DOCSLIB.ORG

The Two Faces of Consciousness Rich Rewards

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Two Faces of Consciousness Rich Rewards books and arts of broader positions, a practice that is less appropriate in the academic context and only The two faces of exacerbates the above problems. The later chapters on parapsychology, hallucinatory consciousness states and meditative spiritual traditions are Consciousness: An Introduction also less successful than the rest; Blackmore’s by Susan Blackmore combination of expertise and scepticism Hodder and Stoughton: 2003. 544 pp. £19.99 makes her an ideal ‘tour guide’ for such Oxford University Press: 2003. 460 pp. realms, but ultimately these chapters estab- $39.95 (pbk), $79 (hbk) lish little and do not seem to connect with Ilya Farber the ideas developed in the earlier sections. Ultimately, this remains a very satisfying The study of consciousness being rather book. It could serve well as a core text for broad, its more science-oriented practition- courses in philosophy,psychology and related ers quickly become adept at glancing disciplines, and would provide useful con- through promising-looking new books to text for other, more discipline-specific texts. discern whether they partake a little too Its broad scope and clear explanations also much of the ‘cosmic’. This isn’t usually make it an excellent choice for independent difficult, but Susan Blackmore’s new book study. It’s a shame about the cover, though. almost seems to have been intentionally This might seem a petty complaint, but designed to thwart such attempts at classifi- Books about consciousness divide into the considering that academic respect for the cation. Consciousness: An Introduction is scientific and the ‘cosmic’ — but which is this? study of consciousness is still grudging and clearly intended and marketed as a college- probational, such matters of appearance level textbook, but it sports a cover that is in its comprehensiveness, but the discussion are not trivial. I’ll be using Consciousness dominated by a glowing humanoid outline is carefully structured: ideas appear not as in my course next semester, but I’ll also be festooned with chakra-like circles and individual items to be memorized, but as passing out a nice selection of book covers reaching ecstatically towards some sort of steps in an integrated, multifaceted process on the first day of class. ■ celestial radiance. of investigation. Ilya Farber is in the Department of Philosophy, A glance through the copious figures The book does have a bit of a split George Washington University, initially reveals a reassuring profusion of personality, seeming at times like a guide- Washington DC 20052, USA brains and graphs and experimental proto- book to self-discovery and at others like a cols, but in the final quarter of the book primer on recondite academic disputes. these give way to buddhas, drug-induced It soon becomes clear, however, that this visions and floating spirits. Even the usually bipolar character is strategic. The chattier reliable strategy of investigating the author’s bits (full of second-person questions and Rich rewards credentials just generates new puzzles. A exhortations) provide excitement and moti- Pioneers of Microbiology and the search through Blackmore’s oeuvre turns up vation, and encourage students to adopt an Nobel Prize near-death experiences and memes,a book on engaged, reflective approach to the material, by Ulf Lagerkvist testing your psychic powers and a chapter on whereas the more scholarly parts delve World Scientific: 2003. 182 pp. $24, £16 why parapsychology tells us nothing about unapologetically and at length into the W. F. Bynum consciousness. For decades she described details of particular theories and problems. herself as a hopeful and open-minded inves- This double structure should make the Historians of twentieth-century science tigator of psychic phenomena,but was all the book accessible and attractive to a wide often write about their subject in terms of while on the board of the magazine Skeptical range of readers. Nobel milestones. Laureates are convenient Inquirer, and in 2001 she announced the end There are a few notable problems. One markers of major scientific advance, and of her involvement in such studies. It is easy is an unfortunate tendency for favourite have the added attraction that a great deal to imagine potential readers or teachers giv- authors, such as Daniel Dennett and Ben- of information about them is generally in ing up in bafflement,unable to figure out just jamin Libet, to crop up again and again in the public domain. This in itself reinforces what kind of book this is. different contexts, sometimes in place of their scientific visibility and