Read "Molecules of Emotion The Science Behind Mind-Body Medicine" by Candace B. Pert, Ph.D. available from Rakuten Kobo. Sign up today and get $5 off. Why do we feel the way we feel? How do our thoughts and emotions affect our health? Are our bodies and minds distinct from each other or do. [PDF] Download Molecules Of Emotion: The Science Behind Mind-Body Medicine BY - Candace B. Pert Full Books. 1. [PDF] Download.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Arabic|
|ePub File Size:||26.88 MB|
|PDF File Size:||8.16 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
Molecules of Emotion by Candace B. Pert - Why do we feel the way we feel? How do our thoughts and emotions affect our health? Are our bodies and minds. Molecules of Emotion: The Science Behind Mind-Body Medicine. www. ronaldweinland.info “Candace has taken a giant step toward shattering some cherished. Editorial Reviews. From Library Journal. Intrigue at the "Palace": back-stabbing, deceit, Molecules of Emotion: The Science Behind Mind-Body Medicine - Kindle edition by Candace B. Pert. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device.
Nov 08, Morgan Blackledge rated it it was ok Oh man I really took a chance on this one. And oh man do I feel like a dip. Who ate skittles and farted? My brain did when I bought this book. It's by Candice Pert — an American neuroscientist and pharmacologist who discovered the opiate receptor, the cellular binding site for endorphins in the brain, as well as being a distinguished lead researcher at the NIMH, who published over scientific articles on peptides and their receptors and the role of these neuropeptides in the immun Oh man I really took a chance on this one. It's by Candice Pert — an American neuroscientist and pharmacologist who discovered the opiate receptor, the cellular binding site for endorphins in the brain, as well as being a distinguished lead researcher at the NIMH, who published over scientific articles on peptides and their receptors and the role of these neuropeptides in the immune system. Do We Know!?
The result of translating my scientific ideas into the vernacular seems to have been that my life in science and my personal life have transformed each other, so that I have become expanded and enriched in myriad unexpected ways by the discoveries I've made, the science I've done, and the meaning I continue to uncover. Writing this book was an attempt to put down on paper, in a much more detailed and usable form, the material I've been presenting in lectures.
My goal in writing, as in speaking, was twofold: to explain the science underlying the new bodymind medicine, and to give enough practical information about the implications of that science, and about the therapies and practitioners embodying it, to enable my readers to make the best possible choices about their personal health and well-being. Perhaps my journey, intellectual as well as spiritual, can help other people on their paths. And now -- on with the "lecture"!
I get a thrill out of sitting in the empty room, when all is quiet and there exists a state of pure potentiality in which anything can happen. The sound of the doors swinging open, the muffled voices of the crowd as they file slowly into the room, the clinking of water glasses and screeching of chairs -- all of this creates a delightful cacophony, music to my ears, the overture for what is to come.
I watch the people as they move toward their seats, finding their places, chatting with a neighbor, and getting comfortable, preparing themselves to be informed, hopefully entertained, unaware that my goal is to do more: to reveal, to inspire, to uplift, perhaps even to change lives.
I often find myself addressing very mixed audiences. Depending on the nature of my host's organization, the crowd is either weighted toward mainstream professionals -- doctors, nurses, and scientific researchers -- or toward alternative practitioners -- chiropractors, energy healers, massage therapists, and other curious participants -- but frequently includes members from both camps in a blend that can best be described as the Establishment meets the New Paradigm.
This sort of composition is very different from the more homogeneous audiences present at the hundreds of talks I've given over the past twenty-four years to my fellow scientists, colleagues, and peers. For them, I deliver my more technical remarks in the language of the club, not needing to translate the code we all understand. I still address such groups, making the yearly round of scientific meetings, but now I also venture into a foreign land, where few of my fellow scientists dare -- or wish -- to go.
Breathing deeply for a moment or two, I relax into my seat and close my eyes. My mind clears as I offer a brief prayer to enter a more receptive state. Calling on an intuitive sense of my audience's expectations and mood, I can feel the wall coming down, the imaginary wall that separates us, scientist from lay person; the expert, the authority, from those who do not know -- a wall I personally stopped believing in some time ago.
