This is not a typical self-help book. It is not really a prescriptive book -- it is about the science of aging, and the scientifically-proven methods This is not a typical self-help book. It is not really a prescriptive book -- it is about the science of aging, and the scientifically-proven methods to increase one's healthy span of life. The author, Daniel Levitin, is a neuroscientist and a cognitive psychologist. His book contains an appendix with 70 pages of scientific references.
But this is not dry-reading. It is filled to the brim with anecdotes, especially stories about people who lived well into their 80's, 90's, and even beyond with healthy, fulfilling lives. And the book is spiced with humor. For example, "If I livve to one thousand and have more than ten generations of offspring, I'm going to need to get a bigger table for Thanksgiving dinners."
Levitin is also a musician; he also wrote the book This Is Your Brain on Music. So many of his anecdotes are about musicians who lived long, healthy lives. Levitin talks about an 87-year-old consultant audio engineer who came into his home recording studio, studied the acoustics for an hour, then suggested a few minor changes that totally transformed the acoustics!
This is a comprehensive book; it covers a lot of areas in all aspects of life. Levitin talks about areas where older people get better with age, life self-control and self-discipline, agreeableness, and emotional stability. Other areas like conscientiousness, openness and extraversion decrease with old age. Besides IQ and EQ, a big deal is made of CQ--"Curiosity Quotient", because it is the best measure for predicting life success. Older people have more wisdom, because they can see patterns that others do not see. They are not as fast at mental calculations and retrieving names, but they are better and faster at seeing the big picture. This comes from decades of generalization and abstraction.
There is a lot of discussion of memory, and an interesting idea called "Multiple Trace Theory". Every experience lays down a unique trace in the brain. Repetitions don't overwrite earlier traces; they simply lay down more, near-identical but unique traces of their own. The more traces there are for an event, the more likely you will recall it rapidly and accurately. Levitin claims that memory doesn't truly decline with age. But memory tests case stress that affect older people more than young.
While some historians say that the purpose of the brain was discovered only recently, this is not true. There are two references in the Bible, showing that the authors of the Old Testament knew that the brain is the seat of thought.
Levitin talks a lot about healthy emotions and social engagement. He writes that loneliness is worse for your health than smoking 15 cigarettes a day. The book has lots lf suggestions for activities that can reduce loneliness.
There is a chapter in the book on nutrition, on exercise, and sleep. Of course, these three topics are central to health. Levitin writes, "Even the teensiest, tiniest, barely measurable amount of physical activity improves brain functions." The book discusses various marketed interventions that are claimed to reverse human aging--but none have been proven, and some are dangerous.
We are all getting older, and this book just might spark you to change some aspect of life, some idea or activity that will increase your healthy life span....more
This is a fantastic book about exercise! It is not a self-help book that encourages you to exercise daily; it is a dive into the biology, psychology, This is a fantastic book about exercise! It is not a self-help book that encourages you to exercise daily; it is a dive into the biology, psychology, anthropology, and scientific research into the why's and wherefore's of exercise. The book is filled with fun facts and myth-busting research into what exercise can and cannot do to improve one's fitness, well-being, health, and longevity.
Did you know that in ancient times, and in today's isolated tribes, people sit just as much as people in modern society? Primates like chimpanzees are no more active than humans (though they do tend to walk further). Did you know that people can outrun horses--not in short sprints, but in long, drawn-out races? (The author participated in one such race and in fact did outrun some horseback riders.) People in hunter-gathering tribes do not exercise; they look at purposeful exercise as something that crazy people do! But they do get plenty of exercise by walking, and their daily activities. And, ancient people were not stronger than today's modern society; in a society where food is not abundant, excessive muscles that require a lot of energy to maintain are more of a burden than an aid.
Exercise is something that most people dislike. Humans have evolved to run, but we have also evolved to sit! Research has found that exercise will not help you to live longer, but it will help you to live a healthier, more active life.
This book is filled with the results of scientific research, and helped me to understand better how evolution has shaped our active--and inactive--lives. The book's conclusion is concise:
"Make exercise necessary and fun. Do mostly cardio, but also some weights. Some is good, but more is better. Keep it up as you age."
This is a fascinating, engaging book. I read this book at the same time I was reading a science fiction novel about how a spider-like species senses tThis is a fascinating, engaging book. I read this book at the same time I was reading a science fiction novel about how a spider-like species senses the environment, through vibrations. Suddenly, I understood the issues and this book and the novel complemented one another.
I was blown over by the fact that some animal senses still remain a mystery. Scientists are still trying to understand the mechanisms of magnetic detection. How bats sense their environment is simply amazing. Their measures and countermeasures and counter-countermeasures with the detection of certain insects was truly eye-opening for me!
This is a fantastic book--highly recommended!...more
How do we navigate? What parts of the brain are responsible for our ability to navigate? Why are some people really good at navigation, while others aHow do we navigate? What parts of the brain are responsible for our ability to navigate? Why are some people really good at navigation, while others are terrible? Can you train yourself to be a better navigate? What allows certain animals to be master navigators?
