Slashdot Mirror


Neuron Path Discovery May Change Our Conception of Itching

Hugh Pickens writes "Historically, many scientists have regarded itching as just a less intense version of pain, though decades spent searching for itch-specific nerve cells have been unfruitful. Now, Nature reports that neuroscientist Zhou-Feng Chen and his colleagues at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri have found the first behavioral evidence that there are separate circuits of nerve cells to convey itchiness and pain, and their studies suggest that itch and pain signals are transmitted along different pathways in the spinal cord. 'Most people accept that there are specific, highly specialized neurons for sensations like taste,' says Chen. 'But for pain and itch this is much more controversial.'" (Continues below.) "Two years ago, Chen's group discovered that a cell-surface protein called the gastrin-releasing peptide receptor (GRPR) is important for sensing itchiness but not pain in mice. When Chen and his colleagues destroyed GRPR-bearing neurons by means of a cell toxin, the mice reacted to painful stimuli just like normal mice, licking themselves and flinching or jumping in response to heat, highly irritant chemicals and mechanical pressure. But when the researchers injected the animals with chemicals that normally cause scratching, such as histamine, they barely responded, and the greater the number of GRPR-expressing neurons destroyed, the more subdued was the scratching response."

161 comments

  1. Pondering the luck of others by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    [...] the first behavioral evidence that there are separate circuits of nerve cells to convey itchiness and pain, and their studies suggest that itch and pain signals are transmitted along different pathways in the spinal cord.

    This got me thinking...

    You know how it is when you're stuck in a conversation at work with Bob the Office Drone and you get a terrible itch building up in waves across your scrotum? The kind that makes you force a smile on your face while you're thinking "Man oh man, I wish Bob would fuck off so I could scratch myself!"

    Well... quadriplegics don't get that! Lucky bastards.

    Guess I'm a "the glass is 3% full" kind-of-guy.

    .

    --
    Trolling is a art,
    1. Re:Pondering the luck of others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Got karma to burn grub? Personally my itch spot is in the rare little fold of skin just at the tip of the coccyx (an inch above the anus). It escalates into burning pain if I sit still on it long enough.

      AC obviously

    2. Re:Pondering the luck of others by Fluffeh · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Well... quadriplegics don't get that! Lucky bastards.

      What if they do get that feeling... but no amount of scratching relieves it? Good god, that would be like... like... being stuck in a wheelchair for the rest of your life! Arghhh!!!

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    3. Re:Pondering the luck of others by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Some do, actually. Phantom Limb syndrome does weird things. The worst bit is it's totally impossible to scratch it.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    4. Re:Pondering the luck of others by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Phantom Scrotum Syndrome?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    5. Re:Pondering the luck of others by ajseidl · · Score: 1

      That's Slashdot for you--always breaking new ground. How long before Pfizer has a drug to treat Phantom Testicular Itch? Upside, I suppose they won't have to test for birth defects in test subjects progeny.

      --
      I see donkeys.
    6. Re:Pondering the luck of others by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      Phantom Scrotum Syndrome?

      Well, just ask any nice lady whether she got it...

    7. Re:Pondering the luck of others by CODiNE · · Score: 1

      If they're only missing one limb then scratching the other side usually makes it stop. Now if you've lost BOTH limbs to that terrible accident then... errrr... well there's always transcendental meditation.

      --
      Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
    8. Re:Pondering the luck of others by skeffstone · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This awesome TED talks talks about phantom limbs, and one way to truly remove them! http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/vilayanur_ramachandran_on_your_mind.html Grab a cup of coffee, and enjoy! :)

    9. Re:Pondering the luck of others by dov_0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      you're stuck in a conversation at work with Bob the Office Drone and you get a terrible itch building up in waves across your scrotum? The kind that makes you force a smile on your face while you're thinking "Man oh man, I wish Bob would fuck off so I could scratch myself!"

      You wait til people are gone before you scratch?

      --
      sudo mount --milk --sugar /cup/tea /mouth /etc/init.d/relax start
    10. Re:Pondering the luck of others by budgenator · · Score: 1

      Well... quadriplegics don't get that! Lucky bastards.

