Jump to content

debate among science if it is true or not


Recommended Posts

Some say nerve cells ,brain cells ,heart cells or the spine does not repair or divide and some say it takes 50 years or more to repair or divide.


Why such confusion.


Other debate among science if myth or not or where it got stated is stress , anger ,frustration can cause ulcers or hernia.


Also say hair loss ,thin hair ,going bold ,gray hair is do to stress , anger or frustration can cause it.



Why such a confusion among scientists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm surprised that you're seeing debate about the impact of stress. For example, stomach ulcers were once thought to be down to stress, until it was discovered that in fact they are be caused by Helicobacter pylori (and stress aggravates this). Maybe there's "confusion" because many factors in fact work together to produce a result. Maybe there is also confusion because new studies can shatter wide-spread and long-standing beliefs/assumptions and it takes time to accept new research!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to mention genetic factors, especially in the case of stomach ulcers. I remember hearing that the majority of the population carry helicobacter pylori in their stomachs and are asymptomatic.


Genetics/environment/stress, pretty much involved with every ailment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All those thinks I posted above science should have a good understanding of it by now.It been years and years of research.


You would think in 15 or 20 years from now they will know how to repair heart cells or the spine .


There was video on youtube of long term meth addic of years of smoking meth and most brain cells gone.After not using meth the brain was slowing making new conntections or making new brain cells or trying to repair it.Do not know if this is true or not but there was some video on youtube .Now they say people who drink or smoke pot kills brain cells.


The UV rays from sun can lead to skin cancer and stress may cause hair loss ,thin hair ,going bold .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Sorry I cannot find a book or any information to clear up the debate .


Some say nerve cells ,brain cells ,heart cells or the spine does not repair or divide and some say it takes 50 years or more to repair or divide.


Why is this not proven or dis-proven ?

Other debate among science if myth or not or where it got stated is stress , anger ,frustration can cause ulcers or hernia.


Again why the debate hear .


What is with science today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know what you mean, nec209.

I encountered this issue a few years ago.


It was learning about the Heliobacter pylori issue myself a few years ago that caused me to wonder about the reliability of the medical science industry. I haven't thought about the issues in a while, but I have thought about them in the past few months.


Nonetheless, we cannot deny that modern science and scientists have failed us when it and they should have been more reliable.


Scientists generally disagree.

Some have egos and do not believe they are wrong. (this would NOT be a legitimate reason to claim something as true)

Others have yet to see contradicting evidence for a claim they make. (this would be a legitimate reason to claim something as true)

Perhaps scientists want to continue receiving funding, so they claim that they have not arrived at an answer. (this would NOT be a legitimate reason to claim something as true)


Sometimes scientists make claims without enough evidence to make such claims in the first place. (I do not consider this a legitimate reason to claim something as true)


In the 2000s, many people were still debating and discussing neurogenesis.

Many people didn't fully understand how mitosis worked.


In reference to ulcers, I think ignorance by medical professionals is what made people assume that ulcers were induced by stress.


Not all medical professionals are researchers. As such, the majority probably did not look into the depth of the issue.


Some medical professionals just sit around, acting like witch doctors, and making snap judgments on the health of persons from what they learned in medical school and residency. It's really pathetic and can distort what causes of medical illness could be, thus distorting how the public understands the mechanisms of illness. And really.. for something like this... it seems like a silly situation, because doctors are suppose to believe in germ theory. And lacking the possibility or inquisition that a germ was causing the problem all along seems as bad as a doctor believing in the humors or that God is against the person.


I would have to say ignorance and the ego are to blame.

How could I prove such a claim, though?


This is totally feasible.

Find the doctors who misdiagnosed people with ulcers.

Ask the doctors, "Why did you think it was stress or x,y,x?"


Do you think if I went up to people who've recently accepted new paradigms that they would admit they had a large ego and/or ignorance?


I don't think so.

This is one of those issues that will more than likely be understood by those in the realm of medicine and science.

Perhaps something that cannot be easily put in the history books, too.

Nonetheless, we've been able to claim how doctors hundreds of years ago were ignorant and discuss how.

We can still do that today.


I'm currently researching how ignorance and the ego are the blame in some past sociological and scientific issues.

There is a sociology to science.


For instance, I've been trying to understand why educational professions didn't take cognitive science into consideration and attempting to apply what can be learned from cognitive research in hopes of making more educated learned with increased learning skills.


That's one example. What was the issue for the past few decades?

I'm not sure. I suspect it was the ego of the educational professors.

Otherwise, it was their ignorance about current cognitive studies in relation to the human learning experience.


In terms of stomach ulcers, why did it take so long?


Well, if scientists are stuck in the paradigm of of ulcers being stress-induced, and extremely biased in such, they more than likely wouldn't dig inside someone's stomach and study gut bacteria. It's surprising that people paid $100,000+ USD would act as such after years of schooling, but for some odd reason, these people are allowed to get away with intellectual crimes. I can't tell if they were lazy, ignorant, biased, or egotistical.


The major difference between an educator and the medical professional is intensive training in the scientific method. I have the firm belief that the medical professionals were more lazy than ignorant. Otherwise, they didn't have the ethical right to use the scientific method to find the right answer.


With nerve cells, I'm thinking it comes down to scientists not having the tools to research such. Neuroscientists tend to keep an open-mind and are often grounded in psychological research, thus they understand how the mind can create biases for itself. As such, neuroscientists attempt to over-ride faulty neurological programming the brain induces from observed data, and the neuroscientists strive for seeking more from the outside world than what generalizations the brain might make for itself. There is also the fact that neural tissue takes time and effort to culture and sustain. If the cultures easily ruin, then the chance of seeing mitosis might be low.


If there are cells that are not going to divide, then they more than likely have exited the cell growth stages, thus went into G0 or "G sub 0." If that's the case, perhaps there are a group of scientists who think such cells are in hibernation and might have the potential to divide again. Maybe there is a group of scientists who disagree with those scientists' evaluation. I don't know what the arguments are, though. But it is, of course, something I should be looking into, as I do have the level of knowledge to look into it. Maybe another cytologist/neuroperson here would know, as I'm going to be busy in the next few weeks, thus unable to look into the issue.

Edited by Genecks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about another, more simple reason. How do you nail down the result of multifactorial processes as e.g. ulcers down to a single source?

This is also somewhat true for the growth question. Even within a tissue cells are not identical. Thus if only a very limited amount of these cells do exhibit growth, it is simply not easy to detect. In fact, it is known that certain neurons do indeed exhibit limited growth. It is, however not rapid growing and proliferating as in other tissues and it thus took a while to demonstrate that.


Bottom line is that especially as we cannot conduct invasive and harmful experiments on humans, we have to rely on high-dimensional epidemiological data or animal models that may or may not apply to humans to find associations of some stimuli with certain effects. But as no everyone reacts the same to the same stimuli many of these findings will likely to be invalidated eventually, unless a a specific mechanism exists that can be identified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.