assures us that, That would be a shame, though, because others who would arguably be more rele- on the whole, the various bodies that Alfred Blackmore has in fact written a truly excel- vant. Blackmore draws on a wide variety of Nobel asked to adjudicate his prizes have lent textbook. Two years ago she gave up her philosophically engaged scientists (includ- done their job correctly. Disciplines such university position to work on this project ing Francis Crick, Antonio Damasio, Ray as mathematics, evolutionary biology and full-time, and the attention shows. The Jackendoff, Vilayanur Ramachandran and geology, overlooked by Nobel, have their book’s 27 detailed chapters cover every major Francisco Varela), but is much less careful own means of rewarding excellence, and aspect of consciousness, and Blackmore with scientifically engaged philosophers, historians use these accordingly. reveals herself to be a careful and judicious often letting Dennett stand in for the whole That scientists also value the award of researcher: the central figures and theories pack.This is most problematic in the chapters the ultimate scientific prize far beyond its of most chapters are familiar, but they are on neuroscience,where one would have liked considerable monetary value has recently presented with unusually careful attention to see more coverage of the specific proposals been demonstrated by the contested 2003 to details of argumentation and evidence, of philosophers who specialize in the topic, prize for medicine or physiology, which was rather than being reduced to the sort of such as Patricia and Paul Churchland, Kath- awarded for medical magnetic resonance simple iconic positions that fuel most ‘battle leen Akins, Ned Block, Owen Flanagan and imaging (see Nature 425, 648; 2003). of ideas’ texts. Many lesser-known authors Thomas Metzinger. Blackmore, an experi- Although it took some time for the current and positions are also introduced, and some enced author of popular-science books,often prestige of the Nobel prizes to develop, of the most interesting ones receive extended uses the journalist’s technique of using indi- the second award in physiology or medicine treatment. The book is nearly encyclopaedic vidual scholars as symbolic representatives (1902) exacerbated a priority dispute between 604 © 2003 Nature Publishing Group NATURE | VOL 426 | 11 DECEMBER 2003 | www.nature.com/nature books and arts Winging it The colour and intricate detail of a moth’s wing, like the one shown here from the painted lichen moth (Hypoprepia fucosa), is rarely appreciated. Although there are many more species of moths than butterflies, their nocturnal habit tends to keep them from view. Print-maker Joseph Scheer became interested in moths when he began using a high-resolution scanner to capture directly images of insects. The prints allow a view of the anatomical detail, previously only available through a stereomicroscope, across an entire specimen. Now Scheer has become something of an amateur lepidopterist, studying the diversity of the local moth populations as he collects more specimens for his prints, a selection of which can be seen in Night Visions: The Secret Designs of Moths (Prestel, £29.95). Mary Purton Ronald Ross (who got the prize) and Giovanni Erik Johannson, professor of physiology at the first awards was Nobel’s stipulation that Battista Grassi (who was overlooked) over the Karolinska, probably persuaded Nobel the science prizes ought to be awarded for the their relative contributions to knowledge of to add ‘physiology’ to the medical prize. best research ‘in the preceding year’. Mem- the role of Anopheles mosquitoes in malaria Johannson campaigned ardently against the bers of the awarding bodies knew that it takes transmission. Nobel had made provision for award of a prize to Paul Ehrlich, his reason time for the permanent value of a scientific each of his prizes to be shared by up to three being that Ehrlich’s famous ‘side-chain’ discovery to be judged, and one of Nobel’s people, although shared prizes in science theory of antigen–antibody interaction was original trustees,Ragnar Sohlman,managed were rare before the inter-war period and too speculative and had been contested by to get the terms of the will relaxed. The became the norm only after the Second Svante Arrhenius, the deserving winner of Medicine or Physiology Committee seemed World War. the 1903 prize for chemistry. to have adopted a rough ten-year guideline, Ulf Lagerkvist’s discussion of the early Grumblings about nationalistic bias which explains why some of the early medicine or physiology prizes is by far the surfaced early in international attitudes recipients were deemed eligible. Thus the most original part of his little book, which towards Nobel committees, and it must be first winner, von Behring, had done his focuses on the lives of four pioneers of said that the first two Scandinavian medical important work on diphtheria (the word is microbiology who all won the coveted prize: laureates, Niels Finsen (1903) and Allvar irritatingly misspelled throughout Lager- Emil von Behring,Robert Koch,Paul Ehrlich Gullstrand (1911),have not exactly remained kvist’s book) roughly a decade earlier. By the and Elie Metchnikoff. He describes the household names, if they ever were. Johann- time of the award he was engaged in largely composition and deliberations of the early son may have been unusual in raising the fruitless research on tuberculosis.