Back to Articles  
 

The New Biology

by Dr. Bruce Lipton, Ph.D., 2001

Recent advances in cellular science are heralding an important evolutionary turning point. For almost fifty years we have held the illusion that our health and fate were preprogrammed in our genes, a concept referred to as genetic determinacy. Though mass consciousness is currently imbued with the belief that the character of one's life is genetically predetermined, a radically new understanding is unfolding at the leading edge of science.

Cellular biologists now recognize that the environment (external universe and internal-physiology), and more importantly, our perception of the environment, directly controls the activity of our genes. The lecture will broadly review the molecular mechanisms by which environmental awareness interfaces genetic regulation and guides organismal evolution.

The quantum physics behind these mechanisms provide insight into the communication channels that link the mind-body duality. An awareness of how vibrational signatures and resonance impact molecular communication constitutes a master key that unlocks a mechanism by which our thoughts, attitudes and beliefs create the conditions of our body and the external world. This knowledge can be employed to actively redefine our physical and emotional well-being.

Lecture Outline:

Knowledge of the philosophical foundation underlying conventional (allopathic) medicine is relevant for it illuminates why and how the dogma of genetic determinacy was derived.

Francis Bacon defined the mission of modern science shortly after the onset of the scientific revolution (1543). Accordingly, the purpose of science was "to dominate and control Nature." To accomplish that goal, scientists had to first acquire knowledge of what "controls" an organism's structure and function (behavior). Concepts founded in the principles of Newtonian physics defined the experimental approach to this quest. These principles stipulate that the Universe is a "physical mechanism" comprised of parts (matter), there is no attention given to the invisible "energy." In this world view, all that matters is "matter." Consequently, modern science is preoccupied with materialism.

The way to understand how a finely tuned mechanism works is to disassemble it and analyze all of the component "parts." This approach is called reductionism. Through an analysis of the parts and how they interact, defective part(s) in a malfunctioning organism can be identified and either repaired or replaced with "manufactured" parts (drugs, engineered genes, prosthetic devices, etc.). Knowledge of the body's mechanism would enable scientists to determine how an organism works and how to "control" the organism by altering its "parts."

Biologists were preoccupied with taking organisms apart and studying their cells for the first half of this century. Subsequently, cells were disassembled and their molecular "parts" catalogued and characterized. Cells are comprised of four types of large (macro-) molecules: proteins/polysaccharides (sugars)/nucleic acids (gene stuff)/lipids (fats)

The name protein means "primary element" (proteios, Gr.) for proteins are the primary components of all plant and animal cells. A human is made of ~100,000 different proteins. Proteins are linear "chains," whose molecular "links" are comprised of amino acid molecules. Each of the 20 different amino acids has a unique shape, so that when linked together in a chain, the resulting proteins fold into elaborate 3-dimensional "wire sculptures." The protein sculpture's pattern is determined by the sequence of its amino acid links. The balancing of electromagnetic charges along the protein's chain serves to control the "final" shape of the sculpture. The unique shape of a protein sculpture is referred to as its "conformation." In the manner of a lock and key, protein sculptures compliment the shape of environmental molecules (which include other proteins). When proteins interlock with the complementary environmental molecules, they assemble into complex structures (similar to the way cogged "gears" intermesh to make a watch).

When proteins chemically couple with other molecules they change the distribution of electromagnetic charges in the protein. Changes in "charge" cause the protein to change its shape. Therefore, upon coupling with chemicals, a protein's will shift its shape from one conformation to another conformation. A protein generates "motion" as it changes shape. A protein's movement can be harnessed to do "work." Groups of interacting proteins that work together in carrying out a specific function are referred to as "pathways." The activities of specific protein pathways provide for digestion, excretion, respiration, reproduction, and all of the other physiologic "functions" employed by living organisms.

Proteins provide for the organism's structure and function, but random protein actions can not provide for "life." Scientists needed to identify the mechanism that "integrates" protein functions to allow for the complex behaviors. Their search was linked to the fact that proteins are labile (opposite of stabile). Like parts in a car, proteins "wear-out" when they are used. If an individual protein in a pathway wears-out and is not replaced then the action of the pathway will stop. To resume function, the protein must be replaced. Consequently, behavioral functions were thought to be controlled by "regulating" the presence or absence of proteins comprising the pathways. The source of replacement protein parts is related to "memory" factors that provide for heredityÖthe passing on of "character"

The search for the hereditary factors that controlled protein synthesis led to DNA. In 1953, Watson and Crick unraveled the mystery of the "genetic code," which revealed how the DNA served as a molecular "blueprint" that defined amino acid sequences comprising a protein. The DNA blueprint for each protein is referred to as a gene. Since proteins define the character of an organism and the proteins' structures are encoded in the DNA, biologists established the dogma known as the Primacy of DNA. In this context, Primacy means "first level of control." It was concluded that DNA "controls" the structure and behavior of living organisms. Since DNA "determines" the character of an organism, then it is appropriate to acknowledge the concept of Genetic Determinism, the idea that the structure and behavior of an organism are defined by its genes.

Science's materialist-reductionist-determinist philosophy led to the Human Genome Project, the multibillion-dollar program to map all of the genes. Once this is accomplished, it is assumed that we can use that knowledge to repair or replace "defective" genes and in the process, realize Science's mission of "controlling" the expression of an organism.

