Don't Forget: Drink a Beer—Or Two—Daily!
Kalev and Matthew During, a professor of molecular virology, immunology and medical genetics at The Ohio State University College of Medicine and a principal investigator of gene therapy at Auckland ran a study on the beneficial effects of low-dose alcohol drinking to see if would improve cognition in people compared to abstention. This is similar to the effects of the flavonoids and other antioxidants found in red wine protecting against heart disease by the potentially reduce heart disease risk, however the mechanism is different. http://www.americanheart.org
The researchers initially started looking at the role of N-methyl-D-aspartic acid (NMDA) receptors which are critical to memory, because they regulate the strength of synapses between nerve cells through which the cells communicate. Through this focus they then discovered that memory was enhanced by strengthening of a subunits known as NR1. This newly found information lead researchers to a link between alcohol consumption and NR1 activity. The study used two strains of transgenic rats, one that had an abundance of NR1 subunits one in which it was suppressed. Both groups were fed a diet consisting of 0, 2.5 or 5 percent ethanol. During their evaluation the looked at object recognition, and emotional memory task. The results showed that the normal rats who consumed moderate amounts of alcohol fared better on both tests compared to the rats who never consumes any alcohol. However the rats on a heavy alcohol diet did not do well on the first task but performed better than the other groups on the latter task of emotional memory.
Comparative studies investigated the effects of different forms of alcohol on cognition and memory. Such as the research conducted by the Harvard School of Public Health and Brigham and Women’s Hospital where they analyzed data from 12,480 women age 70 to 81 who consume alcohol moderately on a daily basis. The senior author of the study explains that “Women who consistently were drinking about one-half to one drink per day had both less cognitive impairment as well as less decline in their cognitive function compared to women who didn’t drink at all.
Opposing studies has shown that heavy alcohol usage clearly damages day-to-day memory. http://alcoholism.about.com Prolonged alcohol abuse causes permanent damage to the memory system. Short-term memory loss is often the first indicator of alcohol-related neurological damage. This type of memory loss means a person has difficulty remembering new information, so the learning process takes longer
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Saturday, September 29, 2007
Neurobiology Assignments (X2)
Chapter 4 ( Soul made Flesh) comments:
I have to agree with Burd when it came to being fascinated with this chapter. There were some very mind blowing occurences that took place. Willis was one who resolved controversial things by consulting a"relevant passage in Galen or Aristotle”. This, alone, was very interesting to me because of how rare it is for people in the world of science to feel studies in other fields(such as philosophy and psychology) were important and relevent enough to incorporate those theories into their research. We have had many discussions in my past philosophy and psychology classes where professors have commented on how science professors feel that biology hold all the answers and that psychology & philosophy were not real sciences. Due to my prior understanding (from past experiences with the "rivalry"), I would have never thought they were once " partners that needed each other". It made me proud that they once worked well together and had a higher level of compatibility than they have now in this present time.
Secondly, finding out that Willis was the first person to describe the breakout of typhus was memorable for me because I enjoying learning about those who were keen enough to make medical breakthrough which will benefit mankind in a great capacity. The discovery (by William Harvey) of how the heart sends blood through the body was remarkable in the fact that he confirmed his theories by conducting experiments. That was a very admirable thing to do since there was so much errogenous ideas floating around during that time plus so many people how were looking to disprove everything being said/thought.
More information on William Harvey:
www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/William_Harvey.html
More information on Thomas Willis
http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n06/historia/willis_i.htm
Writings by Thomas Willis = Cerebri Anatome:
http://www.jrsm.org/cgi/content/full/96/3/139
Scientific American Article Summary:
The article that I read was entitled:” Did Sesame Street Have It Right?" and the article was about how there is a new study out supporting the idea that shows like Sesame Street can improve language-processing abilities. While these kid shows are teaching children songs so they can learn the alphabet & numbers, they are also "improving a person's ability to decipher different tones" while also enhancing their reading and speech functions. The brain stem is thought to be a pathway for language and music. Instead of going along with the original thinking that the neural connections in the brain were fixed, they are finding that it is more flexible and is shaped by our senses.
Nina Kraus (a professor of neurobiology and physiology at Northwestern University) and her team of researchers did experiments on twenty-nine, 25-year-old subjects. Sixteen of the twenty-nine subjects had been playing the musical instruments since five years old. In this two part experiment, the subjects were exposed to different stimuli and their brain activity was recorded. In the first part, the participants watched someone syllables of speech or they watched someone play the cello. In the second part, they watched a silent film to hold their attention while the sounds they heard they heard from the sounds from the previous segments.
The findings were that the musicians had "sharper and more enhanced encoding of important cues related to pitch and tone" when the sounds were alone and paired. The electrical responses were sensitive to timing. The musician’s brain stems responded quicker to the stimulus plus there was more neural activity. A correlation was also found that between the amount of brain stem activity and the amount of years the musician played their instrument. Thirty to forty percent of children who have learning and/or reading problems cannot transcribe sound. They, next, wanted to research different ways where musical training could be able to "improve auditory function by erasing those deficits."
Through studies on the cortical effects of music training, Jonathan Burdette (an associate professor of neuroradiology at Wake Forest University Medical Center) found out that students who played instruments were smarter than those who didn’t.
This article was very interesting to me because I heard, beforehand, that people who played instruments were smarter because they utilized the left side of their brains. Getting a better understanding of this interesting finding (which is supported by scientific research) was encouraging because it shows how we can help our children mentally early on. I want, now, to find out the correlations between neural activity and shows, which introduce songs along with different languages to children such as Dora, the Explorer. This shows allows for songs that teach children numbers, the alphabet, and other helpful words in English and in Spanish.
I have to agree with Burd when it came to being fascinated with this chapter. There were some very mind blowing occurences that took place. Willis was one who resolved controversial things by consulting a"relevant passage in Galen or Aristotle”. This, alone, was very interesting to me because of how rare it is for people in the world of science to feel studies in other fields(such as philosophy and psychology) were important and relevent enough to incorporate those theories into their research. We have had many discussions in my past philosophy and psychology classes where professors have commented on how science professors feel that biology hold all the answers and that psychology & philosophy were not real sciences. Due to my prior understanding (from past experiences with the "rivalry"), I would have never thought they were once " partners that needed each other". It made me proud that they once worked well together and had a higher level of compatibility than they have now in this present time.
Secondly, finding out that Willis was the first person to describe the breakout of typhus was memorable for me because I enjoying learning about those who were keen enough to make medical breakthrough which will benefit mankind in a great capacity. The discovery (by William Harvey) of how the heart sends blood through the body was remarkable in the fact that he confirmed his theories by conducting experiments. That was a very admirable thing to do since there was so much errogenous ideas floating around during that time plus so many people how were looking to disprove everything being said/thought.
More information on William Harvey:
www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/William_Harvey.html
More information on Thomas Willis
http://www.cerebromente.org.br/n06/historia/willis_i.htm
Writings by Thomas Willis = Cerebri Anatome:
http://www.jrsm.org/cgi/content/full/96/3/139
Scientific American Article Summary:
The article that I read was entitled:” Did Sesame Street Have It Right?" and the article was about how there is a new study out supporting the idea that shows like Sesame Street can improve language-processing abilities. While these kid shows are teaching children songs so they can learn the alphabet & numbers, they are also "improving a person's ability to decipher different tones" while also enhancing their reading and speech functions. The brain stem is thought to be a pathway for language and music. Instead of going along with the original thinking that the neural connections in the brain were fixed, they are finding that it is more flexible and is shaped by our senses.
Nina Kraus (a professor of neurobiology and physiology at Northwestern University) and her team of researchers did experiments on twenty-nine, 25-year-old subjects. Sixteen of the twenty-nine subjects had been playing the musical instruments since five years old. In this two part experiment, the subjects were exposed to different stimuli and their brain activity was recorded. In the first part, the participants watched someone syllables of speech or they watched someone play the cello. In the second part, they watched a silent film to hold their attention while the sounds they heard they heard from the sounds from the previous segments.
The findings were that the musicians had "sharper and more enhanced encoding of important cues related to pitch and tone" when the sounds were alone and paired. The electrical responses were sensitive to timing. The musician’s brain stems responded quicker to the stimulus plus there was more neural activity. A correlation was also found that between the amount of brain stem activity and the amount of years the musician played their instrument. Thirty to forty percent of children who have learning and/or reading problems cannot transcribe sound. They, next, wanted to research different ways where musical training could be able to "improve auditory function by erasing those deficits."
Through studies on the cortical effects of music training, Jonathan Burdette (an associate professor of neuroradiology at Wake Forest University Medical Center) found out that students who played instruments were smarter than those who didn’t.
This article was very interesting to me because I heard, beforehand, that people who played instruments were smarter because they utilized the left side of their brains. Getting a better understanding of this interesting finding (which is supported by scientific research) was encouraging because it shows how we can help our children mentally early on. I want, now, to find out the correlations between neural activity and shows, which introduce songs along with different languages to children such as Dora, the Explorer. This shows allows for songs that teach children numbers, the alphabet, and other helpful words in English and in Spanish.
Scientific American Mind Article
The Scientific American Mind article, “Into thin air: Altitude’s toll on the brain” introduced by David Dobbs speaks of a neuroscientist’s study of examining the effects that one-time and cumulative high-altitude climbing have on the human brain. The article, “Brain Cells into Thin Air”, written by R. Douglas Fields describes the research of fellow neurologist Nicholas Fayed and colleagues ("Evidence of Brain Damage After High-Altitude Climbing by Means of Magnetic Resonance Imaging”).
Current technology has allowed for noninvasive brain imaging. In the study, thirty-five climbers, including twelve professionals and twenty-three amateurs, who had returned from high-altitude trips were given MRI brain scans. Of the thirty-five climbers, thirteen people had attempted Mt. Everest. Of the thirteen climbers, three had trudge 8480 meters, three had gone 8100 meters, and the last seven made it as far as 6500 to 7500 meters. Those who had attempted Mt. Everest had the most severe results except for one climber who had a normal MRI scan. The remaining twelve brain scans showed that the climbers had suffered “cortical atrophy,” a wasting away and decrease in size of the cerebral cortex, and “enlargement of the Virchow-Robin spaces.” Virchow-Robin spaces (VRS) are the perivascular spaces surrounding blood vessels in the cerebral cortex. These vessels drain fluid and communicate with the lymph system. An MRI can clearly demonstrate these spaces. Patients of all ages express a relatively small perivascular space but these spaces tend to increase in size and frequency with progressive age. Usually these spaces are 2 or 3 mm in diameter but can grow to become quite large (5 to 20 mm). Within the group, the brains of the amateur climbers also had showed sub-cortical lesions in the frontal lobes.
The article goes on to address a person’s tolerance to hypoxia or lack of oxygen. It had stressed that hypoxia “varies according to differences in innate physiology and physical conditioning.” These differences “can help the body and brain to better tolerate exertion and physiological stresses of high-altitude mountaineering” though it cannot be eliminated.
The first stage of high altitude sickness is called acute mountain sickness (AMS). AMS is caused by a lack of oxygen when traveling to higher elevations (usually over 2,100 m). When climbers do not have a chance to acclimate to the altitude, they can experience “headache, insomnia, dizziness, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting”. Stage two is called high-altitude cerebral edema (HACE). HACE is a potentially fatal form of AMS where the brain swells and stops functioning in the normal way. Symptoms of this includes confusion, fatigue, changes in behavior, ataxia (staggering), difficulty speaking, vomiting, hallucinations, blindness, paralysis of a limb, seizure, unconsciousness, total paralysis, and coma. Furthermore, an insufficient amount of oxygen to the brain can directly impair and cause damage to brain cells. Accordingly, “the walls of blood capillaries in the brain and elsewhere begin to leak at high altitude, and this leakage causes dangerous swelling, pressing the brain outward against the rigid skull.”
The study of Nicholas Fayed and colleagues explained that none of the Mt. Everest climbers experienced HACE and only one amateur climber experienced a mild case of AMS. However, all of the experienced climbers showed “lasting brain damage” prior to the Mt. Everest attempt and their MRI scans were unchanged following the climb.
In another experiment, Fayed and colleagues studied an eight-member team who attempted Aconcagua, a 6926-meter mountain in the Andes. Two of the climbers had reached the summit point while five had gone 6000 to 6400 meters and the last one had gone as far as 5500 meters. In this group, three had experienced AMS and two had suffered HACE. The MRI results showed that all of the climbers suffered cortical atrophy, seven of the eight climbers had enlargement of the Virchow-Robin spaces, and four of the climbers showed many subcortical lesions. Several of the climbers also experienced a range of harmful symptoms. Three years after the expedition, all of the climbers were re-examined to determine if the brain had recovered from the stresses of mountaineering Aconcagua. The results showed that the brain damage was still apparent through the MRI scans. In another case, researchers found that seven climbers who reached the summit of Mount Blanc, a 4810-meter summit in the Alps, showed enlarged Virchow- Robin spaces.
Overall, the research shows that amateur climbers are at greater risk to AMS or HACE being inexperienced while professional climbers are at greater risk of cumulative high-altitude stresses. In the study, professional climbers experienced a greater cortical atrophy over the amateur climbers. This only goes to show that there is a price to pay to live dangerously…literally!
Current technology has allowed for noninvasive brain imaging. In the study, thirty-five climbers, including twelve professionals and twenty-three amateurs, who had returned from high-altitude trips were given MRI brain scans. Of the thirty-five climbers, thirteen people had attempted Mt. Everest. Of the thirteen climbers, three had trudge 8480 meters, three had gone 8100 meters, and the last seven made it as far as 6500 to 7500 meters. Those who had attempted Mt. Everest had the most severe results except for one climber who had a normal MRI scan. The remaining twelve brain scans showed that the climbers had suffered “cortical atrophy,” a wasting away and decrease in size of the cerebral cortex, and “enlargement of the Virchow-Robin spaces.” Virchow-Robin spaces (VRS) are the perivascular spaces surrounding blood vessels in the cerebral cortex. These vessels drain fluid and communicate with the lymph system. An MRI can clearly demonstrate these spaces. Patients of all ages express a relatively small perivascular space but these spaces tend to increase in size and frequency with progressive age. Usually these spaces are 2 or 3 mm in diameter but can grow to become quite large (5 to 20 mm). Within the group, the brains of the amateur climbers also had showed sub-cortical lesions in the frontal lobes.
The article goes on to address a person’s tolerance to hypoxia or lack of oxygen. It had stressed that hypoxia “varies according to differences in innate physiology and physical conditioning.” These differences “can help the body and brain to better tolerate exertion and physiological stresses of high-altitude mountaineering” though it cannot be eliminated.
The first stage of high altitude sickness is called acute mountain sickness (AMS). AMS is caused by a lack of oxygen when traveling to higher elevations (usually over 2,100 m). When climbers do not have a chance to acclimate to the altitude, they can experience “headache, insomnia, dizziness, fatigue, nausea, and vomiting”. Stage two is called high-altitude cerebral edema (HACE). HACE is a potentially fatal form of AMS where the brain swells and stops functioning in the normal way. Symptoms of this includes confusion, fatigue, changes in behavior, ataxia (staggering), difficulty speaking, vomiting, hallucinations, blindness, paralysis of a limb, seizure, unconsciousness, total paralysis, and coma. Furthermore, an insufficient amount of oxygen to the brain can directly impair and cause damage to brain cells. Accordingly, “the walls of blood capillaries in the brain and elsewhere begin to leak at high altitude, and this leakage causes dangerous swelling, pressing the brain outward against the rigid skull.”