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • October 24–26, 2021 2
    SCIENCE · INNOVATION · POLICIES WORLD HEALTH SUMMIT BERLIN, GERMANY & DIGITAL OCTOBER 24–26, 2021 2 “No-one is safe from COVID-19; “All countries have signed up to Universal no-one is safe until we are all Health Coverage by 2030. But we cannot safe from it. Even those who wait ten years. We need health systems conquer the virus within their that work, before we face an outbreak own borders remain prisoners of something more contagious than within these borders until it is COVID-19; more deadly; or both.” conquered everywhere.” ANTÓNIO GUTERRES Secretary-General, United Nations FRANK-WALTER STEINMEIER Federal President, Germany “We firmly believe that the “All pulling together—this must rights of women and girls be the hallmark of the European are not negotiable.” Health Union. I believe this can NATALIA KANEM be a test case for true global Executive Director, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) health compact. The need for leadership is clear and I believe the European Union must as- sume this responsibility.” “The lesson is clear: a strong health URSULA VON DER LEYEN system is a resilient health system. Health President, European Commission systems and preparedness are not only “Governments of countries an investment in the future, they are the that are doing well during foundation of our response today.” the pandemic have not TEDROS ADHANOM GHEBREYESUS Director-General, World Health Organization (WHO) only shown political leader- ship, but also have listened “If we don’t address the concerns and to scientists and followed fears we will not do ourselves a favor. their recommendations.” In the end, it is about how technology SOUMYA SWAMINATHAN Chief Scientist, World Health can be advanced as well as how Organization (WHO) we can make healthcare more human.” BERND MONTAG President and CEO, Siemens Healthineers AG, Germany “The pandemic has brought to light the “Academic collabo ration is importance of digital technologies and in place and is really a how it can radically bridging partnership.
    [Show full text]
  • Sir Charles Sherrington'sthe Integrative Action of the Nervous System: a Centenary Appreciation
    doi:10.1093/brain/awm022 Brain (2007), 130, 887^894 OCCASIONAL PAPER Sir Charles Sherrington’sThe integrative action of the nervous system: a centenary appreciation Robert E. Burke Formerly Chief of the Laboratory of Neural Control, National Institute of Neurological Disorders, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA Present address: P.O. Box 1722, El Prado, NM 87529,USA E-mail: [email protected] In 1906 Sir Charles Sherrington published The Integrative Action of the Nervous System, which was a collection of ten lectures delivered two years before at Yale University in the United States. In this monograph Sherrington summarized two decades of painstaking experimental observations and his incisive interpretation of them. It settled the then-current debate between the ‘‘Reticular Theory’’ versus ‘‘Neuron Doctrine’’ ideas about the fundamental nature of the nervous system in mammals in favor of the latter, and it changed forever the way in which subsequent generations have viewed the organization of the central nervous system. Sherrington’s magnum opus contains basic concepts and even terminology that are now second nature to every student of the subject. This brief article reviews the historical context in which the book was written, summarizes its content, and considers its impact on Neurology and Neuroscience. Keywords: Neuron Doctrine; spinal reflexes; reflex coordination; control of movement; nervous system organization Introduction The first decade of the 20th century saw two momentous The Silliman lectures events for science. The year 1905 was Albert Einstein’s Sherrington’s 1906 monograph, published simultaneously in ‘miraculous year’ during which three of his most celebrated London, New Haven and New York, was based on a series papers in theoretical physics appeared.