This book discusses all these questions, and sometimes the answers are surprising. Neuroscientists have discovered that so-called "place cells" fire in the hippocampus portion of the brain, coding for location. Perhaps about 10,000 place cells fire in a pattern to represent a particular location. Maybe 20% of the hippocampus is devoted to these place cells. So-called "sharp-wave ripples allow us to mentally simulate future possibilities, and map out routes. There are also head direction cells that act like the needle of a compass. When they fire, they have among the highest signal-to-noise ratio of all neurons in the brain. They help to give us an absolute (not relative) sense of direction.
Women and men navigate differently. Men rely on cardinal directions and metric distances, while women rely more on memories of landmarks. Men perform better at mental rotation tasks, while women are better in tests of location memory.
Some scientists believe that this is in agreement with the hunter-gatherer theory. Mental rotation is useful for hunting, while location memory is more useful for gathering food. Modern women seem to be better at remembering the locations of school textbooks, spare house keys, and homework folders. However, some anthropologists say that this is all nonsense! A few hours spent playing a video game can erase these differences.
In countries where men and women are treated equally, both sexes have good navigation skills. But in countries where women are treated as second-class citizens, and forbidden to drive, they score worse in navigational tests. This isn't too surprising. Interestingly, people who perform best at smell identification tests also do best at navigation. It seems like spatial memory and olfaction are linked.
Released in a forest, people can walk in a straight line for hours on a clear day, using the sun as a guide. But on an overcast day, few people could walk further than a mile from their starting point, as they backtrack and loop erratically. GPS guidance is degrading our ability to navigate. GPS maps show fewer landmarks, which are needed for navigation. Scientists have shown that when using a GPS, neurons in the hippocampus are flatlined!
Many books on psychology mention the significantly enlarged hippocampus found in London taxi drivers. They spend years learning all the roads in London, in preparation for a taxi-driving entrance exam. This book, however, points out that the volume in a brain is finite. An enlargement of one portion of the brain means that other portions must be somewhat smaller, as a result.
The author, Christopher Kemp, is a molecular biologist. He writes in a straightforward style, avoiding cutesie humor. He brings lots of interesting anecdotes to the narrative. My only problem with the book occurs on page 143, where he demonstrates a misunderstanding of statistics and test scores. Nevertheless, this is a short and engaging book. It deserves to be read by anyone who finds navigation to be important in daily life....more
This book is a marvelous blend of stories about crime, and biochemistry. I love how the author describes each type of poison in a separate chapter, inThis book is a marvelous blend of stories about crime, and biochemistry. I love how the author describes each type of poison in a separate chapter, interleaving stories about crimes committed with the poison's chemical and biological characteristics. A major theme in the book is the multiple uses of these poisons. The lethality of many of them depend on dosage; at low dosage these poisons are actually in use to improve health in some way!
The crime stories are absolutely fascinating. Here are some examples:
"Gin and tonic" was invented by the British in the mid-1800s. It consisted of gin, sugar, lime, and a quinine tonic. The gin, sugar, and lime were used to mask the bitter taste of quinine, which was discovered to prevent malaria. However, during the Napoleonic era, French physicians assumed that since quinine, a bitter white powder, was medically useful for treating malaria, that all bitter white powders would also be beneficial. Strychnine is also a bitter white powder, so ...
In 2017, Betty Miller lived in a retirement home in Vermont. She harvested castor beans on the home's property, and processed them to make ricin. She put the ricin in the food of other residents. She wanted to test the effectiveness of ricin as a poison, before using it to commit suicide. However, none of the residents became very sick, because her ricin was not pure, and ingestion of ricin is not an effectivve route for poisoning. Today, research is being done to see if ricin could be targeted to kill cancer cells.
Alexander Litvinenko was a KGB agen, and after the fall of the Soviet Union, he became an FSB agent. He found evidence that his superiors were colluding with a crime syndicate that was trafficking heroin from Afghanistan to Western Europe. He alleged that Putin was personally involved in a cover up. He later defected to the West. In 2005, while living in the UK, he was poisoned with polonium-210. It is suspected that Putin himself gave the order to poison him!
I am very much puzzled by the stories about arsenic. It accumulates in the body, so it can be used in a series of small doses to simulated a slowly-worsening natural illness. On the other hand, consider the people living in the region of Styria in Austria, home of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Many people there regularly eat arsenic as a health tonic! They start with small doses, and gradually build up an immunity. There seems to be some truthg that a series of small, increasing doses does provide some health benefit. But, how does this reconcile with its usage as poisoning in small, cumulative doses?
I was encouraged to start this book because of the high ratings here on Goodreads. But before I started reading it, I thought that this would not be an interesting book. But -- it is a real page-turner for me! It is so well-written, and the blend of chemistry and crime is presented so nicely. I highly recommend this book!...more
I really enjoy books written by active researchers in the field. This is not exactly a book, since it is a series of lectures in audiobook format. NevI really enjoy books written by active researchers in the field. This is not exactly a book, since it is a series of lectures in audiobook format. Nevertheless, the subject is fascinating. Some of the topics covered in the book are old hat -- meaning, that I've read about them several times in other other books. Nevertheless, there are enough new topics in this book to hold my interest. In fact, up until now, I had really believed in some of these brain myths. Indre Viskontas gently lets you know why these myths were initially ingrained into our culture, and the research that has shown why the myths need to be exploded.
