Tracing the Roots of Aggression

Many evolutionary theories explain the development of human aggression as a necessary trait for survival. However, aggression rarely has practical use in contemporary society. When exhibited, it is often in a violent and illegal context and therefore it is incriminated. Sometimes, it can even be considered part of someone’s temperament.

Aggression is thought to be the result of a complex corticolimbic interaction between subcortical neural systems, decision-making circuits, and frontoparietal regions [1]. Strong genetic and hormonal influences, in addition to the various environmental stimuli, seem to regulate these networks. This raises questions regarding the degree of responsibility that violent people bear.

Aggression Is a Male Phenomenon
According to statistics, the ratio of crimes committed by males compared to females is greater than 10:1. The more aggressive behavior of males starts to manifest itself even before adolescence, with boys being more likely to be involved in some kind of antisocial conduct [2].
Hormones are among the first suspects for male aggression. Exposure to androgens in the early stages of adolescence is thought to constitute a possible cause. However, according to a recent meta-analysis, the association between testosterone levels and antisocial behavior is weak [3]. Next is the stress hormone cortisol, whose action is regulated through the hypothalamus and adrenal axis. Lower cortisol concentration was found in the saliva of males with antisocial conduct [4]. Finally, low levels of the serotonin metabolite 5-HIAA and low blood sugar are other messengers implicated in the regulation of aggressive behavior.

Is It You Y?
More than four decades have passed since males with XYY syndrome, known also as supermales, were associated with criminal behavior. A higher percentage of XYY men was found in prisons and in institutions for criminally insane people than was found among the normal population. This hypothesis has been significantly weakened after the publication of epidemiological studies that suggested otherwise [5], although it has not been totally refuted as emerging evidence still supports the initial claim [6].
Taking a closer look at the genes, recent knockout studies in mice have excluded any contribution of the Y-linked loci to aggression [7]. Nevertheless, the investigation of other chromosome loci revealed genes that might explain the sex-related difference in aggression and should be interpreted along with the hormone hypothesis. A shorter GAG repeat in the Androgen receptor in Swedish and Indian males accused of aggressive behavior has been associated with it [8]. Certain polymorphisms of the monoamine oxidase (MAOA, MAOB)-coding genes have been linked with functional differences in expression. A plethora of enzyme-coding genes (COMT, dopamine-β-hydroxylase and tryptophan hydroxylase) has been linked to male aggressive behavior [9].

Environmental Interactions
Stressful events, especially in the first years of life, confer a higher risk for manifesting antisocial conduct. Interestingly, it seems that stress triggers aggressive behavior in males with a “vulnerable” genetic background and more specifically a low-activity polymorphism in the MAOA gene. The causality in this case is not clear yet, as evidence suggests that an initial stressful event down-regulated the activity of the MAOA genes later on [2].

The Role of Recreational Substances
Substance use is closely related to offending behavior in both sexes, with alcohol being the most common culprit. It is not only widespread alcohol use, but also its high correlation with violent behavior that make it one of the most significant perpetrators of aggression. Drug users on the other hand, rarely exhibit such behavior, with cocaine users being the only exception [10]. 
Aggressive behavior, like every behavior, is difficult to approach and explain with molecular and genetic mechanisms. However, there seems to be a notable interaction between the environment and one's genetic background. This requires further investigation, as the potential implications for preventing the development of an aggressive behavior, even in a small portion of the population, could improve dramatically the fabric of our societies.

[1] Coccaro et al, Biol Psychiatry, 2011
[2] Craig and Halton, Hum Genet, 2009
[3] Book et al, Aggress Violent Behav, 2001
[4] Shirtcliff et al, Dev Psychopathol, 2005
[5] Noël et al, Clin Genet, 1974
[6] Stochholm et al, BMJ Open, 2012
[7] Gatewook et al, J Neurosci, 2006
[8] Rajender et al, Int J Legal Med, 2008
[9] Pavlov et al, J Appl Genetics, 2012
[10] Lammers et al, Tijdschr Psychiatr, 2014

by Andreas A. Diamantaras, MSc student
This article originally appeared in CNS Volume 7, Issue 3, Nature vs Nurture

Can You Raise Your Kids Gay?

Over the years, the controversy of the nature versus nurture debate has extended beyond childhood behavior to intelligence and also sexual preference. Today's article aims at uncovering the roots of male homosexuality.

digitalart / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

On July 16th 1993, the Daily Mail ran the headline: "Abortion hopes after the 'gay genes' findings". The author, Jason Lewis, claimed that, thanks to recent advances, it might soon be possible to predict the sexual orientation of a baby and give parents the option of abortion. Irrespective of the intentions of the author and possible implications of this article, let us first consider whether this will ever be possible. Since male homosexuality is much more common in nature than female homosexuality, most of the research on sexual orientation concerns only male homosexuality. Years into research on the topic, scientists cannot give a conclusive answer to the question of reasons for our sexual orientation. Simply put, it does not exist.

The Evolutionary Mystery
Homosexual behavior is natural in the animal world, with over 1500 species practising it [1]. Does this give us a first clue that biological factors play a crucial role in establishing sexual orientation? Possibly. In 1991, a twin study conducted by Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard showed that among monozygotic male twins, one gay brother increased the probability of the second being gay by up to 52% [2]. In contrast, this percentage was as low as 22% for dizygotic twins and 11% for adoptive brothers. Hamer and colleagues proposed that an Xq28 allele influences sexual orientation, as its sharing between gay brothers was 64%, not 50% as would be expected by chance [3].

Over 1500 species practice homosexual behaviors

Yet, evolution would intuitively not promote a gene that is anti-reproductive. Why would it then survive in our population at all? The hypothesis here is simple and elegant – the gene that in males promotes homosexuality, in females contributes to their fecundity. Families with homosexual members have been shown to reproduce more than those without  [1]. We must, however, note that genetic studies conducted on a large group of participants showed that the genetic changes can explain only a small fraction of the occurrence of homosexuality [4].