When I open my eyes and glance around at one of these mixed crowds, I notice first that, in marked contrast to the more scientific gatherings, there are usually large numbers of women present.
It still surprises me to see so many of them, dressed beautifully in their flowing California-style robes of many colors. I am always stunned by the many shades of purple in their dress, more shades than I ever knew existed! Then, looking beyond the surface, I try to assess the various components of my audience and what might have motivated them to come today.
My attention goes first to the doctors and other medical professionals, whose contingent is almost always dominated by males.
The men sit erect in their well-tailored dark suits and crisp white shirts, while nearby their female counterparts look officiously around, checking the room for the faces of their colleagues. Scattered more sparsely throughout the room are the neophytes, earnest young men and women with packs on their backs and dreams in their eyes. Their posture is perky and eager, revealing their sincerity and also their uncertainty about what they want or where they are going.
As the room settles and voices are hushed to a low din, I wonder: What do all these people expect me to tell them? What do they want to know, what are they hoping for? Some are here because they saw me on Bill Moyers's PBS special Healing and the Mind, a program that also included segments with Dean Ornish, Jon Kabat-Zinn, Naomi Remen, and a number of the other doctors, scientists, and therapists who are trying to make the same mind-body connections that have become my life's work.
Being interviewed by such a well-informed, receptive journalist made it possible for me to speak of the molecules of mind and emotion with a passion and humor not ordinarily associated with medical research scientists.
I tried to make it easy for a television audience to understand the exciting world of biomedicine, molecular theory, and psychoneuroimmunology, revealing information usually shrouded by an impenetrable language, letting them know that they have a stake in understanding this body of knowledge, because it could give them the power to make a difference in the state of their own health. The physicians, nurses, health care professionals -- what brings them out? Have they touched on some new situation that their current knowledge cannot explain?
Many of them know me as a former chief of brain biochemistry who toiled at the National Institutes of Health for thirteen years, demonstrating and mapping biochemicals I later came to call the physiological correlates of emotion. All of them seem to be aware that science marches on, and that much of what they were taught in medical school twenty years ago, even ten years ago, is no longer current, even applicable.
They know that my work is in a breaking field -- no less a chronicler of contemporary culture than Tom Wolfe himself has pronounced neuroscience the "hottest field in the academic world" in a recent issue of Forbes -- and that it's just now finding its way into medical schools around the world. Then there are the many massage therapists, acupuncturists, chiropractors -- the so-called alternative medicine practitioners who offer their patients approaches that are not part of the mainstream.
I'm aware that these people have been marginalized for years, rarely taken seriously by the powers that be -- the medical schools, insurance companies, the American Medical Association, the Food and Drug Administration -- although it is well documented that the public spends billions yearly on their services.
They have read about my theory of emotions, about how I have postulated a biochemical link between the mind and body, a new concept of the human organism as a communication network that redefines health and disease, empowering individuals with new responsibility, more control in their lives.
The philosophers, the seekers, they're here too.
Some are very silent -- listeners, not talkers -- these pale, earnest young men and women who tell me after the lecture that they've been traveling in India or living in Asia. They see my work as proof of what their gurus and masters have long been saying, and they want more answers, perhaps about the meaning of it all. Maybe they've heard me quoted as the scientist who said "God is a neuropeptide. Many come simply because they are curious. Perhaps they've heard of my reputation as a young graduate student who laid the foundation for the discovery of endorphins, the body's own pain suppressors and ecstasy inducers.
Or they may know me as the young woman who was passed over for a prestigious pre-Nobel Prize and dared to challenge her mentor for the recognition she felt she deserved. They may recall how the resulting front-page controversy exposed a system that was sexist and unjust at its core, and caused a shake-up that embarrassed a medical dynasty. Others are here because they need to have hope. The sick, the wheelchair-bound, I see them positioned on the aisles, near the doors.
