Brain hemispheres

Minds of their own

gettingwell4 5+ stars Premium, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Epigenetics, Memory, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress , , , , , ,

It’s the weekend, so it’s time for: Running errands? Watching sports? Other conditioned behavior?

Or maybe broadening our cognitive ability with Dr. Michael Levin’s follow-ups to his 2021 Basal cognition paper and 2020 Electroceuticals presentation with a 2022 paper and presentation starting around the 13:30 mark:

Michael Levin - Cell Intelligence in Physiological and Morphological Spaces

“A homeostatic feedback is usually thought of as a single variable such as temperature or pH. The set point has been found to be a large-scale geometry, a descriptor of a complex data structure.”

His 2022 paper Technological Approach to Mind Everywhere: An Experimentally-Grounded Framework for Understanding Diverse Bodies and Minds:

“It is proposed that the traditional problem-solving behavior we see in standard animals in 3D space is just a variant of evolutionarily more ancient capacity to solve problems in metabolic, physiological, transcriptional, and morphogenetic spaces (as one possible sequential timeline along which evolution pivoted some of the same strategies to solve problems in new spaces).

Developmental bioelectricity works alongside other modalities such as gene-regulatory networks, biomechanics, and biochemical systems. Developmental bioelectricity provides a bridge between the early problem-solving of body anatomy and the more recent complexity of behavioral sophistication via brains.

This unification of two disciplines suggests a number of hypotheses about the evolutionary path that pivoted morphogenetic control mechanisms into cognitive capacities of behavior, and sheds light on how Selves arise and expand.

While being very careful with powerful advances, it must also be kept in mind that existing balance was not achieved by optimizing happiness or any other quality commensurate with modern values. It is the result of dynamical systems properties shaped by meanderings of the evolutionary process and the harsh process of selection for survival capacity.”

PXL_20220904_102050409

Brain changes

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Anterior cingulate cortex, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Epigenetics, Hippocampus, Limbic system, Memory , , ,

This 2022 human study investigated healthy young adult brain changes using MRI and epigenetic clock technologies:

“We aimed to characterize the association of epigenetic age (i.e. estimated DNA methylation age) and its acceleration with surface area, cortical thickness, and volume in healthy young adults. It is largely unknown how accelerated epigenetic age affects multiple cortical features among young adults from 19 to 49 years. Prior findings imply not only that these dynamic changes reveal different aspects of cortical aging, but also that chronological age itself is not a reliable factor to understand the process of cortical aging.

accelerated epigenetic age vs brain features

Seventy-nine young healthy individuals participated in this study. Findings of our study should be interpreted within the context of relatively small sample size, without older adults, and with epigenetic age assessed from saliva.

Additional and unique regional changes due to advanced and accelerated epigenetic age, compared to chronological age-related changes, suggest that epigenetic age could be a viable biomarker of cortical aging. Longitudinal and cross-sectional studies with a larger sample and wider age range are necessary to characterize ongoing effects of epigenetic cortical aging, not only for healthy but also for pathological aging.”

https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhac043 “The effects of epigenetic age and its acceleration on surface area, cortical thickness, and volume in young adults” (not freely available) Thanks to Dr. Yong Jeon Cheong for providing a copy.

Gut and brain health

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Amygdala, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Brainstem, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Immune system, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Serotonin, Stress, Testosterone , , , ,

This 2021 human review subject was interactions of gut health and disease with brain health and disease:

“Actions of microbial metabolites are key for appropriate gut-brain communication in humans. Among these metabolites, short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), tryptophan, and bile acid metabolites / pathways show strong preclinical evidence for involvement in various aspects of brain function and behaviour.

Dietary fibres, proteins, and fats ingested by the host contain components which are metabolized by microbiota. SCFAs are produced from fermentation of fibres, and tryptophan-kynurenine (TRP-KYN) metabolites from dietary proteins. Primary bile acids derived from liver metabolism aid in lipid digestion, but can be deconjugated and bio-transformed into secondary bile acids.

1-s2.0-S0149763421001032-gr1

One of the greatest challenges with human microbiota studies is making inferences about composition of colonic microbiota from faeces. There are known differences between faecal and caecal microbiota composition in humans along with spatial variation across the gastrointestinal tract.