The author is not only a neuroscientist, but an opera singer, too!...more
Every chapter is interesting, but this book seems to go in circles. I just cannot figure out what the author intended for the overall theme. Brian GreEvery chapter is interesting, but this book seems to go in circles. I just cannot figure out what the author intended for the overall theme. Brian Greene is a well-known author and physicist. He delved into so many different subjects--it was hard to keep track what he was ultimately driving at.
The beginning of the book was about the beginning of time, about the laws of thermodynamics and entropy, and the structure of DNA. So far so good. Then the book diverges into religion, philosophy, consciousness, and all sorts of other subjects. The final chapters return to physics and what will happen in the very very very distant future.
Perhaps the book could have been improved by just making it into a collection of essays. Then there would be less need to try to make it into a coherent story.
I didn't read this book--I listened to the audiobook, narrated by the author. Brian Greene reads his book rather well, and his voice, at least, is not distracting. ...more
"We cannot make artificial life because we cannot agree on what life is. We cannot find life on Mars because we cannot agree what life represents". --
"We cannot make artificial life because we cannot agree on what life is. We cannot find life on Mars because we cannot agree what life represents". --Radu Popa
Scientists still cannot agree on a definition of life. That is because life comes in so many forms and structures; there is no single definition that can encompass them all. That is the central theme of Carl Zimmer's book.
The early portion of his book discusses what is a human. When did humans first evolve? Zimmer writes a number of interesting anecdotes about primate behaviors and their reactions to death. One hundred-thousand years ago, homo sapiens began carrying out funerals. This demonstrates that people understood that diseases and injuries cause death.
Zimmer writes about flowers that were buried by Ice Age squirrels 30,000 years ago in Siberia. Scientists have nurtured them back into healthy plants. He writes about hibernating bats. He writes about Covid-19. Famous Hungarian biochemist Szent-Györgyi said that self-reproduction is not a requirement for life. As a humorous aside, he gave as an example that a single rabbit cannot reproduce.
The tail end of the book discusses the origin of life. Some scientists believe that the most important components or requirements for life are shell membranes called "liposomes". They act as containers for life's molecules. Scientists have made liposomes by adding water to meteorites. Other scientists find that visiting the Kamchatka Peninsula is a great place to study early-Earth-like conditions. The peninsula is packed with active volcanoes, crater lakes, hot springs and ponds.
This is just a small sample of all the topics discussed in this book. The author does not try to be humorous. Instead, he captivates the reader with an amazing assortment of stories about scientists who have tried to define the edge between the non-living and life. Highly recommended!
This is the first book I tried from the "Great Courses" series. I've got to say, this one is wonderful. The author is a great speaker, and he speaks fThis is the first book I tried from the "Great Courses" series. I've got to say, this one is wonderful. The author is a great speaker, and he speaks from experience. He is a professor and a researcher in the subject.
One of the most fascinating aspects of this book is the many types of memory. I had thought that there was only short-term and long-term memory. From this book, I learned of several other types of memory that are not self-evident. It was quite eye-opening for me! I deeply enjoyed the metaphors that are used to explain the different types of memory. This makes it quite easy to understand the concepts.
I especially appreciated the revelation that after controlling for certain variables, aging is not correlated with memory deterioration!
This fascinating book describes how parasites may change our reasoning, behavioral patterns, social behaviors, and even our politics. These parsites rThis fascinating book describes how parasites may change our reasoning, behavioral patterns, social behaviors, and even our politics. These parsites range from single-celled organisms to larger ones like worms. The book shows a multitude of ways that harmful microbes can change insect behavior, sometimes resulting in infecting humans and causing severe illness.
There is an amazing anecdote about a French biologist who tried desperately to get enough grant money to travel, at great expense, to New Zealand. He went there to find a parasite work that drives crickets to jump into water (they can't swim). He went there and came up almost empty handed. Then he found out that about 80 miles from where he lived, hundreds of crickets every night were driven into a swimming pool by that same parasite!
It is amazing how a certain wasp injects venom into a roach and pacifies it. Then the wasp walks the roach to its burrow, like a dog! The roach is much bigger than the wasp, and the wasp doesn't have to waste energy dragging it.
A cat parasite named T. gondii can also infect people. People can catch it by contact with cats, cat litter, unwashed vegetables, gardening, and undercooked meat. It infects the brain, and can cause subtle behavioral changes. It may even trigger schizophrenia in some genetically-sensitive people. Infected people are more prone to traffic and industrial accidents. In rats, the microbe induces "fatal feline attraction." Anti-psychotic medication given to rats can prevent this condition!
People given flu vaccinations may become more social. This may be true for other virus infections, as well. This does not bode well for Covid-19 infections, for which, before symptoms arise, may draw people to become more social and spread the virus further.
Experiments with young mice in a sterile environment suggest that microbiota in the gut shape the wiring of the brain, and strongly suggest an influence on personality. Bacteria in the gut seem to do this by stimulating the vagus nerve, which connects the digestive system and the brain. There is evidence that probiotics--fermented foods--can be helpful in many ways.
