What an amazing book -- I learned so much from it! Some portions of the book have actually impacted things I have been doing for health. So, the book What an amazing book -- I learned so much from it! Some portions of the book have actually impacted things I have been doing for health. So, the book is not only informative -- it is useful, too!
The first chapters of the book show why the study of inflammation has been so controversial. The fact that inflammation can be both a consequence of disease and a cause of disease has been a dampening effect on research and publication.
I learned that C-Reactive Protein (CRP) is used as a marker for chronic, low-level inflammation. It is not a cause of inflammation, but simply a marker. High levels indicate that one is three times more likely to have a heart attack, and twice as likely to have a stroke. Aspirin yields the best results for those with the highest CRP levels. CRP is at least as good--perhaps better--than LDL cholesterol for predicting risk. But using both markers is better than using either one alone.
Statins help prevent heart attacks, not only by lowering cholesterol, but also by reducing inflammation. As a result, even if you have low cholesterol, statins can significantly reduce the risk of heart attack or stroke.
In obese people, more than half of the cells of fat tissue are actually immune cells. Excess fat is essentially an immune organ. The resulting inflammation is low-level, chronic, smoldering, and escaping detection. There is evidence that it plays a role in diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, and heart disease. In addition, there is a connection between inflammation and metabolism. In obesity, as the body becomes resistant to leptin, fat cells secrete yet more leptin, promoting hunger and inflammation. The inflamed cells tend to ignore insulin, pushing the pancreas to secrete more insulin, leading to diabetes.
I learned that the inflammation in the brain may contribute more to dementia than plaques and tangles!
Aspirin is one of the few modern drugs with the ability to both dampen and reverse inflammation.
The book contains a lot of information about the role of Omega-3 fats in redcucing inflamation. Omega-3 fats are only obtained from the diet, especially from dark leafy greens, walnuts, flax seeds, hemp and chia seeds, algae and seaweed. The book also discusses the role of processed foods in increasing inflammation and worsening health.
The book talks about the studies by Colin Campbell into the connection between animal protein and inflammation and cancer. He found that animal protein induces heart disease more than saturated fat. Campbell's "China Study" suggested that animal foods are linked to higher rates of chronic inflammatory diseases like heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and obesity, while plant foods are protective.
Certain spices like turmeric hold a lot of promise for treating a wide range of chronic diseases. Stimulation of the vagus nerve can be anti-inflammatory. Actions like yoga, tai chi, meditation, deep and slow breathing, laughter, fasting, social connections, singing, chanting, and listening to certain types of music can all help reduce inflammation. On the other hand, habitual stress can encourage hidden inflammation. Things like loss of a loved one, a harrowing divorce, a bullying boss, burnout on the job, pollution, sleep loss, poverty and loneliness can all lead to heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, autoimmunce conditions, depression and anxiety.
At certain points the book becomes very technical. I skimmed over these sections, because I realized I wouldn't remember them for long. But the sections of the book that describe the effects of inflammation and how to reduce inflammation are extremely helpful. Highly recommended!...more
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
What a mishmash! The book starts out with Hawkins' hypothesis about the organization of the neocortex. Here, he even gets the subtitle of his book wroWhat a mishmash! The book starts out with Hawkins' hypothesis about the organization of the neocortex. Here, he even gets the subtitle of his book wrong; it is not a "new theory", but a "new hypothesis". For his idea to be a theory, it must be supported by an overwhelming preponderance of data. This simply isn't supported in the book.
Hawkins has an interesting biography. He founded Palm Computing, and designed the Palm Pilot and Treo. In 2002 he founded the Redwood Neuroscience Institute, now at Berkeley. Then he founded Numenta, and independent research company. The goals of his company are twofold: 1) to understand how the neocortex works, and 2) to apply how the brain works to machine intelligence.
The first half of the book is ok, even fascinating at times. The focus is on how the brain makes many parallel predictions about the environment. The neocortex learns multiple models of the world, makes predictions based on those models. In order to learn about the world, to formulate models, you have to move. Something has to change in order to see, feel, or hear it from different aspects. Then there is a "vote" as to which of the models is most accurate.
