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.
they're not directly talking to the motor circuits to tell you to move your legs or arms to pick up the sandwich or whatever they're rather creating this General problem that the animal has to solve which is that I'm hungry I need to get food it would be really if I could have a sandwich and then the animal uses all of its mental capacities right to solve that problem so they're just there to set the goal not so much to direct the solution
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.
within the hypothalamus there's a population of neurons called agrp neurons so it's just an acronym agrp and stands for a gy related p but it doesn't really matter um they're absolutely critical for that repetitive phase for the searching for food for the desire to find food and consume it when you're hungry
If you eliminate or kill these neurons, which has been done in experimental mouse models in the laboratory, but also there are humans that have lesions or neurotoxic effects on these AGRP neurons. And what you find is that they don't want to eat. They have no appetite for food whatsoever.