The supremacy of the brain

A post principally about our friends the neurons and the fact that they communicate both inside and outside our brain. But how….and why?

We are told that our brain is uniquely responsible for so many extraordinary things. Not only does it remember, it processes, rationalises and comprises our ‘thinking’ consciousness. Unlike the loss of a leg or arm, without our brain we are lost. But is there more going on in relation to cognition than we currently realise? Whilst our brain is critically important as a processor of sensory information, from whence does it really get its commands? ‘How does the human brain, a bio-physical object, create thoughts and emotions, consciousness, subjectivity, experience? How can the material create the immaterial?’ – Arthur S Reber

New research from NERF published in the journal Science suggests that ‘the spinal cord modulates and finetunes our actions and movements by integrating different sources of sensory information, and it can do so without input from the brain. Indeed neuronal activity in the spinal cord resembles various classical types of learning and memory.’

In my posts of May 2022 Gut Reaction and December 2023 Bossed by Bacteria I examined how our gut microbiota, one of life’s great survivors, communicates two ways with the human brain (gut-brain axis) via the vagus nerve. And we comprise a lot of bacteria. The authors of Vagus Nerve and Underlying Impact on the Gut Microbiota-Brain Axis in Behavior and Neurodegenerative Diseases observe that we are home to 4 trillion microbes with more than 1000 species. 99% of our genetic composition is located in our intestinal microbiota.

They went on to describe the vagus nerve as having ‘ an important role in the signal transmission between microorganisms and the brain’, and stated ‘the projection of the vagus nerve to other parts of the brain …produces various behavioural and psychological effects’.

In correspondence this week with the intellectually generous mycologist at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio Professor Nicholas Money, I asked the question, ‘given mycelial expressions of consciousness, including sensitivity, decision making, learning, and memory; and the discovery of positive interactions between mycorrhizal fungi and bacteria -might we be underestimating the role and function of our resident bacteria? 

• Might gut bacteria,  in communicating with the human brain, be in part responsible for an aspect of human consciousness?
• Might we be mistaken in viewing ourselves as the host, and bacteria as the guest? Have we (and other life-forms) evolved as agents for and by bacteria and/or mycelium?
• Are we simply part of their evolutionary cycle?

Nik Money replied, ‘The concept of microbial consciousness is very provocative as long as one does not take it too far into the land of make believe and, for example, tremendously wishful thinking about cooperative behaviour in nature (not that you are doing this). I hope that my article, at least the one that I published in “Fungal Biology” emphasized the importance of language and the idea that consciousness can be viewed as something that exists throughout life, from the simplest cells to something as magnificent* as Homo sapiens. (*Not so much: see “The Selfish Ape.”) This cautiousness about consciousness existing along a continuum of sensitivity applies to the question of mind control by the trillions of bacteria (& billions of fungi) in our guts. It seems plausible that they alert us to the fact that they are hungry, to which we respond by feeling hungry and eating breakfast. We are then, in a sense, farmed animals.

Out there (and you may be one of them) are those existentialists who do not subscribe to a binary world but see all life, and indeed energy, as a single continuum and presence – of which the human consciousness is just an integral part. Whilst they recognise their ‘being’, they regard themselves as an element of a universally connected whole. Moreover, they often present as very happy people. Are they deluded? And might, at the root of all life, it be a fungus or bacteria that binds us all together and makes us what we are?

Advertisements appearing within or below this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

Where is the NHS’s digital future?

Thanks to Smith Business Insight for the photo

A post about the need for the NHS to switch from paper-based technology to machine-readable formats.

Does this post sound like gibberish? Don’t stop reading – it is actually quite simple, it’s just that this week I have faced a number of digital difficulties that I wanted to share with you.

