Dr. Bruce H. Lipton, Ph.D. © 2001 http://www.brucelipton.

com

The Biology of Belief

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’s 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

the multibillion dollar program to map all of the genes. biologists have assumed that DNA “controls” life. Clearly. If an individual protein in a pathway wears-out and is not replaced then the action of the pathway will stop. the idea that the structure and behavior of an organism are defined by its genes. would be tantamount to removing the cell’s brain. and genes are contained in the cell’s nucleus. In this context. proteins “wear-out” when they are used. The source of replacement protein parts is related to “memory” factors that provide for heredity…the passing on of “character” The search for the hereditary factors that controlled protein synthesis led to DNA. protein sculptures compliment the shape of environmental molecules (which includes other proteins). A protein generates “motion” as it changes shape. enucleated cells may continue to survive and exhibit a “regulated” control of their biological processes. Primacy means “first level of control. Since 1953. the organ that “controls” life is known as the brain. In fact. a protein’s will shift its shape from one conformation to another conformation. genes are “not self-emergent. Though enucleation should result in the immediate death of the cell. the assumption that genes “control” cell behavior is wrong! As is described by Nijhout (X). they assemble into complex structures (similar to the way cogged “gears” intermesh to make a watch). behavioral functions were thought to be controlled by “regulating” the presence or absence of proteins comprising the pathways. it is the environment that controls gene expression. When proteins interlock with the complimentary environmental molecules.” It was concluded that DNA “controls” the structure and behavior of living organisms.” The activities of specific protein pathways provide for digestion.” which revealed how the DNA served as a molecular “blueprint” that defined amino acid sequences comprising a protein. Watson and Crick unraveled the mystery of the “genetic code. reproduction and all of the other physiologic “functions” employed by living organisms. then it is appropriate to acknowledge the concept of Genetic Determinism. To resume function. the nucleus would be expected to be the equivalent of the cell’s “brain. The DNA blueprint for each protein is referred to as a GENE. biologists established the dogma known as the Primacy of DNA. A protein’s movement can be harnessed to do “work.” Dispelling the Myth of Genes: If the brain is removed from any organism. Once this is accomplished. In 1953. Removing the cell’s nucleus. Since proteins define the character of an organism and the proteins’ structures are encoded in the DNA. When proteins chemically couple with other molecules it changes the distribution of electromagnetic charges in the protein. Their search was linked to the fact that proteins are labile (opposite of stabile). referred to as enucleation. Rather than endorsing the Primacy of DNA. but random protein actions can not provide for “life.” Consequently. the protein must be replaced. Science’s materialist-reductionist-determinist philosophy led to the Human Genome Project. Since genes are presumed to control cellular life. how can they control the behavior of the cell? Nijhout further emphasizes that genes are regulated by “environmental signals. the immediate and necessary consequence of that action is—death of the organism. excretion. Consequently.” that is genes can not turn themselves on or off. respiration.” In the manner of a lock and key. Like parts in a car. Changes in “charge” cause the protein to change its shape. upon coupling with chemicals. The unique shape of a protein sculpture is referred to as its “conformation. If genes can’t control their own expression. Therefore. In multicellular animals.” Groups of interacting proteins which work together in carrying out a specific function are referred to as “pathways.sculpture. we must acknowledge the Primacy of the Environment! 2 . realize Science’s mission of “controlling” the expression of an organism.” Scientists needed to identify the mechanism that “integrates” protein functions to allow for the complex behaviors. Since DNA “determines” the character of an organism. cells can live for two or more months without a nucleus. it is assumed that we can use that knowledge to repair or replace “defective” genes and in the process. Proteins provide for the organism’s structure and function.