It is difficult to interpret microbiome-host associations without identifying the driving influence in such an interaction. Large cohort studies may require thousands of participants on order to reach 20 % explanatory power for a certain host-trait with specific microbiota-associated metrics (Shannon diversity, relative microbial abundance). Collection of metadata is important to allow for a better comparison between studies, and to identify differentially abundant microbes arising from confounding variables.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763421001032 “Mining Microbes for Mental Health: Determining the Role of Microbial Metabolic Pathways in Human Brain Health and Disease”

Don’t understand why these researchers handcuffed themselves by only using PubMed searches. For example, two papers were cited for:

“Conjugated and unconjugated bile acids, as well as taurine or glycine alone, are potential neuroactive ligands in humans.”

Compare scientific coverage of PubMed with Scopus:

  • 2017 paper: PubMed citations 39; Scopus citations 69.
  • 2019 paper: PubMed citations 69; Scopus citations 102.

Large numbers of papers intentionally missing from PubMed probably influenced this review’s findings, such as:

  1. “There are too few fibromyalgia and migraine microbiome-related studies to make definitive conclusions. However, one fibromyalgia study found altered microbial species associated with SCFA and tryptophan metabolism, as well as changes in serum levels of SCFAs. Similarly, the sole migraine-microbiota study reported an increased abundance of the kynurenine synthesis GBM (gut-brain module).
  2. Due to heterogeneity of stroke and vascular disease conditions, it is difficult to make substantial comparisons between studies. There is convincing evidence for involvement of specific microbial genera / species and a neurovascular condition in humans. However, taxa were linked to LPS biosynthesis rather than SCFA production.
  3. Several studies suggest lasting microbial changes in response to prenatal or postnatal stress, though these do not provide evidence for involvement of SCFA, tryptophan, or bile-acid modifying bacteria. Similar to stress, there are very few studies assessing impact of post-traumatic stress disorder on microbiota.”

These researchers took on a difficult task. Their study design could have been better.

PXL_20210628_095746132

Wildlife

PXL_20210710_100826663

Take acetyl-L-carnitine for early-life trauma

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Amygdala, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Primal Therapy, Serotonin, Stress , , , , , , , ,

This 2021 rodent study traumatized female mice during their last 20% of pregnancy, with effects that included:

  • Prenatally stressed pups raised by stressed mothers had normal cognitive function, but depressive-like behavior and social impairment;
  • Prenatally stressed pups raised by control mothers did not reverse behavioral deficits; and
  • Control pups raised by stressed mothers displayed prenatally stressed pups’ behavioral phenotypes.

“Acetyl-L-carnitine (ALCAR) protected against and reversed depressive-like behavior induced by prenatal trauma:

alcar regime

ALCAR was supplemented in drinking water of s → S mice either from weaning to adulthood (3–8 weeks), or for one week in adulthood (7–8 weeks). ALCAR supplementation from weaning rendered s → S mice resistant to developing depressive-like behavior.

ALCAR supplementation for 1 week during adulthood rescued depressive-like behavior. One week after ALCAR cessation, however, the anti-depressant effect of ALCAR was diminished.

Intergenerational trauma induces social deficits and depressive-like behavior through divergent and convergent mechanisms of both in utero and early-life parenting environments:

  • We establish 2-HG [2-hydroxyglutaric acid, a hypoxia and mitochondrial dysfunction marker, and an epigenetic modifier] as an early predictive biomarker for trauma-induced behavioral deficits; and
  • Demonstrate that early pharmacological correction of mitochondria metabolism dysfunction by ALCAR can permanently reverse behavioral deficits.”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-021-02255-2 “Intergenerational trauma transmission is associated with brain metabotranscriptome remodeling and mitochondrial dysfunction”

This study had an effusive endorsement of acetyl-L-carnitine in its Discussion section, ending with:

“This has the potential to change lives of millions of people who suffer from major depression or have risk of developing this disabling disorder, particularly those in which depression arose from prenatal traumatic stress.”

I take a gram daily. Don’t know about prenatal trauma, but I’m certain what happened during my early childhood.

I asked both these researchers and those of Reference 70 for their estimates of a human equivalent to “0.3% ALCAR in drinking water.” Will update with their replies.

No word from those researchers, so here’s what I calculate:

  • (.003 x .081) x 70 kg = 1.7% human equivalent dose.
  • 1 liter water = 1 kg, so .017 x 1000 g = 17 g per liter of water.

