome basically means that a person's genetic structure can be altered in the way that changes the folding or condensation of DNA. The epigenome has recently been the "pro-nature" basis of the nature vs. nurture battle, as it states that changes in the characteristics of DNA due to environmental factors can be passed down to future generations - so you are not only what you eat, but also what your grandparents ate.
Although these two projects have the potential to be comparable in how they benefit humanity, there is also the change that the brain is too complicated for us to understand just yet. The potential harm is that we could invest a lot of money into something that we are not technologically or scientifically capable of understanding at the moment.
When I read the article, my opinion about the subject swayed numerous times. Initially, I thought mapping the brain will be a great development in science, and tax payers money is going to a good cause. Then as I kept reading, I was left to think that the brain is so complex it will be a dead end study. Because the brain is so complex new discoveries will lead to more complex findings, but I think it will become a vicious circle with no definite answers. As stated in the article, "while the human genome was finite, the brain is really infinite because not only does it have 86 billion neurons… [and] 100 trillion connections, but those connections are changing all the time." Will spending all of this money lead us to any concrete conclusions? Then as I concluded the article I switched back to my original position, that studying the brain will be beneficial for society and health as a whole. If scientists are able to map tangible abstracts of the brain, I think this can help lead to the discovery of etiologies and possibly cures or treatments for certain diseases. I think mapping the brain will be overall beneficial for society.
ReplyDeleteQuestions that I have are, why a fruit fly? How is such a small organisms brain similar to the complex human brain? Also how long will this study take before beginning to map the human brain?
I would support the Human Brain Map Project as both an economic investment, an advancement in neurological knowledge, and an advancement in the overall health of the older population of the United States.
ReplyDeleteI am confident that once completed, the Human Brain Map Project would return more money than was spent on the project, just as the Human Genome Project accomplished. If the secrets of the brain's connection to Alzheimers were uncovered, the United States would save money on nursing home and medical fees, because Alzheimers is such a long process taking about 10 years for the disease to progessively and devestatingly kill the person affected. The families are also greatly affected by this disease because many families end up trying to care for their loved ones physically and financially. This causes a great strain on the economy. This project would also be great in advancing neurological knowledge. The human brain is so complex that it is no where near being comprehending by scientists (kind of like space), so we need to invest in it, especially because it is vital to our lives and futures. This project would also advance the health of the entire United States. Alzheimers affects so many people right now and the number is only rising. It is important to research more biological and environment risk factors to reduce the number of people affected by this horrible disease.
I would have a couple questions for the scientists running this project. First, will they only be researching only biological markers of Alzheimers or would they research how different environmental and epigenetic factors affect the brain's link to Alzheimers as well? If so, which factors would they choose to research? I'm interested in learning about the epigenetic factors. Secondly, why are they choosing to start by researching the brain of the fruit fly? How confident are they that they could fully extrapolate that research and apply it to the human brain?
Alzheimers is one of the most crucial diseases of our day, because it affects so many people financialy, emotionally, and physically. It needs to be investigated further. This is why I would fully support this project.
I feel like with the current way that the US healthcare system is set up, we definitely do not have room to do a brain mapping project, regardless of whether it's a good idea or not. Our country is already in so much debt and prices for medical procedures are already high enough, and I wouldn't think it would be a wise choice to spend that much more money on a new project right now. However, if we did come to a time when we had the money to spend on this project, I'd definitely have a few questions and concerns about the project. I'd be very interested in how the mapping would actually be carried out, since the brain is such a delicate organ and many types of damage to it are irreversible. Would the people who's brains are being mapped be at high risk for injury, personality changes, intelligence loss, etc? I would also want to know what kind of results we could expect from this project. Will we definitively know when a person will develop Alzheimer's or just know that they may be at a higher risk for developing it? I think that unless we get solid results from this project, it may not be worth it. If they develop a way that can accurately identify these diseases, I think the project would be a very smart idea, since many of these diseases go undetected for an amount of time. If we have the technology to detect them sooner, people's outcomes may be less severe and their lives can be improved overall.
ReplyDeleteI do feel that in the long run this investment in the Human Brain Map will benefit the economy. After seeing the wealthy of information that has come from the Human Genome Project I would like to hope that the same plethora of knowledge about the brain could result from this new endeavor. However, this article does raise some interesting arguments against the project as well that, from a tax payer's perspective, should be carefully considered. First, I have to wonder if a budget of $3B will be enough for a project as massive as mapping the human brain, especially considering the multiple levels of research that will need to be conducted beginning with fruit flies and small animals and later moving to the human brain. Additionally, while the Human Genome Project also had the same budget, the project also took place over a decade ago so the funding may have gone farther than it would today. There is also some concern over what type of technology would be used to map the human brain. As expressed in the article, current technology like the MRI is not a high enough resolution to see the level of detail necessary for this project. The article also touched upon issues of opposition among the science community because of government involvement in trying to coordinate hundreds of scientists and have everyone working on the same project, the same goal. In particular, one question that stuck with me raised in the article is how do you know when you are done mapping the brain? The human genome is a finite construct, but the brain has around 85 billion neurons and 100 trillion connections that change all the time, which makes it seem like we may never fully understand or map the human brain. Finally, I have to wonder, as a tax payer, if I would ever see the results of the Human Brain Map in my lifetime. Would there be major medical advances that would benefit me within the next 25 years to help me live a healthier life and future treatments for illnesses such as Alzheimer's, schizophrenia, or Parkinson's? This project is a huge investment and if there is no guarantee of a return in either a economic or health care form, would this project really be considered beneficial and a good use of resources?
ReplyDeletePersonally, I do believe that any information gained by the Human Brain Map could be beneficial. However, after seeing information from the Human Genome Project being used for monetary gain I do wonder if there is the same potential for such events to occur as a result of this new project. What if we do figure out causes to schizophrenia or Alzheimer's? Is there to be a battle over who can patent and treat, maybe even one day cure Alzheimer's? Further, I have to wonder if this project will be as much of a success because as stated, the human brain is much more expansive and is constantly changing. Will the Human Brain Map every be truly complete or will it have to expand beyond the planned 10 years of study and far beyond the allocated $3B? I do believe that this project could be incredibly beneficial to the scientific and medical communities one day, but I also have to wonder about the project's feasibility which currently seems to be lacking. If it is not possible to get the scientific community to come together on this project, will it ever even take off? I think there is more planning to be done before the science community is ready to tackle the Human Brain Map, if it can come to a consensus.
As many other people who have posted before me have stated, this is a really tough decision. On one hand, as of 2013 more than 5.1 million Americans suffer from Alzheimer’s and unless we can find a cure or treatment, this number will continue to escalate. While our healthcare has gotten better with new technology, more individuals are living longer which increases their risk of Alzheimer’s. The disease itself is irreversible and progressively debilitating, affecting not only the individual but their family and loved ones as well. Mapping the human brain could lead to a breakthrough that could aid in finding a cure or treatment would save the lives of millions each year and save many more families.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, the US health care system is not stable right now and the financial debt of the country is continuously climbing to an extraordinary number. Is spending billions more on this project without knowing what the results could be really worth it? And even if there is some breakthrough, can our health care system handle it? Will those who need help be given help? How will the insurance companies respond?
As other people have also mentioned, I want to know why a fruit fly is being used. I know that our brain is similar to most mammals but I am just wondering if we really do have to start at a fruit fly with the limited amount of resources we do have. I am also curious if the team is looking specifically for something or just going in blindly hoping to uncover something? Is there an estimated time of how long this mapping will take? Is there a plan of what interventions could possibly be set in place after a discovery is made? When in development will these brains be mapped? This is important because of plasticity and how adaptable our brain is that allows it to constantly change.
I think that Professor Michael Eisen has the right idea for this argument. The human genome is a very different scenario than the human brain. He makes many valid points. The first being how do you get all of these scientist to cooperate on one way to map the brain. The second is that the brain is infinite where as the human genome was finite. Why waste the money to try and map something that is infinite? The money could better be invested in other endeavors. If you want to try and find the roots and a cure for Alzheimer invest 1 billion in an Alzheimer project. Listen to the voice of reason. Wartman says we need to take a leap of faith, cross our fingers and hope. Well as the leader of a country in debt I wouldn't take a leap of faith with 3 billion dollars and hope for the best. Especially with so many other places that money could go. Unless a better counter argument is presented then we need to take a leap of faith I'm fairly certain the Eisen wins this round.
