# Is it possible to graduate without a brain (literally)? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [October 9, 2003, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535 "2003-10-09T20:48:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bb73d2/32.png) [@MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MC_Master_of_Ceremonies)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2003, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/1 "2003-10-09T20:48:00Z")
In last weeks science section of the Guardian, there is a very brief mention that a few years ago (the 70’s?) a professor (in the UK) reported that a very severe case of water on the brain, so severe infact that where most people have a brain this person had mainly water with only a thin lining of brain tissue. This person was described as socially normal, having an IQ of 124 and a first class degree? In the article the professor and the university was named, but I no longer have the article. This to me sounds like an urban legend, soi what is the striaght dope on this? Is it true? Is it even possible? ---
**Author:** ![MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/bb73d2/32.png) [@MC\_Master\_of\_Ceremonies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MC_Master_of_Ceremonies)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2003, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/2 "2003-10-09T20:50:00Z")
Just dug up this article on the web which repeats pretty much what was said in the Guardian article: [http://web.syr.edu/~sndrake/necbrain.htm](http://web.syr.edu/~sndrake/necbrain.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Jpeg\_Jones](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/4bbf92/32.png) [@Jpeg\_Jones](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jpeg_Jones)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2003, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/3 "2003-10-09T21:00:12Z")
Well, I found [another site](http://www.mysteries.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/6,2.htm) describing the same thing. For what it’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2003, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/4 "2003-10-09T22:52:47Z")
I remember seeing a documentary about this; there has been some controversy (IIRC) over the imaging methods and procedures that were used to form the diagnosis that the brain was almost entirely missing. ---
**Author:** ![bonzer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/45deac/32.png) [@bonzer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bonzer)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2003, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/5 "2003-10-10T00:27:45Z")
The article “Whence cometh the myth that we only use ten percent of our brains?” by Barry L. Beyerstein - downloadable from [this page](http://www.sfu.ca/psychology/groups/faculty/beyerstein/articles.htm) - casts a dubious eye over Lorber’s conclusions in its penultimate section. Basically, the suggestion is that the patients involved might have a near normal provision of neurons, but these are compressed into a smaller volume. ---
**Author:** ![Blackeyes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f6c823/32.png) [@Blackeyes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Blackeyes)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2003, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/6 "2003-10-10T00:47:07Z")
Only ten percent you say? _Real_-ly? [Oh? What part don’t you use?](http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/10percnt.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Waenara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/50afbb/32.png) [@Waenara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waenara)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2003, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/7 "2003-10-10T01:04:31Z")
I did a bit of searching on Medline and found a few articles (great benefit of being a university student). Unfortunately, I can’t link directly to the abstracts or full-text articles that I found. I am definitely NOT a neurologist, but I found a few articles that I think are relevant: **Current prognosis in overt neonatal hydrocephalus.** in _Journal of Neurosurgery. 57(3):378-83, 1982 Sep._ > [@](#): > > Chiefly because of advances in prenatal diagnostic ultrasonography, prognostic data on congenital hydrocephalus have increased in pertinence. Neurosurgeons may be confronted with requests for prognostic information after discovery of gestational hydrocephalus . Because previous reports reflect technical problems, complications, and less favorable results of an evolutionary period in hydrocephalus therapy, the authors have attempted to update the prognostic picture with a review of their results in hydrocephalus that is overt at birth. the status of 37 children treated with cerebrospinal fluid shunts after delivery at term with overt hydrocephalus was evaluated after an average 6-year follow-up period. They represented 8% of all children being followed for hydrocephalus . Outcome was also reviewed in 11 patients with severe hydrocephalus who were not treated. Of treated patients, 86% survived 1 to 16 years, while all of the untreated infants died at an average of 2.5 months. Approximately two-thirds of treated patients have normal or borderline intellectual capabilities (mean IQ 96, standard deviation 22). Dandy-Walker malformation was associated with a high mortality and a very low IQ in survivors. Congenital aqueductal atresia was also associated with intellectual impairment, but children with communicating hydrocephalus and myelomeningocele were not intellectually impaired. **Among the survivors with low IQ, the poor outcome was generally predictable on the basis of cortical mantle thickness and “brain mass” calculations before therapy. The findings from this partially selected series indicate that the majority of babies born with overt hydrocephalus have a good prognosis with appropriate therapy.** _[emphasis added]_ Another article: \*\*Intellectual sequelae of primary non-obstructive hydrocephalus in infancy: analysis of 50 cases. \*\* in \*Clinical Neurology & Neurosurgery. 