If Not Genes, Then What?
If genes do not explain 100% of homosexuality, there must be some additional factors. Interestingly, a fraction of male homosexuality might be explained by immunology. A phenomenon called the fraternal birth order effect shows that homosexual males have a higher number of older brothers. To put it differently, having a son increases the probability of the next male child being homosexual.
This is explained by the maternal immunity hypothesis. It states that male offspring immunize the mother to male cells, thus producing anti-male antibodies during the next pregnancy with a male. The theory posits that those antibodies cross the placenta and blood-brain barrier, changing the brain’s development. This, in turn, may cause diverted sexual attraction and sexual orientation in the male offspring [5]. This phenomenon is the most thoroughly established factor in the field of human homosexuality [1]. However, we cannot forget that more than half of homosexual males have no older brothers [1].

The Neuroscience of Homosexuality
Concerning the ‘homosexual brain’, a number of brain regions have been shown to be, either functionally or anatomically, different in homosexuals compared to heterosexuals. Research has shown that brain regions such as the interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus show similar anatomy in homosexual men as in heterosexual women, that is clearly different from heterosexual men [6]. Yet it must be noted that even if homosexual males’ brains are similar to those of heterosexual women, it is not clear whether those changes precede the development of homosexuality, or whether attraction to males has elicited changes in the brain.

Environment and Sexual Orientation
In his paper, John Bancroft argues that homosexuality is caused by environmental factors [1]. He starts with an argument that homosexual males usually experience sexual attraction earlier than heterosexuals. They might therefore develop same-sex attraction because at this point of time, boys spend most of their time with other boys. This is, however, only a speculation.
He goes further and says that homosexuality is often just a phase in human development and that the final phase is heterosexuality. To support his hypothesis, Bancroft gives an example of a people in Papua New Guinea: Young boys around the age of ten are taken to all-male dormitories. They are told to fellate older boys and swallow their semen (in a belief that it is crucial for their proper development). At a particular age, they leave the dormitories and lead a heterosexual life that leads to marriage. He claims that this proves his argument of homosexuality being just a phase. Yet, the author fails to mention that activities performed in all-male dormitories might be merely a cultural concept and that in no way are they a proof of homosexuality.
Additionally, nurture theorists claim to have identified characteristic familial patterns that are supposedly related to children’s homosexuality. Those include low paternal presence or high maternal cues in the case of male homosexuality. However, this can be easily reversed – perhaps those familial patterns were caused by the homosexuality of children [1].

Homosexuality is multifaceted and extremely complicated

Clearly, homosexuality is a multifaceted and extremely complicated phenomenon. But why do we even think about it? The Daily Mail headline from 1993 seems unnecessarily harsh and, at least now, incorrect. We are investigating the basis of homosexuality, but can it have detrimental outcomes? Being able to predict one's sexual preferences might mean denying the right to live. So maybe, we should just let it go and try to accept that people are different no matter where this difference comes from.

[1] Jannini et al, J Sex Med, 2010
[2] Bailey and Pillard, Arch Gen Psychiatry, 1991
[3] Hamer et al, Science, 1993
[4] Mustanski et al, Hum Genet, 2005
[5] Blanchard and Bogaert, Am J Psychiatry, 1996
[6] LeVay, Science, 1991

by Filip Morys, PhD student Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Leipzig
This article originally appeared in CNS Volume 7, Issue 3, Nature vs Nurture 

The Origins of Intelligence

The intelligence quotient (IQ) is the best predictor of success in academia and at work. It also serves as a reliable indicator of longevity [1], making the origin of intelligence and the possibility of enhancing it a most interesting research topic.

The theory of multiple intelligences proposed by Howard Wagner in 1983 outlines nine types [2]. Some of them, such as bodily-kinesthetic intelligence (“body smart”) would be hard to assess using a written test. Yet, it has been shown that people who performed well on any single test section, such as linguistic intelligence, also score high on other areas [2].

Source

Big Brains Mean More Intellect
Intelligence positively correlates with the size of the whole brain [1]. However, brain size is limited by skull size and the skull has to pass the birth canal. Complications are hence more likely during the birth of naturally intelligent babies, possibly lowering their survival chances. Moreover, the individual volumes of brain areas are highly heritable [1,3], supporting the theory that nature is more influential on intelligence than nurture. Thus, not surprisingly, in diseases that cause dementia, brain cells are lost and the brain effectively shrinks.

Genes for Smartness and Intellectual Disability
Intelligence is a polygenetic trait. This year, the University of Edinburgh announced the discovery of the first intelligence gene. A highly active NPTN gene allows adolescents to score higher on intelligence tests [4]. The gene codes for a neuronal synapse protein that plays a role in brain development and neuronal signaling. Surprisingly, the NPTN gene explains only about 0.5% of the variability in intelligence. Conversely, candidate gene studies have revealed over 282 genes associated with intellectual deficits (formerly known as mental retardation).

“The measure of intelligence is the ability to change.” – Albert Einstein

Results pooled from a number of studies conducted during the last century on human intelligence research indicate that genetic factors are responsible for up to 50% of differences in intelligence between individuals [1,5].

Race over Education or Education over Race?
The philosophy of race superiority suggests that some ‘types’ of humans are superior from birth because of their lineage. Fortunately, this has largely been unpopular since the abolishment of slavery in America (1865) and the defeat of Nazi Germany (1945). Following each of these events, the Caucasian and Afro-American races began to mingle. With the establishment of racially integrated schools, it became apparent that Afro-Americans showed a lower cognitive ability compared to their white peers [5]. This result was partly attributed to their lower socioeconomic status [5], but may have fueled racism in Europe.