We all drink at least a liter of water every day. A 17 gram/liter dose is way too high for humans, considering:

I downgraded this study to Required further work. It’s likely these researchers overdosed mice to ensure their treatment produced an effect. That’s counterproductive to the purpose of animal studies: to help humans.

PXL_20210704_095621886

Week 9 of Changing to a youthful phenotype with broccoli sprouts

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Beliefs, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Epigenetics, Immune system, Limbic system, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Primal Therapy, Stress , , , ,

To follow up Week 8 of Changing to a youthful phenotype with broccoli sprouts:

1. This week has really been different.

A. Physically, on Friday Eve I worked out per my usual upper-body-workout-every four-days routine. I felt strong, and on one exercise I increased the weight by 33%. No problem doing the same number of reps and sets! Keeping good form was challenging.

Per Week 7, I eight-count each concentric rep slowly, then perform each eccentric rep to the same count, with a goal to reach muscle exhaustion during each set. Then pause and do another set.

What changed? Could I have done all this before?

No. I’d tried, making baby steps with increasing weight and keeping good form. But now I can, and I’ll do it again, along with other physical challenges.

B. Seven blog posts this week show improved cognitive function. Is A claim of improved cognitive function sufficient evidence?

Awakening was how it felt. Waking up to what I didn’t see before.

C. This 35th blog post for May comes after 30 posts in April. It wasn’t my goal to do one a day. It’s my goal to Surface Your Real Self. Did a few of them help?

I hope to do other things with my life in June. But the fact remains that humans are herd animals. We “think in herds, go mad in herds, while they [we] only recover their [our] senses slowly, one by one.” We’ll stay in the Madness of Crowds phase until enough people refuse to be propagandized.

2. As a result of reading A pair of broccoli sprout studies, I changed practices to start batches with one tablespoon of broccoli seeds twice a day so I could consume broccoli sprouts twice daily. Right now it’s a PITA task that requires optimization.

The two studies’ findings were:

  1. Broccoli sprouts are better than supplements.
  2. Eating sprouts twice a day is better than eating them once a day.
  3. When in doubt, refer back to Item 1.

3. I reordered broccoli seeds and will receive them next week. In the meantime, I introduced yet another unknown by consuming sprouts that came from a different vendor:

These seeds are smaller. Hundreds of seeds and seed coats annoyingly pass through my strainer, which didn’t happen with larger seeds. 3-day-old sprout sizes are smaller, and they smell and taste different.

This vendor put “seed” four times on their label. The other vendor didn’t bother to put “seed” even once on their broccoli seed package label.

Like other vendors, they prefer buzzword marketing with “microgreen” and “sprouting” rather than provide useful consumer information such as number of seeds and broccoli variety characteristics. Will people buy “Broccoli Sprouting Seeds” but won’t buy Broccoli Seeds? Do people say “Cool beans!” anymore?

My reorder states there are ~720,000 broccoli seeds in that 5 lb. package. I’ll update with its volume after it arrives.

See Week 10 of Changing to a youthful phenotype with broccoli sprouts for follow ups.

Using oxytocin receptor gene methylation to pursue an agenda

gettingwell4 < 0 Detracted from science, Amygdala, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Epigenetics, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Stress, Vasopressin , , , , , , , , ,

A pair of 2019 Virginia studies involved human mother/infant subjects:

“We show that OXTRm [oxytocin receptor gene DNA methylation] in infancy and its change is predicted by maternal engagement and reflective of behavioral temperament.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6795517 “Epigenetic dynamics in infancy and the impact of maternal engagement”

“Infants with higher OXTRm show enhanced responses to anger and fear and attenuated responses to happiness in right inferior frontal cortex, a region implicated in emotion processing through action-perception coupling.

Infant fNIRS [functional near-infrared spectroscopy] is limited to measuring responses from cerebral cortex. It is unknown whether OXTR is expressed in the cerebral cortex during prenatal and early postnatal human brain development.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187892931830207X “Epigenetic modification of the oxytocin receptor gene is associated with emotion processing in the infant brain”

Both studies had weak disclosures of limitations on their findings’ relevance and significance. The largest non-disclosed contrary finding was from the 2015 Early-life epigenetic regulation of the oxytocin receptor gene:

These results suggest that:

  • Blood Oxtr DNA methylation may reflect early experience of maternal care, and
  • Oxtr methylation across tissues is highly concordant for specific CpGs, but
  • Inferences across tissues are not supported for individual variation in Oxtr methylation.

