Unidad de Neurobiología Aplicada (UNA, CEMIC-CONICET), Investigador Principal (CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Brain Struct Funct. 2018 Jun;223(5):2515-2518. doi: 10.1007/s00429-018-1625-1. Epub 2018 Feb 22.
Assertions regarding attempts to link glial and macrostructural brain events with cognitive performance regarding Albert Einstein, are critically reviewed. One basic problem arises from attempting to draw causal relationships regarding complex, delicately interactive functional processes involving finely tuned molecular and connectivity phenomena expressed in cognitive performance, based on highly variable brain structural events of a single, aged, formalin fixed brain. Data weaknesses and logical flaws are considered. In other instances, similar neuroanatomical observations received different interpretations and conclusions, as those drawn, e.g., from schizophrenic brains. Observations on white matter events also raise methodological queries. Additionally, neurocognitive considerations on other intellectual aptitudes of A. Einstein were simply ignored.
对试图将神经胶质和宏观结构的大脑事件与阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦的认知表现联系起来的观点进行了批判性回顾。一个基本问题源于试图根据单一、老化、福尔马林固定的大脑的高度可变的大脑结构事件,对涉及精细调节的分子和连接现象的复杂、微妙的相互作用功能过程得出因果关系,而这些过程与认知表现有关。考虑到数据的弱点和逻辑上的缺陷。在其他情况下,类似的神经解剖学观察结果得到了不同的解释和结论,例如,从精神分裂症患者的大脑中得出的结论。对大脑白质事件的观察也提出了方法学上的质疑。此外,对阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦其他智力才能的神经认知考虑也被忽视了。