Intelligence is an indicator for success

A post-World War II study in Germany looked at the “occupation babies” of Afro-American and Caucasian American soldiers with German mothers. The IQ of the mixed-race children was 96.5 compared to 97 in Caucasian children [6]. This suggested that inheritance of culture, education, and equal opportunity (rather than race) influence IQ.

Dirty Minds at Age 5 Associated with Lower IQ
A study published this year showed that the exposure of pregnant women to air pollution released by the burning of fossil fuels can cause birth defects and lower the IQ of their offspring by about 3.8 points at age 5 [7]. This result persisted even after the scientists accounted for the level of parental education and several other factors that might influence child IQ. Similar studies have shown that pollution is a cause of birth defects, childhood behavioral disorders, and rare cancers [7].

The Recipe for Raising a Genius Is Continuous Practice
In 1993, K. Anders Ericsson presented evidence showing that violinists who practiced more than 10,000 hours before their 20^th birthday were likely to become professionals [6,8]. This was applied to the mastery of other skills and eventually became known as the 10,000 hours rule. Talent plays a lesser role.
A standard IQ test provides no or unreliable results for half of the intelligence types known so far. Intrapersonal intelligence, for example, contributes to good teamwork, stress management, and leadership. However, there is no comprehensive and standardised measure for it [9].
It requires four hours of practice (with coaching and reinforcement), for six days a week, for fifty weeks a year, over ten years will help you master anything! It's no wonder, really. But honestly, how many of us would volunteer to undergo such rigorous training?

[1] Gardner, The Nine Types of Intelligence, http://bit.ly/19kchVz
[2] Deary et al, Eur J Hum Genet, 2006
[3] Science Daily, 2007, http://bit.ly/1s8kvcf
[4] Desrivières et al, Mol Psychiatry, 2014
[5] Dickens, Future Child, 2005
[6] Blech, Spiegel Online, 2010, bit.ly/1pVTiEV
[7] Perera et al, J Public Health Policy, 2014
[8] Ericsson et al, Psychol Rev, 1993
[9] Arora et al, Med Educ, 2010

by Rick Cornell Hellmann, PhD student AG Schwab
This article originally appeared in CNS Volume 7, Issue 3, Nature vs Nurture 

Open positions for PhD and Master students in Neuroscience research in Berlin

The working group "Neural Regeneration and Plasticity" at the Department of Neurology (Charité Campus Mitte) is looking for a student (m/f), who is interested in a Master’s Thesis about the interrelation of Alzheimer’s disease and Type 2 Diabetes in a mouse model.

Focus:
- behavioral tests in mice
- histology (preparation and staining of brain tissue)
- microscopy

Contact:
Stefanie Schreyer (AG Steiner)
stefanie.schreyer@charite.de

How Much of Ourselves Are We Born With?

Today is Universal Children's Day, which was established in 1954 to promote international togetherness and awareness among children worldwide. In today's article we are revisiting the nature versus nurture debate.

The phrase ‘nature versus nurture’ is derived from early studies on the effects of parenting on childhood development. Researchers sought to determine the relative contributions of an individual’s innate qualities, determined by one’s genes (nature), and parenting or personal experiences (nurture) on the psychological and behavioral traits of children. If a child shows aggressive behavior, was he or she genetically ‘programmed’ to behave in such a way, or is it the product of his or her upbringing or environment? Consider if one of the child’s parents is also aggressive. Did the child acquire this behavioral trait through exposure to his or her parent's behavior or through inheritance?
No concept is as pervasive in the study of health and disease as distinguishing the effects of internal and external stimuli on bodily function. Since Claude Bernard elegantly introduced the idea, it has not only formed the basis of modern physiology but has also helped us understand numerous pathological states in terms of the interaction between inherited and environmental factors.
Over the years, the controversy has extended beyond childhood behavior to intelligence, sexual preference, and the propensity for certain diseases (see ''The Origin of Intelligence'' and ''Can You Raise Your Kids Gay?''). Despite being heavily researched, at least two problems make the nature versus nature debate a major challenge facing modern biology. The diseases and traits being investigated, particularly those to do with the brain, are themselves complex and often hard to characterize. Moreover, as our understanding of biology progresses, separating the consequences of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on a certain physiological or pathological state becomes increasingly difficult (see here).

Shedding Light on the Issue Using Twin Studies
Separating the effects of genes and environment on childhood development and the pathogenesis of diseases can be achieved by performing adoption and twin studies. Francis Galton first proposed this approach in 1875. It gained impetus at the beginning of the 20^th century when Gregor Mendel’s insights into the mechanism of heredity became widely known. Identifying differences in specific traits by studying monozygotic twins, who share identical genetic information, over portions of their lives gives us insights into the contribution of the environment in developing these characteristics.
In terms of psychological traits, separated twins usually grow up to be very similar even when brought up in substantially different environments. In the landmark Minnesota Twin Study, which began in 1979, researchers studied more than 100 sets of twins or triplets that had been separated in infancy and raised apart from one another. They found that genetics can explain up to 70% of the variability in personality, intelligence, and temperament between the twins [1].

Implications Beyond Medicine
Investigating the relative contributions of innate and acquired factors in human psychology and health can have far-reaching consequences. Not surprisingly, the nature versus nurture debate has also made its way to the courtrooms. Many experts believe that criminality, for example, is a trait that is predominantly inherited. Thus, defense lawyers sometimes argue (with varying degrees of success) that, in certain cases, people accused of committing crimes cannot be held responsible for their actions because they cannot be held accountable for their DNA.
The discovery of rare mutations that strongly predispose to aggression, such as that of the monoamine oxidase type A gene, has helped encourage the acceptance of such legal arguments [2] (see also ''Tracing the Roots of Aggression"). Biologists and physicians often oppose legal battles that attempt to make use of such a defense. They believe that the public often poorly understands the link between genes and behavior, which is a complex issue.