The neocortex is a sheet about 2.5 mm thick. It is composed of about 150,000 columns through the sheet. There is very little physical difference between the various areas of the sheet, and very little difference between the columns. Each cortical column generates a model of physical objects. It generates a reference frame for each object and then makes sensory-motor predicitons. Cortical columns model reference frames not only for physical objects, but for abstract objects like math, politics, and language. A key aspect is that reference frames can refer to other reference frames, in a recursion. Language is full of recursions, as well as physical objects.
In 1978, Vernon Mountcastle proposed that a common algorithm unerlies all perception and cognition. The author claims that the common algorithm formulates the reference frames. The "Thousand Brains Theory" states that knowledge of any particular item is distributed among thousands of complementary models. A perception becomes stable, because the columns hold a vote.
So far, so good. I think that some reference to Bayesian reasoning would have helped Hawkins' case for his "theory". Bayesian reasoning and calculations could form the basis for holding multiple models in memory, and taking a vote, by combining memories with incoming sensory information. I hold this as a significant lack of insight on the author's part. (Hawkins; you should be talking to some physicists and mathematicians--I am trying to help you!)
Hawkins lists what he calls the 4 attributes of AGI (Artificial General Intelligence). They are: 1) Learn continuously 2) Learning via movement 3) Many models 4) Use reference frames to store knowledge While these attributes may be necessary for intelligence, they are certainly not enough. I personally have written software systems to have all these attributes--including multi-level recursions--but I certainly would never claim that the software has "general intelligence".
Then the next portions of the book chase some ideas about intelligence, artificial intelligence, the search for other intelligences in the universe, and leaving our knowledge in permanent structures for posterity. It's all fascinating, but I got whiplash from all these ideas coming out of nowhere, without an attempt to adhere to an overall theme. What a mishmash!...more
This is a fascinating book about the science behind ageing. The book takes a comprehensive look at research into the reasons why we age. I was particuThis is a fascinating book about the science behind ageing. The book takes a comprehensive look at research into the reasons why we age. I was particularly struck by how optimistic the author is, that some day the secrets of anti-ageing will be understood and ageing will be a thing of the past. It won't happen overnight. Right now, science is finding certain approaches to extend life--and more importantly, to extend healthy life. As each year passes, perhaps a few hours or days can be added to the average extent of life. At some point, each year will be accompanied by enough scientific advances to advance the average extent of life by a year--and the people alive at that time will essentially become ageless.
But this won't happen anytime soon. The reason is that ageing is a complex process. If one cause of ageing is discovered and bypassed, then a new cause will crop up. For example, in prehistorical times, cancer was rare--people did not live long enough for cancer to develop. The DNA in every cell incurs hundreds or thousands of mutations. Most of these mutations are not problematic. But those mutations that are a problem accumulate over the years, and eventually can contribute to cancer.
One way to fight cancer is to shorten the affected telomeres in the cells' DNA. But this is exactly what would be detrimental to the extent of life. There seems to be a delicate balance between long telomeres contributing to old age, and short telomeres which help to combat cancer.
Only a single chapter at the end of the book describes concrete measures we can take to extend our lives. And--you can guess what those measures are. They are not secrets. And, from my other reading about the so-called "blue zones", I wonder why the social connections are not highlighted among those measures.
I did not read this book--I listened to the audiobook, narrated by the author. This was a mistake. The author's voice is pleasant, with a British accent. But his diction is unclear, and the audio engineering is not up to par. I found it difficult to understand some sentences. I found myself rewinding a bit from time to time, to try to understand some of the words. (English is my native language.) So while I definitely recommend this book, I would not recommend the audiobook....more
This fascinating book is about paleoanthropologist Tim White, and his team's discovery of Ardi--short for Ardipithecus ramidus. Tim White had a reputaThis fascinating book is about paleoanthropologist Tim White, and his team's discovery of Ardi--short for Ardipithecus ramidus. Tim White had a reputation--a pretty bad reputation, actually--of being a very blunt, salty, arrogant scientist. But he was the most learned, obsessive, meticulous, aggressive, and far-seeing scientist of his time. He really and truly "knew his stuff".
