All posts by medical

Anatomy

The Study of Human Anatomy and the Corpses of Vienna – JSTOR Daily

From antiquity to todays medical schools, dissection of cadavers has been one of the key ways doctors and scientists have learned about the human body. But its also often been a controversial practice. As scholar of medical history Tatjana Buklijas explains, for much of the nineteenth century, no place offered easier access to corpses than Vienna.

In medieval and early modern Europe, Buklijas writes, medical researchers dissected the bodies of executed criminals. Around 1800, as scientific interest in anatomy broadened, various nations began shifting to give anatomists access to the corpses of the poor. For example, the British government was troubled byscientifically motivated grave robbery, which sometimes targeted the graves of the middle and upper classes. So it passed the 1832 Anatomy Act, allowing the dissection of those who died in workhouses. Meanwhile, American medical students stole the bodies of recently deceased African-Americans.

But by the mid-nineteenth century, Buklijas writes, Vienna became an essential stop on the educational tours of foreign, largely American and German, students, for the opportunity it offered to practice dissection.

Why Vienna? Buklijas points first to diverging in attitudes toward death in North and South Europe. Other historians have argued that southern Europeans traditionally saw a death as a sudden, complete separation of body and soul. Northerners, on the other hand, believed the process was more gradual, making dissection dicier. Vienna sat on the North-South border, but through the end of the eighteenth century, it served as the capital city of the Hapsburg Empire, which had adopted Italian-style Roman Catholicism. The Hapsburgs followed the papal custom of having their own bodies embalmed, with their hearts, intestines, and the remainder of their bodies buried at different churches. In Vienna, unlike in many other places, dissected corpses were buried with respectful religious ritual.

The citys medical establishment was also centralized. The General Hospital, founded in 1784, was the largest in Europe. It worked closely with the University of Vienna, allowing faculty to examine patients in life and use their bodies after their death as a fair repayment for the free medical care they had received in the hospital, Buklijas writes.

Karl Rokitansky, who was the hospitals chief pathologist and a well-known anatomy professor in the mid- to late nineteenth century, had an extraordinary level of power over the entire process of obtaining corpses. Buklijas finds that he not only controlled the use of unclaimed cadavers from hospitals but enjoyed the secret privilege of claiming any body buried in Vienna. In an 1867 letter, Rokitansky explained that, at his request, the chief municipal public health official would tell the gravedigger to only bury a body shallowly. Later, he would send someone to dig it up. There was no danger of protests from the families of the deceased because the gravediggers were bound by an oath of silence, Buklijas writes.

Evidently, that sneaky collusion to steal corpses helped provide an education for a generation of international medical students.

Support JSTOR Daily! Join our new membership program on Patreon today.

JSTOR is a digital library for scholars, researchers, and students. JSTOR Daily readers can access the original research behind our articles for free on JSTOR.

By: TATJANA BUKLIJAS

Bulletin of the History of Medicine, Vol. 82, No. 3 (Fall 2008), pp. 570-607

The Johns Hopkins University Press

Read the original:
The Study of Human Anatomy and the Corpses of Vienna - JSTOR Daily

Anatomy

Anatomy of a Goal: Breaking down the goal that finished off the Union last week – Brotherly Game

Entering the 90, the Philadelphia Union were just down by a goal in Frisco. Jim Curtin made a change in the lineup, bringing Jack Eliott on for Matt Real. You may be asking yourself why I bring this up. Its a simple one, the formation changed to what appears to be a 3-5-2.

After the sub, the U are on their side of the field and throw the ball back into play. From there the ball gets passed back to goalkeeper, Andre Blake to reset the play. Black sends the ball upfield, where Dallas gets on the end of it.

Dallas Paxton Pomykal is on the end of a short pass and starts to go full steam ahead towards the Unions goal.

As you watch the replay of the goal, you can see just how open Pomykal was for Dallas. You can see Alejandro Bedoya and Mark McKenzie are both way off of Pomykal. Which Philadelphia Union color analyst perfectly calls out how the fact the Union look tired.

As he gets closer to the 18 yard box, the Unions defense continues to back pedal. Pomykal enters the penalty area drops the pass off to a teammate, and continues to run to the other edge of the box.

As he runs behind his teammate, Pomykal gets feed the ball again. Jakob Glesnes misreads the play thinking it was a pass to Dallas Zdenek Ondrasek.

However, Pomykal keeps the ball and dribbles around Ondrasek, where he also beats Ray Gaddis and finds an opening for a cross-body shot. Putting the ball to the left side of an outstretching Blake. Where the ball just touches the goalpost and goes into the upper corner of the net. Handing the boys in blue their first loss of the season. Dallas wins the game 2-0.

See more here:
Anatomy of a Goal: Breaking down the goal that finished off the Union last week - Brotherly Game

Anatomy

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Anatomy of a cover-upPart 1 – World Socialist Web Site

The Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Anatomy of a cover-upPart 1 By Alice Summers 3 March 2020

The following is the first part of a three-part series on the Phase 1 report of the Grenfell Tower Inquiry. Phase 1 concluded last December. Phase two of the Inquiry opened this week, with witnesses from the corporations and organisations whose actions caused the deaths of 72 people granted immunityby the Attorney General from any prosecution that might result from their testimony.

The report from Phase 1 of the Grenfell Inquiry, limited to considering the events on the night of the fire, is a whitewash designed to obscure the real causes of the fire and direct blame towards the London Fire Brigade (LFB).

While the 900-page report is valuable in its examination of the types of dangerous construction materials used at Grenfell Tower and their role in promoting the spread of fire, it largely ignores or minimises the criminality of cost-cutting companies and a complicit Conservative Party-run local authority. Through their decisions to use these materials, they bear direct responsibility for the devastating fire.

A 40-page section at the end of the report is dedicated to remembering the 72 people who died at Grenfell Tower. Based on the testimony given by friends and family members, it is a moving commemoration of their lives.

The report provides a forensic, minute-by-minute presentation of the June 14, 2017 catastrophe. It is harrowing in its description of the horrors faced by residents and firefighters as they tried to escape or tackle the fire.

The report makes use of witness testimony from survivors, firefighters and Control Room Operators (CROs) to form its account, as well as transcripts from 999 calls and phone calls between trapped residents and their loved ones outside the tower.