They know I've been on the cutting edge with my research, crossing disciplines and researching for breakthroughs in cancer, AIDS, mental illness.
I always feel a little nervous when I see them sitting in my audience. Are they expecting me to deliver their miracle cure like a preacher at a revival meeting?
Hope is a dirty, rarely uttered word in the circles I frequent, and it still tugs uncomfortably at my self-image as a scientist. To think I'm being viewed as a healer -- God forbid, a faith healer! Yet I can't ignore the expressions of desperation and suffering that I see on their faces.
Yes, at least I can give them that, something they can use in seeking alternatives, these people for whom mainstream medicine offers no further answers, no treatment, no hope.
Regardless of their profession, orientation, or expectations emotional or intellectual, I've come to believe that most of the lay people who find their way to my lectures are hoping to hear science demystified, de-jargonized, described in terms they can understand. They want to be more in control of their own health and to learn more about what is going on in their own bodies, and they have been deeply disappointed, disillusioned by the failure of science to deliver on its promises to provide cures for the major diseases.
Now they want to take back some power into their own hands, and they need to know about what the latest scientific discoveries mean for obtaining optimal health.
Perhaps you, my reader, see yourself in one or more of the groups described above. If so, I hope for your sake, as I always hope for the members of my audiences, that some part of the information presented in this book will make a difference in your life.
What follows is generally a lavish detailing of my list of accomplishments. I feel genuinely moved by the appreciation expressed by my host or hostess, but always a bit embarrassed and undeserving of such flattering words. Over the years, I've learned to keep my ego reigned in by saying a quiet blessing during these introductory remarks.
I ask that I not be cowed by my mission, nor swept up in it. I remind myself that, in spite of the spotlight I am about to step into, first and always I am a scientist, a seeker of the truth -- not a rock star!
I silently vow that I won't let any of this go to my head -- although that could easily happen, and did happen occasionally at one time. At last I hear my name and rise from my chair to begin the long walk onto the stage. I remember to breathe deeply as I pass the front row and feel all eyes in the room turn to focus on me.
A few whispered words reach my ears as I move along: "There she is! Is that her? She doesn't look like a scientist! I wonder with an inward chuckle. I am still a woman, a wife, and a mother. Don't I fit their pictures of the scientist? Of course, they have their own ideas, and many of them fit the standard cliche of the conservatively dressed, intense-looking, usually male scientist.
Not too long ago, I wore those serious little boxy suits, the dress-for-success uniform, conforming to the more buttoned-down image people expect. But now, my own transformation is boldly reflected in the way I present myself, an image that better matches my message these days.
In keeping with the evolution of my scientific ideas, my dress has evolved so that I now look more like the ladies in the flowing robes, my clothes looser and more colorful, more comfortable, even more purple!
These days I dare to be more outrageous, although those who know me insist that outrageousness has always been the hallmark of my personality, however submerged I've tried to keep it at times to survive. Taking my place at the podium, I wait while the technicians fumble with my mike and make last-minute adjustments to the projection screen at my side.
As I look out on the sea of upturned faces, I am struck by how perfectly still people sit. I know they won't move until I crack a joke, giving them permission to enjoy themselves and explode in laughter, animating the room and filling it with energy. My audience is ready and so am I -- hundreds, sometimes thousands of people are seated before me waiting for my words.
I take one last minute to focus inwardly on my mission: to tell the truth about the facts that were discovered by my colleagues and myself. First and foremost, I am a truth-seeker. My intention is to provide an understanding of the metaphors that express a new paradigm, metaphors that capture how inextricably united the body and the mind really are, and the role the emotions play in health and disease.
The house lights dim as I clear my throat and my first slide comes up on the screen. I have become quite addicted to this experience, ever since when I gave a lecture to the National Endocrine Society and accidentally brought down the house with a joke that was intended to cover a mistake I'd made. Now I don't waste any time. I start right off with a cartoon that never fails to elicit hearty, if sometimes nervous, laughter.