      Are you sure, quads get phantom limb pain, so I assume phantom limb itching is also likely; imagine an itch that can't be scratched. I burned my hand a few years ago, at the burn clinic they, in a teaching hospital, aways ask about pain, never about itching. Finally one Dr. from another hospital casually mentioned that benedryl would stop the itching. Imagine the gritty itch from a bad sunburn lasting for 3 months, God bless that Dr.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    11. Re:Pondering the luck of others by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      As my old friend Willy the Pimp used to say, "I hate the itch, but I love that scratch."

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    12. Re:Pondering the luck of others by filthpickle · · Score: 1

      I saw something interesting about that. They used mirrors to make it seem to the person that the missing limb was actually there...in some cases it helped those symptoms.

      The (oversimplified) idea was that once your brain sees yourself with the missing limb apparently there and alright...it stops thinking that there is something wrong. I can't remember where I saw this.

    13. Re:Pondering the luck of others by boast · · Score: 1

      wish I had mod points. That was interesting.

    14. Re:Pondering the luck of others by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Also reminds me of this. They touch your hand (which is hidden) and a fake hand at the same time, and your mind begins to think the fake hand is your own.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    15. Re:Pondering the luck of others by treeves · · Score: 1

      This reminds me of something I read in a book by Richard Restak, a neurologist and author of several books on the brain. You can do an exercise with another person to fool your brain into accepting an inanimate object as being a part of your body. Sit in a chair across from the other person at a solid opaque table and have the other person tap your thigh (under the table where you can't see it) in exact synchrony with them tapping the table top. It has to be perfectly synchronized or it won't work. Do this for a little while and you will start to perceive the table top as part of your body, since your brain is associating the feeling in your leg with what your eyes see (the table being tapped). Then have the other person tap the table without touching your leg and you should anticipate a sensation in your leg. I haven't tried it yet but I want to....

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    16. Re:Pondering the luck of others by shaitand · · Score: 1

      You know. I just realized that there is actually a condition under which I might consider castration... phantom blowjob syndrom. Where my phantom member always feels like I'm getting head.

  2. Ouch. Torturous. by BobSixtyFour · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Mice that had lost the GRPR-producing neurons reacted to painful stimuli just like normal mice, licking themselves and flinching or jumping in response to heat, highly irritant chemicals and mechanical pressure."

    Poor mice :(

    1. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If hooking a car battery up to a monkey's brain will help find the cure for AIDS and save somebody's life, I have two things to say... the red is positive and the black is negative.
      --Nick Dipaolo

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Fluffeh · · Score: 1

      You should see what they do to test the products we all use everyday. Double ouchies.

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    3. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Rakshasa+Taisab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hey, I'd be all ok even if it was your brain being wired up for some car battery shocks.

      --
      - These characters were randomly selected.
    4. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by dcollins · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "If hooking a car battery up to a monkey's brain will help find the cure for AIDS and save somebody's life, I have two things to say... the red is positive and the black is negative.
      --Nick Dipaolo"

      What if it's a hundred monkeys? A million monkeys? A billion? What if there's a 5% chance it might help? What if it's a researcher who thinks it might help, but hasn't been right to date?

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    5. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're just monkeys.

      Lazy bastards haven't finished my copy of Hamlet.

      Work harder, you ingrates!

    6. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by z0idberg · · Score: 1

      What if you had AIDS and it might cure you?

    7. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by nacturation · · Score: 2, Funny

      What if it's a hundred monkeys? A million monkeys? A billion? What if there's a 5% chance it might help? What if it's a researcher who thinks it might help, but hasn't been right to date?

      As long as it's not an infinite number of monkeys brains being bashed in with an infinite number of typewriters because then we'd not only destroy the complete works of Shakespeare, but also the cure for every problem there is.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    8. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by TheLink · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm pretty sure that hooking up a car battery to your brain can cure you of AIDS.

      The problems are the resulting side effects and reduced longevity.

      --
    9. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      It's even better when you realize that AIDS is a lifestyle disease, like obesity.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    10. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need more batteries.

    11. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by overcaffein8d · · Score: 1

      yes, i had it covered on the infinite amount of monkeys and infinite amount of typewriters, but i must have neglected to get the infinite amount of ink. at least they're not using computers with windows, because then they'd have an infinite number of BSOD

      --
      Those of us who think they know everything annoy those of us who do.
    12. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Nathrael · · Score: 1

      So if you get raped and get AIDS, it's because of your lifestyle? Damn these girls in their miniskirts. They were asking for it!

