Plato, The Republic -- Excerpts

 

 

Book I

You are very kind, I said; and would you have the goodness also to inform me, whether you think that a state, or an army, or a band of robbers and thieves, or any other gang of evil-doers could act at all if they injured one another?

 

No indeed, he said, they could not.

But if they abstained from injuring one another, then they might act together better?

 

Yes.

And this is because injustice creates divisions and hatreds and fighting, and justice imparts harmony and friendship; is not that true, Thrasymachus?

 

I agree, he said, because I do not wish to quarrel with you.

How good of you, I said; but I should like to know also whether injustice, having this tendency to arouse hatred, wherever existing, among slaves or among freemen, will not make them hate one another and set them at variance and render them incapable of common action?

 

Certainly.

And even if injustice be found in two only, will they not quarrel and fight, and become enemies to one another and to the just

 

They will.

 

 

Book IX

 

Of all changes, he said, there is none so speedy or so sure as the conversion of the ambitious youth into the avaricious one.

 

And the avaricious, I said, is the oligarchical youth?

Yes, he said; at any rate the individual out of whom he came is like the State out of which oligarchy came.

 

Let us then consider whether there is any likeness between them.

Very good.

First, then, they resemble one another in the value which they set upon wealth?

 

Certainly.

Also in their penurious, laborious character; the individual only satisfies his necessary appetites, and confines his expenditure to them; his other desires he subdues, under the idea that they are unprofitable.

 

True.

He is a shabby fellow, who saves something out of everything and makes a purse for himself; and this is the sort of man whom the vulgar applaud. Is he not a true image of the State which he represents?

 

He appears to me to be so; at any rate money is highly valued by him as well as by the State.

 

You see that he is not a man of cultivation, I said.

I imagine not, he said; had he been educated he would never have made a blind god director of his chorus, or given him chief honour.

 

Excellent! I said. Yet consider: Must we not further admit that owing to this want of cultivation there will be found in him dronelike desires as of pauper and rogue, which are forcibly kept down by his general habit of life?

 

True.

Do you know where you will have to look if you want to discover his rogueries?

 

Where must I look?

You should see him where he has some great opportunity of acting dishonestly, as in the guardianship of an orphan.

 

Aye.

It will be clear enough then that in his ordinary dealings which give him a reputation for honesty he coerces his bad passions by an enforced virtue; not making them see that they are wrong, or taming them by reason, but by necessity and fear constraining them, and because he trembles for his possessions.

 

To be sure.

Yes, indeed, my dear friend, but you will find that the natural desires of the drone commonly exist in him all the same whenever he has to spend what is not his own.

 

Yes, and they will be strong in him too.

The man, then, will be at war with himself; he will be two men, and not one; but, in general, his better desires will be found to prevail over his inferior ones.

 

True.

For these reasons such an one will be more respectable than most people; yet the true virtue of a unanimous and harmonious soul will flee far away and never come near him.

 

 

Very true.

Can we any longer doubt, then, that the miser and money-maker answers to the oligarchical State?

 

There can be no doubt.

Next comes democracy; of this the origin and nature have still to be considered by us; and then we will enquire into the ways of the democratic man, and bring him up for judgement.

 

That, he said, is our method.

Well, I said, and how does the change from oligarchy into democracy arise? Is it not on this wise? --The good at which such a State aims is to become as rich as possible, a desire which is insatiable?

 

What then?

The rulers, being aware that their power rests upon their wealth, refuse to curtail by law the extravagance of the spendthrift youth because they gain by their ruin; they take interest from them and buy up their estates and thus increase their own wealth and importance?

 

To be sure.

There can be no doubt that the love of wealth and the spirit of moderation cannot exist together in citizens of the same State to any considerable extent; one or the other will be disregarded.

 

That is tolerably clear.

And in oligarchical States, from the general spread of carelessness and extravagance, men of good family have often been reduced to beggary?

 

Yes, often.

And still they remain in the city; there they are, ready to sting and fully armed, and some of them owe money, some have forfeited their citizenship; a third class are in both predicaments; and they hate and conspire against those who have got their property, and against everybody else, and are eager for revolution.

 

That is true.

On the other hand, the men of business, stooping as they walk, and pretending not even to see those whom they have already ruined, insert their sting --that is, their money --into some one else who is not on his guard against them, and recover the parent sum many times over multiplied into a family of children: and so they make drone and pauper to abound in the State.

