Toward an Explanation of the Genesis of Ketamine-Induced Perceptual Distortions and Hallucinatory States

The NMDA receptor (NMDAR) channel has been proposed to function as a coincidence-detection mechanism for afferent and reentrant signals, supporting conscious perception, learning, and memory formation. In this paper we discuss the genesis of distorted perceptual states induced by subanesthetic doses of ketamine, a well-known NMDA antagonist. NMDAR blockage has been suggested to perturb perceptual processing in sensory cortex, and also to decrease GABAergic inhibition in limbic areas (leading to an increase in dopamine excitability). We propose that perceptual distortions and hallucinations induced by ketamine blocking of NMDARs are generated by alternative signaling pathways, which include increase of excitability in frontal areas, and glutamate binding to AMPA in sensory cortex prompting Ca++ entry through voltage-dependent calcium channels (VDCCs). This mechanism supports the thesis that glutamate binding to AMPA and NMDARs at sensory cortex mediates most normal perception, while binding to AMPA and activating VDCCs mediates some types of altered perceptual states. We suggest that Ca++ metabolic activity in neurons at associative and sensory cortices is an important factor in the generation of both kinds of perceptual consciousness.

Smoking is associated with remodeling of gap junction in the rat heart: Smoker's paradox explanation?

Background: In a previous study utilizing the rat model, exposure to tobacco smoke for 5 weeks increased survival after AMI, despite similar age and infarct size between the smokers and nonsmokers, and absence of reperfusion. Objective: Thus, this study aimed to analyze the effects of exposure to tobacco smoke on intensity, distribution or phosphorylation of connexin 43 in the rat heart. Methods: Wistar rats weighing 100 g were randomly allocated into 2 groups: 1) Control (n = 25); 2) Exposed to tobacco smoke (ETS), n = 23. After 5 weeks, left ventricular morphometric analysis, immunohisthochemistry and western blotting for connexin 43 (Cx43) were performed. Results: Collagen volume fraction, cross-sectional areas, and ventricular weight were not statistically different between control and ETS. ETS showed lower stain intensity of Cx43 at intercalated disks (Control: 2.32 ± 0.19; ETS: 1.73 ± 0.18; p = 0.04). The distribution of CX43 at intercalated disks did not differ between the groups (Control: 3.73 ± 0.12; ETS: 3.20 ± 0.17; p = 0.18). ETS rats showed higher levels of dephosphorylated form of Cx43 (Control: 0.45 ± 0.11; ETS: 0.90 ± 0.11; p = 0.03). On the other hand, total Cx43 did not differ between control and ETS groups (Control: 0.75 ± 0.19; ETS: 0.93 ± 0.27; p = 0.58). Conclusion: Exposure to tobacco smoke resulted in cardiac gap junction remodeling, characterized by alterations in the quantity and phosphorylation of the Cx43, in rats hearts. This finding could explain the smoker's paradox observed in some studies.

The psychobiological model: a new explanation to intensity regulation and (in)tolerance in endurance exercise

The mechanisms underpinning fatigue and exhaustion, and the specific sources of exercise-endurance intensity regulation and (in)tolerance have been investigated for over a century. Although several scientific theories are currently available, over the past five years a new framework called Psychobiological model has been proposed. This model gives greater attention to perceptual and motivational factors than its antecedents, and their respective influence on the conscious process of decision-making and behavioral regulation. In this review we present experimental evidences and summarize the key points of the Psychobiological model to explain intensity regulation and (in)tolerance in endurance exercise. Still, we discuss how the Psychobiological model explains training-induced adaptations related to improvements in performance, experimental manipulations, its predictions, and propose future directions for this investigative area. The Psychobiological model may give a new perspective to the results already published in the literature, helping scientists to better guide their research problems, as well as to analyze and interpret new findings more accurately.

The multifaceted roles of metabolic enzymes in the Paracoccidioides species complex

Paracoccidioides species are dimorphic fungi and are the etiologic agents of paracoccidioidomycosis, which is a serious disease that involves multiple organs. The many tissues colonized by this fungus suggest a variety of surface molecules involved in adhesion. A surprising finding is that most enzymes in the glycolytic pathway, tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle and glyoxylate cycle in Paracoccidioides spp. have adhesive properties that aid in interacting with the host extracellular matrix and thus act as 'moonlighting'proteins. Moonlighting proteins have multiple functions, which adds a dimension to cellular complexity and benefit cells in several ways. This phenomenon occurs in both eukaryotes and prokaryotes. For example, moonlighting proteins from the glycolytic pathway or TCA cycle can play a role in bacterial pathogenesis by either acting as proteins secreted in a conventional pathway and/or as cell surface components that facilitate adhesion or adherence. This review outlines the multifunctionality exhibited by many Paracoccidioides spp. enzymes, including aconitase, aldolase, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase, isocitratelyase, malatesynthase, triose phosphate isomerase, fumarase, and enolase. We discuss the roles that moonlighting activities play in the virulence characteristics of this fungus and several other human pathogens during their interactions with the host.

Taylor's power law for ecological communities: an explanation on nonextensive/nonlinear statistical grounds

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

The structuring body : a critical study in the description & explanation of perceptual experience

The aims of the dissertation are to find the right description of the structure of perceptual experience and to explore the ways in which the structure of the body might serve to explain it. In the first two parts, I articulate and defend the claim that perceptual experience seems direct and the claim that its objects seem real. I defend these claims as integral parts of a coherent metaphysically neutral conception of perceptual experience. Sense-datum theorists, certain influential perceptual psychologists, and early modern philosophers (most notably Berkeley) all disputed the claim that perceptual experience seems direct. In Part I, I argue that the grounds on which they did so were poor. The aim is then, in Part II, to give a proper appreciation of the distinctive intentionality of perceptual experience whilst remaining metaphysically neutral. I do so by drawing on the early work of Edmund Husserl, providing a characterisation of the perceptual experience of objects as real, qua mind-independent particulars. In Part III, I explore two possible explanations of the structure characterising the intentionality of perceptual experience, both of which accord a distinctive explanatory role to the body. On one account, perceptual experience is structured by an implicit pre-reflective consciousness of oneself as a body engaged in perceptual activity. An alternative account makes no appeal to the metaphysically laden concept of a bodily self. It seeks to explain the structure of perceptual experience by appeal to anticipation of the structural constraints of the body. I develop this alternative by highlighting the conceptual and empirical basis for the idea that a first-order structural affordance relation holds between a bodily agent and certain properties of its body. I then close with a discussion of the shared background assumptions that ought to inform disputes over whether the body itself (in addition to its representation) ought to serve as an explanans in such an account.

[CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

The multifaceted roles of Eph/ephrin signaling in breast cancer

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22568950