      --
      A good education is a bit like a STD - it makes you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and gives you a desire to spread it.
    13. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't be joking about other peoples' misery.

    14. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by superwiz · · Score: 1

      You shouldn't be joking about other peoples' misery.

      "If a bus hits you, it's comedy. If I get a splinter, it's tragedy" -- Mel Brooks

      Having said that, the gp was not "joking". He was using a hyperbole to demonstrate a point. While some jokes are hyperbole, not all hyperbole are jokes -- some simply demonstrate a point.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    15. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Better test them on monkey than on animal rights activists. I would actually be against any animal-rights activists that would volunteer to take a monkey's place in an experiment. Peoples' well-being comes before animals'.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    16. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1
      And his point was?

      Millions of people die of AIDS in Africa without doing anything in particular to go looking for it. Thousands got AIDS in France simply by receiving tainted blood transfusions. Millions of babies get it from their mom while still in the womb. Now, please explain, how is that "lifestyle"?

    17. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by shentino · · Score: 1

      Come to think of it I could say the same thing about how the food industry, particularly fast food, deliberately taints their product to make you fat, hungry, and addicted to the food.

      Besides Kevin Trudeau, you should also take a look at Super Size Me, as well as Fast Food Nation, two other authors who have nothing at ALL to do with KT.

    18. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Now, please explain, how is that "lifestyle"?

      I don't believe I have the burden of proof of that statement. You attacked the style of the statement (hyperbole) by mis-characterizing it as a joke. I explained your mis-characterization. That doesn't mean that I agreed with the content of the statement. Nor does this very comment mean that I disagree with the content of that statement. So far I made no judgment on the content of that statement. And I don't have a burden of proof of a statement on which I made no judgment.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    19. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      Peoples' well-being comes before animals'.

      I wonder if you would still have that opinion if you were reincarnated as a lab monkey.

    20. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Vovk · · Score: 1

      I don't believe I have the burden of proof of that statement. You attacked the style of the statement (hyperbole) by mis-characterizing it as a joke. I explained your mis-characterization. That doesn't mean that I agreed with the content of the statement. Nor does this very comment mean that I disagree with the content of that statement. So far I made no judgment on the content of that statement. And I don't have a burden of proof of a statement on which I made no judgment.

      Aaaaaaah!!! Stop it! You obviously disagreed with

      It's even better when you realize that AIDS is a lifestyle disease, like obesity.

      But you missed the entire point that it was sarcasm. Then OTHER PEOPLE missed your sarcastic/hyperbolic statement about girls in miniskirts and now there's an entire thread which should be labeled offtopic or troll and it's making my brain hurt :(

      hell... the entire thread started off with "poor mice", let's get back to that.

      I am 100% for testing on animals if it means we can make advances in medical science. Now, the science of itchiness... I'm quite positive that there is some better project on which these researchers can work.

    21. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Krneki · · Score: 1

      I'm positive this will work, HIV positive.

      --
      Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
    22. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by superwiz · · Score: 1

      Aaaaaaah!!! Stop it! You obviously disagreed with

      You probably think that because you think that this comment:

      So if you get raped and get AIDS, it's because of your lifestyle? Damn these girls in their miniskirts. They were asking for it!

      was mine. It wasn't.

      hell... the entire thread started off with "poor mice", let's get back to that.

      Please!!!

      I am 100% for testing on animals if it means we can make advances in medical science.

      hear, hear

      Now, the science of itchiness... I'm quite positive that there is some better project on which these researchers can work.

      That's a common misconception about academic research. It does basic science. So it doesn't try to be "useful". Its aim is (a) to be interesting to the researchers (b) to provide description of natural phenomena without concern for its use. The fact that some of the basic research ends up being useful is purely coincidental.

      In this particular case, it's actually not a bad idea to do a a completely exhaustive basic research. Since it's not yet understood how every little detail of a human body works, it's not a bad idea to find out and document all of it. Doing something "useful" with that information is the next stage. But given the interconnected nature of the all the systems in the body, it's a really, really, really good idea to research and document it all.

      It's almost guaranteed that someday someone will make a pill for some nasty condition and that pill might accidentally also effect the GRPR-bearing neurons. Because of this research, they'll be able to understand why during clinical trials some patients were found to experience itchiness. It's practically a guarantee that this will happen sooner or later. When it comes to documenting human body, encyclopedic understanding is never a bad idea.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    23. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by superwiz · · Score: 1

      I wonder if you would still have that opinion if you were reincarnated as a lab monkey.

