Consciousness on-off switch discovered deep in brain



Continue reading page |1|2


ONE moment you're conscious, the next you're not. For the first time, researchers have switched off consciousness by electrically stimulating a single brain area.


Scientists have been probing individual regions of the brain for over a century, exploring their function by zapping them with electricity and temporarily putting them out of action. Despite this, they have never been able to turn off consciousness – until now.


Although only tested in one person, the discovery suggests that a single area – the claustrum – might be integral to combining disparate brain activity into a seamless package of thoughts, sensations and emotions. It takes us a step closer to answering a problem that has confounded scientists and philosophers for millennia – namely how our conscious awareness arises.


Many theories abound but most agree that consciousness has to involve the integration of activity from several brain networks, allowing us to perceive our surroundings as one single unifying experience rather than isolated sensory perceptions.


One proponent of this idea was Francis Crick, a pioneering neuroscientist who earlier in his career had identified the structure of DNA. Just days before he died in July 2004, Crick was working on a paper that suggested our consciousness needs something akin to an orchestra conductor to bind all of our different external and internal perceptions together.


With his colleague Christof Koch, at the Allen Institute for Brain Science in Seattle, he hypothesised that this conductor would need to rapidly integrate information across distinct regions of the brain and bind together information arriving at different times. For example, information about the smell and colour of a rose, its name, and a memory of its relevance, can be bound into one conscious experience of being handed a rose on Valentine's day.


The pair suggested that the claustrum – a thin, sheet-like structure that lies hidden deep inside the brain – is perfectly suited to this job (Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B, doi.org/djjw5m).


It now looks as if Crick and Koch were on to something. In a study published last week, Mohamad Koubeissi at the George Washington University in Washington DC and his colleagues describe how they managed to switch a woman's consciousness off and on by stimulating her claustrum. The woman has epilepsy so the team were using deep brain electrodes to record signals from different brain regions to work out where her seizures originate. One electrode was positioned next to the claustrum, an area that had never been stimulated before.


When the team zapped the area with high frequency electrical impulses, the woman lost consciousness. She stopped reading and stared blankly into space, she didn't respond to auditory or visual commands and her breathing slowed. As soon as the stimulation stopped, she immediately regained consciousness with no memory of the event. The same thing happened every time the area was stimulated during two days of experiments (Epilepsy and Behavior, doi.org/tgn).


To confirm that they were affecting the woman's consciousness rather than just her ability to speak or move, the team asked her to repeat the word "house" or snap her fingers before the stimulation began. If the stimulation was disrupting a brain region responsible for movement or language she would have stopped moving or talking almost immediately. Instead, she gradually spoke more quietly or moved less and less until she drifted into unconsciousness. Since there was no sign of epileptic brain activity during or after the stimulation, the team is sure that it wasn't a side effect of a seizure.


Koubeissi thinks that the results do indeed suggest that the claustrum plays a vital role in triggering conscious experience. "I would liken it to a car," he says. "A car on the road has many parts that facilitate its movement – the gas, the transmission, the engine – but there's only one spot where you turn the key and it all switches on and works together. So while consciousness is a complicated process created via many structures and networks – we may have found the key."


Awake but unconscious


Counter-intuitively, Koubeissi's team found that the woman's loss of consciousness was associated with increased synchrony of electrical activity, or brainwaves, in the frontal and parietal regions of the brain that participate in conscious awareness. Although different areas of the brain are thought to synchronise activity to bind different aspects of an experience together, too much synchronisation seems to be bad. The brain can't distinguish one aspect from another, stopping a cohesive experience emerging.


Since similar brainwaves occur during an epileptic seizure, Koubeissi's team now plans to investigate whether lower frequency stimulation of the claustrum could jolt them back to normal. It may even be worth trying for people in a minimally conscious state, he says. "Perhaps we could try to stimulate this region in an attempt to push them out of this state."


Anil Seth, who studies consciousness at the University of Sussex, UK, warns that we have to be cautious when interpreting behaviour from a single case study. The woman was missing part of her hippocampus, which was removed to treat her epilepsy, so she doesn't represent a "normal" brain, he says.



Continue reading page |1|2


Future Issue of New Scientist Magazine


  • New Scientist

  • Not just a website!

  • Subscribe to New Scientist and get:

  • New Scientist magazine delivered every week

  • Unlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issues

  • Subscribe Now and Save




If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Longest-running experiment gets a fast forward


A clever tweak is letting students "cheat" at one of the world's longest running experiments.