Since 1953, biologists have assumed that DNA "controls" life. In multicellular animals, the organ that "controls" life is known as the brain. Since genes are presumed to control cellular life, and genes are contained in the cell's nucleus, the nucleus would be expected to be the equivalent of the cell's "brain."

Dispelling the Myth of Genes:

If the brain is removed from any organism, the immediate and necessary consequence of that action isó death of the organism. Removing the cell's nucleus, referred to as enucleation, would be tantamount to removing the cell's brain. Though enucleation should result in the immediate death of the cell, enucleated cells may continue to survive and exhibit a "regulated" control of their biological processes. In fact, cells can live for two or more months without a nucleus. Clearly, the assumption that genes "control" cell behavior is wrong!

As is described by Nijhout (X), genes are "not self-emergent," that is genes can not turn themselves on or off. If genes can't control their own expression, how can they control the behavior of the cell? Nijhout further emphasizes that genes are regulated by "environmental signals." Consequently, it is the environment that controls gene expression. Rather than endorsing the Primacy of DNA, we must acknowledge the Primacy of the Environment!

Cells "read" their environment, assess the information and then select appropriate behavioral programs to maintain their survival. The fact that data is integrated, processed and used to make a calculated behavioral response emphasizes the existence of a "brain" equivalent in the cell. Where is cell's brain? The answer is to be found in bacteria, the most primitive organisms on Earth. The many processes and functions of this unicellular life form are highly integrated, consequently, it must have a brain equivalent. Cytologically, these organisms do not contain any organelles (diminutive of "organs) such as nuclei, mitochondria, Golgi bodies, etc. The only organized structure in these primitive life forms is its "cell membrane," also known as its plasmalemma. The cell membrane, once thought to be like a permeable Saran Wrap that holds the cytoplasm together, actually provides for the bacterium's digestive, respiratory, excretory and integumentary (skin) systems. It also serves as the cell's "brain."

The cell membrane is primarily composed of phospholipids and proteins. Phospholipids, which resemble lollipops with two sticks, are arranged in a crystalline bilayer. The membrane resembles a bread and butter sandwich, wherein the lipid "sticks" form the central butter layer. The phospholipid bilayer forms a skin-like barrier which separates the external environment from the internal cytoplasm.

Built into the membrane are special proteins called Integral Membrane Proteins (IMPs). IMPs look like olives in the membrane's bread and butter sandwich. There are two classes of IMPs: receptors and effectors. Receptors are the cell's "sense" organs, the equivalents of eyes, ears, nose, etc. When a receptor recognizes and binds to a signal, it responds by changing its conformation. Conventional biology stipulates that receptors only respond to "matter" (molecules), a belief consistent with the Newtonian view of the universe as a "matter machine."

Leading edge contemporary cell research has transcended conventional Newtonian physics and is now soundly based upon a universe created out of energy as defined by quantum physics. This new physics emphasizes energetics over materialism, substitutes holism for reductionism, and recognizes uncertainty in place of determinism. Consequently, we now recognize that receptors respond to energy signals as well as molecular signals.

Conventional medicine has consistently ignored research published in its own main-stream scientific journals, research that clearly reveals the regulatory influence that electromagnetic fields have on cell physiology. Pulsed electromagnetic fields have been shown to regulate virtually every cell function, including DNA synthesis, RNA synthesis, protein synthesis, cell division, cell differentiation, morphogenesis and neuroendocrine regulation. These findings are relevant for they acknowledge that biological behavior can be controlled by "invisible" energy forces, which include thought.

When activated by its complementary signal, the protein receptor changes its conformation so that it is able to complex with a specific effector protein. Effector proteins carry out cell behaviors. Effector proteins may be enzymes, cytoskeletal elements (cellular equivalents of muscle and bone) or transporters (proteins that carry electrons, protons, ions, and other specific molecules across the "bread and butter" barrier). Generally effector proteins are inactive in their resting conformation. However, when the receptor binds to the effector protein, it causes the effector to changes its own conformation from an inactive to an active form. This is how an environmental signal activates a cell's behavior. The activity of effector IMPs generally regulate the behaviors of cytoplasmic protein pathways, like those associated with digestion, excretion, and cell movement. If specific functional proteins are not already present in the cell, activated effector IMPs send a signal to the nucleus and elicit required gene programs.

Receptor IMPs "see" or are "aware" of their environment and effector IMPs create physical responses that translate environmental signals into an appropriate biological behavior. The IMP complex controls behavior, and through its affect upon regulatory proteins, these IMPs also control gene expression... The IMP complexes provide the cell with "awareness of the environment through physical sensation," which by dictionary definition represents perception. Each receptor-effector protein complex collectively constitutes a "unit of perception."

A biochemical definition of the cell membrane reads as follows: the membrane is a liquid crystal (phospholipid organization), semiconductor (the only things that can cross the membrane barrier are those brought across by transport IMPs) with gates (receptor IMPs) and channels (effector IMPs). This definition is exactly the same as that used to define a computer chip. Recent studies have verified that the cell membrane is in fact an organic homologue of a silicon chip.

Taken in this context, the cell is a self-powered microprocessor. Simply stated, the cell is an organic computer. The operation of the cell can be easily understood by noting its homology to the computer: the "CPU" (information processing mechanism) is the cell membrane, the keyboard (data entry) are the membrane receptors, the disk (memory) is the nucleus, the screen (data output) is the physical state of the cell. Receptor/effector IMP complexes, the units of "perception," are equivalent to computational bits.

