Deepity Chopra and Rudolph Tanzi sell Big Brain kit; admit science behind it is weak

April 23, 2014 • 7:56 am

A while back Deepity Chopra tw**ted at me to read a piece he’d written with Dr. Rudolph Tanzi, a neuroscentist at Harvard and Massachusetts General Hospital. (How someone who is a credible scientist got mixed up with Chopra is beyond me). At any rate, I read Chopra and Tanzi’s piece, “You will direct your own biology,” which I criticized here.  It’ about how you can change your genes and the course of human evolution simply by thinking about it, meditating, and living the Chopra Life. Here are a few excerpts (my emphasis):

This means that control is being given back to each person; we are no longer seen as puppets of our DNA. The human genome is set to be the stage for future evolution that we ourselves direct, making choice an integral part of genetics. This is in stark contrast to the “biology as destiny” view where genes override choice. Unless decisions, lifestyle, environment, and personal preferences are included, a full picture of the mysteries of our DNA cannot be attained.

The speed and extent of change at the genetic level would astonish researchers even a few years ago. Yoga and meditation, for example, can trigger almost immediate responses in genetic activity. Exercise, a balanced diet, good sleep, and stress reduction – all well-known for improving bodily function – exert beneficial effects via our genes. So the next frontier will be to discover how deep and lasting such changes are, how much control we have over them individually, and how they can be passed on to future generations through so-called “soft inheritance,” in which the parents’ life experiences and behavior directly influence the genome of their offspring (transmitted via the epigenome, which controls how the activities of our genes are turned up and down).

. . . The mind and emotions directly affect gene activity, and since the mind is the source of a person’s lifestyle and behavior, it directs one’s biological transformations. Self-awareness holds the key to this process of self-transformation. Consciousness is invisibly reaching into the biochemistry of every moment of life. In your body, as in every cell, regulation is holistic, self-generated, self-organizing, and self-directed in concert with consciousness.

This is, of course, pure unadultrated woo; there’s not a shred of evidence that humans can change their genes in a permanent way via changes in our lifestyle, much less through exercise or meditation. This is Lamarckian self-help.

One reason, perhaps, that Tanzi has formed an unholy alliance with Chopra is that Deepakity is a huge cash cow. Here, for example, is the Super Brain Kit, which, I’m horrified to report, is a prize you can get for donating $144 to the Public Broadcasting System (PBS). It uses some of the self-modifying tropes touted in the article above:

As emphasized in our recent book, Super Brain, we believe there is also a better approach to understanding the brain. Your neural networks are being reshaped with every thought, feeling word, and act. This process is intimately tied to genetic activity. Today you will casually perform some very mysterious actions: As an aware being you will imbue your desires with intention (“I’ll have the tuna salad”), direct your attention to specific objects and aspects of the world (“Just look at that sunset!”), and experience the shifting landscape of your inner world (“This movie is boring”) as you navigate the terrain of your mind.

“I’ll have the tuna salad”??? Really? That’s what you pay $144 for?

Screen shot 2014-04-23 at 5.10.05 AM

At any rate, “Yakaru,” an author at the site Spirituality is No Exercise, has followed up on this offer, describing his results in the post “Dr. Rudoph Tanzi’s rainbow bridge to quackery“.  Yakaru reports the kerfuffle on my own site, which I never reprised; so let me do so here. The comments appeared on my post cited above:

Or as one commenter put it to Tanzi directly:

“Can you provide any kind of evidence that human thought can voluntarily influence gene expression, that this supposed effect is epigenetic, that it can be stably inherited and that it can be adaptive?”

After Tanzi’s usual blustering and threats of libel action (he’s threatened me repeatedly for simply decrying the weakness of the science), he admitted that no, the evidence isn’t there. As Yakaru notes:

Eventually after much evasion, complaining, insults, obfuscations, threats of libel suits, and hand-waving, he mentioned, among other things, a study on mice. Here, epigenetic changes relating to stress were inherited by offspring for a generation or two, before disappearing. Well and good. But making a grand leap from lab mice to humans — isn’t that rather a lot like the very worst of the “old paradigm”? And just because it works for stress in mice, will it also work for consciously directed thought in humans? Is it heritable by epigenetics? And if so will it be stable enough to eventually affect evolution?

Tanzi finally admitted he has no evidence for any of that…. “yet”. In his words (Yakaru’s emphasis):

“So, no, we do not yet have direct molecular evidence of humans changing their DNA epigenetically in response to life experience and perceptions accompanied by biochemical and molecular genetic reactions…..”

Let me Finish Tanzi’s quote (taken from a comment at my site) so I won’t be accused of  letting Yakaru’s quote stand out of context (and it’s not out of context):

“. . . We are only proposing this will be an important area of study in the future and would have profound implications on our own trans-generational evolution. With this idea we proposed a “consciousome” project aimed at understanding how our experiences and psychological and physiological reactions to those experiences affect our genomes, as well as those of the next generation. The preliminary data from current epigenetic studies of lower organisms suggests that this is a feasible and worthy of investigation in humans. Our piece was aimed at planting the idea and getting this line of investigation going.”