ReplyDeleteThe brain map project, just like the human genome map, could potentially be a hugely beneficial project. In theory, without taking into consideration the potential limitations, this project could assist in research to increase the capacity for treatment and prevention of brain diseases. However, there are potentially significant limitations. One of which is government financing for the project. The article points out that scientific ventures should not be centrally run and funded by the government as opposed to individual scientists. This particular venture is vast and will take a long time to finish. I personally think that, since the public will not see immediate positive effects, it will be difficult to keep them on board with funding using tax dollars. The article also argues that the benefits will not quite to the same scale as the human genome project. In other words, the public may not even see the same benefits as the human genome project in the long run.
ReplyDeleteAs a tax payer, I would like to see a plan as to how this study is going to be conducted in the long run. Specifically, it would be good to know approximately how long the study will take even if it is an estimate. I would like to know the long term plan and how they plan to use the tax dollars to progress this plan. Biologically, I would like to know how scientists will account for each individual's unique genetic and neurological makeup in this study.
ReplyDeleteWell I would like to ask the scientists first and foremost if it’s possible. And if possible will results provide solutions to Alzheimer’s as well as other brain related phenomena. If the answer those questions are yes or even potentially, then I say we go for it. My grandmother suffers from Dementia and if this brain mapping could help her Dementia, or prevent someone else’s grandparent from ever having Dementia than I fully support the research, no matter the economic burden on tax payers.
If we spend our whole lives worried about economic issues we will never take risks. If we spend our whole lives using money carelessly we will go broke. However, if the reason to spend money is important and useful, than I don’t see a problem. We can’t spend our scientific lives worried about money, especially if we as a country want to make breakthroughs and be the first to do stuff. Sometimes science doesn’t work out, but that’s no reason to not try! The US has never been a place of quitters and has never been one to say it’s ok to come in second. I understand that times are tough and I understand we have to allocate our dollars appropriately. But research creates jobs, and finding cures and conclusions brings in the dough!
I will say though, if the scientists mapping the brain map, either do not have a solid strategy or have no chance of mapping the brain to better our understanding as a scientific community then I will be very disappointed if they go through with it. It would be unethical for these scientists to do research and make money on this discovery if it will not be beneficial. So I hope the funding and pitch for the research is done properly, appropriately and ethically. If so then I support the research. Especially if it can prevent our parents and grandparents from getting Alzheimer’s, and if it keeps the US advancing in the science field.
This post will assist the internet people for creating new
ReplyDeleteweblog or even a blog from start to end.
My weblog - waist to hip ratio calculator
Although the Human Brain Map may take an extremely long time, if it succeeds it will be one of the biggest medical advancements in history. Like the human genome project, the success of this will be able to improve diagnosis of disease, early detection of genetic predisposition, gene therapy, and risk assessment. Carl Zimmer responded with the correct statement that you must walk before you run. Like any other advancement, initial steps are inevitable to breakthrough to promising results.
ReplyDeleteI agree with many of my fellow students that if we spend our whole lives worrying about the economics related to efforts, we will not be able to make any advancements in science. If the study on the brain of fruit flies gives sufficient evidence to assume that this can help even a group of people with a certain strand or type of Alzheimer’s or dementia, I think it is something that should be strongly considered. I can understand the arguments that we do not have room to fund such a project considering our country is already in so much debt, and our costs for medical procedures is exceeding more than it should, but if successful then the benefits most definitely outweigh the costs.
However, before jumping into the conclusion that I fully support this project there are some concerns I would have. First of all I would like to understand what the long and short term goals would be of this project, in terms of time (from the beginning of research to when medical breakthroughs can be recorded). I also would like to comprehend how the brain will be handled and tested considering it is both the most important and delicate organ in our bodies. If this project is funded, and successfully implemented I think this will aid to the discovery and execution of many life saving treatments and diagnoses.
Like the Human Genome Project this idea of brain mapping seems to have some positive promises. Brain mapping could potentially cure Alzheimer's diseases, schizophrenia, neurological diseases, and mental health illness, which affect so many people’s lives. Wortman’s story was very inspirational and that’s just one story that has changed and was saved by the human genome project. With that said, I say we take that risk of starting this human mapping research. By taking risks there are many pros and cons to consider. So what I would want to ask them is their plan and what they see from this research. It’s important to have an idea of the way they plan to implement this and why this would benefit the population. Will it save lives? Will it help families keep the elders in their lives in a normal state? What are the next steps if this does fail? There needs to be a convincing argument for our tax dollars to research so I’m not saying we should say yes right away but rather to be open minded to the idea. I feel as though alot of my classmates will disagree with this because yes I agree we don't have much money to spare in this country but I'm just saying that we should be opened to people's ideas before shutting it down completely.
ReplyDeleteI completely understand the hesitation that some of the scientists presented as a concern in the NPR clip. They expressed that the human brain is constantly changing from moment to moment, so how could we possibly know when and if it is even possible to "finish" mapping it. They say the brain is infinite and extremely dynamic so they are hesitant to have confidence its success.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a very pessimistic way of viewing the project and, even as a tax payer myself, I am willing to pay the dollars for such research, even if it takes longer than expected. The human genome project was a long and lengthy process but it could not have been done and benefited so many people without starting somewhere. Lucas Wartman admits that there are of course 85 billion neurons, but we can only listen to about 1,000-1,200 of them at one time. He also admits that scientists now use MRIs to map the brain, but the smallest they have gotten is the size of a poppy seed. All of these obstacles will make the beginning of mapping the brain difficult, but with persistence and continual support, I think it will benefit the rest of the population, just like the Human Genome Project did. Of course in the beginning, research will seem like a waste of money as they study the brains of fruit flies, time and continual support will make all the tax dollars worth it.
The only thing I would like to ask scientists is why they mention that no one has seen the details of the plan. I think it is very smart that the government will assign different sections of mapping to groups of scientists, but I am curious how it will be determined, and who gets what? The brain is so complex and I think it will be extremely difficult to assign such tiny sections when they are constantly changing. In order for this project to be as efficient as possible, I think it will be necessary to inform all participants of the details of the study and constantly publish results to all scientists, to make certain that everyone is on the same page with supporting discoveries.
If the human genome project was never completed, Lucas Wartman wouldve never found the drug needed to eradicate the protein that his leukemia needed to survive. If this drug was discovered to help him and thousands of other people who did not respond to chemotherapy, imagine all of the possibilities that could develop from future research of the Human Brain Map with regards to Dementia and Alzheimers.
I agree that the brain map would be very beneficial as research and would made a positive impact on Alzheimer's and other degenerative brain diseases. However, as I was reading the article I could not help wonder how realistic this undertaking would be to accomplish because of how complex the brain is. The article itself stated the complexity of the brain's neurological pathways and how they are constantly evolving as well. It would be great to be able to be able to identify how to treat these diseases from this research, but the effects of these treatments may vary from individual to individual due to differences in the brain. Therefore, a magic bullet may not be possible. While I feel there could be great potential benefit, it is hard to say if funding this is the best way to spend government money since there are so many unknowns and there are several other pressing issues. However, I do feel research on the brain is very important and should be done.
ReplyDeleteAlexandra Kramer
ReplyDeleteI think it could be very beneficial to study the brain in such depth. From what it sounds like, this type of intense research is already helping people. Exploring new information proves to be a great way to find new ways of curing cancers. Looking at different ways of approaching something is important.
Of course there are some downsides to doing a project like this. It is definitely expensive though. So this type of research will hopefully show results, maybe not right away (because it will take at least a decade to really find anything out), but in the long run. A researcher also made a good point saying that we will never know when we are done mapping the brain. If we continue finding beneficial information, though, then I guess we will just continue to keep discovering more and more. The brain is key to figuring out what is going on in our bodies. We just have to remember that we must stay as open minded as possible about what we learn because the more we find out, the more our previous thoughts and beliefs may change.