    [Show full text]
  • Metchnikoff and the Phagocytosis Theory
    PERSPECTIVES TIMELINE Metchnikoff and the phagocytosis theory Alfred I. Tauber Metchnikoff’s phagocytosis theory was less century. Indeed, the clonal selection theory and an explanation of host defence than a the elucidation of the molecular biology of the proposal that might account for establishing immune response count among the great and maintaining organismal ‘harmony’. By advances in biology during our own era5. tracing the phagocyte’s various functions Metchnikoff has been assigned to the wine cel- Figure 1 | Ilya Metchnikoff, at ~45 years of through phylogeny, he recognized that eating lar of history, to be pulled out on occasion and age. This figure is reproduced from REF. 14. the tadpole’s tail and killing bacteria was the celebrated as an old hero. same fundamental process: preserving the However, to cite Metchnikoff only as a con- integrity, and, in some cases, defining the tributor to early immunology distorts his sem- launched him into the turbulent waters of evo- identity of the organism. inal contributions to a much wider domain. lutionary biology. He wrote his dissertation on He recognized that the development and func- the development of invertebrate germ layers, I first encountered the work of Ilya tion of the individual organism required an for which he shared the prestigious van Baer Metchnikoff (1845–1916; FIG. 1) in Paul de understanding of physiology in an evolution- Prize with Alexander Kovalevski. By the age of Kruif’s classic, The Microbe Hunters 1.Who ary context. The crucial precept: the organism 22 years, he was appointed to the position of would not be struck by the description of this was composed of various elements, each vying docent at the new University of Odessa, where, fiery Russian championing his theory of for dominance.
    [Show full text]
  • Guest Editorial 1 Guest Editorial
    Indian JJ PhysiolPhysiol PharmacolPharmacol 2012; 2012; 56(1) 56(1) : 1–6 Guest Editorial 1 Guest Editorial IMMUNOLOGY AND NOBEL PRIZE : A LOVE STORY Several breakthroughs revealing the way in which our bodies protect us against microscopic threats of almost any description have been duly acknowledged by the Nobel Prizes in Physiology or Medicine. Interestingly, Nobel Prizes in Physiology or Medicine including the latest one, for the year 2011, has been awarded for twelve times to the field of Immunology. The story began in 1901 with the very first Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine - it was awarded to Emil Von Behring for his pioneering work which resulted in the discovery of antitoxins, later termed as antibodies. Working with Shibasaburo Kitasato, Von Behring found that when animals were injected with tiny doses of weakened forms of tetanus or diphtheria bacteria, their blood extracts contained chemicals released in response, which rendered the pathogens’ toxins harmless. Naming these chemical agents ‘antitoxins’, Von Behring and Erich Wernicke showed that transferring antitoxin-containing blood serum into animals infected with the fully virulent versions of diphtheria bacteria cured the recipients of any symptoms, and prevented death. This was found to be true for humans also; and thus Von Behring’s method of treatment – passive serum therapy – became an essential remedy for diphtheria, saving many thousands of lives every year. Shortly after this, the very first explanation about the mechanisms of immune system’s functioning was proposed which paved way for extensive research in immunology till today. Paul Ehrlich had hit upon the key concept of how antibodies seek and neutralize the toxic actions of bacteria, while Ilya Mechnikov had discovered that certain body cells could destroy pathogens by simply engulfing or “eating” them.
    [Show full text]
  • Emil Von Behring (1854–1917) the German Bacteriologist
    Emil von Behring (1854–1917) The German bacteriologist and Nobel Prize winner Emil von Behring ranks among the most important medical scientists. Behring was born in Hansdorff, West Prussia, as the son of a teacher in 1854. He grew up in narrow circumstances among eleven brothers and sisters. His desire to study medicine could only be realized by fulfilling the obligation to work as an military doctor for a longer period of time. Between 1874 and 1878 he studied medicine at the Akademie für das militärärztliche Bildungswesen in Berlin. In 1890, after having published his paper Ueber das Zustandekommen der Diphtherie- Immunität und der Tetanus-Immunität bei Thieren, he captured his scientific breakthrough. While having worked as Robert Koch’s scientific assistant at the Berlin Hygienic Institute he had been able to show – together with his Japanese