The first concerns my ‘NHS identity badge’, a simple item required as a NHS Foundation Trust governor. Last year I received an email with an attached form to complete. Adding the information required I returned it to the sender. My email was never picked up and so predictably the ‘Microsoft Word doc form’ was not copied into the Trust’s data systems. This year I received a fresh authorisation by email, again as an attachment. Returning it duly completed resulted in a further email bearing a Word doc attachment that I was instructed to hand to the Trust’s photographer. But there was a problem. The attachment was illegible due to script overlay and the photographer struggled to read it. Fortunately I had kept a digital copy that we were able to enlarge to discern an authorisation number. He took the photo. I was given a card with my photo on it. Done, sort of!

Well, what is the point of all this? The first thing to note is that these barely-digital systems meant that a Trust employee is being paid to push paper in the form of emails and attachments at the end of which all I got was a photo with my name on it. The process involved six emails, if you include those from Human Resources. It used out-dated technology that was not machine-readable and could not be digitally checked, actioned and stored.

The second issue related to the ‘declaration of interests’ by Trust governors, an important statement by those holding a public office. In this case the Word attachment sent by email was ‘not available for edit’. I returned it as a Google doc which, it seems, could not be accessed by the Trust due to a firewall. Using copy and paste a solution was eventually reached, one that returned a document, the content of which needed to be manually transferred into a data system using translating software.

The experience told me that in each case lip-service was applied to NHS digital processes. Should I have worn a sword for my photograph, or used a pigeon to return my declaratory forms?

It is hardly surprising that the NHS is so finance-hungry. Whilst banking, commerce, and even the law, use digital systems effectively, here in our health service we remain decades behind other institutions. Is it mismanagement by managers or the resistance of staff? What happened to the energetic, visionary cyber-savvy recruit? Was she crushed in the first avalanche of paper?

Perhaps we need to wake up to the fact that if we want improvements to health care, we need to make financial savings on the simple administrative tasks that take up time, delay processes, and tie up staff in offices operating legacy systems?

Advertisements appearing within or at the foot of this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

Cyber security whilst travelling

Thanks to India Outbound for the image

With spring travel just around the corner, a post about sensible steps that we can take before and whilst travelling both abroad and at home.

Special thanks to Professor Alexandros Paraskevas, University of West London, for his research paper Cybersecurity in Travel and Tourism: A Risk-based Approach

The other day, my brother received a strange email relating to a friend who was travelling. It appeared totally authentic, but it sought a cyber permission. Fortunately, my brother was on it. He avoided the phishing attachment, deleted the request and contacted the friend. It transpired that, moments before the message, his friend had used airport Wi-Fi to send an unrelated email.

With increased cyber security awareness, many organisations are ramping up their cyber protection to levels that make it hard for criminals to exploit. But doing so means that criminals are turning to softer targets – us. Whilst we should be aware of state sponsored actors, hacktavists, black hats operating through the dark web and organised crime groups, increasingly threats are coming from individual back-room hackers, focused on what is termed, ‘cognitive hacking‘: our personal vulnerability that arises from our conditioned response to take the information we receive by email on face value.

Which leads us to the question of our ‘cyber hygiene’. This encompasses our physical device security, personal identity and access management, third-party and external dependencies (especially when making payments), and information protection and encryption.

Let us start with malware attacks. These frequently involve a bogus software update or an email attachment that may contain malware in a self-extracting file capable of gathering your system information, taking screenshots and can download network mapping malware called reconnaissance tools, enabling remote desktop access, stealing passwords, searching email and even installing new remote desktop programmes.

Whilst your standard virus protection, if properly installed and active, may protect you from known malware, the presence of new attacks, or attacks involving out-of-date software may not be flagged.

During an intensive cyber security review to obtain Cyber Essentials Plus certification, I discovered that cyber vulnerability may often arise from old software remaining on our computers and the terminals we may encounter whilst travelling. Tests on my systems revealed thirteen critical vulnerabilities, mostly as a result of un-updated software.

In addition to our personal computers, ‘legacy systems‘ that have not been updated with the latest security patches, or are completely outdated, are still used in many hotels, restaurants, pool and beach bars. They present an easy target for attackers to infect with malware. For example, when our credit card is swiped, its details are briefly stored in the point of sale terminal’s RAM while being transmitted to the payment processor. Malware installed in the terminal can copy the card data and transmit it to hackers.