Survivors and the relatives of those who lost their lives showed enormous bravery in reliving their experiences.

From early into the night of the fire, Grenfell Towers inhabitants were already encountering terrible conditions, with the fire rapidly spreading up the building, and flats, lobbies and stairwells filling up with toxic smoke.

Nicholas Burton, who lived with his wife Maria Del Pilar Burton in Flat 165 on floor 19, was awoken by banging on his door shortly after 1:30a.m. He was confronted by a wall of acrid, black smoke as he opened his front door, similar to when a tyre is on fire. Maria sadly passed away in hospital as a result of the fire.

Other survivors of the fire describe their efforts to escape their homes, only to be confronted with thick, black smoke, making breathing almost impossible and reducing visibility. Many were forced to return to their flats.

Samuel Daniels describes the agonising experience of being forced to leave behind his elderly and frail father, Joseph--who died in the doorway of his home in Grenfell Tower--as he attempted to escape their 16th floor flat. As Samuel opened his front door, thick black smoke poured into the flat [making] him feel lightheaded and caus[ing] his knees to buckle. He called to Joseph to leave the flat with him, but his father, who suffered from dementia, was stubborn and disorientated and was unable to follow his instructions. Firefighters, informed by Samuel of his fathers presence and illness, tried to reach Joseph but failed.

Transcripts from 999 calls show the impossible situation faced by trapped inhabitants with disabilities, who could not evacuate on their own and who firefighters struggled but were unable to reach.

The report describes the ordeal of residents who attempted to leave the building, before succumbing to the terrible conditions in the stairwells and lobbies. Lina Hamide, who had lived in Flat 74 on floor 10, tried to flee sometime after 4:00 a.m. Struggling to breathe, she made it down two flights of stairs before collapsing. She survived after being carried out of the tower by firefighters.

Yehualashet Enyew lived on floor 18 and made an escape attempt with his neighbor, Paulos Tekle, after 3:00 a.m. Yehualashet tried to help Mr Tekles five-year old son, Isaac Paulos, holding his hand and helping him down the stairs with firefighters leading the way. With smoke thickening, Yehualashet realised halfway down the stairs that he had lost Isaac and began to lose consciousness. Isaac died and Yehualashet felt that he could not have survived without the help of a firefighter.

The bodies of many residents were later found on the stairs.

The report quotes Saber Nedas last heartbreaking voicemail left for his brother-in-law, Habibrahman Abdulrahman, in which he said, Goodbye. We are now leaving this world, goodbye. I hope I havent disappointed you. Goodbye to all.

Saber Nedas body was later found in the childrens playground on the west side of the tower. He had jumped after leaving the voicemail message.

In the last telephone call between Mariem Elgwahry and her brother Ahmed Elgwahry, who was standing outside at the bottom of the tower, Ahmed repeatedly tried to encourage his sister to leave. Mariem felt unable to do so: No. I cant get out. The landing is filled with thick black smoke and I cant see, she said. Ahmed believed that his sister had not wanted to leave because it would have meant leaving Eslah Elgwahry, their disabled mother, behind.

According to thermal imaging cameras used by firefighters on the night, temperatures in Grenfell Tower reached 1,080C and photos included in the report show lobbies and hallways filled with dense smoke.

Firefighters attempting to tackle the fire did so under almost impossible conditions, with many testifying that they had never witnessed a fire of this scope before. Watch Manager (WM) Michael Dowden, in charge of the LFBs response for the first hour of the fire, says in his oral evidence:

There were probably moments where I did feel helpless Its a very, very difficult place to be as an incident commander when its justits just relentless. We can usually try and control and get a grip on the dynamic stage of an incident, but this was like nothing else I had ever experienced before. The ferocity, the way that fire was developing, it was just relentless.

Grenfell Tower fire Inquiry chairman Sir Moore-Bick noted the bravery shown by firefighters on the night, stating that they displayed enormous courage and selfless devotion to duty. In many cases they pushed themselves to, and even beyond, the limits of endurance in their attempt to fight the fire and to rescue those who remained in the building.

The toll on CROs, who responded to 999 calls, is noted in the report, and they are praised as having borne the personal consequences of that night with remarkable fortitude. Moore-Bick observes that the psychological cost to them must not be underestimated.

Yet both CROs and firefighters receive harsh criticism in the report, often targeted at individual officers, including the relatively junior-ranking WM Dowden, who Moore-Bick says failed in their professional duty. The Fire Brigades Union (FBU), in its response to the report, points out this personalised micro-criticism of individual control staff detracts from the real failures. Control staff were under-resourced, not trained for such a fire and faced huge uncertainties on the night.

Sener Macit, who lived in Flat 133 on floor 16, describes in his witness testimony the descent from his flat to escape the tower and the effect that the smoke-logged stairwells were having on both residents and firefighters.

As he and his wife went down the stairs, with the smoke so thick that they coughed constantly and struggled to breathe even with damp cloths over their faces, they came across the bodies of other people on the stairs. Macit describes encountering two firefighters around floor 10, who despite his calls for help were unable to assist him, as one looked like he was about to pass out.

According to the report, many of the firefighters entering the tower to rescue residents were working far beyond the normal limits of their breathing apparatus (BA), with many wearers being deployed beyond the number of times that standard procedures allow. Many senior commanders expressed concern about how quickly their BA resources were being used up.

Firefighters deployed inside the tower also had significant difficulties coordinating their efforts with the command bridgehead, as radio equipment often could not establish a connection. By around 5:30 a.m., firefighters found smoke to be so dense that their radios were not working beyond floor five.

Tackling the fire from within the tower also proved difficult due to the ferocity of its spread, inadequate equipment and low water pressure. Firefighter Alan Sime said that by around 3:00 a.m., the efforts of he and his colleague, Ernest Okoh, were making little impact on the flames on floor five. They were having to fight the fire lying on their stomachs; visibility was down to one foot and they could not see their hands.

Two other firefighters, Oliver Desforges and Richard Mitchell, who had been deployed to the tower around 4:00 a.m., said that low water pressure had prevented them from effectively containing or extinguishing fires in the flats on floor four, all of which were completely alight.

Firefighters struggled to use hoses or wet risers due to insufficient water supplies, and by around 5:50 a.m., Assistant Commissioner (AC) Andrew Roe had to make the decision to stop deploying firefighting crews above floor 12. By around 6:30 a.m., fire crews found there was no water above floor six due to a defective rising water main.