colleague Shibasaburo Kitasato (1852–1931) – via experimentation on animal that it was possible to neutralize pathogenic germs by giving „antitoxins“. Behring demonstrated that the antitoxic qualities of blood are not seated in cells, but in the cell-free serum. Antitoxins recovered of human convalenscents or laboratorty animals, prove themselves as life-saving when being applied to diseased humans. At last – due to Behring’s discovery of the body’s own immune defence and due to his development of serotherapy against diphtheria and tetanus – a remedy existed which was able to combat via antitoxin those infectious diseases which had already broken out. Having developped a serum therapy against diphtheria and tetanus Behring won the first Nobel Prize in Medicine in 1901. Six years before, in 1895, he had become professor of Hygienics within the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Marburg, a position he would hold for the rest of his life.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline of Immunology
    TIMELINE OF IMMUNOLOGY 1549 – The earliest account of inoculation of smallpox (variolation) occurs in Wan Quan's (1499–1582) 1718 – Smallpox inoculation in Ottoman Empire realized by West. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, the wife of the British ambassador to Constantinople, observed the positive effects of variolation on the native population and had the technique performed on her own children. 1796 – First demonstration of smallpox vaccination (Edward Jenner) 1837 – Description of the role of microbes in putrefaction and fermentation (Theodore Schwann) 1838 – Confirmation of the role of yeast in fermentation of sugar to alcohol (Charles Cagniard-Latour) 1840 – Proposal of the germ theory of disease (Jakob Henle) 1850 – Demonstration of the contagious nature of puerperal fever (childbed fever) (Ignaz Semmelweis) 1857–1870 – Confirmation of the role of microbes in fermentation (Louis Pasteur) 1862 – Phagocytosis (Ernst Haeckel) 1867 – Aseptic practice in surgery using carbolic acid (Joseph Lister) 1876 – Demonstration that microbes can cause disease-anthrax (Robert Koch) 1877 – Mast cells (Paul Ehrlich) 1878 – Confirmation and popularization of the germ theory of disease (Louis Pasteur) 1880 – 1881 -Theory that bacterial virulence could be attenuated by culture in vitro and used as vaccines. Proposed that live attenuated microbes produced immunity by depleting host of vital trace nutrients. Used to make chicken cholera and anthrax "vaccines" (Louis Pasteur) 1883 – 1905 – Cellular theory of immunity via phagocytosis by macrophages and microphages (polymorhonuclear leukocytes) (Elie Metchnikoff) 1885 – Introduction of concept of a "therapeutic vaccination". Report of a live "attenuated" vaccine for rabies (Louis Pasteur and Pierre Paul Émile Roux). 1888 – Identification of bacterial toxins (diphtheria bacillus) (Pierre Roux and Alexandre Yersin) 1888 – Bactericidal action of blood (George Nuttall) 1890 – Demonstration of antibody activity against diphtheria and tetanus toxins.
    [Show full text]
  • Microbiology: Example Saqs
    Microbiology: Example SAQs Level 1: remembering. Frequently used task words: define, list, label, name. Can the student recall or remember the information? Identify TWO methods used to treat drinking water to reduce the risk of infection. This question just asks for the name of the methods, and nothing else is required. You don’t need to write an explanatory paragraph. You don’t even need to put the answer into a sentence. Boiling water Chlorination Microbiology: Example SAQs Level 2: understanding. Frequently used task words: describe, explain, identify & example. Can the student explain ideas or concepts? Explain the importance of using controls in microbial experiments. This question can have more than one answer and the length required is difficult to determine by looking at the question. Does your academic want an essay or do they want a one-liner? You can address this by looking at how much this question is worth. In an exam each mark is worth about a minute of time, so the amount you need to write depends on the mark value. Controls in microbial experiments allow us to validate the results. The control ensures that the microbial growth is a result of experimental conditions rather than contamination. For example, when testing the presence of microbes in food, the control agar plate is left unopened / unexposed. No growth in the control culture plate will make sure the microbial growth in experimental plates is from food rather than from the contamination of nutrient agar. Microbiology: Example SAQs Level 3: applying. Frequently used task words: apply, illustrate, solve, use & demonstrate.