 

Yes, he said, there are plenty of them --that is certain.

The evil blazes up like a fire; and they will not extinguish it, either by restricting a man's use of his own property, or by another remedy:

 

What other?

One which is the next best, and has the advantage of compelling the citizens to look to their characters: --Let there be a general rule that every one shall enter into voluntary contracts at his own risk, and there will be less of this scandalous money-making, and the evils of which we were speaking will be greatly lessened in the State.

 

Yes, they will be greatly lessened.

At present the governors, induced by the motives which I have named, treat their subjects badly; while they and their adherents, especially the young men of the governing class, are habituated to lead a life of luxury and idleness both of body and mind; they do nothing, and are incapable of resisting either pleasure or pain.

 

Very true.

They themselves care only for making money, and are as indifferent as the pauper to the cultivation of virtue.

 

Yes, quite as indifferent.

Such is the state of affairs which prevails among them. And often rulers and their subjects may come in one another's way, whether on a pilgrimage or a march, as fellow-soldiers or fellow-sailors; aye, and they may observe the behaviour of each other in the very moment of danger --for where danger is, there is no fear that the poor will be despised by the rich --and very likely the wiry sunburnt poor man may be placed in battle at the side of a wealthy one who has never spoilt his complexion and has plenty of superfluous flesh --when he sees such an one puffing and at his wit's end, how can he avoid drawing the conclusion that men like him are only rich because no one has the courage to despoil them? And when they meet in private will not people be saying to one another 'Our warriors are not good for much'?

 

Yes, he said, I am quite aware that this is their way of talking.

And, as in a body which is diseased the addition of a touch from without may bring on illness, and sometimes even when there is no external provocation a commotion may arise within-in the same way wherever there is weakness in the State there is also likely to be illness, of which the occasions may be very slight, the one party introducing from without their oligarchical, the other their democratical allies, and then the State falls sick, and is at war with herself; and may be at times distracted, even when there is no external cause.

 

Yes, surely.

And then democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the remainder they give an equal share of freedom and power; and this is the form of government in which the magistrates are commonly elected by lot.

 

Yes, he said, that is the nature of democracy, whether the revolution has been effected by arms, or whether fear has caused the opposite party to withdraw.

 

 


Aristotle:           On the Soul (Περ Ψυχς (Perď psyche), Latin De Anima    

Excerpts

 

Book I, Part 2

The starting-point of our inquiry is an exposition of those characteristics which have chiefly been held to belong to soul in its very nature. Two characteristic marks have above all others been recognized as distinguishing that which has soul in it from that which has not-movement and sensation. It may be said that these two are what our predecessors have fixed upon as characteristic of soul.

 

Some say that what originates movement is both pre-eminently and primarily soul; believing that what is not itself moved cannot originate movement in another, they arrived at the view that soul belongs to the class of things in movement. This is what led Democritus to say that soul is a sort of fire or hot substance; his 'forms' or atoms are infinite in number; those which are spherical he calls fire and soul, and compares them to the motes in the air which we see in shafts of light coming through windows; the mixture of seeds of all sorts he calls the elements of the whole of Nature …This implies the view that soul is identical with what produces movement in animals. That is why, further, they regard respiration as the characteristic mark of life; …

….

Part 3

There are four species of movement-locomotion, alteration, diminution, growth; consequently if the soul is moved, it must be moved with one or several or all of these species of movement.

….

Book II,

 Part 1

Let the foregoing suffice as our account of the views concerning the soul which have been handed on by our predecessors; let us now dismiss them and make as it were a completely fresh start, endeavouring to give a precise answer to the question, What is soul? i.e. to formulate the most general possible definition of it.

Among substances are by general consent reckoned bodies and especially natural bodies; for they are the principles of all other bodies. Of natural bodies some have life in them, others not; by life we mean self-nutrition and growth (with its correlative decay). It follows that every natural body which has life in it is a substance in the sense of a composite.

Part 4

…The soul is the cause or source of the living body. The terms cause and source have many senses. But the soul is the cause of its body alike in all three senses which we explicitly recognize. It is (a) the source or origin of movement, it is (b) the end, it is (c) the essence of the whole living body.

The process of nutrition involves three factors, (a) what is fed, (b) that wherewith it is fed, (c) what does the feeding; of these (c) is the first soul, (a) the body which has that soul in it, (b) the food.

 

Book 3

Part 1

there is no sixth sense in addition to the five enumerated-sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch

….