Consequently. The phospholipid bilayer forms a skin-like barrier which separates the external environment from the internal cytoplasm. these IMPs also control gene expression. the equivalents of eyes. The cell membrane. consequently. The IMP complex controls behavior. There are two classes of IMPs: RECEPTORS and EFFECTORS. If specific functional proteins are not already present in the cell. mitochondria. However. it causes the effector to changes its own conformation from an inactive to an active form. like those associated with digestion. This new physics emphasizes energetics over materialism. IMPs look like olives in the membrane’s bread and butter sandwich. when the receptor binds to the effector protein. Each receptor-effector protein complex collectively constitutes a “unit of perception. these organisms do not contain any organelles (diminutive of “organs) such as nuclei. It also serves as the cell’s “brain. once thought to be like a permeable Saran Wrap that holds the cytoplasm together. and other specific molecules across the “bread and butter” barrier). Effector proteins may be enzymes. respiratory. which resemble lollipops with two sticks. substitutes holism for reductionism. and recognizes uncertainty in place of determinism. Conventional medicine has consistently ignored research published in its own main-stream scientific journals. Receptor IMPs “see” or are “aware” of their environment and effector IMPs create physical responses that translate environmental signals into an appropriate biological behavior. ears. we now recognize that receptors respond to energy signals as well as molecular signals. the protein receptor changes its conformation so that it is able to complex with a specific effector protein. RNA synthesis. excretion.” . Conventional biology stipulates that receptors only respond to “matter” (molecules). cell differentiation. nose. including DNA synthesis. The many processes and functions of this unicellular life form are highly integrated. cytoskeletal elements (cellular equivalents of muscle and bone ) or transporters (proteins that carry electrons. which include thought. Effector proteins carry out cell behaviors.” The cell membrane is primarily composed of “phospholipids” and proteins. The membrane resembles a bread and butter sandwich. are arranged in a crystalline bilayer. protons. a belief consistent with the Newtonian view of the Universe as a “matter machine. it responds by changing its conformation.” 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. wherein the lipid “sticks” form the central butter layer. Pulsed electromagnetic fields have been shown to regulate virtually every cell function. When a receptor recognizes and binds to a signal. etc. it must have a brain equivalent. The only organized structure in these primitive life forms is its “cell membrane. excretory and integumentary (skin) systems. and cell movement. actually provides for the bacterium’s digestive. research that clearly reveals the regulatory influence that electromagnetic fields have on cell physiology. The fact that data is integrated. and through its affect upon regulatory proteins. cell division. This is how an environmental signal activates a cell’s behavior. ions. Cytologically. Receptors are the cell’s “sense” organs. Built into the membrane are special proteins called Integral Membrane Proteins (IMPs). Where is cell’s brain? The answer is to be found in bacteria. Generally effector proteins are inactive in their resting conformation. processed and used to make a calculated behavioral response emphasizes the existence of a “brain” equivalent in the cell. The IMP complexes provide the cell with “awareness of the environment through physical sensation. Golgi bodies. These findings are relevant for they acknowledge that biological behavior can be controlled by “invisible” energy forces. The activity of effector IMPs generally regulate the behaviors of cytoplasmic protein pathways.” which by dictionary definition represents perception. protein synthesis. morphogenesis and neuroendocrine regulation. etc..Cells “read” their environment. assess the information and then select appropriate behavioral programs to maintain their survival. activated effector IMPs send a signal to the nucleus and elicit required gene programs. the most primitive organisms on Earth.” also known as its plasmalemma. When activated by its complimentary signal. Phospholipids.