The fire brigade was unable to take control of firefighting lifts in Grenfell Tower, a problem which Moore-Bick notes is relevant to the circumstances in which some residents came to lose their lives. A 42-metre high aerial fire-fighting platform had to be brought in from the neighbouring county of Surrey, as the tallest appliances owned by the LFBwhich covers a population of nearly 9 million over an area 1,500 km2only reached 32 metres in height.

To be continued

The author also recommends:

Grenfell Inquiry witnesses granted immunity from prosecution resulting from oral evidence [2 March 2020]

Two years since the Grenfell inferno: The case for socialism [14 June 2019]

The political implications of the Grenfell Tower fire [27 June 2017]

The political implications of the Grenfell Tower fire [23 August 2017]

2019 has been a year of mass social upheaval. We need you to help the WSWS and ICFI make 2020 the year of international socialist revival. We must expand our work and our influence in the international working class. If you agree, donate today. Thank you.

More here:
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry: Anatomy of a cover-upPart 1 - World Socialist Web Site

Anatomy

Former ‘Grey’s Anatomy’ Star Kate Walsh Reunites With a ‘Private Practice’ Co-Star — What Is the Cast up to in 2020? – Showbiz Cheat Sheet

Before there was Station 19, there was another Greys Anatomy spinoff: Private Practice. The series followed Kate Walshs Addison Montgomery as she left Seattle for sunny Los Angeles, joining the practice of a a close friend. Its been over seven years since the series came to an end. Heres a look at what the cast is busy with in 2020.

Before Greys and Private Practice, Walsh was a relatively unknown actress. In the years since, she landed two more notable roles, in the short-lived sitcom Bad Judge and the teen drama 13 Reasons Why. Walsh recurred in season 1 of The Umbrella Academy and is set to appear in the upcoming series Emily in Paris.

In March 2020, Walsh met up with her former co-star Amy Brenneman, who portrayed psychiatrist Turner for all six seasons. Unlike Walsh, Brenneman had a very established career before Private Practice. She was nominated for multiple Emmys for her roles on NYPD Blue and Judging Amy.

Though she has done a number of movies of the years, Brenneman is still best known for her TV work. She starred in the supernatural series The Leftovers from 2014-2017. She also has a lead role in the upcoming Hulu thriller series The Old Man.

Paul Adelstein (far right) portrayed pediatrician Cooper Freedman in Private Practice for all six seasons. Before the series, he was best known for his lead role in the drama Prison Break. Since the show ended, Adelstein has had prominent roles in Scandal and Girlfriends Guide to Divorce. He currently recurs on Chicago P.D.

KaDee Strickland portrayed Charlotte King, the chief of staff at a hospital close to the practice whose role changes throughout the series run. This is still considered her most notable role to date. In addition to scattered film roles, Strickland was a part of the main cast of Secrets and Lies Season 1 and the two-season Hulu drama Shut Eye.

Taye Diggs portrayed internal medicine specialist Sam Bennett for all six seasons of Private Practice. Diggs has a storied career, having gotten his start on Broadway. He has starred in a number of films such as How Stella Got Her Groove Back and Chicago. Diggs has also maintained a strong presence on TV over the years, in shows like Murder in the First, Empire, and All American.

Tim Daly portrayed alternative medicine physician Pete Wilder in the first five seasons of Private Practice. Prior to landing the role, he starred in short-lived series such as The Fugitive and The Nine. He also earned an Emmy nomination for his recurring role in The Sopranos. Daly starred in Madam Secretary throughout its own six-season run.

Caterina Scorsone joined the cast of Private Practice as neurosurgeon Amelia Shepherd in season 3, remaining on the show until its end. Prior to joining, she starred in Canadian series Power Play and Missing. After Private Practice ended, Scorsone came over to Greys Anatomy, where she remains a part of the main cast today.

Audra McDonald portrayed fertility specialist Naomi Bennett on Private Practice for the first four seasons. She turned as a guest in season 6. McDonald, like her on-screen ex-husband, comes from a musical theater background, and some may recognize her from her role as Grace in the 1999 film version of Annie. McDonald currently stars in the legal drama The Good Fight.

The rest is here:
Former 'Grey's Anatomy' Star Kate Walsh Reunites With a 'Private Practice' Co-Star -- What Is the Cast up to in 2020? - Showbiz Cheat Sheet

Neuroscience

BioXcel Therapeutics Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2019 Financial Results and Provides Business Update – BioSpace

NEW HAVEN, Conn., March 09, 2020 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- BioXcel Therapeutics, Inc. (BTI or Company) (Nasdaq: BTAI), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company utilizing artificial intelligence to identify improved therapies in neuroscience and immuno-oncology, today announced its quarterly results for the fourth quarter and full year ended December 31, 2019 and provided an update on key strategic and operational initiatives.

2019 has been a tremendous year for BTI. We have made significant growth in our two programs BXCL501 and BXCL701 laying the groundwork to achieve key milestones in the coming years, stated Vimal Mehta, Chief Executive Officer of BTAI. In neuroscience, we have made momentous advancements in the clinical development of BXCL501 and look forward to announcing topline results from our SERENITY program and our Phase 1b/2 TRANQUILITY trial in dementia-related agitation in mid-2020. Additionally, we have been dedicated to expanding the potential therapeutic use of BXCL501, announcing a fourth indication last month as well as examining biomarkers that may have relevance for a range of hyperarousal disorders. We believe these therapeutic opportunities, along with our plans to investigate BXCL501 for the treatment of all types of agitation, are crucial steps to building out a leading neuroscience franchise.

Dr. Mehta added, In addition to our ongoing studies with BXCL701 in prostate and pancreatic cancers, we are also evaluating this immuno-oncology candidate, in combination with KEYTRUDA, in multiple advanced solid tumors with the goal of improving treatment responses to this PD-1 inhibitor. We believe this basket trial, led by researchers at MD Anderson, will help to accelerate the evaluation of BXCL701 and help to explore its full potential.

Fourth Quarter 2019 and Recent Highlights

BXCL501-Neuroscience Program BXCL501 is an investigational sublingual thin film of dexmedetomidine, a selective alpha-2A adrenergic receptor agonist, designed for the treatment of acute agitation. The Company believes BXCL501 may directly target a causal agitation mechanism.