In a chapter called "The Forgotten Emotion", there is a fascinating discussion about disgust. It is so interesting to learn the reasons why we are disgusted by certain things. Why are earthworms, rats, cockroaches, acne, and even seaweed are considered disgusting. Why is vomiting contagious? Many of these disgusts are influenced by evolution. Our aversions to parasites and disgusting things translate into everyday behaviors, including bigotry and political views.
Ancient Mosaic Law "correctly identifies the main sources of infection as vermin, insects, corpses, bodily fluids, food (especially meat), sexual behaviors, sick people, and other contaminated people or things. It implies that the underlying source of infection is usually invisible and can be spread by the slightest physical contact. And it prescribes effective methods of disinfection, such as hand washing, bathing, sterilization by fire, boiling soap, and quarantining."
In the book's last chapter, there is an interesting hypothesis that explains a correlation between collectivism with levels of infectious diseases and parasites. This correlation exists on an international level, and also within the US on a regional level. This hypothesis explains regional levels of religiosity, intermarriage, political persuasions, and certain personality traits.
Obviously, the book's title is taken from the once-famous commercial against drug use. A man holds up an egg and says "This is your brain". Then he points to a frying pan and says "This is drugs." He cracks the egg into the hot frying pan and says "This is your brain on drugs. Any questions?"
This is a short book that shows a multitude of ways in which parasites can alter our thinking and our behavior. Some of these behaviors are actually helpful, while many are harmful. I enjoyed reading the book, as it gives a lot of insight into the reasons for some types of behaviors--and how to avoid the harmful behaviors....more
Stephen Meyer is a very articulate author, who understands the subject of DNA and the researches into the origin of life very well. Unfortunately, he Stephen Meyer is a very articulate author, who understands the subject of DNA and the researches into the origin of life very well. Unfortunately, he does not understand the very basis of the philosophy of science. He received a Ph.D. from University of Cambridge. How did this happen? He must have learned there how to fool his professors with fast talk and glib glosses with subtle illogical arguments.
The first third of this book is an excellent overview of the discovery of DNA, and descriptions of how DNA conveys information. The remainder of the book, unfortunately, makes totally unsubstantiated claims that Intelligent Design is the best theory that accounts for the origin of life.
Meyer defines Intelligent Design as an idea that living things are best explained by a rational agent, a guiding intelligence, rather than an undirected process. This very definition is faulty, as it makes it sound like an either-or proposition. Can't the origin of life be explained as the result of a natural process, that is not totally random, much like evolution by natural selection?
Meyer describes many computational and chemical explanations for the origin of life, and (rightly) shoots them all down. But why does he ignore Conway's game of life--which generates a huge, specific complexity out of random initial conditions and a few very simple rules? It is an excellent metaphor for biological life. It serves as as "analogy for the counter-intuitive notion that design and organization can spontaneously emerge in the absence of a designer." (Wikipedia) The philosopher Daniel Dennett used the analogyto illustrate the possible evolution of consciousness and free will.
Meyer lists the five requirements for an idea to become a scientific theory. He describes a number of criticisms that Intelligent Design is not a scientific theory, because it does not meet the criteria. Then, Meyer shoots the criticisms down, large using the "what-aboutism" approach. Meyer is wrong in using "what-aboutism" as a counter-criticism, because his arguments simply do not dig deeply enough into the criticisms.
One of the criticisms of Intelligent Design, is that it simply pushes back the problem. "If an intelligent agent designed life, then who or what designed the designer?" Meyer addresses this criticism with what I call a "what-aboutism". Meyers explains that if you ask who carved the sculptures on Easter Island come about, would you ask, "yes, but who designed the sculptors?" Of course you wouldn't ask that question, because we know that the sculptors were ordinary human beings. But, if you say that the origin of life is explained as a supernatural intelligent designer, then that deserves a lot more explanation.
Two of the requirements for a scientific theory are that it must be testable and falsifiable. But Meyer misunderstands these requirements. A theory that makes super-duper claims must have super-duper evidence to back it up! For Intelligent Design to be a legitimate scientific theory, it must make multiple predictions that can be tested--and if the predictions are not found to be true, they must falsify the theory. But no such predictions are made.
Yes, Intelligent Design can EXPLAIN the origin of life--but that does not prove it to be valid. Intelligent Design can EXPLAIN anything and everything.
Yes, but Meyer would say that no other extant scientific theory can explain the origin of life. Well, in ancient times, there was no scientific theory that could explain the origin of rainbows. Therefore a super-powerful super-natural agent must be responsible for rainbows. Does that make sense? No--scientists simply have not been able to explain the origin of life. The origin of life, and the source of consciousness are two very difficult questions that scientists are still researching, and they probably will continue for a long time. But theorizing that a supernatural intelligent agent is at work requires more than glib reasoning. It requires a LARGE NUMBER of scientific experiments, each of which is designed to potentially DISPROVE the theory. And each experiment must FAIL to disprove the theory.
