Brain Images Just Got 64 Million Times Sharper

Brain Images Just Got 64 Million Times Sharper
https://today.duke.edu/2023/04/brain-images-just-got-64-million-times-sharper


A single voxel of the new images – think of it as a cubic pixel – measures just 5 microns. That’s 64 million times smaller than a clinical MRI voxel.
...
Some of the key ingredients include an incredibly powerful magnet (most clinical MRIs rely on a 1.5 to 3 Tesla magnet; Johnson’s team uses a 9.4 Tesla magnet), a special set of gradient coils that are 100 times stronger than those in a clinical MRI and help generate the brain image, and a high-performance computer equivalent to nearly 800 laptops all cranking away to image one brain.

 

This is early technology that will be limited to research for years. Fortunately, this is where we need this technology.

In the end, IMO, all progress is ultimately technological, and this is just as true in medicine. Individual abilities, models, guidelines, paradigm, they matter very little, it's what's durable and can be used by others that matters. There is no understanding of DNA, and everything that follows, until X-ray crystallography. So massive improvements in key technologies is pretty much the only way we will see progress.

And only in technology can you see anything like 64 million times improvement. Contrast this with the decades-long obsession to eke out maybe 5% significance out of the BPS paradigm, and failing at it, and it's basically the difference between professional-grade expertise, and amateurs fooling around with rubber bands and spit.

 

I was thinking along the same lines about Maureen Hanson's findings of molecular changes in ME, vs. the BPS bunch telling pwME to believe their way to health.

 

I will be decades before something like this is used for ME. it can't even be used on humans yet, or live animals because it's too dangerous. It will probably start being used on autopsy brains, which is not promising because not only does ME get no funding but ME brains are also very hard to come by. We haven't even started using decades old brain imaging technology in this illness.

This might be good news for those who become ill 20 years from now but it is definitely not good news for us.

 

Ohh I like this. What I'm trying to work out is whether it can actually effectively being to look at neurons, even though it gives the impression it might sort of a bit more using the workaround:

On the top of head thinking about ME stuff though of course the issue is an analogy I've seen said here before of fuel pipe issue vs motivation = looks the same to some in behaviour (either doing things less well, more of a struggle, adapated behaviour, circumventing strategies) and whether/how that difference would immediately be shown on this vs any other scan.

I just am intrigued to work out whether it can pick up how well (effectively/efficiently) something is working cell-wise rather than just how hard or whether it is going to the wrong place or something. Because these scans seems to best pick up the 'how much' question on activity.

BUt I guess also if it can be used on the brain I don't know enough to ask whether could it be used on the body ie the fuel-pipe itself if it can pick up cell level in a way perhaps other forms of scanning previously couldn't?

I know some neurologists like to pretend the brain is some master-thing that isn't just part of a feedback loop and basically reacting to issues and feedback sent perhaps by other parts of the body because the problem is elsewhere (but that way almost anything systemic going wrong would be theoretically just 'mind decided to turn that off so could decide to turn it back on stupidity') but its that mapping-back to other aspects of the body that I think might be somewhat fascinating.

Ironically what it could immediately, with good research design, test is the idea that 'behavioural training' improves the disability: if you label the disability correctly as getting exhausted/not being able to do it to your old level. ie if you note that everyone should be able to read a book or talk for 30mins and any signs on the scan of deterioration within that time are signs of illness. And then get people to do a maths tests straight after. Heck you could even do a CPET style exercise before.

Because you could then note whether even 'brain training' (direct to task being tested instead of even CBT - which is direct to question being asked training people to say they feel better when they don't) can change that longeivity for the 'marathon' or if it is just diversion of resources.

But otherwise currently I guess we don't know whether exhausted in one area to do with tasks, for us, is just going to look like exhausted for other things. But I guess maybe that would be another interesting one, if they could put healthy controls in there for a 12hr maths test and then compare those with different severity of ME to see where their scans compare eg a mild ME person to a healthy control who just ran a marathon whilst listening to heavy metal (if it is exhaustion-based for some of these things it might quantify it).

So that definition of what ME is becomes pretty fundamental to whether this hell continues - because simplistically trying to label it as 'can do less' isn't the same as exhaustion in the true sense of the word where there is a limit over a set period. And trying to increase that limit by pushing at it reduces it further (like overfishing), and teaching someone to perform one task using all of their energy perfectly whilst leaving them bed-bound for the week isn't 'improvement'.

Given my own symptoms I do think aspects in the area of 'load' and multi-tasking/executive function/working memory is probably where to best spot the effects. Just keeping eyes open (physical motor task added in, probably also to do with the intake of visual information too) whilst talking and thinking makes a huge difference to the load. I'd be intrigued if they genuinely can identify neurons or types of cells to look at that sort of complex work-up as a starter in order for them to 'see' that disability in different severities.

I'd just be curious as to whether theoretically the 'brain' in that instance is doing the equivalent of a tech room guy trying to work out how to balance the lights vs music vs graphics at a massive music gig second-by-second (at that point music is more important than graphic so we need to take the graphic down to turn the sound up for it) when the power begins waning or is limited (slightly inspired by a recent programme on COldplay working out how to power their gigs in a green way: https://www.today.com/popculture/music/coldplay-using-fans-energy-dance-moves-power-shows-rcna32277) - and if they even know how to label the area or cell-type involved with doing that yet. ie it mightn't always be the brain's load issue but the brain having to deal with the load issue across multiple areas creating an additional load alongside its normal part above what HCs doing the component tasks that others would have etc. that gets shown by the scan.