I think that this project will be a huge advancement in science. That is, if it is possible. If it were successful this would dramatically increase our knowledge of the neurological system, which could benefit the health of so many people. The article mentions that the project will unlock information about diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and schizophrenia, all of which are rising today. This will be extremely beneficial to Alzheimer’s disease, and especially for early onset Alzheimer’s. This project will allow doctors to figure out exactly where a problem in the brain is happening and how they can control or fix it completely. This research will save a lot of health care costs that go towards nursing homes, and care for those who have these diseases.
ReplyDeleteAlthough taxpayers might be hesitant to this idea, the revenue that comes from this project will most likely outweigh the costs. People cannot expect answers and results right away and should understand that this research will take time. Over time, this project will improve the economy by returning money. However, there are always risks to investing so much money in a single project. As a concerned taxpayer I would wonder how long this project would take. Like some of my classmates, I would ask about how scientists will deal with the fact that science is a changing field and new diseases are always being discovered. Overall, I think this project will be a beneficial investment for the healthcare of this country, and the US as a whole.
This article was very interesting. Mapping the brain is a very expensive and complicated problem and I do understand hesitation to putting so much time and effort into it. However, I think that if there are potential benefits this could be an amazing advancement. The article mentions gaining a better understanding of Alzheimer’s, Schizophrenia and Parkinson’s. There is so little known about these diseases that can drastically affect a person’s life that I think doing anything in our power to learn more about them is worth it.
ReplyDeleteThe article also brings up the argument of whether or not the research should be conducted in one centralized method rather than by multiple researchers around the world as it is currently. Although I do see the downside of allotting so much man power and resources to one singular goal working together can help to speed up the process. When individuals share their findings and divide up work they can learn from each other and finish the project faster. In the long run this will actually decrease the man hours and resources that go into this project in total.
Tax-payers are often anxious to see what their money is being used for. This is difficult with large scientific endeavors because results may not be seen for many years. However, using the success of the Human Genome Project I think public opinion can be swayed in favor of the brain mapping project. The Human Genome Project may not have done all it was expected to but it did make enormous strides in improving health. Highlighting its successes and staying optimistic about the possibilities available after brain mapping will help the project gain public support.
This new project, the Brain Activity Map, is something, in my opinion, that is worth investing both time and money into. It is going to take 3 billion dollars, 10 years of research and hundreds of scientists; however, I think the potential benefits make it worthwhile. During the State of the Union, President Obama said "Every dollar we invested to map the human genome returned $140 to our economy — every dollar." A similar thing could occur with this new project as well. The NPR “Somewhere Over The Brainbow: The Journey To Map the Human Brain” does a great job at explaining the pros and cons of this project. As the President said, “our scientists are mapping the human brain to unlock the answers to Alzheimer's." Currently, according to the CDC, Alzheimer’s Disease is the sixth leading cause of death; that in itself makes such a thing worth researching. As Sara Shilling said in her post, “An emotional cost will not only be allayed, but also a fiscal one. If less people need to be in nursing home and under constant supervision, that will save a lot of healthcare costs.” Also, I am certain that this project would answer other questions, aside from this one disease.
ReplyDeleteThere are, of course, concerns that should be addressed. Science writer Carl Simmer says that, "With the brain, we're kind of at the same stage as we were in the early 1980s with the genome.” This is worrisome, however, we need to realize that the brain is complicated, and it will obviously take years before any major findings. Zimmer goes further in stating "The problem is that while the genome was finite, the brain is really infinite, because not only does it have 86 billion neurons ... [and] 100 tillion connections, but those connections are changing all the time.” A feasible goal should be to start smaller, and then work the way up to understanding the complex human brain; and as the NPR reads, “look for big headlines about fruit flies the next couple of years." Another red flag that I noticed was thanks to Michelle Mackie’s post: “After seeing information from the Human Genome Project being used for monetary gain I do wonder if there is the same potential for such events to occur as a result of this new project.” I guess competition is just a part of life, and something that is bound to happen with a project like this. Mapping the human brain will be both pricey and complicated, but if it does pay off, it could really reap tremendous benefits for humanity.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm
ReplyDeleteI am a huge fan of NPR, and definitely was pleased to hear this report contemplating the costs and benefits of brain mapping. As a tax-paying citizen, I believe it is important to understand where one's money is going in terms of medicine, and how government financed research will play a role in the future of medical advancement. I loved hearing about how the human genome project helped treat Dr. Lucas Wartmans cancer. It is amazing and inspiring to see what science can do, and how the investment in the humane genome project is now playing a role in disease prevention, treatment, and changing the way research is done in the future.
As an educated, politically aware citizen, I believe investing in medical research is the best way to spend our tax dollars. However, I would want to find out how practical this research is. The humane genome project cost an extreme amount of money, yet opened up so many doors for the future of humanity. As a tax paying citizen I would be interested to learn more about how realistic and feasible this research would be. The brain is the most complex organ in the body, and some scientists who spoke in the NPR podcast explained that it would be difficult to determine when mapping was finished as so little is truly known about the brain & the brain is always changing. I would love to support such research, however I am not yet convinced that funding such a large scale project would be a good idea. When mapping the brain, there is no common goal that can be identified, and no way to predict what mapping the brain will really do. Though I strongly believe in the power of research, I don't think there is enough evidence and a clear enough plan in place to support such a project.I am highly interested in seeing the details for research that have not yet been released.
In the end, I question whether the brain is too vast and infinite for brain mapping. It is clear that more research and support need to be in place before tax paying dollars can contribute to such a scientific feat. Lucas Wartman said "We have to take the leap and spend the money, cross our fingers & hope. If it does pay off, it really could reap tremendous benefits to humanity." However, I am not yet convinced.
I agree with several of my classmates that while mapping the human brain will ultimately prove worthwhile in terms of both health and economics, it will take a long time for society to reap the tangible benefits of such an extensive and costly project. It seems like we're at a crossroads as we were several decades ago with the human genome. Should we invest billions of dollars into a project that we don't know will pay off in the end, or keep that money and funnel it into something else?
ReplyDeleteThe article brings up several arguments opposing the brain mapping project to consider. As Carl Zimmer puts it, there's no way to know what mapping the brain can actually do. It's going to be challenging to garner support from the public without a guarantee that the information gathered from this project can and will be applied to benefit those with Alzheimer's and other diseases affecting the brain. Even Wartman, who greatly benefitted from the Human Genome Project, uses the words "leap, cross our fingers, and hope." The fact of the matter is we might be pouring a significant amount of money into something that will never materialize into a success for society as a whole. Furthermore, there is the issue of the brain being infinite. A question I have for scientists is how will the ever-changing nature of the brain be addressed? Will they study the same set of brains over a long period of time to observe and analyze the changes they undergo? Still, I think that although the human brain may be infinite, the benefits from studying it might be infinite too.Neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's constitute a major public health problem in this country, and to have any chance at finding a cure, we need to understand the disease by studying the brain.
As a tax paying citizen, I would rather have my money spent on a project with potential such as this one than the other pointless endeavors the U.S. government pumps money into. I'm on board with the human brain mapping project in the name of science and progress. If we don't fund this now, I along with many others will always be wondering if it would have been worth it to spend the money and see what happens.
Heya are using Wordpress for your blog platform? I'm new to the blog world but I'm trying to get
ReplyDeletestarted and set up my own. Do you require any coding knowledge to make your
own blog? Any help would be really appreciated!
Take a look at my weblog; Louis Vuitton Outlet
This was a very interesting article. I believe that putting this much money and time into a project such as mapping the human brain is good idea. I think that this project has the potential of helping us understand diseases such as Alzheimer's, dementia and Parkinson's of which we know so little. Although I believe that it is a good idea, I cannot seem to see what other potential this project could have besides helping us understand and possibly cure mental diseases. If I were to ask a question to the scientists involved in this project it would be: What other possible benefits besides helping understand and potentially curing mental diseases can potentially be achieved through this project?