The study of Nicholas Fayed and colleagues explained that none of the Mt. Everest climbers experienced HACE and only one amateur climber experienced a mild case of AMS. However, all of the experienced climbers showed “lasting brain damage” prior to the Mt. Everest attempt and their MRI scans were unchanged following the climb.
In another experiment, Fayed and colleagues studied an eight-member team who attempted Aconcagua, a 6926-meter mountain in the Andes. Two of the climbers had reached the summit point while five had gone 6000 to 6400 meters and the last one had gone as far as 5500 meters. In this group, three had experienced AMS and two had suffered HACE. The MRI results showed that all of the climbers suffered cortical atrophy, seven of the eight climbers had enlargement of the Virchow-Robin spaces, and four of the climbers showed many subcortical lesions. Several of the climbers also experienced a range of harmful symptoms. Three years after the expedition, all of the climbers were re-examined to determine if the brain had recovered from the stresses of mountaineering Aconcagua. The results showed that the brain damage was still apparent through the MRI scans. In another case, researchers found that seven climbers who reached the summit of Mount Blanc, a 4810-meter summit in the Alps, showed enlarged Virchow- Robin spaces.
Overall, the research shows that amateur climbers are at greater risk to AMS or HACE being inexperienced while professional climbers are at greater risk of cumulative high-altitude stresses. In the study, professional climbers experienced a greater cortical atrophy over the amateur climbers. This only goes to show that there is a price to pay to live dangerously…literally!
Friday, September 28, 2007
Scientific American Mind Article - Summary and thoughts
From time to time, everyone hears ghastly accounts of vicious murders, horrific abuse, merciless maiming, and other atrocities. The odd thing about these accounts is that the ‘predator’ or ‘afflicting party’ in most of these cases usually does not have a criminal record, nor has he or she committed a crime of any kind before. To answer the resounding question of “why?,” Neuroscientists have done extensive research, bringing forth some interesting conclusions.
In the December 2006 issue of Scientific American Mind, readers got an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the new research findings published in the article “The Violent Brain” by Daniel Strueber, Monika Lueck and Gerhard Roth. It is safe to assume that everyone has heard the gender-specific statements, “girls don’t hit,” and “boys need to be able to defend themselves.” However, not a lot of people automatically link these statements to a probability of higher rates of violence in men than women. “According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's statistics on crime in the U.S., 90.1 percent of murderers apprehended in 2004 were male and men accounted for 82.1 percent of the total number arrested for violent crimes.” The study does not discount women from crimes, however. Women, in turn, “engage in more indirect, covert aggression, whereas men tend toward immediate, outward physical aggression.”
Biologically speaking, there are a few hypotheses regarding the origin, or perhaps the reason for such behavior. One of them is the frontal brain hypothesis, which links anti-social, aggressive behavior to damages in the prefrontal cortex. Some examples include Vietnam War Veterans, and children who underwent frontal brain surgery at a young age. Other research suggests that damage to specific parts of the brain, such as the limbic system, hippocampus, and amygdale may further explain violent behavior. Anatomical comparisons of a test study group at USC lead by Adrian Raine, show that “the volume of gray matter in the prefrontal cortex was 22.3 percent lower among the unsuccessful offenders as compared with the control subjects.”
Another possible explanation is one of biochemical roots – the lack of specific regulatory neurotransmitters. For instance, numerous studies have linked low levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter responsible for fear in the brain, to reckless, unsociable acts. While bad biochemistry, biological and genetic maladies may seem to increase the risk of violent behavior in males, it should also be noted that a combination of the aforementioned with ‘psychosocial risks’ such as an abusive past, unemployment, lack of proper relationship with parents, would truly be the cause of an explosion resulting in violent crimes.
On the other hand, children who have had abusive backgrounds and such negative influences in their environment have also been able to overcome these circumstances, to lead a healthy life. So now, argument begs the question, “is violent behavior caused by natural or nurtured negative influences?” or in other words, the argument ends at the nature vs. nurture theory/predicament.
I feel that as though, if one leans toward the nature end of the argument, any criminal could easily escape judgment because he or she was genetically predisposed to it. As petty as the argument sounds, it could sadly be accepted. Also, studies have not successfully expressed that damage to the frontal lobe of the brain directly causes violent behavior. Conversely, if one chooses the nurture argument, then what is the explanation for those who have been raised in negative environments, yet still overcame their past?
In the December 2006 issue of Scientific American Mind, readers got an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the new research findings published in the article “The Violent Brain” by Daniel Strueber, Monika Lueck and Gerhard Roth. It is safe to assume that everyone has heard the gender-specific statements, “girls don’t hit,” and “boys need to be able to defend themselves.” However, not a lot of people automatically link these statements to a probability of higher rates of violence in men than women. “According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's statistics on crime in the U.S., 90.1 percent of murderers apprehended in 2004 were male and men accounted for 82.1 percent of the total number arrested for violent crimes.” The study does not discount women from crimes, however. Women, in turn, “engage in more indirect, covert aggression, whereas men tend toward immediate, outward physical aggression.”
Biologically speaking, there are a few hypotheses regarding the origin, or perhaps the reason for such behavior. One of them is the frontal brain hypothesis, which links anti-social, aggressive behavior to damages in the prefrontal cortex. Some examples include Vietnam War Veterans, and children who underwent frontal brain surgery at a young age. Other research suggests that damage to specific parts of the brain, such as the limbic system, hippocampus, and amygdale may further explain violent behavior. Anatomical comparisons of a test study group at USC lead by Adrian Raine, show that “the volume of gray matter in the prefrontal cortex was 22.3 percent lower among the unsuccessful offenders as compared with the control subjects.”
Another possible explanation is one of biochemical roots – the lack of specific regulatory neurotransmitters. For instance, numerous studies have linked low levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter responsible for fear in the brain, to reckless, unsociable acts. While bad biochemistry, biological and genetic maladies may seem to increase the risk of violent behavior in males, it should also be noted that a combination of the aforementioned with ‘psychosocial risks’ such as an abusive past, unemployment, lack of proper relationship with parents, would truly be the cause of an explosion resulting in violent crimes.
On the other hand, children who have had abusive backgrounds and such negative influences in their environment have also been able to overcome these circumstances, to lead a healthy life. So now, argument begs the question, “is violent behavior caused by natural or nurtured negative influences?” or in other words, the argument ends at the nature vs. nurture theory/predicament.
I feel that as though, if one leans toward the nature end of the argument, any criminal could easily escape judgment because he or she was genetically predisposed to it. As petty as the argument sounds, it could sadly be accepted. Also, studies have not successfully expressed that damage to the frontal lobe of the brain directly causes violent behavior. Conversely, if one chooses the nurture argument, then what is the explanation for those who have been raised in negative environments, yet still overcame their past?
Scientific American Mind Article
The topic of my Scientific American article from the Mind deals with memory loss. In the article Recovering Lost Memory by Karl Peter Giese, this scientist refers to the neurodegenerative disease called Alzheimer's. Giese tells us that Alzheimer's disease is one in which there is an extensive loss of neurons in the brain which in turn destroys the memory's of that person. He goes on to describe a study done by Andre Fischer that shows neuron loss can be recovered, though neuron loss is irreversible.
It has been believed by scientists for a long time that memories lost cannot be recovered. In the article by Fischer described by Giese, memory loss may not be permanent. Environmental enrichment was used in the study by Fischer, using the model subject of mice. Genetically modified mice were used. These mice produced p25, a protein that does not occur normally but instead is formed as a result of Alzheimer's, terming it pathological. It is seen that the brain compensates for memory deficiency by actually producing this protein It was found to over activate an enzyme which regulated the function of other proteins. The protein, p25, can have opposite effects. If there are low levels in the brain, then beneficial effects on memory are seen, but if the brain produces high levels of p25, neuron death is inevitable. In order to examine therapy for memory loss, Fischer and his colleagues used the negative aspects of p25 to kill neurons in mice.
In these mice, the scientists selectively activated p25 which erased their memories in relation to tasks learned. There were two memory tests the mice underwent. The first involved a water maze in which they had to locate a submerged platform and the mice, in the second task, had to associate a particular environment with what they called a "mild foot shock." Both of these tasks involved the hippocampus which is a part of the brain critical to memory and profoundly affected by Alzheimer's. The researchers then provoked the fabrication of p25 to destroy greater than half of the hippocampal neurons. After testing the mice after killing their neurons, Fischer stated the memories had disappeared.
The second part of the experiment included environmental enrichment in which the mice ran on wheels and objects that would be found in a cage in a normal home. The enrichment did not replace the neurons lost but multiplied the connections between the happocampal neurons remaining. The mice were then able to compensate for the neurons that were lost by increasing the p25 levels and allowed for memory retrieval.
Fischer and his colleagues found a chemical that imitated environmental enrichment. Protein function that regulates gene activity can be moderated by environmental enrichment. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) which is blocked by this unknown chemical, impacts gene activity and this blocker could lead to the recovery of lost memories.
Based on this research, drug therapies can now be made that target HDAC enabling memories to be recovered. Though this and p25 are only a few suppliers of Alzheimer's disease, other studies with different models are needed in order to establish whether the HDAC blocker can actually recover memories. This will also lead scientists and doctors to understanding the storage and retrieval of memories. Fischer and his partners launched a great finding: connections are more important than numbers, in terms of neurons.
Scientific American Mind Summary
The Scientific American Mind article, “Juicing the Brain” written by Jonathan D. Moreno focuses on research that will decrease mental fatigue of soldiers and other professionals with jobs that cause irregular sleeping patterns. The goal of the United States military is to “produce a better soldier” who will overcome limitations of the common person. One of those limitations is mental and physical fatigue caused by sleep deprivation. Sleep deprivation can increase human error in any profession but especially in the military. Sleep deprivation can offset our sleep cycles that are controlled by the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN). The SCN is found in the hypothalamus and is considered “the brain’s biological clock.” It is composed of 20,000 neurons and functions as the “pacemaker for circadian rhythm in mammals.”
Morena continues by discussing the drug, modafinil that’s marketed as Provigil. It was approved by the FDA in 1998 for treating narcolepsy and sleeping disorders, and is now being tested for military use. The mechanism of action of the drug is still not understood but it is suspected that as a nontraditional stimulant it “nudges the brain toward wakefulness through specific pathways” by possibly increasing serotonin levels in the brain stem. A double-blind study was performed using modafinil and a placebo. Results from the study indicated that sleep-deprived subjects that took modafinil did better on cognitive tests compared to those on the placebo. The military is also testing another class of drugs called ampakines which are used for dementia and schizophrenia, and have showed promise in their performance of stimulating someone with sleep deprivation.
The article also focused whether or not electrical stimulation would help people “exceed their normal intellectual capabilities.” The article mentioned two techniques used for electrical stimulation: direct-current (DC) depolarization and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). DC polarization involved attaching an electrode to the subject’s scalp, which resulted in better verbal skills due to the increased rate of neuronal firing and activating “cells involved in word generation.” While TMS involves a magnetic coil placed above the head of a subject and magnetic impulses pass through their cortex. The goal of these two techniques is to cure patients with dementia or stroke symptoms. However, since they can enhance cognitive skills the military is speculating whether electrical stimulation can be a useful tool for sleep deprived soldiers. It was proposed that impulses could be generated within the soldiers’ helmets to keep them alert. Finally, the article mentions the elimination of the fear gene. The fear gene called stathmin is “associated with innate anger and learned fear.” And Moreno briefly talked about the scientific and ethical questions involved with this enhancement.
I found this article interesting since as a college student I am extremely sleep deprived averaging four to five hours of sleep a night. When I first read this article I thought that the use of this prescribed stimulant was a positive medical advancement, especially for soldiers during long and hazardous days of combat. However, this drug enhancement therapy could possibly lead to dependency and addiction. So, now that I think about it using a prescribed stimulant to stay awake seems completely dangerous, and especially in the case of a soldier who would need to take it constantly. I would also be leery beacause no side effects have been identified yet and long term use complications haven't been found either. I think it would definitely alter one’s sleep cycles and could lead to more eventual health problems. The electrical stimulation techniques seem to be a safer alternative compared to the prescription drugs. However, I have come to the conclusion that either treatment could have positive results but equal or greater consequences could arise since the brain's biological clock will be offset.
Morena continues by discussing the drug, modafinil that’s marketed as Provigil. It was approved by the FDA in 1998 for treating narcolepsy and sleeping disorders, and is now being tested for military use. The mechanism of action of the drug is still not understood but it is suspected that as a nontraditional stimulant it “nudges the brain toward wakefulness through specific pathways” by possibly increasing serotonin levels in the brain stem. A double-blind study was performed using modafinil and a placebo. Results from the study indicated that sleep-deprived subjects that took modafinil did better on cognitive tests compared to those on the placebo. The military is also testing another class of drugs called ampakines which are used for dementia and schizophrenia, and have showed promise in their performance of stimulating someone with sleep deprivation.
The article also focused whether or not electrical stimulation would help people “exceed their normal intellectual capabilities.” The article mentioned two techniques used for electrical stimulation: direct-current (DC) depolarization and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). DC polarization involved attaching an electrode to the subject’s scalp, which resulted in better verbal skills due to the increased rate of neuronal firing and activating “cells involved in word generation.” While TMS involves a magnetic coil placed above the head of a subject and magnetic impulses pass through their cortex. The goal of these two techniques is to cure patients with dementia or stroke symptoms. However, since they can enhance cognitive skills the military is speculating whether electrical stimulation can be a useful tool for sleep deprived soldiers. It was proposed that impulses could be generated within the soldiers’ helmets to keep them alert. Finally, the article mentions the elimination of the fear gene. The fear gene called stathmin is “associated with innate anger and learned fear.” And Moreno briefly talked about the scientific and ethical questions involved with this enhancement.
I found this article interesting since as a college student I am extremely sleep deprived averaging four to five hours of sleep a night. When I first read this article I thought that the use of this prescribed stimulant was a positive medical advancement, especially for soldiers during long and hazardous days of combat. However, this drug enhancement therapy could possibly lead to dependency and addiction. So, now that I think about it using a prescribed stimulant to stay awake seems completely dangerous, and especially in the case of a soldier who would need to take it constantly. I would also be leery beacause no side effects have been identified yet and long term use complications haven't been found either. I think it would definitely alter one’s sleep cycles and could lead to more eventual health problems. The electrical stimulation techniques seem to be a safer alternative compared to the prescription drugs. However, I have come to the conclusion that either treatment could have positive results but equal or greater consequences could arise since the brain's biological clock will be offset.