      I don't wonder that. I am also going to continue not wondering that. I'll take my chances. But I do appreciate the concern. Really... I really do.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    24. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder what your opinion would be if you were reincarnated as an anti-monkey! (Suffering pain when it experiences pleasure, and vice versa)

    25. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Ant+P. · · Score: 1

      Well to be fair, they aren't dressing like that for nothing.

    26. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Sausage+Nibblets · · Score: 1

      What if it's a hundred monkeys? A million monkeys? A billion? What if there's a 5% chance it might help? What if it's a researcher who thinks it might help, but hasn't been right to date?

      To the victor go the spoils. Sorry monkeys, but we're more evolved, and even though it might be horrific, we're going to use you to make sure that we, the more highly evolved humans, continue to stay on top and prosper. Thanks though, we appreciate your willingness to get shot into space.

    27. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How did their mother get it? How did the owners of the tainted blood get it? How did it start in Africa?

      Ask yourself these questions and you'll arrive at the conclusions hinted at by the GP.

    28. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      It's even better when you realize that AIDS is a lifestyle disease, like obesity.

      It boggles the mind that there are still people ignorant enough to believe this. Even here - or perhaps especially here.

    29. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by pipingguy · · Score: 1

      OK then, let's replace the monkeys with animal rights activists then. Same screeching noises and poo-flinging but less guilt.

    30. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by darpo · · Score: 1

      Speak for yourself. Some of us do our best to buy product brands -- my laundry detergent and dish soap, for example -- that aren't tested on animals.

    31. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fine, reasoned moral argument.

    32. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Golddess · · Score: 1

      Peoples' well-being comes before animals'.

      I take it then that you are against other people smoking, drinking, eating fatty foods, red meat, white meat, fish, or even simply living (just to name a few things), even if it does not affect you in any way?

      If someone wants to volunteer themselves to be a guinea pig, I say let them.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    33. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      What if it's a hundred monkeys? A million monkeys? A billion?

      This is a ridiculous rhetorical situation for several reasons. Mostly because frying monkey brains isn't going to cure aids, but also because you're not going to get a billion damn monkeys.

      What if there's a 5% chance it might help?

      Another ridiculous point: describe to me how a research experiment might have a "5% chance" instead of "Well, it seems like it might work, but we won't know until we test" you know, like every research project out there. You think you have a cure and it's only afterward that you find out that you do or don't, there's no calculating the odds because you don't have that information.

      What if it's a researcher who thinks it might help, but hasn't been right to date?

      So you're asking what if it's a typical researcher: wrong right up until he's right?

      It's beside the point but my answer with all those conditions is still yes, because a trillion monkeys don't add up to one person in my book.

    34. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but what if it were one billion animal rights activists instead of monkeys? It would be worth it even if there was .00000000000000001% chance it might help.

    35. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by elmartinos · · Score: 1

      They might not have finished your copy of Hamlet, but have produced an enormous amount of Perl code.

    36. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by j33pn · · Score: 1

      I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if a billion monkeys suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced.

      --
      You people and your slight differences disgust me! - Prof. Farnsworth
    37. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by j33pn · · Score: 1

      I will destroy another major city every hour, that is, unless you pay me - One hundred billion monkeys!

      *The President and his advisors LAUGH.*

      Dr. Evil that's more than the entire federal monkey budget for 1969.

      --
      You people and your slight differences disgust me! - Prof. Farnsworth
    38. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      What if it's a hundred monkeys? A million monkeys? A billion?

      Then you'd probably have enough dead monkeys to open up your own chain restaurant. Thankfully, fried monkey brain and fried monkey toes are still a delicacy in some parts of the world.

    39. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Dammit! I CANNOT find the red terminal on this monkey!

    40. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Happler · · Score: 1

      Just remember, the internet is proof that a large amount of monkeys behind a large amount of keyboards does not produce Hamlet. Just porn.

    41. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      What if people got AIDS from donating money to TV preachers? Would you still support the urgent crash research to discover a cure?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    42. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      What if people got AIDS from donating money to Bush's reelection campaign?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    43. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by holmstar · · Score: 1

      The only unbiased definition I can come up with for "more evolved" would be "having accrued a greater number of mutations over the period of its existence", which I doubt would put humans on top.

