The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
And then using some molecular tricks, they were able to either silence or activate the neurons that, for instance, respond to sweet. When they do this, they see incredible consequences on perception that, indeed, occur in your brain, and my brain as well, all the time without these kind of manipulations.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
Conversely, they can have subjects drink bitter water or plain water while activating, selectively activating, the neurons that respond to sweet. And what they find, is that then subjects will actively prefer bitter or plain water to actual preferences, such as sweet.
Let's say I activate this group of neurons and the animal increases licking and I'm activating the sweet neurons. And so that's expected because now it's tasting this water as if it was sugar.