Is the Debate Obsolete?
Over the past few decades, we have made some astounding discoveries regarding how our genetic material is controlled. We now know that DNA is not the rigid, unchanging blueprint of our entire lives that it was once thought to be. Gene expression is a flexible (yet tightly regulated) process that is modulated continuously in health and disease.
Epigenetics (meaning ‘in addition to’ genetics) is the field of biology that deals with the alterations in gene expression that occur in the absence of changes to the DNA sequence. These changes can persist over long periods of time and, perhaps most interestingly, can be inherited from one generation to the other. The signals that trigger epigenetic changes can come from within the organism itself or from the surroundings (see "Lamarck's Last Laugh" on p.4).
The more we learn about epigenetics, the smaller the distinction between nature and nurture becomes. Consider an example. Exposing an individual to stress can alter the expression of proteins involved in the pathogenesis of mood disorders [3]. This altered expression can persist not only throughout the individual’s lifetime, but can also be transmitted to his or her offspring. If one of this individual’s children eventually develops depression, is the contribution of the exposure of the child’s parent to stress inherited or environmental? The simple answer is both. It thus comes as no surprise that, nowadays, many experts consider the debate obsolete.

Although we should not insist on drawing a line where boundaries are becoming less and less clear, making a distinction between the effects of nature and nurture aids our understanding of complex biological processes.

[1] Bouchard TJ Jr et al, Science, 1990
[2] Brunner, Nelen et al, Am J Hum Genet, 1993
[3] Murgatroyd, Nat Neurosci, 2009

by Ahmed Khalil
This article originally appeared in CNS Volume 7, Issue 3, Nature vs Nurture
 

Neurasmus Annual Meeting

This year's annual meeting of the Neurasmus Master's program, in which Charité is a partner university, took place in the first week of July in Göttingen. 

As usual, the graduating students presented their Master theses on the first day, and this time also attended a lecture by Prof. Erwin Neher, father of the patch-clamp technique and Nobel laureate in 1991. In the evening, a guided tour through the university town welcomed the participants.

Focus on Career Development
The Neurasmus program has become strongly committed to offering career guidance to its students. The second day of the meeting was dedicated to this topic: it started with a workshop where the current students discussed their career questions and issues with the alumni. The afternoon followed with talks by invited speakers from Sartorius, a biotech company from Göttingen and parallel meetings amongst the students and the advisory board for the program coordinators to come up with ideas to improve the career development of Neurasmus students.

Art and Culture
The third day was reserved for a day trip to the neighboring city of Kassel, which included a guided tour through Documenta – a contemporary art exhibition that takes place there every five years – and the 'Hercules Park' and its several waterfalls and fountains. And, of course, the annual meeting is never complete without its traditional karaoke night.

Closure and Next Steps
On the fourth and final day of the meeting, MedNeuro alumna and program officer Julia Rummel conducted a design thinking workshop powered by her company, Innoki. The goal for the students: to investigate how to find a suitable lab for a PhD. In the evening, the graduation ceremony and dinner for the second-year students took place in a beautiful outdoor setting. It is hard to say goodbye to Neurasmates, but we know it is always a mere 'see you later'. Next year's annual meeting will take place in Bordeaux, the Neurasmus headquarters, at the end of August, together with Orientation Week for the freshmen. Until then, we in Berlin are looking forward to welcoming the new Neurasmus students who are about to start their studies at the Charité!

by Mariana Cerdeira, PhD Student AG Harms

This article originally appeared September 2017 in CNS Volume 10, Issue 3, Spirituality in Science

Activating methods as a tool for effective teaching

Teaching is an almost inevitable part of academic life. Since I predict several teaching assignments on my career path, I recently decided to enroll in a course about activating teaching methods [1]. I had no prior knowledge about what these methods entailed, but enrolled in the course simply because I was not familiar with any teaching methods aside from frontally presenting information to students. 

So, on the day of the course, I entered the seminar room willing to be surprised, and that happened immediately: the first thing the instructor asked me to do was to draw a playing card from a deck. I took my seat, still curious about what the use of the card was, only to be shortly summoned by the instructor to form a group with the other participants that had the same card color as I did and to talk about what expectations we have from the course. If my thoughts were in any way astray at the very beginning of the course, at this point I was positively surprised, and excited that I would not have to sit through eight hours of someone monotonously lecturing, and be much more engaged with my peers and the course.

From Daydreaming to Participating

Engagement with the content is precisely what activating teaching methods are about. In the past, classroom dynamics were always dominated by the teacher. As a pupil, your engagement level could be on a continuum from overzealous question-asker to daydreaming scenery-admirer. To ensure that as many students as possible actually profit from class, activating teaching methods seek to help the students stay alert and, as the name suggests, actively participate in class. This way, the task of content delivery is shared by teacher and students. The art of teaching thus morphs from designing speeches and slides into finding ways for bringing out the best ideas from the students themselves.

Active methods bring out the best in students

 

There are many small exercises that can be used to achieve this, ranging from the well-known drawing of mind maps and explaining concepts to peers, to more obscure, but just as useful ones, like blacking out everything not essential in a text within a short timespan or speculating about how parts of a process might work together before being taught the specifics (see Box below) [2]. What all of these methods have in common is that students are encouraged to mindfully handle the task, to process content that was taught within the same course unit, and to make connections to prior knowledge. As I found out myself, these characteristics help students remember the matter with more ease, and reduce the effort of making all the connections from scratch when studying individually after class.

Alternating Teaching Phases

Naturally, these techniques are no one-size-fits-all solution for every teaching context. Activating teaching techniques only make sense when used in alternation with timespans where the students receive information from the instructor. The idea of alternating these two phases comes from the educationalist Klaus Döring [3]. The beauty of this approach is that it can be applied both for individual units as well as the entire course. One example of this could be interspersing units in which the students have to provide most of the content, like giving presentations or preparing posters.