BXCL701-Immuno-Oncology Program-BXCL701 is an orally-delivered small molecule, innate immunity activator designed to inhibit dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP) 8/9 and block immune evasion by targeting Fibroblast Activation Protein (FAP). It has shown single agent activity in melanoma and safety has been evaluated in more than 700 healthy subjects and cancer patients.

Strengthened Balance Sheet

Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2019 Financial Results

BTI reported a net loss of $8.3 million for the fourth quarter of 2019, compared to a net loss of $7.1 million for the same period in 2018. The fourth quarter 2019 results include approximately $0.7 million in non-cash stock based compensation.

Research and development expenses were $6.5 million for the fourth quarter of 2019, as compared to $6.0 million for the same period in 2018. The increase was primarily due to an increase in professional research and related project costs, salary, and related payroll costs, manufacturing costs offset in part by a decrease in clinical trial expenses.

General and administrative expenses were $1.9 million for the fourth quarter of 2019, as compared to $1.3 million for the same period in 2018. The increase was primarily due to increases in salary, and related payroll costs and professional fees.

BTI reported a net loss of $33.0 million for the full year 2019, compared to a net loss of $19.3 million for the same period in 2018.

Research and development expenses were $25.8 million for full year 2019, as compared to $14.6 million for the same period in 2018. The increase was primarily due to clinical trial costs, salary and related payroll costs, professional research and project costs and manufacturing costs.

General and administrative expenses were $7.8 million for full year 2019, as compared to $5.4 million for the same period in 2018. The increase was primarily due to salary and related payroll costs and professional fees.

As of December 31, 2019, cash and cash equivalents totaled approximately $32.4 million.

Please note that these numbers do not include our recent financing, which secured $60 million in net proceeds.

Conference Call:BTI will host a conference call and webcast today at 8:30 a.m. ET. To access the call, please dial 877-407-2985 (domestic) and 201-378-4915 (international). A live webcast of the call will be available on the Investors sections of the BTI website at http://www.bioxceltherapeutics.com. The replay will be available through March 23, 2020.

About BioXcel Therapeutics, Inc.:

BioXcel Therapeutics, Inc. is a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company focused on drug development that utilizes artificial intelligence to identify improved therapies in neuroscience and immuno-oncology. BTI's drug re-innovation approach leverages existing approved drugs and/or clinically evaluated product candidates together with big data and proprietary machine learning algorithms to identify new therapeutic indices. BTI's two most advanced clinical development programs are BXCL501, an investigational sublingual thin film formulation in development for acute treatment of agitation resulting from neuropsychiatric disorders, and BXCL701, an investigational orally administered systemic innate immunity activator in development for treatment of a rare form of prostate cancer and for treatment of pancreatic cancer in combination with other immuno-oncology agents. For more information, please visit http://www.bioxceltherapeutics.com.

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements in this press release include but are not limited to the timing and data from clinical development initiatives and trials for BXCL501 and BXCL701, the Companys cash runway and the Companys future growth and position to execute on key milestones. When used herein, words including anticipate, being, will, plan, may, continue, and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. In addition, any statements or information that refer to expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, performance or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking. All forward-looking statements are based upon BTI's current expectations and various assumptions. BTI believes there is a reasonable basis for its expectations and beliefs, but they are inherently uncertain.

BTI may not realize its expectations, and its beliefs may not prove correct. Actual results could differ materially from those described or implied by such forward-looking statements as a result of various important factors, including, without limitation, its limited operating history; its incurrence of significant losses; its need for substantial additional funding and ability to raise capital when needed; its limited experience in drug discovery and drug development; its dependence on the success and commercialization of BXCL501 and BXCL701 and other product candidates; the failure of preliminary data from its clinical studies to predict final study results; failure of its early clinical studies or preclinical studies to predict future clinical studies; its ability to receive regulatory approval for its product candidates; its ability to enroll patients in its clinical trials; undesirable side effects caused by BTIs product candidates; its approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on EvolverAI is novel and unproven; its exposure to patent infringement lawsuits; its ability to comply with the extensive regulations applicable to it; its ability to commercialize its product candidates; and the other important factors discussed under the caption Risk Factors in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 as such factors may be updated from time to time in its other filings with the SEC, which are accessible on the SECs website at http://www.sec.gov.

These and other important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those indicated by the forward-looking statements made in this press release. Any such forward-looking statements represent managements estimates as of the date of this press release. While BTI may elect to update such forward-looking statements at some point in the future, except as required by law, it disclaims any obligation to do so, even if subsequent events cause our views to change. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing BTIs views as of any date subsequent to the date of this press release.

BIOXCEL THERAPEUTICS, INC.

BALANCE SHEETS

(amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

BIOXCEL THERAPEUTICS, INC.

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

BIOXCEL THERAPEUTICS, INC.

STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY (DEFICIT)

(amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

BIOXCEL THERAPEUTICS, INC.

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(amounts in thousands, except share and per share data)

Contact Information:

BioXcel Therapeutics, Inc.www.bioxceltherapeutics.com

Investor Relations:John Grazianojgraziano@troutgroup.com1.646.378.2942

Media:Julia Deutschjdeutsch@troutgroup.com1.646.378.2967

Read more:
BioXcel Therapeutics Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2019 Financial Results and Provides Business Update - BioSpace

Neuroscience

Helmets protect athletes’ skulls. Will the NFL use neuroscience to protect their brains? – Salon

As a spectator, it's easy to forget the long term consequences of 300 pound humans crashing intoeach other atover 20 miles per hour. But this is the reality of American football. During play, thebrainis one of the most susceptible parts of the body and thelong-termdanger may remain hidden until years after retirement.

Newsafety rulesand improved helmetsprevent injuries such as skull fractures. Butno amount of training or equipmentis yet known to prevent concussions, internal brain injuries caused when the brain shakes back and forth, orchronic traumatic encephalopathy(CTE), the neurodegenerative disease that results from accumulated hits to the head. The best thing we can do is stop playing these types of sports. The second best option is to mitigate the risks.

The NFL is plagued with controversy over the league's relationship with head injuries. Traditional helmets are designed to prevent skull fractures. However, concussions are not just blunt force trauma, but results ofrotational forcesexerted when the head snaps back and forth.