According to Prof Paraskevas, studies have also shown that major airline and hotel websites leak guest booking data (including booking reference code, full name, address, mobile phone number, passport number, and the last four digits of credit card numbers) to their advertisers, social media websites, data aggregators, and other partners. This can include the hotel booking process or through the reservation page. Hackers can subsequently log into a reservation, view personal details, and even alter or cancel the booking.

After hotel reception areas, airport terminals constitute locations where we are most distracted. Hackers use a technique known as the ‘evil twin’ attack, positioning themselves near an authentic Wi-Fi access point to discover its SSID and frequency. They then send a radio signal using the same frequency and SSID which bears the same name as the legitimate hotspot allowing the hackers to take control of the device, collect their personal data and can monitor activity on the device.

Wise moves for travellers – top twenty tips:

1. Remove old or unwanted software to shut ‘back-door‘ access.
2. Update your software, particularly web browsers and virus protection.
3. Activate auto-update so software receives essential patches.
4. Connect your devices, and activate your ‘find my device’ feature.
5. Disable autoplay.
6. Create a separate administrator account to take charge of all system changes to your computer. This will alert you to requests to make changes that are sought (or induced).
7. Back up your data before you depart.
8. Keep your device locked when not in use, never leave it unattended.
9. Avoid being overlooked when accessing a device.
10. Disable remote connectivity by switching off auto connect.
11. Keep Bluetooth turned off when not in use.
12. Avoid sensitive activities on public networks, including online shopping.
13. Only use sites that commence “https://” when shopping or banking.
14. Always prefer mobile connection to public connections.
15. Avoid unsecured networks.
16. Hover and read a link before clicking.
17. Beware mobile travel apps that share your personal data to your social media.
18. Don’t use publicly accessible computers for anything other than browsing, and avoid connecting via USB to other people’s chargers or data storage.
19. Maintain well-planned physical security for devices, especially when left in hotel rooms.
20. Think before connecting.

Advertisements appearing within or below this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

Bossed by bacteria

With thanks to Axel Kock for the image

A post arising from recent research suggesting that our bacteria may manage our brains.

Do I recall this correctly? At one stage it was contended that there was a gut-brain barrier – by which the brain was isolated from the gut, and protected from its dynamic participant, the gut microbiome.

Well now you can forget that ‘scientific truth’. A new study (22.12.2023) that you can read about here suggests that the gut biome not only connects with the brain, but can influence it – both indirectly by stimulating the enteric nervous and immune systems, and directly through molecules that enter circulation and cross the blood-brain barrier. ‘Emerging evidence suggests that the timing and duration of (brain) development occurs in discrete windows called sensitive periods (SPs) which may be driven in part by cues from the developing gut microbiome.’

The study goes on to conclude, ‘Through a combination of classical statistical analysis and machine learning (ML), we find that the development of the gut microbiome, children’s cognitive abilities, and brain structure are intimately linked, with both microbial taxa and gene functions able to predict cognitive performance and brain structure.’

This recent study inevitably moves the argument against us and our fixed genetic markers as managers of our development, in favour of our controlling resident micro-organisms. Irrespective of human intention, it is our gut bacteria that forms us into what our bacteria want us to be, and make us what we are. They appear to help manage our development, including that of our brain, which is probably (if we subscribe to evolutionary theory) for their own purposes rather than ours.

Back in May 2022 I raised the importance of the gut biome in relation to our identity. I asked whether homo sapiens was the zenith of evolution, or might we simply be one of the vehicles elaborated by our clever gut microbiome to perpetuate their species? In other words, are we actually in charge, or is it out gut flora, passed from generation to generation that calls the shots?

Microbiota has been one of life’s great survivors. Flexible, adaptable, opportunistic, and seemingly ‘intelligent’, it has probably paved its own pathway through the life-forms that surround it. As intelligent life, we carry it further, and indeed everywhere we go. Perhaps we have evolved for its purpose?

Next time you consider your freedoms, opportunities, rights and entitlements, may be it would be wise to think about what is really driving your choices?