ReplyDeleteThere's no doubt in my mind that studying the brain and working to create a Human Brain Map would be extremely beneficial. The article states that we have the potential to gain a better understanding of Alzheimer’s, Schizophrenia and Parkinson’s. These diseases affect so many people, whether it be directly or indirectly, that learning more about them would be an amazing feat in the medical world and for our overall health and well-being. I also like the idea of research being more organized and shared so that scientist's can collaborate ideas and efforts.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, as a tax-paying citizen of the US, I don't know if I agree with so much money being invested in such research. Considering the current state of our health care system, I think our efforts should be focused on fixing issues related to cost, access and quality of care for all rather than a possible cure for those few who can afford it. A question that I would raise would be how they can ensure the outcomes of their research will be equally beneficial to everyone.
The questions I wouuld ask would be:
ReplyDeleteAre we trying to encourage more research in battling degenerative diseases or are we trying to enhance pre existing brain functions?
Will there be comprehensive education about neurological disorders in the public since our research base is outpacing public awareness currently?
Can we involve more geneticists in actively tracing the epidemiology of neurdegenerative diseases among different cohorts as opposed to studying rates after they have fully developed? This will give scientists a greater understanding of the development and relationship of these disases among similar people.
The legal aspects will be greatly inclufnced by the congruence of neurtechnology with information systems, possibly allowing us to directly access our thoughts, dreams and memories, whichpose security and liabiulity issues. How will these be addressed?
After reading this article, I do not know where exactly I stand in my opinion of the Human Brain Mapping Project. I agree with my classmates that have articulated their concern with the time that this project will take to actually have a benefit. The project has the potential to open numerous avenues for further understanding of the human brain and the diseases that affect the brain, but the concrete benefits will come after substantial time and a costly price. I cannot be sure of whether or not the successes of this project will compensate for the cost of it, which is why I am split in my opinion of the project.
ReplyDeleteIt was intriguing to read about the cure of Watman's cure of his own cancer by using the discoveries of the Human Genome Project. Unfortunately though this is only the story of one man and is probably the exception to the rule. We cannot be sure that by carrying out the Human Brain Mapping Project, we will necessarily be able to cure diseases like Alzheimer's. It is probably though that we will be able to gain insight into prevention measures and treatments. The ultimate question is whether the benefits of this project will exceed the costs.
I welcome the Human Brain Map Project/BRAIN Initiative. As many of my classmates have already noted, I think that it can yield many important findings with implications for diagnoses, treatments, and understanding diseases, similar to the impact of the Human Genome Project.
ReplyDeleteMore details about the project are to be provided in the near future, particularly those that pertain to budget and funding. It might be a little bit of a sensitive time to announce such a costly project at a time when cuts on spending are made elsewhere and the US is heavily in debt. In that sense, the timing of it all may be a little questionable, but on the other hand, this project may very well span over a decade and it needs to start at some point, perhaps even sooner rather than later. It’s only a matter of time before a project like this is initiated. This sort of project is simply needed; there is too much unknown about the brain. When considering all that – we hope – will come out of it – it’s an investment and it will be well worthwhile.
I think it’s very sensible for the teams to start off with studies of creatures to develop the tools to use and to know what to look for, rather than going in blindly.
Carl Zimmer sums up some of my sentiments well – “how do you know when you’re done mapping a brain?” Not only are there billions of neurons, but there are also connections between neurons. In addition to that, people’s brains are wired differently depending on experiences they have had. I wonder how much that might affect findings.
Another thing I’ve thought about is the potential for international collaboration. The few details and information that have been presented at this point make it seem like it’ll only be a US project. The Human Genome Project involved researchers from several other countries. I wonder if the BRAIN initiative will too, and how that might affect findings in terms of patents, technologies, and drugs.
It is so exciting to know that the government plans to fund the Brain Activity Map. Unlike one of the men interviewed on All Things Considered, I do not see it as a disadvantage that there is no concrete outcome or expectation from this research. I like Laura Sullivan’s comparison between the US government funding the Brain Activity Map and the US government funding NASA. This will be organized research of hundreds of scientists, all working towards a similar goal.
ReplyDeleteThe man interviewed who does not support the Brain Activity Map had poorly constructed arguments. First he said that by having the government organize the research, it could stifle scientists' creativity and innovation. He also thought that this project is a bad idea because there is no finite plan or even a concrete goal. In his opinion, it is possible that the project will never be able to be completed. I do not see how he has a basis for these conclusions. Using the example of NASA, there were hundreds and thousands of unpredicted inventions that have resulted from the space race, international space station, building our understanding of the galaxy, and other auxiliary projects. Although NASA started with one idea – to land a man on the moon, it continued to be funded even though there was no concrete mission or end point in mind. In fact I think in the case of NASA and the Brain Activity Map, I could better argue that having a well defined end point would actually stifle creativity and innovation rather than the other way around. Instead scientists should focus on answering one question at a time, and then using those results to ask more questions and explore more options – the very core of scientific inquiry.
I also find the question of whether or not this project will benefit people in the long run a very shortsighted and close-minded question. I think it is wise to err under the assumption that most scientific research is beneficial to the public, as long as it passes ethical review. This makes much more sense than assuming that research won’t have as much benefit as another project (in this case the project of comparison is mapping the human genome), which seems arbitrary and an illogical reason to not provide public funds.
I definitely think that studying the brain would help put a huge dent in the mystery of Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and other terrible diseases. This is a great opportunity to explore this area of science. I understand why tax payers may feel uncomfortable with spending large sums of money on analyzing small animals rather than humans, but think of how much money analyzing a human would be? You would want to spend the money only if you knew it was effective. I view analyzing small animals first as a precaution to make sure the task could actual be accomplished successfully. Although I think the public is entitled to answers pertaining to the high costs, I do not think that scientists can answer questions pertaining to which species they use or map first. I think it is simply first map the smallest simple organism at a lower cost than mapping a human, then see if the same thing can be done on a human successfully.
ReplyDeleteWhile I'm always in favor of furthering scientific research and would usually support funding towards developing a new way to find answers to medical dilemmas, I'm unsure of how favorable this project will be in terms of the benefits outweighing the costs. While the Human Genome Project was more realistic both cost-wise and time-wise, it still took several years and cost almost $3 billion for taxpayers. This BRAIN Initiative, on the other hand, will be difficult to estimate for costs and duration. Even with an estimation, it will probably take years longer and cost even more.
ReplyDeleteOne could argue that the human genome is also extensive, yet we've mapped that out in a matter of years. However the problem is that even now, there is so little that scientists fully understand about the brain. On top of that, the brain is incredibly vast and complicated- could we realistically map the human brain in its entirety? We would have to map a large chunk of the brain before we can do anything with the information, whether it's to find the cure to Alzheimer's or any mental illnesses. And as Carl Zimmer stated, "The problem is that while the genome was finite, the brain is really infinite". There are 86 billion neurons, 100 tillion connections, and an inconceivable number of combinations between these neurons which apparently are constantly changing. That makes for quite a difficult project, when the task is insurmountably large, will probably cost a ton of money, and is also changing constantly.
While I think it's a great idea to map the brain for scientific advancement, as a taxpayer, I would not want to contribute to the millions of dollars that will go into a project that will last decades. If I will only know its significance in such small increments that I'll be reading headlines about fruit flies a few years from now, I don't really believe that the benefits will outweigh the costs. There's no guarantee that scientists will be able to fully map the brain, and it seems like a gamble to spend so much money and time on a seemingly unrealistic scientific project.
While I believe the benefits associated with brain mapping would reap massive benefits I don’t believe that they would be quite on par with the mapping of the human genome. Genetics allows the blueprint to be analyzed, a blueprint which is inextricably linked to most diseases and disorders. The brain’s function anatomically is not necessarily as intertwined with as many conditions an genetics are. As such the number of patients that would benefit from the investment made in mapping human brain function would be significantly less than the number that have benefited from the mapping of the human genome. That being said the investment is still a potentially life saving one for patients living with alzheimer’s disease. The investment would be completely worthwhile however I believe it would be less lucrative than the genome mapping. Drastic funding cuts have been made to research, as such I would want justification as to why this research should divert funds away from other projects. How long would it take to progress from fruit flies to humans and how much funding would be used in this progression? Is there a deadline for advancement before the funding is diverted away from the project? Because the funding is now limited for research it is vital to strictly monitor the allocation of resources.
