Researchers Find Missing Link Between the Brain and Immune System

http://neurosciencenews.com/lymphatic-system-brain-neurobiology-2080/

by summerdown2 • 11 years ago

393 109 11 years ago

neurosciencenews.com

summerdown22• 11 years ago

The paper can be found in Nature here:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/natu...

gwern2• 11 years ago

Fulltext: https://www.dropbox.com/s/2mmdmty3nxfe5u8/2015-louveau.pdf / http://sci-hub.org/downloads/e18c/louveau2015.pdf

atmosx• 11 years ago

Thanks!

fixermark• 11 years ago

I'm not a doctor or neuroscientist, but this strikes me as a significant find if I'm understanding it correctly, right? "We were pretty sure the lymphatic system doesn't directly connect to the brain. Well we were wrong, (points) there it is."

summerdown22• 11 years ago

I'm not a doctor or neuroscientist either, but from what I gather it is indeed significant.

It potentially makes the link between the brain and the body chemically study-able. Up to now there's always been the assumption of a brain/blood barrier stopping much of the chemical transfers. Now it appears there's a mechanism that might bypass that.

Again, this is just what I gather from reading. I have no special expertise.

timr4• 11 years ago

Blood is not the same as lymph. This is a lymphatic drainage vessel, not a blood vessel.

Think of the lymphatic system as a kind of a superhighway for your immune system. It doesn't carry blood.

timr4• 11 years ago

We've known that there had to be a brain/immune connection of some sort. We didn't know that there was a tube.

Remember that most of the interesting stuff in biology is invisible to the naked eye. Also, despite a few hundred years of poking around in corpses, we're still pretty crude in terms of what we can see and understand anatomically. The assumption that we have this stuff "mostly figured out" strikes me more as wishful thinking than fact.

It's interesting to find a new tube lurking around, but then, it sounds like a pretty small tube. Animals are messy on the inside. Also, dark.

skmurphy• 11 years ago

We now know there is at least one tube, and perhaps much much more.

In terms of mostly figured out I think we are still below 1% of what we may know in 2100 about the body.

Michael Murphy wrote a very interesting book "The History of the Body" in 1993 http://www.amazon.com/The-Future-Body-Explorations-Evolution... curating a number of observations on the potential extent of our capabilities.

shostack4• 11 years ago

Loved this comment as you did a great job of distilling the level of wonder that still remains to be discovered.

While I'm not in any way qualified to assess this, it seems the fact that there's essentially a new piece of human anatomy that we've discovered is game changing. Potentially on the level of things that cause entire fields of medicine to re-evaluate what they thought they knew.

I wonder what this means for other things we've taken for granted about neurochemistry. Any qualified individuals care to speculate on the possibilities?

josu2• 11 years ago

So you are saying that this was an known unknown, what other known unknowns are there about the human body?

vlasev• 11 years ago

What boggled my mind is that in this day and age there could still be tubes within the human body that we don't know about! How is this possible?

webnrrd2k• 11 years ago

In Vagina: An Autobiography, Naomi Wolf explains how the clitoris wasn't fully mapped out until (IIRC) the 70's. There is a lot of internal structure that was missed for a long time... I find it amazing that this could have happened, and it doesn't surprise me that there are still important features of human anatomy to be discovered.

BTW, I don't think I agree with everything she writes, but It's a really interesting book.

marincounty• 11 years ago

I wonder if I will be alive if they ever figure out how the Placebo Effect works? With discoveries like this--maybe? I always used the Placebo Effect as the existence of a God. I will probally be proved wrong by science, if God decides to give me a few years? (Yes, I have faith. I am probably delusional? It helps me get through the day. I don't want to offend atheists? So, please don't hammer me.)

moey• 11 years ago

How come having faith makes one 'probably delusional? How is having faith offending atheists?

I find your comment offending.

collyw3• 11 years ago

I am not a believer, but until science comes up with a better explanation of where the universe came from, I am not going to bash anyone else's religion. (The creationist part is pretty suspect to me though).

gwern2• 11 years ago

If you really cared about the placebo effect, you would be reading papers on it and its mechanism. The placebo effect is not that mysterious: many instances can be traced to specifics like confirmation bias, genetics (particularly COMT variants), regression to the mean, etc.

anigbrowl3• 11 years ago

I'm not offended, just confused about what you are trying to say.

roywiggins• 11 years ago

There's no particular reason to believe that the placebo effect is nonphysical other than the fact that we don't know exactly how it works. Lots of things fall into that category.

You can ascribe God to dark matter and placebo effects, but you just have a God of the Gaps.

dzhiurgis2• 11 years ago

I think I see what you mean and was looking for question like this, which is:

Does it mean that brain can control your immune system?