When new, heretofore unrecognized, "signals" enter the environment, the cell creates new perception units to respond to them. New perception units require "new" genes for the IMP proteins. The cell's ability to make new IMP receptors and respond to the new signal with an appropriate survival-oriented response (behavior) is the foundation of evolution. Cells "learn" by making new receptors and integrating them with specific effector proteins. Cellular memory is represented by the "new" genes that code for these proteins. This process enables organisms to survive in ever changing environments.

This learning/evolution mechanism is employed by the immune system. To the immune cell (T-lymphocyte), invasive antigens (e.g., viruses, bacteria, toxins, etc.) represent "new" environmental signals. T-lymphocytes create protein antibodies that complement and bind to the antigens. Antibodies are "receptors" for they specifically recognize their antigen "signal." Protein antibody structure is encoded in genes (DNA). In making new antibodies, cells "create" new genes.

A cell's awareness of the environment is reflected in its receptor population. In single-celled organisms (bacteria, protozoa and algae), the cell's receptors respond to all survival-related environmental signals. These signals include elements of the physical environment (light, gravity, temperature, salts, minerals, etc.), food (nutrients, other organisms), and life-threatening agents (toxins, parasites, predators, etc.).

In multicellular organisms, the cells evolved additional receptors required for "community" identity and integration. Integration receptors respond to information signals (hormones, growth factors) used to coordinate functions in cell communities. A special group of receptors confer "identity" so that members of the cellular community can collectively respond to a "central" command. Identity receptors are referred to as "self receptors," or "histocompatibility receptors." Self-receptors are used by the immune system to distinguish "self" from invasive organisms. Organs or tissues can not be exchanged unless they bear the same self-receptors as the recipient.

When a perception unit recognizes an environmental signal, it will activate a cell function. Though there are hundreds of behavioral functions expressed by a cell, all behaviors can be classified as either growth or protection responses. Cells move toward growth signals and away from life-threatening stimuli (protection response). Since a cell can not move forward and backward at the same time, a cell can not be in growth and protection at the same time. At the cellular level, growth and protection are mutually exclusive behaviors. This is true for human cells as well. If our tissues and organs perceive a need for protection, they will compromise their growth behavior. Chronic protection leads to a disruption of the tissue and its function.

What happens if a cell experiences a stressful environment but does not have a gene program (behavior) to deal with the stress? It is now recognized that cells can "rewrite" existing gene programs in an effort to overcome the stressful condition. These DNA changes are mutations. Until recently, all mutations were thought to be "random," meaning that the outcome of the mutation could not be directed. It is now recognized that environmental stimuli can induce "adaptive" mutations that enable a cell to specifically alter its genes. Furthermore, such mutations may be mediated by an organism's perception of its environment. For example, if an organism "perceives a stress that is actually not there, the misperception can actually change the genes to accommodate the "belief."

In conclusion: The structure of our bodies are defined by our proteins. Proteins represent physical complements of the environment. Consequently, our bodies are physical compliments of our environment. IMP perception units in the cell's membrane convert the environment into awareness. Reception of environmental signals change protein conformations. The "movement" generated by protein shape changes is harnessed by the cell to do "work." Life (animation) results from protein movements which are translated as "behavior." Cells respond to perception by activating either growth or protection behavior programs. If the necessary behavior-providing proteins are not present in the cytoplasm, the IMP perception units can activate expression of appropriate genes in the cell's nucleus.

"Perceptions" lie between the environment and cell expression. If our perceptions are accurate, the resulting behavior will be life enhancing. If we operate from "misperceptions," our behavior will be inappropriate and will jeopardize our vitality by compromising our health.

— Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D.

Literature Cited....and Additional Good References:

These references are organized into subject categories and serve as references to related information. Relevance of each article enclosed in parentheses. Most references are from the journal Science, this source is present in almost all local libraries and schools of higher learning. Articles with an * are written for general reading audiences.

* Physics and Biology:

  • The Quantum Centennial A. Zellinger Nature 2000, 408:639-641 (Brief review of quantum physics origins and its impact on civilization)
  • Exploiting Thermal Motion K. Schulten Science 2000, 290:61-62 (Reveals that quantum waves are at heart of protein reaction mechanism)
  • A New Twist on Molecular Shape Frank Weinhold, Nature 2001, 411:539-541 (Reveals why Newtonian-based chemistry textbooks hinder advance into quantum mechanical understanding of molecular interactions)
  • Biologists Cut Reductionist Approach Down to Size Nigel Williams, Science 1997, 277:476-477 (Current science is materialistic since "information" considered to be only found in physical molecules)
  • Complex Systems: Beyond Reductionism Science 1999, 284:79-109 Collection of 10 articles that question continued use of "Reductionism" and endorse "Holism" as necessary for acquiring new knowledge.
  • Detecting Individual Atoms and Molecules with Laser: Every atom or molecule emits and absorbs light of characteristic wavelengths, V. S. Letokhov Scientific American September 1988 pgs 54-59 (Atoms and molecules communicate via frequency resonance)
  • Laser Chemistry: The Light Choice R. A. Kerr Science 1994, 266:215-217 (Research on how vibrational energy affects specific molecular bonds)
  • * Physicists Advance into Biology J. Glanz Science 1996, 272:646-648 (Bringing new physics to cell biology)
  • Resonance In Bioenergetics C. W. F. McClare Annals NY Acad. Science 1974, 227:74-83 (States that vibrational energy interfaces biological tuned resonance information system)
  • Cold Numbers Unmake the Quantum Mind C. Seife Science 2000, 287:791 (Microtubules not source of "quantum" consciousness)