g. the screen (data output) is the physical state of the cell. Recent studies have verified that the cell membrane is in fact an organic HOMOLOGUE of a silicon chip. Since a cell can not move forward and backward at the same time. parasites.. Furthermore. Cells “learn” by making new receptors and integrating them with specific effector proteins. temperature. This learning/evolution mechanism is employed by the immune system. If our tissues and organs perceive a need for protection. viruses. When new. a cell can not be in growth and protection at the same time. “signals” enter the environment. and life-threatening agents (toxins. etc. they will compromise their growth behavior. toxins. When a perception unit recognizes an environmental signal. It is now recognized that environmental stimuli can induce “adaptive” mutations which enable a cell to specifically alter its genes.) represent “new” environmental signals. T-lymphocytes create protein ANTIBODIES which complement and bind to the antigens.” Protein antibody structure is encoded in genes (DNA). Identity receptors are referred to as “self receptors. 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. etc. all behaviors can be classified as either growth or protection responses.A biochemical definition of the cell membrane reads as follows: the membrane is a liquid crystal (phospholipid organization). To the immune cell (T-lymphocyte). This is true for human cells as well. In single-celled organisms (bacteria. In making new antibodies. This definition is exactly the same as that used to define a computer chip.” or “histocompatibility receptors.). Though there are hundreds of behavioral functions expressed by a cell. gravity. predators. the cell creates new perception units to respond to them. New perception units require “new” genes for the IMP proteins.” are equivalent to computational BITS. the cell IS an organic computer. This process enables organisms to survive in ever changing environments. These DNA changes are mutations. invasive ANTIGENS (e. Until recently. For example. A special group of receptors confer “identity” so that members of the cellular community can collectively respond to a “central” command. These signals include elements of the physical environment (light. Taken in this context. the cell’s receptors respond to all survival-related environmental signals. At the cellular level. minerals.). the disk (memory) is the nucleus. Chronic protection leads to a disruption of the tissue and its function. the cells evolved additional receptors required for “community” identity and integration. protozoa and algae). Antibodies are “receptors” for they specifically recognize their antigen “signal. A cell’s awareness of the environment is reflected in its receptor population. the misperception can actually change the genes to accommodate the “belief. growth and protection are mutually exclusive behaviors. Cellular memory is represented by the “new” genes that code for these proteins.” meaning that the outcome of the mutation could not be directed. In multicellular organisms. Cells move toward growth signals and away from life-threatening stimuli (protection response). other organisms). the keyboard (data entry) are the membrane receptors. 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.” 4 . food (nutrients. cells “create” new genes. Receptor/effector IMP complexes. Organs or tissues can not be exchanged unless they bear the same self-receptors as the recipient. 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. such mutations may be mediated by an organism’s perception of its environment. Simply stated. 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). if an organism “perceives a stress that is actually not there. bacteria. etc. salts. the units of “perception.” Self-receptors are used by the immune system to distinguish “self” from invasive organisms. heretofore unrecognized. all mutations were thought to be “random. the cell is a self-powered microprocessor. Integration receptors respond to information signals (hormones. growth factors) used to coordinate functions in cell communities. it will activate a cell function.

284:79-109 Collection of 10 articles that question continued use of “Reductionism” and endorse “Holism” as necessary for acquiring new knowledge. A. The “movement” generated by protein shape changes is harnessed by the cell to do “work. J. F. LIPTON. 289:1455-1457 (Moveable genes create rapid changes in DNA code) Dirty Transcripts from Clean DNA B. 408:639-641 (Brief review of quantum physics origins and its impact on civilization) A New twist on Molecular Shape Frank Weinhold. Kerr Science 1994. PhD Literature Cited. 