Every year during the 1970's, 1980's, and 1990's, Tim White participated in or led an expedition to East Africa. At first he worked with Richard Leakey in Kenya, and then worked primarily in Ethiopia. He searched for fossils of early hominids; the ancestors of modern humans. This was not easy work. First, he had to obtain grant money to fund the expeditions and research. Then he had to go through a maze of bureaucrats in Ethiopia to get permission to search in a certain area. This could take months or even years, as Ethiopia went through political turmoil. Then, after finally getting all set up, he would take a caravan of vehicles on a several-day trip through the desert. He went through the homelands of various warring tribes, and sometimes had to dodge bullets and deal with gun-crazy people!
White found the remains of Ardi, a 4.4-million year old set of fossils that predated the bones of "Lucy". He began studying the fossil remains for many years. He was meticulous, and documented every nuance and detail from his very incomplete collection of fossil bones. He deduced that Ardi was bipedal--she was an upright walker--even though she could also grab onto tree branches. White deduced from multiple clues, that modern humans are more closely related to Ardi than to modern apes. When he finally published his findings, the scientific community was aghast. They just did not believe White--they didn't want to believe him! The scientific community criticized White--perhaps just as much because of White's personality, as his paradigm-shifting views.
It took many years for scientists to finally recognize how correct White had been. The book mentions the aphorism that "science advances when old professors die." In this case, it is probably true.
The most interesting parts of the book, are those that describe the detective work that scientists performed, to discover the secrets of the origin of humans. It was also engaging to hear how expeditions faced danger and desert heat to uncover the tiny fossil fragments. I highly recommend this book!
Oh--I did not read this book. I listened to the audiobook, narrated extremely well by Roger Wayne. He spoke so well that I could distinguish who was speaking, just from listening to his voice. What a delight!...more
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
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
Hundreds of thousands of people try to practice a "paleo" lifestyle, where "paleo" is short for "paleolithic", and is a euphemism for "caveman". They Hundreds of thousands of people try to practice a "paleo" lifestyle, where "paleo" is short for "paleolithic", and is a euphemism for "caveman". They eat mostly meat, thinking that this is what our ancestors thrived on for tens, or even hundreds of thousands of years. They believe that humans ate this way and evolved to take advantage of this type of diet. They believe that humans have not had enough time, since the agricultural revolution, to evolve toward a more modern type of diet. Some practitioners of the paleo lifestyle take their approach much further. Some, for example, donate blood frequently, in order to mimic the results of being wounded frequently. And, some do other strange things. But they don't necessarily refuse to vaccinate themselves (although some do), in order to prevent the scourges of yesteryear, like smallpox, polio, measles, and so on. But they are not always consistent; they wear modern clothes instead of skins, they don't live in caves, and they don't use bear teeth to incur blood loss, and they wear eyeglasses.
Marlene Zuk's builds up a pretty convincing argument to back up her main premise, that humans have indeed had time to evolve significantly since the "first" agricultural revolution, about 12,000 years ago. She is an evolutionary biologist and behavioral ecologist. So, she actively does research in related fields.
Some anthropologists study isolated "primitive" tribes in order to improve understanding of prehistorical humans. But, this approach is fraught with issues. Today's isolated tribes have been influenced by modern society in many ways, and are not as isolated as many would think. They do help anthropologists to understand small-scale societies, but not earlier stages of evolution.
Evolution can be rapid. There is an interesting story about how a group of crickets in Hawaii evolved in twenty generations to suppress their singing, to be quiet, to avoid a parasitic fly. There is a similar story about an experiment that showed rapid evolution of guppies in eleven years.
The ability for some people to drink milk makes it the poster child for rapid evolution in humans. These people have developed a tolerance for lactose in milk. Lactose tolerance is an advantage in high latitudes. Lactose tolerance allows a more efficient uptake of calcium, that is otherwise prevented where sunlight is low, and vitamin D is difficult to obtain. Some societies in northern Africa have also developed lactose tolerance, which must have evolved independently from those in northern Europe. A hypothesis for this evolution is that the ability to drink milk from animals gives people a source of uncontaminated fluid, in a region where water is scarce. So, this is an example of convergent evolution, where a functionality has evolved in multiple places at multiple times, independently. Zuk remarks that one cannot refuse to drink milk in a paleo diet, because lactose tolerance depends on one's genes, and these genes have changed.