New Concepts Regarding Gene Expression and Mutation:

  • Metaphors and the Role of Genes in Development H. F. Nijhout BioEssays 1990, 12 (9):441-446 (Describes that genes are not self-emergent, they need environmental signal for activation)
  • The Origin of Mutants John. Cairns, J. Overbaugh and S. Miller Nature 1988, 335:142-145 (This was first major paper on "adaptive" mutations [i.e., mutations that are not random!])
  • The Evolution of Genetic Intelligence David S. Thaler Science 1994, 264:224-225 (Discusses new papers which verify adaptive (Cairnsian) mutations, new gene control scheme compared to Darwinian scheme)
  • * Evolution Evolving Tim Beardsley Scientific American September 1997, pages 15-16 (Provides the first notice of Cairns study to the "general public," almost ten years after it was first published!)
  • Transposons Help Sculpt a Dynamic Genome Anne S. Moffat Science 2000, 289:1455-1457 (Moveable genes create rapid changes in DNA code)
  • Dirty Transcripts from Clean DNA B. A. Bridges Science 1999, 284:62-63, (Genetic mechanisms for "adaptive" mutations)
  • Test Tube Evolution Catches Time in a Bottle T. Appenzeller Science 1999 284:2108-2110 (The "regularity" and "reproducibility" (not chance) of mutational response in genetic "adaptations.")
  • Gaia and Natural Selection T. M. Lenton Nature 1998, 394:439-447 (Nature selects organisms that benefit Earth, not survival of the "fittest")
  • Principles for the Buffering of Genetic Variation J. Hartman, et al., Science 2001, 291:1001-1004 (Discusses that traits are due multi-genes, many genes acting together, allows "buffering" of effect of individual mutated genes)
  • New Clues to How Genes Are Controlled J. Marx Science 2000, 290:1066-1067 (Same "transcription factors" used for 3 different genes in same nucleus, how does single factor select among three genes?)
  • Tangled Strands In The Double Helix M. Ridley Nature 2000, 406:347-348 (Reviews 2 books by evolutionary geneticist R. Lewontin, who questions current genetics dogma as "bad science," brings up environment-gene issues)
  • * Genomes as smart systems J. A. Shapiro Genetica 1991, 84:3-4 (Compares the new understanding of gene function and behavior with the established "DNA dogma")
  • Brain Wiring Depends upon Multifaceted Gene J. Travis Science News 2000 157:406 (A single gene can create 38,000 different versions of a protein, knowing gene does not predict the outcome possibilities)
  • * How the Genome Readies Itself for Evolution E. Pennisi Science 1998, 281:1131-1134
  • * Doubled Genes May Explain Fish Diversity G. Vogel Science 1998, 281:1119-1121, and
  • * DNA Microsatellites: Agents of Evolution? E. R. Moxon and C. Wills Scientific American January 1999, pages 94-99
  • Twinned Genes Live Life In The Fast Lane E. Pennisi Science 2000, 290:1065-1066 (Reviews article on how gene duplication serves as source for "new" genes and other new DNA mutation mechanisms to support rapid evolution)
  • * Mining Treasures from 'Junk DNA R. Nowak Science 1994, 263:608-610 (Junk DNA s important role in evolution)
  • * Quick-Change Pathogens Gain an Evolutionary Edge D. Grady Science 1996, 274:1081 Versatile Gene Uptake System Found in Cholera Bacterium E. Pennisi Science 1998, 280:521-522 (Bacteria pick-up environmental genes)
  • Close Encounters: Good, Bad, and Ugly E. Pennisi Science 2000, 290:1491-1493 (Microrganisms exchange DNA in cooperation, resulting in continuous evolution thru interaction)
  • Protein Dynamics: Implications for Nuclear Architecture and Gene Expression T. Misteli Science 2001, 291:843-847 (Describes role of nuclear proteins in gene expression)

Transcription: from information to gene action

  • how chromatin changes its shape michael hagmann science 199, 285:1201-1203 (how environmental signals [growth/protection] select gene programs)
  • catalysis by a multiprotein ib kinase complex t. maniatis science 1997, 278:818-819 (an example to illustrate pathway from signal at membrane receptor to nuclear gene activation)
  • inner workings of a transcription factor partnership b. j. graves science 1998, 279:1000-1002 (how proteins turn on genes)
  • * New antibiotic dulls bacterial senses, j. travis science news 1998, 153:276 (receptor relay system controls gene expression)
  • signaling through scaffold, anchoring, and adaptor proteins t. pawson and j. d. scott science 1997, 278:2075-2080 and, integrin signaling f. g. giancotti and e. ruoslahti science 1999, 285:1028-1032, (how environmental signals traverse membrane, are carried by cytoskeleton to nucleus and influence gene expression)

Epigenetics: (Environmental "programming" of genes)

