At the recent large neuroscience conference (SFN: Nov 15-19, 2008) I was offered a new post-doc position with a 50% pay increase! The new post-doc offered a great opportunity to further examine novel neuroprotective treatments in a great and clinically relevant model, that has near unlimited opportunities for me.

I turned down the job - which is in itself highly irrational - for the obvious difference in pay, but also my current position is only funded for the next 6 months – not to mention the additional factor of the current worldwide economic conditions. What I did next though really makes me question this whole rational human thing (at least at a personal level). I then turned and made a counter offer to the principal investigator I would work for him free on part of the problem.

Now that is some negotiating strategy, going from a 50% pay increase to offering to work free for him.

How irrational, not to mention stupid is that? This is all despite my additional scientific interest of studying human irrationality (so in theory I am not ignorant of this human pension for irrationality). Maybe I should have my head scanned - I think I might know what it will find

Additionally, there are no rational reasons particularly keeping me at my current location and post-doc position.

So what I am suggesting is in your own day to day choices maybe step back once in awhile to check how rationale some of your choices are (hopefully they won’t be as irrational as my one personal example I am sharing).

Image via Wikipedia

Brain stimulation for a healthy brain can come in many forms - for the past couple days it has been touring NY city and visiting museums. I visited the MoMA (The Museum of Modern Art) today as part of my final art plunge brain stimulation activity in NY city.

What struck me was one of the audios in which at 19^th century artist said something to the effect of: the 19^th century artist sees a thousand times more in a lifetime than an artist from the 18^th century and that obviously this difference will require new art forms to convey the new reality.

I assume he meant that most 18^th century artist didn’t travel much but also didn’t live in such big cities with a high density of people (therefore see less life/lives in a given day) and hence overall sees less ‘new things’ in a lifetime. This notion of taking in more information (seeing) than the previous generation somewhat struck me, but also made me jump to the 21^st century.

Think of what the average 21^st century kid will see in their lifetime. Not only traveling a great deal and many living in gargantuan cities but the big difference is the TV/movies (traditional media) and the internet. Think of the hours of video information that are taken in over a lifetime (even a year) and the endless number of web pages. If the artist thought there was a big change from the 18^th to 19^th century – well then I would really expect a new art form for the 21^st century. Of course the question is in what form it will take? I will suggest that it, being the product of the information age, will involve petabytes of information. The question is how to present this massive load of info. You cannot use a traditional canvas (a human cannot pain that high of density), might the art actually take the form of the net ? Is the new art form just plain and simple the net?

Will an artist of the 21st century by linking various sites (both personally made and other sites) to form an ‘image’, a feeling, an experience, a story? In reality of course this is being done today (and done in the past). Will there be new and better ways to perform this? Do we call this art today, will we call in art in a hundred years, will some form of this new art hang in art galleries of the future - or will we all be using the net to view the new art?

Okay - enough of my art musings, off to society for neuroscience annual meeting tomorrow where 30,000+ neuroscientist descend to view all the latest and greatest neuroscience.

What did you do today to stimulate your brain?

Image via Wikipedia

How healthy are your arteries that supply the blood to your brain (carotid arteries)? Your brain health is influenced by getting an adequate blood supply. What do you think happens to your brain health if it is not getting sufficient blood supply due to blocked unhealthy arteries?

A frightening new study (abstract published at the American Heart Association meeting) indicates that for at risk children (obese or high cholesterol with an average age around 14 years) their vascular age was that of a 45 year old. Scary !

Using ultrasound imaging of the neck arteries (measuring the thickness of the inner walls of the carotid (neck) arteries - these are the ones supplying blood to the brain) of these children they could compare them to various age ranges to get a vascular age of these group of kids.

On average these kids had a cholesterol level of 223.4 mg/dL, LDL cholesterol of 149.8 mg/dL, triglyceride levels of 151.9 mg/dL.

The triglyceride levels of over 100 mg/dL was the best predictor of advanced vascular aging among the lipid risk factors. And those kids that were obese and triglycerides above 100 mg/dL were even worse off.

Do you know your cholesterol and triglyceride levels and what the norms are? If you don’t maybe you should.

What best correlated to the bad carotid artery inner wall thickness was the simple body mass index (BMI) and higher systolic blood pressure. Two fairly easy measurements for all of us to obtain. For a simple BMI calculator go here. Overweight is anything above 25, and obese is anything above 30. Go to your doctors or a drug store and get your blood pressure measurements.

You want a healthy cardiovascular system if you want a healthy and functioning brain. Everything is connected.

Back to the 14 year kids with arteries of a 45 year old. This is not a good picture, not a good future. Thirty years added to their age which would suggest they are more likely to die at 45 instead of 75. And I would guess that this increased age of arteries keep on getting worse with a continuation of their current lifestyle. Instead of their arteries 30 years older than their real age, maybe it stretches out to 40 or 45. A truly scary scenario. And think of the current epidemic of obesity in children, what does this hold for the future of this generation? Will for the first time in current developed nations we have a decrease in lifespan - or we will spend billions upon billions to use advanced modern medicine to keep them alive, and what will this cost society not only at a financial level but at a functional level?