CRISPR-Cas teaching model

I went on to use these methods in a course I taught to high schoolers about the CRISPR-Cas technology. My conclusion is that activating teaching methods require a much more intensive kind of preparation as a course instructor than plain presentations. One does not only have to have a clear array of concepts that students must learn in a given course unit, but also script-writing skills in order to orchestrate an engaging balance between the different types of activities, minimal crafting skills in order to prepare appealing materials and moderation skills in order to keep the course on the right track. Tiring as this endeavor might be, it resulted in highly positive feedback, both for the course I audited and for the one I taught.

“Divining models” is a technique that requires groups of students to make connections to previous knowledge and discuss them in order to solve a puzzle composed of paper pieces. The paper pieces can either be inscribed with parts of a process or shaped like the pieces of a complex, and they have to be brought in the right order or arrangement. I used this when teaching high schoolers about CRISPR-Cas systems: each group received an envelope with pieces representing the Cas9 protein, the target DNA, the tracrRNA, and they had to figure out how the DNA cleaving complex is assembled.

[1] Training with Elmar Groß at the Charité Gesundheitsakademie, 27th of April 2017, www.orbium.de

[2] Plocher I, Staiger M, Jösch G.: Train the Trainer. 2011

[3] Döring, KW: Handbuch Lehren und Trainieren in der Weiterbildung. 2008

by Ioana Weber, PhD Student AG Tarabykin

This article originally appeared September 2017 in CNS Volume 10, Issue 3, Spirituality in Science

From Neuroscience to Yoga and Meditation

An interview with Stephanie Bianchi, MSc in Neuroscience; Yoga, Meditation and Mindfulness Instructor

You hold a Bachelor in Molecular Biology and a Master in Neuroscience. Would you tell us more about your background?

As a little child, I always knew what I wanted to study. I was fascinated by the perfection of nature and felt driven to study more about how it originates all, hence my degrees in molecular biology and genetics. Later on in my career, I had the opportunity to collaborate on a research project on Fragile X Syndrome with the MIND Institute in Sacramento and the National Fragile X Syndrome Foundation in Guatemala. As I was completing the research project, I knew I wanted to expand my knowledge and understanding on the brain and molecular neurobiology.

In 2012, I received a scholarship from the Neurasmus program to study neuroscience and made my way back to Europe. Now that I look back, that time of my life has probably been the most transformative and life-changing period so far. I loved every second of it, even when I was at my lowest. I love neuroscience and the program made me fall deeper in love with that curiosity of wanting to know and experience “the mind” at its fullest. In 2014, I graduated from the University of Bordeaux and University of Coimbra as a MSc in Neuroscience.

Left: Carlos Salguero / Right: World Peace Initiative Foundation

How did yoga and meditation come into your life?

While I was in the middle of my master’s degree I suffered a major breakdown. I was suffering from depression, severe anxiety episodes, paranoid events, adrenal fatigue, dysregulations on the whole endocrine system and on the way to a hypothyroidism, just to name a few. In a matter of months, my health and mostly my mental health had deteriorated as never before. As ironic or serendipitous as life is, while I was being diagnosed with these disorders, I was also studying them at university. I went to several physicians and none of them offered me a holistic solution that would get to the root of the problem. From the little understanding of myself that I had back then, I deeply knew the problem was in my mind.

As a result and with the guidance of a wonderful team of experts in California, I started to dive deep into yoga, meditation and mindfulness practices, hand in hand with making some necessary lifestyle changes. In a matter of weeks, I could notice the benefits of strengthening the mind-body connection and my conditions started to subside. I felt deeply relieved and somewhat astonished by the awareness I was gaining from simply sitting with myself and observing my thoughts. I was truly amazed by the incredible potential of these practices that invite you to experience life from within and I wondered how come there was so little scientific research on the topic. From that point on, I have been deeply involved in the study of yoga, meditation and mindfulness, traveling to different countries and learning from different teachers and schools of thought. 

What motivated you to change careers so radically?

When my health started to improve, I felt more alive, utterly happy, deeply empowered and enjoyed a vitality never experienced before. I was able to perform better in less time, all my relationships improved, I felt an overflowing sense of peace and stillness and I had just discovered a highly improved quality of life. I always sensed there was more to life, and I guess I finally felt like this was a life worth living. 

"I had found “wellness gold” – it had to be shared"

Don’t get me wrong, I lived a wonderful life. I had lived in 5 different countries in 8 years, spoke 5 languages, had a supportive loving family and a global network of friends and I was on the way of what promised to be a successful career – yet I felt as empty as ever. I used to live with the constant chatter on my mind, chasing worldly pleasures and instant gratification, such as titles, success stories, material things, social status, the next big party and any other cue of social success – and while it was all great, I just could not care less about any of it anymore.

At that time, I thought I had just gone through a small crisis and my life would finally resume to finish my last year of university. Little did I know that it had only been the beginning of the transformation. The next year of my life I underwent a major transformation, on a physical, emotional and mostly on a mental level. It had been as if the very basis of my whole existence had been deeply questioned, restructured and I was now rediscovering the nature of the self, now with a deeper understanding of the mind.

I love neuroscience and I highly enjoyed all the years in the field, I just did not feel the same drive to pursue a career in research now that I had found what it felt to me like “wellness gold”. I personally had undergone a major crisis, where using mostly mind-body practices I had been able to restructure and rewire my brain into a more healthy, fulfilling, joyful and plentiful life. This had to be shared. It was as if the purpose of my life had been challenged and redefined to what I do now. I could no longer devote myself to my lab work and spend years on a research project. I felt driven to go out there and go deeper into the experience of the mind and share with the world the very known but untapped benefits of these millennial practices.

