The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-08-03
THE DRAIN cAN GROW.
Parts of the CerebeIfum May he De-
stroyed and RESTORED


From the New York Herald.
Recent experiment by NJ Vitzou.
French Psychologist. lead 10 a somewhat
sensational conclusion. and may possibly
explain some wonderful and mex plicable
recoveries from brain injury that have
been reported in the past. That cOnclu-
sion, briefly stated, is that part OF the
brain. when entirely destroyed or remOv-
ed may be replaced by the growth Of new
brain cells
II this be true. then the brain-the dom
mating organ OF the animal economy
possesses "A property that Is shared by
none Of the lower organs over which IL
overwhelmingly. that of natural replace
ment after injury. If mans finger 4
cut on by circular saw, no one eNpeaIs
20 see new finger grow out in its place;
II ne loses an eye. We do not look FOR an
other TO replace IL. ct If Mr.. LitZOu Is
right, the destruction Of an important lobe
OF the Drdln-fOr instance, that which pre-
sides over sight-need not be hopeless.
The cells viii gradually form again and
respond to the visual impressions re-
celved through the optic nerve as before.
ms property or regrOWtn Is common
among the lower creatures. If a lobster 8
claw be taken or. new one viii grow in
It's place. With still lower organisms the
removal Of almost any amount OF tissue
IS scarcely a serious affair. and its re-
placement is largely a matter of time.
Now 1t appears that the higher animals
snare this power. at least with respect TO
one organ, aud that the most important
of ALL
This is not altogether new idea. 1t has
Oeen advanced before. and has even been
made the subject of somewhat heated
controversy. but NJ. Vicious experiments
are so apparently decisive that they may
settle the matter, although in science all
questions are open, and no one may con-
slider that he has said a permanent last
word However this may be, these are
the experiments that seem to settle the
matter. They Were tried not on man, II is
unnecessary to say-fOr II is not yet legal
10 scoop out even part of a human brain
while its owner let lives-but on some of
MS nearest relatives among the lower
aIhlnals-namely, monkeys. The Oppo-
nents OF viVisection would doubtless raise
their voices in energetic protest at the
cruelty shown to these creatures That
experimentation of this kind must neces-
sarlly be cruel few will deny, but to the
enthusiastic Psychologist cruelty is quite
Justihable when it leads to the acquisi-
ton of scientific knowledge
IN TINS case that part of the brain which
presides over the sense of sight was re-
moved from each of the monkeys. the
part without which any one of us would
be quite as blind as If his eyes were nut
out 1t was quite evident, after the op-
GRAFTON, that the animals We're in fact
totally blind They were kept and cared
Tor, ana as the months went on they
seemed to be on the way to recovery. FL
nally, IN about a years time, it was evil
cent tnat they saw if not as perfectly
as before, at least partially; that is some
thing was performing the functions of
the removal of the brain tissue. So far
the experiment can hardly be said to be
conclusive, for cases have been known
Where one part of the brain has been able
TO perform the duty of another part It
may have been, then. that the task of re-
spending to visual impressions had been
learned by some other part of the brain.
Inc monkeys were therefore operated
upon again. Part of the skull was re-
moved and the brain was examined The
part that had been taken out was found
to be partly replaced by growth of new
cells, so that II seems practically GER
tain that it was this new brain growth
that had been the cause of the partial
restoration of sight.
What will all this lead to? If it will be
or any benefit to the human race then the
poor monkeys suffered and died in a
good cause. If a monkeys brain cells
can grow again, So undoubtedly, can a
mans; and this fact gives us reason to
nope Tor recovery In cases of serious brain
injury that before seemed hopeless. Again,
If such growth is possible means of fos-
tering and stimulating it are probable
and will doubtless be the objects of fur
Their research. Some method may even
be discovered by which the new growth
may be made more vigorous and healthy
than the old, in which case startling and
sensational results may follow, though
this may seem to be looking a little too
far into the realms of mere possibility.
But why should not a weak part of the
brain be cut out and replaced with a new
and healthy growth of brain cells? Why
should not the idiot be given in this way
new thinking machine and the imbe-
Gle, the paranoatc, the crank, be fitted
out with the new mental apparatus?
In the days to come the statement that
JohpSmith has just been growing new
cerebelum in the hospital may be heard
with no more surprise than is now caused
by the news of an operation for Appendix
citis. The question would then arise Who
is the reconstructed John Smith? Has his
personally altered? Is he the same or
another? But this must be left to the
psychologists and the courts Of law of
the year 1950-or Whereabouts.