William Harvey revisited

William Harvey's discovery of the circulation of the blood is often described as a product of the Scientific Revolution of the Seventeenth Century. Modern research has, however, shown thatHarvey followed the Aristotelian research tradition and thus tried to reveal the purpose of the organs through examination of various animals. His publication of 1628 has to be read as an argument of natural philosophy, or, more precisely, as a series of linked observations, experiments and philosophical reasonings from which the existence of circulation has to be deduced as a logical consequence. Harvey did not consider experiments as superior to philosophical reasoning nor intended he to create a new system of medicine. He believed in the vitality of the heart and the blood and rejected Francis Bacon's empirism and the mechanistic rationalism of Descartes. Harvey's contribution and originality lied less in his single observations and experiments but in the manner how he linked them with critical reasoning and how he accepted, presented and defended the ensuing radical findings.

Methodological and physiological test-retest reliability of (13) C-MRS glycogen measurements in liver and in skeletal muscle of patients with type 1 diabetes and matched healthy controls.

Glycogen is a major substrate in energy metabolism and particularly important to prevent hypoglycemia in pathologies of glucose homeostasis such as type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). (13) C-MRS is increasingly used to determine glycogen in skeletal muscle and liver non-invasively; however, the low signal-to-noise ratio leads to long acquisition times, particularly when glycogen levels are determined before and after interventions. In order to ease the requirements for the subjects and to avoid systematic effects of the lengthy examination, we evaluated if a standardized preparation period would allow us to shift the baseline (pre-intervention) experiments to a preceding day. Based on natural abundance (13) C-MRS on a clinical 3 T MR system the present study investigated the test-retest reliability of glycogen measurements in patients with T1DM and matched controls (n = 10 each group) in quadriceps muscle and liver. Prior to the MR examination, participants followed a standardized diet and avoided strenuous exercise for two days. The average coefficient of variation (CV) of myocellular glycogen levels was 9.7% in patients with T1DM compared with 6.6% in controls after a 2 week period, while hepatic glycogen variability was 13.3% in patients with T1DM and 14.6% in controls. For comparison, a single-session test-retest variability in four healthy volunteers resulted in 9.5% for skeletal muscle and 14.3% for liver. Glycogen levels in muscle and liver were not statistically different between test and retest, except for hepatic glycogen, which decreased in T1DM patients in the retest examination, but without an increase of the group distribution. Since the CVs of glycogen levels determined in a "single session" versus "within weeks" are comparable, we conclude that the major source of uncertainty is the methodological error and that physiological variations can be minimized by a pre-study standardization. For hepatic glycogen examinations, familiarization sessions (MR and potentially strenuous interventions) are recommended. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.