The book sounds so much like the "god of the gaps". When creationists attempt to disprove evolution, they point to gaps in the fossil record. To a scientist, the origin of life is just a big gap, waiting to be closed....more
This book is about scientists and doctors who are genetically engineering humans. They are using CRISPR and other technologies to alter the DNA structThis book is about scientists and doctors who are genetically engineering humans. They are using CRISPR and other technologies to alter the DNA structure of embryos.
The book focuses on Chinese scientist Dr. Jiankui He, who genetically altered two twin embryos. The purpose of the alteration was to remove the possibility of contracting AIDS. He was encouraged by officials at his university and by governmental officials to pursue his research. It seems, though, that he tricked doctors into performing IVF treatments using modified embryos. However, a year after he announced his research at a conference, he was arrested in China for illegal medical practice, and committed to three years in jail.
There are still big technical problems that are very concerning with genetic modifications. There is always a possibility for off-target effects, like scrambling DNA in unintended locations. Also, gene therapy to perform personalized medicine is presently very labor intensive and costly. And, it only works in one person.
A big part of the book is the stress on social privilege. There is fear that only the elite will be able to afford enhancement technologies, and therefore use them to become more elite. Also, even in these very early stages of research, experimental treatments can incur high costs for transportation and hotels. This prevents low-income people from participating in the research. In the research experiments performed by Jiankui He, these costs were subsidized by the company that sponsored the study.
Genetic tests are being done in the US for many genetic conditions; the selection for gender is already legal. However, the medical risks of IVF do not outweigh the potential benefits of genetic enhancements. Instead of genetic editing, it would seem to be preferable to use genetic selection to filter out known serious genetic defects.
The author seems to go into diatribes against social inequality. Much of this has to do with the unequal availability of genetic treatments to low-income people. But this inequality is already affecting society in a big way--for example, IVF procedures are extremely expensive. We don't have to dig into genetic enhancements to find inequalities. At this point in time, the major issue seems to be the possibility that mistakes can cancel out any perceived improvements in an embryo's DNA. The author does describe how most genetic conditions are the product of multiple genetic defects. I would have liked to have read more about quantifying the likelihood that attempts at genetic enhancements will go awry, in unforeseen ways....more
This is an entertaining book about what genetics tells us about ourselves, and what it does not tell. For example, genetics tells us that a certain smThis is an entertaining book about what genetics tells us about ourselves, and what it does not tell. For example, genetics tells us that a certain small percentage of our genes comes from Neanderthals. It cannot tell us if you descended from a particular tribe of Native Americans. DNA analyses tell us about tendencies, but does not tell you that you are violent, or prone to Alzheimer's disease, or what "race" you belong to. In fact, genetics cannot distinguish among races--it is a social classification, not a biological one.
I got a kick out of reading about how so-and-so claims to be a direct descendant of Charlemagne. The claim is true; but just about every European is also a descendant.
The book is packed with interesting anecdotes. The most riveting story is about England's King Richard III. The exhuming of his grave and subsequent DNA analysis fully corroborated the legend of his life and death, and the his portrayal by Shakespeare. Since he died 600 years ago, he is probably the oldest corpse positively identified through DNA analysis.
I enjoy reading science books that are written by scientists who truly understand their field--as long as the book is well written. And this book is--the author is a geneticist, and the book is filled with the author's dry wit. It reminds me a lot of the books by Bill Bryson. I listened to the audiobook, which is narrated by the author. The author's narration is clear, and his British accent is charming. ...more
What a marvelous book! Bill Bryson is one of my favorite authors. His dry wit shines in all of his books. Before reading this book, it was hard for meWhat a marvelous book! Bill Bryson is one of my favorite authors. His dry wit shines in all of his books. Before reading this book, it was hard for me to imagine what the book would be like. I've read some of Bryson's travel books--all delightful--but I couldn't image what a book about the body would be like. As it turns out, it is a tour book, written in the same style, as a metaphorical tour of the body.
Bryson interleaves talking about a lot of facts with interesting and often humorous anecdotes. Every single page is very interesting, even entertaining. There are a few gruesome parts that I simply skipped over. This is not a comprehensive book about the body; Bryson relates interesting facts, lots of trivia, and really skips the details. That is the magic he brings to a very engaging book.
I didn't read this book, I listened to the audiobook, as read by the author. Bryson has a pleasant, soft voice. Unlike other narrators with soft voices, this audiobook's audio engineering allowed me to hear and understand the narration distinctly. It is also fun, because Bryson's voice inflections bring out the points he wants to emphasize, and the humor comes out in a perfectly deadpan manner....more
What a wonderful book! It is a comprehensive look at all types of behavior, from the magnanimous to the hideous. It is filled with stories that heightWhat a wonderful book! It is a comprehensive look at all types of behavior, from the magnanimous to the hideous. It is filled with stories that heighten the reader's level of engagement. The book is long, yes. But not overly long. Sapolsky's subtle humor and little bits of light-hearted sarcasm fill the book and make it fun to read.
So, what is the "cause" of behavior? The answer in this book, stated so clearly, is "it's complicated." There is no single cause. The structure of neurons and architecture of the brain is one contributing factor. Our collections of genes is another factor. One's upbringing certainly plays a role, as well as one's peers. One's environment is a major contributor. Hormones, such as testosterone may play a role at times, although its influence seems to be over-rated. Whether or not you are hungry when you make a decision is another factor. And it is clear that an adolescent's yet undeveloped brain has a big influence on lack of impulse control. So, yes, it is complicated.