If the NFL wants to get serious about concussion prevention, as many believe they morally have a responsibility to do, independent neuroscience has to have a leading role in how helmets are designed.While the NFL denies bias in how they use science, it is impossible to deny that they have a large financial interest in the results, and this has led to questionable measures on head protection. From1994 to 2009, the NFL actually employed their own researchcommittee. But the committee was overhauled in 2009 after criticismfromCongressfor their continued denial of the link between football and brain disease.

And then there are equipment companies like Riddell, which wassuedby thousands of former NFL playersin 2013for falsely claiming that players using their Revolution helmet were31 percent less likelyto get a concussion. Riddell based their marketing on a study of their new helmet by scientists at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Even when the authors of the paper informed Riddell that their interpretation of their results was wrong (the actual reduction was closer to 2 percent), Riddell failed to alter the original claim.

Advertisement:

Science's approach for the modern American football helmet

If you've ever been a passenger in a car that suddenly slams on its breaks, you know a little of what it's like to be tackled. You probably fall forward, kept in your seat by your seat belt. The car stopped, but you were still rapidly accelerating. You experienced a linear force.Measurementson a college player showed the average acceleration of 10 hits he took during a single game. Each hit was roughly equivalent to what you would feel if you crashed a car into a wall going about 30 miles per hour.

Understanding of concussions and CTE has evolved significantly over the past few years and helmet designs are now just starting to catch up with the research. For example, scientists oncethoughtthat a concussion only bruised the outer grey matter surface of the brain.New researchpublished over the past five years demonstrates that the brain doesn't bruise, but does experience rotational forces and damage extending to white matter, deep tissue in the brain, as the fibers in white matter pull and twist upon impact.

Designing a better helmet is about being creative about reducing the rapid deceleration of the brain upon impact. In 2013,the start up companyVICISset out to create a helmet based on this current medical knowledge, with neurosurgeons, concussion specialists, and former NFL team physicians as advisers. Their approach focused on rotational forces on the brain instead of just linear ones.

Thanks to the more than $85 million raised,$1.1 million from the NFL, they launched the ZERO1 helmetin 2016. This product has a "reflex layer inside the shell composed of dozens of separate columns of padding, which bend, compress, and move in response to force in every direction, whether it's linear or rotational. The helmet also has a "deformable outer shell that morphs its shape when hit, acting like a car bumper to absorb the blow. Sinceaccelerationis speed divided by time, you can reduce acceleration by either decreasing speed or prolonging the time of the impact. The idea behind the car bumper properties of ZERO1 is that it increases thetime of impact.

In 2018,120 professional and college teamswore the ZERO1. Performance testing suggests that this collaborative approach between scientists and sports was working. The ZERO1 football helmet wasranked #1in ability to reduce force to the head in the NFL's and NFL Player Association helmet laboratory performance testing from 2017-2019, every year it has been available.

While this innovative helmet design washailedby neuroscientists, players, and sports leagues alike, VICIS did not survive competition with Schutt and Riddell, the two dominant companies in the helmet industry. In late 2019, VICIS announced it wasout of money.

Other scientists are taking up the challenge to build a better helmet.David Camarillois not just an Assistant Professorat Stanford University, he is also a former college football tight end. In 2013,his research labdevelopedcomputerized mouth guardsto help accurately chart head acceleration data upon head impacts.

While most helmets use solids to absorb energy, like foam or the columns in the VICIS ZERO1, the Camarillo lab'sapproach introduces liquid into thehelmetwith the idea that liquids can absorb more energy than solids. Camarillo compares the design to a "hydraulic shock absorber." The team used computer simulations of an NFL impact test and compared the liquid approach with four other helmets with different energy absorption technologies. Results from hisstudysuggest that the helmet reduces the average brain tissue strain upon impact by about 25 percent and could reduce concussions by at least 75 percent. However, as these results are still based entirely on computer simulations, the safety and logistics of building an actual helmet are still in research stages.

A concussion is not the same as CTE

While these new helmets are intended to prevent concussions, singular events caused by one hit, they may still be insufficient to protect against CTE.CTEis a neurodegenerative disease resulting from cumulative hits, whether they are concussive or not, that occur many times over many years. CTE is nearly impossible to study as symptoms almost never occur until many years or decades after repeated head trauma and positive diagnosis is only possible through anautopsy after death.

Ann McKee is a neuropathologist and expert in neurodegenerative diseases. She also directs Boston University's CTE Center. Her2017paper became famous when it suggested that 99 percent of former NFL players showed pathological evidence of CTE based on data collected from former players whose brains had been donated to Boston brain banks. The paper was scrutinized on the grounds that brains donated for CTE diagnosis may be biased towards CTE presence (i.e. family members saw the signs while the donor was alive). Her2019article enhances the correlation by being the first paper to include a non-football playing control group.

Experts are still trying to understand how head injuries, concussions, and other factors change the brain to cause CTE.Some scientists, such as the VICIS team and the Camarillo lab, believe that reducing the fierceness of the hardest hits that result in isolated concussions through more effective helmets will reduce the number and severity of CTE cases.

In the past decade, the NFL has spent over$200 million on concussion research, with multi-million dollar contributions in2016and2018. However, at leastsome of that researchhas been overshadowed by what seems on the surface like a practice of funding labs associated with the NFL while withholding funds from labs that are critical of the organization. Players' lives are at stake and it is beyond time that the multi-billion dollar organizations that run this sport start putting players over profits. New helmet designs may be exciting parts of the solution, but only if the goal remains focused on sparing participants a lifetime of brain damage. In mid-November 2019, the NFL announced a$2 million grant competitionto create a new "top performing helmet." Let's hope that it will go to unbiased researchers with good intentions.

View post:
Helmets protect athletes' skulls. Will the NFL use neuroscience to protect their brains? - Salon

Neuroscience

Washington University to break ground on major neuroscience research hub Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis – Washington…

Visit the News Hub

New construction will inspire discovery, collaboration, faculty recruitment at School of Medicine

Washington University in St. Louis will begin construction in March on an 11-story, 609,000-square-foot neuroscience research building on the School of Medicine campus. The project initially will bring together more than 100 research teams focused on solving the many mysteries of the brain and the bodys nervous system.