 

Part 9 …

Nature never makes anything without a purpose and never leaves out what is necessary…

Part 12 …

The nutritive soul then must be possessed by everything that is alive, and every such thing is endowed with soul from its birth to its death. For what has been born must grow, reach maturity, and decay-all of which are impossible without nutrition. Therefore the nutritive faculty must be found in everything that grows and decays.

Part 13 …

It is clear that the body of an animal cannot be simple, i.e. consist of one element such as fire or air. For without touch it is impossible to have any other sense; for every body that has soul in it must, as we have said, be capable of touch. All the other elements with the exception of earth can constitute organs of sense, but all of them bring about perception only through something else, viz. through the media.


Excerpt from Isaac Newton,

Preface to the Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica, 1686

But since the manual arts are chiefly conversant in the moving of bodies, it comes to pass that geometry is commonly referred to their magnitudes, and mechanics to their motion. In this sense rational mechanics will be the science of motions resulting from any forces whatsoever, and of the forces required to produce any motions, accurately proposed and demonstrated. This part of mechanics was cultivated by the ancients in the five powers which relate to manual arts, who considered gravity (it not being a manual power) no otherwise than as it moved weights by those powers. Our design, not respecting arts, but philosophy, and our subject, not manual, but natural powers, we consider chiefly those things which relate to gravity, levity, elastic force, the resistance of fluids, and the like forces, whether attractive or impulsive; and therefore we offer this work as mathematical principles of philosophy; for all the difficulty of philosophy seems to consist in this—from the phenomena of motions to investigate the forces of nature, and then from these forces to demonstrate the other phenomena; and to this end the general propositions in the first and second book are directed. In the third book we give an example of this in the explication of the system of the World; for by the propositions mathematically demonstrated in the first book, we there derive from the celestial phenomena the forces of gravity with which bodies tend to the sun and the several planets. Then, from these forces, by other propositions which are also mathematical, we deduce the motions of the planets, the comets, the moon, and the sea. I wish we could derive the rest of the phenomena of nature by the same kind of reasoning from mechanical principles; for I am induced by many reasons to suspect that they may all depend upon certain forces by which the particles of bodies, by some causes hitherto unknown, are either mutually impelled towards each other, and cohere in regular figures, or are repelled and recede from each other; which forces being unknown, philosophers have hitherto attempted the search of nature in vain; but I hope the principles here laid down will afford some light either to that or some truer method of philosophy.

 


HORMONE – Bayliss and Starling

Excerpts on the history of the Engish word, “hormone,” born circa 1902-1905

 

The first evidence that the gut was an endocrine organ was provided by William Bayliss (1860–1924) and Ernest H. Starling (1866–1927) who reported their discovery of secretin and its humoral regulatory role in 1902 [27]. Their observations highlighted the importance of the ‘ductless glands’ and provided evidence that ‘nervism’ was not the only mechanism controlling gut secretion. Bayliss and Starling, in a discovery ‘breathtaking in its elegant simplicity’ [28] noted that acid in the gut stimulated secretion of the pancreas when both organs were denervated. They concluded that since acid introduced directly into the circulation failed to cause this response, whereas injection of the jejunal mucosal extract did, that the action of acid on the gut was the effect of a chemical reflex. They proposed the name ‘secretin’ for the hypothetical chemical messenger involved, and suggested a new class of chemical substances that they grouped together under the term ‘hormone’ (derived from hormonos {I arouse to excitement}), initially proposed by W.B. Hardy (1864–1934). Starling in his Croonian Lecture of 1905, presciently noted the potential role of such agents in both secretion and as regulators of growth [29]. The discovery of a ‘chemical messenger’ initiated the development of endocrinology and the subsequent evolution of concepts that included the neuro-humoral regulation of body function as well as the brain-gut axis. As a result, the consideration of nervism as the only regulatory mechanism of the body waned and the advent of endocrinology was initiated. …

 

Modlin, Manish C. Champaneria, Jan Bornschein, Mark Kidd, “Evolution of the Diffuse Neuroendocrine System – Clear Cells and Cloudy Origins,”Neuroendocrinology 2006;84:69-82

 

Bayliss and Starling first communicated their discovery to the Royal Society only one week after the experiment (Bayliss & Starling, 1902a) and published the full account of the experiments leading to the discovery of secretin in The Journal of Physiology later that same year (Bayliss & Starling, 1902b). These experiments were important not only for the understanding of the regulation of exocrine pancreatic secretion, but for the wider recognition of chemical control of physiological functions. Starling developed his ideas of chemical control and these were elaborated in his series of four Croonian Lectures to the Royal College of Physicians, London in 1905 (Starling, 1905a,b,c,d). He introduced the term hormone, derived from ėρĶóω ([“hormon”] I arouse to activity) – this name suggested by Mr W. B. Hardy (Bayliss, 1924), to describe those chemical messengers which ‘have to be carried from the organ where they are produced to the organ which they affect by means of the blood stream’ (Starling, 1905a).              