Although pitch – or bitumen – seems solid at room temperature, it flows like a liquid given enough time. To prove this, in 1930, a team at the University of Queensland, Australia, put some in a funnel. Since then, a drop of pitch has broken off and dropped just nine times, and was seen falling on cameraMovie Camera for the first time in April this year.


Another version of the experiment at Trinity College Dublin in Ireland started in 1944, and its first drop was caught on filmMovie Camera last July. This incredibly slow progress is part of the experiment's appeal, earning the Australian version a place in the Guinness Book of World Records and an Ig Nobel prize in 2005.


Drizzles of pitch


Kostya Trachenko at Queen Mary, University of London, wanted a pitch-drop experiment that his students could see in action over the course of an academic year, letting them measure the fluid's viscosity. So his team set up their own version last September, using a low-viscosity pitch.


The group put the pitch in five containers with nozzles of various widths, to see how that would affect the flow rate, and let it drizzle into vessels below. After 317 days, Trachenko's students weighed the pitch that had fallen and calculated its viscosity, which was about 30 times lower than the Australian pitch. In combination with its predecessors, the London experiment clearly shows how materials sit on a continuum between solid and liquid, says Trachenko. "It challenges students. It makes them ask questions."


Shane Bergin, part of the team that oversees Dublin's pitch drop, agrees: "When we think of solids, liquids and gas, it is a very old interpretation of the states of matter," he says, adding that it's good to see a new experiment demonstrating the flaws in this way of looking at things. "I'm delighted there is a whole new generation of scientists doing it."


If cheating is not your thing, another little-known pitch drop experiment was rediscovered in 2013 at Aberystwyth University, UK. It was set up in 1914 but has budged just 6 millimetres in 100 years. The sample is so viscous, calculations suggest it will be at least another 1300 years before the pitch even leaves the funnel.


Journal reference: Physics Education, DOI: 10.1088/0031-9120/49/4/406


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



'Flying saucer' airbag for Mars splashes down in Hawaii


Hauled from the sea like an oversized jellyfish, this soggy saucer could one day drop humans on the dusty surface of Mars.


On Saturday, NASA lifted the doughnut-shaped airbag high over the Pacific Ocean and then let it fall back to Earth, testing an inflatable system for putting human missions on the Red Planet.


Most successful robot landings have used some combination of parachutes, airbags and retro-rockets to safely slow the descent from the edge of Mars's thin atmosphere to its rust-coloured surface. And in 2012, the 1-tonne Curiosity rover pioneered the ambitious "sky crane" system, which lowered the rover to the surface on tethers suspended from a hovering platform. But human missions will need to bring tens or hundreds of times more mass to the surface in one trip, and existing technologies do not scale up well.


Ripped chute


The Low-Density Supersonic Decelerator is an inflatable system that reduces speed on the way down without adding lots of mass. The system would also use an enormous parachute twice the size of Curiosity's.


After a series of weather delays, NASA completed the first test flight on 28 June. The team lifted the system into the air above a missile range in Hawaii using a high-altitude balloon. The craft then used rockets to propel itself to an altitude of 55 kilometres, where atmospheric density is closer to that around Mars, before plummeting into the sea. "The delays were due to unfavourable winds that would have carried the balloon and vehicle over populated areas," says team member Mark Adler at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena, California.


This flight was meant to test just the rockets, but they performed so well that the team also deployed the saucer-shaped airbag and parachute. The airbag slowed the vehicle from about Mach 4 to Mach 2.5. The parachute, however, did not fare so well.


"It showed damage early in deployment, which the supersonic flow eventually turned into a lot of damage, destroying the parachute," says Adler. The team will examine the recovered chute as well as high-speed video of the drop to figure out what went wrong and redesign the parachute in time for more tests early next year, he says. But overall, he is pleased with the results.


"The successful test flight is a major milestone for landing heavier payloads on Mars," says Allen Chen, also at JPL. "The project has successfully invented and demonstrated a method for testing technologies that we're going to need to push Mars exploration forward."