87(4):247-53, 1985. \* > [@](#): > > In 50 cases of primary non-obstructive non-progressive hydrocephalus in infancy, possibilities of predicting later intelligence were investigated. The mean IQ was 80 +/- 24; in 50% of the cases IQ was normal, in 22% between 85 and 55 and in 28% below 55. The occipitofrontal circumference and the degree of ventricular enlargement had no correlation with the intellectual outcome in the children. Most prognostic value on the IQ had the age when reaching the developmental milestones, the degree of motor disability and the number of minor malformations. **As there was no relation between the degree of hydrocephalus and the intellectual impairment, the conclusion can be made that associated anomalies of the CNS and defects in the cyto-architecture of the neocortex are more important factors in explaining mental retardation in cases.** _[emphasis added_ This article talked about linguistic difficulties in children with hydrocephalus: \*\*Oral discourse after early-onset hydrocephalus : linguistic ambiguity, figurative language, speech acts, and script-based inferences. \*\* in \* Journal of Pediatric Psychology. 18(5):639-52, 1993 Oct. \* > [@](#): > > Studied 101 children, ages 6 to 15 years (50 with early-onset hydrocephalus , 51 normally developing), on four oral discourse tasks: establishing alternate meanings for ambiguous sentences; understanding figurative expressions; making bridging inferences; and producing speech acts. Children with hydrocephalus performed more poorly than controls on all four discourse tasks; and a higher-IQ hydrocephalus subgroup performed more poorly than controls on all but the figurative expressions task. \*\*The fluent, grammatically framed, but content-impoverished language described in early-onset hydrocephalus appears to reflect not so much problems in deriving word- and sentence-based meaning as deficits in the pragmatic use and understanding of language in discourse. \*\*_[emphasis added[_ This article talked about learning disabilities in general: \*\*Neuropsychologic and adaptive functioning in adolescents and young adults shunted for congenital hydrocephalus . \*\* in \*Journal of Child Neurology. 14(3):144-50, 1999 Mar. \* > [@](#): > > The major aim of this study was to assess whether the syndrome of nonverbal learning disabilities described in hydrocephalic children is observed in adulthood. Eleven adults shunted for congenital hydrocephalus related to spina bifida and eight adults shunted for hydrocephalus related to aqueductal stenosis were administered an extensive neuropsychologic battery to investigate discrepancies between verbal and visuospatial cognition, verbal and visuospatial long-term memory, and psycho-social adaptive abilities. The results showed no discrepancies between Wechsler Performance IQ or Verbal IQ in either hydrocephalic group. Nevertheless, the subjects with spina bifida appeared more cognitively impaired than the subjects with aqueductal stenosis, who performed normally on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. Memory assessment using Signoret’s Memory Battery revealed no discrepancy between verbal and visuospatial memory in the hydrocephalic group. Nevertheless, the subjects with spina bifida had poorer verbal and visuospatial memory performance than the subjects with aqueductal stenosis. There were no differences on the Vineland Adaptive Behavioral Scale between subjects with spina bifida and those with aqueductal stenosis in autonomy, socialization, and daily living skills. **These results suggest that shunted congenital hydrocephalus is not characterized by nonverbal learning disabilities syndrome in adolescence or in adulthood.** _emphasis added]_ This study is an older one, but it was the only full-text article I had access to: \*\*The relationship of intelligence and cerebral mantle in treated infantile hydrocephalus . (IQ potential in hydrocephalic children). \*\* in [/iPediatrics. 52(1):38-44, 1973 Jul. \* > [@](#): > > If a mantle of 2.8cm is attained the IQ scores approach a normal distribution pattern. With an IQ of 80 being the lower limints of low normal ability leve, 42 or 59 children are at least of low normal intelligence. Forty-one of these children have 2.8cm of cerebral mantle. A statistical analysis of the relation ship of IQ and cerebral mantle in Fig. 1 results in a chi square of 21.8, P \< .001, which is clearly significant. Moreover, 26 children have an IQ of 100 which is the midpoint of average intelligence or greater. From looking at the graph in the article, the three highest IQs were approximately 130-135, with frontal cerebral mantle thicknesses of approximately 3.1cm (IQ of 130) to 4.0cm (IQs of 130 and 135). The graph only measures thicknesses of up to 5.0cm - but I didn’t see anywhere in the article that mentioned what “normal” thickness would be). ---
**Author:** ![Waenara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/50afbb/32.png) [@Waenara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waenara)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2003, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-possible-to-graduate-without-a-brain-literally/206535/8 "2003-10-10T01:14:15Z")
Oops - forgot to add my general conclusions. It appears that if hydrocephalus is treated earlier, there is generally a better prognosis. IQ correlates at least roughly to cerebral mantle thickness, and mental deficiencies may be due to changes in the neuronal structures, rather than just the thickness of the cortical mantle. Long term outcomes for hydrocephalus cases indicate that there may be linguistic difficulties, but there are no other associated learning disabilities. \*WARNING: WAG ahead. \* I think that’s interesting - given that the case mentioned in the OP had a higher degree in _maths_. Perhaps people with this kind of brain damage have difficulty with abstract discourse and language, but don’t have a problem with mathematical reasoning. I didn’t find any studies about the case from the OP specifically, so I couldn’t confirm or refute the original claims about brain thickness in that patient. Perhaps a “thin lining of brain tissue” means different things to different people. To a neurologist, it might mean a (statistically) significant difference in thickness. But to a layperson, it conjures up images of a tissue-thin layer. I know it did for me, anyways.