Scientific American (SA) points out that although there are medical illustrators on staff at the University of Southern California it is highly likely that they were not consulted before putting out the cited press release about a $50 million dollar donation. The brain is shown back to front!
Additional images of the brain are available from Google.
Update: 04/05 18:27 GMT by mrcoolbp : User wantkitteh points out that the inaccurate image has been pulled from the USC links (though it's showing in the SA article at the time of this update)
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
University of Southern California Should Probably Stop Doing Brain Science
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 24 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @06:36AM
The visual cortex is in the occipital lobe in the rear of the brain, and this where actual image processing happens in an actual brain. Thus the illustration is perfectly correct in context.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @06:41AM
Oh right. It's a blog. Bloggers are morons. Carry on.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday April 05 2015, @06:50AM
How is one view superior to the other?
(Score: 0, Funny) by dyingtolive on Sunday April 05 2015, @08:48AM
Well, the view on your mom's posterior is actually the preferable one.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 3, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Sunday April 05 2015, @01:21PM
Your comment gets multiple LOLs, dying. First, you may have meant to post AC. Second, my mom has been dead for a long time now. Are you a necrophiliac? Third - you're stating the obvious. I was going to mention that I prefer to follow a woman with (or without) a brain, but it was so obvious, I let it pass.
(Score: 4, Touché) by dyingtolive on Sunday April 05 2015, @07:19PM
Man, I swear. No sense of humor in these parts.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 5, Interesting) by sjames on Sunday April 05 2015, @07:15AM
Look at the Scientific American link and you will see the problem. It's not that they turned the image around from the traditional view, it's that they show the brain backwards in the outline of a human head, such that the frontal lobe is at the back of the skull. That is unquestionably wrong (though I'll admit, it could be a congressman).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @07:30AM
Wasn't there an episode of The Outer Limits about a congressman who didn't know he was an alien until he hit his head in an accident and a brain scan revealed extra lobes?
(Score: 4, Funny) by hemocyanin on Sunday April 05 2015, @08:13AM
Fiction requires a willing suspension of disbelief and if it can't get that concession, it's lousy fiction. That episode you mention sounds like it would suck. Now, if the brain scan showed large empty cavities, perhaps full of hot gas, that's something I could believe.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @09:55AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birthright_(The_Outer_Limits) [wikipedia.org]
It was told from the point of view of a senator in existential crisis. He wasn't quite the everyman character you might prefer to see, but placing an ordinary everyman so deeply into an alien conspiracy might ruin the suspension of disbelief.
Funny you should mention gas, since the aliens were poisoning the atmosphere.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Monday April 06 2015, @02:21AM
The grant is to study brain injury. Any thing that would cause the brain to spin 180 degrees is obviously a traumatic injury.
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts"- --Daniel Patrick Moynihan--
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday April 05 2015, @10:53AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 4, Informative) by FatPhil on Sunday April 05 2015, @10:55AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday April 05 2015, @11:03AM
That one too.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday April 05 2015, @11:01AM
This [twimg.com]. As shown in the Scientific American link (scroll down).
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday April 05 2015, @11:17AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday April 05 2015, @05:15PM
That explains the confusion. Perhaps SA thinks it's still the 1st?!?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday April 05 2015, @01:24PM
Ahhhhhh - I didn't see that image. Yeah - backward. As suggested above though, it could well be a congress critter.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @11:19PM
LOL
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @08:00AM
Scraping the bottom again, eh.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @11:13AM
It is the weekend...
But yeah, PR dweeb screws up technical clip-art is weak, weak tea.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday April 05 2015, @03:13PM
They rewrote the post and the screw up is hilarious. A new brain institute screws up in a big way when announcing themselves to the world. Every neuroscience department is laughing their asses off. Backwards brain.
(Score: 4, Informative) by wantkitteh on Sunday April 05 2015, @03:39PM
...for whom this story doesn't make a lot of sense, even after viewing the links: the offended image has been pulled, mirror of it somewhere in the comments above.
(Score: 2) by mrcoolbp on Sunday April 05 2015, @06:24PM
Thanks, I'll update the story.
(Score:1^½, Radical)