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Today on New Scientist


Russia's relentless quest for Arctic fuel treasure

In The Conquest of the Russian Arctic, Paul R. Josephson tells of crazy-heroic engineering and environmental disaster in the service of fossil fuel extraction


Science ignored in US birth control ruling

The US Supreme Court has ruled that asking companies to provide free contraception is a violation of religious freedom – a decision made without looking at the science


Diabetes drugs may sometimes do more harm than good

The side effects of some drugs used to treat type 2 diabetes can make them not worth their while, especially for older people


A perfect negative crystal floating in space

What looks like a solid octahedron is actually a void inside a chunk of spinel, a gem best known as the centrepiece of the British queen's Imperial Crown


Old Scientist: 50 years of nuclear fears and fantasies

From the July archives of New Scientist, how our views of a nuclear future have gone from dreams to nightmares over 50 years of worries, weapons and waste


Five ways to keep sharks away from the beach

What's the best way to protect people from sharks? With controversy raging over Western Australia's shark cull, we look at five methods used around the world


Rainbow 'bird's nest' MRI reveals how a heart beats

A colourful image of muscle fibres, which shows how a heart beats, is on display at a new exhibition in London


Don't have a cow: Making milk without the moo

If we could make milk the same way we make beer, the environmental benefits would be huge, says bioengineer Ryan Pandya


Biggest X-ray eye in space to hunt hot cosmic objects

The Athena space telescope will launch in 2028 to gather hot, energetic light from monster black holes and interstellar gas storms


Park the eco-apocalypse for a journey of hope

Adventures in the Anthropocene: A journey to the heart of the planet we made by Gaia Vince is a story of optimism about how 10 billion people can live together


Swedish space rock may be piece of early life puzzle

A strange Swedish meteorite is unlike any rock seen before and is seemingly the first piece of a "bullet" that sparked an explosion of life on early Earth


Don't fear Facebook's emotion manipulation experiment

Rage has erupted over a Facebook experiment aimed at manipulating users' emotions. There are reasons not to get angry, says psychology researcher Tal Yarkoni


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Russia's relentless quest for Arctic fuel treasure



Suburban Norilsk, one of the few cities built on permafrost (Image: Sergey Maximishin/Panos Pictures)


The Conquest of the Russian Arctic tells the tale of the country's extreme efforts to exploit the the resources in its northern reaches


AT -15 °C, high-carbon steel cracks. At -30°C, pneumatic hoses split and cranes fail. At -40 °C, compressors stop working. Ball bearings shatter. Steel structures rupture on a massive scale.


Still Russia builds, and mines, and tries to settle its Arctic territories. President Vladimir Putin has revived the old Stalinist vision that saw slave labour assembling cities on beds of permafrost. This time around, in place of the inexhaustible human resources of the gulag, there are delays, cancellations and rather nervous foreign investors.


The Arctic contains 90 per cent of Russia's recoverable hydrocarbons. Were the country to finally overcome its many and various technical challenges, after more than a century of trying, it would be vastly wealthy.


So the Arctic remains a burden Russia cannot bear to relinquish. This potentially great nation continues to saddle itself with the costs of transportation over great distances, of keeping warm, or just staying alive, in great cold.


Since the mid-1980s, Paul Josephson, a historian of science and technology, has charted the country's heroic engineering projects. He has traced its gigantomanic ambitions back, more often than not, to Stalin's Great Plan for the Transformation of Nature. Launched in 1948, it aimed to divert the flow of major waterways, industrialise Siberia, and turn the infertile steppe into a breadbasket.


The consequences for the environment have been at best ambiguous, at worst catastrophic. Natural resources had no price in Soviet economics. Since they were not owned privately, they had no value. Development had no regard for waste or loss. Little has changed under the current system of state capitalism; the Arctic's underfunded environmental projects are smothered under state plans for "modernisation".


Josephson is a well-travelled, well-connected and impassioned analyst. But his call for Putin's Russia "to move more slowly, to adopt measured policies... forego impatience for circumspection" is unlikely to be heeded.


After 40 years writing sober, academic accounts of the world's most hubristic, atrocity-littered engineering projects, it may be time for Josephson to bare his teeth a little.


This article appeared in print under the headline "Arctic nightmares"


Issue 2975 of New Scientist magazine


  • New Scientist

  • Not just a website!

  • Subscribe to New Scientist and get:

  • New Scientist magazine delivered every week

  • Unlimited online access to articles from over 500 back issues

  • Subscribe Now and Save




If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Science ignored in US birth control ruling


Religion 1, science 0. Yesterday the US Supreme Court ruled that forcing small companies to provide women with free contraception was a violation of their religious freedom. Anti-abortion campaigners celebrated but others have criticised the decision for not taking the scientific evidence into account.