277:476-477 (Current science is materialistic since “information” considered to be only found in physical molecules) Complex Systems: Beyond Reductionism Science 1999.. Proteins represent physical complements of the environment. our bodies are physical compliments of our environment. Most references are from the journal Science. If we operate from “misperceptions. Wolffe and M. allows “buffering” of effect of individual mutated genes) New Clues to How Genes Are Controlled J.”) Epigenetics: Regulation Through Repression A. Zellinger Nature 2000. mutations that are not random!]) The Evolution of Genetic Intelligence David S. 264:224-225 (Discusses new papers which verify adaptive (Cairnsian) mutations. McClare Annals NY Acad. 286:481-486 (“Acquired” characteristics passed from parent to child without changes in DNA coding) Was Lamarck Just a Little Bit Right? M. V. Lewontin. A. M.” brings up environment-gene issues) . 394:439-447 (Nature selects organisms that benefit Earth.. the IMP perception units can activate expression of appropriate genes in the cell’s nucleus. Nature 2001. 12 (9):441-446 (Describes that genes are not self-emergent. “Perceptions” lie between the environment and cell expression. Science 2001. Overbaugh and S. they need environmental signal for activation) The Origin of Mutants John. Science 1997. 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. Sci. 266:215-217 (Research on how vibrational energy affects specific molecular bonds) Physicists Advance into Biology* J.” almost ten years after it was first published!) Transposons Help Sculpt a Dynamic Genome Anne S. Matzke Science 1999. P. 287:791 (Microtubules not source of “quantum” consciousness) NEW CONCEPTS REGARDING GENE EXPRESSION AND MUTATION: Metaphors and the Role of Genes in Development H. Thaler Science 1994. Ridley Nature 2000. S. et al. Letokhov Scientific American September 1988 pgs 54-59 (Atoms and molecules communicate via frequency resonance) Laser Chemistry: The Light Choice R. Lenton Nature 1998.In conclusion: The structure of our bodies are defined by our proteins. 290:1066-1067 (Same “transcription factors” used for 3 different genes in same nucleus. not survival of the “fittest”) Principles for the Buffering of Genetic Variation J. Nijhout BioEssays 1990. this source is present in almost all local libraries and schools of higher learning. Balter Science 2000. 406:347-348 (Reviews 2 books by evolutionary geneticist R. many genes acting together.. Marx Science 2000. Consequently. IMP perception units in the cell’s membrane convert the environment into awareness. Cairns. 335:142-145 (This was first major paper on “adaptive” mutations [i.and Additional Good References: These references are organized into subject categories and serve as references to related information. Detecting Individual Atoms and Molecules with Laser: Every atom or molecule emits and absorbs light of characteristic wavelengths. F. how does single factor select among three genes?) Tangled Strands In The Double Helix M. Relevance of each article enclosed in parentheses. PHYSICS AND BIOLOGY: The Quantum Centennial A.. (Genetic mechanisms for “adaptive” mutations) Test Tube Evolution Catches Time in a Bottle T. 227:74-83 (States that vibrational energy interfaces biological tuned resonance information system) Cold Numbers Unmake the Quantum Mind C. If the necessary behaviorproviding proteins are not present in the cytoplasm. Reception of environmental signals change protein conformations.” Life (animation) results from protein movements which are translated as “behavior. Glanz Science 1996. BRUCE H.” Cells respond to perception by activating either growth or protection behavior programs. pages 15-16 (Provides the first notice of Cairns’ study to the “general public. the resulting behavior will be life enhancing. If our perceptions are accurate.” our behavior will be inappropriate and will jeopardize our vitality by compromising our health. A. W.. 291:1001-1004 (Discusses that traits are due multi-genes. Hartman. 272:646-648 (Bringing new physics to cell biology) Resonance In Bioenergetics C. Articles with an * are written for general reading audiences. who questions current genetics dogma as “bad science. Moffat Science 2000. Appenzeller Science 1999 284:2108-2110 (The “regularity” and “reproducibility” (not chance) of mutational response in genetic “adaptations. 1974. new gene control scheme compared to Darwinian scheme) Evolution Evolving* Tim Beardsley Scientific American September 1997.e. 288:39 (Environment controls genes through “epigenetic” mechanisms) Gaia and Natural Selection T. 284:62-63. Bridges Science 1999. Seife Science 2000. Miller Nature 1988.