ReplyDeleteI think that this is an extremely difficult decision to make. Entertaining both sides is essential, and on science alone, it would obviously be a helpful field to study. However there is the fact that the brain does constantly change. We also have to consider that diseases such as Alzheimer's and dementia (with the exception of course of early onset or rare diseases) are diseases of old age. And it is possible that they are simply a part of the human life cycle. Though they are horrible and unfortunate, especially for the family members to deal with, they are a part of life and may not be eradicated even if you try to study them.
ReplyDeleteFrom the financial side though, new burdens and obstacles are present. Firstly, convincing the American tax payers that this is a worthy or sound decision RIGHT THIS YEAR, is probably not going to happen without opposition from a LOT of people. I myself feel that, while we do waste a TON of money in departments that we shouldn't, we have a failing school system that could use a lot of aid, and a changing medical system that also needs support for just 2 examples off the top of my head. These are both large scale investments that would need the money long term, and obviously I'm no expert in these fields, but I feel a lot of Americans would agree with my argument.
Overall how do I feel? Like these are good studies to conduct and should be conducted, but potentially in a few years, not necessarily right now.
As technology continues to improve, increasing the number of medical breakthroughs that occur, I personally feel that there is a necessity to the Human Brain Map since it has the potential to increase health outcomes in relations to many different diseases associated with the brain. I agree with comparing this huge health initiative to the fact that it would have similar financial and health benefits like the Human Genome Project, since it is known that 20 years ago, the Human Genome Project also faced great skepticism and was doubted. On the other hand, it’s very much expected that the Human Brain Map project will also face similar skepticism and doubts that was faced by the Human Genome Project not only from the medical community, but also the general community. As the article said, I agree that it would be very difficult to unite different scientific communities to pursue a singular, consensus plan.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I feel that mapping the human brain will benefit health outcomes and increase the number of medical innovations and breakthroughs, as a tax-payer, I am worried about how much it is going to cost the government to conduct such a huge-scale project and whether or not we do have the resources to follow through with this project. Also, I think that this is also one of the main concerns that others in America have. Therefore, it would be a smart idea to clarify this issue and make the project’s funding, budgeting and finances overall transparent to the public. Secondly, I am curious to know how the project plan is going to be laid out. The article does say that scientists will start with fruit flies and then eventually sooner or later move their research on to the human brain. I am curious to know what the plan is in between those stages. Other than these two questions or comments that I have, it can clearly be seen that this project is still in consensus and therefore, before there is further advocacy and more concrete planning regarding the Human Brain Map, I think it is wise to observe and see how this all plays out. Overall, I am for the government’s initiative of mapping the human brain. Mapping the human brain would definitely be beneficial to the health of human beings, potentially unlocking the answers to Alzheimer’s and other diseases associated with our brain.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI also feel conflicted about the value of conducting this research. My concern is that public opinion is so results-driven that if no direct "cures" are developed after at least a year of work, many will lobby to stop the project altogether. In the report, the science writer illustrated this point with the analogy of the fruit fly brain compared to a human brain. In addition to bringing up issues with societal acceptance, the analogy also alludes to an even more expansive problem, the sheer complexity of the human brain. Perhaps all this investment and time will yield no major conclusive information (unlike the human genome project which was already known to have a tangible end to the genetic code length).
ReplyDeleteA big deciding factor for me was the budget, the Obama Administration plans to invest 100 million dollars for this project, which is pretty minuscule for the potential impact and the importance of any bit of knowledge that might come from this research. To put it into perspective, it cost BU $194 million dollars to build FitRec. If it will only cost us half of that money to build a more knowledgeable generation of scientists, it would be worth the expense in my opinion (even considering the possible draw backs aforementioned.
I think it is great that the president supports human genome research. With a fast aging elderly population it is crucial that we spend time on studying diseases, especially Alzheimers. There is currently not cure for Alzheimer's and much more research needs to be conducted so that researchers know better ways on how to target the problem. All of this research will have a good impact for everyone because new cures will be discovered in the future, and researchers will learn more and more. Of course a cure and solutions may not be discovered in the first couple months because it takes time, but the benefits will be worth it in the long run. The human brain is extremely complex, and more research is necessary to better understand how it works and why certain diseases develop.
ReplyDeleteSome questions as a tax payer is how will the researchers know how much money they actually need? Who will they choose to study once testing can be performed on humans? Will they make public their information that they discover? I also think it will take time to educate the public who pay taxes on the importance of doing this research.
I think that the Human Brain Map program will be successful in the sense that it will bring greater understanding to a part of humans that is barely understood but I do not think it will bring the same magnitude of information that the Human Genome Project did just because of the complexity of the human brain. Planning a project that doesn't have all the necessary technology to begin with for only 10 years seems a bit ambitious on the governments part but I think the research is necessary in the next step of studying the human body.
ReplyDeleteI am unsure whether we can afford the multiple levels of effort to study the brain map. However, I do believe that it is necessary to spend the money because the brain map is a study worth exploring. Similarly, the human genome project was costly but it opened doors to advances in most diseases. The potential benefits that could come from studying the human brain map are limitless. For example, the study could lead to advances in the treatment of Alzheimers, which affects over 5 million people in the United States. Conversely, I believe that it will be hard to get people to want to enter in studies on the human brain. For example, some study procedures may be invasive. I also think people will have a hard time accepting the human brain map because the results will not be immediate.
ReplyDelete- What is the common goal of the human brain map?
- What are your 1 year, 5 year, and 10 year plans for the project?
- How will the money be budgeted?
ReplyDeleteI think this program will yield very beneficial information. I am assuming that the funding aspect of this program has been detailed out for a certain amount of years. I think we can afford to utilize this program to learn more information about the brain, but it is very unrealistic to assume we will learn every aspect of the human brain. I feel that with this program we are taking a strategic approach to learning and cultivating new knowledge about the brain. I feel this will yield beneficial information that will lead to positive health benefits and possible preventions and treatments for certain brain diseases. As a taxpayer, I would like to ask them what their main goals are? How long is this program funded for as of now? I am excited to see what new knowledge this program will yield for the future of brain related injuries or diseases.
ReplyDeleteI think this program will yield very beneficial information. I am assuming that the funding aspect of this program has been detailed out for a certain amount of years. I think we can afford to utilize this program to learn more information about the brain, but it is very unrealistic to assume we will learn every aspect of the human brain. I feel that with this program we are taking a strategic approach to learning and cultivating new knowledge about the brain. I feel this will yield beneficial information that will lead to positive health benefits and possible preventions and treatments for certain brain diseases. As a taxpayer, I would like to ask them what their main goals are? How long is this program funded for as of now? I am excited to see what new knowledge this program will yield for the future of brain related injuries or diseases.
I agree with a lot of my classmates on this. I think that this mapping will bring even more information about the human genome than we previously did not know about, or maybe only knew slightly about. I do, however, agree with classmates' position that it will not be able to be as big of a discovery or give us as big a flood of new information that the Human Genome Project was able to give us. That, of course, does not mean that we should pay less attention to its findings for they could be extremely beneficial to us in many ways: scientific and medically speaking.
ReplyDelete"With the brain, we're kind of at the same stage as we were in the early 1980s with the genome," says science writer Carl Zimmer. I wonder if it will take twenty more years to finish the mapping the brain just like it took from the 1980s to 2003 to finish the human genome project. This would be a question I would ask the NPR staff. I would ask them to predict a time frame and how long it would take for these advances to "unlock the secrets" of certain conditions. How do they differentiate the conditions? Pricey and complicated are two words used in the article to describe mapping the brain. How will NPR overcome this limitation when gaining support for this project? In the next few months, they will have a detailed plan. I am curious about the progression of studies from the fruit fly to the human brain and if todays technology can shorten the process? What predictions will come alongside the detailed plan? How will the company plan to convince the science community that the benefits outweigh the costs?
ReplyDeleteI agree with most of my classmates in the sense that the BRAIN project, although beneficial to Alzheimer's research, might not be as foreseeable in the long run compared to other scientific studies. Tax payers who don't see results within a reasonable time frame may not want to support such research. However, I do believe that the brain project would contribute greatly to the field of neuroscience in general. The assumption that humans only use about 10% of their brain capacity may only exist because we failed to possess the technology to discover more in the past. One of the main questions I would ask is how much time is estimated between using techniques to map a fruit fly's brain as opposed to a human brain. Another concern of mine is that if we can find the money to fund the BRAIN project, shouldn't the US government make an effort to fund NASA as well? (good point brought up by fellow classmate Hannah). Government grants should be issued to all types of research in many fields. However, our taxes should not have to rise as a result. Especially in times of a trying economy. Even without the BRAIN project, i'm sure private sectors will continue their research regarding Alzheimer's.