One of the mandates of Obama's Affordable Care Act is that companies must provide health insurance that offers free birth control. This was challenged by Hobby Lobby, a craft store chain, and Conestoga Wood Specialists, a furniture maker.


The Supreme Court ruling states that these companies – and other small family-run businesses like them – may opt out of providing their employees with birth control coverage if the methods conflict with their religious beliefs.


The two companies that brought the case believe that life begins when a sperm and egg meet. They are not opposed to birth control methods that prevent fertilisation, but condemn those that prevent the implantation of a fertilised egg – believing this amounts to abortion – citing the morning-after pills Plan B and Ella, and two intrauterine devices as examples.


Limiting options


If the Supreme Court had consulted the accepted body of scientific knowledge, however, they would have found that the companies' religious beliefs were not in conflict with the birth control methods they opposed, says Pratima Gupta, a doctor at the San Francisco Medical Center and former board member of the pro-choice network Physicians for Reproductive Choice and Health. According to the US Food and Drug Administration, all four contraceptives in question work by preventing fertilisation – not implantation.


"There is no confusion in the scientific community regarding the mechanisms behind each contraceptive option and the medical community is in agreement that none of them equate to abortion," says Gupta. She adds that making women pay for their own contraception limits their options to less effective methods that ultimately yield more unwanted pregnancies and abortions.


Also left out of the Supreme Court conversation was evidence on the health effects of different birth control options, and other medical uses of contraceptives beyond the prevention of pregnancy.


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Diabetes drugs may sometimes do more harm than good


"First do no harm" is the maxim that doctors try to live by. For people with type 2 diabetes, this could mean a rethink of the treatment they receive.


The side effects of diabetes medication and the necessity for frequent injections mean that taking the drugs could be counterproductive, especially for older people, suggests a study published today.


The researchers conclude that doctors should stop automatically recommending drug treatment for the two-thirds of diabetics whose blood sugar is only slightly raised. Instead, patients should be able to decide for themselves if they think the hassle and side effects are worth it.


"We need to rethink our whole treatment strategy," says Richard Lehman, a family doctor in Banbury, UK, who was not involved in the study.


Type 2 diabetes usually develops in middle age, often in people who are overweight, when their bodies stop responding properly to insulin. This hormone controls the amount of glucose in the blood, so when things go awry, blood sugar levels can skyrocket. People with the condition are more likely to suffer heart attacks, kidney and nerve damage, and blindness.


If people can't lose weight through diet and exercise to regain their insulin function, doctors usually prescribe an oral drug called metformin. If this doesn't lower blood sugar sufficiently, insulin injections and drugs called incretins are also prescribed.


Hypo danger


Metformin's side effects tend to be mild and temporary but insulin and incretins can cause longer-term problems, such as weight gain and nausea.


More dangerously, they can also cause "hypos", when blood sugar drops too low, causing disorientation and fainting. In severe cases, people can fall into a coma. "More people are now admitted to hospital in the US for low blood sugar than for high," says John Yudkin of University College London, who led the latest work.


People taking insulin also have to inject themselves several times a day, as well as carry out regular finger-prick tests of blood sugar, a burden that can weigh heavy on some people, says Lehman.


Despite these issues, doctors have increasingly prescribed insulin and incretins over the past decade, reflecting the consensus that blood sugar levels should be kept under tight control.


For example, in the UK, the number of people with type 2 diabetes injecting insulin increased from 37,000 in 1991 to 277,400 in 2010.


However, there is little evidence that strict blood sugar control prevents health problems linked with diabetes. One trial showed the approach reduced heart attacks by 15 per cent, but the participants were younger on average than a typical person with diabetes. Three trials done in relatively older people have shown no benefits. One even showed the approach increased deaths.


Net gain for life?


In the latest study, Yudkin's team used the data from those four trials, as well as other information about the drugs, to work out the net gains or losses to people's quality of life.


Their model suggests that a 45-year-old with only slightly raised blood sugar who begins drug treatment would gain up to 10 months of healthy life. A 75-year-old, on the other hand, would gain only about an extra three weeks.