Scientific American Mind Article
In the Scientific American Mind article “Strange but True: Less Sleep Means More Dreams,” Christie Nicholson investigated the mystery behind sleep deprivation and its affect on dreams. A neurologist at the Minnesota Regional Sleep Disorder Center in Minneapolis stated that the reason for why “dreams are often perceived as real and vivid is because of sleep deprivation resulting in a greater brain activity once in a REM stage” (Nicholson, 2007).
Although sleep may seem like a steady state, it actually consists of several stages that cycle throughout the night. Scientists use an apparatus called an electroencephalogram to determine the stage of sleep, that is, the typed of brain waves are presented on amplitudes and frequencies. “The sleep cycle begins with four stages of slow-wave sleep called non-REM. The first stage of non-REM is the nodding off period where one is experiencing a sensation of falling into a hole. The second stage is when the brain activity decreases. Then, stages 3rd and 4th are shut off to which the heart and breathing rates drop dramatically. Lastly, lucid dreams occur in the 5th stage of sleep, known as the REM (rapid eye movement) stage. The most characteristic of REM sleep is the bursts of rapid eye movement while dreaming as well as the most vivid dreaming occurs” (Nicholson, 2007). One complete sleep cycle lasts about 90 to 100 minutes. A person experiences 4 to 5 complete sleep cycles.
In order to study the functions of sleep and the biological mechanisms underlying the effects of sleep deprivation, scientists studied REM deprivation in humans. In this case, a person experiences the stages of sleep. However, the scientists wake the person up once the REM stage occurs, and then the person returns back to sleep. In this case, REM stage is continued but an increase in dream imagery becomes vivid as if the person is hallucinating. In addition, intake of alcohols or drugs would repress REM.
Furthermore, animal studies of REM deprivation are markedly different than human studies. One of the most common ways to REM deprive a rat is to put the animal in a position where it is able to experience slow wave sleep, but not REM. The rat will be awakened immediately upon entering REM, and the lengths of time rats undergo REM are much longer than humans. As a result, “rats die after four weeks of REM deprivations” (Nicholson, 2007). The cause of death remains unknown. Even now, scientists continue to search for answers to why humans spend about 27 years of dreaming over the course of an average life and why it’s important.
I found Nicholson’s article very interesting because it made me think about my sleeping habits. That is, I tend to stay up late studying, and later end up experiencing vivid nightmares. I’ve always experienced such vivid dreams, which has been a problem for me. The reason is that at times I wake up in the middle of the night hearing myself cry in the dream. And last year I had nightmares that felt like I was choking and woke up in a state that I was gasping for air. And so now, after reading her article I understood why at times I experienced such vivid dreams due to sleep deprivation.
Scientific American article Summary
In the Scientific American article Learning Fear by Watching: The Brainier, Cheaper Path to Knowledge, Kevin Ochsner from Columbia University attempts to underline what regions of the brain are active while learning through second hand experience. In order to do this, Ochsner illustrates how a recent study, Learning Fears by Observing Others: The Neural Systems of Social Fear Transmission, by Andreas Olsson and Elizabeth Phelps, depicts how we learn vicariously and store this information.
The bulk of research regarding how we learn has been done on the effects of first-hand experiences. However, we tend to learn though observing others’ experiences as well, thereby acquiring information vicariously through them. As a part of this study, Olsson and Phelps carried out an experiment whereby participants’ “neural activity” was measured as they watched a clip depicting an example of classical fear conditioning. In the clip, an actor was shown to gradually associate a certain shape with the administration of an electric shock. Hence, the participants witnessed the actor come to fear the shape due to the painful stimulus it elicited. Fear learning can be measured through a technique called “skin conductance,” whereby the change in electrical resistance on the surface of the hand is used as an indicator of whether fear learning has occurred.
When one is learning through direct experience, a region of the brain called the amygdala shows clear activation. According to an imaging study conducted by Olsson and Phelps, “functional brain scans” depicted the same type of activation (in the amygdala region of the brain) when a participant was watching an actor in a video clip learn though direct experience. This demonstrates that the participants were learning to associate the shape with a painful stimulus (hence, a fear of the shape), similar to that they witnessed being experienced by the actor in the video. When the participants’ skin conductance was measured, it indicated that they had learned to couple the shape with a fear of receiving an uncomfortable stimulus. This implies that people posses the tendency to learn through observing others. This can be seen as a result of similarities in brain activity during direct experiences or watching others learn.
Olsson and Phelps, taken in conjunction with a number of previous studies done on this subject matter, suggests that we tend to learn from observing others’ experiences by putting ourselves in their shoes, thereby better understanding them. However, due to the relatively crude nature of the imaging technique, it is not as yet possible to predict behaviors. We may gain a general idea of what a person is thinking by observing their neural activity, however, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to pin-point exactly what those thoughts entail. Activation of corresponding regions of the brain does not denote a concurrence in the feelings of the observer and the person being observed. However, the scope of learning can be determined through activity in brain regions called the insula and the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC).
Nonetheless, it is difficult to equate fear learning with solely observation. There is most often an interplay between direct experiences and observing and analyzing the behaviors of the person being watched.
I have always found the question of how we learn to be intriguing due to which Ocsher’s article, delineating the results of Olsson and Phelps experiment, caught my eye instantly. I hope that more research is carried out in the future to better understand the influence of second -hand learning as I feel this is an integral part of how we acquire knowledge.
* Learning Fear by Watching: The Brainier, Cheaper Path to Knowledge, Kevin Ochsner
http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=learning_fear_by_watching_the_brainer_ch&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
The bulk of research regarding how we learn has been done on the effects of first-hand experiences. However, we tend to learn though observing others’ experiences as well, thereby acquiring information vicariously through them. As a part of this study, Olsson and Phelps carried out an experiment whereby participants’ “neural activity” was measured as they watched a clip depicting an example of classical fear conditioning. In the clip, an actor was shown to gradually associate a certain shape with the administration of an electric shock. Hence, the participants witnessed the actor come to fear the shape due to the painful stimulus it elicited. Fear learning can be measured through a technique called “skin conductance,” whereby the change in electrical resistance on the surface of the hand is used as an indicator of whether fear learning has occurred.
When one is learning through direct experience, a region of the brain called the amygdala shows clear activation. According to an imaging study conducted by Olsson and Phelps, “functional brain scans” depicted the same type of activation (in the amygdala region of the brain) when a participant was watching an actor in a video clip learn though direct experience. This demonstrates that the participants were learning to associate the shape with a painful stimulus (hence, a fear of the shape), similar to that they witnessed being experienced by the actor in the video. When the participants’ skin conductance was measured, it indicated that they had learned to couple the shape with a fear of receiving an uncomfortable stimulus. This implies that people posses the tendency to learn through observing others. This can be seen as a result of similarities in brain activity during direct experiences or watching others learn.
Olsson and Phelps, taken in conjunction with a number of previous studies done on this subject matter, suggests that we tend to learn from observing others’ experiences by putting ourselves in their shoes, thereby better understanding them. However, due to the relatively crude nature of the imaging technique, it is not as yet possible to predict behaviors. We may gain a general idea of what a person is thinking by observing their neural activity, however, it is very difficult, if not impossible, to pin-point exactly what those thoughts entail. Activation of corresponding regions of the brain does not denote a concurrence in the feelings of the observer and the person being observed. However, the scope of learning can be determined through activity in brain regions called the insula and the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC).
Nonetheless, it is difficult to equate fear learning with solely observation. There is most often an interplay between direct experiences and observing and analyzing the behaviors of the person being watched.
I have always found the question of how we learn to be intriguing due to which Ocsher’s article, delineating the results of Olsson and Phelps experiment, caught my eye instantly. I hope that more research is carried out in the future to better understand the influence of second -hand learning as I feel this is an integral part of how we acquire knowledge.
* Learning Fear by Watching: The Brainier, Cheaper Path to Knowledge, Kevin Ochsner
http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=learning_fear_by_watching_the_brainer_ch&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
Monday, September 24, 2007
Chapter 4 Synopsis and Critique
Chapter 4 Synopsis and Critique
Synopsis:Chapter Four, entitled “The Broken Heart of the Republic,” begins with Thomas Willis’ education. He became a student of Oxford in 1638. It was there that his life would begin to unravel both personally and communally.
King Charles was becoming more and more detested throughout England. While he was taking the people’s money, he had Laud persecute the Puritans and other rebels forming secret courts. The church services, requested on King Charles behalf, were the beginnings to a launch of war. When King Charles called Parliament, angry Puritans and landowners were enraged by the rules. Charles tried to negotiate with Parliament whom was not content with compromise. Enemies of the king imprisoned some of Charles advisors while Charles opponents slipped away quietly, humiliating his power and enraging Parliament. War had begun in the country. Formerly an educational atmosphere, Oxford became the place for the training of militia and the preparation of weapons and gear. At this point, Willis’ future as a clergyman was not looking pleasant so he averted his attention to medicine. On August 22, 1642, only a few months into Willis’ medicinal training, Charles assembled his troops and declared war. Charles had one the first battle of the English Civil War at Edgehill on October 23. Oxford became the new capital. In Oxford, the soldiers became ill by an outbreak of typhus. Thomas Willis described this epidemic as “so grievous that in short time after, either side left off, and from that time, for many months, fought not with the enemy but with the disease” and stated that “ the very air seemed infected.” Though Willis had only a few months of training under his belt, he had developed a “doctor’s eye” and observed the disease as it spread from the returned soldiers to the soldiers at home to the town to the countryside. He observed the whelks and spots of the skin, the disordered pulse, and the raging heat. Both his father and stepmother was taken ill by the epidemic and died. Willis believed that only if the King would return home, could order be restored throughout the lands. A pamphlet had even arisen pleading with the King to return home to cure Londoners of the King’s Evil. By this time Parliament was advancing towards Oxford. King Charles only advantage was his well trained, disciplined army. He asked for volunteers to defend the city, amongst them was Thomas Willis. Upon returning to Oxford after two years, Willis could see much had changed. Seven thousand soldiers were now stationed in Oxford. Oxford was once a reputable, “healthy country city” but now a “sick, foul slum.” People wandered the streets, rats began to multiply and plague began to spread throughout Oxford and more lives were lost as a result. While stationed in Oxford, Willis spent his time teaching himself medicine. He read any books he came across and talked to anyone with some medical knowledge.
One of the King’s physicians was a teacher named William Harvey. Harvey had made a discovery twenty years earlier: “the heart sends blood through the body in a loop.” Harvey tested his observations with experiments. Harvey looked to Aristotle as a leader. Forty years earlier, Harvey had studied under Hieronymus Fabricius, who showed that the eyes pupils respond to light and gave the first proper account of the placenta’s function. Harvey understood that Fabricius had made an error about the anatomy of the veins. Fabricius concluded that the little doors must slow down the blood as it flowed away from the heart through the veins. Harvey, on the other hand, recognized a great importance in these floodgates. He believed that “if these little doors were designed for blocking the flow of blood”, it must have meant that “the veins must carry blood toward the heart, not away from it.” He studied animals to verify that this was correct and found that the more he studied the blood, the more important it became. Harvey was so reputable that he was asked to teach at the College of Physicians. He was fascinated with the brain though he left behind no theories of how the worked. He said, “The brain itself neither sees nor hears, and so forth, yet it does all these things.” He is considered today to have been a “proto-psychologist” and was “one of the few physicians who could cure devils in the head.” Although the brain was of no importance since “sensation does not derive from the brain,” Harvey believed that the blood could feel. During his time at court, he served the King James with a deep devotion saying, “The King… is the foundation of his Kingdom, the sun of the world around him, the heart of the republic, the foundation whence all power, all grace, doth flow.” Harvey continued to explore the heart and blood. He predicted blood traveling through the veins towards the heart and that a pulse was caused “when the heart drove surging waves of blood into the arteries.” He said the blood in the body could be recycled over and over again. He contemplated his theories of the little doors and experimented to in fact verify there truths. When King James past and Charles inherited the throne, Harvey and the King became the best of friends. King Charles was considerate when listening to the ideas that most would dismiss. In 1628, Harvey released his book, The Motion of the Heart. It was disregarded and unaccepted by the people because he was making claims in experiments using autopsies. His reputation was diminishing to a crazed scientist. Taking the criticism with an open mind, he decided to do more research with the help of the King. He met a man by the name of Montgomery who had been wounded as a young boy that left an injury with a hole in his chest. When Harvey looked into the man’s chest, he saw the human heart beating. He wrote, “I was almost tempted to think… that the motion of the heart was only to be comprehended by God.” Harvey followed his King to Nottingham, and at the battle of Edgehill, and finally to Oxford where he was treated like a prisoner. His entire life’s work was taken from him by looters and ran sackers.
In 1644, when Thomas Willis had volunteered to be in the war, Harvey was there treating the sick for plague, typhus, and malaria. Many started to understand Harvey’s theories and vowed to learn about the body through observations and experimentation. In fact, Willis would follow Harvey’s example for the rest of his life. “Willis would search for the true nature of blood, which would lead him to the brain, the nerves, and ultimately the soul.”
During the war, Oliver Cromwell came to be a great leader who would further discipline its military. Cromwell overlooked the fact that he was one of the first beginning to establish a democracy; not only a political one, but a religious one as well. Many threats, such as Overton’s mockery, were sent to the conservative orders in Oxford which ridiculed the Aristotelian idea of the soul. Mortalists claimed to preach true Christianity saying the soul was mortal and if the body was dead, an immaterial soul would not be able to break out of a material body.
In the meantime, Archbishop Laud had been beheaded by Parliament for treason. In April of 1646, King Charles sneaked out of Oxford disguised as a servant leaving his people behind. By June of 1646, Oxford forces surrendered to Parliament. Harvey left unnoticed. Willis had left his home where his life had unraveled just a few years prior. The war, in particular the devastation of defeat, was shared by the entire King’s people who were forced to move on and begin a new life.
Critique:
I found myself to be very involved while reading Chapter 4 of Soul Made Flesh. The first thought to cross my mind was that of Willis who “was taught to resolve any controversy by finding a relevant passage in Galen or Aristotle.” In science, I cannot fathom the idea of looking to philosophers for answers. It surprised me that Willis would not have contemplated experimenting with his theories. However, I did find it very interesting that Willis was one of the first to describe the clinical outbreak of typhus, the whelks and spots of the skin, the disordered pulse, and the raging heat. I can only imagine what he thought when he first came into contact with the epidemic.
I also found it very interesting that William Harvey had made the discovery that the heart sends blood through the body in a loop. I liked the way that Harvey thought, to the degree that he looked at the body for himself and tested his observations with experimentation. To me, he seemed like a “think it through” kind of man who wouldn’t conduct only one experiment to come to some conclusion.
In addition to Harvey, his teacher Fabricius was quite appealing. I thought it was intriguing that he showed that the eye’s pupils respond to light and gave the first correct account of the placenta’s function. But it shocked me to find that Fabricius mistook the function of the valves (“little doors”). However, I was reassured when Harvey noticed this mistake. And I can only envision his reaction to seeing Montgomery’s heart beating within his chest. I also found it very fascinating that Harvey studied the embryology of a chicken at least in the sense to investigate the heart and blood.
