A strange and curious history

[Rogie]

In 1949 the Nobel prize for Medicine was awarded to Egas Moniz. I had never heard of him, so would hazard he's also unknown to those of you clustered here in the Beer Bar.

 

Can you guess what he was given it for? Here's a clue: He was a Portuguese neurologist, who believed that patients with obsessive behaviour were suffering from fixed circuits in the brain. Any ideas?

 

In 1935, in a Lisbon hospital, he believed he had found a solution. "I decided to sever the connecting fibres of the neurons in activity," he wrote. . .

 

His original technique was adapted by others, but the basic idea remained the same.

 

In 1949 he was awarded the Nobel prize, but from the mid-1950s, it (i.e. Moniz's technique) rapidly fell out of favour, partly because of poor results and partly because of the introduction of the first wave of effective psychiatric drugs.

 

Here's what somebody wrote about the modern equivalent of Moniz's treatments:

 

"I'm not criticising chemotherapy because it's effective but compared to other treatments, in decades to come it will seem to be overly destructive and something that needed to be changed and will be changed.

 

"It's a very similar judgement, that the pluses outweigh the minuses."

 

So putting things in perspective, maybe Moniz and those who copied him can be excused. In future years chemotherapy may be regarded as a barbaric aberration; alongside radiotherapy, amputation, heart transplants, indeed any transplant, hip and other joint replacements, etc.

 

In case you are still wondering, Moniz received his Nobel prize for inventing lobotomy.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15629160

[Guest fountainhall]

I was reasonably sure I had it after your mention of the 1935 quote!

 

It must have been a gruesome procedure. I see it has been described as "frontal-lobe castration". Considering that countries started to ban the procedure just a year later (the Soviet Union in 1950) and it was virtually ended in the 1970s, shouldn't the Nobel Committee have the right to withdraw a Prize? Rather like a Brit can be stripped on a knighthood?

 

That said, I see it as being in a totally different league from the other procedures you list, all of which have been 'valid' for a very considerable time. Clearly, as medical research continues, procedures like chemotherapy will almost certainly disappear. But I put lobotomy in a very different - and far more destructive - category

[ChristianPFC]

I read about lobotomy some time ago, and re-read now http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy, and I am shocked again. Surprisingly, it was not used a means to cure homosexuality (at least I didn't found "gay" or "homosexual" in the wikipedia article).

 

There were a few Nobel Prices that now with hindsight seem unwarranted. Let me quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT

 

The Swiss chemist Paul Hermann Müller was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1948 "for his discovery of the high efficiency of DDT as a contact poison against several arthropods."[2] After the war, DDT was made available for use as an agricultural insecticide, and soon its production and use skyrocketed.[3]

 

In 1962, Silent Spring by American biologist Rachel Carson was published. The book catalogued the environmental impacts of the indiscriminate spraying of DDT in the US and questioned the logic of releasing large amounts of chemicals into the environment without fully understanding their effects on ecology or human health. The book suggested that DDT and other pesticides may cause cancer and that their agricultural use was a threat to wildlife, particularly birds.

 

In the following decades, DDT was banned worldwide.

 

But this is science, so you have to see how things develop with time.

 

But awarding the Nobel Price for Literature in 1953 to Winston Churchill who said something like he wants to fry the German fugitives in Dresden (Dresden bombing 1945, now generally considered as a war crime, I didn't search for the exact quotation) cannot be justified.

[Guest fountainhall]

But awarding the Nobel Price for Literature in 1953 to Winston Churchill who said something like he wants to fry the German fugitives in Dresden (Dresden bombing 1945, now generally considered as a war crime, I didn't search for the exact quotation) cannot be justified.

Was not the bombing of Dresden - a dreadful act - a sort of retaliation for the carpet bombing of the English city of Coventry in November 1940?

 

The raid reached such a new level of destruction that Joseph Goebbels later used the term Coventriert ("Coventrated") when describing similar levels of destruction of other enemy towns

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_Blitz

 

From what I can see on the internet, the tonnage dropped on Coventry was similar to that dropped on Warsaw - 500 tonnes - and other European cities - e.g. Rotterdam. Civilians inevitably were caught up in these raids, sometimes deliberately so. The tonnage dropped on Dresden was considerably greater and the casualties higher (although not as high as those in the 1943 air raid on Hamburg). But I can find no reference anywhere to Churchill declaring anything about "frying German citizens". Indeed, whilst Churchill approved of it, the bombing seems to have been partly the inspiration of Air Marshall Sir Douglas Evill who stated in a memo to the Chiefs of Staff Committee that -

 

interfering with mass civilian movements was a major, even key, factor in the decision to bomb the city center. Attacks there, where main rail junctions, telephone systems, city administration, and utilities were located, would result in chaos. Britain had learned this after the Coventry Blitz, when loss of this crucial infrastructure had longer-lasting effects than attacks on war plants

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II

 

But then, this was wartime, and a time in a long, ghastly war when it seemed it might last at least until the end of 1945. Deliberate targeting of civilians was common, and would have to include the London blitz and the totally indiscriminate V1 and V2 "flying bomb" rockets. So any strategy which would reduce the Allies' casualties was on the table - as was the atomic bomb for the Americans in the Pacific.

 

We can easily condemn all sides with the benefit of hindsight and greater knowledge. But singling out one act is, I suggest, somewhat pointless.

 

As to Churchill's literary merits, I haven't the faintest idea!