Age matters because the chance of an older person, with perhaps five years of life ahead of them, developing one of the health complications of diabetes is lower than that of a younger person with, say, 35 years. Therefore older people taking diabetes medication get less benefit from taking it, but all the side effects and hassle. "The person who's best able to decide whether or not [the extra weeks or months of lifespan] are worth years of pills and injections is the patient," says Yudkin.


"This study highlights the importance of looking at the individual needs of the person with type 2 diabetes, rather than adopting a blanket approach," says Simon O'Neill, director for health intelligence for Diabetes UK. "It also underlines how vital it is that healthcare professionals and people with diabetes work closely together to jointly decide what the best treatment options are for that person and weighing up the potential benefits and side effects, which will vary from person-to-person".


The previous studies had aroused the suspicion people were being overmedicated, says Lehman. This latest meta-analysis could be the clincher. "This really will change practice," he says.


Journal reference: JAMA Internal Medicine, DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.2894


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



A perfect negative crystal floating in space


(Image: Danny Sanchez)


MAGNESIUM aluminium oxide sure is a pretty mineral. It forms spinel, a gem coveted throughout history and whose red variant is sometimes confused with ruby. It was used in the Timur Ruby necklace made for Queen Victoria. And an egg-sized lump of the stuff, known as the Black Prince's Ruby, forms the centrepiece of the Imperial Crown. Both pieces are part of the British Crown Jewels, and there's an even bigger rock, the Samarian spinel, in the Iranian Crown Jewels.


The spinel in this photo is a tiddler by comparison, but no less beautiful and certainly more intriguing. The field of view of the image is 2.9 millimetres, which makes the floating octahedron in the middle less than half a millimetre wide. But get this: it's a "negative crystal". The octahedron is the outline of a space, and what looks at first like the sides of a solid crystal are actually the walls of a void inside a bigger lump of crystal.


"This is one of the most shockingly perfect negative crystals I have come across," says photographer Danny Sanchez, who is based in Los Angeles. You can see more of his photomicrography at http://ift.tt/1qfabhA.


This article appeared in print under the headline "Floating crystal palace"


Issue 2975 of New Scientist magazine


  • Subscribe to New Scientist and you'll get:

  • New Scientist magazine delivered every week

  • Unlimited access to all New Scientist online content -

    a benefit only available to subscribers

  • Great savings from the normal price

  • Subscribe now!




If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Old Scientist: 50 years of nuclear fears and fantasies


Worried about nuclear proliferation? Not much has changed in 50 years. In July 1963, signatories to a letter in New Scientist agreed with the UK's minister for science, Lord Hailsham, who said: "If we go on indefinitely experimenting with nuclear weapons, manufacturing them and stockpiling them, boasting of their potentialities, and keeping them at instant readiness, sooner or later a situation will arise, sometime, somewhere, where one will go off".


The same letter could be written today. Half a century on, no nuclear weapons have been fired in anger, but the laws of statistics and of unintended consequences are both probably awaiting their moment.


Back in the 1960s, though, many of us were still in awe, and the benefits of nuclear fission were being hailed. Not so by July 1979, when disposing of nuclear waste from power stations was the hot topic. We reported then that it was important that the waste "remain undamaged for up to 1000 years". At the end of the 20th century, we predicted, liquid nuclear waste would be converted to glass, cast into lead blocks, and buried deep underground. Whether the lead or the nuclear waste would be the most damaging to the environment, we failed to mention.


By July 2009, our concerns had shifted somewhat. Amid the recession that continues today, cost had become a key issue. The UK government was uncertain whether it could afford to renew its Trident nuclear weapons programme. The future of ballistic missile submarines is "up for grabs", we reported a government official as saying. The official was right – the debate still rages today.


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.



Rainbow 'bird's nest' MRI reveals how a heart beats


(Image: Laurence Jackson)


This is not a colourful bird's nest: it is the collection of muscle fibres that work together to make a mouse heart beat.


The vivid MRI picture was captured using diffusion tensor imaging, which tracks the movement of fluid through tissue, using different colours to represent the orientation of the strands.


The fibres, which spiral around the left ventricular cavity, curve in different directions around the inside and outside walls of the chamber. When the fibres pull against one another, the result is an upwards twisting motion that forces blood to be pumped out.


The image, which was the overall winner of the Research Images as Art competition at University College London last year, is currently on display at the Summer Science Exhibition taking place at the Royal Society in London. It is part of an exhibit showcasing future imaging techniques that will allow us to peer inside the body.


If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.