I don't think so. It looks like immune system protects your brain though. Also I am not medical scientist and it would be nice to hear others opinions.

lucaspiller• 11 years ago

There have been studies on whether being happy makes you healthier, and yes there is a correlation between it:

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/magazine/happiness-stress-h...

Whether that's due to this, or just the fact that the brain controls the release of stress hormones into the bloodstream is a different question.

tunesmith• 11 years ago

I actually think it's interesting to consider how this could relate to the placebo effect. Linkage between brain and immune system.

lobster_johnson• 11 years ago

The placebo effect is not that mysterious, and doesn't need religion to make sense. Opioids and neurotransmitters such as dopamine play a large part. The neurological and psychosomatic mechanisms have not been all figured out, but the solutions are not found in superstition.

Bjartr• 11 years ago

I wonder what it would say about the under development placebo effect blocker if placebos were evidence of god.

aurora72• 11 years ago

According to Loren Cordain, autoimmune diseases such as MS are triggered by eating certain kinds of food such as legume and milk.

mkagenius• 11 years ago

Discoveries like these scares me sometimes that how little we know about our body and nature.

iyn• 11 years ago

I totally understand the feeling, but on the other hand, it's incredible that there is so much to explore, so many new things to learn, see and experience. Yes, everything around seems to be pretty complex, at least considering our current abilities [0], but I believe that we can choose how we look at the world/problems - pragmatic optimism may help with feeling overwhelmed :).

[0] Sometimes I think that the perceived complexity of the universe says more about the mind than the universe itself.

pcrh• 11 years ago

Awesome finding, I hope it is confirmed soon. Many neurodegenerative diseases are known to involve an immune component, but how that might occur has been a mystery.

It has very significant implications for diseases such as Alzheimer's disease, Lou Gehrig's disease (aka Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, ALS), multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, etc.

senorito• 11 years ago

Well ... it's great that finally the physiological structures of this connection are unveiled, but it's been known for a long time that you can measurably positively affect your immune system by means of meditation which is a mental process.

BadCookie5• 11 years ago

Could this finding explain why I (and many other people) get migraine headaches as part of an allergic response to certain foods?

msie3• 11 years ago

Why would anyone downvote you for this?

msie3• 11 years ago

I shouldn't be downvoted for questioning why another innocuous comment is downvoted. I was defending a worthwhile comment. Geez...

MrBunny3• 11 years ago

So I have MS. I go to any link that has to do with the Immune system. Recently I see tons of "discoveries" and attempts to link it to MS. Which gets me excited but than I start to think how much of this is truth and how much is bullshit? Or that MS and others like it are so complex that all of the findings are true... Either way starting to have a hard time finding hope in any of these articles.

swsieber• 11 years ago

I think we are just beginning to scratch the surface of the link between our immune systems and things like MS. I think the fact that we have so much coming to light bodes well. I do think much of it is overstated; but that there is so much activity makes me think we'll start seeing real progress.

In case you didn't see it earlier (a week or two ago, perhaps in a comment somewhere?) http://www.nih.gov/researchmatters/january2015/01122015reset... Apparently reseting the immune system can halt MS to a certain degree. And that's what I think our real progress will be: by degrees, because those things are complex.

BadCookie5• 11 years ago

I risk getting downvoted for this, but have you tried any dietary changes? There are cases of people with MS who have seen tremendous improvement on a low histamine or paleo style diet. There are no guarantees, of course, but what do you have to lose? I would think it would be worth the inconvenience of trying it out for a few months even if the odds of success are very small.

Here's an example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLjgBLwH3Wc

MrBunny3• 11 years ago

I actually have changed my diet and take drugs that help prevent more events. Additionally its really hard to track the progression since you can have an event (damage) without actually knowing (mild issues). However the damage is there and IMO is what produce the most day to day trouble. Tricking your brain into thinking your feet are on fire or your arm is weak weird shit like that. When I finally got MRI they found 7+ lesions in the brain and spine. For me to be honest most days I'm ok but it really sucks take these crazy expensive drugs every day. It's a very expensive disease that produces lasting damage even if a cure is to found.

Sorry don't mean to rant.

sago2• 11 years ago

MS responds very well to a whole range of therapies that have no proven disease modifying abilities. It is an almost perfect disease for a methodology to claim success on. The Relapsing Remitting course is variable, so people with the condition are likely to seek new treatment during worse periods, and thereafter regress to the mean. The knock on effects of the lesions in brain and spine can often be self-limiting (tiredness, pain, lack of coordination, mood changes, diminished vision), so are very conducive to placebo effects. MS can in some patients plateau and relapse rates drop off or cease (not often, but sometimes), so it is perfect for testimonials of dramatic benefits, if you don't systematically count the failures.

If you check out just about any 'alternate' modality, you'll have a very good chance of finding it claims high success on MS. In comparison, most modalities don't tend to claim success rates on amputations. Though both involve the destruction of tissues.

It's a great case study in science based medicine.