Washington University in St. Louis will begin construction in March on what will be one of the largest neuroscience research buildings in the country. Located on the School of Medicine campus, the 11-story, state-of-the-art research facility will merge, cultivate and advance some of the worlds leading neuroscience research.

The 609,000-square-foot facility and interconnected projects initially will bring together over 100 research teams focused on solving the many mysteries of the brain and the bodys nervous system. Those teams, comprising some 875 researchers, will come from a wide array of disciplines, including the medical schools neurology, neuroscience, neurosurgery, psychiatry and anesthesiology departments.

Washington University is one of the premier institutions in the world in neuroscience research, with faculty known for their contributions to the understanding of normal brain development, how nerve cells communicate, neuroimaging, neurological diseases such as Alzheimers disease, and surgical treatments for cerebral palsy, among other contributions, said Chancellor Andrew D. Martin. With this new building, we are able to offer the neuroscience community a central home and a laboratory environment that can inspire entirely new concepts that allow us to grasp a much deeper understanding of the brain and have a global impact on health and science.

The School of Medicine has a long history as one of the worlds foremost centers for neuroscience research, including as a leading institution in the study of Alzheimers disease. Its scientists have identified key molecules involved in sculpting nervous system development and triggers of neurodegenerative diseases, mapped connections from brain region to brain region, and developed pioneering surgical treatments for nerve injuries, among other groundbreaking discoveries.

David H. Perlmutter, MD, executive vice chancellor for medical affairs, the George and Carol Bauer Dean of the School of Medicine, and the Spencer T. and Ann W. Olin Distinguished Professor, said the new facility will open the door to bold new research initiatives and partnerships.

Understanding the brain is key to addressing some of the most devastating afflictions that affect mankind, Perlmutter said. So many of us have been touched by the inexorable decline of our loved ones due to diseases and conditions such as Alzheimers and Parkinsons, brain trauma, glioblastoma and severe mental illness, and we have learned that the development of effective therapies has proven formidable. As scientists, we believe that a deeper understanding of cognition and emotional regulation can help us address major public health problems such as obesity, substance abuse, depression and suicide.

The initiative will increase synergy and facilitate greater collaboration between scientists in the medical schools neuroscience-focused departments and researchers in related disciplines, especially those whose work requires close collaboration with neuroscientists.

This rendering shows a view from the west of the planned neuroscience research center.

Collaboration across disciplines will be key to advancing our understanding of this new frontier in medicine, Perlmutter said. For example, new studies have recognized the importance of the microbiome and its interaction with our immune system in shaping the development and function of the brain. Work on synaptic connections in the nervous system is also critical to the development of machine intelligence and socially interactive robots that could solve many of the most important challenges of modern society. This building will be dedicated to advancing our global leadership position in solving these very big problems with imagination and rigor.

The new research center also is expected to inspire health-minded entrepreneurial pursuits and synergy with visionary business developers situated within a stones throw of the new research center. The building and related construction, which will be built at an expected cost of $616 million, will sit at the eastern edge of the Medical Campus, in the 200-acre Cortex Innovation Community, one of the fastest growing business, innovation and technology hubs in the United States and home to numerous biotech startups founded by Washington University faculty, staff and students.

We are constructing the building at the intersection of Cortex and the Medical Campus to encourage efforts by Washington University neuroscientists to transform their research into innovations that can move rapidly to improve medical care and quality of life for people with neurological conditions, said Jennifer K. Lodge, PhD, the universitys vice chancellor for research.

Among Washington Universitys achievements in the field of neuroscience, two Nobel Prizes in Physiology or Medicine have been won by scientists at the university. In 1944, Joseph Erlanger and Herbert Gasser won the Nobel for their work studying nerve fibers. They showed that the conduction velocity of nerve impulses is faster in thick nerve fibers than in thin fibers, and identified numerous other properties of sensory and motor nerves. And in 1986, Stanley Cohen and Rita Levi-Montalcini won the Nobel for discovering chemical growth factors essential for cell growth and development in the body. In the 1950s, they discovered nerve growth factor, a protein crucial for building networks of nerves.

The School of Medicine has a longtime, deep commitment to understanding, treating and preventing Alzheimers in particular. In the U.S., 5.8 million people are living with the disease, with the number projected to rise to nearly 14 million by 2050. Alzheimers and other dementias cost the U.S. a staggering $290 billion in 2019, and the cost is predicted to climb as high as $1.1 trillion by 2050, according to the Alzheimers Association.

The new center is intended to complement and build on The Brain Research Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies Initiative (The BRAIN Initiative), an extensive effort launched in 2013 by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to revolutionize our understanding of the brain and brain disorders. Despite tremendous advances in neuroscience, the causes of numerous neurological and psychiatric conditions remain unknown. Like The BRAIN Initiative, Washington Universitys leadership understands how critical that information will be to figuring out how to effectively counter these diseases and help the many people suffering from them. In fact, several research projects led by Washington University investigators are funded by The BRAIN Initiative and will find a home in the new neuroscience building.

The medical schools faculty have long been lauded for the collaborations they develop across the university, and the new research facility is intended to boost and significantly drive such efforts. The building will feature research neighborhoods and a shared area on each floor to spur conversation and collaboration. The neighborhoods will be organized around research themes among them, addiction, neurodegeneration, sleep and circadian rhythm, synapse and circuits, and neurogenomics and neurogenetics that bring together people with common interests from multiple departments. The first researchers are slated to move into the building in 2023. While the initial construction will accommodate more than 100 research teams, additional shell space could be built out later for another 45 research teams.

This rendering shows a view from the southwest of the planned neuroscience research building.

The additional space created in this building represents the next step in the schools strategic plan to increase its research base by more than 30% over the next 10 years. The school is currently ranked fourth among U.S. medical schools in NIH funding and aims to leverage the breadth of its basic and clinical research assets, together with existing and new industry partnerships, to enhance its core mission in discovery and development of new treatments.

We have been very successful at attracting top-notch researchers and their teams to the School of Medicine, and this continues to be a chief goal, Perlmutter said. The focus on neuroscience in this building is also integral to our aspirations across the Medical Campus to utilize the paradigm of personalized medicine and to address the problems of aging and degenerative diseases.