"The purpose of my life had been redefined"

Soon after my graduation, I took a long journey to the Indian Himalayas and Thailand, where I studied different meditation traditions, attended teachings of the Dalai Lama and studied yoga at Ashrams in different parts of India. Nowadays, I continue to enrich my practice under the study of different teachers. The experience of my disciplined and deep meditation and yoga practices never ceases to amaze me. I feel deeply inspired and motivated to continue to share the long list of benefits of these millennial practices all around the world.

Did you experience any fear or doubt when you left science?

Yes and no. Yes, the fear was always present. The mind chatter was constant: "what if you fail?", "you are committing career suicide", "you will regret it, you will never be able to come back to science again", etc. But I had now gained a deeper understanding of the self and the way the mind works. I stood strong by a deep resilient conviction that this was the path I was supposed to take and so I did. With time, this resilient and empowered knowing has only become stronger, finding myself revered and constantly revitalized, energized and empowered by what I do every day. I sleep less, enjoy a wealth of well-being, wake up every day looking forward to what I call my job and I feel so grateful to have found a new and more suitable lifestyle and career for me. 

Are you still involved in science in any way?

Two years ago I co-founded a foundation called Mindful Guatemala, in which we teach children, teenagers and adults how to use practical Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) techniques to assist behavioral, emotional and physical issues and to generally improve their quality of life.

We are now on the way to becoming a for-purpose organization, raising awareness of the potential therapeutic benefits of these standardized techniques, implementing them in national and regional companies, organizations, schools and foundations as a way to empower individuals to prevent stress-related conditions and to help them navigate through difficult situations. In the near future, we aim to support the 8-week MBSR interventions with scientific evidence.

In addition, I have been collaborating with an institution that provides higher education for teens and adults with neurodevelopmental disorders, where I have been teaching mindfulness, yoga and meditation techniques for the last 3 years, and observing amazing results in participants with Autism, Down Syndrome, Fragile X Syndrome, Angelman Syndrome, among others. We are now collaborating with a group of psychologists and physical therapists developing a curriculum on how to teach the different populations different techniques according to their needs and our experience in these past years.

My deepest wish is to be of assistance to bringing forth this convergence we have been seeing in the last years between Western scientific research methods and Eastern millennial practices. Why only settle for one world when we can combine the best of both?  

by Stephanie Bianchi

MSc in Neuroscience / Mindful Guatemala

This article originally appeared September 2017 in CNS Volume 10, Issue 3, Spirituality in Science

The Neuroscience of Yoga: Bridging the Gap Between Spirituality and Science

Yoga has become increasingly popular in the last decades and anyone who has attended a handful of yoga classes would agree to feeling an increased sense of emotional stability and mental clarity after practice. Nowadays, thanks to sophisticated brain imaging techniques, neuroscience is revealing exciting and transformative insights about the art and science of yoga. Western science is finally confirming what eastern practitioners have been reporting and documenting for over 2,000 years: that yoga and meditation can literally rewire the structure of the brain. 

What Is Yoga, Anyway?

Yoga (from Sanskrit meaning “unity”) is an ancient practice that unites the innate capacity of human beings to realize their true potential. We recognize our highest potential through the practices of the various yoga disciplines, such as yoga asana or physical postures, breathing regulation, meditation, study of teachings, devotional chanting, among others. In the West, we became familiarized with yoga asana, which only represents one aspect that the practice uses to align us with our highest potential and develop higher qualities, such as more love, compassion, humbleness, kindness, empathy, insight and service.

In the early 2000s, Richard Davidson from the University of Wisconsin jump-started the convergence of both worlds with his famous research on meditating Buddhist monks, finding mental training in form of meditation may induce short and long-term neural changes in the brain [1]. Several other researchers have followed, including Sarah Lazar, who found that brain regions associated with attention and sensory processing were thicker in people practicing meditation. The changes were observed even in novice meditators with as little as two weeks experience. This means that not only meditation professionals benefit from the practice [2]. 

Sharpening Higher Cognitive Functions

In as little as 15 years, the emerging field has witnessed almost a 10-fold increase in published research papers on the impact of yoga in human health [3]. Several papers focus on the pre-frontal cortex and the attentional engagement that yoga requires. Positive changes in the brain structure and function of areas related to awareness, decision-making, executive functions, self-regulation and attention have been observed [4], leading to an efficient regulation of emotions, social behavior, impulsivity, fears and conflicting thoughts. This area is also strongly implicated in human qualities such as empathy, consciousness, social and emotional intelligence, insight, intuition and attuned communication [5]. One of the most interesting studies in this area found that 50 year-old meditators had similar cortical thickness as 25 year-olds, suggesting that yoga might offset age-related cortical thinning [2] .

via Flickr by Amila Tennakoon

Nowadays, one of the most prevalent health threats is stress. Everybody has experienced it in one way or another. Long-term stress can have significant adverse effects on health and is a risk factor for many major illnesses, such as heart disease, stroke and depression [6]. Neurobiological studies have implicated the amygdala as a crucial area involved in our stress response. A recent study found that participants following an 8-week yoga intervention reported significantly reduced perceived stress and a reduction in the right basolateral amygdala gray matter density [7], furthering our understanding of why we feel so good during and after a yoga class. 

Breathing Into Your Memory Center

The hippocampus plays a vital role in long-term memory, learning, navigation and spatial orientation. Recent studies have found an increased hippocampal volume in elderly participants over a period of 6-months, suggesting that yoga could have the potential to alleviate age-related neurosenescence, findings of particular importance for the field of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease [8]. Furthermore, depression is a potential risk factor for cognitive decline and dementia and recent reviews suggest that a yoga intervention might effectively reduce these symptoms [9].  

I think everyone who has taken a yoga class can relate to the unique experience that this practice brings to one’s day. Our mind can be in an absolute turmoil when getting to class, thinking about the next deadline, the shopping list, answering our boss's email, and so on, but then we feel absolute peace when lying down in savasana, the final resting posture. Yoga has been shown to restore the autonomic nervous system to a healthy balance by stimulating the parasympathetic nervous system. It reduces our heart rate and blood pressure, eases our respiration and increases heart rate variability – all signs of improved parasympathetic tone and a peaceful smiling face after class [10].