ReplyDeleteAs a tax-paying citizen, some questions that I'd like to ask the scientists undertaking this Human Brain Map is when they will be finished. The brain is so fast and full of differences, so at what point, if there is one, will the scientists/ researchers stop. I would also be concerned about the amount of time and money that will go into the project. Could this money be spent on new drugs/ treatments for neurological issues or Alzheimer's disease? What would happen if there is a point in which the scientists are not able to map the human brain? Although they are starting with fruit flies and will eventually build up to testing humans, what happens if a limit is reached? Since this program could continue forever, how much time and money will be put in until they stop. I think it is a good project because before this we saw the Human Genome Project work. It will help develop new treatments and drugs to helping people with neurological problems.
ReplyDeleteHearing about the human brain project at first made me somewhat skeptical. Because this project is complicated and lengthy, a lot of tax dollars will be spent funding this national science project for years to come. However, if running this project means the potential of understanding the brain better as well as provide treatments for various mental health issues, then I am in favor of it.
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand, it would be almost a waste of the time and money that has gone into this research project. Though scientists are unsure of what may come, there is the chance of discovering something great and having great benefit come ouf of this, such as what happened with the human genome project. It would be a shame to stop funding this project now because we're not sure what may come out of it. In face of making the choice to either spend more money in the pursuit of understanding our brain, one of the most vital organs we possess, or to sit back because the project and potential benefits are unknown. I'd rather continue the project and find out that nothing good could come from this rather than accept the fact without having tried to find out for ourselves.
In addition, mental health issues are very hard to treat because there, for the most part, are not physical indications or markers. Only time and vigilance with a patient could allow for the diagnosis of a mental disorder. Because mental disorders are so hard to detect, treating them makes them even harder. Furthermore, even after having diagnoses a patient with a mental health disorder, there is still much more knowledge that needs to be discovered surrounding mental health issues in order to treat the patients more effectively.
I believe that the human brain project would do wonders in this much needed area. The human brain project has the potential of letting doctors and the medical community better understand the etiology and nature of different mental health conditions and by understanding them more we can figure out how to treat them better. Even if the human brain project never gets completed or doesn't produce as much information as we would hope for, it still seems to be that any knowledge derived from this project could be put to good use and that any discover is better than no discovery at all. It is true, that there are many risks with continuing with this project, but the chance to improve the lives of many is worth it.
I’m not sure that I fully support the idea of scientists undertaking the Human Brain Map. I think that I would support a project that involved determining the common types of neuron connections that are involved in diseases like Alzheimer’s, but I feel that a better general understanding of the brain is necessary before successful brain mapping can occur. When scientists have become even more comfortable with the process of gene mapping and have a better general sense of the brain, I may be more supportive of human brain mapping, but until then, I do not really think that they will have enough success to merit spending all of that money that could be allocated to other areas of research in which scientists will have more success. Additionally, I feel as though there are too many half started mapping projects going on at one time. Wouldn’t it be better if scientists first figured out all of the different components involved in the human genome before targeting brain mapping? It kind of feels as though there are so many areas in this field that scientists are interested in, that they only have time to deal with the superficial issues before they get distracted by the next new scientific fascination. I would rather see my tax dollars go to finishing one gene-sequencing project before starting another one.
ReplyDeleteAs a tax-paying citizen, I am extremely skeptical about the benefits of this project. The project itself sounds like a very interesting endeavor; however, it is expensive, and it is very open-ended. If I pay good money for this research, will I ever get to see the results/benefits of it? Because the brain is so complicated, I think it will take much longer than 10 years to map. Also, if there is no foreseeable end to this project, then there is no foreseeable end to the amount of money that will be spent on it. If someone were to tell me exactly what they expect to find within the next 10 years in regards to mapping the brain, I would be more likely to want to fund the research; however, since the brain is so complicated, people do not know what they will find, or even if it is possible to actually map the brain. This is why I am skeptical about giving my money over to this project.
ReplyDeleteI think investing on the effort to study the brain map is worth it. It was costly and a long road to map the human genome, and look how it turned out! Although there is still much more to understand about DNA and how it affects many diseases and conditions, the understanding of the human genome has been a positive milestone beneficial to healthcare. Therefore, I think looking into the brain is worth the shot. As an investment, some may think such project is too costly or too ambitious and impossible, but I think that if there is even the slightest chance of the results helping to further understand certain mental illness, then there is a bright future for new treatments and cures.
ReplyDeleteHowever, along the way, there may be some unintended motives as there are for genetic testing. Just how companies have manipulated genetic testing purposes for their own benefit, I fear that companies could do the same for "brain testing." Maybe companies will one day test the brain for certain personality traits, as opposed to a mental condition. Regardless, I think the investment into mapping the brain would lead to incredible findings.
I would be very reserved when deciding whether I wanted to support this study with tax money because there are just so many unknowns about the project. First of all this project will be extremely expensive and the outcomes can not really be predicted. The brain is so complex that scientists are not even really sure what beneficial results may come from creating the brain map. It is very likely that this project would take even longer than the Human Genome Project, which started in 1980. Like many other tax payers, I would question what types of results might arise from this project within a reasonable amount of time such as 5-10 years. I would want to know what the potential for this project would be in the near future rather than several decades from now. I would also be skeptical due to the fact that much of the initial research will be conducted on fruit fly and other small animal brains before they could even begin mapping out the human brain.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I am definitely for finding a cure for diseases such as Alzheimer's and other brain diseases, I would like to see the scientists do more research on the human brain before they begin trying to map it out. As the article says, scientists still know relatively very little information on the human brain despite the centuries of research that have been conducted. I would ask whether there were better alternatives to curing or preventing these diseases that could be developed through more easily obtainable information, such as through genes or drug studies. Overall I would be very skeptical of the results that could actually be discovered in the near future from brain mapping.
Compared to some other things that our government spends money on, I believe that funding research on the Brain Activity Map is much more important and beneficial. So many diseases and mental conditions are difficult to diagnose and treat because the way that the brain works in largely unknown. If there was a Brain Activity Map, we would be able to treat millions of people. However, I understand the argument that our brains are so complex that billions of dollars and years of research may not result in anything worthwhile. It's true that, unlike the Human Genome Project, the money invested in the Brain Activity Map will not be returned to our economy at a higher rate. However, my philosophy is that we will never know the results and potential of the research if it never happens. Even if the research is starting small, with the brains of fruit flies, it's worth it because as mentioned in the article and echoed by many of my classmates: "You have to walk before you can run." The research may not pay off, but if it does then the benefits will be incredibly.
ReplyDeleteOne potential problem that I can foresee as a result of the mapping of the human brain is that the results could be used to judge or discriminate against people. As mentioned earlier, the brain is very complex. If the brain is partially mapped and certain similarities are found between people with the same disease, it's possible that many people that fit the same traits do not share the same disease. For example, just because a person's brain shows activity similar to those suffering from schizophrenia, that does not necessarily mean that they are schizophrenic because there may be other unknown activity going on the changes the meaning of the original activity detected. Mapping brain activity will most likely take decades to get a good understanding.
As a tax-paying citizen, I fully support paying for the Brain Activity Map project. However, I would like to ask the scientists that are undertaking this task if they have set up very specific procedures and areas of the brain that they are studying? I think that it would be more economical if the scientists initially focused in an area of the brain that they already have better information and access to than another part. I would also ask if the information will be made public as it's being discovered, similar to in the Human Genome Project, so that other scientists around the world and contribute? There will undoubtedly be problems and unforeseen consequences from research into mapping the human brain, but I think that it would be wrong if we didn't try to learn what we can and potentially discover cures.
I think investing in the Brain Activity Map is a smart move. Considering what we've gained by doing the same thing with the human genome, mapping the brain will have huge returns in regards to both the economy and our health. I am a little surprised to find this much hesitation into starting the project - yes, I understand that it will take a very long time, and will require a lot of hard work and funding, but the potential good that can come from doing this will far outweigh these costs.
