medigraphic.com

2012, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Hum Med 2012; 12 (2)

Consequences of the development of neurosciences in the solution of social problems

Brown MM, Valdés GY, González OE

Language: Spanish
References: 47
Page: 262-275
PDF size: 214.65 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The development of scientific knowledge has challenged the metaphysical ideas, prohibitions, and taboos that in most cases have stuck the mankind scientific advance. This advance has always been there to solve men’s increasing problems, such as the development of neurosciences and its application to solve human problems. Nowadays, neurosciences have reached such a great level that, new concepts, trends, and contradictions have come out. Several aspects about the contribution of neurosciences to the social development, as well as the risks and current limitations that could occur are analyzed in this work.


REFERENCES

  1. Kandel JHS, Thomas M. Jessell, editor. Principles of neural science. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2000.

  2. 2.Jiménez P R. Metodología de la investigación. Elementos básicos para la investigación clínica. La Habana: Editorial Ciencias Médicas; 1998.

  3. 3.Cheung EH. A New Ethics of Psychiatry: Neuroethics, Neuroscience, and Technology. Journal Psychiat Pract. 2009;15(5):391-401.

  4. 4.Neuromarketing: beyond branding. Lancet Neurology. Feb 2004; 3:71.

  5. 5.Farah MJ. Neuroethics: the practical and the philosophical. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005; 9(1):34-40.

  6. 6.Mollaret P, Goulon M. Le coma dépassé. Rev Neurol 1959; 101:5-15.

  7. 7.Machado C, editor. A new definition of death based on the basic mechanisms of consciousness generation in human beings. Actas del IV Simposio Internacional sobre Muerte Cerebral; 9-12 March 2004; La Habana.

  8. 8.Machado C, García, OD, editor. Guidelines for the determination of death. Actas del IV Simposio Internacional sobre Muerte Cerebral; 9-12 March 2004; La Habana.

  9. 9.Resolución Ministerial No. 90. Gaceta Oficial de la República de Cuba. (Sep 21; 2001).

  10. 10.Wijdicks EF. The diagnosis of brain death. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(16):1215-21.

  11. 11.Nebra AC, Virgós B, Santos-Lasaosa S, Tejero-Juste C, Larraga-Sabaté J, Araiz JJ, et al. Diagnóstico clínico de muerte encefálica y empleo del Doppler transcraneal, con ecografía de las arterias cerebrales medias y el segmento intracraneal de las arterias vertebrales. Concordancia con los hallazgos de la gammagrafía cerebral. Rev Neurol. 2001;33(10):916-20.

  12. 12.Machado C, Román-Murga JM. Utilidad de los potenciales evocados multimodales y del electrorretinograma en el diagnóstico precoz de la muerte encefálica. Rev Neurol. 2007;27(159):809-17.

  13. 13.Hodelín-Tablada R, Fuentes-Pelier D. Diagnóstico clínico de la muerte encefálica y empleo del Doppler transcraneal. Rev Neurol. 2002;34(12):1198-200.

  14. 14.Hodelín-Tablada R, Fuentes-Pelier D. Electrorretinograma y potenciales evocados visuales en el diagnóstico de muerte encefálica. Rev Neurol. 2000; 31(6):598-9.

  15. 15.Niedermeyer E, da-Silva FL. Electroencephalography: basic principles,clinical applications, and related fields. 5th ed. Niedermeyer E, da Silva, F.L., editor. Baltimoore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.

  16. 16.Takeuchi K, Shiogai T, editor. The brain death state in medical science. Actas del IV Simposio Internacional sobre Muerte Cerebral; 9-12 March 2004; La Habana.

  17. 17.Cabrera N, Toledo AM. Los estudios de pesquisa activa en Cuba. Revista Cubana de Salud Pública. Marzo 2008 [citado 2 May 2010]; 34 (1): Disponible en: http://www.scielosp.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S086434662008000100015&nrm=iso.

  18. 18.Zito M. De fiesta las Neurociencias Revista Informativa Cubahora 2010 [citado 2 May 2010]: Disponible en: http://www.cubahora.cu/index.php?tpl.

  19. 19.Bartres-Faz D, Tormos JM, Junque C, Pascual-Leone A. Transcranial magnetic stimulation: contribution to psychiatry and to the study of brain-behavior relationship. Actas Esp Psiquiatr. 2000;28(2):130-6.

  20. 20.World Health Organización.[Internet] Deaths from stroke. In: The Atlas of Heart Disease and Stroke. 2002 [actualizado; citado 6 de septiembre del 2007]; Available from: http://www.who.int/cardiovascular_diseases/resources/atlas/en/.

