The Neuron Doctrine Is In Disagreement With Nerve Net Theory

In by

Young (1936, 1939) described the giant axons of squid as fused neural processes. He described first-rate giant axes “connected by a complete protoplasmatic bridge in the middle” and looked at how fusion unfolds during embryogenesis. He also described the third-rate grosaxon formed by the fusion of many small axons and stated that “each order of the third order of Axon is therefore a syncytium.” It launches impulses as a whole; there is no evidence that individual parties react with different thresholds. During the discussion on these mergers, Young writes: “There is no need to delay the question of whether we should save the letter of neuron theory by saying that, by definition, these cells are not neurons (see Maximow – Bloom 1930) “28 (referring to the histology manual) “It is important to recognize that the appearance of such fusions does not generally invalidate the theory of neurons” (its italic). 10An important feature of recent individual injections with small marker molecules that can be visualized to show all the processes of the individual cell is that the Golgi method should not be considered often to be the coloration of nerve cells as a whole, as seemed to be the case when no competing method was available. Individual cells, which are set up by injection, often have richer dendritic leaves than for the same class of cells in Golgi preparations. The teaching of neurons has not been significantly enhanced by electronic microscopic evidence, as it should not have been at this stage. Moreover, no one bothered to refute the various assertions of the reticulists. To my knowledge, no electronic microscopic evidence has ever been demonstrated against axonal mergers such as Golgi or Auerbach; It is difficult to know what would have been sought in an electron microscope just before a full examination of serial sections. It is equally difficult to know what kind of electronic microscopic evidence would be used to convince someone that Nissl`s intercelluric “grey” does not exist. When George Gray and I studied the bloody nervous system (Gray and Guillery in 1963), it never occurred to us to check whether it was correct when it came to reporting neurofibrils running from one neuron to another; We wanted to know why blood neurofibrils looked so much thicker than the vertebrates we studied.