Overall, the chapter was very engaging with all the different theories and observations made by these scientists. I feel that science back then was so different from what it is today. By this, I mean looking to philosophy to answer the questions posed by these scientists or dissecting any animal that could bring them one step further to some observational conclusion.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Lorenzo's Oil Analysis & Critique
Movie Summary
The movie starts out in the Comoros Islands, Africa, where the Odones have lived among the people for many years. Lorenzo Odone, a very bright boy, is shown speaking fluent Comorian to his friend Omuori Hassane. Not long after he comes back to the United States, Lorenzo exhibits strange symptoms (blackouts, fits, etc) of a rare disease – ALD. Adrenoleukodystrophy is a degenerative disorder corroding the Myelin Sheath on neurons, hindering rapid transfer of signals to the next neuron. ALD was just coming under the radar of neurologists, who had not yet come up with a treatment. Lorenzo is first put into the research study group run by Professor Nikolais, who prescribed a non-saturated fats diet, in order to eliminate the increase in saturated fats in Lorenzo’s body, which are the main players in stripping off myelin. Upon noticing that Lorenzo’s saturated fat levels are increasing, rather than decreasing, the Odones, Augusto and Michaela, take an initiative to thoroughly familiarize themselves with the sciences in order to better understand their son’s medical condition.
On their quest to help Lorenzo, they encounter resistance from the ALD foundation to their new ideas that go against Prof. Nikolais’s research study and the studies of other doctors. Relentlessly, the Odones continue to learn and hypothesize ways to help their son. After organizing an ALD conference with doctors from all over the world, the Odones learn about a potential treatment – Oleic Acid. They order a digestible form of Oleic Acid and begin treating their son with it, using it as salad dressing in his salad. Initially, they see a decline in his saturated fats, however the progress platues at a point, still too high for him. In less than a year, Lorenzo lost a lot of motor control, speech, and other abilities.
Michaela’s sister was the main caretaker of Lorenzo. However, after she leaves due to squabble between herself and Michaela, proper nurses become hard to find and very hard to keep. Michaela then invites Lorenzo’s old friend Omuori from the Comoros Islands, to stay with them and take care of Lorenzo. Shortly afterward, while on the search for a new nurse, Michaela’s sister comes back to take care of Lorenzo, ending the search altogether.
In the meantime, Augusto finds out about Competitive Inhibition through Erucic Acid. Oleic Acid only dealt with C-18, whereas Erucic Acid would deal with upper carbons. Since, local pharmaceutical companies don’t make a digestible version of Erucic Acid, the Odones find an English pharmacist willing to make the form of Erucic Acid required. Upon consumption of the Erucic Acid with the Oleic Acid, Lorenzo’s C-24 and C-26 levels become normal – a feat that no research group was able to accomplish. He also started ‘communicating’ with his parents through eye-blink responses and moving his finger.
Movie Critique
I truly enjoyed the movie. On of the themes of the movie is still resonating in my head – Doctors do not have the final say in anything. Also the cliché comes to mind – “…where there is a will, there is a way.” Even after discouragement from other ALD parents, and doctors who are more accredited than them, the Odones are not willing to blindly accept the answers of the doctors. Augusto and Michaela wanted results, and they actually put in everything they had, physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially, and got results.
Our society today is not much different from the one portrayed in the movie. Even now, once doctors pass their final verdict on a patients life, not many people put in their effort and time to come up with a cure themselves. “It is preposterous!” we think. “How can we do what doctors can’t?” We don’t consider the possibility that our logic and that of a doctor holds the same value, especially if we enter the playing field with the necessary knowledge to make sense of the situation at hand.
I was very happy to know that Lorenzo Odone is still alive and celebrated his 28th birthday in May 2006. He is deprived of most of his functions but still communicates through blinking his eyelids to say no, and moving his finger to say yes. Michaela Odone died of Cancer in June 2006, and Augusto Odone and Omuori still take care of Lorenzo. Mr. Odone still works in the Myelin Project headquarters in Virginia.
I really liked the emphasis the movie put on hidden agendas of the intellectual research community. Unless the research gains monetary endowment or public interest recognition, scientists do not bother with testing or experimenting with possible treatment, regardless of what benefit one, victim, might attain. This theme was evident in the 1980s and still is in this day and age.
All of this begs the question, “are we learning from past mistakes?”
I found an article about Lorenzo in the Inquirer:
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bstith/Lorenzoarticle.htm
The movie starts out in the Comoros Islands, Africa, where the Odones have lived among the people for many years. Lorenzo Odone, a very bright boy, is shown speaking fluent Comorian to his friend Omuori Hassane. Not long after he comes back to the United States, Lorenzo exhibits strange symptoms (blackouts, fits, etc) of a rare disease – ALD. Adrenoleukodystrophy is a degenerative disorder corroding the Myelin Sheath on neurons, hindering rapid transfer of signals to the next neuron. ALD was just coming under the radar of neurologists, who had not yet come up with a treatment. Lorenzo is first put into the research study group run by Professor Nikolais, who prescribed a non-saturated fats diet, in order to eliminate the increase in saturated fats in Lorenzo’s body, which are the main players in stripping off myelin. Upon noticing that Lorenzo’s saturated fat levels are increasing, rather than decreasing, the Odones, Augusto and Michaela, take an initiative to thoroughly familiarize themselves with the sciences in order to better understand their son’s medical condition.
On their quest to help Lorenzo, they encounter resistance from the ALD foundation to their new ideas that go against Prof. Nikolais’s research study and the studies of other doctors. Relentlessly, the Odones continue to learn and hypothesize ways to help their son. After organizing an ALD conference with doctors from all over the world, the Odones learn about a potential treatment – Oleic Acid. They order a digestible form of Oleic Acid and begin treating their son with it, using it as salad dressing in his salad. Initially, they see a decline in his saturated fats, however the progress platues at a point, still too high for him. In less than a year, Lorenzo lost a lot of motor control, speech, and other abilities.
Michaela’s sister was the main caretaker of Lorenzo. However, after she leaves due to squabble between herself and Michaela, proper nurses become hard to find and very hard to keep. Michaela then invites Lorenzo’s old friend Omuori from the Comoros Islands, to stay with them and take care of Lorenzo. Shortly afterward, while on the search for a new nurse, Michaela’s sister comes back to take care of Lorenzo, ending the search altogether.
In the meantime, Augusto finds out about Competitive Inhibition through Erucic Acid. Oleic Acid only dealt with C-18, whereas Erucic Acid would deal with upper carbons. Since, local pharmaceutical companies don’t make a digestible version of Erucic Acid, the Odones find an English pharmacist willing to make the form of Erucic Acid required. Upon consumption of the Erucic Acid with the Oleic Acid, Lorenzo’s C-24 and C-26 levels become normal – a feat that no research group was able to accomplish. He also started ‘communicating’ with his parents through eye-blink responses and moving his finger.
Movie Critique
I truly enjoyed the movie. On of the themes of the movie is still resonating in my head – Doctors do not have the final say in anything. Also the cliché comes to mind – “…where there is a will, there is a way.” Even after discouragement from other ALD parents, and doctors who are more accredited than them, the Odones are not willing to blindly accept the answers of the doctors. Augusto and Michaela wanted results, and they actually put in everything they had, physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially, and got results.
Our society today is not much different from the one portrayed in the movie. Even now, once doctors pass their final verdict on a patients life, not many people put in their effort and time to come up with a cure themselves. “It is preposterous!” we think. “How can we do what doctors can’t?” We don’t consider the possibility that our logic and that of a doctor holds the same value, especially if we enter the playing field with the necessary knowledge to make sense of the situation at hand.
I was very happy to know that Lorenzo Odone is still alive and celebrated his 28th birthday in May 2006. He is deprived of most of his functions but still communicates through blinking his eyelids to say no, and moving his finger to say yes. Michaela Odone died of Cancer in June 2006, and Augusto Odone and Omuori still take care of Lorenzo. Mr. Odone still works in the Myelin Project headquarters in Virginia.
I really liked the emphasis the movie put on hidden agendas of the intellectual research community. Unless the research gains monetary endowment or public interest recognition, scientists do not bother with testing or experimenting with possible treatment, regardless of what benefit one, victim, might attain. This theme was evident in the 1980s and still is in this day and age.
All of this begs the question, “are we learning from past mistakes?”
I found an article about Lorenzo in the Inquirer:
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bstith/Lorenzoarticle.htm
Scientific American Mind Article
In the September 13, 2007 Scientific American Mind article “Fact or Fiction: Babies Exposed to Classical Music End Up Smarter," Nikhil Swaminathan explores the research behind the media-fueled “Mozart Effect.” The term was coined in a 1993 by Frances H. Rauscher in a study published in Nature involving college students and the positive effect of listening to a Mozart sonata prior to performing spatial reasoning tasks. Similar studies have been able to replicate these results, whereas others have not. Over the years, Rauscher’s work has been the basis for the development of a growing market targeting parents and those that are expecting. Such is the case with products, such as Disney’s line called Baby Mozart—an offshoot of their Baby Einstein line—, which promotes the progression of early childhood mental development by way of music. It is evident in the advancements of such product lines and certain state laws, such as the one that mandates the distribution of CDs containing classical music to all mothers in Georgia, that the research conducted by Rauscher and his contemporaries have not gone unnoticed. However, there is still a great debate pertaining to the viability of such findings.
Researchers of the 2004 Stanford study that examined this phenomenon concluded that the liaison between music and cognition originates from the “older belief that has been labeled ‘infant determinism,' the idea that a critical period early in development has irreversible consequences for the rest of a child’s life” (Swaminathan, 2007). Critics of such studies have determined that such effects are merely coincidental and only occur on a case-by-case basis. Rauscher himself has said that the Mozart Effect is merely a “myth,” and that children themselves would benefit more if they actually engaged in formal music lessons, as opposed to passively listening to symphonies. Incidently, such opposition from the scientific community has done nothing to sway the ever-growing market that links music and children’s intellect. Swaminathan ends the article with a caveat about the growing market, stating that the use of such products should not substitute for a parent’s intrinsic role to stimulate and engage a child’s mind through social activity.
I found Swaminathan’s article particularly intriguing because I, personally, was exposed to many years of music education as a child. Although I cannot know how I would have been impacted had I not taken instrumental lessons, I believe that such an experience has definitely contributed to the development of my sense of focus and self-discipline. I agree with Rauscher when he states that musical instruction can help increase children’s cognitive skills more so than passively listening to classical music. The complex pathway in which the eyes visualize musical notes and transpose it into the rapid movement of fingers on the ivory keys of a piano is truly a reflection of the vast intricacies of the human brain.
Researchers of the 2004 Stanford study that examined this phenomenon concluded that the liaison between music and cognition originates from the “older belief that has been labeled ‘infant determinism,' the idea that a critical period early in development has irreversible consequences for the rest of a child’s life” (Swaminathan, 2007). Critics of such studies have determined that such effects are merely coincidental and only occur on a case-by-case basis. Rauscher himself has said that the Mozart Effect is merely a “myth,” and that children themselves would benefit more if they actually engaged in formal music lessons, as opposed to passively listening to symphonies. Incidently, such opposition from the scientific community has done nothing to sway the ever-growing market that links music and children’s intellect. Swaminathan ends the article with a caveat about the growing market, stating that the use of such products should not substitute for a parent’s intrinsic role to stimulate and engage a child’s mind through social activity.
I found Swaminathan’s article particularly intriguing because I, personally, was exposed to many years of music education as a child. Although I cannot know how I would have been impacted had I not taken instrumental lessons, I believe that such an experience has definitely contributed to the development of my sense of focus and self-discipline. I agree with Rauscher when he states that musical instruction can help increase children’s cognitive skills more so than passively listening to classical music. The complex pathway in which the eyes visualize musical notes and transpose it into the rapid movement of fingers on the ivory keys of a piano is truly a reflection of the vast intricacies of the human brain.
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Lorenzo's Oil
After watching the film, Lorenzo’s Oil, which is about Lorenzo Odone who suffered with Adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD), I visited Lorenzo’s website. He is now 29 years old and according to the site he is deprived of many functions but his mind is still there. Lorenzo’s methods of communication include blinking his eyelids to say no and wiggling his fingers to say yes, which was shown in the film. According to the site, he loves listening to music and enjoys being read to. Lorenzo’s parents started The Myelin Project that is a “multinational gathering of families struck by one demyelinating disease or another.” To help patients with demyelinating diseases treatments for remyelinating the axons have been performed in vitro and on animals, but trials on humans are in the near future. The two treatments for remyelination of axons are transplantation of myelin-forming cells and pharmaceutical compounds. God-willing in the near future these treatments will be available not only help other boys with ALD but to help others with demyelinating diseases.
This movie hit very close to home for me in a couple ways. First, it made me think of my one cousin who is a carrier of the gene for muscular dystrophy. He found out that he had an extremely mild case of the disease when he was child and was blessed that the disease never escalated to its fullest degree of severity. However, he has been warned that his children have a fifty percent chance of having a severe case of the disease. With his wedding quickly approaching and the expectation from his future wife to have a family, the worry and anticipation is at times unbearable. In relation to this movie, I could only imagine how Lorenzo’s mother must have felt when she found out that she was the carrier of the ALD gene. Even though she had no idea that she was a carrier of ALD the guilt must have still been agonizing. While my cousin knows that he is a carrier, he has to make the decision to risk having children with the disease or not have children of his own at all. I wonder what advice Michaela would have given my cousin if she was still alive.
The second thing about this film that hit me hard was the undying trust and faith the Muscatine’s had in the scientists and doctors. Since the Muscatine’s were in charge of the ALD family conferences and newsletters they were very skeptical about the information they gave out to parents. At first I was irritated with their inability to question the medical teams yet at the same time I thought about my parent’s dependency on my doctors when I was sick. The Muscatine’s, my parents, and millions of parents all over become desperate to save the lives of their children, and therefore become dependent on the knowledge of doctors and scientist’s to help them. Many people believe that doctors know everything but if they did we wouldn’t have to go from doctor to doctor for a second opinion. Even in my case my parents had to question the doctors when I was told by one neurosurgeon to wash my hair a week after my surgery, which was wrong. My parents had a bad feeling about his advice, so they decided to question my primary neurosurgeon and pediatrician to get second opinions. Both of them agreed that I had to wait 3 weeks after my surgery. I give the Odone’s a lot of credit for taking it upon themselves to not only question the doctors but to find an oil that saved the life of their son.
This film left a definite impression on me. It made me feel compelled to become more aware of other diseases like ALD and to make others aware of these diseases as well. I pray that someday remyelination treatments will be able to save the lives of those inflicted with these life-threatening diseases.
This movie hit very close to home for me in a couple ways. First, it made me think of my one cousin who is a carrier of the gene for muscular dystrophy. He found out that he had an extremely mild case of the disease when he was child and was blessed that the disease never escalated to its fullest degree of severity. However, he has been warned that his children have a fifty percent chance of having a severe case of the disease. With his wedding quickly approaching and the expectation from his future wife to have a family, the worry and anticipation is at times unbearable. In relation to this movie, I could only imagine how Lorenzo’s mother must have felt when she found out that she was the carrier of the ALD gene. Even though she had no idea that she was a carrier of ALD the guilt must have still been agonizing. While my cousin knows that he is a carrier, he has to make the decision to risk having children with the disease or not have children of his own at all. I wonder what advice Michaela would have given my cousin if she was still alive.