 

Barry First, “Secretin and the exposition of hormonal control,” The Journal of Physiology, 2004, 560, 339.

See also the Original Classic Paper (J Physio Vol 18 (1902) 520pp, 325-353)

 

 

 

 

 

An interesting story concerning the genesis of the term hormone was narrated by the distinguished Cambridge biochemist Joseph Needham in his book Order and Life (1936). Starling was invited to dinner at Caius College Cambridge by the eminent biologist W.B. Hardy. During their conversation both decided that they needed a word for an agent released into the blood stream that stimulated activity in a different part of the body. They asked help of their colleague W.T. Vesey, an authority on Greek classical studies and especially on the work of the ancient poet Pindar, who frequently used the Greek verb [hormonos], denoting "excite" or "arouse", and Starling conserved the term in his note-book and in his mind until his first lecture. The author does not give the exact date of this historical dinner, thus the time between it and the first appearance of the word hormone remains unknown. It is probable that Needham was present at the dinner or that the story was told to him by another who heard it himself4.

It is noteworthy that John Smith of Brasenose College at Oxford had used the word hormetic 250 years before, in 1666, in the phrase "the hormetic power and contraction of the muscles". The verb " ėρĶóω" was used in the "Hippocratic Collection" with the same meaning (=to rush, to set in motion)10. For example, in the famous Hippocratic Treatise "Sacred Disease" it is mentioned that the corruption of the brane is caused by the phlegm and the bile ... when they rush (ταν ορμóσουν) to the brain from the rest of the body by way of the veins10.             

 

Effie Poulakou-Rebelakou, Costas Tsiamis, Spyros G. Marketos, “On the centenary of the term, hormone,” HORMONES 2005, 4(3):177-179

 

 

 

NB—the Greek letters may not be correct (computer problem!)


Endorphin (Wikipedia 4 July 2009)

Endorphins are endogenous opioid polypeptide compounds. They are produced by the pituitary gland and the hypothalamus in vertebrates during strenuous exercise,[1] excitement, pain, death, and orgasm,[2][3] and they resemble the opiates in their abilities to produce analgesia and a sense of well-being. Endorphins work as "natural pain relievers", whose effects may be enhanced by other medications.

The term "endorphin" implies a pharmacological activity (analogous to the activity of the corticosteroid category of biochemicals) as opposed to a specific chemical formulation. It consists of two parts: endo- and -orphin; these are short forms of the words endogenous and morphine, intended to mean "a morphine-like substance originating from within the body."[4]

The term endorphin rush has been adopted in popular speech to refer to feelings of exhilaration brought on by pain, danger, or other forms of stress,[1] supposedly due to the influence of endorphins. When a nerve impulse reaches the spinal cord, endorphins are released which prevent nerve cells from releasing more pain signals. Immediately after injury, endorphins allow humans to feel a sense of power and control over themselves that allows them to persist with activity for an extended time.

 

History

Opioid neuropeptides were first discovered in 1975 by two independent groups of investigators.

       John Hughes and Hans Kosterlitz of Scotland isolated — from the brain of a pig — what they called enkephalins (from the Greek εγκέφαλος, cerebrum).[5][6]

       Around the same time in the calf brain, Rabi Simantov and Solomon H. Snyder of the United States found[7] what Eric Simon (who independently discovered opioid receptors in the brain) later termed "endorphin" by an abbreviation of "endogenous morphine", which literally means "morphine produced naturally in the body".[4] Importantly, recent studies have demonstrated that diverse animal and human tissues are in fact capable of producing morphine itself, which is not a peptide.[8][9]

 

Mechanism of action

Beta-endorphin is released into the blood (from the pituitary gland) and into the spinal cord and brain from hypothalamic neurons. The beta-endorphin that is released into the blood cannot enter the brain in large quantities because of the blood-brain barrier. The physiological importance of the beta-endorphin that can be measured in the blood is far from clear: beta-endorphin is a cleavage product of pro-opiomelanocortin (POMC) which is also the precursor hormone for adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH). The behavioural effects of beta-endorphin are exerted by its actions in the brain and spinal cord, and probably the hypothalamic neurons are the major source of beta-endorphin at these sites. In situations where the level of ACTH is increased (e.g. Addison disease), the level of endorphins also increases slightly.

