Shopping Cart -

Your cart is currently empty.
Continue Shopping
This website use cookies and similar technologies to improve the site and to provide customised content and advertising. By using this site, you agree to this use. To learn more, including how to change your cookie settings, please view our Cookie Policy
Pocketmags Digital Magazines
Pocketmags Digital Magazines
   You are currently viewing the United Kingdom version of the site.
Would you like to switch to your local site?
Digital Subscriptions > Skeptical Inquirer > Jan Feb 2017 > Consensus: Could Two Hundred Scientists Be Wrong?

Consensus: Could Two Hundred Scientists Be Wrong?

Stuart Vyse is a psychologist and author of Believing in Magic: The Psychology of Superstition, which won the William James Book Award of the American Psychological Association. He is a fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry.

An illustration of the human brain showing the hippocampus (red area), one of the structures removed from Henry Molaison’s brain.
(source: Wikimedia)

In August of 2016, publication of a book about neuroscience’s most famous amnesia patient—known for decades only as H.M.—stirred up a controversy in the world of science. On August 3, the New York Times Magazine released an article adapted from Luke Dittrich’s book, Patient H.M.: A Story of Memory, Madness, and Family Secrets (Dittrich 2016a; 2016b). Two days later, on August 5, more than two hundred neuroscientists from around the world had signed a letter to the Times in support of Professor Suzanne Corkin, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientist who did most of the research with H.M (DiCarlo et al. 2016).

Henry Molaison (H.M.) suffered profound memory loss as a result of an experimental brain operation conducted in 1953 in an effort to control his epilepsy. The surgery removed most of Molaison’s hippocampus and some nearby structures on both sides of his brain, leaving him incapable of creating new episodic memories. Henry, who was the inspiration for the popular film Memento, could recall many things that happened to him prior to 1953, but after the surgery he couldn’t tell you what he had done five minutes before the present moment. As Dittrich put it in the New York Times Magazine article, “Each of the hundreds of times [he and Professor Corkin] met, it was, for Henry, a first meeting. . . .”

Purchase options below
Find the complete article and many more in this issue of Skeptical Inquirer - Jan Feb 2017
If you own the issue, Login to read the full article now.
Single Issue - Jan Feb 2017
Or 299 points
Annual Digital Subscription
Only £ 2.83 per issue
Or 1699 points

View Issues

About Skeptical Inquirer

Stem Cell Research: Still Embattled after All These Years Science vs. Silliness for Parents: Debunking the Myths of Child Psychology Survey Shows Americans Fear Ghosts, the Government, and Each Other and much more..