The second thing about this film that hit me hard was the undying trust and faith the Muscatine’s had in the scientists and doctors. Since the Muscatine’s were in charge of the ALD family conferences and newsletters they were very skeptical about the information they gave out to parents. At first I was irritated with their inability to question the medical teams yet at the same time I thought about my parent’s dependency on my doctors when I was sick. The Muscatine’s, my parents, and millions of parents all over become desperate to save the lives of their children, and therefore become dependent on the knowledge of doctors and scientist’s to help them. Many people believe that doctors know everything but if they did we wouldn’t have to go from doctor to doctor for a second opinion. Even in my case my parents had to question the doctors when I was told by one neurosurgeon to wash my hair a week after my surgery, which was wrong. My parents had a bad feeling about his advice, so they decided to question my primary neurosurgeon and pediatrician to get second opinions. Both of them agreed that I had to wait 3 weeks after my surgery. I give the Odone’s a lot of credit for taking it upon themselves to not only question the doctors but to find an oil that saved the life of their son.
This film left a definite impression on me. It made me feel compelled to become more aware of other diseases like ALD and to make others aware of these diseases as well. I pray that someday remyelination treatments will be able to save the lives of those inflicted with these life-threatening diseases.
Lorenzo's Oil
Lorenzo's Oil is a gripping story about a young boy who is diagnosed with adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD) and the effort and support this child received from his parents trying to save him from the inevitable: death.
I was amazed at this true story in general. Being a biology major, we are constanly reading material from many divisions of biology. Lorenzo's parents, in order to understand their son's disease, were doing the same thing. They spent so many hours in the NIH library reading tons of articles not only understanding their son's disease but how and why it was working on him. This was simple research. Because of their effort, they ended up finding a way for Lorenzo to get back on the path to health.
I loved the fact that the simple research was the fact that helped Lorenzo. In today's world, people get so hung up with the up-and-coming tehcnology, that they forget the little things. I feel this movie shows that just because we have the technology available to us, does not always mean its the way to go and will give us all the answers. We, as a community, still need to work hard to get what we need and to find answers to the questions that we have.
I think the other thing that blew me away with Lorenzo's parents was their determination. It seems like everytime someone was shutting a door on them, saying no, or discouraging them from doing what was in their gut, they did it anyway. For instance, the parents at the ALD committee, seemed as if they had the same feelings as Lorenzo's parents, but were quickly shut down when faced with controversy, whereas Lorenzo's parents wanted to continue debating why the parents should listen to the doctors when their child's blood fat count kept increasing. Lorenzo's parents felt this shouldn't be happening on the diet if the purpose of the diet itself was to attempt to decrease the blood fats not increase them. It seemed as if the other parents were taking no for an answer and taking the doctor's word as real, when the doctors did not even really know what ALD was, in a below the surface kind of way. I loved the determination Lorenzo's parents also showed when it came to the care that their son received. They felt it was of utmost importance that he received top of the line care from nurses, not when it came down to medicine and such, but when it came to making sure Lorenzo was encouraged, loved and mentally challenged (though he had a neurological problem).
All in all, I feel everyone should watch this movie, regardless of whether one knows about biology or not. This is a true story about determination and simplicity that turned a complicated situation into something life-saving. This movie leaves the opportunity open to learn something new.
I was amazed at this true story in general. Being a biology major, we are constanly reading material from many divisions of biology. Lorenzo's parents, in order to understand their son's disease, were doing the same thing. They spent so many hours in the NIH library reading tons of articles not only understanding their son's disease but how and why it was working on him. This was simple research. Because of their effort, they ended up finding a way for Lorenzo to get back on the path to health.
I loved the fact that the simple research was the fact that helped Lorenzo. In today's world, people get so hung up with the up-and-coming tehcnology, that they forget the little things. I feel this movie shows that just because we have the technology available to us, does not always mean its the way to go and will give us all the answers. We, as a community, still need to work hard to get what we need and to find answers to the questions that we have.
I think the other thing that blew me away with Lorenzo's parents was their determination. It seems like everytime someone was shutting a door on them, saying no, or discouraging them from doing what was in their gut, they did it anyway. For instance, the parents at the ALD committee, seemed as if they had the same feelings as Lorenzo's parents, but were quickly shut down when faced with controversy, whereas Lorenzo's parents wanted to continue debating why the parents should listen to the doctors when their child's blood fat count kept increasing. Lorenzo's parents felt this shouldn't be happening on the diet if the purpose of the diet itself was to attempt to decrease the blood fats not increase them. It seemed as if the other parents were taking no for an answer and taking the doctor's word as real, when the doctors did not even really know what ALD was, in a below the surface kind of way. I loved the determination Lorenzo's parents also showed when it came to the care that their son received. They felt it was of utmost importance that he received top of the line care from nurses, not when it came down to medicine and such, but when it came to making sure Lorenzo was encouraged, loved and mentally challenged (though he had a neurological problem).
All in all, I feel everyone should watch this movie, regardless of whether one knows about biology or not. This is a true story about determination and simplicity that turned a complicated situation into something life-saving. This movie leaves the opportunity open to learn something new.
Lorenzo's Oil
Lorenzo’s Oil is a heartrending movie about the true-life story of a young boy who becomes diagnosed with Adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD). The movie depicts the downhill course of Lorenzo’s disease, the journey his parents face, and their struggle combating the illness while overcoming conflicting opinions of those closest to them. The main theme that appears time and again is the battle of two parents fighting between their devout love for their son’s life and the “leisure exploration” of the disease by the scientific community.
Lorenzo was diagnosed with ALD in 1984 when he was just five years of age. ALD is an inherited genetic disorder that damages the myelin sheaths surrounding nerve cells in the brain. Also, brain damage occurs because of the enzyme that breaks down the very long chain fatty acids is impaired so the body cannot metabolize the acids properly and therefore accumulates toxic amounts in the central nervous system. The childhood form of ALD, which Lorenzo is diagnosed with, is the most severe with an onset between ages 4 and 10. The most common symptoms are behavioral changes such as abnormal withdrawal or aggression, poor memory, and poor school performance. Other symptoms include loss of sight and the ability to walk, learning disabilities, seizures, poor articulated speech, difficulty swallowing, deafness, fatigue, and progressive dementia. The most horrifying part is that death usually occurs within a couple of years after prognosis.
The movie moved me in many ways. I found myself in constant struggle when deciding whose side I agreed with more. When Lorenzo was first diagnosed with the disease, Augusto “asked the doctor if he could read the medical papers” and the doctor responded, “Don’t bother, you won’t understand them.” I found it heartless of any one person to tell another that they are incapable of doing something. It reinforced the fact that anyone can do anything they set their mind to, only if they are determined and focused enough. Lorenzo’s parents were resolute in finding a treatment for their son: the oil, which was a combination of two oils, oleic and erucic acid. I was delighted to watch Augusto and Michaela’s determination throughout the course of the movie. Again, I felt for Augusto and Michaela Odone because it appeared that they were alone with no one to help them. In a striking quote, Michaela tells Dr. Nikolais, “The life of one boy is not enough reward for you to risk the reputation of the institution and the esteem of yours peers.” To some extent I agree that scientists cannot go out on a limb for any one thing without complete evidence. A scientist must be able to combine all their knowledge into a well-defined thesis and experimental protocol in order to receive the money needed to carry out the research. On the other hand, it is truly distressing to hear a person’s cry for help knowing that nothing can be done hastily without timely proof and assertion of the facts.
Since the movie was released, many people, including scientists, have opened their eyes to ALD, which affects more people than first projected. Important to note, though Dr. Hugo Moser was depicted as an impersonal scientist throughout the movie, he truly cared and dedicated his entire life to researching the disease and conducting experiments. Before his death, Moser was looking to find a marker that could predict the onset of ALD in patients before diagnosis.
I was amazed to find out that Lorenzo is still alive today at age 29 and is “still holding his own” (Augusto Odone) though he is still almost totally paralyzed with some exceptions (blinking his eyes and moving his fingers and head). I have learned that there has been no real success on the re-myelination of the nerve cells of the brain; however, constant research is still being done. Although Mr. and Mrs. Odone have past away in recent years, I was happy to hear that his old friend Oumouri still cares for him today. Their legacy will continue to live on through The Myelin Project that they helped create. The Myelin Project’s goal is to find a way to restore the myelin sheaths that ALD destroys. For now, Lorenzo still waits for this to be achieved so that he may look forward to living a normal life.
For more information on The Myelin Project:
http://www.myelin.org/
Lorenzo’s Oil: The full story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3907559.stm
The mixed legacy of Lorenzo’s Oil:
http://www.post-gazette.com/healthscience/20010508hlorenzo1.asp
A Real-Life Sequel to ‘Lorenzo’s Oil”:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/27/AR2007012701542.html
The use of the movie “Lorenzo’s Oil” as a Teaching Tool:
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bstith/loren.htm
Lorenzo was diagnosed with ALD in 1984 when he was just five years of age. ALD is an inherited genetic disorder that damages the myelin sheaths surrounding nerve cells in the brain. Also, brain damage occurs because of the enzyme that breaks down the very long chain fatty acids is impaired so the body cannot metabolize the acids properly and therefore accumulates toxic amounts in the central nervous system. The childhood form of ALD, which Lorenzo is diagnosed with, is the most severe with an onset between ages 4 and 10. The most common symptoms are behavioral changes such as abnormal withdrawal or aggression, poor memory, and poor school performance. Other symptoms include loss of sight and the ability to walk, learning disabilities, seizures, poor articulated speech, difficulty swallowing, deafness, fatigue, and progressive dementia. The most horrifying part is that death usually occurs within a couple of years after prognosis.
The movie moved me in many ways. I found myself in constant struggle when deciding whose side I agreed with more. When Lorenzo was first diagnosed with the disease, Augusto “asked the doctor if he could read the medical papers” and the doctor responded, “Don’t bother, you won’t understand them.” I found it heartless of any one person to tell another that they are incapable of doing something. It reinforced the fact that anyone can do anything they set their mind to, only if they are determined and focused enough. Lorenzo’s parents were resolute in finding a treatment for their son: the oil, which was a combination of two oils, oleic and erucic acid. I was delighted to watch Augusto and Michaela’s determination throughout the course of the movie. Again, I felt for Augusto and Michaela Odone because it appeared that they were alone with no one to help them. In a striking quote, Michaela tells Dr. Nikolais, “The life of one boy is not enough reward for you to risk the reputation of the institution and the esteem of yours peers.” To some extent I agree that scientists cannot go out on a limb for any one thing without complete evidence. A scientist must be able to combine all their knowledge into a well-defined thesis and experimental protocol in order to receive the money needed to carry out the research. On the other hand, it is truly distressing to hear a person’s cry for help knowing that nothing can be done hastily without timely proof and assertion of the facts.
Since the movie was released, many people, including scientists, have opened their eyes to ALD, which affects more people than first projected. Important to note, though Dr. Hugo Moser was depicted as an impersonal scientist throughout the movie, he truly cared and dedicated his entire life to researching the disease and conducting experiments. Before his death, Moser was looking to find a marker that could predict the onset of ALD in patients before diagnosis.
I was amazed to find out that Lorenzo is still alive today at age 29 and is “still holding his own” (Augusto Odone) though he is still almost totally paralyzed with some exceptions (blinking his eyes and moving his fingers and head). I have learned that there has been no real success on the re-myelination of the nerve cells of the brain; however, constant research is still being done. Although Mr. and Mrs. Odone have past away in recent years, I was happy to hear that his old friend Oumouri still cares for him today. Their legacy will continue to live on through The Myelin Project that they helped create. The Myelin Project’s goal is to find a way to restore the myelin sheaths that ALD destroys. For now, Lorenzo still waits for this to be achieved so that he may look forward to living a normal life.
For more information on The Myelin Project:
http://www.myelin.org/
Lorenzo’s Oil: The full story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3907559.stm
The mixed legacy of Lorenzo’s Oil:
http://www.post-gazette.com/healthscience/20010508hlorenzo1.asp
A Real-Life Sequel to ‘Lorenzo’s Oil”:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/27/AR2007012701542.html
The use of the movie “Lorenzo’s Oil” as a Teaching Tool:
http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~bstith/loren.htm
Lorenzo's Oil
Lorenzo's Oil is based on the true story of Augusto and Michaela Odone. They were in search for a cure for their son Lorenzo's adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD). Until about the age of 7, Lorenzo Odone was a normal child. Doctors said that he would lose all his functions and die within two to three years. After then, he gradually showed symptoms of the disease. Some of the initial symptoms was he had poor memory, and his behavior changed by showing signs of irritability. Later on as the disease progressed, more serious symptoms were developed such as hearing loss, seizures, difficulty with walking and coordination. He was eventually diagnosed as suffering from ALD. Adrenoleukodystrophy is an extremely rare incurable degenerative brain disorder.
And so, the Odones uncovered the Myelin Project in the possibility of finding out a way to restore the myelin sheath. According to Lorenzo’s doctor named Dr. Moser, taking the oil reduced the chance of getting the disease by half. When Augusto and Michaela were told to be patient as they watched their son becoming weaker as months passed by, they took matters into their own hands. That is, they went through a series of struggles, and challenged themselves in search for a cure to which it tested the strength of their marriage, and the limitations of medicine. The Odones went to medical libraries to educate themselves in the hope of discovering something which can halt the progress of the disease. In addition, they badgered researchers and questioned top doctors, scientists, and chemists all over the world to find answers to their questions. At the end, some type of dietary oil from France gave Lorenzo a chance to live again even if his disease cannot be cured, but can only be controlled. And so, he could no longer regain most of his bodily functions. Lorenzo could only communicate again by a modified sign language.
This was an inspirational movie that really inspired me. The actor for Lorenzo gave an outstanding performance, which was very moving and I felt like I knew what Lorenzo’s going through. And the actress for Michaela and actor for Augusto gave a brilliant performance as parents trying to save the life of their son. I was touched by the members of the ALD organization who slowly gave in to support the Odon family. At the same time, I was heartbroken when situations went wrong with the plan in saving the life of Lorenzo and other children who were suffering from ALD.
Related Links:
The clinical course of childhood and adolescent adrenoleukodystrophy before and after Lorenzo's oil
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T50-42MW6JM-6&_user=961290&_coverDate=02%2F28%2F2001&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000049422&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=961290&md5=6d7c8e831046484a88e76bb723b3b5ed
This was an interesting experiment on the Drosophilia mutant bubblegum (fruit flies) that provided insights into the molecular basis for ALD.