Yakaru then takes the opportunity to rewrite Chopra and Tanzi’s blurb for “Super Brain”:

Well maybe they could have could have chosen a title that reflected the reality of the situation a little better. Like maybe –

Super Brain: hypothetically Unleashing the possibly Explosive but so far purely speculative Power of Your presumed Mind to Maximize or at least minimally affectHealth, Happiness, Spiritual Well-Being if we ever figure out how.

I have problems with people promoting an ill-conceived idea of how we can affect the structure of our genome in an adaptive way by simply changing the way we think; but I have an even bigger problem when those half-baked (indeed, not even quarter-baked) ideas are used in a $144 self-help project.  I call that profiting from quackery, and bilking a gullible public.

Now, Deepak, let the tw**ts begin!

70 thoughts on “Deepity Chopra and Rudolph Tanzi sell Big Brain kit; admit science behind it is weak”

          11. Well, Ant was a little ‘Kurt’ in his response.

            A little subtle I know but fans should get the reference. 🙂

          14. [Basil]
            “It’s not a hamster you blithering Barcelonian idiot, it’s a RAT!”
            Apologies to any Barcelonians out there!

  2. Blimey, even I, who know this much about science, got the Lamarckianism bit before I saw that you pointed it out, Jerry. Shocking.

    Slaínte.

  3. Well: I can just invent any theory, sell lots of books and whatever kits and then say there’s no scientific basis to believe in it, but we should investigate further and maybe we will discover it makes sense — in the future.

    1. People actually apply a sort of libertarian stance with these things as well. Not only should it be okay to sell these falsehoods, but the free market of ideas should compete to win hearts and minds over to the “good ideas”. The problem here of course is that truth and influence are not always equal.

    2. I have contemplated doing an “LRon” and running a religion as you suggest.
      To be honest, I’d rather be a people-trafficker. For sex slaves, or for organs … a bit academic … they’re just meat.
      But it would be less dishonest than selling Deepity “thoughts.”

    1. Think of it this way – you’re getting all the content of Chopra’s brain for a mere $14/neuron.

  6. Well, taking a cue from Smokey and my dear old Mum, I’m a bit suspicious of such products – After all, My momma told me, you’d better Chopra round.

  7. “The human genome is set to be the stage for future evolution that we ourselves direct, making choice an integral part of genetics.”

    Chopra, clearly, has never worked a day in community mental health.

  8. Where is the “one simple trick”?

    I like how “I’ll have the tuna salad” is morphed into “imbuing my desires with intention.” And I thought I was just ordering lunch, silly me.

    That one result with stressed mice is getting a ridiculous amount of mileage in the popular press. The stretches being made from it are astonishing. If stress can have an effect on reproduction, why not a desire imbued with intention to eat tuna salad? We need the next generation to be 100% tuna salad intentioned.

  11. One commenter on the original post here noted that Tanzi was in the comments at their Linked In article insisting that they were presenting solid science.

    The commenter provided an interesting quote from Tanzi which has since “disappeared” from the comments at linked In (the quote was posted to WEIT while Tanzi still commenting, so I can only assume it’s authentic)–

    Tanzi:

    “Jerry Coyne’s rebuttal reflects an overwhelming level of scientific naiveté. He basically claims that the DNA sequence of your genome is fixed throughout your body for life. Perhaps, he has never heard of somatic mutations that cause tumors, or the newest discovery that 40% of our brain’s neurons contain new structural changes in DNA that occur during one’s lifetime. Perhaps he has never read of trans-generational transmission of newly acquired traits during adulthood along with epigenetic modifications to the genome”

    http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2013/12/14/lol-deepak-has-more-bogus-science-for-me-to-read/#comment-651905

    [NB, I post under a pseudonym on the net for professional reasons, & have no professional or financial interests in this matter. My personal email address is available at my website.]

    1. Of course every new cell produced by the body has a chance (probably approaching 100%) of containing newly mutated DNA in it. That’s because every time a DNA strand is replicated for any purpose at all, there is a chance of some form of mutation. So yes, every new neuron built by the body during your lifetime development contains DNA which is slightly different from the code originally produced when your daddy’s sperm connected with your momma’s egg.

      But that is not evidence for anything like what Tanzi is proposing. What he’s proposing is that thoughts can selectively mutate DNA in ways that will have desired phenotypic results. His logic is as silly as saying “Carbon-14 decays emitting a free electron…therefore, humans should be able to zap people with internally produced electric currents at will.”

  12. Why is it that whenever people selling pseudoscience get argued into a corner, they always fall back on the old “I’m just proposing an interesting subject for a future study” line?