Convergent evolution also occurred in societies that lived in high altitudes. Some people in the Andes mountains have developed high hemoglobin concentrations in their blood. On the other hand, people in Tibet who live at altitudes at 13,000 feet above sea level don't have high hemoglobin levels. Instead, they have evolved faster breathing rates, in order to distribute enough oxygen to their bodies.
A central question in this book, is whether a paleo diet really is the "one and only diet that ideally fits our genetic makeup." Early humans often ate roots, tubers, and other starchy foods. Prehistoric humans and Neandertals ate grains, and sometimes cooked their food. They ate a wide variety of plants, and even made crackers! So, the suggestion that we should eat a paleo diet consisting of meat and fish, and not fruits and vegetables and grains, is plainly wrong. It is also true that the proportion of meat eaten increased about 30,000 years ago, after the invention of the bow and arrow. However, big-game hunting was an unreliable as a sole source of support for a family. I just love Zuk's comment; "Saying you want to maintain your wife and children on it is the ancestral equivalent of claiming that you will support your family by playing lead guitar in a band."
I enjoyed this book, and it seems to cover some aspects of paleolithic diet trends. But I wasn't wholly convinced by the arguments. It is very difficult to quantify how much meat vs. how much plant food was eaten in prehistoric times. The remains of plants don't fossilize, and the evidence for grains and plants in prehistoric diets is sporadic. I think that a more complete understanding will require evidence from archaeology. (By the way, I am a vegan, so I certainly do not buy the arguments to follow a paleo diet.)...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
Much of this book is autobiographical. Richard Dawkins collects anecdotes from his professional life. He has led a fascinating life, and has become frMuch of this book is autobiographical. Richard Dawkins collects anecdotes from his professional life. He has led a fascinating life, and has become friends with a number of wonderfully intelligent and interesting people. I guess I am a bit jealous of his experiences! Some people think that Dawkins comes off as being arrogant, but I totally disagree. To me, he comes across as a good person, often humble, who admits mistakes yet recognizes his value to science and to society. I find his writing to be inspiring.
Dawkins has written a number of books about evolution, and some have become classics. If you are unfamiliar with his books, you may not appreciate many of the references in this book. And, in some of the later chapters he dives into evolution science, which can become rather technical. ...more
A few months ago, I heard Steven Pinker give a talk about this book. I must say that his speaking skill did not impress me. However, his writing skillA few months ago, I heard Steven Pinker give a talk about this book. I must say that his speaking skill did not impress me. However, his writing skill is brilliant. This is a very important book--epic in scope, comprehensive, well thought-out and structured, incredibly well researched, and full of some very important messages.
The book begins with a student's question "Why should I live?" To which Pinker answers with a profound interpretation of the "meaning of life". I won't repeat his complete answer, but he writes,
[You have] the ability to like, love, respect, help and show kindness--and you can enjoy the gift of mutual benevolence with friends, family, and colleagues ... You can foster the welfare of other sentient beings by enhancing life, health, knowledge, freedom, abundance, safety, beauty, and peace.
Pinker writes that the Enlightenment helped us escape from superstition and ignorance. It increased our understanding of ourselves through science. Also, Humanism is a secular foundation for morality. And, it is individuals who are sentient, not the tribe. The Enlightenment helped to abolish cruel punishments and slavery. Also, Humanism helped bring about an increase in peace.
The Enlightenment has helped to eradicate some terrible diseases. Science is the most unambiguous achievement by mankind. Science helped to eradicate smallpox, a painful and disfiguring disease that killed 300 million people in the 20th century. And, we have forgotten that on April 12, 1955, "people observed moments of silence, rang bells, honked horns, ... took the day off, closed schools, ... and forgave enemies." That was the day that Jonas Salk's polio vaccine was declared to be safe.
Pinker extols the virtues of genetic engineering, that can accomplish in days what farmers accomplished over millennia, and what Norman Borlaug took years of "mind-warping tedium" to accomplish. Hundreds of studies, every major health and science organization, and over a hundred Nobel laureates have testified to the safety of transgenic crops. Nevertheless, some traditional environment groups persist in denying them to the world.
I just loved this quote from the book:
In 1976, Mao single-handedly and dramatically changed the direction of global poverty with one simple act: he died.