[Guest]

Was not the bombing of Dresden - a dreadful act - a sort of retaliation for the carpet bombing of the English city of Coventry in November 1940?

 

Yes.

Additionally the Germans made a complete mess of many mainland European cities, belonging to countries which have the moral high ground, as after all they did not actually start the war.

[Rogie]

I have no idea how the Nobel Prize committee go about their business, how they choose the winners. Sometimes the award is given some time after the original discovery and, especially in the field of science where the discovery's implications can be wide-ranging and difficult or impossible to predict, that seems prudent. Provided the scientist has an excellent reputation and has published his work in peer-reviewed articles, in other words isn't a maverick, I cannot see how we can blame the Prize committee if years later they appear to have been misguided.

 

When it comes to certain categories, there would seem to be a dearth of suitable candidates in some years. One that come to mind is the peace prize. I cannot remember whether they absolutely have to award it to somebody every year or whether they can withold it if there are no suitable candidates, which would seem more sensible, and to give that year's money, which is of considerable value, to charity.

[Rogie]

This has nothing to do with lobotomy, thank goodness, but nevertheless offers a fascinating insight into how neuroscientists are delving into the intricate working of the brain. This is not new, it has previously been investigated using functional MRI scans, but this modified technique is much more versatile.

 

New way to communicate with brain damaged patients

 

A method of communicating with brain damaged patients who appear to be in a vegetative state has been discovered by scientists in the UK and Belgium.

Writing in The Lancet medical journal they describe how they measured electrical activity in the brain to detect consciousness.

The technique, known as EEG, is painless and involves attaching electrodes to the head.

Doctors hope it can be used as a diagnostic tool in homes and hospitals.

Hopefully if you click on this link it will take you to a short clip that appeared on BBC News yesterday. It might be available for a limited time only, so apologies if it doesn't work for you.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15685824

 

Apparently the part of the brain 'lights up' even when the patient merely thinks about wiggling his toe or whatever, which is clearly of fundamental importance in cases where the patient is thought to be in a vegetative state.

 

The following link is more technical and gives details of the researchers and their methods.

 

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2011-11-eeg-awareness-people-previously-thought.html

 

and here is an excellent article in The Guardian:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/10/brain-scanner-hope-patients-vegetative

[Rogie]

Another strange and curious history, although it's hardly 'history' as its latest development has only just been announced! It's not worth starting a new topic so I've added it here.

 

The world's first official trial using human embryonic stem cells in patients has been halted.

 

Geron, based in California, made the sudden announcement that it was halting further work in this field.

 

In a statement the company said in the "current environment of capital scarcity and uncertain economic conditions" it had decided to concentrate instead on developing cancer treatments.

 

Geron said it was seeking partners to enable further development of its stem cell programmes. The press statement implies the decision is purely a financial one - by stopping its stem cell programme it will cut its workforce by more than a third and save millions of dollars.

 

This is what the chief executive of Geron said 3 years ago:

 

"What stem cells promise for a heart attack or spinal cord injury or diabetes is that you go to the hospital, you receive these cells and you go home with a repaired organ, that has been repaired by new heart cells or new new nerve cells or new islet cells that have been made from embryonic stem cells."

But . . .

If that future exists, it won't be Geron that will now lead the way.

John Martin, Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine at University College London said:

"The Geron trial had no real chance of success because of the design and the disease targeted. It was an intrinsically flawed study. And for that reasons we should not be describing this as a set back.

You sure about that Professor? Well, it turns out he's somewhat biased . . .

"The first trials of stem cell that will give an answer are our own in the heart. The heart is an organ that can give quantitative data of quality."

Josephine Quintavalle from the group Comment on Reproductive Ethics said:

"At long last after 10 years of unremitting hype, reality has caught up with embryonic stem cell claims. If Geron is abandoning this project it is because it is simply not working, despite the millions of dollars and hot air that has been invested in the promotion of this research."

I haven't been following the field of stem cell research and so I have no evidence for this but my first reaction is this company, Geron, adopted a 'death or glory' approach. I would imagine any small research group trying to do their research 'properly' will pay the price of Geron's rashness and find funding hard to come by.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...health-15740133

[ChristianPFC]

Was not the bombing of Dresden - a dreadful act - a sort of retaliation for the carpet bombing of the English city of Coventry in November 1940?

Sure, you can charge up German bombings against Allied bombings, but my point is that Hitler did not get a Nobel Price and Churchill did.

 

I once read an article about the Bengal famine of 1943 that largely blamed Churchill for the death of up to 4 million Indians. Checking on wikipedia, they cite him

 

Winston Churchill the Prime Minister of that time responded with a telegram to Wavell asking, if food was so scarce, "why Gandhi hadn’t died yet."

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943

 

Whis displays the same attitude as Marie Antoinette (People have no bread? Why don't they eat cake?)

 

Quick check on wikipedia:

 

The phrase "Let them eat cake" is often attributed to Marie Antoinette. However, there is no evidence to support that she ever uttered this phrase, and it is now generally regarded as a "journalistic cliché".

 

One might argue that human failings have nothing to do with being awarded a Nobel Price in Literature.

 

Another example is Erwin Schrödinger (Nobel Prize in Physics in 1933) who designed a thought experiment where a cat dies or lives die depending on radiaocative decay.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat

 

Even as a thought experiment, unacceptable to me!

[Rogie]

Another example is Erwin Schr