That rat study found that blood OXTR methylation of 25 CpG sites couldn’t accurately predict the same 25 CpG sites’ OXTR methylation in each subject’s hippocampus, hypothalamus, and striatum (which includes the nucleus accumbens) brain areas. Without significant effects in these limbic system structures, there couldn’t be any associated behavioral effects.

But CpG site associations and correlations were deemed good in the two current studies because they cited:

“Recent work in prairie voles has found that both brain- and blood-derived OXTRm levels at these sites are negatively associated with gene expression in the brain and highly correlated with each other.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306453018306103 “Early nurture epigenetically tunes the oxytocin receptor”

The 2018 prairie vole study – which included several of the same researchers as the two current studies – found four nucleus accumbens CpG sites that had high correlations to humans. Discarding one of these CpG sites allowed their statistics package to make a four-decimal place finding:

“The methylation state of the blood was also associated with the level of transcription in the brain at three of the four CpG sites..whole blood was capable of explaining 94.92% of the variance in Oxtr DNA methylation and 18.20% of the variance in Oxtr expression.”

Few limitations on the prairie vole study findings were disclosed. Like the two current studies, there wasn’t a limitation section that placed research findings into suitable contexts. So readers didn’t know researcher viewpoints on items such as:

  • What additional information showed that 3 of the 30+ million human CpGs accurately predicted specific brain OXTR methylation and expression from saliva OXTR methylation?
  • What additional information demonstrated how “measuring responses from cerebral cortex” although “it is unknown whether OXTR is expressed in the cerebral cortex” provided detailed and dependable estimates of limbic system CpG site OXTR methylation and expression?
  • Was the above 25-CpG study evidence considered?

Further contrast these three studies with a typical, four-point, 285-word limitation section of a study like Prenatal stress heightened adult chronic pain. The word “limit” appeared 6 times in that pain study, 3 times in the current fNIRS study, and 0 times in the current maternal engagement and cited prairie vole studies.

Frank interpretations of one’s own study findings to acknowledge limitations is one way researchers can address items upfront that will be questioned anyway. Such analyses also indicate a goal to advance science.

Emotional responses and BDNF methylation

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Amygdala, Brain hemispheres, Epigenetics, Limbic system, Stress , , ,

This 2019 German human study found:

“A critical role of BDNF [brain-derived neurotrophic factor] methylation in human amygdala response to negative emotional stimuli, whereby:

  • High BDNF methylation rates were for the first time shown to be associated with a high reactivity in the amygdala; and
  • High BDNF methylation and high amygdala reactivity were associated with low novelty seeking.

There was no interaction or main effect of the Val66Met polymorphism on amygdala reactivity.

Our data adds evidence to the hypothesis that epigenetic modifications of BDNF can result in an endophenotype associated with anxiety and mood disorders. However, since correlations do not prove causality:

  • A direct link between human BDNF mRNA/protein levels, methylation, amygdala reactivity and psychiatric disorders is still missing, demanding further research.
  • Determining the underlying directions of the relations between BDNF methylation, amygdala reactivity, and NS [novelty seeking] cannot be accomplished based on our data and must await further research.

The fact that our results mainly involve the right amygdala is in line with previous studies. Recent reviews suggest a general right hemisphere dominance for all kinds of emotions, and, more specifically, a critical role of the right amygdala in the early assessment of emotional stimuli.

The experimental fMRI paradigm utilized a face‐processing task (faces with anger or fear expressions), alternating with a sensorimotor control task. Harm avoidance, novelty seeking, and reward dependence were measured using the Tridimensional Personality Questionnaire.”

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/hbm.24825 “The role of BDNF methylation and Val 66 Met in amygdala reactivity during emotion processing”

OCD and neural plasticity

gettingwell4 0-1 star Wasted resources, Amygdala, Brain hemispheres, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Stress, Thalamus , , , ,

Update: this was retracted on February 23, 2021. The retraction note is at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84474-5.

This 2019 New York rodent study investigated multiple avenues to uncover mechanisms of obsessive-compulsive disorder:

“Psychophysical models of OCD propose that anxiety (amygdala) and habits (dorsolateral striatum) may be causally linked. Numerous genetic and environmental factors may reduce striatum sensitivity and lead to maladaptive overcompensation, potentially accounting for a significant proportion of cases of pathological OCD-like behaviors.