Berendsen Science 1998. 290:471 (Now that the genome is sequenced. Garcia-Anoveros Science 1996.000 different versions of a protein. C. Corey and J. 283:1247-1249 (How connections between proteins regulate cell pathways) MEMBRANE STRUCTURE/FUNCTION: The Molecules of the Cell Membrane Mark S. 274:1850-1851 (Reviews mechanisms by which proteins incorporate into lipid membrane) Signaling Across Membranes: A One and a Two and a . Bretscher Scientific American 1985. et al. 84:3-4 (Compares the new understanding of gene function and behavior with the established “DNA dogma”) Brain Wiring Depends upon Multifaceted Gene J. Nowak Science 1994. J. pages 94-99 Twinned Genes Live Life In The Fast Lane E. Nature 1997. Noji Science 1998. mix-n-match. Gerstein and C. Engelman Science 1996. Attwood Science 2000. M. 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. Spitzer and T. R. pgs 56--66 Building Doors into Cells H. Henderson Sci. 280:521-522 (Bacteria pick-up environmental genes) Close Encounters: Good. Chang et al. K. Unwin and 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. 290:1721-1726 (Describes cholesterol’s role in membrane dynamics. 253:100-108 (A great review of membrane structure and properties) The Structure of Proteins in Biological Membranes N. C. Monroe Science 2001. 273:29-30 (Seeing dynamics of protein folding) Proteins in Motion* M. and Ugly E. King and J. Simons and E. 263:608-610 (Junk DNA’s important role in evolution) Quick-Change Pathogens Gain an Evolutionary Edge* D. 274:370-371 (Describes universality and “multiplicity” of receptor proteins) Receptors as Kissing Cousins G. J. Moxon and C. creating “families” of receptors each with distinct properties) Stretching Is Good for a Cell* E. Ruoslahti Science 1997. 291:1503-1505 (Cells can 6 . discusses lipid “rafts” that transport IMPs) INFORMATION IN BIOLOGY: The Babel of Bioinformatics T. Wills Scientific American January 1999. 281:1131-1134 Doubled Genes May Explain Fish Diversity* G. J. Vogel Science 1998.Genomes as smart systems* J. DNA Microsatellites:Agents of Evolution?* E.. Milligan Science 2000.. Pennisi Science 1998. Pennisi Science 2000. and. 1985. Oct. Grady Science 1996. 288:65-67 (Different receptors can pair-up.Am. knowing gene does not predict the outcome possibilities) How the Genome Readies Itself for Evolution* E. 282:642-643 (How proteins fold into shapes) Folding Proteins Caught in the Act* R. so what. Sejnowski Science 1997. 272:652-653 (How genes respond to environment) Dialing Up an Embryo: Are Olfactory receptors digits in a developmental code?* J. Pennisi Science 2000. A. 285:1682-1684 (How membrane protein conformation changes send signals into cytoplasm) The Rotary Enzyme of the Cell: The Rotation of F1-ATPase H. Service Science 1996. Chothia Science 1999. resulting in continuous evolution thru interaction) Protein Dynamics: Implications for Nuclear Architecture and Gene Expression T. et al Science 1997. A. Stock Science 1996. 281:1119-1121. Travis Science News 1998. Barinaga Science 1999. 387:580-584 (Describes the technology of making a digital chip out of a cell membrane) Biological Information Processing: Bits of Progress* N. 291:843-847 (Describes role of nuclear proteins in gene expression) PROTEINS: A Glimpse of the Holy Grail?* H. Roush Science 1996. E. Bad. J. 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. Lisman and J. Wedemayer. Shapiro Genetica 1991. Joyce Science 1997. F. 154:106-107 (Surface Receptors-how cells know who they are and where they should go) What Maintains Memories? J. 276:1345-46 (Physical tension influences cell behavior) Structure of the MscL Homolog from Mycobacterium tuberculosis: A Gated Mechanosensitive Ion Channel G. R. 276:16651669 (The precise nature of gene mutations in antibody formation) B Cell Receptor Rehabilitation-Pausing to Reflect L. Major obstacle was not in identifying the genes but in understanding the code) A Biosensor That uses Ion-Channel Switches B. 273:323-324 (Membrane mechanism to transduce physical stresses into electrical activity/cell control) The Architecture of Life* D.. 282:220-226 Mechanosensation and the DEG/ENaC Ion Channels D. 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. Cornell. Misteli Science 2001. P. 282:1844-1845 (Insight into how protein conformation changes produce work) New Clues to How Proteins Link Up to Run the Cell* M. Ingber Scientific American January 1998 pgs48-57 (role of tensegrity in shaping cellular life) How Cells Handle Cholesterol K. F. 274:1081 Versatile Gene Uptake System Found in Cholera Bacterium E. 277:1060-1061 (How information” can be processed from biochemical reactions) “Smart” Genes Use Many Cues to Set Cell Fate* W. Science 1998. Ikonen Science 2000. 290:1491-1493 (Microrganisms exchange DNA in cooperation. Travis Science News 2000 157:406 (A single gene can create 38. Pennisi Science 1998.