Added David Holtzman, MD, the Andrew B. and Gretchen P. Jones Professor and head of the Department of Neurology: A key goal for the neuroscience center is to take what we discover in our laboratories and get it out into the public sector so patients, and society as a whole, can benefit. This building and the collaborations it will grow will position us to achieve meaningful breakthroughs in science and medicine.

An internationally renowned expert on the causes of Alzheimers disease, Holtzman and his team helped develop antibodies aimed at preventing dementia by reducing deposits of the Alzheimers proteins amyloid beta and tau in the brain, and have advanced the understanding of how sleep and apolipoprotein E the most important genetic risk factor for Alzheimers contribute to brain injury. Holtzman also is involved in a project led byRandall J. Bateman, MD, the Charles F. and Joanne Knight Distinguished Professor of Neurology, to develop a blood test that can measure levels of amyloid beta and other proteins in the blood with the goal of diagnosing Alzheimers before symptoms develop.

The new neuroscience facility to be located at 4370 Duncan Avenue extends the School of Medicines reach eastward. As part of the construction, the university will add to its network of elevated, connected walkways, known as the Link, to reach the neuroscience research hub, and also will build a utility plant. In addition to the facilitys labs and research-focused areas, the new building will have event space, a large seminar room and a food-service area, as well as an 1,860-space parking garage. The architectural firms Perkins and Will, and CannonDesign are the projects designers, and McCarthy Building Companies will oversee construction.

Neuroscience research is a synergetic enterprise that depends on the expertise of people in many fields, Holtzman said. By bringing together so much knowledge, talent and passion, this new facility will make it considerably more likely that people will have the kinds of water-cooler discussions that lead to interdisciplinary game-changing ideas and projects. Im very excited to see what we will do.

Neuroscience research highlights

Washington University researchers:

Through ongoing research, they are:

Washington University School of Medicines 1,500 faculty physicians also are the medical staff of Barnes-Jewish and St. Louis Childrens hospitals. The School of Medicine is a leader in medical research, teaching and patient care, ranking among the top 10 medical schools in the nation by U.S. News & World Report. Through its affiliations with Barnes-Jewish and St. Louis Childrens hospitals, the School of Medicine is linked to BJC HealthCare.

See the rest here:
Washington University to break ground on major neuroscience research hub Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis - Washington...

Neuroscience

Neuroscience Market Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast 2020 2026| GE Healthcare, Siemens Healthineers, Noldus Information Technology – 3rd Watch News

Los Angeles, United State: The global Neuroscience market is broadly studied by the authors of the report with large focus on the vendor landscape, regional expansion, leading segments, rising trends and key opportunities, and other important subjects. The report highlights powerful factors augmenting the demand in the global Neuroscience market and even those hampering the global market growth. It comes out as a useful resource for players to identify key growth pockets of the global Neuroscience market. Additionally, it provides accurate market size and CAGR forecasts for the global Neuroscience market as well as its segments. This information will help players to plan growth strategies accordingly for the coming years.

For more details, Get a Sample Copy of this Report (Including Full TOC, Table & Figures) @ https://www.qyresearch.com/sample-form/form/1437954/global-neuroscience-market

Competitive Landscape:

The analysts authoring the report have provided in-depth research and analysis on the market growth of top players in the global Neuroscience market. Parameters such as market share, business expansion plans, key strategies, products, and applications were considered for the company profiling of market leaders. The company and competitive landscape analysis section of the report could help players to know where they stand in the global Neuroscience market.

Key players profiled in the report on the global Neuroscience Market are: GE Healthcare, Siemens Healthineers, Noldus Information Technology, Mightex Bioscience, Thomas RECORDING GmbH, Blackrock Microsystems, Tucker-Davis Technologies, Plexon, Phoenix Technology Group, NeuroNexus, Alpha Omega

Segment Analysis:

All of the product type and application segments of the global Neuroscience market included in the report are deeply analyzed based on CAGR, market size, and other crucial factors. The segmentation study provided by the report authors could help players and investors to make the right decisions when looking to invest in certain market segments.

Global Neuroscience Market by Type:

Whole Brain ImagingNeuro-MicroscopyElectrophysiology TechnologiesNeuro-Cellular ManipulationStereotaxic SurgeriesAnimal BehaviorOtherWhole Brain Imaging, Neuro-Microscopy, and Electrophysiology Technologies are the top three types of neuroscience, with a combined market share of 62%

Global Neuroscience Market by Application:

HospitalsDiagnostic LaboratoriesResearch InstitutesOtherNeuroscience is applied mostly in the hospital with a market share of 47%. It is followed by Research Institutes and Diagnostic Laboratories

Regional Analysis:

The report is a compilation of different studies, including regional analysis where leading regional Neuroscience markets are comprehensive studied by market experts. Both developed and developing regions and countries are covered in the report for a 360-degree geographic analysis of the global Neuroscience market. The regional analysis section helps readers to become familiar with the growth patterns of important regional Neuroscience markets. It also provides information on lucrative opportunities available in key regional Neuroscience markets.

The Middle East and Africa (GCC Countries and Egypt)

North America (the United States, Mexico, and Canada)

South America (Brazil etc.)

Europe (Turkey, Germany, Russia UK, Italy, France, etc.)

Asia-Pacific (Vietnam, China, Malaysia, Japan, Philippines, Korea, Thailand, India, Indonesia, and Australia)

Get Customized Report in your Inbox within 24 hours @https://www.qyresearch.com/customize-request/form/1437954/global-neuroscience-market

Table of Contents

Report Overview: It provides a quick look at product and application segments of the global Neuroscience market, major players, study objectives, years considered, and research scope.

Market Share by Players: Here, readers can gain knowledge about how well some players are doing in the global Neuroscience market in terms of production and revenue.

Market Size by Product and Application: It includes accurate market size forecasts for different product and application segments of the global Neuroscience market.

Production by Regions: This section throws light on import and export scenarios, leading players, production value growth rate, and production growth rate of all regions included in the report.

Value Chain and Sales Channel Analysis: It covers analysis on the industry value chain and different sales channels, customers, distributors, and suppliers.

Cost and Price Analysis: The authors of the report have taken into account almost all factors influencing the costing and pricing scenarios of the global Neuroscience market.