Mutant Fruit Flies Respond to Lorenzo’s Oil
http://www.jstor.org/view/00368075/di002525/00p0005f/0?frame=noframe&userID=435c1661@loyola.edu/01c054500f27671150cfc8dc3&dpi=3&config=jstor
http://www.jstor.org/view/00368075/di002525/00p0045v/0?frame=noframe&userID=435c1661@loyola.edu/01c054500f27671150cfc8dc3&dpi=3&config=jstor
A Real-Life Sequel to 'Lorenzo's Oil'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/27/AR2007012701542.html
Lorenzo’s Oil: The full story
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3907559.stm
And so, the Odones uncovered the Myelin Project in the possibility of finding out a way to restore the myelin sheath. According to Lorenzo’s doctor named Dr. Moser, taking the oil reduced the chance of getting the disease by half. When Augusto and Michaela were told to be patient as they watched their son becoming weaker as months passed by, they took matters into their own hands. That is, they went through a series of struggles, and challenged themselves in search for a cure to which it tested the strength of their marriage, and the limitations of medicine. The Odones went to medical libraries to educate themselves in the hope of discovering something which can halt the progress of the disease. In addition, they badgered researchers and questioned top doctors, scientists, and chemists all over the world to find answers to their questions. At the end, some type of dietary oil from France gave Lorenzo a chance to live again even if his disease cannot be cured, but can only be controlled. And so, he could no longer regain most of his bodily functions. Lorenzo could only communicate again by a modified sign language.
This was an inspirational movie that really inspired me. The actor for Lorenzo gave an outstanding performance, which was very moving and I felt like I knew what Lorenzo’s going through. And the actress for Michaela and actor for Augusto gave a brilliant performance as parents trying to save the life of their son. I was touched by the members of the ALD organization who slowly gave in to support the Odon family. At the same time, I was heartbroken when situations went wrong with the plan in saving the life of Lorenzo and other children who were suffering from ALD.
Related Links:
The clinical course of childhood and adolescent adrenoleukodystrophy before and after Lorenzo's oil
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T50-42MW6JM-6&_user=961290&_coverDate=02%2F28%2F2001&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000049422&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=961290&md5=6d7c8e831046484a88e76bb723b3b5ed
This was an interesting experiment on the Drosophilia mutant bubblegum (fruit flies) that provided insights into the molecular basis for ALD.
Mutant Fruit Flies Respond to Lorenzo’s Oil
http://www.jstor.org/view/00368075/di002525/00p0005f/0?frame=noframe&userID=435c1661@loyola.edu/01c054500f27671150cfc8dc3&dpi=3&config=jstor
http://www.jstor.org/view/00368075/di002525/00p0045v/0?frame=noframe&userID=435c1661@loyola.edu/01c054500f27671150cfc8dc3&dpi=3&config=jstor
A Real-Life Sequel to 'Lorenzo's Oil'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/27/AR2007012701542.html
Lorenzo’s Oil: The full story
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3907559.stm
Lorenzo's Oil
Lorenzo’s Oil is a compelling and heart wrenching movie depicting the real-life story of Michaela and Augusto Odone’s unremitting struggle in procuring treatment for their young son, Lorenzo, who is inflicted with a rare yet lethal degenerative disease called ALD (adrenoleukodystrophy).
After spending 3 years in the Comoros Islands (off the coast of East Africa), the Odones move back to the United States where their lives begin to crumble as Lorenzo exhibits extreme irritability and unexplainable rage. Augusto and Michaela do not pay much attention to their son’s uncharacteristic behaviors initially. However, when Lorenzo exhibits periods of deafness and frequent fainting/dizzy spells, they become alarmed and take their son to consult a number of doctors.
Eventually, Lorenzo is diagnosed with ALD, a sex-linked (or X-linked) disease which causes rapid degeneration of the brain by corroding the myelin sheath; a fatty covering which serves to insulate neurons in the body. Neurological functioning becomes progressively worse, ultimately resulting in death. ALD patients accumulate an abnormal amount of long-chain saturated fatty acids, as they lack the enzyme needed to metabolize the fat. Hence, the fatty acid tends to build up leading to lethal consequences. ALD is passed from mother to son and the symptoms usually occur within 5-10 years of the child’s life. Death is expected to follow within 2 years of the emergence of symptoms.
The Odones are devastated to learn that not only has their child been inflicted with this debilitating disease, but that there is no known cure as of yet. Lorenzo is enrolled in a clinical trail, where his neurologist ( Dr. Nikolas) prescribes a diet low in saturated fat in an attempt to bring down Lorenzo’s long chain fatty acid levels. This attempt however, fails as Lorenzo’s body continues to manufacture an increased level of fat in order to compensate for the fat lost as a result of the new diet. The Odones soon learn of other cases where the diet has been ineffective as well. Following a string of uncooperative doctors and other medical professionals, Michaela and Augusto decide to take matters into their own hands. As Lorenzo’s condition rapidly worsens, they decide to read everything published about the disease and its possible biochemical basis.
Finally, the Odones come across a type of olive oil, which is a combination of oleic and erucic acids. When this oil is incorporated into Lorenzo’s diet, the parents witness a 50% drop in his saturated fat levels. Eventually, the levels revert back to normal. However, Lorenzo continues to possess limited neurological functioning.
Lorenzo’s Oil had a profound impact on me. ALD was not a disease I was previously aware of and its rapid progression was frightening and painful to watch. The part of the movie that affected me the most was when Michaela could not understand what Lorenzo was attempting to say, even though she could understand him perfectly well earlier that morning. I found myself shocked at the alarmingly rapid pace of the disease. The movie also did a laudable job in highlighting the lack of research regarding obscure or uncommon ailments. It brought to light the question of weather it is acceptable for the medical community to place less importance on acquiring a cure for diseases that affect a relatively small portion of the world’s population.
Despite the success of the movie in helping its viewers grasp the excruciating pain and biochemical basis of ALD, I found the ending to be unrealistic and misleading. When I began to research on Lorenzo Odone and the supposed “miracle cure” faculty of the oil, I unfortunately found that it did not help Lorenzo gain any significant neurological functioning back. He is still alive - surprisingly having outlived both his doctor and his mother - however, he is as bedridden now as he was previously. This led me to revoke a question which I have grappled with many times: is it the quality of life that is important or the quantity? Nonetheless, I did find information documenting the oil’s preventative capabilities. Young boys who were identified as potential victims of ALD were given Lorenzo’s Oil. This seemed to bring down their chances of being afflicted with the diseased exponentially. Hence, even though the oil may not be the answer for those already suffering from ALD, it seems to have an affect in preventing the onset of the disease.
Research is still continuing today to acquire a dependable cure for this disease. The only way this can be done is through repairing the damaged myelin. The Odones established the Myelin Project to spearhead research to help ALD inflicted patients regain their motor and cognitive abilities. This, I am sure, has helped the outside world understand and sympathize better with those suffering from ALD and their loved ones.
*For more information regarding the preventative ability of Lorenzo’s Oil read: Lorenzo’s Oil: The Full Story by BBC News.
URL <>
Also take a look at “Research Backs Lorenzo’s Oil Treatment of Disease”
URL: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/07/12/research_backs_lorenzos_oil_treatment_of_disease/
*For more information regarding the Myelin Project, visit the home page:
URL http://www.myelin.org/
* For more information regarding the symptoms and treatment of ALD visit “ALD and Lorenzo’s Oil.”
URL: http://rarediseases.about.com/cs/ald/a/041301.htm
After spending 3 years in the Comoros Islands (off the coast of East Africa), the Odones move back to the United States where their lives begin to crumble as Lorenzo exhibits extreme irritability and unexplainable rage. Augusto and Michaela do not pay much attention to their son’s uncharacteristic behaviors initially. However, when Lorenzo exhibits periods of deafness and frequent fainting/dizzy spells, they become alarmed and take their son to consult a number of doctors.
Eventually, Lorenzo is diagnosed with ALD, a sex-linked (or X-linked) disease which causes rapid degeneration of the brain by corroding the myelin sheath; a fatty covering which serves to insulate neurons in the body. Neurological functioning becomes progressively worse, ultimately resulting in death. ALD patients accumulate an abnormal amount of long-chain saturated fatty acids, as they lack the enzyme needed to metabolize the fat. Hence, the fatty acid tends to build up leading to lethal consequences. ALD is passed from mother to son and the symptoms usually occur within 5-10 years of the child’s life. Death is expected to follow within 2 years of the emergence of symptoms.
The Odones are devastated to learn that not only has their child been inflicted with this debilitating disease, but that there is no known cure as of yet. Lorenzo is enrolled in a clinical trail, where his neurologist ( Dr. Nikolas) prescribes a diet low in saturated fat in an attempt to bring down Lorenzo’s long chain fatty acid levels. This attempt however, fails as Lorenzo’s body continues to manufacture an increased level of fat in order to compensate for the fat lost as a result of the new diet. The Odones soon learn of other cases where the diet has been ineffective as well. Following a string of uncooperative doctors and other medical professionals, Michaela and Augusto decide to take matters into their own hands. As Lorenzo’s condition rapidly worsens, they decide to read everything published about the disease and its possible biochemical basis.
Finally, the Odones come across a type of olive oil, which is a combination of oleic and erucic acids. When this oil is incorporated into Lorenzo’s diet, the parents witness a 50% drop in his saturated fat levels. Eventually, the levels revert back to normal. However, Lorenzo continues to possess limited neurological functioning.
Lorenzo’s Oil had a profound impact on me. ALD was not a disease I was previously aware of and its rapid progression was frightening and painful to watch. The part of the movie that affected me the most was when Michaela could not understand what Lorenzo was attempting to say, even though she could understand him perfectly well earlier that morning. I found myself shocked at the alarmingly rapid pace of the disease. The movie also did a laudable job in highlighting the lack of research regarding obscure or uncommon ailments. It brought to light the question of weather it is acceptable for the medical community to place less importance on acquiring a cure for diseases that affect a relatively small portion of the world’s population.
Despite the success of the movie in helping its viewers grasp the excruciating pain and biochemical basis of ALD, I found the ending to be unrealistic and misleading. When I began to research on Lorenzo Odone and the supposed “miracle cure” faculty of the oil, I unfortunately found that it did not help Lorenzo gain any significant neurological functioning back. He is still alive - surprisingly having outlived both his doctor and his mother - however, he is as bedridden now as he was previously. This led me to revoke a question which I have grappled with many times: is it the quality of life that is important or the quantity? Nonetheless, I did find information documenting the oil’s preventative capabilities. Young boys who were identified as potential victims of ALD were given Lorenzo’s Oil. This seemed to bring down their chances of being afflicted with the diseased exponentially. Hence, even though the oil may not be the answer for those already suffering from ALD, it seems to have an affect in preventing the onset of the disease.
Research is still continuing today to acquire a dependable cure for this disease. The only way this can be done is through repairing the damaged myelin. The Odones established the Myelin Project to spearhead research to help ALD inflicted patients regain their motor and cognitive abilities. This, I am sure, has helped the outside world understand and sympathize better with those suffering from ALD and their loved ones.
*For more information regarding the preventative ability of Lorenzo’s Oil read: Lorenzo’s Oil: The Full Story by BBC News.
URL <>
Also take a look at “Research Backs Lorenzo’s Oil Treatment of Disease”
URL: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/07/12/research_backs_lorenzos_oil_treatment_of_disease/
*For more information regarding the Myelin Project, visit the home page:
URL http://www.myelin.org/
* For more information regarding the symptoms and treatment of ALD visit “ALD and Lorenzo’s Oil.”
URL: http://rarediseases.about.com/cs/ald/a/041301.htm
Lorenzo's Oil Summary and Critique
Lorenzo's Oil is the heart-warming and inspiring account of a young boy named Lorenzo Odone who was diagnosed with the terrible disease adrenoleukodystrophy (ADL). ADL is a disease (linked to the X- chromosome) that inhibits the break down of long-chained, saturated fats in the bloodstream. This, in turn, would cause the corrosion of the myelin sheaths and lead to brain damage.
The movie starts by depicting when the young boy and his family lived in Africa for three years. After their return to the states, it shows how Lorenzo's behavior turned erratic and violent (starting at school and then entering the home) plus how many doctors said there was no explanation for his behavior. After his parents took him to a neurologist, he was diagnosed with ADL and his parents were told that he had no more than three years to live. The doctor's claimed there wasn't a cure and there was no hope. The Odones were not satisfied with this information so they searched out anyone who knew anything about this disease. Their search brought them to Dr. Nikolais who was the top ADL research scientist at the time. He was testing an experimental diet program for ADL patients where the foods eaten would reduce the levels of saturated fat in their blood. Lorenzo's levels did not improve on this diet and his parents went in search of new methods for helping their r son despite the scrutiny from the ADL support group and Dr. Nikolais. To make a long story short, the Odones found out (through research and trial & error) adding purified erucic acid and oleic acid to Lorenzo's diet significantly reduced the amount long, saturated fats in his blood and brought the levels back down to normal. After a continuation of the newly revised treatment, Lorenzo's abilities started to come back but they are still very limited. The movie ended with hope because it seems as if Lorenzo could make a full recovery one day.
The movie, in my opinion, was excellent and it added to my belief that there is a God and he can do anything. It astonished me that people who had no background, degrees, nor experience in medicine/ biology/ neuroscience, they went to the library constantly found out answers which helped to save their son's life when men with PhD’s could not find anything. Despite all the negative feedback they were getting, they kept fighting. It was very inspiring to see that one person can make a difference for the better. Never think that you are too insignificant to contribute to anything. The mother's drive for answers and her undying love for her son were so powerful and beautiful. The movie proved to me that knowledge is power and is not limited to anyone. It is there for anyone to grasp.
Links for more information on Lorenzo and the Mylein Project:
http://www.myelin.org/themovie.htm
http://www.myelin.org/research.htm
http://www.myelin.org/overview.htm
The movie starts by depicting when the young boy and his family lived in Africa for three years. After their return to the states, it shows how Lorenzo's behavior turned erratic and violent (starting at school and then entering the home) plus how many doctors said there was no explanation for his behavior. After his parents took him to a neurologist, he was diagnosed with ADL and his parents were told that he had no more than three years to live. The doctor's claimed there wasn't a cure and there was no hope. The Odones were not satisfied with this information so they searched out anyone who knew anything about this disease. Their search brought them to Dr. Nikolais who was the top ADL research scientist at the time. He was testing an experimental diet program for ADL patients where the foods eaten would reduce the levels of saturated fat in their blood. Lorenzo's levels did not improve on this diet and his parents went in search of new methods for helping their r son despite the scrutiny from the ADL support group and Dr. Nikolais. To make a long story short, the Odones found out (through research and trial & error) adding purified erucic acid and oleic acid to Lorenzo's diet significantly reduced the amount long, saturated fats in his blood and brought the levels back down to normal. After a continuation of the newly revised treatment, Lorenzo's abilities started to come back but they are still very limited. The movie ended with hope because it seems as if Lorenzo could make a full recovery one day.
The movie, in my opinion, was excellent and it added to my belief that there is a God and he can do anything. It astonished me that people who had no background, degrees, nor experience in medicine/ biology/ neuroscience, they went to the library constantly found out answers which helped to save their son's life when men with PhD’s could not find anything. Despite all the negative feedback they were getting, they kept fighting. It was very inspiring to see that one person can make a difference for the better. Never think that you are too insignificant to contribute to anything. The mother's drive for answers and her undying love for her son were so powerful and beautiful. The movie proved to me that knowledge is power and is not limited to anyone. It is there for anyone to grasp.