Yoga might offset age-related cortical thinning

 

A number of published papers conclude that breathing, meditation, and posture-based yoga increases overall brain health and yoga practice may be an effective treatment for a clinical and healthy aging population, in addition to being relatively easy and cost-effective to implement [11]. So now, if you have not yet experienced a yoga class, I invite you to attend one and feel for yourself all the benefits this millennial practice has to offer. After a while, yoga becomes not what we do, but rather how we do something. When we invite an ever-present awareness to all that we do, yoga becomes a way of living, rather than just a disciplined practice we commit to one hour a day.

by Stephanie Bianchi, MSc in Neuroscience / Mindful Guatemala

This article originally appeared September 2017 in CNS Volume 10, Issue 3, Spirituality in Science

 
[1] Lutz et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci, 2014
[2] Lazar et al,. Neuroreport., 2005
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=yoga
[4] Afonso et al., Front Aging Neurosci., 2017
[5] Desai, Effects of Yoga Nidra and other Meditation Techniques, In: Yoga Nidra: The Art of Transformational Sleep, 2017
[6] Tawakol et al., The Lancet, 2017
[7] Hölzel et al., Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci., 2010
[8] Hariprasad et al., Indian J Psychiatry, 2013
[9] Mathersul et al., Evid Based Complement Alternat Med., 2016
[10] Stephens, Children (Basel)., 2017
[11] Desai et al., Complement Ther Clin Pract., 2015

On Mind, (White) Matter and Meditation

In our modern times, everyone rushes between appointments, fulfills work-related tasks all day and is busy with several means of self-optimization. In a bid to find their inner center again and rest, people are increasingly turning to centuries-old traditions like yoga and meditation.

Meditation is a concept from several Asian spiritual traditions where one’s attention is focused on a single thing such as breathing, bodily sensations or certain words or phrases known as “mantras”. For example, an easy approach is progressive muscle relaxation, where you consecutively contract and then relax different muscle groups to focus on that particular sensation. In principle, meditation means turning away from distractions of any form and concentrating on the present moment. While it sounds relatively simple, it is not easy to escape outer and inner noise. To those wondering whether they meditate correctly, there is an easy way of checking: "if you are feeling better at the end, you are probably doing it right." [1]. Another aspect of meditative practice (which appears very Buddhist in its own right) is that there is no right way to meditate because there is no goal to reach. Instead, the journey is the real aim [2]. And just like physical exercise, you will perform better with practice.

There Are Many Paths to Meditation
What actually happens during meditation that drives Homo economicus to adopt centuries-old traditions to calm down? For several decades, science has been trying to elucidate the psychological and physiological mechanisms behind mindfulness and meditation. Unfortunately, despite increasing popularity in research, this particular field of study faces severe methodological problems: there is an immense degree of individual variety among the general background of neuro-connectivity, meditation practice, and expertise of the subjects. As a consequence, and even though researchers readily make use of EEG, fMRI, PET and other sophisticated neuroimaging techniques, results are often inconclusive.

source: http://bit.ly/2uWg0dA

One of the earliest studies reported a decrease in blood pressure of hypertensive patients following meditation [3]. EEG studies showed a reduced frequency of alpha and theta waves linked to meditative state [4]. Depending on the type and tradition, meditation may lead to different effects. For example, researchers found increasing sympathetic activity and arousal with practice of Hindu tantric meditation as opposed to heightened parasympathetic activity and calmness when following other traditions [5]. Network connectivity studies with expert Taoist meditators reported significant differences in brain white matter and functional network topology between resting state and during meditation [6], while others find activation of basal ganglia (caudate body), limbic system (entorhinal cortex) and medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) [7].

Meditation focuses on the moment

Changes in brain activity and/or connectivity may also underlie the beneficial effect of meditation and mindfulness on pain. Pain consists of two elements: the sensory perception and the cognitive evaluation of this perception as painful. A review discussed the changes in brain activity with meditation practice as a consequence of increased thalamus and insula activity (where the sensation itself is processed) and a reduction in MPFC activity (responsible for the evaluation of pain). Therefore, it seems that meditation and mindfulness are effective because they alter the way sensory perception is assessed [8], a concept which may be applicable to a variety of health and mental problems.

Meditation to Improve Mental Health?
Recently, a large review took a deeper look at these topics [9]. Of all evaluated 18,000 citations, only 47 studies showed satisfactory methodological quality and could be included. From these, the authors conclude that meditation is likely not superior to active treatments (e.g. psychotherapy or medication) regarding stress-related problems, such as anxiety, depression and pain, yet a legitimate alternative in terms of side effects. One of the best accepted effects of meditation and mindfulness is stress reduction. It is not surprising, therefore, that big tech companies have started using these practices as a general leadership strategy to increase creativity and productivity [10].
What about you? Have you got experience with stress or ever lost your head over endless to-do-lists and half-baked could-be-done ideas? Maybe it is your turn to take your time and shape up your brain connections in order to be more creative, focused and happy!

by Bettina Schmerl, PhD Student AG Shoichet

This article  originally appeared September 2017 in CNS Volume 10, Issue 3, Spirituality in Science

[1] http://bit.ly/1CfRBPx
[2] http://bit.ly/29s6NAn
[3] Benson et al., J Chronic Dis. 1974
[4] Cahn and Polich. Psychol Bull. 2006
[5] Amihai and Kozhevnikov. Biomed Res Int. 2015
[6] Jao et al., Brain Connectivity. 2016
[7] Sperduti et al., Conscious Cogn. 2012
[8] Zeidan and Vago, Ann Y Acad Sci, 2017
[9] Goyal et al., JAMA Intern Med. 2014
[10] http://bit.ly/1TmWHgu

You Can Take a Course On (Calling) BS Now. For Real!