278:223 (Parasite genes change to accommodate environment) Eugenics Revisited* J. Maniatis Science 1997. 11:214-218 Social Status Sculpts Activity of Crayfish Neurons M. 273:1380-1383 (Human genes selected by environmental bacteria) How the Malarial Parasite Manipulates Its Hosts* V. Giancotti and E. 223:818-820 Calcium Signaling: Up.. 290:61-62 (Reveals that quantum waves are at heart of protein reaction mechanism) Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields Induce Cellular Transcription R. (How environmental signals traverse membrane. 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. Science 1996. Acad. Liboff.. 282:1279-1280. Goodman and A. 14:89-92 (Describes how vibrational energies physically alter protein structure/function) Electromagnetic Fields May Trigger Enzymes* M.. are carried by cytoskeleton to nucleus and influence gene expression) STEM CELLS: Multipotential (embryo-like) cells used in “regenerate” tissues and organs in adults Stem Cells: New Excitement. 279:191-192 (calcium signals read in AM and FM) Deciphering the Language of Cells T. Hemmings Science 1997. et al. Putney Jr. 279:1454-1455 (Reveals major role of environment over genes) GROWTH/PROTECTION MECHANISM: A Cellular Rescue Team J. Natl. 290:1672-1674 (Stem cells in bone marrow can replace neurons) ELECTROMAGNETICS AND CELL BEHAVIOR: Exploiting Thermal Motion K. 278:2075-2080 and. Mann Science 1994. Anchoring. G. S. Science 1998.What’s the Point?* J. 285:1028-1032. Sci. Pawson and J. Schulten Science 2000. Ruoslahti Science 1999. Barinaga Science 1999. 157:232 (Bipolar disorder can be controlled by adhering to daily routine schedule) Behavioral Genetics in Transition* Charles C. Morell Science 1997. et al. Travis Science News 1998. 279:1000-1002 (How proteins turn on genes) New Antibiotic Dulls Bacterial Senses* J. R. 85:3928-3932 (Electromagnetic fields regulate protein synthesis) Time Varying Magnetic Fields: Effect on DNA Synthesis A. D. Werb and Y. R. Robinson Journal of Cell Biology 1985. Raloff Science News 1998. Yan Science 1998. J. Integrin Signaling F. 284:22 (Electromagnetic fields impact cognition and imagination) ENVIRONMENT AND BEHAVIOR (also see Conscious Parenting section below): Pushing the Mood Swings B. 158:77 (EMFs primarily effect stressed people ) The Responses of Cells to Electrical Fields: A Review K. S. Persistent Questions G. Vogel Science 2000. Bry. 220:1283-1285 (Electromagnetic fields regulate RNA synthesis) Exposure of Salivary Gland Cells to Low-frequency Electromagnetic Fields Alters Polypeptide Synthesis R. Bower Science News 2000. 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. Barinaga Science 1996. and Adaptor Proteins T. Scott Science 1997. 153:119 (title self explanatory) EMF’s Biological Influences:Electromagnetic fields exert effects on and through hormones* J. 101:2023-2027 (Describes effects of magnetic fields on cell behavior) Shedding Light on Visual Imagination* M. 285:1201-1203 (How environmental signals [growth/protection] select gene programs) Catalysis by a Multiprotein IB Kinase Complex T. Goodman. Tsong Trends in Biochemical Sciences 1989.. et al. 275:628-630 (Life-death switch mechanism) Sphinx of Fats* J. L. 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. Pomerantz and D Baltimore Nature 2000. 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.“remodel” antibodies (receptors) after they are formed) TRANSCRIPTION: FROM INFORMATION TO GENE ACTION How Chromatin Changes Its Shape Michael Hagmann Science 199. Cahalan Trends in Neuroscience 1988. 264:1686-1689 (Returning role of environment to behavior) A Cellular Striptease Act* Z. Normile Science 1998. 151:342-343 (How ceremide signal gauges level of stress) Superoxide Relay Ras Protein’s Oncogenic Message* E. Science 1984.. Jensen Science News 1998. 153:29-31 (Title self-explanatory) When Do EMFs Disturb the Heart? J. Science 1983. Raloff Science News 1997. Graves Science 1998. Henderson Proc. 275:1567-1568 (Growth-protection switch mechanism) . 153:276 (Receptor relay system controls gene expression) Signaling Through Scaffold. The Plasticity of Ion Channels:Parallels between the Nervous and Immune Systems R. 1988. A. Down. D. Raloff Science News 2000. W. Pennisi Science 1997. Lewis and M. Up Down. Y.