  • Epigenetics: Regulation Through Repression A. P. Wolffe and M. A. Matzke Science 1999, 286:481-486 ("Acquired" characteristics passed from parent to child without changes in DNA coding)
  • Was Lamarck Just a Little Bit Right? M. Balter Science 2000, 288:39 (Environment controls genes through "epigenetic" mechanisms)
  • Epigenetic Reprogramming in Mammalian Development W. Reik, W. Dean and J. Walter Science 2001, 293:1089-1093 (Describes how environmental programs, ie, epigenetic control templates, are erased and reset in embryonic development)
  • Reprogramming of genomic function through epigenetic inheritance M. A. Surani Nature 2001, 414:122-128 (Describes "genomic imprinting," mechanism by which parents program gene expression in offspring)

Proteins:

  • * a glimpse of the holy grail? h. j. c. berendsen science 1998, 282:642-643 (how proteins fold into shapes)
  • * folding proteins caught in the act r. f. service science 1996, 273:29-30 (seeing dynamics of protein folding)
  • * proteins in motion m. gerstein and c. chothia science 1999, 285:1682-1684 (how membrane protein conformation changes send signals into cytoplasm)
  • the rotary enzyme of the cell: the rotation of f1-atpase style='font-size: 10.0pt'> H. Noji Science 1998, 282:1844-1845 (Insight into how protein conformation changes produce work)
  • * New Clues to How Proteins Link Up to Run the Cell M. Barinaga Science 1999, 283:1247-1249 (How connections between proteins regulate cell pathways)

Membrane Structure/Function:

  • the molecules of the cell membrane mark s. bretscher scientific american 1985, 253:100-108 (a great review of membrane structure and properties)
  • the structure of proteins in biological membranes style='font-size: 10.0pt'> N. Unwin and R. Henderson Sci.Am. Oct. 1985, pgs 56--66
  • Building Doors into Cells H. Bayley Scientific American September 1997 pgs62-67 (Using membrane technology to engineer membrane transport and reception)
  • Crossing the Hydrophobic Barrier: Insertion of Membrane Proteins D. M. Engelman Science 1996, 274:1850-1851 (Reviews mechanisms by which proteins incorporate into lipid membrane)
  • Signaling Across Membranes: A One and a Two and a ... style='font-size: 10.0pt'>J. Stock Science 1996, 274:370-371 (Describes universality and "multiplicity" of receptor proteins)
  • Receptors as Kissing Cousins G. Milligan Science 2000, 288:65-67 (Different receptors can pair-up, mix-n-match, creating "families" of receptors each with distinct properties)
  • * Stretching Is Good for a Cell E. Ruoslahti Science 1997, 276:1345-46 (Physical tension influences cell behavior)
  • Structure of the MscL Homolog from Mycobacterium tuberculosis: A Gated Mechanosensitive Ion Channel G. Chang et al., Science 1998, 282:220-226 Mechanosensation and the DEG/ENaC Ion Channels D. P. Corey and J. Garcia-Anoveros Science 1996, 273:323-324 (Membrane mechanism to transduce physical stresses into electrical activity/cell control)
  • * The Architecture of Life D. Ingber Scientific American January 1998 pgs48-57 (role of tensegrity in shaping cellular life)
  • How Cells Handle Cholesterol K. Simons and E. Ikonen Science 2000, 290:1721-1726 (Describes cholesterol s role in membrane dynamics, discusses lipid "rafts" that transport IMPs)

Information in Biology:

  • The Babel of Bioinformatics T. K. Attwood Science 2000, 290:471 (Now that the genome is sequenced, so what. Major obstacle was not in identifying the genes but in understanding the code)
  • A Biosensor That uses Ion-Channel Switches B. A. Cornell, et al. Nature 1997, 387:580-584 (Describes the technology of making a digital chip out of a cell membrane)
  • * Biological Information Processing: Bits of Progress
  • N. C. Spitzer and T. J. Sejnowski Science 1997, 277:1060-1061 (How information" can be processed from biochemical reactions)
  • * "Smart" Genes Use Many Cues to Set Cell Fate W. Roush Science 1996, 272:652-653 (How genes respond to environment)
  • * Dialing Up an Embryo: Are Olfactory receptors digits in a developmental code? J. Travis Science News 1998, 154:106-107 (Surface Receptors-how cells know who they are and where they should go)
  • What Maintains Memories? J. E. Lisman and J. R. Fallon Science 11999 283:339-340 (Addresses issues of holism versus reductionism in cell information pathways)

Creating new perception proteins: the antibody as a model system

  • *evolutionary chemistry: getting there from here g. f. joyce science 1997, 276:1658-1659 (the molecular nature of "learning and memory" as seen in antibody maturation)
  • structural insights into the evolution of an antibody combining site g. j. wedemayer, p. a. patten, l. h. wang, p. g. schultz, and r. c. stevens science 1997, 276:1665-1669 (the precise nature of gene mutations in antibody formation)
  • b cell receptor rehabilitation-pausing to reflect style='font-size: 10.0pt'> L. King and J. Monroe Science 2001, 291:1503-1505 (Cells can "remodel" antibodies (receptors) after they are formed)

Stem Cells:

Multipotential (embryo-like) cells used in "regenerate" tissues and organs in adults

  • Stem Cells: New Excitement, Persistent Questions G. Vogel Science 2000, 290:1672-1674 (Stem cells in bone marrow can replace neurons)