Our results indicate that both the development and reversal of OCD-like behaviors involve neuroplasticity resulting in circuitry changes in BLA-DLS and possibly elsewhere.”

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-45325-6.pdf “Amelioration of obsessive-compulsive disorder in three mouse models treated with one epigenetic drug: unraveling the underlying mechanism”

The researchers explored two genetic models of OCD, showed why these insufficiently explained observed phenomena, then followed up with epigenetic investigations. They demonstrated how and the degree to which histone modifications and DNA methylation regulated both the development and reversal of OCD symptoms.

However, the researchers also carelessly cited thirteen papers outside the specific areas of the study to support one statement in the lead paragraph:

“Novel studies propose that modulations in gene expression influenced by environmental factors, are connected to mental health disorders.”

Only one of the thirteen citations was more recent than 2011, and none of them were high-quality studies.

Epigenetic causes of sexual orientation and handedness?

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Epigenetics, Testosterone , , , , , , ,

This 2018 Austrian human study subject was various associations of prenatal testosterone levels to fetal development:

“The available evidence suggests, albeit not conclusively, that prenatal testosterone levels may be one cause for the association of sexual orientation with handedness. Associations among women were consistent with predictions of the Geschwind–Galaburda theory (GGT), whereas those among men were consistent with predictions of the callosal hypothesis. However, research on the associations between sexual orientation and handedness appears to be compromised by various methodological and interpretational problems which need to be overcome to arrive at a clearer picture.

The GGT posits that high prenatal testosterone levels cause a delay in the fetal development of the left cerebral hemisphere which results in a right-hemisphere dominance and hence in a tendency for left-handedness. According to the GGT, high prenatal testosterone levels entail not only a masculinization of the female fetus, but also a feminization of the male fetus (contrary to neurohormonal theory). Overall, the male fetus is subjected to higher levels of intrauterine testosterone than the female fetus. The GGT is thus consistent with the higher prevalence of left-handedness among men than among women.

The callosal hypothesis applies to men only and assumes, in line with neurohormonal theory, that low prenatal testosterone levels are associated with later homosexuality. According to the CH, high prenatal testosterone enhances processes of cerebral lateralization through mechanisms of axonal pruning, thereby resulting in stronger left-hemisphere dominance and a smaller corpus callosum. Consistent with this, women have a larger corpus callosum than men.”

The study’s Limitations section included the following:

  1. “Limitations of the current study pertain to the self-report nature of our data. Behavioral data may provide differing results from those obtained here.
  2. Assessment of sexual orientation relied on a single-item measure. Utilization of rating scales (e.g., the Kinsey Sexual Orientation Scale) or of multi-item scales, and assessing different components of sexual orientation, would have allowed for a more fine-grained analysis and for a cross-validation of sexual orientation ratings with sexual attraction.
  3. Albeit both our samples were large, the proportions of bisexual and homosexual individuals were, expectedly, only small, as were effects of lateral preferences. Thus, in analysis we could not differentiate bisexual from homosexual individuals. Bisexual and homosexual individuals may differ with regard to the distribution of lateral preferences.
  4. Some effect tests in this study have been underpowered. Independent replications with even larger samples are still needed.”

The largest unstated limitation was no fetal measurements. When a fetus’ epigenetic responses and adaptations aren’t considered, not only can the two competing hypotheses not be adequately compared, but causes for the studied phenotypic programming and other later-life effects will also be missed.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-018-1346-9 “Associations of Bisexuality and Homosexuality with Handedness and Footedness: A Latent Variable Analysis Approach”

Differing approaches to a life wasted on beliefs

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Amygdala, Anterior cingulate cortex, Beliefs, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Brainstem, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Dopamine, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Locus coeruleus, Lower brain, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Primal Therapy, Serotonin, Stress, Thalamus , , , , , , , , , ,

Let’s start by observing that people structure their lives around beliefs. As time goes on, what actions would a person have taken to ward off non-confirming evidence?

One response may be that they would engage in ever-increasing efforts to develop new beliefs that justified how they spent their one precious life’s time so far.

Such was my take on beliefs embedded in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5684598/pdf/PSYCHIATRY2017-5491812.pdf “Epigenetic and Neural Circuitry Landscape of Psychotherapeutic Interventions”:

“Animal models have shown the benefits of continued environmental enrichment (EE) on psychopathological phenotypes, which carries exciting translational value.