Kirkwood and S. Scien Exploration 1990. 7(4). Grinberg-Zylberbaum. Williamson Annals New York Academy of Sciences 1980. Travis Science News 1998. A. influence by stress and trauma) Teaching the Spinal Cord to Walk I. J. environmental switches activate cancer) Epidemiology Faces Its Limits* Gary Taubes Science 1995. et al.. pages 50-56 (Evidence showing life-long health is determined by life in the womb) Death and Methylation P. 284:238-240 (The mind over matter story) NEURAL PLASTICITY: Brain Changes in Response to Experience M. Loeb Science 1997. 276:534-535 (Digital switches +/.. 226(2):22-29 (Classic paper. V. Roush Science 1997. Rosenzweig. Bennett and M. 153:180 (Brain remodeling occurs in adults.” how regulatory proteins select maternal/paternal genes in response to environment) Gray Matters J. 280:1345-1347 (Discusses “genomic imprinting. Brown Scientific American January 1998 pgs 90-95 Placebos Prove So Powerful Even Experts Are Surprised* S.H.e. 154:276 and. 157:263 (Lack of social connections linked to dementia/Alzheimer’s disease. Check Newsweek Sept. 157:247 Silencing a Gene Slows BreastTumor Fighter N. Heal Thyself D. aging related to metabolism. Science 2001. Lowenstein and J. Parent.. L. 406:147-150 (TMS mechanism explained. J.shows brain cell populations dynamically adjust up or down with use) Adult Human Brains Add New Cells* J. L. 265:1796-1799 (genetic factors account for ~5% of breast cancer) Silencing the BRCA1 Gene Spells Trouble N. Cancer and Heart Attacks: How Your Odds are Set in the Womb S. et a3. “learn. 266:1942-1944 (Most “cancer” genes are normal cellular genes with a control problem) Transient Expression of a Mutator Phenotype in Cancer Cells L. 244:432-436 (How brain activity surrounds body) The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox in the Brain:The Transferred Potential J. 157:407 (“Silencing” a process by which environment/behavior regulate gene expression. 283:1343-1345 (Glial cells modify response of Neurons) 8 . Kaufman and S. E. but not in “normal” cells) Outside Influences: A cancer cell’s physical environment controls its growth* J. Seppa Science News 2000.422-XX (Describes research on brains interacting over distances) The Evoked Magnetic Field of the Human Brain L. Blakeslee NY Times (On the Web) 10/13/1998 Can the Placebo Be the Cure? [Prozac is 80% placebo!] M. Wickelgren Science 1998. Strauss Science 2001. Brain.” how to walk through muscle feedback mechanism) Mapping the Sensory Mosaic* S. Bower Science News 1998. 279:1653-1654 (Brain “maps” dynamically altered to reflect usage) Solving the Brain’s Energy Crisis* Ann Gibbons Science 1998.in cell control) Obesity. 409:141-144 ( Significance of epigenetic [environmental] control in melanoma and other cancer) AGING Growing Old Together E. L. Miki. Jones Nature 2001. 277:1449-1450 (“Adaptive mutation” mechanism activated in cancer. M. insulin pathways) Why Do We Age? T. 280:376-378 (Perception linked to synchronous firing of neurons) Recording and Interpretation of Cerebral Magnetic Fields R. Juliano Science 1998. et al. Travis Science News 1997. 408:233-238 (Reviews role of caloric intake. Physics Essays 1994. 340:45 (How brain magnetic fields surround body) Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation and The Human Brain M. use it or lose it) Grown-Up Monkey Brains Get Growing* B. Austad Nature 2000. Ullian. metabolism and stress upon aging response) BRAIN INFLUENCES: Conditions That Appear to Favor Extrasensory Interactions Between Homo Sapiens and Microbes C. Scientific American 1972. Lounasmaa Science 1989. 291:657-662 (Glial cells control synapse formation between neurons) A Glial-Neuron Signaling Pathway Revealed by Mutations in a Neurexin-Related Protein L. Pleass & N. 283:1126-1127 (Dispelling myth about “no new neurons”. Diamond. Breast Cancer Gene Offers Surprises* author? (news) Science 1994. 266:66-71. how brains regenerate) Dementia May Travel Lonely Road B. 279:319-321 (Spinal cords severed from brain create neural connections. 292:1284-1286 (Directing magnetic fields into brain [TMS] can change behavior and relieve depression) The Placebo Effect* W. Dean Dey J. A. 292:41-43 (Reveals “common” aging mechanism among all organisms. Bower Science News 2000. plus insights to therapeutic use) Boosting Brain Activity From The Outside In L. C. Begley. Hari and O. Helmuth Science 2001. Davenport and E. Yuan and B. 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. Hallett. Ganetzky Science 1999. 159:222-223 (Reviews important contributions of glial cells in brain functions) Control of Synapse Number by Glia E. Science 1994. Nature 2000. 152:138139 Putative Cancer Gene Shows Up in Development Instead* W. Netting Science News 2001. i. 4:213-231 (Human thought can control experiment’s results!) Listening in on the Brain* Science 1998. Enserink Science 1999. Science 1999. M. 1999. 27.CANCER: A Strong Candidate for the Breast and Ovarian Cancer Susceptibility Gene BRCA1 Y. Seppa Science News 2000.