Pinker devotes chapters to improvements in the environment, and the problem of climate change. He shows that there is virtually no dissension among scientists that climate change, and specifically global warming, is a significant problem. However, he is optimistic that these issues can, in principle be solved by courageous governmental action.
The book describes the growth of democracy around the world--not steadily, but in waves. Democratic countries have higher rates of economic growth, fewer wars and genocides, better-educated citizens, and almost no famines. The best reason for democracy, stated by Karl Popper, is that it is a solution to the problem of how to dismiss bad leadership without bloodshed. And, it gives people the freedom to complain.
Pinker shows how disbelief in human-caused climate change is not correlated with scientific illiteracy, but is due to allegiance to values held by one's social circle. Political tribalism is decried as the most insidious form of irrationality today. And this tribalism exists on the left and the right sides of the political spectrum. Pinker writes,
American conservative politics has become steadily more know-nothing, from Ronald Reagan to Dan Quayle to George W. Bush to Sarah Palin to Donald Trump.
Pinker lists all of the ways in which President Trump has resisted progress, and backtracks to a less advanced way of life: Reversal of health care, reversal of globalism, reversal in the growth of wealth, reversal of the environment, safety, law and order, international trade, equal rights, tolerance, and the judicial system. The president has all the hallmarks of a dictator; he is impulsive and vindictive.
The last chapter of the book is about humanism; the chapter starts out well, but then briefly becomes too philosophical and abstract for my taste. Then the chapter returns to a more accessible, concrete structure. It becomes obvious that Pinker is an atheist. He writes that the "existence of the God of scripture is a perfectly testable scientific hypothesis." And, he list some experiments that could be performed to test the hypothesis. He also shows how the religiosity of nations, and even from region-to-region within the United States, is inversely related to happiness and well being. The United States, being more religious on the whole than West European countries, has higher homicide rates, abortion, STD's, child mortality, obesity, educational mediocrity, and premature deaths. And, Pinker points out that non-religious people in the U.S. tend not to vote--that helps explain why we have Trump in office today.
This is such a fascinating book; it takes up arguments where his earlier book The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined leaves off. This is the seventh book that I have read by Steven Pinker--and this one is just as wonderful as his previous books....more
This is such an excellent book, mainly because I had never thought very much about the need for a good night's rest. The first part of this book does This is such an excellent book, mainly because I had never thought very much about the need for a good night's rest. The first part of this book does not really address "why we sleep". Instead, the book describes "what happens if we do not get enough sleep." Not until about halfway through the book, does the question "why we sleep" really get answered.
The author, Matthew Walker, is a professor of neuroscience and psychology. I always prefer to read science-related books that are written by scientists who are actively doing research in the field. They are the most authoritative, and they best understand all of the nuances involved in the interpretation of experimental results. As long as the science book is well written--and this book is definitely written in an engaging style--I always prefer to read a book written by an active researcher.
The author divides a night's sleep into two primary portions; the early portion is characterized mostly by NREM (non-REM) sleep, while the later portion is mostly REM sleep (Rapid Eye Movements). Both portions are essential. NREM sleep helps one to cement memories into permanent storage, while REM sleep helps one to apply past experiences to solve problems. If you skimp on either portion, then your brain has a very difficult time recuperating. The book describes, in just the right amount of detail, a host of experiments that have shown the deleterious consequences of insufficient sleep. And, I was really surprised by the range of consequences, and their seriousness. This book has thoroughly convinced me to make every effort to get a full night's sleep; at least 7 hours, and preferably 8 hours.
I am not going to try to recap the myriad consequences of insufficient sleep. Suffice it to say, they are truly scary. This is a fascinating book, and I highly recommend it to everyone who sleeps.
I didn't read this book; I listened to the audiobook version, as narrated by Steve West. He does a very good job keeping my interest throughout his narration....more
Dean Burnett is a neuroscientist. He writes a regular blog for The Guardian, called Brain Flapping. And his writing style is not just entertaining, itDean Burnett is a neuroscientist. He writes a regular blog for The Guardian, called Brain Flapping. And his writing style is not just entertaining, it is spirited and humorous and faithful to the science as well. Oh, and did I mention that he is a stand-up comedian? He signs his name "Dean Burnett, Ph.D. (no, really)" [image] While most of this book is about psychology, he grounds quite a lot of his discussions in descriptions of the parts of the brain that are responsible for different actions. And, I learned a lot from this book, and actually, a lot of very useful things. Here I just scratch the surface of what I learned.