Electromagnetics and Cell Behavior:

  • Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields Induce Cellular Transcription R. Goodman, et al., Science 1983, 220:1283-1285 (Electromagnetic fields regulate RNA synthesis)
  • Exposure of Salivary Gland Cells to Low-frequency Electromagnetic Fields Alters Polypeptide Synthesis R. Goodman and A. S. Henderson Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 1988, 85:3928-3932 (Electromagnetic fields regulate protein synthesis)
  • Time Varying Magnetic Fields: Effect on DNA Synthesis A. R. Liboff, et al., Science 1984, 223:818-820
  • * Calcium Signaling: Up, Down, Up Down....What's the Point? J. W. Putney Jr. Science 1998, 279:191-192 (calcium signals read in AM and FM)
  • Deciphering the Language of Cells T. Y. Tsong Trends in Biochemical Sciences 1989, 14:89-92 (Describes how vibrational energies physically alter protein structure/function)
  • * Electromagnetic Fields May Trigger Enzymes M. Jensen Science News 1998, 153:119 (title self explanatory)
  • * EMF's Biological Influences:Electromagnetic fields exert effects on and through hormones J. Raloff Science News 1998, 153:29-31 (Title self-explanatory)
  • When Do EMFs Disturb the Heart? J. Raloff Science News 2000, 158:77 (EMFs primarily effect stressed people )
  • The Responses of Cells to Electrical Fields: A Review K. R. Robinson Journal of Cell Biology 1985, 101:2023-2027 (Describes effects of magnetic fields on cell behavior)
  • * Shedding Light on Visual Imagination M. Barinaga Science 1999, 284:22 (Electromagnetic fields impact cognition and imagination)

Environment and Behavior:

(also see Conscious Parenting section below)

  • Pushing the Mood Swings B. Bower Science News 2000, 157:232 (Bipolar disorder can be controlled by adhering to daily routine schedule)
  • * Behavioral Genetics in Transition Charles C. Mann Science 1994, 264:1686-1689 (Returning role of environment to behavior)
  • * A Cellular Striptease Act Z. Werb and Y. Yan Science 1998, 282:1279-1280, The Plasticity of Ion Channels: Parallels between the Nervous and Immune Systems R. S. Lewis and M. D. Cahalan Trends in Neuroscience 1988, 11:214-218 Social Status Sculpts Activity of Crayfish Neurons M. Barinaga Science 1996, 271:290-291 (Papers that show how environmental experiences change cell behavior by changing population/action of membrane surface receptors)
  • A Model of Host-Microbial Interactions in an Open Mammalian Ecosystem L. Bry, et al. Science 1996, 273:1380-1383 (Human genes selected by environmental bacteria)
  • * How the Malarial Parasite Manipulates Its Hosts V. Morell Science 1997, 278:223 (Parasite genes change to accommodate environment)
  • * Eugenics Revisited J. Horgan Scientific American June 1993 pgs122-131 (Corrects some misinterpretations regarding extravagant claims of genes controlling behavior)
  • * Habitat Seen Playing Larger Role In Shaping Behavior D. Normile Science 1998, 279:1454-1455 (Reveals major role of environment over genes)

Growth/Protection Mechanism:

  • A Cellular Rescue Team J. L. Pomerantz and D Baltimore Nature 2000, 406:26-29 (describes how cytokine signal selects between cell growth and death [apoptosis])
  • Akt Signaling: Linking Membrane Events to Life and Death Decisions B. A. Hemmings Science 1997, 275:628-630 (Life-death switch mechanism)
  • * Sphinx of Fats J. Raloff Science News 1997, 151:342-343 (How ceremide signal gauges level of stress)
  • * Superoxide Relay Ras Protein s Oncogenic Message E. Pennisi Science 1997, 275:1567-1568 (Growth-protection switch mechanism)

Cancer:

  • A Strong Candidate for the Breast and Ovarian Cancer Susceptibility Gene BRCA1 Y. Miki, et al., Science 1994, 266:66-71;
  • * Breast Cancer Gene Offers Surprises author? (news) Science 1994, 265:1796-1799 (genetic factors account for ~5% of breast cancer)
  • Silencing the BRCA1 Gene Spells Trouble N. Seppa Science News 2000, 157:247 Silencing a Gene Slows Breast-Tumor Fighter N. Seppa Science News 2000, 157:407 ("Silencing" a process by which environment/behavior regulate gene expression, environmental switches activate cancer)
  • * Epidemiology Faces Its Limits Gary Taubes Science 1995, 269:164-169 ("External" factors cause 70-90% cancer/regarding epidemiology: don t believe all you hear! Real science vs "newspaper science")
  • * Oncogenes Reach a Milestone Jean Marx Science 1994, 266:1942-1944 (Most "cancer" genes are normal cellular genes with a control problem)
  • Transient Expression of a Mutator Phenotype in Cancer Cells L. L. Loeb Science 1997, 277:1449-1450 ("Adaptive mutation" mechanism activated in cancer, but not in "normal" cells)
  • * Outside Influences: A cancer cell s physical environment controls its growth J. Travis Science News 1997, 152:138-139
  • * Putative Cancer Gene Shows Up in Development Instead W. Roush Science 1997, 276:534-535 (Digital switches +/- in cell control)
  • Obesity, Cancer and Heart Attacks: How Your Odds are Set in the Womb S. Begley, J. Davenport and E. Check Newsweek Sept. 27, 1999, pages 50-56 (Evidence showing life-long health is determined by life in the womb)
  • Death and Methylation P. A. Jones Nature 2001, 409:141-144 ( Significance of epigenetic [environmental] control in melanoma and other cancer)