  21. 21.Nardone R, Tezzon F. Inhibitory and excitatory circuits of cerebral cortex after ischaemic stroke: prognostic value of the transcranial magnetic stimulation. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol. 2002;42(3):131-6.

  22. 22.Cicinelli P, Pasqualetti P, Zaccagnini M, Traversa R, Oliveri M, Rossini PM. Interhemispheric asymmetries of motor cortex excitability in the postacute stroke stage: a paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Stroke. 2003;34(11):2653-8.

  23. 23.Delvaux V, Alagona G, Gerard P, De_Pasqua V, Pennisi G, de_Noordhout AM. Post-stroke reorganization of hand motor area: a 1-year prospective follow-up with focal transcranial magnetic stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol. 2003;114(7):1217-25.

  24. 24.Gomez-Fernandez L, Telleria-Diaz A. Physiopathology of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: the contribution from transcranial magnetic stimulation. Rev Neurol. 1997;25(142):839-42.

  25. 25.Knabb J. Neuroscience, Moral Reasoning, and the Law. Behav Sci Law. 2009;27:219-36.

  26. 26.Canli T, Zhao Z, Desmond JE, Kang E, Gross J, Gabrieli JD. An fMRI study of personality influences on brain reactivity to emotional stimuli. Behav Neurosci. 2001;115(1):33-42.

  27. 27.Singer T, Seymour B, O'Doherty J, Kaube H, Dolan RJ, Frith CD. Empathy for pain involves the affective but not sensory components of pain. Science. 2004;303(5661):1157-62.

  28. 28.Grabenhorst F, Rolls ET, Parris BA. From affective value to decision-making in the prefrontal cortex. Eur J Neurosci. 2008;28(9):1930-9.

  29. 29.Rolls ET, Grabenhorst F. The orbitofrontal cortex and beyond: from affect to decision-making. Prog Neurobiol. 2008;86(3):216-44.

  30. 30.Rilling JK, Sanfey AG. The neuroscience of social decision-making. Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:23-48.

  31. 31.Walter H, Abler B, Ciaramidaro A, Erk S. Motivating forces of human actions. Neuroimaging reward and social interaction. Brain Res Bull. 2005;67(5):368-81.

  32. 32.Neuromarketing: beyond branding. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3(2):71.

  33. 33.Greenfield S. Brain drugs of the future. BMJ. 1998;317(7174):1698-701.

  34. 34.Mashour GA, Walker EE, Martuza RL. Psychosurgery: past, present, and future. Brain Res Rev. 2005; 48(3):409-19.

  35. 35.Vastag B. Poised to challenge need for sleep, "wakefulness enhancer" rouses concerns. JAMA. 2004;291(2):167-70.

  36. 36.Halford JC, Harrold JA. Neuropharmacology of human appetite expression. Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2008; 14(2):158-64.

  37. 37.Fisher DG, Reynolds GL, Napper LE. Use of crystal methamphetamine, Viagra, and sexual behavior. Curr Opin Infect Dis.2008;23(1):53-6.

  38. 38.Ding H, Du W, Wang H, Zhang L, Wang Z, Du C, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Udenafil for Erectile Dysfunction: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Urology. 2012;22(2):3-6.

  39. 39.Farah MJ, Illes J, Cook-Deegan R, Gardner H, Kandel E, King P, et al. Neurocognitive enhancement: what can we do and what should we do?. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004;5(5):421-5.

  40. 40.Flower R. Lifestyle drugs: pharmacology and the social agenda. Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2004;25(4):182-5.

  41. 41.Ludlow H. Translating principles of neural plasticity into research on speech motor control recovery and rehabilitation. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2008; 51(1):S240-58.

  42. 42.Lim P. Recovery and regeneration after spinal cord injury: a review and summary of recent literature. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2007; 36(1):49-57.

  43. 43.Donoghue JP, Nurmikko A, Black M, Hochberg LR. Assistive technology and robotic control using motor cortex ensemble-based neural interface systems in humans with tetraplegia. J Physiol. 2007;579(3):603-11.

  44. 44.Green AM, Kalaska JF. Learning to move machines with the mind. Trends Neurosci. 1999;34(2):61-75.

  45. 45.Jackson A, Moritz CT, Mavoori J, Lucas TH, Fetz EE. The Neurochip BCI: towards a neural prosthesis for upper limb function. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2006; 14(2):187-90.

  46. 46.Bruce CR.Brain computer interface technology as a tool to augment plasticity and outcomes for neurological rehabilitation. J Physiol. 2007;4 (3):637-42.

  47. 47.Ryu SI, Shenoy KV. Human cortical prostheses: lost in translation?. Neurosurg Focus. 2009; 27(1):E5.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com