Medical hypotheses
-
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a prevalent neurodevelopmental disorder characterised by (inter alia) an increase in distractibility. The current front-line pharmacotherapies for the treatment of ADHD, namely the psychostimulants methylphenidate and amphetamines, have clear abuse potential, hence there is a strong need to develop new drug treatments for this disorder. Central to this process is the identification of the pathophysiological changes which underlie ADHD. ⋯ Fortunately, again, even if psychostimulants do not achieve their therapeutic effects on distractibility in ADHD by acting on the SC, then the development of drugs which dampen stimulus-related activity in the colliculus could still represent an important novel path for drug development to take. Pharmacological manipulations of this structure are able to decrease distractibility. As a consequence, sensory responsiveness in the SC may represent a new model system for use in the development of non-addictive pharmacotherapies for ADHD.
-
We argue that the most ambitious science is intrinsically riskier science, more likely to fail. It is almost always a safer career strategy for the best scientists to seek to extend knowledge more modestly and to build incrementally on existing ideas and methods. Therefore, higher rewards for success are a necessary incentive to encourage top scientists to work on the most important scientific problems, ones where the solution has potentially revolutionary implications. We suggest that mega-cash prizes (measured in tens of millions of dollars) are a suitable reward for those individuals (or institutions) whose work has triggered radically new directions in science.
-
Editorial Biography Historical Article
James Watson tells the inconvenient truth: faces the consequences.
Recent comments by the eminent biologist James Watson concerning intelligence test data from sub-Saharan Africa resulted in professional sanctions as well as numerous public condemnations from the media and the scientific community. They justified these sanctions to the public through an abuse of trust, by suggesting that intelligence testing is a meaningless and discredited science, that there is no data to support Dr. Watson's comments, that genetic causes of group differences in intelligence are falsified logically and empirically, and that such differences are already accounted for by known environment factors. ⋯ Lies and a threatening, coercive atmosphere to free inquiry and exchange are damaging to science as an institution and to scientists as individuals, while voicing unfashionable hypotheses is not damaging to science. The ability to openly voice and argue ideas in good faith that are strange and frightening to some is, in fact, integral to science. Those that have participated in undermining this openness and fairness have therefore damaged science, even while claiming to protect it with the same behavior.
-
Partly spurred by the rapid emergence of discovery tools, empirical science founded on experimental validation now dominates academic funding, publishing, and recognition while forums for theoretical science have been marginalized. Although this hegemony of empiricism instills useful discipline to the scientific process, it also limits the pace of science to sensor innovation and renders the ontogeny of scientific knowledge path-dependent, concealing potential discontinuities in intellectual trajectories. Theoretical science, founded on intuition, inspiration, and abstraction, can complement empirical science by creating disruptive paradigms that facilitate detection of spurious results and frame new hypotheses. ⋯ Paradoxical medicine and dynamic range management may represent initial strategies to reprogram the neuroendocrine stress axes to modulate lifespan at the organism level, and many other strategies are anticipated. The key to theoretical science is original insight, but the prevailing pressure to conform to medicine's educational and practice standards dis-incentivizes independent thinking. A scientific future is envisioned when the commoditization of experimental science will enable its outsourcing, liberating health scientists from the tyranny of empiricism to engage in a more balanced process of discovery infused with theoretical considerations.