The Killians write:
>Sensory compensation isn't real anyway so there are lots of flaws.
 
Sensory compensation IS real.
 
Then it was said:
>For example, a blind person who is reading braille uses the part of the
>visual cortex that is normally used when a sighted person reads.  Many
>other examples were given of how different parts of the brain can take on
>functions usually not processed there.  So a blind deaf ferret could have
>a better sense of smell, as it had more of its brain available for that
>function.
 
I say:
This is not accurate.  Certain functions are housed in certain parts of the
brain.  This is known as a localization theory.  Other centers in the brain
can take over for infarct or damaged parts of the brain.  That much is
true.  However, sense of smell, sight, and hearing are not supermagnified
and keen for individuals who have an impairment in one of these areas.  If
they have a pathology in the center of the brain responisible for hearing
(temporal lobe), or in the vision centers (located in the occipital lobe),
other parts of the brain that are normal will not develop superpowers.
Yes, they can shoulder some of the load but they will not be better than in
a person with no pathology at all.  Their abilities in these areas can only
be the same.  Suggesting a heightened sense of smell, sight, and hearing in
lieu of one of these senes is a fallacy.  The same must hold true for
ferrets as well.
 
--Marissa
[Posted in FML issue 2855]