What a way to oversell the discovery.

The reality is:

    * Different brain regions have different functions: ancient knowledge.
    * Different regions contain distinct cell types and molecular programs: also well established.
    * Anterior and posterior brain structures may trace back to fundamentally separate progenitor lineages that were independently specified very early in evolution and development: that's the interesting new result.

The headline should have been: "Human forebrain and hindbrain arise from distinct embryonic progenitor lineages" - not that we have "two organs" in the brain.

▲ sandeepkd an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Though I agree with the detailed differentiation, still for the headline purpose a generic one that resonates with people easily isn't a bad choice

	▲	an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	jibal 25 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Lying is always a bad choice. The paper in Nature says "Hence, we postulate the brain is a composite organ emanating from two lineage-restricted progenitors; these dual progenitors may be evolutionarily conserved across 550 million years from hemichordates to mammals."

▲ lucideer 38 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Given the parallel example cited in the article of jellyfish having two spatially separate organs, & the subsequent speculation that our own ancestors could also have had spacially separate anterior & posterior masses, the title doesn't really seem unreasonable in its hyperbole.

While it might not be perfectly accurate it's hardly misleading.

	▲	stymaar 29 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I found the title confusing, at the very least because it can be argued that the two brain hemispheres are two organs already, as they operate independently when severed from each other.

▲ t-writescode an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I mean, I learned a bunch of neat new stuff, so I’m excited!

▲ lovich 12 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Additionally the only images in the linked article are also face pics of the researchers instead of anything on the information about said research.

I want to trust science and dislike anti vaxxers but it’s difficult to argue against them when researchers act like the caricature they are mocked as.

Self aggrandizing articles with misleading headlines is giving me 2 triggers for not trusting the content.