Other Sections

About Us:

We established as a research firm in 2007 and have since grown into a trusted brand amongst many industries. Over the years, we have consistently worked toward delivering high-quality customized solutions for wide range of clients ranging from ICT to healthcare industries. With over 50,000 satisfied clients, spread over 80 countries, we have sincerely strived to deliver the best analytics through exhaustive research methodologies.

Read more:
Neuroscience Market Share, Growth, Trends and Forecast 2020 2026| GE Healthcare, Siemens Healthineers, Noldus Information Technology - 3rd Watch News

Neuroscience

Psychomotor Performance in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndr | NSS – Dove Medical Press

Linda Lusic Kalcina, Ivana Pavlinac Dodig, Renata Pecotic, Maja Valic, Zoran Dogas

Department of Neuroscience, Split Sleep Medicine Center, University of Split School of Medicine, Split, Croatia

Correspondence: Zoran DogasDepartment of Neuroscience, Split Sleep Medicine Center, University of Split School of Medicine, Soltanska 2, Split 21000, CroatiaTel +38521557905Fax +38521557955Email zdogas@mefst.hr

Purpose: Determinants of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are hypoxemia and hypercapnia, as well as (micro) arousals from sleep, resulting in chronic sleep fragmentation, sleep deprivation, and excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). All of the above-mentioned factors might contribute to psychomotor impairment seen in OSA patients. Additionally, this study aimed to assess the contribution of BMI, age, EDS assessed with Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), and severity of OSA assessed with apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) to the reaction time on chronometric tests in OSA patients and controls. It is hypothesized that moderate and severe OSA have adverse effects on reaction time of perception to visual stimulus, of solving simple arithmetic operations, and of psychomotor limbs coordination assessed by chronometric psychodiagnostic test battery.Patients and Methods: This study was conducted on 206 male participants; 103 of them had moderate or severe OSA diagnosed by whole-night polysomnography/polygraphy. Control participants (N=103), matched to patients with OSA by age and BMI, had no reported OSA in their medical history, no increased risk for OSA, nor EDS. All participants were assessed with three chronometric psychodiagnostic tests, measuring thereaction time of perception to visual stimulus, of solving simple arithmetic operations, and of psychomotor limbs coordination.Results: Participants from theOSA group achieved impaired results compared to control participants in minimum single task solving time in speed of solving simple arithmetic operations (3 0.9 and 2.6 0.6, P< 0.001), and in minimum solving time of a single task in complex psychomotor limbs coordination (0.69 0.2 and 0.61 0.1, P=0.007). Regression analysis revealed no significant contribution of daytime sleepiness to the results achieved in each of the tests.Conclusion: It is concluded that severe OSA impaired speed of perception, convergent, and operative thinking. Moreover, it is suggested that EDS did not contribute to poor psychomotor outcome in patients with OSA in thisstudy, when age was controlled for.

Keywords: obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, overnight polysomnography, psychomotor performance, psychodiagnostic test, daytime sleepiness

This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License.By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Continued here:
Psychomotor Performance in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndr | NSS - Dove Medical Press

Neuroscience

Atlas Reveals All Proteins in the Human Brain – Technology Networks

An international team of scientists led by researchers at Karolinska Institutet in Sweden has launched a comprehensive overview of all proteins expressed in the brain, published today in the journal Science. The open-access database offers medical researchers an unprecedented resource to deepen their understanding of neurobiology and develop new, more effective therapies and diagnostics targeting psychiatric and neurological diseases.

The brain is the most complex organ of our body, both in structure and function. The new Brain Atlas resource is based on the analysis of nearly 1,900 brain samples covering 27 brain regions, combining data from the human brain with corresponding information from the brains of the pig and mouse. It is the latest database released by the Human Protein Atlas (HPA) program which is based at the Science for Life Laboratory (SciLifeLab) in Sweden, a joint research centre aligned with KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm University and Uppsala University. The project is a collaboration with the BGI research centre in Shenzhen and Qingdao in China and Aarhus University in Denmark.

"As expected the blueprint for the brain is shared among mammals, but the new map also reveals interesting differences between human, pig and mouse brains," says Mathias Uhln, Professor at the Department of Protein Science at KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Visiting professor at the Department of Neuroscience at Karolinska Institutet and Director of the Human Protein Atlas effort.

The cerebellum emerged in the study as the most distinct region of the brain. Many proteins with elevated expression levels in this region were found, including several associated to psychiatric disorders supporting a role of the cerebellum in the processing of emotions.

"Another interesting finding is that the different cell types of the brain share specialised proteins with peripheral organs," says Dr. Evelina Sjstedt, researcher at the Department of Neuroscience at Karolinska Institutet and first author on the paper. "For example, astrocytes, the cells that 'filter' the extracellular environment in the brain share a lot of transporters and metabolic enzymes with cells in the liver that filter the blood."

When comparing the neurotransmitter systems, responsible for the communication between neurons, some clear differences between the species could be identified.

"Several molecular components of neurotransmitter systems, especially receptors that respond to released neurotransmitters and neuropeptides, show a different pattern in humans and mice," says Dr. Jan Mulder, group leader of the Human Protein Atlas brain profiling group and researcher at the Department of Neuroscience at Karolinska Institutet. "This means that caution should be taken when selecting animals as models for human mental and neurological disorders."

For selected genes/proteins, the Brain Atlas also contains microscopic images showing the protein distribution in human brain samples and detailed, zoomable maps of protein distribution in the mouse brain.

The Human Protein Atlas started in 2003 with the aim to map all of the human proteins in cells, tissues and organs (the proteome). All the data in the knowledge resource is open access allowing scientists both in academia and industry to freely use the data for the exploration of the human proteome.

Reference: Sjstedt, E., Zhong, W., Fagerberg, L., Karlsson, M., Mitsios, N., Adori, C., Oksvold, P., Edfors, F., Limiszewska, A., Hikmet, F., Huang, J., Du, Y., Lin, L., Dong, Z., Yang, L., Liu, X., Jiang, H., Xu, X., Wang, J., Mulder, J. (2020). An atlas of the protein-coding genes in the human, pig, and mouse brain. Science, 367(6482). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aay5947

This article has been republished from the following materials. Note: material may have been edited for length and content. For further information, please contact the cited source.

Go here to see the original:
Atlas Reveals All Proteins in the Human Brain - Technology Networks