This paper posits that psychotherapy serves as a positive environmental input (something akin to EE).”

The author conveyed his belief that wonderful interventions were going to happen in the future. However, when scrutinized, most human studies have demonstrated NULL effects of psychotherapeutic interventions on causes. Without sound evidence that treatments affect causes, his belief seemed driven by something else.

The author cited findings of research like A problematic study of oxytocin receptor gene methylation, childhood abuse, and psychiatric symptoms as supporting external interventions to tamp down symptoms of patients’ presenting problems. Did any of the 300+ cited references concern treatments where patients instead therapeutically addressed their problems’ root causes?

For an analogous religious example, a person’s belief caused him to spend years of his life trying to convince men to act so that they could get their own planet after death, and trying to convince women to latch onto men who had this belief. A new and apparently newsworthy belief developed from his underlying causes:

“The founder and CEO of neuroscience company Kernel wants “to expand the bounds of human intelligence.” He is planning to do this with neuroprosthetics; brain augmentations that can improve mental function and treat disorders. Put simply, Kernel hopes to place a chip in your brain.

He was raised as a Mormon in Utah and it was while carrying out two years of missionary work in Ecuador that he was struck by what he describes as an “overwhelming desire to improve the lives of others.”

He suffered from chronic depression from the ages of 24 to 34, and has seen his father and stepfather face huge mental health struggles.”

https://www.theguardian.com/small-business-network/2017/dec/14/humans-20-meet-the-entrepreneur-who-wants-to-put-a-chip-in-your-brain “Humans 2.0: meet the entrepreneur who wants to put a chip in your brain”

The article stated that he had given up Mormonism. There was nothing to suggest, though, that he had therapeutically addressed any underlying causes for his misdirected thoughts, feelings, and behavior.

So he developed other beliefs instead.

What can people do to keep their lives from being wasted on beliefs? As mentioned in What was not, is not, and will never be:

“The problem is that spending our time and efforts on these ideas, beliefs, and behaviors won’t ameliorate their motivating causes. Our efforts only push us further away from our truths, with real consequences: a wasted life.”

The goal of the therapeutic approach advocated by Dr. Arthur Janov’s Primal Therapy is to remove the force of presenting problems’ motivating causes. Success in reaching this goal is realized when patients become better able to live their own lives.

Transgenerational effects of early environmental insults on aging and disease

gettingwell4 0-1 star Wasted resources, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Epigenetics, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Neurochemicals, Stress, Telomeres, Testosterone , , , , , , ,

The first paper of Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance week was a 2017 Canadian/Netherlands review that’s organized as follows:

“First, we address mechanisms of developmental and transgenerational programming of disease and inheritance. Second, we discuss experimental and clinical findings linking early environmental determinants to adverse aging trajectories in association with possible parental contributions and sex-specific effects. Third, we outline the main mechanisms of age-related functional decline and suggest potential interventions to reverse negative effects of transgenerational programming.”

A transgenerational phenotype was defined as an epigenetic modification that was maintained at least either to F2 grandchildren in the paternal lineage, or to F3 great-grandchildren in the maternal lineage.

The reviewers noted that mechanisms of transgenerational programming are complex and multivariate.  Severity, timing, and type of exposure; lineage of transmission; germ cell exposure; and gender of an organism were the main factors that may determine consequences. Mechanisms reviewed were:

  1. Parental exposure to an adverse environment;
  2. Altered maternal behavior and care of offspring; and
  3. Experience-dependent modifications of the epigenome.

There was a long list of diseases and impaired functionalities that were consequences of ancestral experiences and exposures. Most studies were of animals, but a few were human, such as those done on effects of extended power outages during a Quebec ice storm of January 1998.

One intervention that was effective in reversing a transgenerational phenotype induced by deficient rodent maternal care was to place pups with a caring foster female soon after birth. It’s probably unacceptable in human societies to preemptively recognize all poor-care human mothers and remove the infant to caring foster mothers. But researchers could probably find enough instances to develop studies of the effectiveness of such placements in reversing a transgenerational phenotype.

The review didn’t have suggestions for reversing human transgenerational phenotypes, just “potential interventions to reverse negative effects of transgenerational programming.” Interventions suggested for humans – exercise, enriched lifestyle, cognitive training, dietary regimens, and expressive art and writing therapies – only reduced impacts of transgenerational epigenetic effects.