      We probably would win for most adaptable, but that wouldn't necessarily mean that we are better. Being adaptable means that a species can do reasonably well in a variety of environments, but as a trade-off, that species probably isn't quite as efficient at living in any one specific environment, aside perhaps from the one they evolved in.

    44. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by holmstar · · Score: 1

      Ouch.... that joke was so bad it hurt.

    45. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by superwiz · · Score: 1

      That's a false analogy. I am not suggesting that animal rights activists should go to jail for volunteering to take a place of a monkey (not that this is even scientifically useful or feasible but just to humor the ethical question). What I am suggesting is that a scientist who would accept their donation of themselves while an experiment could be performed on a monkey would be acting unethically. They should chose to harm an animal if it can spare a suffering of a human being.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    46. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by Nathrael · · Score: 1

      Of course not. Natural selection is a nice thing. But sadly, AIDS can be gained by a number of things *besides* being a slut and having unprotected sex with strangers. You may even be infected during birth *shock*. Just take a look at Africa...

      --
      A good education is a bit like a STD - it makes you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and gives you a desire to spread it.
    47. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by PachmanP · · Score: 1

      Just remember, the internet is proof that a large amount of monkeys behind a large amount of keyboards does not produce Hamlet. Just porn.

      lol r u srs?! Ill tell my bff!

      --
      You're thinking small. Why miniaturize the laser, when we could instead enlarge the sharks? -John Searle
    48. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      I guess Penn and Teller said it best with (quoting from memory):
      "We would personally strangle, with our bare hands, every chimp in the world to save one street junkie".
      I'm not sure I quite agree, but I have some sympathy for the stand.

    49. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by bhiestand · · Score: 1

      yes, i had it covered on the infinite amount of monkeys and infinite amount of typewriters, but i must have neglected to get the infinite amount of ink. at least they're not using computers with windows, because then they'd have an infinite number of BSOD

      That's overkill - you only need one Windows ME CD for that.

      --
      SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
    50. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by dcollins · · Score: 1

      "You think you have a cure and it's only afterward that you find out that you do or don't, there's no calculating the odds because you don't have that information."

      Hello: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_inference

      "...my answer with all those conditions is still yes, because a trillion monkeys don't add up to one person in my book."

      Kind of funny that you spent so much time trying to obfuscate your actual answer.

      --
      We know where leadership by an anti-intellectual "strongman" who scapegoats minorities and likes boisterous rallies goes
    51. Re:Ouch. Torturous. by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I didn't read much of the Bayesian inference page so I still don't know what that's all about, but I can tell you as someone who does research on animals that we don't bother with it before we do a study.

      If something looks like it is going to work, you generally try it in a simpler model system than a monkey first, because of the costs involved, but if it passes that test it's entirely reasonable to jump right to the monkey model without doing that bayesian inference.

      I do stand corrected though, there might be a way to calculate the odds.

      Kind of funny that you spent so much time trying to obfuscate your actual answer.

      Really? So much time? There were 5 sentences before that, most answering other points you made, and I was following your order. And how much more straightforward an answer could I have given? You want a one word post of just "yes"?

  3. STD detection neuron pathway by syousef · · Score: 2, Funny

    I propose the name "STD detection neuron pathway". Now hand me that cream and leave me alone.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    1. Re:STD detection neuron pathway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are itching for that cream aren't you ? ;)

    2. Re:STD detection neuron pathway by OctaviusIII · · Score: 1

      Wait wait. STD? Sex?

      Who are you and how did you get on Slashdot!?

      --
      What's this? Another weblog? On transit?
  4. Itch by Tofof · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Great. After reading that, now I'm keenly aware of itching sensations all over my body - not unlike watching someone yawn.

    1. Re:Itch by masshuu · · Score: 4, Funny

      i was gona mod you Informative, but i decided that telling people to not read his comment is more important, otherwise it will drive you insane.

      OMG THE ICHING

      --
      O.o
    2. Re:Itch by 6Yankee · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I was already itching - stupid eczema.

      Now hopefully these people will hurry up and find a way to turn this off. I can't wait.

    3. Re:Itch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a documented effect. In fact, I've heard storied about how it's hilarious to go to a medical or scientific conference about itching—perhaps one concerning the subject of this very thread—and watch the audience fidget and scratch through the whole thing.

      I had to scratch about six times just while typing this post.