Advertisements appearing within or at the foot of this post are place by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

Death of the Apostrophe

Thanks to https://www.wordsandpics.org/ for the pic

A post about the declining use of the apostrophe, and what, if anything, we should do about it ?

The apostrophe’s death is probably an exaggerated title for this post. After all, many of us love our apostrophes and protect them assiduously. We wince when seeing – “Jakes apple’s, tomatoes’ and banana’s” – wittily called “greengrocers apostrophe’s” . We rush to correct misuse by others. In protest we may even join the Apostrophe Protection Society or support the Plain English Campaign.

Dorset-born writer Peter Viney says that the apostrophe first appeared in an English manuscript in 1559, its original use being to show a missing sound – the omissive apostrophe, such as sha‘n’t (A. A. Milne’s Winnie the Pooh). It was not until the 17th century that it denoted the possessive – e.g. John’s quill. And it’s in its possessive form that confusion reigns, especially when in conflict with its original use. Thus its and it’s. As Viney observes, an apostrophe in a possessive pronoun may be logical, albeit wrong.

To research this post I naturally consulted C.E.M. Joad’s How to Write, Think and Speak Correctly (Oldhams Press 1939). Maybe I missed ‘apostrophes’ in his otherwise comprehensive compendium, but Cyril Joad wasn’t much help in Ch 5: Punctuation, or even Ch 4: Puzzle Corner – where he explains ‘a number of possible sources of error and confusion’, including of course, the most signific – the split infinitive.

However, apostrophes, especially when used in conjunction with inverted commas, can get congested when we attempt to become ambitious with them – “My boss’s friends’ suggestion was that next week’s outing should be from the ship’s fo’c’s’le, one mile’s jog to the 6′ sign at Sainsbury’s in St James’ Park where we will meet with the Jones’s”.

It is not just greengrocers’ and hairdressers’ signs that demonstrate confusion over the apostrophe. Even fanatical adherents to the noble art of punctuation suffer shivers when applying it, checking and re-checking that it has found its correct place, if it should be there at all. Waterstone’s dropped Tim’s apostrophe in 2012. Maybe that was the event that triggered millennials and shopkeepers to shun the apostrophe?

I suppose the real question is – does the apostrophe matter? Are we actually confused by possessive and omissive apostrophes? ‘Twill be interesting to hear your view’s!

Advertisements appearing within or at the foot of this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

Rookies’ guide to getting to grips with governance

A post offering tips on becoming an effective NHS Foundation Trust governor

When, last year, I was elected as a public governor of my local NHS Foundation Trust, frankly I knew little about governance for a large organisation, and virtually nothing about the workings of the NHS. My Trust, covering 8 hospitals with 36 governors, is one of the country’s largest integrated care providers, extending throughout the whole county, employing 7,000 staff and providing for a population of more than 650,000. Mine was a scorching initiation.

To its credit, my NHS Trust provided a comprehensive overview of its workings and the role of the governor in a full day of training, covering guidance from NHS England (formerly Monitor) – the ‘overseer’ of NHS Trusts, telling how exactly governors fit into the hierarchy of the Trust, what they can and cannot do, and how they are expected to fulfil their role.

Of course, such training provides little more than the nuts and bolts of the mechanics of governance. But good governance owes more to judgment calls than it does to rules and regulations. It is clearly an art, for which some are equipped – and others struggle.

This post is aimed at those with whom I have resonance, who may be interested in serving as a governor but who may struggle to overcome the mammoth task of getting to grips with the art of governance.

What exactly do governors do?

Put simply, NHS Foundation Trusts have three layers of governance. First, the Executive Directors, headed by a CEO, are employed by the Trust to administer the organisation. They ensure that the right staff are recruited, that statutory services are delivered in a timely way and the NHS Trust stays within its budget. Next we have the non-executive directors of which my Trust currently has five. Their job is to oversee the salaried executive. These too are paid positions and require specific skill-sets to ensure that each of the core duties of the Trust is managed appropriately by the executive and that planned outcomes are achieved. Together with the Chair, the Executive and Non-Executive Directors make up the Board.