Beta-endorphin has the highest affinity for the μ1-opioid receptor, slightly lower affinity for the μ2- and δ-opioid receptors and low affinity for the κ1-opioid receptors. μ-receptors are the main receptor through which morphine acts. Classically, μ-receptors are presynaptic, and inhibit neurotransmitter release; through this mechanism, they inhibit the release of the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA, and disinhibit the dopamine pathways, causing more dopamine to be released. By hijacking this process, exogenous opioids cause inappropriate dopamine release, and lead to aberrant synaptic plasticity, which causes addiction. Opioid receptors have many other and more important roles in the brain and periphery however, modulating pain, cardiac, gastric and vascular function as well as possibly panic and satiation, and receptors are often found at postsynaptic locations as well as presynaptically.

 

Activity

Scientists debate whether specific activities release measurable levels of endorphins. Much of the current data comes from animal models which may not be relevant to humans. The studies that do involve humans often measure endorphin plasma levels, which do not necessarily correlate with levels in the CNS. Other studies use a blanket opioid antagonist (usually naloxone) to indirectly measure the release of endorphins by observing the changes that occur when any endorphin activity that might be present is blocked.

Capsaicin (the active chemical in red chili peppers) also has been shown to stimulate endorphin release.[10] Topical capsaicin has been used as a treatment for certain types of chronic pain.

 

Runner's high

Another widely publicized effect of endorphin production is the so-called "runner's high", which is said to occur when strenuous exercise takes a person over a threshold that activates endorphin production. Endorphins are released during long, continuous workouts, when the level of intensity is between moderate and high, and breathing is difficult. This also corresponds with the time that muscles use up their stored glycogen. During a release of Endorphin the person may be exposed to bodily harm from strenuous bodily functions after going past their body's physical limit. They may be able to keep running despite pain, and thus possibly come to bodily harm from endorphin release. Workouts that are most likely to produce endorphins to the extent of damage at the body's physical limit include, boxing, running, free running, swimming, cross-country skiing, long distance rowing, cycling, weight lifting, aerobics, a martial art such as muay thai, soccer, basketball, rugby, lacrosse, hockey, tennis, American football and other strenuous exercises.

However, some scientists question the mechanisms at work, their research possibly demonstrating the high comes from completing a challenge rather than as a result of exertion.[11] Studies in the early 1980s cast doubt on the relationship between endorphins and the runner's high for several reasons:

       The first was that when an antagonist (pharmacological agent that blocks the action for the substance under study) was infused (e.g. naloxone) or ingested (naltrexone) the same changes in mood state occurred as when the person exercised with no blocker.

A study in 2003 by Georgia Tech found that runner's high might be caused by the release of another naturally produced chemical, Anandamide. Anandamide is similar to the active endocannabinoid anandamide,[12][13] The authors suggest that the body produces this chemical to deal with prolonged stress and pain from strenuous exercise, similar to the original theory involving endorphins. However, the release of anandamide was not reported with the cognitive effects of the runner’s high; this suggests that anandamide release may not be significantly related to runner's high.[13]

In 2008, researchers in Germany reported that the myth of the runner's high was not a myth but was in fact true. Using PET scans combined with recently available chemicals that reveal endorphins in the brain, they were able to compare runners’ brains before and after a run.[14] The runners the researchers recruited were told that the opioid receptors in their brains were being studied, and did not realize that their endorphin levels were being studied in regard to the runner's high.

The participants were scanned and received psychological tests before and after a two-hour run. Data received from the study showed endorphins were produced during the exercise and were attaching themselves to areas of the brain associated with emotions (limbic and prefrontal areas).[15]

An investigated possiblity is that a molecule, such as anandamide carries endorphins through the blood-brain barrier, as endorphins are too large to cross the BBB by themselves. If not, endorphins may be produced in the brain itself.

It is now suggested by many that endorphins are some of the many chemicals that contribute to runner's high; other candidates include adrenaline, serotonin, dopamine and more.

