This article discusses a recent study conducted by neuroscientists who were looking for a way to communicate by translating brain signals into messages. This type of communication would help patients paralyzed with ALS, or Lou Gehrig’s disease, because they are restricted to communicating slowly through eye-blinking and muscle twitching. A neuroscience team led by Bettina Sorger conducted a study in which scanning machines translated signals from the brains of six healthy volunteers into letters. Sorger claims that “this is not mind-reading” since the volunteers were in control of what messages they were sending, making this more like “a typewriter for the brain.” The team used massive MRI machines to detect increased blood flow in precise locations in the brain as the volunteers imagined particular tasks. Scanners were then used to decode the messages using computer “data-mining” techniques.
Already
in use, this method has been a major breakthrough for ALS patients. These MRI machines allow the patients
to communicate much more quickly, since their message is processed all at once,
where before they had to communicate each individual letter. The only drawback is that these machines
are very expensive, and take up a lot of space. The article did mention that these machines could be used to
train patients how to communicate in this manor, and then smaller machines
could potentially be developed once the patient knows how they work. The article also mentioned another
possibility of communication is using machines to detect how light passes
through the brain.
I found this article very interesting
and informative, but I do not think that it did a good job explaining each of
the new methods of communication in depth. However, it was a good article for learning what the wider
scope of new innovative methods of communication could be in the future.
Vergano,
Dan. "Breakthrough for the Speechless May Turn Thoughts into Words."USATODAY.COM. USA Today, n.d. Web. 29
Sept. 2013.
After reading Blake's response to the article "Breakthrough for the Speechless May Turn Thoughts in Words", I must say that I am very intrigued. I think that this is an amazing idea, and that it could help so many people in a variety of situations. Giving voice to those who cannot speak is not only a fantastic scientific endeavor, but also a very noble one. One thing that was well presented by Blake was her simplified version of the obviously very complex article. She made it both easy to understand and very informative. I also liked how she showed the drawbacks of the advancements, like the difficulty of using the system and its high price. I thought that this gave the reader a very balanced view of the article. A third thing that I liked was that Blake put her opinion in at the end. I thought this was a great touch to the end of her response. The two things that I didn’t like was the lack of quotes and the fact that there were no statistics. I think that these two things would help to make her response more specific, and give the reader a better understanding of how much of a difference these technologies have made. How much do the scanning machines cost? How many are in use today? Answers to these questions would definitely help to support your response. One thing that I learned was that people who suffer from diseases like ALS now have the chance to speak. I really had no idea that this technology was possible, and it’s amazing to think of the impact that it could have on our world.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, “Breakthrough for the Speechless May Turn Thoughts into Words,” by Dan Vergano, Blake did a great job summarizing and then analyzing the information presented. She was able to explain the complicated processes of the neuroscience system of transmitting brain signals into messages. The incorporation of quotes into her report was also helpful to understanding the material being presented, so the scientific terms were intertwined into the more easily explained topics. Blake was able to acknowledge the drawbacks of using these MRI machines, even though people would like to think there are none. Her conclusion of the breakthrough technologies clearly explained how new technologies are constantly improving the lived of those diagnosed with ASL, or Lou Gehrig’s disease.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Blake’s work did its job of explaining how his specific MRI machine is able to formulate messages from people who without assistance could only communicate through rapid eye blinks and slight muscle movements, I would have liked to know what other technologies have been used in the past to help ASL patients with their correspondence skills. However, she did mention how there are some new studies with machines that measure how light passes through the brain and how that can possibly increase communication skills. I wish that she would have explained this in more depth, to be able to formulate an opinion on if these technologies or the MRI machines priorly talked about will be more successful.
The possibility of being able to communicate with people who before were completely disengaged from our ever growing world is almost unimaginable and the ability to now do that is a huge step forward for the world. But, there are some vital questions that still need to be answers, especially those regarding the monstrous machines that need to be used and the high price tag that are put on such machines.
I found the article "Breakthrough for the Speechless May Turn Thoughts in Words" very interesting. I believe that Blake did a very good job analyzing, condensing and presenting the data. After reading the article and Blake's summery I think that she did a very good job summarizing, not leaving out any key points. Also she did a very good job of explaining all of the complicated procedures they talked about, restating them in an easy to understand but still informative manor. I also thought that she did a good job incorporating quotes, making sure that all of them made sense, not just sticking them in at random with no explanation. Lastly in her review she included not just the advances that this new technology brought along, but she also talked about the drawbacks.
ReplyDeleteOver all Blake’s review was very good, but there is stillroom for improvement. I noticed a few spots where there were grammatical errors, but that is expected. I think that it would have been interesting to go more in-depth with article and see what studies led up to this or if there was any communication before this besides just the blinking, twitching, etc. One last bit of criticism, I don’t think that she mentions that the smaller machines could be useful for people to use outside the hospital rooms, although she did mention that there is work towards smaller machines.