Tricky wording of “reverse negative effects of transgenerational programming” showed that research paradigms weren’t aimed at resolving causes. The review was insufficient for the same reasons mentioned in How one person’s paradigms regarding stress and epigenetics impedes relevant research, prompting my same comment:

Aren’t people interested in human treatments of originating causes so that their various symptoms don’t keep bubbling up? Why wouldn’t research paradigms be aligned accordingly?

When reversals of human phenotypes aren’t researched, problems may compound by being transmitted to the next generations.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S014976341630714X “Transgenerational effects of early environmental insults on aging and disease incidence” (not freely available)

Parental lying thwarted both their children and researchers

gettingwell4 2-3 stars Required further work, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Epigenetics, Stress , , , ,

This 2017 German human study explored the relationship between birth stress and handedness. The authors summarized previous research which, among other points, estimated epigenetic contributions to handedness as great as 75%.

The research hypothesis itself was worthwhile based on the prior studies cited and elsewhere such as Group statistics don’t necessarily describe an individual. But the study hit a snag in its reliance on the sixty participants (average age 24) completing, with the assistance of their parents and medical records, a 24-item questionnaire of maternal health problems during pregnancy, substance use during pregnancy, and birth complications.

It’s extremely unlikely that the sixty subjects provided accurate information. For example:

  • Only one of the subjects reported maternal alcohol use during pregnancy. An expected number would have been twenty-six!
  • None of the subjects reported maternal mental illness during pregnancy. An expected number would have been at least seven!

I’d guess that the subjects’ parents willingly misled their children about facts of their child’s important earliest development periods. It’s my view that parental lies and omissions are not only unethical to the children, but also, whenever the lies and omissions became recognized, they potentially diminish or destroy the society among family members.

As mentioned on the Welcome page, lies and omissions ruin the standard scientific methodology of surveying parents and caregivers. The absence of reliable evidence made it impossible for the current study’s researchers to determine causes of epigenetic effects still present in the subjects’ lives.

Parental lies and omissions also diminish or destroy the society between the sources of information – the research subjects – and the users of the information. Such lies and omissions adversely affect anyone who values evidence-based research.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1357650X.2017.1377726 “DNA methylation in candidate genes for handedness predicts handedness direction” (not freely available)

Epigenetic stress effects in preterm infants

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Cortisol, Epigenetics, Glutamate, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Neurochemicals, Serotonin, Stress , , , , , ,

This 2017 Italian review selected 9 human studies on the epigenetic effects of:

“One of the major adverse events in human development. Preterm infants are hospitalized in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit where they are exposed to life-saving yet pain-inducing procedures and to protective care.”

Highlights of the referenced studies included:

  • “Early exposure to adverse events during the third trimester of pregnancy is capable to alter the epigenetic status of imprinted and placenta-related genes which have relevant implications for fetal development and preterm infants’ HPA [hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal] stress reactivity during infancy.”
  • “There was an association between DNAm [DNA methylation] and white matter tract tissue integrity and shape inferred from dMRI [diffusion MRI], suggesting that epigenetic variation may contribute to the cerebral phenotype of preterm birth.”

Limitations of the referenced studies included:

  • “A multiple sampling design that includes parental samples, placental tissue, cord blood and extends across the life-course would be required to investigate the relative contributions of in utero and postnatal exposures to changes in DNAm, and the extent to which preterm birth leaves a legacy on the methylome.”
  • Saliva, blood, and other tissues’ DNA methylation may not produce valid links to brain tissue DNA methylation of the same gene, which may hamper conclusive inferences about behavior, etc.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763417302117 “Preterm Behavioral Epigenetics: A systematic review” (not freely available)

http://www.nature.com/tp/journal/v6/n1/full/tp2015210a.html “Epigenomic profiling of preterm infants reveals DNA methylation differences at sites associated with neural function” (one of the studies selected, quoted above)

The hypothalamus couples with the brainstem to cause migraines

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Brain development, Brain hemispheres, Brainstem, Cortisol, Epigenetics, Hippocampus, Hypothalamus, Limbic system, Lower brain, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Stress

This 2016 German human study with one subject found:

“The hypothalamus to be the primary generator of migraine attacks which, due to specific interactions with specific areas in the higher and lower brainstem, could alter the activity levels of the key regions of migraine pathophysiology.”

