“Viruses are often ignored in relation to neurodegenerative diseases,” Yale University neurobiologist Anthony van den Pol tells The Scientist. “That’s in part because there’s no clear sign that a virus causes a neurodegenerative disease. But it might.”
Some viruses can enter the body through the nose and mouth and move to the brain by replicating and spreading through the olfactory bulbs; the lingual nerve, which runs down the jawline and into the tongue; or the vagus nerve, which travels through the neck and thorax to the stomach.
Understanding how infections trigger the immune system, for example, could lead to ways to downregulate glia-driven inflammation in hopes of preventing long-term damage, he suggests.
The facts about how the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA links neurodegenerative diseases to cancer have been known to all serious scientists since the time researchers discovered the so-called “death gene.” A friend mentioned that this discovery was not publicized when it was first made during the early 1990s by researchers at Harvard and MIT.
I could not verify that claim, but it took less than 5 minutes to find this report:
Together, these results provide an in-depth analysis of miRNA dysregulation in glioblastoma and demonstrate the potential utility of these data in the design of miRNA-regulated therapies for the treatment of brain cancers.
The forthcoming treatment for all cancers was subsequently reported as A cure for cancer? Israeli scientists say they think they found one (1/28/19)
It became readily apparent that skeptics were terrified by these claims from: Israeli company that claims cure for cancer would face years of testing ahead for US market — even if it works (1/29/19)
Accelerated Evolution Biotechnologies (AEBi) claims to use peptides, a chain of amino acids, to target and kill cancer cells.
The company told the Jerusalem Post it will develop a cancer cure “within a year’s time” — but the company has only tested the treatment in mice so far.
An AEBi spokesman acknowledged in an email to CNBC that “complete cure for cancer meaning that we will have the complete solution ready for first tryout in humans.”
The claims were decried in Experts Decry Israeli Team’s Claims That They Have Found The Cure For Cancer (1/30/19)
My claims that the virus-driven degradation of messenger RNA caused all pathology had already been attacked and an anonymous participant in a “Reddit” discussion.
Hi, I came across this post because I had an interaction with this James V. Kohl while back on fb. To my worse juddgement, he kind of got me riled up and I said some rather stern words at him but otherwise innocuous things I called him out on. After searching myself on google, I see my name appears in his blog! He posted a couple things I allegedly said , claiming it is me along with my place of work from my fb profile so that they would come up together in a search. Also, he writes something about my comments towards him occuring on the day of the march for science which is neither here nor there. They don’t reveal anything to really worry about other than me accusing him of being a quack to make it look like I am trying to discredit him, a respectable scientist and that is not something someone at the Institute I work at would do to another scientist . He tries to play off everything with his seemingly impressive internet resume and has somehow, published his drivel somewhere, which appears on pubmed searches and uses that to legitimize himself. Go with your better judgment and do not engage with this individual. I am not surprised at all he has become a topic in reddit leading other burgeoning scientists towards confusion, but I see in all your comments your intincts on this guy are aligned, or the question of who he is would not have created this thread.
Anyone who participated in the so-called March for Science nonsense and referred to me as a quack while employed by an institute for the study of longevity should stay quiet.
Instead, see: Received via form submission from: rna-mediated.com/contact
3/2/19 I am imploring you to remove the tag of my name and institute from your website. You have no right to post misinformation about me in association with the ________ Institute. You can be assured my lawyer will contact you if you do not address this in a timely manner. You are not fooling anyone, and if you don’t want a legal battle on your hands I’d comply swiftly. You won’t win. You can keep your opinions on this as is but you had better respect my request.
3/2/19 Who gave you permission to post searchable misleading commentary on my client ________? You are being warned to remove this effective immediately.
The unnamed antagonist and his so-called attorney gave no details about what misleading commentary I was accused of posting. However, the antagonist works as a researcher on aging.
I’ve been presenting my research on aging since the early 1990s and my presentations include these two, which were made during Anti-Aging Medicine conferences in Las Vegas, Nevada.
