<p>I cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg </p>
<p>The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid Aoccdrnig to rscheearch taem at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Such a cdonition is arppoiately cllaed Typoglycemia :) </p>
<p>Amzanig huh? Yaeh and yuo awlyas thought slpeling was ipmorantt.</p>
<p>Typoglycemia?! hahaha wow - the people who make these e-mail hoax-type things need to be better at making up words than that. I'm a medical professional, but please tell me I'm not the only one who deconstructed that word and noted that "glycemia" means the presence of glucose in the blood...</p>
<p>I will admit that it is pretty interesting though</p>
<p>I don't think it's a condition. I thought it just had to do with the way the brain worked naturally. With schemas and everything. That is why rset was thought to be reset because reset looks much more like that than rest.</p>
<p>Uh yeah...it's not meant to trick people at all...everyone IS supposed to be able to read it, as the second paragraph suggests. Just because there's a name for the condition doesn't mean that it isn't something the brain does naturally.</p>
<p>sure someone made it up. do you think it would be more "official" or something if it was a researcher at Cambridge that made it up, instead of some guy sitting around at home? what difference does it make? no, typoglycemia is probably not a term thrown around by researchers discussing brain conditions. so what.</p>
<p>at any rate it's pretty cool to be able to read it; that's all i wanted to get out of posting this.</p>
<p>mmm, interesting, but what else is new. That's human nature people, we look at people as wholes too. Just look at the ivy league admission process.</p>
<p>Actually, I doubt everyone could read it. My daughters have dyslexia, and decoding is their major problem. I think they would have a really hard time with this test.</p>
<p>As I said, schemas. It's the same idea. Although everyone says that other things help often test scores are a big fat objective thing no matter what that labels a kid as smart or dumb. You see a person with long hair and you think "slacker" or a guy with aviators and think "*******." There is no end to it. And no dyslexic people probably couldnt read it but that's part of the disorder. It is just psychology.</p>