题目内容
Jonas Frisen had his eureka moment in 1997. Back then, scientists suspected that there was a special type of cell in the brain that had the power to give rise to new brain cells. If they could harness these so-called neural stem cells to regenerate damaged brain tissue, they might someday find a cure for such brain diseases as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. But first they had to figure out where neural stem cells were and what they looked like. Frisen, then a freshly minted Ph. D. at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, was peering through his microscope at some tissue taken from a rat’s injured spinal cord when he saw cells that appeared to have been enervated by the injury, as though they were busy making repairs. Frisen thought these might be the neural stem cells scientists had been looking for. It took him six years of painstaking research to make sure. Frisen is quick to emphasize that his research is basic and that treatments are years off. But the findings so far hint at extraordinary potential. Two years ago he identified neural stem cells in the adult human brain, And he’s now researching the mechanisms by which these cells grow into different types of brain cells. Rather than growing brain tissue in a petri-dish and implanting it in, say, the forebrain of a Parkinson’s patient, doctors might someday stimulate the spontaneous growth of new neural cells merely by administering a drug. "It sounds like science fiction," Frisen says, "but we can already do it in mice." In 2007 he will publish the results of his recent experiments. He’s isolated a protein in the mouse brain that inhibits the generation of nerve cells. Using other chemicals, he’s been able to block the action of this inhibitor, which in turn leads to the production of new brain cells. Frisen honed his analytical mind at the dinner table in Goteborg, in southwest Sweden. His mother was a mathematics professor and his father was an ophthalmologist. Frisen went to medical school intending to be a brain surgeon or perhaps a psychiatrist, but ended up spending all his free time in the lab. In 1998 he got seed money from a Swedish venture capitalist to set up his own company, NeuroNova, to commercialize his work. A private foundation tried to lure him to Texas, but Swedish businessman Marcus Storch persuaded him to stay by funding a 15-year professorship at Karolinska, covering his salary and the running costs of his 15-person lab. "Jonas Frisen stood out from all candidates by far," says Storch, whose Tobias Foundation sponsors stem-cell research. "He is something of a king in Sweden." Two years ago two more venture capitalists helped the company expand by hiring a CEO and setting up a separate lab. Since most researchers are interested in stem cells taken from embryos, the practice has attracted considerable controversy in the past few years. Frisen has benefited indirectly from research restrictions in the United States, which have driven funds and brain-power to Singapore, the United Kingdom and Sweden. The Bush Administration currently forbids U. S. -funded work on all but 78 approved stem-cell cultures, many of which are located outside the country. In just one sign of the times, the U. S.-based Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation recently announced grants totaling $20 million for stem-cell research—the largest award yet given to the field by a medical charity—to research institutes in Sweden and elsewhere, but not in the United States. Since Frisen doesn’t work with embryonic stem cells, he’s unwittingly become a champion of the radical right, which argues that scientists ought to concentrate solely on adult stem cells. He happens to disagree. "It would be overoptimistic or outright stupid," he says. "To really understand adult cells, we need to master how embryonic stem cells work." But what really gets Frisen going is when people ask him when they can expect a drug for Parkinson’s and other diseases. "I say, five decades, just to get the number thing out of the way," he quips. "I’m not going to oversell this." When pressed, he admits that clinical trials might begin in five years. That would be a eureka moment worth waiting for. On which of the following aspects does Frisen disagree with some radicals
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
科学家发现大洋底部的裂陷扩展从来没有停止过。这个发现可能会解答一个曾引起人们关注的问题。地球每天的时间都比前一天延长了1/700秒，即每过一年，一天要延长0.5秒，据此推测，再过2亿年，一年将只有250天了。对“一个曾经引起人们关注的问题”的解答，最准确的是( )。
下列有语病的一项是( )
Long-married couples often schedule a weekly "date night"—a regular evening out with friends or at a favorite restaurant to strengthen their marital bond. But brain and behavior researchers say many couples are going about date night all wrong. Simply spending quality time together is probably not enough to prevent a relationship from getting stale. Using laboratory studies, real-world experiments and even brain-scan data, scientists can now offer long-married couples a simple prescription for rekindling the romantic love that brought them together in the first place. The solution Reinventing date night. Rather than visiting the same familiar haunts and dining with the same old friends, couples need to tailor their date nights around new and different activities that they both enjoy, says Arthur Aron, a professor of social psychology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. The goal is to find ways to keep injecting novelty into the relationship. The activity can be as simple as trying a new restaurant or something a little more unusual or thrilling—like taking an art class or going to an amusement park. The theory is based on brain science. New experiences activate the brain’s reward system, flooding it with dopamine and norepinephrine. These are the same brain circuits that are ignited in early romantic love, a time of exhilaration and obsessive thoughts about a new partner. (They are also the brain chemicals involved in drug addiction and obsessive-compulsive disorder.) Most studies of love and marriage show that the decline of romantic love over time is inevitable. The butterflies of early romance quickly flutter away and are replaced by familiar, predictable feelings of long-term attachment. But several experiments show that novelty—simply doing new things together as a couple—may help bring the butterflies back, recreating the chemical surges of early courtship. Over the past several years, Dr. Aron and his colleagues have tested the novelty theory in a series of experiments with long-married couples. In one of the earliest studies, the researchers recruited 53 middle-aged couples. Using standard questionnaires, the researchers measured the couples’ relationship quality and then randomly assigned them to one of three groups. One group was