Malaria evades the body's immune response

It’s known that malaria causes a highly inflammatory response in infected individuals that leads to the deadly clinical complications of anemia and cerebral disease.

The Yale research team learned that the parasites produce their own version of a human cytokine, or immune hormone, which directs the inflammatory response during malaria.

They also discovered that this cytokine, called PMIF, incapacitates the anti-malaria, memory T-cell immune response.

Using a genetically modified strain of the malaria parasite in mice, the Yale team found that PMIF causes host T-cells to develop into short-lived effector cells rather than protective memory cells.

The short-lived cells die during the infection, and the long-lived memory T-cells are not produced in adequate numbers to combat the infection or to protect from re-infection, which occurs repeatedly in malaria-endemic regions.

“These findings indicate that malaria parasites actively interfere with the development of immunological memory, and may account for the inhibition of protective immune responses in human malaria,” said Rick Bucala, M.D., professor of internal medicine, pathology, and epidemiology and public health at Yale School of Medicine.

• “This knowledge will help us identify specific therapies that can protect anti-malarial T-cells from death and improve an individual’s immune response to infection or to vaccination.”

More information: PNAS paper: www.pnas.org/conte… ull.pdf+html

New Brain Structure Explains Willful Blindness

The article in today's NYT by Nancy Koehn titled “Why Red Flags Can Go  Unnoticed” was chiefly concerned with the effects of willful blindness  in humans. It did not answer the primary question: WHY do people ignore  clear warnings of impending problems.

Bruce Nappi, in his new novel   LIARS! provides a profound explanation: two human species  coexist on earth today, and one of them is not able to broadly  understand or apply logical reasoning, and no, it's not males and  females!

The new discovery came when he first determined what creates  consciousness in the human brain. Step one was recognising a new  physiological brain model that revises Sigmund Freud's Id, ego and  super-ego brain structure.

The second was sorting out what makes humans  different from animals.  In fact, contrary to common belief, that  difference does not occur at the homo sapiens level but further back  down the evolutionary tree.  Differences in awareness for humans and  animals are described and labeled A2 and A1 respectively, but, the  characteristics listed for humans (A2) raised a big problem: they didn’t  describe all known human abilities.

He categorised the additional  abilities with a new label A3.  The implication was both amazing and  unsettling! Both A3 and A2 had human traits, but they were as distinct  as A2 (humans) and A1 (animals). The solution required that each be  considered a different species - amazing for sure.

However, if the  discovery was true, it would have huge ramifications for human social  structures. He tested the theory against more and more of the great  social questions.  The new A3 model produced so many logical answers  that he is convinced he has stumbled onto a profound discovery.

New Brain Structure Explains Willful Blindness In Humans And Why Red Flags Go Unnoticed

Human or robot? Part 2

"Babies look to us for guidance in how to interpret things, and if we treat something as a psychological agent, they will, too," Andrew Meltzoff says.

"Even more remarkably, they will learn from it, because social interaction unlocks the key to early learning."

The finding offers clues to how babies decide whether a new object, such as a robot, can think and feel. Details are reported in the October/November issue of Neural Networks.

“Babies learn best through social interactions, but what makes something ’social’ for a baby?” says Andrew Meltzoff, lead author of the paper and co-director of the Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences at the University of Washington.

“It is not just what something looks like, but how it moves and interacts with others that gives it special meaning to the baby.”

“Babies look to us for guidance in how to interpret things, and if we treat something as a psychological agent, they will, too,” Meltzoff says. “Even more remarkably, they will learn from it, because social interaction unlocks the key to early learning.”

Meltzoff and colleagues hypothesized that babies would be more likely to view the robot as a psychological being if they saw other friendly human beings socially interacting with it.

During the experiment, an 18-month-old baby sat on its parent’s lap facing study coauthor Rechele Brooks, a research assistant professor. Sixty-four babies participated in the study, and they were tested individually.

They played with toys for a few minutes, getting used to the experimental setting.

Once the babies were comfortable, Brooks removed a barrier that had hidden a metallic humanoid robot with arms, legs, a torso and a cube-shaped head containing camera lenses for eyes.

The robot—controlled by a researcher hidden from the baby—waved, and Brooks said, “Oh, hi! That’s our robot!”

Following a script, Brooks asked the robot, named Morphy, if it wanted to play, and then led it through a game. She would ask, “Where is your tummy?” and “Where is your head?” and the robot pointed to its torso and its head. Then Brooks demonstrated arm movements and Morphy imitated.

The babies looked back and forth as if at a ping pong match, Brooks says.

At the end of the 90-second script, Brooks excused herself from the room. The researchers then measured whether the baby thought the robot was more than its metal parts.

The robot beeped and shifted its head slightly—enough of a rousing to capture the babies’ attention. The robot turned its head to look at a toy next to the table where the baby sat on the parent’s lap.

Most babies—13 out of 16—who had watched the robot play with Brooks followed the robot’s gaze. In a control group of babies who had been familiarized with the robot but had not seen Morphy engage in games, only three of 16 turned to where the robot was looking.

“We are using modern technology to explore an age-old question about the essence of being human,” says Meltzoff. “The babies are telling us that communication with other people is a fundamental feature of being human.”

More news from the University of Washington: http://uwnews.org/uwnhome.asp

Estrogen, Puberty and Autism | Neurodiversity

Estrogen, Puberty and Autism | Neurodiversity

To what degree have high and low-fat diets influenced human evolution? If low fat delays puberty and results in more brain growth, might this be because more synapses are useful for finding more fat?

When there is more fat in diets and puberty rates drop, for a woman there is a greater number of children produced over a single lifetime. Less fat in diet, fewer children produced. This seems like an evolutionary process.

Do thin males with less fat have less estrogen, reach puberty later, have bigger brains and exhibit more neotenous features?

Should autistic males be on extremely low-fat diets so that they reach puberty later, thus allowing more time for their brains to mature?

Is the degree of brain synapse pruning that occurs in infancy related to the estrogen levels in the mother or the child? High mother testosterone levels encourage higher rates of autism, which may be directly related to less pervasive synapse pruning. Is it possible that a high mother estrogen level results in low male baby estrogen levels that prolong or diminish the testosterone prunings?

In other words, the Simon Baron-Cohen research regarding mother testosterone levels and autism may be related to mother estrogen levels. If low estrogen at puberty translates to delayed puberty, delayed testosterone surges and increased brain growth, then the same process may be engaged during the first testosterone surges that compel a diminution of the right cerebral hemisphere during infancy. Low estrogen levels as an embryo, infant and toddler may have a direct impact on cerebral lateralization and synapse production.

Another interesting article 'Introduction to Neotenty' Here ............