The Council of Governors, elected by members of the Trust – the public and the staff, together with those nominated by a handful of stakeholders, is the last line of governance, effectively holding to account the non-executive directors for the performance of the Board. The Chair has the challenge of ensuring that the Board
works effectively, as a team, and in conjunction with the Council of Governors.

It follows that governors are not elected to direct the Trust, but to check on it from a public and staff point of view. Is it being managed appropriately, efficiently and sensitively? Is it remaining within budget and solvent? How is it faring against its targets? Is it delivering health care that patients and the public would expect of it?

How do we, the governors, do it?

The key mechanisms for governance are the regular meetings of the Council of Governors at which the directors explain and justify their actions and decisions. Meetings are attended by the executive directors, non-executive directors and of course, the governors. They provide an opportunity for governors to gain insight into the Trust’s day-to-day workings and performance, to question the Trust’s progress and performance, and to provide appropriate input from a public perspective.

Additionally in my NHS Trust, governors are expected to join one or more sub-committees that have delegated authority to oversee, input and to make recommendations to the Council. In the Durham and Darlington NHS Foundation Trust these comprise ‘Audit and Governance’ (the committee on which I serve), ‘Nomination and Remuneration’, ‘Quality and Healthcare’ and ‘Strategy and Planning’. Their titles indicate the extent of governance expected from public and staff governors.

Overall, public governors should expect to attend approximately twelve meetings throughout the year, in person or by video platform, and to undertake additional evening training sessions that cover a variety of responsibilities.

My take on governance

Whilst not unique by any means, I accept that my working lifetime as a barrister provides me with a raft of questioning skills – a core asset for a governor. More often, changes in outcome result not from challenging an opinion or from stating a view – but from asking the right question of the right person. When answering questions we undertake a journey of self-examination that can bring about a change of outcome. The right question may be a pathway to discovery.

Over the last year as NHS Trust governor, by asking the right questions, I have been instrumental in bringing about the following changes:

1. Introduction of an executive report cover sheet, setting out the purpose of each report we are asked to read, the key issues covered in it, and identified risks that could arise from it.
2. Introducing ‘agenda-setting’ to take account of governors’ questions and issues.
3. Changing the format of meetings from ‘lecture-based’ – to ‘inquiry method’.
4. Providing recognised channels for communication between governors and non-executive directors.
5. Challenging pre-existing assurance level terminology to make it more understandable.
6. Enabling document viewing on iOS using VPR Academic CAD tool.
7. Introducing peer support systems to ease the path for new governors.

Why stand for election as a NHS Foundation Trust governor?

These days, everyone appears to have a view concerning the NHS. And most of us, in our lifetimes, will be recipients of care from it. Health care, whether personal or as a national issue, cannot simply be left to providers.

Whilst NHS Boards will wish to focus on patient safety and quality, their priorities – when juggling with patient throughput, budget decisions, cost savings, institutional perception of service requirements – may not always be in line with ours. It is only by getting involved that we can make any difference.

Imagine – you, a friend, or relative – are admitted for treatment in terminal life-care. What would be your expectations of your hospital and the treatment you receive? Would you expect your medical notes to be read and understood before undergoing treatment? Would you wish to have family visits with a semblance of privacy and dignity? What communication would you expect from your clinicians?

Should your answer to any one of these questions be that you care, then I sense you may already have answered my question as to whether you should become a NHS Trust governor.

Advertisements appearing within or at the foot of this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

How we need Hermits

Artist Jusepe de Ribera 1591-1652, Spain, Museo de Prado

A post about the need for objectivity, reliability, accuracy and truth in an age of artificial intelligence.

Paul of Thebes (227-231 AD) – yes, 113 years – was according to history, the first hermit. In his youth he fled to the desert where he lived in a cave to avoid persecution. He was famously visited by Anthony the Great, a Christian Egyptian monk who allegedly had an absolute connection to the divine truth. Paul’s memory is kept alive by the ‘Monastery of St Paul the Anchorite’ in the Eastern Desert near the Red Sea Mountains south of Cairo.