Do what ever you can to have a healthy cardiovascular system; exercise and eat healthy - and try to do this everyday.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Study finds new link between childhood obesity and heart disease
• Obese kids risk middle-aged arteries

Yesterday, I posted about my visit to the metropolitan museum of art - that was good in many ways but a bit disappointing (with the exception of the ancient Egyptian carved walls). But today the art galleries were highly inspirational and stimulating. This might be due to the art I saw today was new and live - not the art of history. I did not know the name of the artists so I had no preconception, I simply walked in and let my eyes and mind explore. The galleries were vibrant with life - fresh paint, fresh thoughts. Now not all the art was personally stimulating to me and I wonder which of the multitudes of artist will ever ‘make it’? Though that mabye doesn’t matter, they are out there trying, living their dream.

One particular gallery really caught my interest. The art was in what I assume the edgy comic book genre. You could see, feel the inspiration, the drive, the flurry of thoughts and these simple but detailed and interesting mostly black and white panes. Very cool and interesting. I took some photographs which included the name of the artist so I can investigate later. Additionally, there was a gallery with some big carved granite installation that were impressive. I am sure there is plenty more to explore - if I can find the time tomorrow in my last day in NY city.

Art is alive in well in NY city.

Go out and explore art in your area - be it a singer playing a tune at a nearby bar, a poet slamming in a cafe, an artist’s painting hanging in a local gallery, or a novelist in a nearby coffee shop (though this one is difficult to really enjoy :)) - stimulate your brain.

Image via Wikipedia

As part of mind stimulating trip I have the opportunity to visit some museums. I am lucky enough to be in NY city and visited the Metropolitan museum of art – among the greatest in the world.

I strolled through the long and winding rooms and wondered would I think these are great painting if somebody hadn’t told me? Or at least that these seven (pick any famous seven) painters are clearly above the other painters who’s works aren’t hung on these prestigious walls (and are largely or completely forgotten) for millions to see each year? Already the museum had at least got me thinking – proposing thought experiments.

I remember several years ago, after having spent 3 weeks in Europe and visiting various museums, when I walked into a Washington DC museum and as I wandered around I saw a painting in the distance and I said to myself - ‘A Degas’ even though I didn’t recognize this specific painting. When I wandered up to the description sure enough in was a Degas. I was feeling pretty proud for an artless scientist.

Therefore, today I was somewhat mystified when at the museums several times I was wrong with my guess of the artist. I thought I recognized the Pointillism style of X and it would turn out to be Y (pointillism is just one example of impressionism and post-impressionism). Then I realized as I looked closer (without remembering the names), at least to an untrained and schooled eye, that it seemed liked there were little groups that all pretty well used what I use to think of as a distinct style. I am sure somebody with a little bit more art knowledge would surely set me straight - but still there are some similarity in some of the techniques used by the various members (if they were not copying there were ‘heavily influenced’ - not to say the same thing doesn’t happen in writing and/or science).

This throw me for a few minutes because my simplistic understanding of the late 19^th century paintings were the exploration of new ways to look and interpret the world. They we could view the world through individual specific perceptions – but if they were just copying each other - . Early in the day I saw the rich colours and brilliant lighting techniques of the Renaissance and Baroque painters (and throw in Romanticism). Yes, they were beautiful but how many different ways can you depict reality in a straightforward manner (even with very dramatic lighting)? I had heard of several books that highlighted the changes in science and physics that fostered the new art (or vice versa – not sure about the chicken or egg argument in this case). My artless trained conclusion was how many ways can you depict a new reality – hence they soon started copying each other. And like the Renaissance painting style this new exciting departure from normal reality also gave way to the even newer and bolder attempts of modern art (modernism, post-modernism). Okay, enough of my overly simplistic art history lesson (which is I am sure somewhat misguided).

Sadly, I wasn’t inspired today at the museum – maybe because I have seen enough art (in the form of history) as now I only see slight derivations of things I have seen previously from the various museums I have visited around the world. (I also found myself in the middle of my visit to this museum pulling out my laptop and doing a little science as I glanced up at a Degas’ between my work on the computer - actually I guess I am pretty luck to be doing work in such beautiful surroundings).

But I do draw myself near to a Van Gogh painting - looking closely at the splotched on paint - layered thick and richly. I ponder of how his work, his inspiration is congealed in this one time piece of work that can not be copied - that globe of paint smeared with that specific color, that specific slash, that specific motion. His art does seem particularly full of energy - if that is possible.