"what do you have to lose?" - in general time, often money, and a demonstrated reduced likelihood of pursuing scientifically valid treatments. The more claims of beneficial treatments adding to therapeutic noise, the harder it is for individuals to assess treatments properly. On aggregate, we're worse off for the claims of well meaning (and hucksterish) folks.

"it would be worth the inconvenience of trying it out for a few months even if the odds of success are very small." - isn't that the sales pitch of every snake oil salesman or true believer?

FWIW: I have PPMS, and I've heard literally hundreds of claims, ranging from many different (and contradictory) diets, through 'eastern medicine' to revival prayer meetings. The details of the method change, but the structure of the claims, and the way they use evidence, are remarkably similar.

SwellJoe3• 11 years ago

"I risk getting downvoted for this, but have you tried any dietary changes?"

Because you should be downvoted for this.

People who have long-standing health conditions, that they have perhaps battled their whole lives, don't need people on the Internet arm-chair quarterbacking their treatment. They have medical professionals that they've worked with for years and trust, they have almost certainly done more research than you or I about their condition, and they have heard the latest fad cure-all from everyone, everyday, for years. They get it on their facebook wall, they get it from well-meaning (but poorly informed) friends and family, and they get it from strangers on the Internet.

Don't be that stranger on the Internet. Your intentions are positive and laudable, your actions are not.

In short: Unless someone has asked for advice about treatment options for their chronic condition, it is probably impolite to offer it.

Source: Conversations with friends with MS, CP, disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, and various trainings in how to provide safer spaces for people with a variety of conditions.

mojobot• 11 years ago

I do the same thing, because my brother has it. For what it's worth, he went to a series of lectures from the guy that wrote this book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Happiness-Advantage-Principles-Per...

It has helped him deal with things.

88e282102ae2e5b• 11 years ago

One reason why researchers inappropriately link their findings to a disease is because grant agencies don't really fund basic research anymore. So if you want to do basic research, you just think of the most relevant disease and spin the impact of your results when reporting back to the grant agency and to the press. The actual paper won't actual make any grand claims, except something at the end of the discussion that's like "oh and this will let us figure out MS."

The problem is that basic research really is crucial to understanding many diseases, but you can't get it funded because it's not sexy enough (or really, because funding has been cut so much in most countries). So on one hand, the claims that you see are definitely blown out of proportion, but it doesn't mean that something useful wasn't learned. You'd have to read the paper to really know.

rollthehard6• 11 years ago

On the bullshit side column, what's your view on Naltrexone? I take it for Crohn's and it has helped me a lot and know of many MS patients who have benefited from it too.

pmelendez3• 11 years ago

"treatment of neurological diseases ranging from autism to Alzheimer’s"

It upsets me that the author keep referring autism as a disease. A high functioning autistic would be very offended if you say that their way of thinking is a disease.

Note to the downvoters: A developmental range of disorders is not a disease. If you don't agree you are invited to comment.

proksoup• 11 years ago

That is true, offense does come easy.

Ableism and this article comes to mind http://www.autistichoya.com/p/ableist-words-and-terms-to-avo...

(that their* way of thinking)

pmelendez3• 11 years ago

Thanks! I just fixed the typo. The article looks very interesting too.

what-no-tests• 11 years ago

TIL "DoucheCanoe"

snowwrestler• 11 years ago

"Disease" is commonly used as a catch-all word for any malfunctioning of the body, including of the brain. For example if you click the medical definition (3rd bullet) on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disorder

It jumps you to an anchor on the Disease page.

So: even if it offends you, it is not incorrect usage.

I did not downvote you.

pmelendez3• 11 years ago

When you visit the link you would see:

"The term disorder is often considered more value-neutral and less stigmatizing than the terms disease or illness, and therefore is a preferred terminology in some circumstances"

Also, regarding mental disorders the link says:

"In mental health, the term mental disorder is used as a way of acknowledging the complex interaction of biological, social, and psychological factors in psychiatric conditions."

And the wikipedia entry even touch the point I was referring to:

"On the other hand, by emphasizing the medical nature of the condition, this term (disease) is sometimes rejected, such as by proponents of the autism rights movement."

Finally the link starts the section with this phrase:

"In many cases, terms such as disease, disorder, morbidity and illness are used interchangeably.[3] ##There are situations however when specific terms are considered preferable.##" (emphasis is mine)

polskibus• 11 years ago

I wonder if this breakthrough will allow development of better atopy treatments. Allergic rhinitis can be a real pain in the ass.

foxhedgehog2• 11 years ago

I've been telling doctors for years that there seems to be some connection between my digestive issues and my sinus trouble.

sharjeel• 11 years ago

Thanks to the HN comments which assured that it is important. Otherwise after reading the first sentence and processing it with standard sensational filtering regex of my brain, I wouldn't have proceeded forward.

degenerate• 11 years ago

Haha, I never thought of what a regex match would look like for headlines, that's pretty damn hilarious :)

seanp2k2• 11 years ago

I'd think you'd have better luck using bayes with some clever stemming / tokenization :)

WalterSear• 11 years ago

"Medical scientists hate it!"