    [Show full text]
  • Nobel Laureate Surgeons
    Literature Review World Journal of Surgery and Surgical Research Published: 12 Mar, 2020 Nobel Laureate Surgeons Jayant Radhakrishnan1* and Mohammad Ezzi1,2 1Department of Surgery and Urology, University of Illinois, USA 2Department of Surgery, Jazan University, Saudi Arabia Abstract This is a brief account of the notable contributions and some foibles of surgeons who have won the Nobel Prize for physiology or medicine since it was first awarded in 1901. Keywords: Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine; Surgical Nobel laureates; Pathology and surgery Introduction The Nobel Prize for physiology or medicine has been awarded to 219 scientists in the last 119 years. Eleven members of this illustrious group are surgeons although their awards have not always been for surgical innovations. Names of these surgeons with the year of the award and why they received it are listed below: Emil Theodor Kocher - 1909: Thyroid physiology, pathology and surgery. Alvar Gullstrand - 1911: Path of refracted light through the ocular lens. Alexis Carrel - 1912: Methods for suturing blood vessels and transplantation. Robert Barany - 1914: Function of the vestibular apparatus. Frederick Grant Banting - 1923: Extraction of insulin and treatment of diabetes. Alexander Fleming - 1945: Discovery of penicillin. Walter Rudolf Hess - 1949: Brain mapping for control of internal bodily functions. Werner Theodor Otto Forssmann - 1956: Cardiac catheterization. Charles Brenton Huggins - 1966: Hormonal control of prostate cancer. OPEN ACCESS Joseph Edward Murray - 1990: Organ transplantation. *Correspondence: Shinya Yamanaka-2012: Reprogramming of mature cells for pluripotency. Jayant Radhakrishnan, Department of Surgery and Urology, University of Emil Theodor Kocher (August 25, 1841 to July 27, 1917) Illinois, 1502, 71st, Street Darien, IL Kocher received the award in 1909 “for his work on the physiology, pathology and surgery of the 60561, Chicago, Illinois, USA, thyroid gland” [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Jahresbericht 2017
    Das Streben nach Wahrheit und Erkenntnis gehört zum Schönsten, dessen der Mensch fähig ist. Albert Einstein, 1943 Einstein Stiftung Berlin 01 Grußbotschaft Berlin hat sich in den letzten Jahren zur Hauptstadt Die Förderung des wissenschaftlichen Nachwuchses der Wissenschaft entwickelt. Aus genau diesem Grund ist uns ein Anliegen und wir haben diesen Beitrag ger- haben wir uns bei Pfizer vor zehn Jahren dazu ent- ne geleistet. Wir danken der Einstein Stiftung sehr für schieden, unsere Deutschlandzentrale nach Berlin zu ihr Engagement und wünschen allen Absolventinnen verlegen. Denn bei wohl kaum einer anderen Branche und Absolventen viel Erfolg! liegen wissenschaftlicher und wirtschaftlicher Erfolg so eng beieinander wie in der Pharmazie. Viele unse- rer Produkte sind auf nobelpreisgekrönte Entdeckun- gen zurückzuführen: vom Penicillin, mit dem Infektio- nen ihren Schrecken verloren, über Impfstoffe, die vor schweren Krankheiten schützen, bis hin zu modernen Immuntherapeutika, die Krebspatienten neue Hoff- nung geben können. Umgekehrt gilt: Ohne die Mög- lichkeiten der großtechnischen Herstellung hätte Fle- mings Penicillin nie den vielen verwundeten Soldaten im Zweiten Weltkrieg helfen können, ohne die Expertise aus der Industrie würden vielversprechende Kandida- ten aus dem Labor oft nicht den mühsamen Weg durch die klinische Prüfung und die Zulassung finden. Viele Nobelpreisträger forschten in Berlin: Robert Koch ent- deckte hier den Tuberkuloseerreger, Emil von Behring das Serum gegen Diphtherie, Paul Ehrlich begründete an der Charité
    [Show full text]
  • Nobel Laureates in Physiology Or Medicine
    All Nobel Laureates in Physiology or Medicine 1901 Emil A. von Behring Germany ”for his work on serum therapy, especially its application against diphtheria, by which he has opened a new road in the domain of medical science and thereby placed in the hands of the physician a victorious weapon against illness and deaths” 1902 Sir Ronald Ross Great Britain ”for his work on malaria, by which he has shown how it enters the organism and thereby has laid the foundation for successful research on this disease and methods of combating it” 1903 Niels R. Finsen Denmark ”in recognition of his contribution to the treatment of diseases, especially lupus vulgaris, with concentrated light radiation, whereby he has opened a new avenue for medical science” 1904 Ivan P. Pavlov Russia ”in recognition of his work on the physiology of digestion, through which knowledge on vital aspects of the subject has been transformed and enlarged” 1905 Robert Koch Germany ”for his investigations and discoveries in relation to tuberculosis” 1906 Camillo Golgi Italy "in recognition of their work on the structure of the nervous system" Santiago Ramon y Cajal Spain 1907 Charles L. A. Laveran France "in recognition of his work on the role played by protozoa in causing diseases" 1908 Paul Ehrlich Germany "in recognition of their work on immunity" Elie Metchniko France 1909 Emil Theodor Kocher Switzerland "for his work on the physiology, pathology and surgery of the thyroid gland" 1910 Albrecht Kossel Germany "in recognition of the contributions to our knowledge of cell chemistry made through his work on proteins, including the nucleic substances" 1911 Allvar Gullstrand Sweden "for his work on the dioptrics of the eye" 1912 Alexis Carrel France "in recognition of his work on vascular suture and the transplantation of blood vessels and organs" 1913 Charles R.