My first slide looks like this: [John King, See -- it wasn't psychosomatic] I use this joke to make the point that as a culture we are all in denial about the importance of psychosomatic causes of illness. Break the word psychosomatic down into its parts, and it becomes psyche, meaning mind or soul, and soma, meaning body.
Though the fact that they are fused into one word suggests some kind of connection between the two, that connection is anathema in much of our culture. For many of us, and certainly for most of the medical establishment, bringing the mind too close to the body threatens the legitimacy of any particular illness, suggesting it may be imaginary, unreal, unscientific.
If psychological contributions to physical health and disease are viewed with suspicion, the suggestion that the soul -- the literal translation of psyche -- might matter is considered downright absurd. For now we are getting into the mystical realm, where scientists have been officially forbidden to tread ever since the seventeenth century. It was then that Rene Descartes, the philosopher and founding father of modern medicine, was forced to make a turf deal with the Pope in order to get the human bodies he needed for dissection.
Descartes agreed he wouldn't have anything to do with the soul, the mind, or the emotions -- those aspects of human experience under the virtually exclusive jurisdiction of the church at the time -- if he could claim the physical realm as his own.
Alas, this bargain set the tone and direction for Western science over the next two centuries, dividing human experience into two distinct and separate spheres that could never overlap, creating the unbalanced situation that is mainstream science as we know it today.
But much of that is now changing. A growing number of scientists recognize that we are in the midst of a scientific revolution, a major paradigm shift with tremendous implications for how we deal with health and disease. The Cartesian era, as Western philosophical thought since Descartes has been known, has been dominated by reductionist methodology, which attempts to understand life by examining the tiniest pieces of it, and then extrapolating from those pieces to overarching surmises about the whole.
Reductionist Cartesian thought is now in the process of adding something very new and exciting -- and holistic. As I've watched as well as participated in this process, I've come to believe that virtually all illness, if not psychosomatic in foundation, has a definite psychosomatic component.
Recent technological innovations have allowed us to examine the molecular basis of the emotions, and to begin to understand how the molecules of our emotions share intimate connections with, and are indeed inseparable from, our physiology.
It is the emotions, I have come to see, that link mind and body. This more holistic approach complements the reductionist view, expanding it rather than replacing it, and offers a new way to think about health and disease -- not just for us scientists, but for the lay person also. In my talks, I show how the molecules of emotion run every system in our body, and how this communication system is in effect a demonstration of the bodymind's intelligence, an intelligence wise enough to seek wellness, and one that can potentially keep us healthy and disease-free without the modern high-tech medical intervention we now rely on.
In this book I've tried to give pointers about how to tap into that intelligence, and, in the Appendix, I've provided a listing of organizations that practice various aspects of bodymind medicine, so that those of you who are interested can get some guidance on getting the most out of that intelligence, allowing it to do its job without interference. The Appendix also contains some basic tips for healthful living, distilled from my own experience.
Shift happens! The Ptolemaic earth at the center of the universe can give way to the Copernican sun-centered theory -- but not without considerable resistance. Witness Galileo, who was brought before the Inquisition for his role in promulgating that theory over a century after it was first proposed! Or ask Jesse Roth, who in the s found insulin not just in the brain but in tiny one-celled animals outside the human body.
This gave the reigning medical paradigm a good shake, because everyone "knew" that you needed a pancreas to make insulin! In spite of his eminence as clinical director for the National Institutes of Health, Dr.
Roth couldn't get his papers published in a single reputable scientific journal for quite a while. The reviewers sent them back with comments such as: "This is preposterous, you must not be washing your test tubes well enough. Jesse's story illustrates one of the paradoxes of scientific progress: Truly original, boundary-breaking ideas are rarely welcomed at first, no matter who proposes them.
Protecting the prevailing paradigm, science moves slowly, because it doesn't want to make mistakes. Consequently, genuinely new and important ideas are often subjected to nitpickingly intense scrutiny, if not outright rejection and revulsion, and getting them published becomes a Sisyphean labor. But if the ideas are correct, eventually they will prevail.