That is what we most need now. A hermit.

A couple of months ago I had cause to challenge the assertions of the Chat GPT bot. A group of us were aware of its mistake and informed it of the error. To its credit, the bot replied with an apology, recognising its deficiency and agreeing to rectify it.

At least the Chat GPT bot showed grace and humility in its blunder, more than we receive from news reporters or social media when, intentionally or inadvertently, they mislead us.

Thinking about it, what we lack in these times of instant fact and opinion, is indeed a source of wisdom – one that is not influenced, persuaded or responsive to social mores or pressures; preferably one that has an absolute connection with the divine truth, rather than artificially constructed intelligence.

It maybe too late to consult a hermit, even if we might find one. But between us and our consciences perhaps we should be searching and striving for truth and accuracy wherever possible. That, no doubt, would have been Paul’s message to us had we visited him in his cave.

Advertisements appearing within or at the foot of this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

Should BBC’s presenters opine?

Thanks to the Guardian for the photo

A post about today’s change of rules for BBC presenters.

The BBC has announced a new set of rules for top presenters which will allow those hosting ‘flagship programmes’ to express their views on issues and policies.

Garry Lineker’s response has been understated, saying that new rules published today ‘were all very sensible’ ; but secretly he must be thrilled.

The new policy, announced by BBC’s director general Tim Davie, sets out one set of rules for news and current affairs reporters – and another for the entertainment and sports shows that are frequently hosted by freelancers. He stressed that the new guidance applies to people presenting major programmes, many of whom are freelancers, saying:

“These people don’t work for the BBC, and that’s really important. They are doing other things. I think we are trying to get the right balance…For someone who is doing a programme for only a few weeks a year it’s appropriate we are not restricting them for the whole year…’

Whilst seemingly a reasonable compromise, in an age when everyone in public life seems to have a view on everything and the ardent desire to make their views known immediately, does this recent change of policy by the BBC blur the lines between the independent and impartial broadcasting of fact – and promotion of the presenters’ opinion? Isn’t a temporary surrender of personal opinion by high-profile presenters not essential to preserve the BBC’s impartiality? Who, other than the presenter, is left to hold the ring?

The new ruling seeks to prevent those broadcasting on the BBC from political campaigning, but this in turn leads to confusion, especially when one recalls that the triggering event for change was Lineker’s tweet about government asylum policy being reminiscent of 1930s Germany.

Tim Davie did not want to be drawn on whether Lineker’s Tweet would contravene the new rules.

Perhaps it is the success of rival, less-restricted talk-stations such as Times Radio with their constant preoccupation on ‘opinion’ that has, behind the scenes, influenced the BBC’s decision. Save for the fact that high-profile ‘celebrity’ presenters seem to have held the BBC over a barrel, it is difficult to understand how this new policy can be explained, and almost impossible to imagine how it may be implemented.

The question now is – will public broadcasting ever maintain the ascendancy of ‘facts’ over the opinion of those seeking to present them?

*

*

Advertisements appearing within or at the foot of this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

Exploring the link between Bacterial Memory, Human Brain, and Consciousness.

A post about consciousness, memory, the human brain – and what we don’t yet know.

Let’s start with what we know.

Collectives of bacteria, or biofilms, stimulated with light ‘remembered’ the exposure hours after the initial stimulus.

This was the finding of researchers Chih-Yu Yang, Maja Bialecka-Fornal, Colleen Weatherwax, Joseph W. Larkin, Arthur Prindle, Jintao Liu, Jordi Garcia-Ojalvo and Gurol M Suel – as reported in 2020 in the journal Cell Systems. The researchers concluded that the capacity of bacterial biofilms to remember, appears to mirror that of the more complex ‘memory neurons’ in the brain.

Cohabiting alongside our 30 trillion human cells, we have colonies in the gut, larger than the human brain, comprising 39 trillion bacteria and weighing over 2kg. All of which, it seems, possesses the capacity to remember. So memory might not be solely a property of the brain?

