John Hughlings Jackson: bridging theory and clinical observation

Mitochondrial and metabolic features of salugenesis and the healing cycle

Pathogenesis and salugenesis are the first and second stages of the two-stage problem of disease production and health recovery. Salugenesis is the automatic, evolutionarily conserved, ontogenetic sequence of molecular, cellular, organ system, and behavioral changes that is used by living systems to heal. It is a whole-body process that begins with mitochondria and the cell. The stages of salugenesis define a circle that is energy- and resource-consuming, genetically programmed, and environmentally responsive. Energy and metabolic resources are provided by mitochondrial and metabolic transformations that drive the cell danger response (CDR) and create the three phases of the healing cycle: Phase 1-Inflammation, Phase 2-Proliferation, and Phase 3-Differentiation. Each phase requires a different mitochondrial phenotype. Without different mitochondria there can be no healing. The rise and fall of extracellular ATP (eATP) signaling is a key driver of the mitochondrial and metabolic reprogramming required to progress through the healing cycle. Sphingolipid and cholesterol-enriched membrane lipid rafts act as rheostats for tuning cellular sensitivity to purinergic signaling. Abnormal persistence of any phase of the CDR inhibits the healing cycle, creates dysfunctional cellular mosaics, causes the symptoms of chronic disease, and accelerates the process of aging. New research reframes the rising tide of chronic disease around the world as a systems problem caused by the combined action of pathogenic triggers and anthropogenic factors that interfere with the mitochondrial functions needed for healing. Once chronic pain, disability, or disease is established, salugenesis-based therapies will start where pathogenesis-based therapies end.

Preterm Birth and the Development of Visual Attention During the First 2 Years of Life: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Preterm birth is associated with an increased risk for long-lasting attention deficits. Early-life markers of attention abnormalities have not been established to date but could provide insights into the pathogenesis of attention abnormalities and could help identify susceptible individuals.

Objective

To examine whether preterm birth is associated with visual attention impairments in early life, and if so, in which attention functions and at which developmental period during the first 2 years of life.

Data Sources

PubMed and PsycINFO were searched on November 17, 2019, to identify studies involving visual attention outcomes in infants born preterm vs full term.

Study Selection

Peer-reviewed studies from the past 50 years met the eligibility criteria if they directly assessed visual attention outcomes until the age of 2 years in generally healthy infants born preterm or full term. The selection process was conducted by 2 independent reviewers.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guideline was followed. Random-effects models were used to determine standardized mean differences. The risk of bias was assessed both within and between studies.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Five nascent indices of visual attention were analyzed, including very basic functions-namely, the abilities to follow and fixate on visual targets-and more complex functions, such as visual processing (ie, habituation), recognition memory (ie, novelty preference), and the ability to effortfully focus attention for learning.

Results

A total of 53 studies were included, with 69 effect sizes and assessing a total of 3998 infants (2047 born preterm and 1951 born full term; of the 3376 for whom sex was reported, 1693 [50.1%] were girls). Preterm birth was associated with impairments in various attention indices, including visual-following in infancy (Cohen d, -0.77; 95% CI, -1.23 to -0.31), latency to fixate (Cohen d, -0.18; 95% CI, -0.33 to -0.02), novelty preference (Cohen d, -0.20; 95% CI, -0.32 to -0.08), and focused attention (Cohen d, -0.28; 95% CI, -0.45 to -0.11). In the neonatal period, preterm birth was associated with superior visual-following (Cohen d, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.40), possibly owing to the additional extrauterine exposure to sensory stimulation. However, this early association waned rapidly in infancy (Cohen d, -0.77; 95% CI, -1.23 to -0.31).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings suggest that preterm birth is associated with impingements to visual attention development in early life, as manifested in basic and then complex forms of attention. Advancements in neonatal care may underlie improvements found in the current era and accentuate several early protective factors.

How does consciousness for action relate to attention for action?

The interesting target article by Morsella et al. addresses critical issues that impact our understanding of consciousness. It is surprising, however, to see no treatment of the relationship between attention and consciousness, particularly given available models. Whether olfaction is most suitable as a model system to study consciousness for action also seems questionable. These issues are elaborated in the present commentary.