Neuroscience research is often premised on the idea that a better understanding of the brain will lead to the effective treatment of disorders like Alzheimer’s, depression, and schizophrenia. Yet the success rate of this “bench to bedside” approach is weak, neuroscientist Nicole C. Rust explains in this intriguing text. Drawing on decades of experience in her field, Rust unpacks the latest cutting-edge research on brain disorders and argues that to develop effective treatments, people need to explore brain functions as part of a complex system that continuously adapts to changing conditions.
The “bench to bedside” approach to neuroscience needs an overhaul.
Most neuroscience research takes a “bench to bedside” approach to the study of various types of brain dysfunction: People assume that discoveries about how the brain works at the molecular level will ultimately lead to treatments for neurological diseases like Alzheimer’s, epilepsy, schizophrenia, and depression. However, despite significant advances in neuroscience research, scientists do not appear to be learning the kinds of things that will enable them to develop effective and reliable treatment options for major brain disorders.
Take Alzheimer’s disease, for example. Alzheimer’s is partly genetic. Individuals who inherit at least one of a few very rare genes are at a higher risk of developing the disease. Armed with the knowledge that the genetic problem resulted from a mutation of a DNA base pair, researchers developed the theory that Alzheimer’s disease is caused by the accumulation of plaques that lead to neurodegeneration and cognitive decline. Believing they were on the verge of an effective treatment for Alzheimer’s, scientists developed a drug to clear amyloid plaques from the brain. But...
Nicole C. Rust is an American neuroscientist, psychologist, and professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania. She studies visual perception, visual recognition memory, and mood.
Comment on this summary