It may take, as in the case of the new discipline of psychoneuroimmunology, a good decade, or it may take much longer. But, eventually, the new view becomes the status quo, and ideas that were rejected as madness will appear in the popular press, often touted by the very critics who did so much to impede their acceptance.
Which is what is happening today as a new paradigm comes into being. They've been disgusted with the reigning medical model for years and have, in fact, been working actively to overturn it. It's largely through their efforts that such formerly dismissed techniques as acupuncture and hypnosis have gained the credibility they now have.
But even when I talk with the average health-conscious consumer, people who have no ideological animus one way or the other, I'm always astonished at how deep their anger at our present health system is. It's obvious the public is catching on to the fact that they're the ones paying monstrous health care bills for often worthless procedures to remedy conditions that could have been prevented in the first place.
In order to grasp the enormity of this revolution, you have to first understand some of the fundamentals of biomolecular medicine, which is what I like to explain at the beginning of my talks. How many of us can close our eyes and picture or define a receptor, or a protein, or a peptide? These are the basic components that make up our bodies and minds, yet to the average person, they are as exotic and remote from everyday experience as the Abominable Snowman.
If we're to understand what role our emotions may play in our health, then understanding the molecular-cellular domain is a crucial first step. I also like to provide some historical context to help people understand the impact of the recent discoveries. It's a version of one of those lectures I'm putting on the page here to provide a broad overview of my work, the basic science that makes it all decipherable, and fun.
But I also have a story to tell, one that is more personal than scientific, even though parts of it do make their way into some of my more informal public lectures. The narrative of how I was transformed by the science I did, and how the science I did was inspired and influenced by my growth as a human being, especially by my experience as a woman, is as informative, I believe, as the facts of my scientific adventures, and equally as important.
For this reason, I have included my personal narrative in this book, sandwiched in between sections of my lecture, where I hope it provides a perspective that enlightens as it reveals the human story behind the molecules of emotion.
As befitting my own evolution, the personal and the scientific do eventually intertwine as my story progresses, underscoring the fact that science is a very human pursuit and cannot be truly appreciated if it appears as a cold and emotionless abstraction. Emotions affect how we do science as well as how we stay healthy or become ill.
The first component of the molecules of emotion is a molecule found on the surface of cells in body and brain called the opiate receptor. It was my discovery of the opiate receptor that launched my career as a bench scientist in the early s, when I found a way to measure it and thereby prove its existence. It is the very foundation of the modern scientific method, the means by which the material world is admitted into existence.
Unless we can measure something, science won't concede it exists, which is why science refuses to deal with such "nonthings" as the emotions, the mind, the soul, or the spirit.
But what is this former nonthing known as a receptor? At the time I was getting started, a receptor was mostly an idea, a hypothetical site believed to be located somewhere in the cells of all living things. The scientists who most needed to believe in it were the pharmacologists those who study and invent drugs because it was the only way they knew to explain the action of drugs in the organism.
Dating back to the early twentieth century, pharmacologists believed that for drugs to act in the body they must first attach themselves to something in it. The term receptor was used to refer to this hypothetical body component, which allowed the drug to attach itself and thereby in some mysterious way to initiate a cascade of physiological changes.
In her groundbreaking book Molecules of Emotion, Candace Pert provides startling and decisive answers to these and other challenging questions that scientists and philosophers have pondered for centuries. Her pioneering research on how the chemicals inside our bodies form a dynamic information network, linking mind and body, is not only provocative, it is revolutionary.
By establishing the biomolecular basis for our emotions and explaining these new scientific developments in a clear and accessible way, Pert empowers us to understand ourselves, our feelings, and the connection between our minds and our bodies -- body-minds -- in ways we could never possibly have imagined before.
SlideShare Explore Search You. Submit Search.
Successfully reported this slideshow. We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime. Upcoming SlideShare. Like this presentation? Why not share!
An annual anal Embed Size px. Start on. Show related SlideShares at end.