Various genes have been attributed to behavior patterns. But even this is complicated. The so-called "warrior gene" is not really a significant factor, except in a very limited set of circumstances. No single gene is responsible for a behavior pattern, but only in large collections do genes play some role in behavior.
The book does get technical at times; lots of discussion about the role of certain hormones, and the structure of neurons and the architecture of the brain. You can skip over these sections if you like. But it is 100% fascinating, and the narrative is written for a lay person in mind.
I didn't read this book; I listened to the audiobook, skillfully narrated by Michael Goldstrom. The audiobook helped me to relieve boredom during a long solo drive. I looked forward to every session with it....more
This is a wonderful book about heredity. It is such a comprehensive treatment of the subject. The hardcover version of the book is 672 pages long, aboThis is a wonderful book about heredity. It is such a comprehensive treatment of the subject. The hardcover version of the book is 672 pages long, about 575 pages of text followed by references and an index. So, this is not a book to be read in a couple of days. But don't let the length keep you from reading the book. It is terrific--filled with stories and anecdotes that are all quite engaging. This is a very engaging book!
It wasn't until the last couple of hundred years that it was generally understood that many human traits are heritable. This came to me as a surprise. Didn't people notice how families seem to have similar traits? Yes, but the mechanism of heredity was not really understood.
The story of Luther Burbank was very interesting. During the 1870's he developed a series of plant hybrids that were marvelous. He developed the Russet Burbank potato. He developed a grafting technique to deliver 20,000 plum trees in a single summer. He was not a scientist, but he had developed an instinct for understanding what might work in solving problems with plants. Burbank claimed to be religious, and that God will be gradually revealed by our savior, science.(!) The Mexican artist Frida Kahlo painted a portrait of Luther Burbank, shown here. [image]
Charles Darwin came up with a hypothesis called "pangenesis", in his book The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication. It was very similar to the Lamarckian concept of acquired characteristics; body parts can be altered by the environment, and this alteration could pass down to descendants. Francis Galton tried to prove Darwin's hypothesis and failed, by transfusing blood among rabbits. Recent experiments, however, show some ability to transfer traits through blood transfusions. Darwin publicly chided Galton for not conducting successful experiments. But neither Darwin nor Galton really had a clue about the mechanism for inheritance.
Carl Zimmer goes into some detail about how the idea of eugenics came about. The Vineland School for the Feebleminded sent out researchers in the early 1900's, to families of the children who lived there. They found that feeblemindedness was inherited, just like Mendel's peas. The research director, Henry Goddard, became a eugenicist. He didn't want to kill the feebleminded, but he did want to prevent them from having children. He brought a team of fieldworkers to Ellis Island, to give intelligence tests to new immigrants. While trying to make the tests independent of culture, they nevertheless found that about 40% of the immigrants were feebleminded. He had tried to account for cultural differences and language barriers in his tests.
The book contains lots of discussion about race and skin color. But the book shows that race is not a meaningful biological concept. Even at the DNA level, there is no clear-cut way to distinguish races.
All sorts of interesting hereditary correlations are discussed in the book. Race and skin color, slave children and height, height among different countries, low intelligence and accidents, high intelligence and fast inspection times, high intelligence and life expectancy. Environmental influences are also described; iodine in the diet can increase intelligence to a point, and good diets can increase height.
In fact, one cannot treat genes and the environment independently. Each one influences the other. In one study of heritability of intelligence, it was bound that heritability is about 60% among affluent families, but close to 0% among poorer families--at least in the United States. This seems not to hold in Europe. Also, heritability increases as we age, perhaps a sort of feedback loop. It was found in the 1970's that intelligence can be changed. This was the reason that the Head Start program was started. It raised the graduation rate of children, by as much as 10% in the case of children whose mothers didn't finish high school.
There are some fascinating chapters about chimeras; fraternal twins who can share each others' blood types, or other genes from each other. Also, it is interesting how fetal cells can remain in a woman's body for years or even decades. They can sense what type of organ they reside in, and transform themselves into that type of cell. This can be helpful or harmful, depending on the situation.
The book tells an incredible story about how researchers trained bees to pull on a string to obtain food. Without training, none of the bees figured out the puzzle, but by incremental-step training, many of them learned to trick. They returned the trained bees to their hive, and after a while, untrained bees were brought to the experiment. Many of them now knew how to procure the food; 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th-hand communications.
There is so much more in the book, all told with marvelous stories. There are fascinating discussions of memes as a form of cultural heredity, and the revolution that has started with CRISPR technology. Don't be put off by the length of the book. The author's ability to tell a story makes this a very enjoyable read....more
I love reading science books that are well-written by an author who is really an expert in the field. And, in this case, Dr. Satchin Panda definitely I love reading science books that are well-written by an author who is really an expert in the field. And, in this case, Dr. Satchin Panda definitely fits the bill. He is a professor at the Salk Institute of Biological Studies. His specialty is the molecular mechanism of the biological clock and the part it plays in overall health. On the other hand, I do not care for self-help books written by scientists, and while there is some excellent advice here, there is also some bad advice.