instructed to spend 90 minutes a week doing pleasant and familiar activities, like dining out or going to a movie. Couples in another group were instructed to spend 90 minutes a week on "exciting" activities that appealed to both husband and wife. Those couples did things they didn’t typically do—attending concerts or plays, skiing, hiking and dancing. The third group was not assigned any particular activity. After 10 weeks, the couples again took tests to gauge the quality of their relationships. Those who had undertaken the "exciting" date nights showed a significantly greater increase in marital satisfaction than the "pleasant" date night group. While the results were compelling, they weren’t conclusive. The experiment didn’t occur in a controlled setting, and numerous variables could have affected the final results. More recently, Dr. Aron and colleagues have created laboratory experiments to test the effects of novelty on marriage. In one set of experiments, some couples are assigned a mundane task that involves simply walking back and forth across a room. Other couples, however, take part in a more challenging exercise—their wrists and ankles are bound together as they crawl back and forth pushing a ball. Before and after the exercise, the couples were asked things like, "How bored are you with your current relationship" The couples who took part in the more challenging and novel activity showed bigger increases in love and satisfaction scores, while couples performing the mundane task showed no meaningful changes. Dr. Aron cautions that novelty alone is probably not enough to save a marriage in crisis. But for couples who have a reasonably good but slightly dull relationship, novelty may help reignite old sparks. And recent brain-scan studies show that romantic love really can last years into a marriage. Last week, at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology conference in Albuquerque, researchers presented brain-scan data on several men and women who had been married for 10 or more years. Interviews and questionnaires suggested they were still intensely in love with their partners. Brain scans confirmed it, showing increased brain activity associated with romantic love when the subjects saw pictures of their spouses. It’s not clear why some couples are able to maintain romantic intensity even after years together. But the scientists believe regular injections of novelty and excitement most likely play a role. Which of the following is NOT true about the novelty theory
Jonas Frisen had his eureka moment in 1997. Back then, scientists suspected that there was a special type of cell in the brain that had the power to give rise to new brain cells. If they could harness these so-called neural stem cells to regenerate damaged brain tissue, they might someday find a cure for such brain diseases as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. But first they had to figure out where neural stem cells were and what they looked like. Frisen, then a freshly minted Ph. D. at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, was peering through his microscope at some tissue taken from a rat’s injured spinal cord when he saw cells that appeared to have been enervated by the injury, as though they were busy making repairs. Frisen thought these might be the neural stem cells scientists had been looking for. It took him six years of painstaking research to make sure. Frisen is quick to emphasize that his research is basic and that treatments are years off. But the findings so far hint at extraordinary potential. Two years ago he identified neural stem cells in the adult human brain, And he’s now researching the mechanisms by which these cells grow into different types of brain cells. Rather than growing brain tissue in a petri-dish and implanting it in, say, the forebrain of a Parkinson’s patient, doctors might someday stimulate the spontaneous growth of new neural cells merely by administering a drug. "It sounds like science fiction," Frisen says, "but we can already do it in mice." In 2007 he will publish the results of his recent experiments. He’s isolated a protein in the mouse brain that inhibits the generation of nerve cells. Using other chemicals, he’s been able to block the action of this inhibitor, which in turn leads to the production of new brain cells. Frisen honed his analytical mind at the dinner table in Goteborg, in southwest Sweden. His mother was a mathematics professor and his father was an ophthalmologist. Frisen went to medical school intending to be a brain surgeon or perhaps a psychiatrist, but ended up spending all his free time in the lab. In 1998 he got seed money from a Swedish venture capitalist to set up his own company, NeuroNova, to commercialize his work. A private foundation tried to lure him to Texas, but Swedish businessman Marcus Storch persuaded him to stay by funding a 15-year professorship at Karolinska, covering his salary and the running costs of his 15-person lab. "Jonas Frisen stood out from all candidates by far," says Storch, whose Tobias Foundation sponsors stem-cell research. "He is something of a king in Sweden." Two years ago two more venture capitalists helped the company expand by hiring a CEO and setting up a separate lab. Since most researchers are interested in stem cells taken from embryos, the practice has attracted considerable controversy in the past few years. Frisen has benefited indirectly from research restrictions in the United States, which have driven funds and brain-power to Singapore, the United Kingdom and Sweden. The Bush Administration currently forbids U. S. -funded work on all but 78 approved stem-cell cultures, many of which are located outside the country. In just one sign of the times, the U. S.-based Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation recently announced grants totaling $20 million for stem-cell research—the largest award yet given to the field by a medical charity—to research institutes in Sweden and elsewhere, but not in the United States. Since Frisen doesn’t work with embryonic stem cells, he’s unwittingly become a champion of the radical right, which argues that scientists ought to concentrate solely on adult stem cells. He happens to disagree. "It would be overoptimistic or outright stupid," he says. "To really understand adult cells, we need to master how embryonic stem cells work." But what really gets Frisen going is when people ask him when they can expect a drug for Parkinson’s and other diseases. "I say, five decades, just to get the number thing out of the way," he quips. "I’m not going to oversell this." When pressed, he admits that clinical trials might begin in five years. That would be a eureka moment worth waiting for. The main idea of the passage is
微信支付 
支付宝支付