    Meanwhile he’s selling books, videos, self-help materials, and making gobs of money. But if he is just meekly proposing a future course of research, why isn’t he off researching it right now? Isn’t he a scientist?

    1. But if he is just meekly proposing a future course of research, why isn’t he off researching it right now? Isn’t he a scientist?

      No, he’s a (self-)publicist.

  13. 99% of self-help industry is pure rubbish. It’s the modern version of snake oil sales. (Like that vodka you saw sold in Davis as a remedy — nothing against vodka as a remedy (works great for me) but let’s be honest.)

    1. 99% of self-help industry is pure rubbish.

      So, only 1% of it is impure, adulterated, low grade rubbish?
      I’m impressed. That they got the quality of bullshit so high.

  14. Given that it will be hard to get funded (understatement): at least dedicate a significant fraction of revenue to research. Doubt it will happen.
    Some things work better in the lab (science) than other things, which work better spilled into books and that lame linked-in site.

  15. I wonder if this is a trend of sorts.

    My spouse recently bought a bunch of shake mixes called Reliv (for reference: http://reliv.com).

    They claim: “Reliv’s exclusive LunaRich® line of products optimizes bioactive lunasin more than any other source available today. Lunasin is a naturally occurring soy peptide and the first dietary ingredient identified to work at the epigenetic level to promote cellular health. What does that mean? It means you can take control of your health.”

    I prefer veggies, fruit, water, sleep, laughter, and exercise to control my health…but Reliv uses a pyramid sales model, and I detest such models.

    1. Oh that word again. “Promote”.

      Turns out, that means exactly and precisely nothing. Every woo-meister, charlatan, and snake-oil salesman, along with every homeopathic, naturopathic, and nutrapathic product “promotes” something or other.

      That’s because it’s a meaningless claim. Unregulable by the FDA.

      That along with “support”. The two words that instantly scream FRAUD.

  16. Dr. Tanzi showed up on this site last go-round, and it resulted in thread that was stimulating and quite entertaining. He carefully avoided responses to every pointed question and counter-claim directed his way, instead employing every diversionary tactic he could think of as he beat an increasingly hastening retreat from his stated positions until finally upchucking his “proposal” disclaimer reprinted above. Will he return for round two?

    1. I for one enjoyed the “that’s it I’m not talking to you anymore”. The stomp off and the inevitable return to offer more bluster. It was rather Monty Pythonesque – now he just needs to perfect a silly walk for when he stomps off and the entertainment value will triple!

  17. This morning, I received an email from LinkedIn with links to “Career insights from LinkedIn Influencers.” This was one of them:

    “Deepak Chopra: Don’t let your ego run the show — The day I destroyed my dream out of pride.”

    Which I found to be very funny for some reason.

  18. I get a physical reaction – that of repulsion – when I read these things. I wonder if I think really hard if I could alter that by altering some genes in my sympathetic nervous system…..of course I’ll have to buy the $144 kit which will make me feel queasy and then every time I read it, I’ll feel queasy so maybe it just won’t work out.

  19. Deepak, when the brain is off the mind, as you know it, is off.

    If cosmic-woo energy is harnessed by the brain we’ve not measured it yet and worse still is that everything in science is stretching further away every day from this orthogonal hypothesis.

  20. Just to give a hint of the kind of people who Chopra associates with, and who will be overjoyed at Tanzi’s credibility, here are two cancer quacks who both belong to the same organization as Chopra for “Evolutionary Leaders”

    To name but two — Bruce Lipton and Gregg Braden.

    Bruce Lipton PhD — here’s a couple of minutes of him on You Tube talking about Darwin being wrong, and how the end of the world can be prevented in the same way that a cancer patient can cure themselves — with thought.

    Part 1

    Part 2

    (Warning, although it’s only a minute or two long, this is brain-meltingly stupid.)

    And a vid of Gregg Braden with “actual footage” of a 3 inch cancer tumor being healed by monks chanting, in a “medicineless hospital” in China.

    I hope Tanzi looks at these and realizes the kind of people who will be using his credibility to promote “the power of thought”. He probably got into this profession with the idea that he could help people. Look where it’s finished up — unwittingly, unintentionally, being of service to a bunch of deadly cancer quacks.

  22. Unfortunately my PBS station has all the quacks on when they have a begathon. Chpra, the wrinkle Doctor etc….

  24. So, this has been tested on mice? Wish I could have seen those cute little critters meditating. Can they sit in a lotus position? Given their brain size, I can’t imagine that they’d to self-direct much mental/physical change to DNA.

  25. I’m surprised Dr. Tanzi hasn’t shown up to defend himself and Deepity.

    A little disappointed now…. 🙁

    1. I’m not so surprised. Tanzi’s learned nothing about professional ethics, but he did learn about the Streisand Effect last time!

Comments are closed.