The basic idea here is TRE--Time Restricted Eating. Dr. Panda's excellent advice is to restrict your eating to a 12-hour window. In fact, 10 hours is better, and 8 or 9 hours is optimal. When you are eating, your body is in a fat-making mode. Your body cannot burn fat at the same time as it makes fat. So, in order to burn fat, you should open up your window of abstaining from eating to as long a period as possible. Even a tiny snack in the evening will cause a delay in the fat-burning process. And, if you eat at random times throughout the day and night, then the fat-making process stays on all the time.
So, this advice seems very worthwhile, and Dr. Panda relates research that helps to back up his claims. Where he diverges from common sense, is when he suggests that you can eat any type of food you want; the time windows when you eat and don't eat are most important to weight loss. Hmm ... seems like if your concern is to reduce the fat in your body, then restricting fat intake should also be a consideration. Or am I missing something here?
Nevertheless, the author has a lot of very good advice, especially for getting a good night's sleep. He suggests eating a last meal of the day at least two to four hours prior to going to bed. This allows your body temperature to go down about one degree Fahrenheit, which is necessary for sleeping. He also suggests reducing blue light from computers, tablets and smartphones as night approaches.
Dr. Panda also dispels a few myths about circadian rhythms. For example, the belief that people are inherently morning larks or night owls is a myth. There is no genetic connection; it is simply a matter of bad habits that are learned. He describes an anecdotal experiment about camping, when melatonin rose earlier in the evening, without bright lights, allowing a longer and more restful sleep. Another myth is the idea about sleep debt as the reason why we often sleep late on weekends, in order to make up for lack of sleep during weekdays.
Another interesting aspect of the book, is the description of circadian rhythms at the cellular level. You body's cells do not all operate on the same cycle. Cells in different organs of the body each have their own circadian rhythms. They are not equally active throughout the day. They become active sequentially, and it is here where the author's research is particularly insightful.
It was interesting for me to read this book at the same time I was listening to the audiobook, When: The Scientific Secrets of Perfect Timing by Daniel Pink. These two books overlap a great deal. But while Pink's book is about more than circadian rhythms, I much prefer Dr. Panda's book; it is much better researched. Despite this book's shortcomings in the "what to eat" department, the advice about "when to eat" should be taken to heart....more
This book is very engaging, even entertaining. It is all about how timing can affect our lives. I didn't read the book--I listened to the audiobook, aThis book is very engaging, even entertaining. It is all about how timing can affect our lives. I didn't read the book--I listened to the audiobook, and it is read by the author, Daniel Pink. Usually, authors do not make good narrators, but this audiobook is definitely the exception. Daniel Pink is a marvelous reader. He brings a good voice, and remarkable enthusiasm to his narration. So, if you are planning to read this book, I wholeheartedly recommend the audiobook version.
Unfortunately, what Pink has to say is not all that illuminating. In the preface, he writes that the captain of the Lusitania might have averted sinking by a U-boat during World War I, if only he had not made certain doubtful decisions in the afternoon. Really? Yes, the afternoon is a period when many people's intellectual faculties are ebbing, but it is hard to believe that the captain put his ship at risk as a result. And besides that--he had to make decisions in the afternoon--could he possibly have postponed his decisions? I doubt that.
It really is just a coincidence, but while listening to this audiobook, I had been simultaneously reading a print book on a similar theme; The Circadian Code: Lose Weight, Supercharge Your Energy, and Transform Your Health from Morning to Midnight. It is a recently-published book, and Pink probably did not have access to it. But, he could have read the research and results that it describes. If Pink had read the recent research, or had talked to the author who is a leading researcher--perhaps the leading researcher in the field of circadian rhythms, Pink would not have written what he wrote about morning people and night owls. Pink's book simply seems like he is talking off the top of his head. I cannot recommend this book to anyone....more
This is a marvelous book about the intelligence of birds. In this book, Jennifer Ackerman describes a wide range of bird species, brain sizes and capaThis is a marvelous book about the intelligence of birds. In this book, Jennifer Ackerman describes a wide range of bird species, brain sizes and capabilities. Bird brains, in size relative to body weight, are similar to those of mammals. Of course, in absolute terms they are small, as their total weight must be minimal in order to fly. I learned so much from this book. I had no idea about some of the capabilities of our feathered friends.
The smartest birds appear to be crows, ravens, and parrots. The most clever bird seems to be the New Caledonian crow. Take a look at this video which shows a crow that has learned an 8-step method to get to some food. Only four animals make complex tools; humans, chimps, orangutans, and New Caledonian crows. And, the crows make hook tools; the only other species than humans. New Caledonian crows demonstrate cumulative technological change. Their tools are too complex to be invented by a single bird. New Caledonian crows have an extended juvenile period of learning tool-making from parents. Also, the lack of predators on New Caledonia allow crows time and ease of mind to tinker with sticks and barbed leaves.