ReplyDeleteIn the video, someone said that scientists around the world have been studying the brain and trying to do what this project aims to accomplish, but are all working independently. I think that significantly more progress would be made if there was coordination that resembled that used in the human genome project. This coordination is key to ensuring that no repetitive research is occurring, and no resources are being wasted. The gentleman that was worried about government workers getting in the way of scientists' creativity in their own labs is a fair point, but I can't see a lot of progress being made if everyone is working independently.
The details of the project will be released with President Obama's budget proposal soon, and I think those are going to play a huge role in either gaining support or creating more push against it. One key feature that I think should be required is a guarantee of communication regarding findings and research being done. I think the project's goals, intentions, and expectations should be well outlined before its beginning.
Also, the gentleman who said that it will be hard to define the "completion" of the map, as the brain is always changing had a fair point, but not a very strong one in my opinion. Though this may be true (and likely is), I truly doubt that just because this research is not as finite as the human genome, we will not gain ANY insight or knowledge from the project. Just because we may not be able to "finish" the map of the brain, we may still make life-changing discoveries and life-saving advancements with what we do find.
Essentially, I feel that just because it's going to be expensive now and we're at the very beginning of a long road, doesn't mean we shouldn't even try to learn more about the human brain in an organized and coordinated fashion.
The reading stated that even neuroscientists do not understand the brain and what is being studied in the brain map, this shows there is necessary research to be completed but funding is always an obstacle. In completing this study of brain mapping there are many layers and other organisms that need to be studied before the human brain can be mapped. With limited funding this study might not be able to be accomplished at this time.
ReplyDeleteThe human genome project did face a great deal of backlash but has proven to be beneficial to the health of the nation. The benefits of this project were not seen until it was well underway and that could also be the case here. The brain mapping is facing a large amount of backlash but it could be beneficial to understanding the causes or effects of many neurological disorders. These benefits cannot be demonstrated until the project has been completed. Hopefully this study will show as much benefit as the Human Genome Project has.
This project could result in harm to patients whose brains are being studied, but it could show serious benefits.I would have a great deal of questions for the scientists some being the following. How can we be sure the fruit fly who initial tests are done on has a similar brain to the human? What protocol will be put in place to ensure the safety of the patients who agree to the study? What population will be studied? How will controls be established, if someone is being studied as a "healthy brain" how would you know they are not prone to Alzheimers? There are many other questions I would ask depending on the answers to these. There are many things unanswered and things to be evaluated as there are only small details of the project that have been released.
As with most topics in Genomics, I can see both sides to whether this is a good idea or not. On one hand scientists undertaking the Brain Activity Map could help a lot of people, answer many unsolved problems and advance medicine. On the other hand, as with most topics, there will be some opposition and feeling of being violated. Personally, I think the benefits outweigh the cons. Our government shovels so much money into other areas where we don't see any of the advancements. At least with this project, we would see the benefit of the funding. I think it's important to point out that this project isn't going to jump right into studying humans, there will be plenty of other organisms studied prior to moving on to humans and therefore, it should be safe.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to the Human Genome Project, opposition is to be expected. But, like the Human Genome Project, it may take a little bit for the benefits to be observed. In the end, I think it's worth it to spend the time and money invested in this area of study. Any time the brain is being studied, it will be a very sensitive subject. This is why I think it is important to study other organisms first, to be sure when humans are involved there has been prior experience. After the completion of the project, so many questions will have been answered that the time and money spent on the project will be irrelevant
Questions: Are you nervous that in the time spent working on this project, something new and quicker may already be in the works to do the same thing? How can you insure that the subjects will be safe since the brain is a tough and sensitive area to deal with? What are the top goals you wish to accomplish with this project? What benefits do you realistically see coming about from this project and how soon can I expect to see them?
As tax-paying citizen I would be concerned that the amount of money being put into the project would not have as great a return, or any return, as it did for the human genome project. I feel like they are trying to convince people that this is worth all of the money based on what happened with the human genome project but success for one project does not guarantee that level of success for another project. This is not to say that the research is not worth it, but rather you can't try to predict a level of success that isn't possible. I would also be concerned that the completion of the project making patients feel that it will cure all diseases, such as Alzheimer's. Just as the human genome project did not lead to cures for all genetic diseases does not mean that this will lead to cures for all neurological disorders.
ReplyDeleteI think that mapping the human brain could yield invaluable information in gaining a better understanding the etiology and treatment for certain disorders, however am not convinced that this is the right time for this project. Many of the diseases associated with brain degeneration are largely not understood and we do not have effective treatment. Diseases such as dementia and Alzheimer's are devastating, and can be very drawn out which is painful for the individual and family, as well as result in massive health care costs. My own grandfather had early-onset Alzheimer's and we had to watch as the disease progressed slowly over the course of ten plus years. Therefore I would be the first to say research into this area is necessary.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I do not think neurologists and scientists have enough base understanding of the brain to carry out this project in the most beneficial manner yet. I am not sure it is realistic to say the brain can be fully mapped out - there are 100 trillion neuron connections that interact and change in different ways, and don’t think we are at the point of receiving as effective results as what came from the Human Genome Project
As quoted in the article, “in this instance, where creativity and innovation are needed, one of the worst things that the scientific community can do is put 500 biologists in a room to pursue a singular, consensus plan to get there.”
Questions I would ask are how long it would take to even progress from fruit flies to humans? How many years would we be committed to funding this project, is there a time cap? I think it may be more beneficial to fund smaller projects focused on the same research, to increase allow competition and innovation to make progress towards base knowledge before concentrating on a single effort.
There are so many unanswered questions when it comes to the human brain. I think that discovering the distinct connections that make the brain function and work may not seem worth it at first, but in the long run can be extremely beneficial. The human genome project have opened a lot of doors but they have also left many questions unanswered. There are still diseases that have no cure. According to the NPR broadcast, the human genome map saved his life thanks to a discovery and isolation of a protein that the cancer relied on. I think that despite this lucky survivor, there are still people that cannot afford to map their genes and unfortunately do not have this same chance. We only use a third of our brains, so mapping the brain can give us a full picture of what neurons we should be listening to, or turning off in order to fully benefit us. I think taxpayers will question why now? Why is it that we have been studying the brain for so long yet we still have little knowledge about its full function? Scientists are starting with the mapping of fly brains as well, which will also be controversial for people to want to contribute their money toward these efforts. I think that the brain should be mapped so that we have more insight into information we never thought imaginable. The more we know the more we can help, despite the brain’s dynamic nature.
ReplyDeletehttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/human-genome-project-tenth-anniversary/
The human brain map project has a lot of potential in its development. I think it is good that discussion has sparked surrounding this issue. I could be on either side of the debate because I see the positives and negatives of it's investments and research. I think it would be very beneficial to finally start unlocking some secrets about the functions of the brain but I know that may well be many years from now even if the human brain map began immediately. The financial costs are definitely cause for an immediate reaction of skepticism to it's validity and importance. The start up time of this proposal would be quite lengthy and as mentioned I think without the specifics of how long they plan on focusing at each stage they are unable to make any guarantees on the outcomes by year. It is putting a lot of pressure on a single organization to come together for such a huge discovery. On the one hand it is a focused and single effort but it also limits the capabilities to one organization while many could be simultaneously working on it with more incentives and more availability to compare results and effective trial and error feedback. I agree with some of my classmates that the project has a lot of great things going for it but I'm concerned as to whether the time investment will really pay off in time for us to start seeing large-scale positive outcomes.
ReplyDeleteOkay, yes this research towards mapping the human brain will be VERY expensive...and its hard to imagine so much money going towards research on a little animal and not health care, but it is definitely worth it. How can we go about trying to discover cures to different diseases, like Alzheimer's, that are all linked to the human brain, when we don't have a complete understanding of the brain? The cost of testing an animal is far less than could ever be imagined for testing on a human. Plus, researchers are not just studying animals, but rather are hoping to make new discoveries on animals, and ultimately see if the same can be said for humans...this method just cuts down costs. This research reminds me of the Human Genome Project...it will definitely prove to be beneficial in the long run.
