Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Do you believe in MRI scanners?

I was thinking about mitochondria, but I got sidetracked when I remembered Ling and his opinion about ATP. Here's how it went:

The vast majority of the energy production in our bodies occurs in our mitochondria. These are the tiny powerhouses which generate most of the high energy adenosine tri phosphate (ATP) on which we ultimately run our metabolism.

NB an aside; Gilbert Ling does not believe in ATP as an energy source for cells (though he thinks it is a crucial molecule), any more than he believes in the lipid bi-layer cell membrane or the sodium/potassium ATP pump. He is truly out on a limb with his "Association Induction Hypothesis" of life at cell and below cell level. A fruitcake, obviously. Except his ideas on the localisation of cell water around proteins led to the invention of the MRI scanner. If MRI scanners work, that cookie Ling is right. And almost all of modern physiology is wrong.

It is, for me personally, MUCH easier to think within the "normal" physiology of my education. But, because MRI scanners work, this is the equivalent of thinking that the table in front of me is "solid" when quantum mechanics tells me that it is anything but solid...

Now there's a thought.

Peter

17 comments:

JohnN said...

So if structured water is real something must be done to maintain the correct balance between sodium and potassium, right?

Peter said...

Hi JohnN,

I'm not sure that Ling regards life as a process as such. He talks in terms of a metastable equilibrium, a "resting living state". In this state potassium is present in place between the C=O groups and N-H groups of backbone of the cell colloid proteins and water is layered over the potassium ions. Things "happen" in cells when ATP, his main "cardinal adsorbent" subtly alters the ionic charge pattern on the protein backbone.

That's a bit wooly, but its several years since I read "Life". The book is both mindbogglingly heavy physiology and intellectually bruising to work through. And, while it says something quite believable about "simple" proteins like gelatin, trying to envisage what is going on in a mitochondrion in his terms is impossible. Certainly for me.

What I am left with is a deep but unresolved interest in why insulin is so involved in cellular potassium "uptake". It's how I hit on this paper.

Insulin controls so much... But when you put "insulin potassium uptake" or the equivalent in to pubmed you get 100,000 hits (I exaggerate, only a bit). The information must be there, just hard to find the search term to locate it...

Peter

JohnN said...

Peter,
His debunking of the sodium pump model is pretty convinving.
It's interesting you brought up the success of NMR analysis as a proxy for Ling's theory. I used to have the same thought.
Damadian - the inventor and patent holder of MRI - attributed the ability of tissue differentiation to Association-Induction theory.
His rationale is no longer considered correct even by Ling. In fact, MRI imaging is possible due to the presence of different ions in the different tissues.

Peter said...

Hmmmm, there is just too much information out there.

Any thoughts on insulin and potassium flux? I had thought it was tied to glucose but apparently not... Why should insulin control cellular potassium, in whichever model?

Peter

JohnN said...

Jeanne Fahnestock, Professor, English, University of Maryland
contributes a chapter in Rhetorical and Incommensurability discussing the dispute between the two camps.
Flux or membrane? Contained or the container? I'm tempted to invoke the famous Rodney King's: "Can't we all just get along?"
[BTW, yours is one of the best blogs on nutrition. Please keep up the good work.]

Here's the abstract:
Cell and membrane:
the rhetorical strategies of a marginalized view

Professor Fahnestock investigates another dispute in which the levels of animosity run high. She traces competing theories defining the structure and composition of the cell, in her chapter, Cell and membrane: the rhetorical strategies of a marginalized view,”focusing especially on disagreements over the nature of the cell’s interface with the world, its membrane or "wall." These controversies have necessarily involved debates over whether the cell is essentially defined by that membrane or by its internal substance—the container or the contained. As the very notion of a "cell" suggests, the container definition has become the orthodoxy that we encounter in classrooms and textbooks and TV ads for skin cleansers. But that view was challenged in the fifties and sixties by Gilbert Ling, a scientist holding a suite of heretical views, but someone who has always had supporters, and renewed in the early part of this century by Gerald H. Pollack. The Ling/Pollack view is seen by all concerned as fundamentally incommensurable with the current paradigm of cell structure; as such, it is ignored by the mainstream. But, Fahnestock argues, incommensurability (as Ceccarelli argues of E.O. Wilson) can be a rhetorical investment, all of the arguments arising from an uncompromising hostility in which irreconcilability becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Given the productivity of the current paradigm, there is no pressure to listen to, let alone accommodate, the alternate, Ling/Pollack (Associated Induction) understanding of the cell and its membrane. But, Fahnestock contends, there are parts of this view that are relatively amenable to the mainstream. The differences might be converted rhetorically into less serious differences of emphasis or perspective, and productive talk could ensue. But the Associated Induction side’s investment in, and the mainstream’s assumption of, incommensurability blocks reconciliation.

