3 ms·

In 2007, John Hawks criticized[1] Lorber's claim. [1]: http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/brain/development/ten_percent_brain_myth_2007.html http://johnhawks.

• tacon 10y ago
  Thanks for that update. That article was in my weird stuff file, and I had no idea the evidence presented was controversial.
  • sandworm101 10y ago
    There is another layer, and it is very political. "Studies" that show people can be functional without brain matter are championed by certain pro-life groups who want to describe "brain dead" people as potentially functional. It came to a head during the Terri Schiavo fiasco. Her scans were horrific, showing very little brain after her accident. People pointed to these studies as evidence that such a scan did not preclude recovery to a normal life, that she should be kept alive at all costs in hope of recovery. That's how these things stay around. Someone finds them useful for completely non-scientific arguments.
• Para2016 10y ago
  Lorber is full of crap. I want to see his 1980 poor resolution head CT and find out what he's called 5 mm and whether that extends throughout each ventricle. I don't actually want to see it at all actually, the imaging will show he's exaggerating his claim and he's totally full of it. Lorber gives MDs a bad name. It's too bad 40 years has lapsed and he's still discussed as anything other than a complete quack.
• scotty79 10y ago
  What about this guy? https://www.google.pl/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSN1930510020070720 https://www.google.pl/amp/mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idU...