1) 2nd Annual Conference on Anti-aging Medicine & Biomedical Technology for the year 2010
Olfactory-hormonal relationships in learning, memory, aging, and behavior (1994)
The early prenatal migration of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) neurosecretory neurons appears to enable a neuroendocrine sequence of events that allows human pheromones to influence postnatal GnRH secretion, maturation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis; and, in part, the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis; hormone-dependent synaptogenesis and synaptolysis; neurotransmission; learning; memory; and behavior. That GnRH regulates the collective neural output manifest in reproductive behavior seems consistent with effects of drug therapies that influence the GnRH pulse, and which are used to treat disorders of neuroendocrine and reproductive maturation as well as dysfunctional behaviors. Is the hypothalamic GnRH pulse generator both the biologic and the psychologic core of mammalian reproduction? What is the contribution of extrahypothalamic GnRH? Is there a lack of “hard” scientific evidence for relationships between biologically relevant odors, olfaction, aging, and human behavior?
In 1995, I published Scent of Eros with co-author Robert T. Francoeur and presented more detailed findings during:
2) 3rd Annual Conference on Anti-aging Medicine & Biomedical Technology for the year 2010
Olfactory-genetic-neuronal-hormonal reciprocity in learning, memory, behavior and in immune function. (1995)
A five-step pathway allowing the social environment (“nurture”) to influence the genetic substrates (“nature”) of mammalian behavior is: gene->cell->tissue->organ->organ system. Though there are many environmental influences on the first step of this pathway, odors are the only known social-environmental stimuli that appear to activate gene expression in neurosecretory cells of tissue in the brain an organ that is essential to any organ system involved in learning, memory, and behavior. Olfaction appears to influence learning, memory, and behavior. Thus, the production and distribution of human odors may link two aspects of our social environment (e.g., olfaction and odors) to the genetic substrates of our behavior through a five-step pathway common to many other vertebrates. Olfactory input influences the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-directed regulation of gonadal and adrenal steroidogenesis. Thus, olfactory deficits associated with aging may be linked to a need for hormone replacement therapy, including dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA). Similarly, olfactory deficits may be linked to immune system function. Many other hormones/neurotransmitters (e.g., melatonin and dopamine) feed back on the GnRH neuronal pathway. This pathway appears to be both the biological and the psychological core of mammalian, including human, behavior. Thus, the influence of odors and olfaction on levels of hormones, including neurotransmitters, may be linked to age-related changes in learning, memory, behavior, and immune system function.
The central focus of my life’s works has been the levels of biological organization that are required to link the creation of the sense of smell from subatomic particles to cytosis and healthy longevity as detailed for ages 10+ in the context of two games: Subatomic: An Atom-Building Board Game and Cytosis: A Cell Biology Board Game.
Antagonists who think I have misrepresented their positions, for comparison, should be more specific. Most of the time I’m not sure what they are complaining about. But see:
Here is a sample of JVK’s posting.
Ecological adaptation occurs via the epigenetic effects of nutrients on alternative splicings of pre-mRNA which result in amino acid substitutions that differentiate all cell types of all individuals of all species. The control of the differences in cell types occurs via the metabolism of the nutrients to chemical signals that control the physiology of reproduction.
The attack on my scientific credibility by the biologically uninformed science idiot PZ Myers has been cited many times in attacks by others such as his idiot minions. They refuse to learn anything about biophysically constrained cell type differentiation and can do nothing else but reassert their ignorance.
In this case, the attack by PZ Myers and his idiot minions ended when he banned me — after I provided experimental evidence that chromosomal rearrangements in white-throated sparrows were responsible for food energy-dependent pheromone-controlled biodiversity in two behavioral morphs.
Two fixed differences among 597 amino acids drive a Val73Ile and Ala552Thr (valine to alanine) polymorphism in ZAL2m that distinguish its morphological and behavioral phenotype from ZAL2.
PZ Myers insulted the intelligence of all serious scientist with his denigration of the works of John A Davison:
He had a “scientific” theory, which was his, which he thought explained all that evolutionary change while refuting those silly scientists who believed that mutations occurred. No! Evolution was all due to chromosome rearrangements, which somehow are not mutations, and he also somehow ignored the existence of allelic differences between species:
The light-activated assembly of the microRNA-RNA-peptide nanocomplex links the physiology of reproduction to biophyically constrained allelic differences between all species via fixation of amino acid substitutions and chromosomal rearrangements.