Lastly I was very intrigued by this article, I had no idea that technology like this was being developed, especially not that it existed. I have heard many stories of paralyzed people communicating through the limited movement they have left, so to hearing this I was instantly interested. I hope that research such as this continues and is one day perfected.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Blake’s review of the article, I am interested in learning more about these machines because it was very well presented overall. One of the better parts of the review was when she cited specific information about the topic, which allowed me to understand the value of these machines. Another part that was well presented was markedly pointing out how the disadvantages of these machines, such as being very expensive and big, contrasted with the benefits. A third aspect of the review I enjoyed was her conclusion, because it was short and to the point, making it a nice ending to the review. One thing that I think could have been improved was as detailed a description of the disadvantages of the machines as the advantages. Giving the reader further understanding of the pros and cons of these machines could help people create their own thoughts about where this could lead. Another aspect that could have been added was the inclusion of quotes from the article, just in order to have hard evidence to support her views. One thing that I learned from the article and review was that this technology is even possible. I had never thought that this kind of technology could be available to us today. I am sure these machines will lead to advances in other technology, and will have a large impact in the future.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Walter-McNeill
ReplyDelete"Breakthrough for the speechless may turn thoughts into words ". A bold title, for a revolutionary article. After reading both the article and blake's review, I was able to formulate a few opinions on the pros and cons of her response. I thought Blake did a good job of summarizing the important information, such as the positives and negatives of this new technology. I also thought she picked out some good key quotes to illustrate complex concept that this article is about. I especially liked her use of the quote "typewriter for the brain", as it helped me better understand how these new machines worked. Finally, I enjoyed how Blake included some information on how the technology has been received, not just what its intended function was. Including examples of their success in use and their high price helped outline the contrasting views on these new machines. To better her review, I think Blake could include more direct statistics to back up her analysis, as there are a few places where I thought they would support her arguments. In addition, some final edits could have been made to make the article grammatically spotless (however one cannot really complain about the few mistakes I found) From this article I learned of this new technology, and I learned that people who have such diseases are now able to communicate better. I think this is a very intriguing idea, and I look forward to hearing about how this concept is put to use.
I thought the article "Breakthrough for the Speechless May Turn Thoughts in Words" was thought provoking and scientifically interesting. Blake did an excellent job of reviewing such a complex article. After reading this article I was still slightly confused on certain terminology and I had some questions that were left unanswered. I think Blake did a great job of simplifying the overall idea of the article to make the concepts easier to understand. Furthermore, Blake’s writing was clear and effective. She got to the heart of the article quite eloquently. Lastly, Blake’s connection of this article to the world today and what the breakthroughs discussed in this article could mean for ALS patients was particularly insightful.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Blake’s review was great there are some things that she could improve on. For instance, Blake didn’t really go into detail about how some of these processes work. A quote or an excerpt from the article might have helped me to better understand the article. In addition, I think more evidence from the article would have been nice to have as a reference while reading her review.
From this article I learned that there are new technologies and treatments that can help ALS patients and people with similar diseases. I really enjoyed reading this article and hope that my classmates continue to post similar articles.
Caroline McGrath
ReplyDelete3/22/20
Current Event 20
https://bronxvilleapbiology.blogspot.com/2013/09/breakthrough-for-speechless-may-turn.html
Vergano, Dan. "Breakthrough for the Speechless May Turn Thoughts into
Words."USATODAY.COM. USA Today, n.d. Web. 29 Sept.
2013.http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/USCP/PNI/Nation/World/2012-06-30-PNI0630preprint-brain-speller_ST_U.htm
I thought the review was very well done. Starting with the summary, it was clear and concise and really gave a full understanding of the article itself. It included important information and was organized in a neat way. I also thought the quotes were well picked and credible and overall added positive things to the review, such as ““this is not mind-reading” since the volunteers were in control of what messages they were sending, making this more like “a typewriter for the brain.”.” He also did a very good job of stressing the importance of the article and how it could relate to our everyday lives, which made me much more intrigued to read it.
I think the first thing that needed to be fixed was the title, as I was unsure of what the review was about because the title of the review was, although intriguing, not very informative, as I didn’t know it was about Luo Gehrig's disease until halfway through the first paragraph. I also think He needed to include more prehistory and background information, like what scientists believed before the discovery and how the discovery changed their way of thinking.
I chose this article because I found the article to be interesting and not too outdated, as many from 2013 are. I find it fascinating how advance our technology has become and how far we’ve come from less than a century ago.