    4. Re:Itch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you are now breathing manually

    5. Re:Itch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MY LEFT ELBOW! YOU BASTARD!

  5. Interesting from an evolution POV by WindBourne · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have always thought that Evolution prefers the minimal amounts needed for life (greater complexity is difficult to maintain UNLESS for a reason). As such, it would be easier on life if the same neuron conveys pain and itch. Yet, Evolution chose to do something different.

    I wonder what was the stimuli for that?

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    1. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by ZackSchil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Removal of parasites, probably.

    2. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by wizardforce · · Score: 2, Interesting

      the two sensations could have evolved at differing times. pain would be most useful to prevent damage and the abiltiy to sense an itch is useful for correcting problems such as dry skin, certain chemical exposure etc. pain is associated with injury perhaps cells that sense an itch don't work the same way [no one has lopped off an arm and felt an itch for it after all...]

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    3. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by ZackSchil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      [no one has lopped off an arm and felt an itch for it after all...]

      Clearly you've never lost a limb. Phantom limb sensations cover pressure, pain, temperature, and irritation. You definitely can feel an itch on an arm or leg that has been lopped off.

    4. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by wizardforce · · Score: 1

      if someone hacks off an arm they are not going to experience anything other than pain first.

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    5. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evolution prefers nothing, whatever puts the survival chances up is more likely to survive and more likely to reproduce. There are many reasons I can think of for itching to be separate. For one, it means something completely different.

    6. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by masshuu · · Score: 1

      Let me word the orignal quote better: "If i stab you in the face with a scalpel, your first sensation and thought is not going to be "Hmm this itches", its going to be more along the lines of "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH FUUUUUUUUUUUUUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH"

      --
      O.o
    7. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Renraku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The reason for pain is to make you escape something.

      Such as burning yourself on a stove, getting stabbed, bitten, stung, etc. You don't want these things to happen. Pain is strongly connected with negative in most minds. At least, most pain..

      The reason for itching is to call your attention to something.

      It's kind of the difference between a critical error and an error. One's a dire warning, and the other one is just an exclamation. It would be very fucking useful to distinguish between the two. One, so that you don't freak out every time you walk through some grasses that tickle your legs. Two, so you don't beat your bed-mate to death when they rub up against you. Three, so you don't let bugs chew on you or flip out every time one does.

      I'll bet the 'itching' pathways have other uses as well. Perhaps the tickling response is there?

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    8. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      It has often occurred to me that, from an evolutionary standpoint, a great many things that aren't distinctly *negative* (that is, they don't particularly *negatively* impact survival/reproduction) could, once introduced into the genepool through random mutation, could continue to survive for a *very long time* before they *eventually* get removed from the genepool.

      Why does *everything* necessarily have to be particularly useful? Mutations are random, so the chances are good that there are random things which are sort of 'neutral' to our survival, which might not get 'selected' out of the population for thousands (millions?) of years. . .

    9. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the chances are good that there are random things which are sort of 'neutral' to our survival, which might not get 'selected' out of the population for thousands (millions?) of years. . .

      Like earlobes, the appendix, or nipples on men.

    10. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm itching to find out too.

      Oh crap..

    11. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by caerwyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're completely right.

      Evolution doesn't really incentivize anything. It provides disincentives for exactly one thing: structures and behaviors that result in a higher likelihood of death before reproduction.

      Evolution doesn't give a shit what your quality of life is like- unless it prevents you from reproducing. It doesn't give a shit what you do- after you've produce offspring. This is why male and female end-of-fertility times are correlated, and why that's also highly correlated with degradation of health. We haven't evolved to be immortal- we've evolved to a), create offspring and b) survive long enough to teach them. The same holds true for other species.

      There are quite a number of mutations that do not affect our reproductive ability. The fact that evolution doesn't prefer one over the other is not only a good thing- it's an essential thing; that genetic variability is what improves our odds of responding effectively to new and dangerous conditions. Neutral mutations are *very* common- and not only that, they're *essential*.