Short-term memory can hold only up to four items, and lasts less than a minute. Anything more than this is actually part of long-term memory. When trying to remember things, context is very helpful--both internal as well as external context. For example, if you are on a drug (even alcohol) when learning something, recalling it at a later time is easier if you on the same drug. The brain encodes memories slightly differently if you are slightly intoxicated.
Burnett does scatter sarcasm throughout the book, but it is in good fun. For example, at the end of the section about the ego bias of memory, he writes, "The upside of this is, even if you don't quite understand what's been written here, you'll probably remember that you did, so it all ends up the same regardless. Good work."
And here is one of my favorite quotes of all time: "I'm also part of the great conspiracy of global scientists to promote the myths of climate change, evolution, vaccination, and a spherical earth. After all, there's nobody on earth wealthier and more powerful than scientists, and they can't risk losing this exalted position by people finding out how the world really works."
It is so interesting how Burnett explains why know-nothings often win arguments and are believed. He writes that empty vessels make the most noise. People who are self-confident are most believed. Politicians are great at this. The smarter a person is, the less confident in their views, and the less they are trusted. Anti-intellectualism is due to the brain's egocentric bias or "self-serving" bias and the tendency to fear things. Someone who seems more intelligent is perceived as a threat. A physically fit person is easy to understand--they just go to the gym more. But someone who is more intelligent is an unknowable quantity, and the "better safe than sorry" instinct triggers suspicion and hostility. People with low intellectual abilities lack the ability to recognize that they are bad at something, so they are unjustifiably high in self-confidence. They have only their own experiences to go from, and cannot perceive what it is to be considerably more intelligent. It works the other way, too. Intelligent are more aware that they don't know everything, so that undercuts their self confident. The general consensus is that by the mid-20's, our brains are fully developed. Brain training games do not boost general intelligence. If you play them enough you can get better at them--but not better at anything else.
I was amazed by the description of patients with aphasia, who cannot understand language. Nevertheless, in an experiment they found humor in a president's speech. Robbed of the ability to understand language, they develop their ability to decipher nonverbal cues. They can recognize from numerous facial tics, body language, rhythm of speech, and elaborate gestures, exactly when the president is lying!
And here is another fascinating tidbit, having to do with the "Social Brain Hypothesis". We evolved big, complex brains as a result of human friendliness and complicated relationships. We want to believe that the world is fair. When we see a victim of something terrible, the brain doesn't like dissonance, so we have two options: conclude that the world is cruel and random, or that the victim did something to deserve it. While believing the victim is responsible is crueler, it allows us to keep our nice cozy assumptions about the world, and we blame victims for their misfortune. "Our brain is so concerned with preserving a sense of identity and peace of mind that it makes us willing to screw over anyone and anything that could endanger this. Charming."
Again, I highly recommend this book to anyone who would like to read a serious book about psychology and the brain, but with more than just a dash of humor....more
This is the 2016, revised edition of this fabulous book. In this edition, Richard Dawkins is a co-author with Yan Wong. This is a very hefty tome, jusThis is the 2016, revised edition of this fabulous book. In this edition, Richard Dawkins is a co-author with Yan Wong. This is a very hefty tome, just under 800 pages. It is a marvelously inventive, masterful look at evolution, as seen from the point of view of homo sapiens travelling backwards in time, back to the dawn of life. Each time the route of evolution reaches a branch point with another species, it is called a Rendezvous; there are 40 rendezvous altogether. The book is extremely interesting and informative. Below I summarize some of the interesting facts I learned.
Some creationists point to the so-called gaps in the fossil record as proof that the scientific theory of evolution is not sufficient to explain the development of species. But Dawkins argues that even without any fossils, the evidence for evolution would still be immense. The distributions of species on continents and islands, the patterns of resemblance, an genetic sequences are sufficient to prove evolution. Fossils are a welcome bonus. The gaps in the fossil records are not all that important.