Mahn• 11 years ago

Pointless weekend project idea: A service that scans articles for matching regexes to classify the level of bullshit of what you are reading. It could even be a browser extension with the bullshit indicator automatically shown for each page in its icon.

BurningFrog• 11 years ago

Neural network!

slowmovintarget• 11 years ago

http://www.blablameter.com/index.php

(Article has an index of 0.14 -- not BS)

nkozyra• 11 years ago

This just requires some NLP to identify obvious hyperbole. In fact, you could probably just watch HN for long enough, establish some training data and have this happen somewhat automatically for you in the browser.

eterm• 11 years ago

http://www.quackometer.net/

edit to add: Not mine, just a site I used to know about that fit this description.

anigbrowl3• 11 years ago

tl;dr lymphatic nodes go all the way up the back of your brain and into your sinuses. We'd been ripping them out and throwing them away every time we did autopsies or dissections because they were attached to the inside of the skull. Oops.

refurb2• 11 years ago

the back of your brain and into your sinuses

Dural sinuses, not nasal sinuses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dural_venous_sinuses

anigbrowl3• 11 years ago

Thanks for that. I thought 'up the back of your brain' was clear when I wrote it but I suppose sinuses are more often associated with a runny nose.

kazinator2• 11 years ago

every time we did autopsies or dissections

It follows that we also rip them out when we open the skull to perform surgeries! Quite possibly, they don't grow back.

I hypothesize that some brain injuries due to impact could tear them too.

spyder• 11 years ago

But how they didn't notice in with MRI or CT scans? Is it because their resolution isn't high enough yet for that?

ENGNR• 11 years ago

Connection between autism and immune system potentially found, further study needed to determine the specifics.

The anti-vaxers are going to have a field day with all this gray area to sow misinformation into.

yuhong• 11 years ago

I am thinking this may be the reason vaccines appeared to cause autism. Of course, this is not a reason not to vaccinate, but the point of vaccines is to invoke the immune system.

kazinator2• 11 years ago

Given the previous belief that there are no lymph vessels connecting to the brain, what was the hypothesis for how lymphoma can spread to the brain?

ChristianMarks3• 11 years ago

Self-promotion is suspect in this highly competitive, and not infrequently nasty field. It was known that there was some transport mechanism--now there are details. But I would caution some skepticism, especially when the discoverer trumpets the extraordinary significance of the discovery.

ejstronge• 11 years ago

Self-promotion is suspect in this highly competitive, and not infrequently nasty field.

I'm not sure who's self-promoting; this is a news article about a big discovery.

But I would caution some skepticism, especially when the discoverer trumpets the extraordinary significance of the discovery.

The linked article is from a news organization.

Further, the data for the article are published in a high-profile journal; these are fairly credible findings.

ChristianMarks3• 11 years ago

If you are not sure, then read the article and keep track of what the researchers say. This will increase your degree of sureness.

nunodonato• 11 years ago

science is catching up with yoga... good to know :P

austinjp• 11 years ago

While is very interesting, from what I can see the research was done in mice not humans.

The diagram of the "new" human lymphatic system is in the press release not the research paper.

I do recognise the value of animal models in research, and this is intriguing, but with tempering with a little caution.

nate_meurer2• 11 years ago

How they discovered it:

The vessels were detected after Louveau developed a method to mount a mouse’s meninges – the membranes covering the brain – on a single slide so that they could be examined as a whole. “It was fairly easy, actually,” he said. “There was one trick: We fixed the meninges within the skullcap, so that the tissue is secured in its physiological condition, and then we dissected it."

Can someone explain what it means to fix the meninges to the skullcap? Do they mean they attached it to the skull bone? How then do they mount a curved bone to a slide?

richardbrevig• 11 years ago

If I had to venture a guess:

They're referring to fixation [0], or preservation of the tissue, and not to affixation, the attachment of something.

So, basically, they fixed the tissue prior to removing it from the skull, causing it to keep form. Whereas, if they removed the tissue from the skull and then chemically fixed it, the tissue would have already lost form and the lymph would be undetectable (no longer be in original form).

Think about a cake in a pan. Baking = fixing. Remove the cake before "fixing" it, and it's a plot of mess. "Fix" it first, and you have a free-standing cake, it'll hold shape. Bad analogy, sorry. :)

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_(histology)

Edit: forgot reference.

nate_meurer2• 11 years ago

Thank you! That makes sense of the wording; they fixed the tissue within the skullcap, not to it.

Researchers Find Missing Link Between the Brain and Immune System

Related Stories