Human neurons are unique compared to animals', new discovery proves

[FfFfFfFF 58,135]

Neurons communicate with each other via electrical impulses, which are produced by ion channels that control the flow of ions such as potassium and sodium. In a surprising new finding, MIT neuroscientists have shown that human neurons have a much smaller number of these channels than expected, compared to the neurons of other mammals.

The researchers hypothesize that this reduction in channel density may have helped the human brain evolve to operate more efficiently, allowing it to divert resources to other energy-intensive processes that are required to perform complex cognitive tasks.

“If the brain can save energy by reducing the density of ion channels, it can spend that energy on other neuronal or circuit processes,” says Mark Harnett, an associate professor of brain and cognitive sciences, a member of MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research, and the senior author of the study.

“Previous comparative studies established that the human brain is built like other mammalian brains, so we were surprised to find strong evidence that human neurons are special,” says former MIT graduate student Lou Beaulieu-Laroche.

Source - https://scitechdaily.com/striking-difference-discovered-between-neurons-of-humans-and-other-mammals/

[Fantina 3,438]

There are so many things that we don't know about our own brain. Super fascinating topic. 

[Creyk 18,667]

Strange

[Guest]

we are animals y'all dont forget that

[gothicdream 39,660]

Science is so f*cking cool

[Fantina 3,438]

@FfFfFfFF Thanks for this website. I am doing a presentation on glial cells in the human brain and found some interesting articles.

[bionic 50,111]

2 hours ago, Fantina said:

There are so many things that we don't know about our own brain. Super fascinating topic. 

Speak for yourself. I've read plenty of Wikipedia articles

[Economy 52,861]

2 hours ago, AnnaNicoleSmith said:

we are animals y'all dont forget that

Meh the term is a bit arbitrary i think...

 

It was used to describe a non human species on earth...

 

But we are one of the species so if by animal u mean earth species then yes (obviously not plants or microbes)

 

I find the debate some ppl have about whether were animals a bit pointless. It literally depends what u mean by animal when u say animal.

[PartySick 172,545]

2 minutes ago, Economy said:

Meh the term is a bit arbitrary i think...

 

It was used to describe a non human species on earth...

 

But we are one of the species so if by animal u mean earth species then yes

 

I find the debate some ppl have about whether were animals a bit pointless. It literally depends what u mean by animal when u say animal

Some people find it degrading to call us animals, I think that's where most of the heated debate stems from.

In a literal sense, we are eukaryotes in the kingdom animalia/metazoa, phylum chordata, class mammalia, etc etc. We have our space on the evolutionary web of life just like every other species on the planet so we are, in fact, animals 

[Economy 52,861]

34 minutes ago, PartySick said:

Some people find it degrading to call us animals, I think that's where most of the heated debate stems from.

In a literal sense, we are eukaryotes in the kingdom animalia/metazoa, phylum chordata, class mammalia, etc etc. We have our space on the evolutionary web of life just like every other species on the planet so we are, in fact, animals 

I get that. But personally i also find it pointless to have a word in the context that just means everything

 

I dont find it offensive to be called animals. But i also think the word is more useful in its traditional use refering to a species that isnt us because at least theres a purpose to the context of using the word

 

Changing it to include us on the grounds that were a connected earthly species also... i dont get the point, now suddely the word doest mean anything of any significance. It just means the same as creature now essentially 

 

Just because societies opinions and views and values change (such as our significance on earth vs other species) doesnt mean we should get to arbitrarily change what a word means and tell others they are wrong for using the original context/meaning of the word.

 

For all intents and purposes the word animal was used to decribe non human creatures... Regardless of whether societies view of human superiority or special status vs other creatures was right or wrong, that was the meaning of the word when it was created. The fact that we are a species also on this planet doesnt negate the original context so to argue what it should mean now i think is just arguing semantics in an arbitrary and opinionative way tbh.

 

Edit: That being said thats just my technical analysis on it, its not a big deal either way. 

[enissa11 2,984]

i don't think special is the right word, it just function differently, other species have also other capacities we don't have, every species has their super powers, we're nothing special.

[FfFfFfFF 58,135]

On 11/20/2021 at 9:08 PM, AnnaNicoleSmith said:

we are animals y'all dont forget that

There is so much nuance into this discussion. Humans are animals, in the sense that we are complex life forms with biological functions, but we are also more than this (animals don't have Language, the ability to create artistical objects that don't serve any practical scope, complex thoughts or meta-thinking - apart from primal forms of all these). To view the human as an animals is not offensive, but is sad because it reduce humanity to animality. Humans are outliners in the animal kindgom, or better said we ''excede'' animality if you will, for better or worse.

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, FfFfFfFF said:

There is so much nuance into this discussion. Humans are animals, in the sense that we are complex life forms with biological functions, but we are also more than this (animals don't have Language, the ability to create artistical objects that don't serve any practical scope, complex thoughts or meta-thinking - apart from primal forms of all these). To view the human as an animals is not offensive, but is sad because it reduce humanity to animality. Humans are outliners in the animal kindgom, or better said we ''excede'' animality if you will, for better or worse.

so interesting what u said, i agree with u now

[Economy 52,861]

On 11/20/2021 at 6:03 PM, enissa11 said:

i don't think special is the right word, it just function differently, other species have also other capacities we don't have, every species has their super powers, we're nothing special.

I dont know about that. Humans dont just have 1 or 2 things were the smartest or best at we have a long list.

 

Whether its complex exchange of thought and information thru complex structured language that can cover just about any topic, our mathematical skills, our ability to teach the next generations new knowledge more efficiently, or the combination of everything allowing us to build a complex ever quickly advancing technological society that now now capable of exploring space, communicating instantly with people halfway across the world, mass producing things or comming up with medical treatments... or wasting tones of resources and time on leisure and entertainment because we can...

 

The list if quite endless on things were unique in and theres more...

 

Its not a lack of humility i dont think or cocky to acknowledge were special when it comes to overall intelligence

 

Furthermore its even more important to acknowledge the power that intelligence has givin us has given us a certain responsibility too that still isnt taken seriously enough...

 

Were the only species right now that can ruin the Earth so badly and so quickly while simultaneously being aware of what our actions are doing to other species.