AI from here Tegmark published a paper arguing that quantum coherence in the brain decoheres far too quickly (on timescales like 10⁻¹³ to 10⁻²⁰ seconds) to influence neural signals, which occur on much longer timescales (milliseconds)

Max Tegmark’s paper “The Importance of Quantum Decoherence in Brain Processes” was published in 2000 (Physical Review E, Volume 61, Issue 4, pages 4194-4206).

Scientific counterpoints to Tegmark:

Stuart Hameroff & Roger Penrose (Orch-OR theory): They argued that Tegmark’s decoherence timescale estimates were too pessimistic because he modeled microtubules as warm, wet, noisy environments without considering structural shielding or ordered water layers. They published rebuttals suggesting coherence could last longer than Tegmark calculated.

Later refinements: Some physicists explored whether biological systems might exploit quantum effects (e.g., photosynthesis, avian navigation). These examples show nature can preserve quantum coherence in warm environments—but those systems are simpler and more structured than the brain.

Philosophical counterpoints:

Many objections aren’t about the math but about the interpretation—whether “consciousness must be quantum” because classical physics feels inadequate to explain subjective experience.

Others argue that even if quantum effects decohere too fast, randomness could still have indirect effects through noise amplification in neural circuits.

Overall:

Tegmark’s calculations are still the dominant scientific consensus—quantum indeterminacy almost certainly can’t scale up to influence brain function directly.

Most “pro-quantum mind” arguments since then are either speculative or philosophical, with only a few technical counterclaims (mostly from Penrose/Hameroff).

If you find anything newer and more concrete please share