The agricultural revolution helped to support a larger population, but did nothing to increase people's health or happiness; in fact it did just the opposite.
There is a very interesting discussion about our most recent common ancestor. That is to say, the human who is the common ancestor to all people alive on Earth today. It is very surprising, that the most recent common ancestor lived around 10,000 years ago.
Silver foxes bred in captivity by D.K. Belyaev for twenty years were bred for tameness. After twenty years, the foxes behaved like border collies! They became friendly, sought human company, and wagged their tails when approached. They even looked like border collies!
We were told when we were young that eating carrots help us see better in the dark. But this was a rumor started by WWII strategists to avoid revealing the secret of radar.
The best analogy for genes is not that they serve as a blueprint, but rather that they serve as a toolbox of routines. So, while a large percentage of our genes is in common with those of other animals, our main difference from other animals is not the toolbox of DNA routines, but is instead the pattern of choosing genetic routines from the available toolbox. This is called the science of epigenetics, which has been around since Conrad Weddington coined the term in 1942.
In 1866, Ernst Haeckel announced that the hippo is a close relative to the whale. This has since been proven through DNA; the hippo's closest living relative actually is the whale!
The duck-billed platypus closes its eyes shut when hunting for food. Its duck bill is a very sensitive organ with 60,000 mechanical and 40,000 electrical sensors. The platypus swivels its bill back and forth, feeling for impulses from potential prey. It probably gets a detailed 3D image of electrical disturbances in its vicinity. It probably is doing some sophisticated beamforming to increase its sensitivity.
Dawkins remarks about a lot of interesting speculations why humans are bipedal. He gives a number of arguments both why bipedal walking is helpful, but others why it is not. In 1954, the British Colonial Administration destroyed the ecosystem of Lake Victoria. Against the advice of biologists, the Nile perch was introduced to the lake, which destroyed fifty species of cichlids, and critically endangered another 130 species. This newly introduced predator had caused devastation to the local economies around the lake. This is the reason why bureaucrats should not try to play God, and play around with ecosystems.
This raises the question, how did so many species evolve in the lake, in the first place? Dawkins makes some interesting speculations about how various species could be physically isolated in the lake, in order to allow the species to branch out due to evolution.
Dawkins makes a strong effort to avoid repeating stories that he told in other books. Instead of repeating them, he makes references to his many other books, for the reader to see additional examples. This is so different from that of many other authors, who often repeat themselves from one book to the next.
A variety of human inventions were anticipated in the animal kingdom. Some examples: echo-ranging (bats), electro-location (duckbill platypus), dam (beaver), parabolic reflector (limpet), infrared sensor (snakes), hypodermic syringe (wasp, snake, scorpion), harpoon (cnidarian), jet propulsion (squid). The wheel and axle was also anticipated; the rhizobium has a true axle and a freely rotating hub, driven by a tiny molecular motor. Such a wheel could not evolve in a large organism, which would involve twisting blood vessels.
I personally loved the renaming of the concept of Intelligent Designers from "Argument from Irreducible Complexity" to "Argument from Personal Incredulity." The argument "says less about nature than about the poverty of your imagination."
Dawkins speculates about what would happen if the "tape of evolution" were to be re-run in the forward direction, starting from pre-Cambrian times? What would happen if it were re-run a statistical number of times? Or starting from an earlier or later time? This experiment has, in a sense, been done to a limited extent in isolated locations like Australia, New Zealand, Madagascar and South America. Also, evolution in has turned out very similarly when allowed to run twice. Eyes have evolved independently 40-60 times, using nine independent optical principles!Echolocation has evolved at least four times in four animals; toothed whales, oilbirds, cave swiftlets and bats. The venomous sting has evolved at least ten times independently. True flapping flight has evolved four times. Parachuting and gliding has evolved maybe hundreds of times.
These notes above represent only a tiny fraction of the thought-provoking concepts in this book. This is a challenging book to read, not only because it is so long, but because of the many complex concepts that are described. The authors even warn the reader at one point that certain pages can be skipped if desired. But the entire book is fascinating. With each species rendezvous, a fractal diagram portrays the branching, along with dates and contour lines; what a fabulous visual portrayal of the concept of evolution!...more
Loading...