153:391 (Stressful jobs/lonely life increase physical illness) Immigrants Go from Health to Worse* B. Sandman. Bower Science News 1998. 739:198-210 (Stress in third trimester can permanently influence brain mechanisms and behavior) Severe Emotional Stress in First Trimester Linked with Congenital Malformations D. Devlin. Prolla Science 1999. Bower Science News 1998. Cancer and Heart Attacks: How Your Odds are Set in the Womb S. Bower Science News 1999. F.CONSCIOUS PARENTING: Nongenomic Transmission Across Generations of Maternal Behavior and Stress Responses in the Rat D. 283:1832-1834. et al. A. of Sciences 1994. Marshall Science 2000. Hannun Science 1996. McGue Nature 1997.EFTsweden. Science 1999. A. Sapolsky Science 1997. Lancet 2000. Arnsten Science 1998. Meaney. 289:721 and Study of Stimulant Therapy Raises Concern B. Kochanska Developmental Psychology 1997. 280:1005-1007 (Emotions trigger behavioral and brain changes) Gigantism in Mice Lacking Suppressor of Cytokine Signalling-2 D. 274:1855-1859 (Reveals how cell behavior is divided into Growth and Protection functions) Healthy Functioning Takes Social Cues* B. Klopp. Fackelmann Science News 1997. 356:875-880 (High stress hormones in first trimester linked to 50% increase in cranial malformations) The Mental Butler Did It B. A. et al. 280:1711 (stress reduces intelligence) The Cortisol Connection:Does Stress hormone play a role in AIDS?* K. Wickelgren Science 1999. pages 72-78 (Parent behaviors shape child’s moral behavior) Duke Study Faults Overuse of Stimulants for Children E. et al Science 2000.Forsberg@EFTsweden. cause increased sensitivity to pain in later life) STRESS AND BIOLOGY: Don’t Stress* K. Gibbons Science 1998. Kids Adopted Late Reap IQ Increases B. D. 286:1155-1158 (Maternal care [i. T. Metcalf Nature 2000.S. Crabbe. 405:1069-1073 (Supression of immune system leads to greater growth of organism) Stress Hormone May Speed Up Brain Aging* B. et al. J. et al. M. Science 1996. Bower Science News 1998. 388:468-471 The Democracy of Genes* M. 1999. Francis. Damon Scientific American August 1999. environment] influences child’s behavior and can change genetics in next generation) Where Health Begins .se . 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. Lee. R. 277:1620-1621 (Role of parenting produces life long [genetic/biochemical] influences on offspring) Child Abuse and Neglect: Usefulness of Animal Data D. Bower Science News 2000. A. C. Annals of the NY Acad. 289:628-630 (Early painful stimuli rewire neonatal brains. Weindruch and T. 284:16701672 (Genetically identical strains. Maestripieri and K.se Kjell. Begley. Mlot Science 1998. Science 1988. Bower Science News 1997. Ruda. Davenport and E. 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 C.152:350-351 (Title self-explanatory) Tracing Molecules That Make The Brain-Body Connection* E. Leutwyler Scientific American Jan. Hansen et al. Wolf. R. pgs 55-62 (Reviews role of parents in child’s brain development) A New Look at Maternal Guidance Elizabeth Pennisi Science 1996. 239:766-768 (Perinatal parenting impacts brain function throughout life) Solving the Brains Energy Crisis* A. and. 1998 pgs 29-30 (Stress causes developmental problems and neurodegeneration) Functions of Ceramide in Coordinating Cellular Responses to Stress Y. 1546:X (Early environment influences shape and “reshape” IQ development) The Importance of a Well-Groomed Child* R. Carroll Psychological Bulletin 1998. Bower Science News 1999. 158:69 (Half of Ritalin using ADHD kids DO NOT have ADHD!) Altered Nociceptive Neuronal Circuits After Neonatal Peripheral Inflammation M. et al. Liu and M.Obesity. 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. J. 273:1334-1336 (Describes new work on maternal experiences selecting gene programs in offspring) The Moral Development of Children* W. 273:1225-1227 (Prenatal environmental influences offspring’s gene expression) Your Child’s Brain S. 154:180 (US culture increases stress and leads to mental disorders) Physical Ills Follow Trauma Response* B. 123:211-216 (Child neglect and abuse derived from “learning” experience) Genetics of Mouse Behavior: Interactions with Laboratory Environment J. Check Newsweek Sept. different environments produce different behaviors) Multiple Pathways to Conscience for Children with Different Temperments G. G. Nature 1997. 27. Diorio. J. 280:1345-1347 (Important: see sidebar regarding genomic imprinting and role of mother’s perception in fetal brain development) The Heritability of IQ B. 152:372 (Title self-explanatory) Probing the Biology of Emotion* C. Begley Newsweek 2/19/96. 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.32 30 25 www.. 388:417-418 (Emphasizes prenatal environment influences upto 50% of IQ) Nurture Helps Mold Able Minds I. 153:263 (Title self-explanatory) The Biology of Being Frazzled* A. 285:1390-1393 (How stress signals select genes that promote aging) Kjell Forsberg Tel 046. Meaney Science 1999.e.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.