 

Acupuncture

In 1999, clinical researchers reported that inserting acupuncture needles into specific body points triggers the production of endorphins.[16][17] In another study, higher levels of endorphins were found in cerebrospinal fluid after patients underwent acupuncture.[18] In addition, naloxone appeared to block acupuncture’s pain-relieving effects. However, skeptics say that not all studies point to that conclusion,[19] and that in a trial of chronic pain patients, endorphins did not produce long-lasting relief. Endorphins may be released during low levels of pain and physical stimulation when it lasts over 30 minutes. Questions remain as to whether the prolonged low level of pain stimulation as in Capsaicin, acupuncture and running or physical activity alone are the threshold that activates endorphin release.

References

       1 a b "The Reality of the "Runner's High"". UPMC Sports Medicine. University of Pittsburgh Schools of the Health Sciences. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       2 "'Sexercise' yourself into shape". Health. BBC News. 2006-02-11. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       3 "Get more than zeds in bed -". Mind & body magazine - NHS Direct. UK National Health Service. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       4 a b Goldstein A, Lowery PJ (September 1975). "Effect of the opiate antagonist naloxone on body temperature in rats". Life sciences 17 (6): 927–31. doi:10.1016/0024-3205(75)90445-2. PMID 1195988.

       5 "Role of endorphins discovered". PBS Online: A Science Odyssey: People and Discoveries. Public Broadcasting System. 1998-01-01. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       6 Hughes J, Smith T, Kosterlitz H, Fothergill L, Morgan B, Morris H (1975). "Identification of two related pentapeptides from the brain with potent opiate agonist activity". Nature 258 (5536): 577–80. doi:10.1038/258577a0. PMID 1207728.

       7 Simantov R, Snyder S (1976). "Morphine-like peptides in mammalian brain: isolation, structure elucidation, and interactions with the opiate receptor". Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 73 (7): 2515–9. doi:10.1073/pnas.73.7.2515. PMID 1065904.

       8 Poeaknapo C, Schmidt J, Brandsch M, Dräger B, Zenk MH (September 2004). "Endogenous formation of morphine in human cells". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101 (39): 14091–6. doi:10.1073/pnas.0405430101. PMID 15383669.

       9 Kream RM, Stefano GB (October 2006). "De novo biosynthesis of morphine in animal cells: an evidence-based model". Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research 12 (10): RA207–19. PMID 17006413.

       10 Klosterman L (2005-11-01). "Endorphins". Chronogram. Luminary Publishing, Inc.. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       11 Hinton E, Taylor S (1986). "Does placebo response mediate runner's high?". Percept Mot Skills 62 (3): 789–90. PMID 3725516.

       12 "Study links marijuana buzz to 'runner's high'". CNN.com. 2004-01-11. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       13 a b Sparling PB, Giuffrida A, Piomelli D, Rosskopf L, Dietrich A (December 2003). "Exercise activates the endocannabinoid system". Neuroreport 14 (17): 2209–11. doi:10.1097/01.wnr.0000097048.56589.47. PMID 14625449.

       14 Boecker H, Sprenger T, Spilker ME, Henriksen G, Koppenhoefer M, Wagner KJ, Valet M, Berthele A, Tolle TR (February 2008). "The Runner's High: Opioidergic Mechanisms in the Human Brain". Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) 18: 2523. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhn013. PMID 18296435.

       15 Kolata G (2008-03-27). "Yes, Running Can Make You High". Health. New York Times. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       16 Johnson C (1999-06-04). "Acupuncture works on endorphins". News in Science, ABC Science Online. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved on 2008-10-15.

       17 Napadow V, Ahn A, Longhurst J, Lao L, Stener-Victorin E, Harris R, Langevin HM (September 2008). "The status and future of acupuncture clinical research". Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.) 14 (7): 861–9. doi:10.1089/acm.2008.SAR-3. PMID 18803495.

       18 Clement-Jones V, McLoughlin L, Tomlin S, Besser G, Rees L, Wen H (1980). "Increased beta-endorphin but not met-enkephalin levels in human cerebrospinal fluid after acupuncture for recurrent pain". Lancet 2 (8201): 946–9. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(80)92106-6. PMID 6107591.

       19 Kenyon J, Knight C, Wells C (1983). "Randomised double-blind trial on the immediate effects of naloxone on classical Chinese acupuncture therapy for chronic pain". Acupunct Electrother Res 8 (1): 17–24. PMID 6135300.

 

This page was last modified on 3 July 2009 at 05:33.