ReplyDeleteAfter having gone through this course, I was already in favor of funding the Human Brain Map Project based on the promise that has resulted from similar collaborations such as the Human Genome Project before having read and listened to the NPR article.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the article featured an enlightening opposing argument made by Michael Eisen, a member of the scientific community. Eisen says that scientists are still years, maybe decades away from the amount of information needed to embark on a large-scale collaborative, governmental project. He maintains that collaborative efforts at our current point in development would not be a constructive use of resources; suggesting creative freedom among individuals and their research teams should remain a priority.
I believe that the motion to go forward with the Human Brain Map Project will be well worth the efforts in the long run, as it’s findings will undoubtedly inform and broaden the scope of understanding in terms of brain function and associated diseases. I am confident that the completion of the Human Brain Map Project will have a significant impact on our lives and how we interpret health in the same way that the Human Genome Project and other large-scale government projects have successfully enacted have done. It is important to acknowledge inherent differences in the two projects, though. The implementation strategies will not be a simple matter of replicating methodology because the human genome is finite whereas the human brain is infinite. Even with the understanding that this project will be considerably different in terms of timeline and resources, I feel that it is both the scientific community and the government’s responsibility to pursue these endeavors. I see this project as an investment in the future that goes beyond the self-interest of society now, a project which findings will persist well into the foreseeable future.
I’d like to ask the members of the scientific community who oppose this proposition, how much time they predict they’ll need or what information they want to uncover before they would willingly involve themselves in this project.
Every day achievements in science are made, and advancements in neurology are on the horizon. Think back to only a few decades ago, when huge accomplishments were made in the field of cardiology, and the first heart transplant was performed. The brain is the one organ that physicians still know little about. Listening to the story of Wartman, and his battle with leukemia was very enlightening. I was extremely happy to hear about a practical application of the human genome project and how it saved his life. Although mapping the brain will be much more complicated then the genome project, many therapies and cures could be found for debilitating diseases.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, I am not sure that we could afford this huge project; the government would be taking a huge risk. What if we invest all this money into unlocking the secrets of the brain and fail miserably? The scientist on NPR explains how the brain is infinite, we cannot spend infinite amount of dollars on this project. The benefits would be numerous, but at what cost do we draw the line? One major question I would like to know is assessing the efficacy of the program. Another question, like many others, is the cost of the project and the timeline. This team better have very talented investigators that can stick to schedules and deliver results in an allotted amount of time.
Although I think that mapping the human brain sounds exciting, I'm not sure whether tax-payers would agree to pay more to see more research like this. Of course, I believe that carrying out this research project would further develop our understanding of how the human brain functions in certain ways. Many advances can be made just from this project that may potentially lead us to understanding and, possibly, curing Alzheimer's Disease altogether. This in itself would be a major step forward in my opinion. However, I believe that there are a few important questions that need to be addressed by the scientists working behind the Human Brain Map. There was mention that currently, scientists are testing methods for brain mapping on fruit-flies. Although this may give scientists more feedback and important information to carry out further research, it is only a mere first step when comparing research/human mapping to that of a human brain. The methods used to map the brain of a fruit-fly may take a very short period of time compared to a human's brain. Thus, as a tax-paying citizen, I'm sure I would not be the only person wondering how long it would take to completely map the human brain. Research is very time consuming and thus, I believe that if this project ultimately stretched over a long period of time, many tax-paying citizens would quite possibly change their minds and save their money. People don't mind paying, as long as they see results. If those results do not come quick enough, I don't believe that people would have the patience to keep supporting and funding this type of research. I do believe that, like the Human Genome Project, the mapping of the human brain would ultimately start paying the economy back greatly. However, I am sure that there will also be certain groups of people who would rather spend funds on research in other sectors rather than mapping of the human brain simply because they may not see the mapping to be as important as other individuals.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there is somewhat of a risk for the country to invest the amount of money that it did into the human genome project into yet another brain mapping project I believe that the return on the investment will be of great magnitude. As we all know the field of genomics is still vastly unknown, but it has the power to take modern medicine to new heights. If we took money out of the equation would we still be thinking about embarking on this project? Even though it is costly I think it is necessary to further the field of medicine. A perfect example of how brain mapping helped is the case of Dr. Wartman; when all modern practices failed he turned to genomics to solve his problem. It may have been time consuming but he was able to beat all the odds and kill all the cancer in his body; which is truly remarkable. When it comes to the step of having to map the fruit flies brain before the human brain the thought is very rational. People always say that tasks are 95% planning and 5% execution, well in this instance it think it applies. the scientists need to find a way to map a less complex brain network before the try to tackle the complexities of the human brain. So by using the fruit flies, even though it may delay the project and cost more money, scientist will get a better final result because they know how to attack the real project: the human brain. All and all I truly think that this project needs to happen, I believe that will open up a whole new world in medicine just as the human genome project did.
ReplyDeleteI believe that this project would truly benefit everyone around the world, and it's nice to see the government backing up this project. I believe this will create more incentive if scientists know that they will have funding for their work, so this will only speed up the process for discoveries, and who knows what we can find? However, this project since it is so new, seems a little vague in what they are trying to do, so there are some questions I have for this team.
ReplyDeleteMy question to the scientists and government would be who gets to profit off the research that comes from this project? Will it be like Myriad who used the genome sequence project to patent the genes that they discovered to monopolize a test that many people can benefit from for their own gains? Or will the government be more regulatory and actually control what happens with the knowledge that comes from this project?
Another question would be how would the effort be coordinated? As stated in the article, you can't have 500 scientists in a room working towards a single plan, but instead have to have scientists be creative and innovative. So then how would they make a plan and set goals if innovation isn't normally coordinated.
There is still so much unknown that I believe this would be a beneficial investment, but I'm not sure the money should come straight from tax dollars at this point in time. I think this is an important investment in terms of preventive medicine, but first, we need to straighten out our country's health care system. I think it's important that if we all pay for this research with tax dollars, we should all be able to access the health care that would allow us to utilize the information later. In the meantime, decisions should be made ensuring that one company does not claim the information for profit. The information that may come from a study like this may be life changing. I think about Alzheimer's and I think about all of the voicemails that I listened to in middle school where my grandmother called, got confused, and began crying. Luckily, we could afford to get her placed in a specialty home, which was the best case scenario, but she was upset often--far from her usual self. This went on for years. Now, as my mom is getting older, she is beginning to think about it, worry about it. That's not who she is and she doesn't want to go through that, or have us kids watch it happen to her. A study that could give us answers, tell us more, possibly cure Alzheimer's, would affect so many of us--it's an necessary investment. But, I question if it makes sense to use tax dollars for this project when the governmental health care system is still in its infancy?
ReplyDeleteAfter studying the ethics of healthcare, I cannot say that this project is the best use of money at this time. However, in the interest of science, this project is certainly a wonderful thing. The brain at this time is still largely unknown and more research, absolutely, is necessary to determine how the brain works. Neurological disorders such as alzheimers and other forms of dementia are, in my opinion, some of the most debilitating deceases and dehumanizing due to personality changes and differences in perceptions of reality in those afflicted. However, what I am most interested in is if this project is solely in the interest of curing Alzheimers? What other potential benefits to researchers see coming out of this project? Are there ideas, for example, for enhancements to the human brain? What interests, outside of neurological disorders are there driving this project?
ReplyDeleteThe first question I would ask the scientists undertaking the Human Brain Map is whether or not the goal is a realistic possibility. In recent years, scientific progress has increased at an exponential rate due to advancements in technology and science. These advances were built off of a chain of successful experiments and good research. If the study does not have a solid plan of experimenting and gathering data, then it is probably not worth funding. Companies asking for funding should be required to clearly state the goals, steps, and benefits of a study to their investors before money is wasted on inconclusive experiments.
ReplyDeleteAnother question/concern is if the goal has practical use in the modern world. Funding for science is limited and experiments that give knowledge without practicality should be examined thoroughly before they receive funding. Money can be given to many causes including food and shelter for everyone, so the knowledge gained from experiments should be worth benefitting people. I would consider the Human Brain Map to be a company that deserves funding because they desire to find a cure for mental diseases using a detailed plan and the product of their research would be beneficial to all.