What struck me the most today was when I visited the ancient Egyptian art section and they had stones wall carvings with hieroglyphics writing. I was not really sure if these were originals (but I assumed so), or copies. But I thought of the person who 5,000 or so years ago worked away to make this wall art. Was he a free person or a slave? Did he enjoy his work, or did they have any choice? But still the work has lasted – not in its original location half way around the world – but sits in a Central park museum on some of the richest land in the world. This art piece is viewed by millions and millions and over years and years. I wonder what is the artist’s story? This made my neurons and brain sing.

Stimulate your brain - take in some art, be it in a book, on the web, or stop by a local gallery in your area (you don’t have to go to some world class museum to view art). Sure you might have some disagreements with what the experts think. You might even have thoughts of your own - and there can not be too many things more stimulating for your brain than some honest to gosh thoughts. Maybe you will even be stimulated to produce some of your own art.

Image via Wikipedia

Due to the whirl wind trip I am not sure how regular I will be posting - but I am sure I will learn a great deal and have plenty to report when I get back.

Resveratrol (which I have written about several times, here, here and here) is also a sirt1 activator, which is found (in very small quantity) in red wine,  is also a sirt1 activator and has been tested multiple times to see what it can do for animal’s health and survival (see below). The interesting thing about SRT1720 is that it works at a 1,000 times lower dose than resveratrol.

A new paper examining SRT1720 was published in cell metabolism and covered at eurakalert and wired.

In mice fed a high fat diet (very similar to the resveratrol study) SRT1720 spared the animals from gaining as much weight (even though they ate the same amount) and becoming insulin resistant. Additionally, the animals fed SRT1720 had greater running endurance (no great surprise since they were not overweight). Overall, the authors providing supporting data for the mechanism behind these affects is due to increased fatty acid oxidation (which should help endurance beyond just being a lighter weight) (the same thing exercise does).

Hmmm this sounds just like the recent paper I did on human exercise. Exercise in humans leads them to become less energy efficient at rest - as there was a decoupling of food intake and energy output (occurs in the mitochondria) and hence the extra energy is burnt off as heat. That is why you can eat more if you are on an exercise program and not gain weight (compared to your twin that is not exercising). This goes beyond just the extra calories you are burning while actually exercising. Your entire muscle metabolism becomes less efficient and you need more food to get the same amount of ATP. And while this sounds bad - there are obvious benefits once your muscles have to start working.

Back to RST1720 you must remember the results reported are for mice on a high fat diet. Resveratrol when tested on mice on a high fat diet improved health and survival (meaning the mice on this diet lived longer). When resveratrol was tested for its effect on lifespan on mice fed a ‘normal’ diet there was no effect (but the diet was not started until 12 months of age - it would be interesting to see if it would work when started earlier).

Take home message:

SRT1720 holds promise as it did prevent excessive weight gain and improved endurance, and appears to be an advance over resveratrol as it is 1,000 times more potent (hence I am guessing would be more economically viable). And combined with previous resveratrol studies is likely to increase the lifespan of animals on a high fat diet. The big question is will SRT1720 extend the lifespan of animals on a ‘normal diet’? This is the holy grail of calorie restriction mimickers. Time will tell.

But the type of genius I am briefly discussing today is life geniuses. And this form of genius might be the most important in the terms of living and enjoying life.

Now I don’t know if anybody has thought of this category of genius - so I will give my (very rough) definition. A life genius excels at living a full throttled life with exuberance and class. The accept and search out challenges and seem to be at ease with anything that is thrown at them. They are simply living life to its fullest in a positive manner. They seem to exude energy and life.

I have been lucky enough to meet a few people that I consider life geniuses. At a neuroscience level I would love to know how their brain works - what makes them special? Do they have less fear, more capacity for love, more empathy, great resilency, greater energy?

I don’t know the answers but these people seem to live a life that most of us are envious of. They actually might be similar to the ‘Experiencers‘ I previoulsy mentioned (in regards to their spending habits). But then you have to take these experiencers and multiply exponentially to  get the life genius level. Maybe being an experincer is a prerequiste for being a life genius.

I am probably not doing a great job in explaining what a life genius is - but maybe you have met one yourself. Whatever the exact definition (even if that is possible) it would be interesting to study the makeup of these individuals - and more importantly find out how us mere mortals can ‘learn’ to become more like them (we can’t all be geniuses but we can learn and become better in any field - math, writing, music - life.

Maybe I will try to interview these lucky individuals and try to come up with some practical things the rest of us can start working on.

Exercise your right to vote.

Here is a link to a video of a very well done explanation of our economic situation and how we got there, which Juan Enriquez gave at the recent Pop! Tech meeting.

Juan Enriquez is a biologist but paticullarly excels at taking a global view of business, science and society. He is the founding director of the Harvard Business School Life Sciences Project , not to mention a member of Craig Venter’s team that collected genomic information from the world’s oceans.

So check out the video and get a big picture view of our economy and how we can take steps to fix it.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Juan Enriquez - Systemic Failure Of Finance