The subject underwent daily fMRI scans, and procedures to evoke brain activity. She didn’t take any medications, and suffered three migraine attacks during the 31-day experimental period.

Neuroskeptic commented:

“The dorsal pons has previously been found to be hyperactive during migraine. It’s been dubbed the brain’s ‘migraine generator.’ Schulte and May’s data suggest that this is not entirely true – rather, it looks like the hypothalamus may be the true generator of migraine, while the brainstem could be a downstream mediator of the disorder.

A hypothalamic origin of migraines would help to explain some of the symptoms of the disorder, such as changes in appetite, that often accompany the headaches.”

The above graphic looks to me like the result of feedback mechanisms that either didn’t exist or inadequately handled the triggering event. Other examples of the hypothalamus lacking feedback or being involved in a deviated feedback loop include:

There are many unanswered questions with a one-person study, of course. Addressing the cause of this painful condition would find out when, where, and how a person’s hypothalamus became modified to express migraine tendencies.

I’d guess that migraine tendencies may appear as early as the first trimester of pregnancy, given that a highly functional hypothalamus is needed for survival and development in our earliest lives. Gaining as much familial and historical information as possible from the person would be necessary steps in therapies that address migraine causes.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2016/05/22/pinpointing-origins-of-migraine/ “Pinpointing the Origins of Migraine in the Brain”

https://academic.oup.com/brain/article/139/7/1987/2464241 “The migraine generator revisited: continuous scanning of the migraine cycle over 30 days and three spontaneous attacks”

As mentioned in How to cure the ultimate causes of migraines? comments are turned off for this post due to it somehow becoming a magnet for spammers. Readers can comment on that post instead.

Observing pain in others had long-lasting brain effects

gettingwell4 4-5 stars Advanced knowledge, Anterior cingulate cortex, Brain hemispheres, Cerebrum, Limbic system, Memory, Neurochemicals, Oxytocin, Stress , ,

This 2016 Israeli human study used whole-head magnetoencephalography (MEG) to study pain perception in military veterans:

“Our findings demonstrate alterations in pain perception following extreme pain exposure, chart the sequence from automatic to evaluative pain processing, and emphasize the importance of considering past experiences in studying the neural response to others’ states.

Differences in brain activation to ‘pain’ and ‘no pain’ in the PCC [posterior cingulate cortex] emerged only among controls. This suggests that prior exposure to extreme pain alters the typical brain response to pain by blurring the distinction between painful and otherwise identical but nonpainful stimuli, and that this blurring of the ‘pain effect’ stems from increased responses to ‘no pain’ rather than from attenuated response to pain.”

Limitations included:

  • “The pain-exposed participants showed posttraumatic symptoms, which may also be related to the observed alterations in the brain response to pain.
  • We did not include pain threshold measurements. However, the participants’ sensitivity to experienced pain may have had an effect on the processing of observed pain.
  • The regions of interest for the examination of pain processing in the pain-exposed group were defined on the basis of the results identified in the control group.
  • We did not detect pain-related activations in additional regions typically associated with pain perception, such as the anterior insula and ACC. This may be related to differences between the MEG and fMRI neuroimaging approaches.”

The subjects self-administered oxytocin or placebo per the study’s design. However:

“We chose to focus on the placebo condition and to test group differences at baseline only, in light of the recent criticism on underpowered oxytocin administration studies, and thus all following analyses are reported for the placebo condition.”

A few questions:

  1. If observing others’ pain caused “increased responses to ‘no pain’,” wouldn’t the same effect or more be expected from experiencing one’s own pain?
  2. If there’s evidence for item 1, then why aren’t “increased responses to ‘no pain'” of affected people overtly evident in everyday life?
  3. If item 2 is often observed, then what are the neurobiological consequences for affected people’s suppression of “increased responses to ‘no pain’?”
  4. Along with the effects of item 3, what may be behavioral, emotional, and other evidence of this suppressed pain effect?
  5. What would it take for affected people to regain a normal processing of others’ “‘pain’ and ‘no pain’?”

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299546838_Prior_exposure_to_extreme_pain_alters_neural_response_to_pain_in_others “Prior exposure to extreme pain alters neural response to pain in others” Thanks to one of the authors, Ruth Feldman, for providing the full study