Comentários e feedback de alunos de O Cérebro dos Dependentes da instituição Universidade Emory

While the professor was wonderful at explaining the topics, a lot of this seems to be outdated.

In my opinion, there was more of a "textbook" explanation for how our brain changes due to addiction, and it didn't really build on anything related to it. I felt like the same few definitions and facts were being repeated throughout the sections.

I also think the course should have gone more in depth about people's upbringings and environmental factors that contribute to addiction, as well as outstanding mental health issues, which leads to addiction in hundreds of thousands of people.

Also, the stigma this course has about marijuana is something else. It genuinely seemed to me that they think it has no health benefits. One example case tried to lead you to believe that if you smoke weed, you need to go to Narcotics Anonymous; which, after being engaged to a recovering addict, and losing a best friend to overdose, I can't seem to wrap my head around.

Overall it was an informative course to an extent, I just really think it needs to be updated.

Information strays between ridiculously shallow and unnecessarily deep (e.g. the stuff about GPCRs is so far removed from importance when discussing addiction). Most of the time the questions are poorly worded and thoughtless, and the whole thing reminds me of a bad high school class. Some parts border on misinformation, does seem almost as if it's been underwritten by the DEA. Paints a very distinct picture, a picture with an agenda and really incomplete portrayal of addiction. Points for trying though.

I may be a bit harsh in my review because I found the material to be so basic as to be a poor use of my time. This conclusion is furthered by the dull presentation. It was very slow, lacked depth, and was delivered in an uninteresting way. Such a critically-important and fascinating topic could have been so much more engaging. Thank you. Anne

as i personally studied medical marijuana and seen its effectiveness in mediating PTSD and reducing stress and pain in cancer patients first hand, and that it in this tow cases at least manage the problem way better that opium, and never ever seen an overdose, demonizing it in the course is not appealing to me..

As a career dieter who is constantly reading about causes of obesity, I can't say I learned anything too earth-shattering. However, the research discussed does support what I have learned from listening to the podcasts from the Institute for the Psychology of Eating.

Quite boring, a lot of propaganda against drugs. Sometimes data is presented in misleading ways to make the harm from drugs look greater. Though if you are new to the topic, you may consider to take the course as it contains some useful information.

I'm sorry, I don't recall much from this course.

I think I rushed through it without absorbing the information.

Not much of information, not deep, a lot of repeating, speaker is very slow, feels like NLP

Not very informative, and too simple. Also, there is way too much repeating

Very informative but very dry presentations.

I wondered why Prof Kuhar offered that course as he did not seem interested or motivated.There are lots of videos that last only 4 or 5 minutes and still they contain numerous repetitions of the same fact and summaries of past videos and the current one. Some basic things were explained in great detail while more complex ones were just named, so I had to look them up on the internet. In his videos Kuhar refers again and again to other sources that participants should use to learn more. The reading recommendations at the end of every week invariably list Kuhar’s book, which is also called The Addicted Brain and that you have to buy as you cannot access it here. I wondered if selling that book was the main motivation to offer that course. It did not come as a surprise that this course if one of those where you can only access the quizzes every week to control your progress if you have paid for the course.

What really disturbed me was that he is still claiming that opioid medication does not create addiction if it is prescribed by a doctor and taken as prescribed. There is a raging opioid crisis in USA mainly because the Sackler family pretended that their Oxycontin would not cause addiction. Doctors believed that with the result of hundreds of thousands of addicted patients, many of whom died from unvoluntary overdoses. How can a professor of pharmacology ignore that dangerous and deadly lie that made the Sackler’s billions of dollars. Criminal charges are pending as we speak? Whose interests does he represent? All in all it seems to me that you learn more facts and get more reliable information about the addicted brain if you simply research on the internet on your own.

yeah i would give zero if possible. very shallow and general, cannot learn much from it. if u want a course about neuroscience there's way better course than this. what the hell emory? what hte hell coursera? i feel less and less sincerity in coursera's mooc these days. edx is doing a much better job in my perspective.

If possible, I would give this course zero stars. It provides an incredibly closed minded view towards all topics and provides very minimal factual information. The makers of this course, and especially the instructor, obviously have had very little to no experience of any kind with most of the topics they discuss.

When I enrolled I thought that it was free. But after complaining the first week’s work and doing the homework, it will not grade me until I upgrade. Either I missed something or this was very deceiving on your part.

There is no way to finish the course unless you pay.

I attended this course only for personal interests, I don´t need it for my profession.

как покинуть курс?

VERY simple