IUBio

CCK

F. Frank LeFever flefever at ix.netcom.com
Tue Jan 12 22:30:54 EST 1999



I checked my SFN program planner (it's on CD) and found that there were
indeed papers on CCK at the annual meeting, eight of them.

Admittedly, a very small number relative to the vast number of papers
on other topics at the meeting, but it does illustrate the fact that
neuroscientists consider CCK relevent to neuroscience.

Inasmuch as Mr. Sargent has clarified his status as a newcomer to
neuroscience, it should not seem so patronizing as it otherwise would
be to point out that neuroscientists study neuroscience by swapping
substances across species (not carelessly, but with quantification of
degree of similarity between homologues), so it is not a foolish or
"non-neuroscience" question to ask about porcine CCK similarity to
human CCK.

Mr. Sargent assumed he had caught some poseur "trying to put
multisyllabic words together", which from his very limited perspective
seemed "meaningless in the context of intramuscular injection".  To
someone who is NOT a newcomer to the field, the question seems quite
legitemate.  I  don't know about intramuscular injection specifically,
but certainly intravenous injection was ONE of the modes of
administration in at least one of the studies presented at the Society
for Neurosience meeting.

(Bytheway, if Mr. Sargent doubts my SFN membership and presentation of
a paper at that meeting, I invite him to take a look at the SFN
website: www.sfn.org. Check out meeting program.  While he is at it, he
might take a look at SFN's journal, J. of Neuroscience and read through
a few titles.  Not likely to learn anything "concrete" from that, but
might learn some humility). 

Also: it may astonish the newcomer to learn tht some neuroscientists
(indeed MANY) study neuroscience in a variety of animals with no
immediate reference to humans whatsoever--e.g. Eric Kandel's work with
aplysia.  Yes, yes, nowadays there are the beginnings of extensions of
some of this line of research to mammals (mice), and one can d  r a w
speculative inferences re humans, but the point is he and his
colleagues have spent many, many years simply studying aplysia. 

I don't know of a comparable body of work with pigs as the experimental
animal, but nothing in principle excludes them from neuroscience... 

Finally, I would not mock anybody's "admittedly narrow field of
neuroscientific knowledge", and had Mr. Sargent ASKED what was the
relevance of porcine CCK to neuroscience, I would have been happy to
tell him (so far, I haven't mentioned the specific areas in which CCK
is of interest).  However, he arrogated to himself the  right too
lampoon something he clearly did not understand; and only when called
on it does he admit the limits of his understanding.  (and even so
seems still to think he is right)

The appropriate role of a newcomer is to listen and ask.  Certainly the
newcomer can also propose ideas--but be prepared to learn that they are
likely to be like the old joke about the two leading newspapers in the
USSSR...

Elsewhere, he admits to having pontificated on the basis of a few items
dredged up from the web, with absolutely no way of his knowing whether
they are valid.  (i.e. his nonsense about the frontal lobes)

F. Frank LeFever, Ph.D.
New York Neuropsychology Group




In <369B5126.44F04806 at ix.netcom.com> Richard Sargent
<dsargent at ix.netcom.com> writes: 
>
>
>
>F. Frank LeFever wrote:
>
>> Ahh, the new kkollins!  Often in error, never in doubt!
>>
>> After some "clever" gobbledigook to show his contempt for the
question,
>
>Not contempt for, but amusement by.  How does 'porcine' anything
belong in
>this ng?  For crying out loud, that means 'pig'.  I know because I
read
>'Animal Farm' a few months ago.  I interpretted, correctly I think,
someone
>just trying to put multisyllabic words together [which seem
meaningless in
>context with 'intramuscular administration'] and had some fun with it.
>Please, Mr. PhD, (or anyone else who is such a loser as to try to mock
my
>admittedly narrow field of neuroscientific knowledge (I only just
started
>to learn about neurological topics and relevant parallel
applications))
>show us how applicable porcine cholecystokinin is to neuroscience
>discussion [as stated].  am I bitter at your superciliousness?  No, I
think
>that you are a sorry little man who needs to have his family
commiserate
>with him so he can find the strength to continue functioning during
his
>pitiful, miserable existence.
>
>> our new neuroscience expert tells us CCK is not relevant to
>> neuroscience.  I'm not sure, but I THINK I saw a few poster
>> presentations on CCK at the Society for Neuroscience meeting in LA
last
>> November (my presentation was on a different topic and I do not try
to
>> keep up with the CCK lit).  In any case, CCK is yet another
substance
>> found first in the gut or other nonbrain tissues (cf. serotonin,
>> substance P, histamine, etc.) and later found to have a significant
>> role in the brain.
>>
>> I think it is clear who belongs in a different newsgroup...
>
>Ah, pride strikes again!  Excuse me for not being able to have 1 or 2
>job/graduate designations under my name as you seem to enjoy making
>reference to.  I think I do not need to make an exit; rather, someone
needs
>to dismount from their high horse.
>
>> F. Frank LeFever, Ph.D.
>> New York Neuropsychology Group
>>
>> In <369AAC11.75513797 at ix.netcom.com> Richard Sargent
>> <dsargent at ix.netcom.com> writes:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >ricyoung at iupui.edu wrote:
>> >
>> >> Could anyone tell me what newsgroup I should direct this question
>> to, or
>> >> maybe someone here knows....
>> >> Is porcine cholecystokinin exactly structurally analogous to
human
>> CCK?
>> >
>> >Actually, PCCK has an expansive effect on porcine organelles while
its
>> >humano-homologue is strictly contractive to the human gallbladder.
>> >
>> >> Would porcine cholecystokinin become antigenic after
intramuscular
>> >> administration?
>> >
>> >It depends on your inertial reference frame.  A tissue biopsy may
be
>> >conclusive as regards the effects of PCCK.
>> >
>> >>  If so, is there a comercially available recombinant CCK>?
>> >
>> >Personally, I wouldn't invest in PCCK if I were you.  However, the
>> HCCK  can
>> >be solenized into iguano-cholecystokinin and recombined with
>> multicultural RNA
>> >strands independent of mitochondrial abiogenesis.
>> >
>> >
>> >> andy young
>> >>
>> >> ricyoung at ruby.iupui.edu
>> >
>> >  To answer your question about what would be the choice newsgroup
for
>> a post
>> >of this sort, this definitely would not be material for a
neuroscience
>> >newsgroup.  Look for a biology newsgroup.
>>
>
>  Peter L. Sargent
>




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net