I present to you "Calling bullshit in the age of big data", a university-level course tackling bullshit in numbers, words and graphs rampant in the world around us.

You know a course will be off to a good start when the intro reads "The world is awash in bullshit…".  "Calling bullshit in the age of big data" is taught by Carl Bergstrom (biologist) and Jevin West (information scientist), two professors at the University of Washington. In case you didn’t get the memo, the course kicked off in Spring 2017 and is fully available online for free [1]. You can continue at self-paced tempo, as the lectures are divided into five or six parts of 3-12 min each.

Source: Twitter, used with permission

Combating New-School Bullshit
Allow me to elaborate a bit on why the course is totally worth your time. It begins with an introduction to bullshit, its philosophy, interesting examples and measures to refute it. Hilariously, during one point in the first lecture the professors called bullshit on their own bullshit by butchering the claims that they saw explosive growth in the course website’s visibility once it was up-and-running. This was all in a bid to explain "new-school bullshit" whereby people try to overwhelm others by fancy graphs. Aside from explaining statistical traps and trickery and big data gimmicks, the course offers useful ways to debunk bullshit even for the lay audience. Beware though: certain parts such as replication crisis and predatory publishing etc., may sound like a (very interesting) repetition of themes from the lab.

Ducks and Glass Slippers
There were certain parts that made me laugh long after I had finished the course and was reviewing my notes. First, the concept of data "ducks", coined by Edward Tufte. A duck is any graphic so heavily decorated with design elements that it distracts the reader with its visuals rather than communicating meaningful information. Another one was ''glass slippers'' (inspired by Disney’s Cinderella), which refers to forcefully trying to mold your data to a standard model.
Importantly, the professors defended science while exposing all the bullshit that comes with practicing it. They argued that science is not bullshit even amid a big reproducibility crisis because most of the hypotheses researchers come up with are at least plausible. Moreover, there are multiple ways to deviate from the null hypothesis. Science and replication are cumulative and conflicting results help to drive the field forward by compelling researchers to think of alternative explanations.
For those of you who just had a feel-good rush after reading that science is not completely a recipe for disaster, let’s go to the sobering part. The professors laid bare the factors that motivate scientists. And no, they don’t talk about the quest for the unknown or saving the humanity (get real!). Their premise is that just like all the other fields, people in science respond to incentives. Scientists are often driven to research for recognition [2], prestige and, most importantly, grant money and job security. Furthermore, Goodhart’s law (1975) [3] and Campbell’s law (1979) [4] also state that when a type of measure (number of citations in elite journals, for instance) becomes a target for researchers, it is no longer a good measure.

Practice fact-checking online

Lastly, much to my delight, the professors addressed the hotly debated issue of fake news as well. Money is the driving force behind fake news. Creating fake news stories is one thing but why do people spread them? Many factors contribute to this fast spread of bullshit, such as laziness to do some serious fact-checking, self-validation and sharing links just to increase social visibility. Social media is a free resource that gives everyone the opportunity to create and disseminate bullshit. However, it becomes a problem of even greater magnitude when reputable media also become an accomplice. Their aim is to take the lead in breaking the news and triggering people, by any means necessary, towards click-bait.

How to Call Out Someone on Their BS Effectively
So where does that leave us? As scientists, we have an even greater responsibility not to get carried away by the cancerous trend of sharing for the sake of social visibility. In order to efficiently call out a skeptical claim on its BS, collect all relevant information, double-check your facts, and run them by someone who knows more about the subject matter. If you err, admit your mistake, and admit it fast. Refute bullshit by tackling the core facts, spend less time explaining the dubious ones, and keep your argument simple – or else your approach may backfire.
Fun, engaging and equal parts thought-provoking, "Calling bullshit" is a timely course for young would-be scientists as well as lay people. It is neither too long nor too predictable content-wise. You can follow the course on Twitter here: https://twitter.com/callin_bull


[1] http://bit.ly/2vVpa7v
[2] http://bit.ly/2vVmuXn
[3] http://bit.ly/2vVcIoa
[4] http://bit.ly/2vVnQRX

by Zara Khan, MSc Student MedNeuro

This article originally appeared September 2017 in CNS Volume 10, Issue 3, Spirituality in Science

Follow Up: Child/Family Space at Charité

On November 1, 1848 the first US women's medical school opens in Boston. Since then the rights for women changed a lot: In our society it is common that women can study and be doctors just like men. However, as nature can not be changed, it is still the woman who has to carry the baby and breastfeed. Unfortunately this can be an obstacle when a mother-to-be or a breastfeeding mum want to combine motherhood an work.


In our March edition of the newsletter (Vol. 10, Issue 1), we included a series of interviews with female members of the Charité research community. One of our participants mentioned the lack of a room in the CCO for breastfeeding women, or staff members who need a room to rest during their pregnancy (read the full interview here).
Kimberly Mason from the NeuroCure office pointed out that such a room equipped with a couch or mattress for anyone needing a rest was initially planned. Unfortunately, when the Charité highrise renovations began, the CCO had to absorb several groups and services. There was an intense scramble for space and the resting room got repurposed.

However, such a space does actually exist: on Campus Mitte you find it in Hufelandweg 9, Level K1, Room 006. There is also a parent-child room on the Virchow Campus. For details see: https://familienbuero.charite.de/charite_mit_kind/kinderbetreuung/kinderzimmer/

Since one room does not cover the needs of all pregnant women and parents with their children for the whole campus, maybe there is something we can do. We want to explore creative alternatives and would like to hear your opinion.

Thank you Kimberly for the helpful information!

by Claudia Willmes, Post-doc AG Schmitz

This article originally appeared September 2017 in CNS Volume 10, Issue 3, Spirituality in Science