Bird brains have evolved separately from mammals, so their brain architecture is quite different from that of humans. Nevertheless, their neural connection patterns are quite similar to those of humans. Sleep patterns and functions are similar between birds and mammals; these patterns seem to have evolved separately, in parallel.
Birds have a trade-off at birth, between immediate functionality--flying almost as soon as they are hatched--and greater brainpower, later. The question this book raises is not whether birds are smart--some are definitely smart--but rather, "why are they smart?" The best answer seems to be that birds are smart so that they can solve problems in their environment; how to get food from hard-to-get places. In Japan, crows drop nuts onto a roadway, and position the nuts so that passing cars break the nuts which they then recover. Crows and ravens have been observed to dig up rocks and drop them on invading researchers.
Scrub jays play a shell game with food that they store in caches. They bury, then later move or pretend to move food from one cache to another. They try to trick and confuse other scrub jays. They do this only in front of rival birds--not their mates. But they play this shell game only if they themselves have pilfered food from others in the past.
There is a fascinating description of how birds learn to sing, with parallels with humans learning to speak. It is a mystery, how birds and humans independently evolved similar approaches for vocal learning. One theory is that birds and humans evolved neural circuits that control body movements into vocal capabilities.
The book describes the art projects that male bower birds develop in order to attract mates. And this is followed by Darwin's really dangerous idea; colorful feathers or beautiful bowers might not just be indicators of a male's fitness, vigor and health--they can be desirable qualities, beatiful traits in the mind of the female. The female's preference has acted to evolve these traits in the male. Birds have been trained to distinguish between paintings by Picasso and Monet; they could distinguish impressionists from cubists. They could also learn to discriminate between good and bad paintings, as defined by human critics.
There are lots more areas where birds excel, even in comparison with humans. I won't cover them all here. I simply recommend to everyone who enjoys watching birds to read this book. It is beautifully written, comprehensive in scope, and the writing style is very engaging.
Oh, and one more thing; last night I dreamt that I was a bird. I flew up into the upper region of a big tree, worrying whether the thin, upper branches could support my weight. I figured out how to perch on a branch (a feat that seemed difficult at first), and then I talked with some of the other birds in the tree. ...more
I wish I had read this book 19 years ago, when it was first published. Now, it is out of date. In fact, the Bibliography and Notes section mentions thI wish I had read this book 19 years ago, when it was first published. Now, it is out of date. In fact, the Bibliography and Notes section mentions that the book was already out of date, as new knowledge is growing at a very fast rate. Nevertheless, the book is fascinating, even if modern genetic technologies are not even mentioned--as they were not yet invented at the time of publication!
We often read that 98% of our genetic letters are in common with chimpanzees, and 97% with gorillas. But, I was amazed to read that humans share exactly the same number and types of bones with chimpanzees, the same chemicals in our brains. We have the same types of immune, digestive, vascular, lymph, and nervous systems. So, it must be the remaining 2% of our gene structures that differentiate humans from chimpanzees.
All sorts of nature-vs.-nurture issues are addressed in this book. The book contains a remarkable table of IQ correlations. For identical twins reared together, the correlation is 86%. For twins reared apart, 76%. For biological siblings, 47%. For adopted children living together, the correlation is 0%. These statistics say a lot about the relative importance of nature vs. nurture. And, remarkably, as one ages from childhood to adolescence to adulthood, the importance of heritability of IQ increases!
Evolution by natural selection is about the "competition between genes, using individual and occasionally societies as their temporary vehicles.... The body's survival is secondary to the goal of getting another generation started." Genes act as if they have selfish goals, an idea first proposed and made popular by Richard Dawkins in his famous book, The Selfish Gene.
I learned from this book that men and women are most attracted to body odors of people of the opposite sex who are most different from them genetically, in terms of MHC genes that govern resistance to parasite intruders, by the immune system. Also, I learned how genes can be expressed due to the release of cortisol and other hormones during periods of stress. For example, people living near the Three Mile Island nuclear plant at the time of the accident had more cancers than expected. But, these cancers were not due to radiation exposure, as there was none, but due to heightened cortisol levels, which which reduced the effectiveness of the immune system.
Genes need to be switched on in order to work. External events and free-willed behavior can switch on genes. Genes are not omnipotent; they are at the mercy of our behavior. Another remarkable fact is that the status of a person's job is a better predictor of the likelihood of a heart attack, than obesity or high blood pressure. Someone in a low-grade job is four times more likely to have a heart attack than a high-grade job. The reason is that low-grade jobs lead to the lack of control over one's fate, leading to an increase in stress hormones, followed by a rise in blood pressure and heart rate. This may explain why unemployment and welfare dependency help to make people ill. It is not understood why we and all animals have evolved in such a way that stress suppresses our immune systems.
The most important lesson from the book is repeated over and over again, "Genes are not there to cause diseases." Gene mutations can lead to disease, and sometimes there is a balancing effect between resistance to one disease at the expense of being susceptible to another disease.
This is an excellent book, very readable, and quite engaging. The author gets into some technical detail at times, without getting too bogged down in jargon. I recommend this book for anyone interested in genetics. My only reservation about it, is the fact that it is already quite out of date due to the rate of increasing knowledge about genetics....more
Loading...