Peter said...

Had to look up incommensurability. A neat word. Keys and Yukin on heart disease.

Peter

JohnN said...

Insulin increases action potential of the potassium channel leading to hypertension.
According to Journal of vascular research:
http://content.karger.com/ProdukteDB/produkte.asp?Aktion=Ausgabe&Ausgabe=234163&ProduktNr=224160

JohnN said...

The most interesting definition of Icommensurability is by Thomas Kuhn: the ovelapping of successive paradigms. One is brewing with the latest publication of Gary Taubes (GC/BC).

Peter said...

Neat definition, let's hope Taubes makes an impact...

Peter

Now looking at insulinomas and CV effects, opinion seems split...

JohnN said...

Regarding split opinions on Insulinomas and CV effects:
My guess is that runaway insulin production is so dangerous that you can't afford to wait for the long-term damage to show up?
Someone should try the JK's diet. Letting the brain run on ketones may starve the rogue stem cells.

Bruce K said...

Ray Peat mentions Gilbert Ling in a lot of his articles, to justify his belief that there are no membranes, cells are not held together by fat, and dietary PUFAs aren't essential. Meanwhile, universities continue to teach the untenable idea that cells are "bags" held together by a lipid membrane. There are no membranes or lipid bi-layers or membrane pumps.
http://members.westnet.com.au/pkolb/peat2.htm

Ed said...

I'm still reading through old posts, one by one. Loving it.

"Insulin increases action potential of the potassium channel leading to hypertension."

Peter, what's your blood pressure?

I wonder if blood pressure is a marker of "area under the curve" of insulin over some (probably short, like a day or 3) preceding period.

I wonder if high BP as a risk factor is purely a marker for other bad things, ie high insulin, high blood sugar (the bad kind) etc.

Peter said...

Hi Ed,

110/70mmHg, occasionally 115/70

Peter

Jack Kruse said...

Ling and his work sound woo woo to people who come to work from the contemporary cell biology model. Ling clearly does not have it all correct but he has the part on ATP and mitochondria correct. He is also spot on that Mitchell's 1978 Nobel is a waste. The reason no one in biology get what he is saying is because the AI hypothesis is the first step to understanding what is really going on in the inner mitochondrial membrane is all QED. Quantum tunneling can not and will never be understood by conventional biology. Until they realize this.......they will continue to think Ling is woo or mad. The truth is his idea lead to Damadian making an MRI machine and I use it everyday to help humans in some fashion. With where Peter is headed now in the proton series I surely hope he comes back to understand that Where Ling began and where Peter is now......the missing link is found in Gerald Pollack's findings on the fourth structure of water at the exclusion zone where water chemistry is separted into negative and positive charges naturally. This creates life's battery and free's ATP to be a cardinal adsorbant to withdraw electrons from this exclusion zone. Pollack has two video's Petro you need to watch. 1.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnGCMQ8TJ_g 2.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqHWueBp23c These two video's explain the contents of his latest book. They dovetail with what Ling's life work was and where you are heading in the protein series. It is all the land of physics......not biology. Physics dictates biology and that will be the hardest thing for you to eventually accept. I have carefully read your work and I think you are intensely curious as I am and want to get to the truth of the matter. I think we have to suspend our own beliefs about contemporary biology to fully appreciate what Ling found in 1952. People tend to buy beliefs and not benefits. Well a physics understanding makes you realize physics explains the benefits and show you the problem with beliefs.

Jack Kruse said...

Ling and his work sound woo woo to people who come to work from the contemporary cell biology model. Ling clearly does not have it all correct but he has the part on ATP and mitochondria correct. He is also spot on that Mitchell's 1978 Nobel is a waste. The reason no one in biology get what he is saying is because the AI hypothesis is the first step to understanding what is really going on in the inner mitochondrial membrane is all QED. Quantum tunneling can not and will never be understood by conventional biology. Until they realize this.......they will continue to think Ling is woo or mad. The truth is his idea lead to Damadian making an MRI machine and I use it everyday to help humans in some fashion. With where Peter is headed now in the proton series I surely hope he comes back to understand that Where Ling began and where Peter is now......the missing link is found in Gerald Pollack's findings on the fourth structure of water at the exclusion zone where water chemistry is separted into negative and positive charges naturally. This creates life's battery and free's ATP to be a cardinal adsorbant to withdraw electrons from this exclusion zone. Pollack has two video's Petro you need to watch. 1.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnGCMQ8TJ_g 2.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqHWueBp23c These two video's explain the contents of his latest book. They dovetail with what Ling's life work was and where you are heading in the protein series. It is all the land of physics......not biology. Physics dictates biology and that will be the hardest thing for you to eventually accept. I have carefully read your work and I think you are intensely curious as I am and want to get to the truth of the matter. I think we have to suspend our own beliefs about contemporary biology to fully appreciate what Ling found in 1952. People tend to buy beliefs and not benefits. Well a physics understanding makes you realize physics explains the benefits and show you the problem with beliefs.