Links for more information on Lorenzo and the Mylein Project:
http://www.myelin.org/themovie.htm
http://www.myelin.org/research.htm
http://www.myelin.org/overview.htm
Friday, September 21, 2007
Lorenzo's Oil
Lorenzo's Oil is the heart-warming and inspiring account of a young boy named Lorenzo Odone who was diagnosed with the terrible disease adrenoleukodystrophy (ADL). ADL is a disease (linked to the X- chromosome) that inhibits the break down of long-chained, saturated fats in the bloodstream. This, in turn, would cause the corrosion of the myelin sheaths and lead to brain damage. The movie starts by depicting when the young boy and his family lived in Africa for three years. After their return to the states, it shows how Lorenzo's behavior turned erratic and violent (starting at school and then entering the home) plus how many doctors said there was no explanation for his behavior. After his parents took him to a neurologist, he was diagnosed with ADL and his parents were told that he had no more than three years to live. The doctor's claimed there wasn't a cure and there was no hope. The Odones were not satisfied with this information so they searched out anyone who knew anything about this disease. Their search brought them to Dr. Nikolais who was the top ADL research scientist at the time. He was testing an experimental diet program for ADL patients where the foods eaten would reduce the levels of saturated fat in their blood. Lorenzo's levels did not improve on this diet and his parents went in search of new methods for helping their r son despite the scrutiny from the ADL support group and Dr. Nikolais. To make a long story short, the Odones found out (through research and trial & error) adding purified erucic acid and oleic acid to Lorenzo's diet significantly reduced the amount long, saturated fats in his blood and brought the levels back down to normal. After a continuation of the newly revised treatment, Lorenzo's abilities started to come back but they are still very limited. The movie ended with hope because it seems as if Lorenzo could make a full recovery one day. The movie, in my opinion, was excellent and it added to my belief that there is a God and he can do anything. It astonished me that people who had no background, degrees, nor experience in medicine/ biology/ neuroscience, they went to the library constantly found out answers which helped to save their son's life when men with PhD’s could not find anything. Despite all the negative feedback they were getting, they kept fighting. It was very inspiring to see that one person can make a difference for the better. Never think that you are too insignificant to contribute to anything. The mother's drive for answers and her undying love for her son were so powerful and beautiful. The movie proved to me that knowledge is power and is not limited to anyone. It is there for anyone to grasp.
Links for more information on Lorenzo and the Mylein Project: http://www.myelin.org/themovie.htm
http://www.myelin.org/research.htm
http://www.myelin.org/overview.htm
Links for more information on Lorenzo and the Mylein Project: http://www.myelin.org/themovie.htm
http://www.myelin.org/research.htm
http://www.myelin.org/overview.htm
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Lorenzo's Oil Analysis
The movie, Lorenzo’s Oil, presents the real-life account of Lorenzo Odone’s plight with the debilitating disease adrenoleukodystrophy (ADL) and his family’s struggle to combat it. At the beginning of the movie, Lorenzo was introduced as the active, lighthearted child of two loving and caring parents. After living in Africa for three years, the Odone finally returned to the United States, where Lorenzo began to attend school. Upon their return, Lorenzo’s happy disposition slowly started to unravel, and he began to exhibit extreme behavioral problems. Concerned about their child, his parents took him to a neurologist to determine the source of his peculiar mannerisms, only to discover that Lorenzo was afflicted with ADL—an X-linked disease that inhibits the degradation of long-saturated fats in the bloodstream and causes the corrosion of neuronal myelin sheaths. The young boy’s cognative, motor, and sensory capabilities would deteriorate prior to his death, which was expected upon two years of the diagnosis. Devastated, the Odones began to research every aspect of the disease, along with potential treatments. In doing so, they encountered the top ADL research scientist, Dr. Nikolais.
Prior to contacting one another, Dr. Nikolais had developed an experimental diet program for ADL patients to reduce their levels of saturated fat in their blood. The Odones placed Lorenzo on the diet, only to find that his levels of saturated fat rose. Upon joining an ADL support coalition, they found that other children complying with the same diet saw similar results. After addressing the issue, the Odones discovered resistance from the organization’s founders to recognize the issue. In the meantime, Lorenzo’s mental state was progressively worsening.
Disillusioned, the Odones reverted to more research and found that integrating purified oleic acid—a compound that was not permitted in Dr. Nikolais’ diet—into Lorenzo’s diet should reduce his levels of saturated fats. Against Dr. Nikolais’ advice, the Odones administered the treatment and saw that it was only effective for the first month. Upon further investigation, they found that adding purified erucic acid, in conjunction with oleic acid, had the potential to significantly decrease Lorenzo’s saturated fat levels. In applying this treatment, Lorenzo’s—whom at this point was a vegetable—levels dropped exponentially and, inevitably, receded to normal. Further administration of the concoction led to the discovery of Lorenzo’s restored, yet limited motor and cognitive capabilities. The movie ends enigmatically, with hopes of the boy’s full mental restitution.
In watching Lorenzo’s Oil, one of the most prominent scenes for me was when Michaela Odone stood up at the ADL support coalition meeting and stated something to the affect of, “I was unaware that our children were in the service of biomedical science. I thought biomedical science was in the service of our children.” I thought that statement in particular was key to emphasizing the dual perceptions to combating the disease presented in this film: that of genuine care and dedication and that of moderate concern and apathy. As a physician who took the Hippocratic Oath and vowed to “do no harm” to his patients, Dr. Nikolais’ reluctance to implement the treatment due to the compounds’ toxic natures was justifiable. But was it morally correct to allow countless numbers of children to die as a result? The Odones were able to make that necessary concern secondary in order to ensure the proliferation of their child. Incidentally, this objective was identical to that of the physician. I found this dichotomy especially interesting when comparing the Odones to the parents that founded the ADL group.
On another note, I thought the conclusion of the movie demonstrated that Lorenzo, along with other ADL patients, had the potential to regain a significant amount of their cognitive and motor capabilities. I was glad to find that Lorenzo is still alive today, but I was slightly dismayed in the fact that he has not had much progress. Although his family has had to champion many obstacles in order to establish the Myelin Project, it was a necessary step to gaining the widespread awareness of the disease.
Prior to contacting one another, Dr. Nikolais had developed an experimental diet program for ADL patients to reduce their levels of saturated fat in their blood. The Odones placed Lorenzo on the diet, only to find that his levels of saturated fat rose. Upon joining an ADL support coalition, they found that other children complying with the same diet saw similar results. After addressing the issue, the Odones discovered resistance from the organization’s founders to recognize the issue. In the meantime, Lorenzo’s mental state was progressively worsening.
Disillusioned, the Odones reverted to more research and found that integrating purified oleic acid—a compound that was not permitted in Dr. Nikolais’ diet—into Lorenzo’s diet should reduce his levels of saturated fats. Against Dr. Nikolais’ advice, the Odones administered the treatment and saw that it was only effective for the first month. Upon further investigation, they found that adding purified erucic acid, in conjunction with oleic acid, had the potential to significantly decrease Lorenzo’s saturated fat levels. In applying this treatment, Lorenzo’s—whom at this point was a vegetable—levels dropped exponentially and, inevitably, receded to normal. Further administration of the concoction led to the discovery of Lorenzo’s restored, yet limited motor and cognitive capabilities. The movie ends enigmatically, with hopes of the boy’s full mental restitution.
In watching Lorenzo’s Oil, one of the most prominent scenes for me was when Michaela Odone stood up at the ADL support coalition meeting and stated something to the affect of, “I was unaware that our children were in the service of biomedical science. I thought biomedical science was in the service of our children.” I thought that statement in particular was key to emphasizing the dual perceptions to combating the disease presented in this film: that of genuine care and dedication and that of moderate concern and apathy. As a physician who took the Hippocratic Oath and vowed to “do no harm” to his patients, Dr. Nikolais’ reluctance to implement the treatment due to the compounds’ toxic natures was justifiable. But was it morally correct to allow countless numbers of children to die as a result? The Odones were able to make that necessary concern secondary in order to ensure the proliferation of their child. Incidentally, this objective was identical to that of the physician. I found this dichotomy especially interesting when comparing the Odones to the parents that founded the ADL group.
On another note, I thought the conclusion of the movie demonstrated that Lorenzo, along with other ADL patients, had the potential to regain a significant amount of their cognitive and motor capabilities. I was glad to find that Lorenzo is still alive today, but I was slightly dismayed in the fact that he has not had much progress. Although his family has had to champion many obstacles in order to establish the Myelin Project, it was a necessary step to gaining the widespread awareness of the disease.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Chapter 3 Synopsis and Critique
Chapter 3 Synopsis
Chapter 3 introduces one of the most prominent figures in the development of neurobiology, Thomas Willis. Although this particular chapter does not indicate exactly what Willis has contributed the science, Zimmer alludes to his potential for greatness by introducing him as an observant boy who recognizes the intrinsic cognitive capabilities of animals. He is introduced in light of the two paths he could have followed as an adult: science or religion. As with the previous chapter, these divisions were presented to illustrate their dichotomous relationship.
Prior to Willis’ birth, the Church of England underwent religious and political turmoil, alternating between the acceptance of Catholic traditions and Protestantism with each successive monarch. It was the reign of King Charles—who not only perceived himself as a “lieutenant to God,” but the rational soul, as well—in the 1600s that directly impacted Willis (45, 46). Lobbying for Roman Catholicism, Charles appointed his favorite bishop, William Laud, to the position of Chancellor of Oxford. There, Laud “had turned Oxford into a factory for producing loyal priests ready to preach the authority of church and king” by educating them with both new Copernican and old Ptolemaic sciences, with greater emphasis on the latter (47, 48). As a university pupil in the lowest level of the school’s caste system, Willis worked for a canon of Christ Church, Thomas Iles, and his wife. Through Mrs. Iles, a medical practitioner, the young man gained exposure to the work of alchemists.
Alchemy was an ancient science whose primary focus was to discover how one substance could be transformed into another. It evolved into a science that promised cures for “all kinds of ailments” (50). Despite its rejection from most European physicians, a small minority, including Philippus von Hohenheim—better known as Paracelsus—continued to practice it. As a physician, Paracelsus believed in “souls that governed…parts of the body” called archei (51). Thus, diseases were perceived as foreign souls invading the body, and individuals afflicted with specific ailments were treated according to which archeus was in distress. This was the first time that a physician recognized that maladies were caused by an external agent rather than punishment for sins. Paracelsus’ work was popularized postmortem and was published in books, such as London Pharmacopoeia. Unbeknownst to himself, his work, in conjunction with that of other alchemists, would greatly influence Willis in his future endeavors.
Chapter 3 Critique
I found Chapter 3 to be rather interesting. In using the Protestant Reformation as a prelude to Laud’s strict regulation of Oxford, Zimmer reinforces the predominance of the beliefs of the Church of England in secular society. This is seen in King Charles’ “ability” to cure scrofula. Known as the “royal touch,” this power was supposedly bestowed upon those that were appointed by God, which, in this case, was the king. What was interesting about this was that Charles made it illegal for even physicians to claim that they could cure this disease, thus strengthening the Church’s tight grasp on the public’s acquisition of scientific knowledge.
This was further illustrated in Laud’s control of Oxford’s program of study. Despite his emphasis on Ptolemaic science and Aristotelian philosophy, I found it surprising that he would include Copernicus in the curriculum altogether, especially since he was placed in its index of banned books in 1616 (28). Regardless of the mathematical proof provided by Galileo—who himself was excommunicated for his “heresy”—I cannot fathom as to why, or even when, this mild transition became acceptable in the Church.
On a completely different note, I found it intriguing that Paracelsus was the first physician to attribute sicknesses to external factors, despite the inaccuracy of his reasoning. Varying from the Church’s belief that sin was the cause of disease, his reasoning was understandable considering that the basis of alchemy did not stem from religion. For this same reason, it was understandable that alchemists opposed Galen, who attributed the liver’s vegetative soul with base emotions like pleasure and desire (15).
Chapter 3 introduces one of the most prominent figures in the development of neurobiology, Thomas Willis. Although this particular chapter does not indicate exactly what Willis has contributed the science, Zimmer alludes to his potential for greatness by introducing him as an observant boy who recognizes the intrinsic cognitive capabilities of animals. He is introduced in light of the two paths he could have followed as an adult: science or religion. As with the previous chapter, these divisions were presented to illustrate their dichotomous relationship.
Prior to Willis’ birth, the Church of England underwent religious and political turmoil, alternating between the acceptance of Catholic traditions and Protestantism with each successive monarch. It was the reign of King Charles—who not only perceived himself as a “lieutenant to God,” but the rational soul, as well—in the 1600s that directly impacted Willis (45, 46). Lobbying for Roman Catholicism, Charles appointed his favorite bishop, William Laud, to the position of Chancellor of Oxford. There, Laud “had turned Oxford into a factory for producing loyal priests ready to preach the authority of church and king” by educating them with both new Copernican and old Ptolemaic sciences, with greater emphasis on the latter (47, 48). As a university pupil in the lowest level of the school’s caste system, Willis worked for a canon of Christ Church, Thomas Iles, and his wife. Through Mrs. Iles, a medical practitioner, the young man gained exposure to the work of alchemists.
Alchemy was an ancient science whose primary focus was to discover how one substance could be transformed into another. It evolved into a science that promised cures for “all kinds of ailments” (50). Despite its rejection from most European physicians, a small minority, including Philippus von Hohenheim—better known as Paracelsus—continued to practice it. As a physician, Paracelsus believed in “souls that governed…parts of the body” called archei (51). Thus, diseases were perceived as foreign souls invading the body, and individuals afflicted with specific ailments were treated according to which archeus was in distress. This was the first time that a physician recognized that maladies were caused by an external agent rather than punishment for sins. Paracelsus’ work was popularized postmortem and was published in books, such as London Pharmacopoeia. Unbeknownst to himself, his work, in conjunction with that of other alchemists, would greatly influence Willis in his future endeavors.
Chapter 3 Critique
I found Chapter 3 to be rather interesting. In using the Protestant Reformation as a prelude to Laud’s strict regulation of Oxford, Zimmer reinforces the predominance of the beliefs of the Church of England in secular society. This is seen in King Charles’ “ability” to cure scrofula. Known as the “royal touch,” this power was supposedly bestowed upon those that were appointed by God, which, in this case, was the king. What was interesting about this was that Charles made it illegal for even physicians to claim that they could cure this disease, thus strengthening the Church’s tight grasp on the public’s acquisition of scientific knowledge.
This was further illustrated in Laud’s control of Oxford’s program of study. Despite his emphasis on Ptolemaic science and Aristotelian philosophy, I found it surprising that he would include Copernicus in the curriculum altogether, especially since he was placed in its index of banned books in 1616 (28). Regardless of the mathematical proof provided by Galileo—who himself was excommunicated for his “heresy”—I cannot fathom as to why, or even when, this mild transition became acceptable in the Church.