If bacteria are remembering, what do they remember, what is the nature of their memory- and do they have capacity for consciousness?

As humans we can most certainly be conscious whilst losing the capacity to retain memory, for example in those individuals that have suffered traumatic brain injury (TBI) involving the hippocampus. But to form memories it appears that we do need consciousness. After subconscious sleep we have limited access to stored memory; and more significantly, following the total loss of consciousness in anaesthesia or due to cerebral hypoxia, our memory is retrievably blank.

However, there are reports from people on operating tables who appear to be able to articulate with clarity events that happened in the operating theatre notwithstanding flat-lining brain functioning, averted gaze or closed eyes. More troubling from a scientific point of view are those few who report matching near-death experiences; and others, particularly children, neither suffering unconsciousness of any kind, nor any insult to the brain, who can speak of previous life experiences. The phenomenon of individuals recalling events during periods of impaired brain activity such as under anaesthesia, during near-death experiences, or vividly describing past-life experiences raises intriguing questions about the interplay between consciousness and memory and whether memory retrieval can occur independently of brain functioning.

Now I hope that you, my reader, are not too disconcerted by this drift. Do remember that before there was scientific fact, there was simply hypothesis and inquiry. The maddest of ideas (flat earth) for good reason preceded enlightenment, raising the possibility of paradigm-shifting revelations in the realm of consciousness and memory.

Might it be that our ancestral gut biome with which homo sapiens quit Africa, bolstered or adapted by life experience, retains a consciousness and memory capacity that can, under certain conditions and circumstances, communicate and share memories with the brain’s neurons?

Advertisements appearing within and at the foot of this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither monetarised nor endorsed.

*

*

*

*

Migration issues

Thanking Wolf Humanities Centre for the picture

A post about migration to and from Britain. How to manage it without barges?

‘From the arrival of the earliest modern humans over 40,000 years ago to the population of the present day, the story of the people of Britain is one of ongoing movement, migration and settlement‘. As the last ice age advanced across the nation 33,000 years ago, and for the following 10,000 years, the UK population plummeted almost to extinction. Our forebearers, it seems, walked here across damp fens or arrived in small boats.

That, of course, was then – and not now. From1960 world population increased by 5 billion. The population of Britain was 52.8 million in 1960. Britain’s current population is about 67 million. Due to economic and political factors, the UK haemorrhages the economically independent, to acquire the economically aspirational.

It figures that Britain is the most attractive option for immigration. Free health care, state education, legal aid and financial/housing support bolster the benefits of English language and economic advantage. It was also predictable that home-grown company executives and doctors currently might consider their interests better met elsewhere.

But this post is not concerned with the disadvantages or merits of migration. It is to address a temporary concern that large numbers of young male economic migrants are leaving their nations, cultures, homes, parents, siblings, wives and children to take up residence in Britain, and in so doing, embarking on illegal and hazardous boat crossings.

In a previous post I suggested that a twenty first century starting point to deal with immigration to the UK would be to enable applications for asylum to be made digitally, safely and securely from outside the jurisdiction rather than, as currently required, from a designated place within it? That way border authorities might be in a better position to make a distinction between genuine asylum and economic migration, concepts that are currently obfuscated by a lack of legal robustness. Legisatively it would require amendment to s.14 Nationaity and Borders Act 2022 and rule 327AB Immigration Rules Part 11: Asylum.

That our asylum law demands presence within the country is understandable in historic terms, but unnecessary given our digital sophistication. Whether for the UK alone, or Europe-wide, the time seems ripe for a system under which applications for asylum – and indeed economic migration – could be screened online, and if successful, offering provisional safe entry via a UK port.

Of course there would be inevitable logistic issues. Web-based applications may be monitored by oppressive regimes, some applicants may not have direct access to the web, and remote screening could produce unappealable errors. However, if rolled out so as to ensure European Convention compatibility, might not such a system provide a precedent for Europe as a whole to stabilise population movement?

Advertisements appearing within or at the foot of this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither monetarised nor endorsed.