Jack Kruse said...

Your K+ comment is huge.....Ling opens the door to this potassium issue and makes sense of it.......and when I get to the Quantum puzzle blog on my site you'll see why Ling's AI is huge in colder temps or when cytokine levels are lower in cells or the brain........BG is not the major issue for people with IR. It is a consequence of the quantum cell. High BG is a big clinical issue when BG is present with higher temps body when cytokines are high all over. This explains why people with T2D have altered UCP1 in muscles and mitochondria. When you are sick for any reason the longer you apply Cold Thermogenesis protocol, the higher BG goes but you develop no clinical issues with these elevation in BG.........because insulin can not hurt you when you control cytokines, your temps, and your mitochondria with your high fat diet.

When energy is used in a quantum cell, it operates coherently and cooperatively as a unit. It becomes destabilizes a bit from its metastable state, and this allows glucose and calcium, to move into the cell in droves. This tells you why I made a big deal about calcium ion frequency resonance in the EMF series. In physics, the electromagnetic force uncouples this metabolic loop, which is normally a coupled coherent event.
Under the control of insulin, glucose adsorption sites on proteins and enzymes become exposed to the environment, and glucose can be burned to replenish the ATP or shunned if the cell is made IR as you mentioned in your proton series. When glucose is the fuel, at the same time, carbon dioxide is produced, which functions to stabilize the resting living state. Here is where quantum physics cosmology knowledge links come back for you to consider........CO2 in "cold environments" causes matter in galaxies to condense under the force of both the electromagnetic and gravitational forces of physics. In your body the same thing happens in the ABSENCE OF CYTOKINES OR INFLAMMATION. This effect is called the Bohr effect, increases the efficiency with which oxygen is unloaded from the red blood cells, curtailing the production of lactate and protons. Protons are positively charged and considered acids. The electromagnetic force does not control their action directly. It does so indirectly by controling the negatviely charged electrons in Ling's model to create voltages in all membranes to set up the redox potential. This is why high proton environments do not have high Oxygen tensions but those with a lot of electrons that are reduced have higher oxygen tensions. In this highly energized coherent state in a cell, potassium is preferentially adsorbed to the ionized carboxylate groups on intracellular proteins. This is how electronic induction works and it is a brilliant find by Ling. No one seems to get how it plugs into the cell because they see the process with biologic glasses when it takes physics lenses to see. This satisfactorily explains why the administration of glucose and insulin can uncomfortably lower blood potassium levels............

Jack Kruse said...

Now let's look at Ling’s association-induction hypothesis, in a low blog flow state like ischemia where low oxygen oxygen tensions rule. Heart disease of MI are good clinical example.

Glycogen is a readily mobilizable fuel source in the heart that’s increasingly called upon as the blood supply of oxygen lessens. Almost instantly, glycogen provides free glucose molecules, which is oxidized to generate ATP, and, once more, in an all-or-none manner, this electronically shifts proteins in a way that maintains the highly energized, resting living state in the face of stress. Glycogen can be replenished by fructose or by the action of beta oxidation of the Pentose phosphate pathway. Carb whores think fructose is the most efficient way to do this. they do not realize that the PPP is the most reducing pathway life does it. Saturated fats give you more electrons than protons. 36 ATP vs 147 ATP.

Over time, if fats or glucose and oxygen are not available, or available in inadequate amounts, the cell destabilizes, and as a result calcium, which is normally excluded due to its reduced solvency in structured cellular water, is permitted to move into the cell in droves. This allows Ca to flow into a cell. Phillipa Wiggins and Pollack has showed definitively intracellular water is structured just by the presence of ATP. by withdrawing electrons from its liquid crystal lattice. This explains why humans who are exposed to non native EMF have massive influxes of Calcium in cells and crave glucose. the Carb pathways replenish ATP fastest but not best. The PPP does it best over a longer time frame. The rapidity of Calcium influx determines which fuel the cell will chose. If you only give it fat it chooses fat and electrons.

Calcium overloading, via excessive excitation or from ATP depletion, over time, irreversibly transitions the cell into the so-called rigor mortis state or dead state. Nothing in modern cell biology can explain rigor mortis but Ling can. This is why K+ confuses people.