    [Show full text]
  • Awarded Nobel Prize for Contributions to Immunology
    History of Immunology Molecular Immunology (MIR 511) August 27, 2013 Sharon S. Evans, Ph.D. Department of Immunology, RPCI (X3421) [email protected] Required reading: Owens; Immunology(7TH Edition) Chapter 1 – Overview of the Immune System: A Historical Perspective of Immunity Objectives 1. To gain a historical perspective of seminal research that provided underpinnings of immunology discipline. 2. To introduce key concepts of tumor immunology. Assigned Reading . Arthur M. Silverstein, Ilya Metchnikoff, the Phogocytic theory, and how things often work in science. J Leuk Biol 90:409, 2011. Jen-Marc Cavaillon, The historical milestones in the undersanding of leukocyte biology initiated by Elie Metchnikoff. J Leuk Biol 90:413, 2011. Historical Paradigms in General Immunology and Tumor Immunology 500 B.C. 1700s-1800s A.D. 2000 A.D. Recognition of Active Immunity/ Protection from Infectious Agents Molecular Mechanisms of Immunity (Ab, cells, cytokines) Tumor Immunity Survival of Species Depends on Defense Mechanisms • Fight/flight • Barriers - skin • Immune response-complexity depends on organism Vertebrates: •Organized lymphoid organs (spleen, thymus, bone marrow, lymph nodes, Peyer’s patches) •Complex circulatory system (lymphocyte trafficking) Immunity (Latin)-immunis Legal term = free from tax burden General Properties of Immune Response: Protect, defend organism from infectious agents • Innate immunity (NK, PMN, MO, megakaryocytes) • Primitive, higher organism • Adaptive immunity (B, T cells) • Only vertebrates Recognize self
    [Show full text]
  • Proquest Dissertations
    RICE UNIVERSITY Gd@C60-(ZME-018) Immunoconjugate Targeting of A375 Melanoma Cells by Christopher Scott Berger A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE Master of Arts Approved Thesis Committee: Lon J. Wilson, Chairman Professor of Chemistry W. Edward Billups Professor of Chemistry ^1 -u Ronald J. Parry Professor of Chemistry HOUSTON, TEXAS MAY 2010 UMI Number: 1486027 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. UMT Dissertation Publishing UMI 1486027 Copyright 2010 by ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Abstract Gd@C6o-(ZME-018) Immunoconjugate Targeting of A375 Melanoma Cells by Christopher Scott Berger For the first time, C6o-monoclonal antibody (mAb) immunoconjugates have been determined to internalize into target cells using water-soluble Gd3+-ion-filled fullerenes (Gd@Ceo(OH)x). Separate conjugations of Gd@C6o(OH)x with the antibody ZME-018 and a murine antibody mixture (MulgG) took place in a 1:5 mAb:Gd@C6o ratio. Quanitative analysis of the immunoconjugates was established using inductively-coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) and UV-Vis spectrometry (Gd@C6o+C6o). Enzyme- linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) show little change in the specific binding of the ZME-018 once conjugated.
    [Show full text]