On a completely different note, I found it intriguing that Paracelsus was the first physician to attribute sicknesses to external factors, despite the inaccuracy of his reasoning. Varying from the Church’s belief that sin was the cause of disease, his reasoning was understandable considering that the basis of alchemy did not stem from religion. For this same reason, it was understandable that alchemists opposed Galen, who attributed the liver’s vegetative soul with base emotions like pleasure and desire (15).
Monday, September 10, 2007
Chapter 2 Analysis
Chapter Summary:
This week an analysis on the book Soul Made Flesh by Carl Zimmer will allow us to better understand the development of the science that we are currently studying. Carl Zimmer’s book gives a timeline of events and describes the people who contributed to the science of neurology. This week’s analysis will focus on chapter two entitled “World Without Soul,” which focuses on how scientific development and the church during the 1500 and 1600’s were unable to find a happy medium. The church doctrine followed Aristotle’s belief that “the Earth was at its center, surrounded by a set of rotating spheres that contained planets and the sun, surrounded in turn by the orbs of the stars” (26). However, as chapter two describes, philosophers and scientists were able to determine that Aristotle was wrong in his belief and therefore the church doctrine was false as well. With their own experiments and interpretations of each other’s research the philosophers in this chapter were able to develop their own understanding of the soul, which was clarified by the work of Descartes.
The most influential Greek astronomer, Claudius Ptolemy (Almagest) found an error in Aristotle’s philosophies. Ptolemy reworked the circular path of the planets by adding epicycles and shifting the Earth from the center of the cosmos (26). Although Ptolemy’s work was “brilliant” it did not support Aristotle’s philosophy as accepted as church doctrine (26). It was near the end of the sixteenth century when Galileo Galilei also determined that Aristotle’s theories of the cosmos were incorrect. According to Aristotle, “the larger the object the faster it should fall, because of the greater urge to reach its natural place.” However, Galileo determined “that heavy and light weights both fall at the same rate” (27). It was studying Copernicus’ work that Galileo realized Copernicus was right and that the Earth was not the center of the cosmos, thereby the “heavens were not a realm of perfection” (28). This new theory distressed the Catholic Church since it disrupted the cohesion of thoughts they strongly believed (28).
Yet there were monks and priests that thought the church should remove Aristotle from their doctrine since “God’s providence was irrelevant in Aristotle’s world made of self-transforming matter” (28). These monks and priests were concerned with the need of a more concrete theory because of the formation of mystical nature-worshiping sects and a growing number of skeptics within Europe (28). According to Zimmer, it was a monk named Marin Mersenne who led the “assault” on Aristotle and he decided “that the only way for the church to survive was to take the soul out of nature” (28).
Another priest, Pierre Gassendi embraced atoms and viewed the universe as “composed of indivisible, indestructible, invisible particles wandering through a void,” and each of these particles have an “intrinsic size, shape, and weight” (29). This idea of atoms, Gassendi believed was in perfect harmony with Christianity as was the idea of a soul made of atoms (29). Gassendi formulated the idea of two souls: the sensitive soul and the rational soul. The sensitive soul involved the nerves “receiving sensations and impressing them on the brain,” while the rational soul was deemed “immaterial” and located in the brain (29). The rational soul was dependent on the sensitive soul to send it images of the outside world (30). This natural philosophy, Gassendi believed would bring proper justice to the Christian soul since the rational soul was not composed of atoms and therefore it was immortal (30).
The ideas and theories of these men led Rene Descartes to bring a new perspective to the concept of the soul and its presence in the body. Zimmer gave a descriptive account of Descartes life and what led him on his philosophical journey. Descartes first research focused with the nervous system, and he came to believe that in the ventricles the soul controlled the body. He thought that a “subtle wind” caused by spirits, which formed as blood rose from the heart to the head pressed against the ventricles causing the “breeze” to surge into the nerves. As the nerves expanded with “spirits” Descartes assumed this caused muscles to swell and contract (35). Descartes treated the human body as an “earthen machine,” arguing that a body could live and move “without the help of life-giving souls” (34). He became convinced that animals and humans were “intricately crafted machines made up of passive particles,” however humans contained a rational soul (36). Descartes supported Galen’s claim that the pineal gland was located where the vessels joined together by studying Galen’s work. He asserted that the pineal gland allowed the rational soul to control the glands movements (37). Therefore, Descartes believed that it was the soul’s movements that “aimed the spirits at particular pores in the walls of the ventricles, which then traveled through the nerves and carried out the soul’s will” (37).
Descartes finally combined his work into one book, The World in 1632. However, due to Galileo’s condemnation by the church, Descartes decided to present his new argument in a short book, Discourse on Method. This book did not include his famous motto “Cogito, ergo sum: I think, therefore I am,” which supported his belief that God does exist (38). He explained in his discourse that the rational soul “directed the flow of animal spirits through the ventricles” (39). Descartes exploited his work in two more books Meditations and Principles (39). It was Descartes study of the brain that led natural philosophers to launch the “Neurocentric Age” (41).
**This link gives a good comparison between Aristotle’s and Ptolemy’s interpretation of the universe: http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/retrograde/aristotle.html.
**The hyperlink of the Descartes Principles is an index of the Principles so you can easily find the ones that interest you the most.
Critique:
According to Zimmer, Copernicus’ claim that the Earth was not at the center of the cosmos, but just another planet orbiting around the sun provided a new conception of the brain and the soul (25). It was Descartes “conception” of the brain and soul’s relationship that captured my attention in this chapter. His theory stated that a “subtle wind” was caused by spirits, which formed as blood rose from the heart to the head. This wind pressed against the ventricles causing the “breeze” to rush into the nerves. As the nerves expanded with “spirits” he assumed this caused the swelling and contracting of muscles (35). At first, I was confused on how he associated a relationship between the “spirits” that formed in the blood with the ventricles. But after I read about the ventricles function and structure I was able to understand why. The ventricles are filled with cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), which provides cushioning for the brain within the skull. I remember learning in class that the CSF dissolves neural hormones via the blood stream throughout the body. This is why I think Descartes associated the “spirits” with the ventricles because the ventricles consist of a fluid that could transport these “spirits” to other parts of the body.
Descartes idea of “spirits” was as “material as blood and bones” (35). This surprised me because Zimmer says on page 31 that Descartes had a “deep-running Catholic faith,” and I would have thought that Descartes observed how in the Bible the soul is a separate entity from the heart and our strength (Deut 6:5). Today in Christian teaching the soul is thought of as a nonphysical element opposed to a physical element as Descartes believed.
I also wanted to mention Gassendi because as a priest he was able to maintain his faith in God and correlate his faith with his scientific study. I found this extremely interesting since as science has developed some people, including myself at times have difficulty balancing the relationship between science and religion. The debates and conflicts between the Church and the development of science are still prevalent today as they were during Gassendi’s and Descartes time. An article in TIME Magazine titled “God vs. Science” is a good source to better understand the debates that are occurring within Science and Religious sects today. One of the debates is Darwinian Evolution vs. The Book of Genesis. As a Christian and a Biology major, I had to find a happy medium between this debate. For that reason I believe that the Book of Genesis is truth, but I also believe that the Earth has evolved and changed. And these changes could have occurred with accordance to scripture in seven days (definitely longer than seven days, so I like to call it God time). The author, David Van Biema includes a debate between two well-known scientists with conflicting opinions on science and religion: Richard B. Dawkins and Francis S. Collins. Dawkins is widely known for his anti-God sentiments and his support of the Darwinian Theory, which is found in his book The God Delusion. While Francis S. Collins, the director of the National Human Genome Institute supports the cohesion of science and religion.
Finally, I wanted to conclude by saying that I found this chapter very enlightening. I was able to apply the themes and philosophers I was introduced to in my Philosophy class to the development of neuroscience. I was also able to view how the Church’s relationship with the scientific community is still in conflict with certain issues.
This week an analysis on the book Soul Made Flesh by Carl Zimmer will allow us to better understand the development of the science that we are currently studying. Carl Zimmer’s book gives a timeline of events and describes the people who contributed to the science of neurology. This week’s analysis will focus on chapter two entitled “World Without Soul,” which focuses on how scientific development and the church during the 1500 and 1600’s were unable to find a happy medium. The church doctrine followed Aristotle’s belief that “the Earth was at its center, surrounded by a set of rotating spheres that contained planets and the sun, surrounded in turn by the orbs of the stars” (26). However, as chapter two describes, philosophers and scientists were able to determine that Aristotle was wrong in his belief and therefore the church doctrine was false as well. With their own experiments and interpretations of each other’s research the philosophers in this chapter were able to develop their own understanding of the soul, which was clarified by the work of Descartes.
The most influential Greek astronomer, Claudius Ptolemy (Almagest) found an error in Aristotle’s philosophies. Ptolemy reworked the circular path of the planets by adding epicycles and shifting the Earth from the center of the cosmos (26). Although Ptolemy’s work was “brilliant” it did not support Aristotle’s philosophy as accepted as church doctrine (26). It was near the end of the sixteenth century when Galileo Galilei also determined that Aristotle’s theories of the cosmos were incorrect. According to Aristotle, “the larger the object the faster it should fall, because of the greater urge to reach its natural place.” However, Galileo determined “that heavy and light weights both fall at the same rate” (27). It was studying Copernicus’ work that Galileo realized Copernicus was right and that the Earth was not the center of the cosmos, thereby the “heavens were not a realm of perfection” (28). This new theory distressed the Catholic Church since it disrupted the cohesion of thoughts they strongly believed (28).
Yet there were monks and priests that thought the church should remove Aristotle from their doctrine since “God’s providence was irrelevant in Aristotle’s world made of self-transforming matter” (28). These monks and priests were concerned with the need of a more concrete theory because of the formation of mystical nature-worshiping sects and a growing number of skeptics within Europe (28). According to Zimmer, it was a monk named Marin Mersenne who led the “assault” on Aristotle and he decided “that the only way for the church to survive was to take the soul out of nature” (28).
Another priest, Pierre Gassendi embraced atoms and viewed the universe as “composed of indivisible, indestructible, invisible particles wandering through a void,” and each of these particles have an “intrinsic size, shape, and weight” (29). This idea of atoms, Gassendi believed was in perfect harmony with Christianity as was the idea of a soul made of atoms (29). Gassendi formulated the idea of two souls: the sensitive soul and the rational soul. The sensitive soul involved the nerves “receiving sensations and impressing them on the brain,” while the rational soul was deemed “immaterial” and located in the brain (29). The rational soul was dependent on the sensitive soul to send it images of the outside world (30). This natural philosophy, Gassendi believed would bring proper justice to the Christian soul since the rational soul was not composed of atoms and therefore it was immortal (30).
The ideas and theories of these men led Rene Descartes to bring a new perspective to the concept of the soul and its presence in the body. Zimmer gave a descriptive account of Descartes life and what led him on his philosophical journey. Descartes first research focused with the nervous system, and he came to believe that in the ventricles the soul controlled the body. He thought that a “subtle wind” caused by spirits, which formed as blood rose from the heart to the head pressed against the ventricles causing the “breeze” to surge into the nerves. As the nerves expanded with “spirits” Descartes assumed this caused muscles to swell and contract (35). Descartes treated the human body as an “earthen machine,” arguing that a body could live and move “without the help of life-giving souls” (34). He became convinced that animals and humans were “intricately crafted machines made up of passive particles,” however humans contained a rational soul (36). Descartes supported Galen’s claim that the pineal gland was located where the vessels joined together by studying Galen’s work. He asserted that the pineal gland allowed the rational soul to control the glands movements (37). Therefore, Descartes believed that it was the soul’s movements that “aimed the spirits at particular pores in the walls of the ventricles, which then traveled through the nerves and carried out the soul’s will” (37).
Descartes finally combined his work into one book, The World in 1632. However, due to Galileo’s condemnation by the church, Descartes decided to present his new argument in a short book, Discourse on Method. This book did not include his famous motto “Cogito, ergo sum: I think, therefore I am,” which supported his belief that God does exist (38). He explained in his discourse that the rational soul “directed the flow of animal spirits through the ventricles” (39). Descartes exploited his work in two more books Meditations and Principles (39). It was Descartes study of the brain that led natural philosophers to launch the “Neurocentric Age” (41).
**This link gives a good comparison between Aristotle’s and Ptolemy’s interpretation of the universe: http://csep10.phys.utk.edu/astr161/lect/retrograde/aristotle.html.
**The hyperlink of the Descartes Principles is an index of the Principles so you can easily find the ones that interest you the most.
Critique:
According to Zimmer, Copernicus’ claim that the Earth was not at the center of the cosmos, but just another planet orbiting around the sun provided a new conception of the brain and the soul (25). It was Descartes “conception” of the brain and soul’s relationship that captured my attention in this chapter. His theory stated that a “subtle wind” was caused by spirits, which formed as blood rose from the heart to the head. This wind pressed against the ventricles causing the “breeze” to rush into the nerves. As the nerves expanded with “spirits” he assumed this caused the swelling and contracting of muscles (35). At first, I was confused on how he associated a relationship between the “spirits” that formed in the blood with the ventricles. But after I read about the ventricles function and structure I was able to understand why. The ventricles are filled with cerebral spinal fluid (CSF), which provides cushioning for the brain within the skull. I remember learning in class that the CSF dissolves neural hormones via the blood stream throughout the body. This is why I think Descartes associated the “spirits” with the ventricles because the ventricles consist of a fluid that could transport these “spirits” to other parts of the body.
Descartes idea of “spirits” was as “material as blood and bones” (35). This surprised me because Zimmer says on page 31 that Descartes had a “deep-running Catholic faith,” and I would have thought that Descartes observed how in the Bible the soul is a separate entity from the heart and our strength (Deut 6:5). Today in Christian teaching the soul is thought of as a nonphysical element opposed to a physical element as Descartes believed.
I also wanted to mention Gassendi because as a priest he was able to maintain his faith in God and correlate his faith with his scientific study. I found this extremely interesting since as science has developed some people, including myself at times have difficulty balancing the relationship between science and religion. The debates and conflicts between the Church and the development of science are still prevalent today as they were during Gassendi’s and Descartes time. An article in TIME Magazine titled “God vs. Science” is a good source to better understand the debates that are occurring within Science and Religious sects today. One of the debates is Darwinian Evolution vs. The Book of Genesis. As a Christian and a Biology major, I had to find a happy medium between this debate. For that reason I believe that the Book of Genesis is truth, but I also believe that the Earth has evolved and changed. And these changes could have occurred with accordance to scripture in seven days (definitely longer than seven days, so I like to call it God time). The author, David Van Biema includes a debate between two well-known scientists with conflicting opinions on science and religion: Richard B. Dawkins and Francis S. Collins. Dawkins is widely known for his anti-God sentiments and his support of the Darwinian Theory, which is found in his book The God Delusion. While Francis S. Collins, the director of the National Human Genome Institute supports the cohesion of science and religion.
Finally, I wanted to conclude by saying that I found this chapter very enlightening. I was able to apply the themes and philosophers I was introduced to in my Philosophy class to the development of neuroscience. I was also able to view how the Church’s relationship with the scientific community is still in conflict with certain issues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)