Aging

  • Growing Old Together E. Strauss Science 2001, 292:41-43 (Reveals "common" aging mechanism among all organisms, aging related to metabolism, insulin pathways)
  • Why Do We Age? T. Kirkwood and S. Austad Nature 2000, 408:233-238 (Reviews role of caloric intake, metabolism and stress upon aging response)

Brain Influences:

  • * Conditions That Appear to Favor Extrasensory Interactions Between Homo Sapiens and Microbes C. M. Pleass & N. Dean Dey J. Scien Exploration 1990, 4:213-231 (Human thought can control experiment s results!)
  • *Listening in on the Brain Science 1998, 280:376-378 (Perception linked to synchronous firing of neurons)
  • Recording and Interpretation of Cerebral Magnetic Fields R. Hari and O. V. Lounasmaa Science 1989, 244:432-436 (How brain activity surrounds body)
  • The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox in the Brain:The Transferred Potential J. Grinberg-Zylberbaum, et al. Physics Essays 1994, 7(4);422-XX (Describes research on brains interacting over distances)
  • The Evoked Magnetic Field of the Human Brain L. Kaufman and S. J. Williamson Annals New York Academy of Sciences 1980, 340:45 (How brain magnetic fields surround body)
  • Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and The Human Brain M. Hallett, Nature 2000, 406:147-150 (TMS mechanism explained, plus insights to therapeutic use)
  • Boosting Brain Activity From The Outside In L. Helmuth Science 2001, 292:1284-1286 (Directing magnetic fields into brain [TMS] can change behavior and relieve depression)
  • *The Placebo Effect W. A. Brown Scientific American January 1998 pgs 90-95
  • *Placebos Prove So Powerful Even Experts Are Surprised S. Blakeslee NY Times (On the Web) 10/13/1998 Can the Placebo Be the Cure? [Prozac is 80% placebo!] M. Enserink Science 1999, 284:238-240 (The mind over matter story)
  • style='font-size:10.0pt;color:black'>Medical applications of neurofeedback style='font-size:10.0pt; color:black'> R. Laibow in Quantitative EEG and Neurofeedback (1999), James R. Evans and Andrew Abarbanel, eds., Academic Press (Describes sequential origin of EEG states during development)

Neural Plasticity:

  • Brain Changes in Response to Experience M. Rosenzweig, E. L. Bennett and M. C. Diamond, Scientific American 1972, 226(2):22-29 (Classic paper- shows brain cell populations dynamically adjust up or down with use)
  • * Adult Human Brains Add New Cells J. Travis Science News 1998, 154:276 and, Brain, Heal Thyself D.H. Lowenstein and J. M. Parent, Science 1999, 283:1126-1127 (Dispelling myth about "no new neurons", how brains regenerate)
  • Dementia May Travel Lonely Road B. Bower Science News 2000, 157:263 (Lack of social connections linked to dementia/Alzheimer s disease, use it or lose it)
  • * Grown-Up Monkey Brains Get Growing B. Bower Science News 1998, 153:180 (Brain remodeling occurs in adults, influence by stress and trauma)
  • Teaching the Spinal Cord to Walk I. Wickelgren Science 1998, 279:319-321 (Spinal cords severed from brain create neural connections, i.e., "learn," how to walk through muscle feedback mechanism)
  • * Mapping the Sensory Mosaic S. L. Juliano Science 1998, 279:1653-1654 (Brain "maps" dynamically altered to reflect usage)
  • * Solving the Brain s Energy Crisis Ann Gibbons Science 1998, 280:1345-1347 (Discusses "genomic imprinting," how regulatory proteins select maternal/paternal genes in response to environment)
  • Gray Matters J. Netting Science News 2001, 159:222-223 (Reviews important contributions of glial cells in brain functions)
  • Control of Synapse Number by Glia E. Ullian, et a3,. Science 2001, 291:657-662 (Glial cells control synapse formation between neurons)
  • A Glial-Neuron Signaling Pathway Revealed by Mutations in a Neurexin-Related Protein L. Yuan and B. Ganetzky Science 1999, 283:1343-1345 (Glial cells modify response of Neurons)

Conscious Parenting:

  • Nongenomic transmission across generations of maternal behavior and stress responses in the rat d. francis, j. diorio, d. liu and m. meaney science 1999, 286:1155-1158 (maternal care [i.e., environment] influences child s behavior and can change genetics in next generation)
  • where health begins -- obesity, cancer and heart attacks: how your odds are set in the womb style='font-size: 10.0pt'> S. Begley, J. Davenport and E. Check Newsweek Sept. 27, 1999, pages 50-56 (Evidence showing lifelong health is determined by life in the womb)
  • Psychological Influences of Stress and HPA Regulation on the Human Fetus and Infant Birth Outcomes style='font-size: 10.0pt'> C. A. Sandman, et al. Annals of the NY Acad. of Sciences 1994, 739:198-210 (Stress in third trimester can permanently influence brain mechanisms and behavior)
  • Weight Matters, Even in the Womb D. Christensen Science News 2000, 158:382-383
  • Severe Emotional Stress in First Trimester Linked with Congenital Malformations D. Hansen et al. Lancet 2000, 356:875-880 (High stress hormones in first trimester linked to 50% increase in cranial malformations)
  • The Mental Butler Did It B. Bower Science News 1999, 156:280-282 (Most behavior operates subconsciously from repeating "tapes" created from "programmed" life experiences)
  • Effects of Neonatal Handling on Age-Related Impairments Associated with the Hippocampus M. J. Meaney, et al. Science 1988, 239:766-768 (Perinatal parenting impacts brain function throughout life)
  • * Solving the Brains Energy Crisis A. Gibbons Science 1998, 280:1345-1347 (Important: see sidebar regarding genomic imprinting and role of mother s perception in fetal brain development)
  • * The Heritability of IQ B. Devlin, et al. Nature 1997, 388:468-471 The Democracy of Genes M. McGue Nature 1997, 388:417-418 (Emphasizes prenatal environment influences upto 50% of IQ)
  • Nurture Helps Mold Able Minds I. Wickelgren Science 1999, 283:1832-1834, and, Kids Adopted Late Reap IQ Increases B. Bower Science News 1999, 1546:X (Early environment influences shape and "reshape" IQ development)
  • * The Importance of a Well-Groomed Child R. M. Sapolsky Science 1997, 277:1620-1621 (Role of parenting produces life long [genetic/biochemical] influences on offspring)
  • Child Abuse and Neglect: Usefulness of Animal Data D. Maestripieri and K. A. Carroll Psychological Bulletin 1998, 123:211-216 (Child neglect and abuse derived from "learning" experience)
  • Genetics of Mouse Behavior: Interactions with Laboratory Environment J. C. Crabbe, et al. Science 1999, 284:1670-1672 (Genetically identical strains, different environments produce different behaviors)
  • Multiple Pathways to Conscience for Children with Different Temperments G. Kochanska Developmental Psychology 1997, 33:228-234 (Conscience development linked to mother s child-rearing style)
  • Tourette Syndrome: Prediction of Phenotypic Variation in Monozygotic Twins by Caudate Nucleus D2 Receptor Binding S.S. Wolf, et al. Science 1996, 273:1225-1227 (Prenatal environmental influences offspring s gene expression)
  • Your Child s Brain S. Begley Newsweek 2/19/96, pgs 55-62 (Reviews role of parents in child s brain development)
  • A New Look at Maternal Guidance Elizabeth Pennisi Science 1996, 273:1334-1336 (Describes new work on maternal experiences selecting gene programs in offspring)
  • * The Moral Development of Children W. Damon Scientific American August 1999, pages 72-78 (Parent behaviors shape child s moral behavior)
  • Duke Study Faults Overuse of Stimulants for Children style='font-size: 10.0pt'> E. Marshall Science 2000, 289:721 and Study of Stimulant Therapy Raises Concern B. Bower Science News 2000, 158:69 (Half of Ritalin using ADHD kids DO NOT have ADHD!)
  • Altered Nociceptive Neuronal Circuits After Neonatal Peripheral Inflammation M. A. Ruda, et al Science 2000, 289:628-630 (Early painful stimuli rewire neonatal brains, cause increased sensitivity to pain in later life)

Stress and Biology:

  • * Don't Stress K. Leutwyler Scientific American Jan. 1998 pgs 29-30 (Stress causes developmental problems and neurodegeneration)
  • Functions of Ceramide in Coordinating Cellular Responses to Stress Y. A. Hannun Science 1996, 274:1855-1859 (Reveals how cell behavior is divided into Growth and Protection functions)
  • * Healthy Functioning Takes Social Cues B. Bower Science News 1998, 153:391 (Stressful jobs/lonely life increase physical illness)
  • * Immigrants Go from Health to Worse B. Bower Science News 1998, 154:180 (US culture increases stress and leads to mental disorders)
  • * Physical Ills Follow Trauma Response B. Bower Science News 1997, 152:372 (Title self-explanatory)
  • * Probing the Biology of Emotion C. Mlot Science 1998, 280:1005-1007 (Emotions trigger behavioral and brain changes)
  • Gigantism in Mice Lacking Suppressor of Cytokine Signalling-2 D. Metcalf Nature 2000, 405:1069-1073 (Suppression of immune system leads to greater growth of organism)
  • * Stress Hormone May Speed Up Brain Aging B. Bower Science News 1998, 153:263 (Title self-explanatory)
  • * The Biology of Being Frazzled A. F. T. Arnsten Science 1998, 280:1711 (stress reduces intelligence)
  • * The Cortisol Connection:Does Stress hormone play a role in AIDS? K. Fackelmann Science News 1997,152:350-351 (Title self-explanatory)
  • * Tracing Molecules That Make The Brain-Body Connection. E. Pennisi Science 1997 275: 930-931 (Regulation of immune system by stress)
  • Gene Expression Profile of Aging and its Retardation by Caloric Restriction C-K. Lee, R. G. Klopp, R. Weindruch and T. Prolla Science 1999, 285:1390-1393 (How stress signals select genes that promote aging)

© 2001-2005 by Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D. Visit his website at: www.brucelipton.com

.


URL: nlpPati.com/articles/biology.shtml

Top