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    12. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, I used to be an EMT back in the 80's. I can tell you that it was easier to deal with ppl that lost fingers or limbs because they RARELY felt it. Likewise, the guy who had been in a gasoline explosion (but his pain was to come; horrible injury to have). The reason is that their body regularly shut down in terms of pain. OTH, a compound fracture of the femur was wicked painful. The gal was screaming, but did not notice the bit that we drilled into her knee. The reason is that all the various muscles around the femur had contracted and the muscles were cramping. Severe pain, but not enough for her body to shut it down. Likewise, a nail had been pulled off and in another case, a piece of wood had gone under a nail (accident), etc. In each case, the pain was enormous, but not enough to shut them down.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    13. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by ShakaUVM · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >>I'll bet the 'itching' pathways have other uses as well. Perhaps the tickling response is there?

      Tickling, I believe, is linked with touch. Your brain suppresses/mutes touches done to yourself, which is why most people can't tickle themselves. How does the brain tell? If your motion and the sensation come within a threshold of each other, it mutes the sensation. I think there's something like a 45ms threshold involved - when people moved a machine that then moved a tickling finger, if they added a delay of more than 45ms to it, suddenly people could tickle themselves.

      There's a lot of interesting hacks inside the human brain.

    14. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Evolution prefers nothing, whatever puts the survival chances up is more likely to survive and more likely to reproduce.
      Evolution prefers simplicity for EXACTLY that reason. In general, a simpler system will have a better chance of survival and reproduction. Otherwise, more energy going into survival means that it takes the creature longer periods of time before reproduction, which increases the odds of death. OTH, some amount of systems will move towards complexities.

      BTW, if you think that complex systems are preferred, then humans and other creatures such as Great Apes, Whales, elephants, pigs, etc should occupy the majority of living space. All of animals do not even come close to that. The fact that prokaryotes (as simple as it gets WRT to living life) are the largest mass of all should speak volumes about evolution. SO, yes, it does strike me that Evolution DOES prefer.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    15. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by bronney · · Score: 1

      You don't touch yourself much do you?? Sexual stimuli is very close to itching. Try it, you might like it.

    16. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by reverseengineer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, this is possibly an excellent example of evolution minimizing complexity through the tactic of re-purposing the same system to be used in different ways in different parts of an organism. As the article notes, the neurons that may be specific to itchiness have a cell surface protein called gastrin-releasing peptide receptor. Gastrin, as the name might suggest, also plays a role in the gastrointestinal system, where it is involved in signaling the release of hydrochloric acid. What do your digestive juices have to do with itchy skin? Notably, gastrin does not work directly to release stomach acid, but rather it binds to what are called ECL cells, which secrete histamine, which then stimulate the parietal cells of the stomach to release acid. Histamine is a versatile molecule that is particularly useful for organizing inflammatory responses, though these responses aren't always welcome. That's why you might take diphenhydramine for allergies and ranitidine for heartburn- both are antihistamines, though for different histamine receptors.

      Thus, strangely enough, skin itches share many of the same signaling pathways as digestion. The cell types involved (epithelial tissue) are similar though, so during the evolutionary development of skin, cells would already have inherited a sensitive network of cell surface receptors and signal transduction pathways. Why not find a way to put them to good use?

      --
      "FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."
    17. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Nathrael · · Score: 1

      The appendix actually has it's use - it's a "reservoir" for various bacteria. And earlobes exist to warm the ear and maintain balance, I think.

      --
      A good education is a bit like a STD - it makes you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and gives you a desire to spread it.
    18. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Evolution doesn't really incentivize anything. It provides disincentives for exactly one thing: structures and behaviors that result in a higher likelihood of death before reproduction.

      Don't forget number of offspring. A mutation that limited each parent to producing only one child in their lifetime would wipe itself out pretty quickly.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    19. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      I think you are anthropomorphizing a very broad theory/process waaay too much...

      Evolution is basically a series of random changes that results in a higher overall rate of survival. There is really nothing logical or simplifying about it - for example, the vast majority of a human brain, or even the human DNA sequence, is unused. Could be "obsolete" structures, or just random changes/development that never served a purpose but also never had any negative consequences.

      If someone were able to design a human brain from scratch, I'm sure it could be 10x as efficient as the one we have.

    20. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by mirkob · · Score: 1

      the major problem in your sentences is the word "chose",

      evolution is a result of a lot of different events and none of them is sentient nor is the total of them,

      so "choosing" an non redundant path isn't something that a "sentient" evolution logically do, it's simply a frequent occurrence because more simple solution to a problem tend to have easier time survive and reproduce.

    21. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Back in 79/80, when I was in my Genetics class, I had the weird idea as applied to cells. In particular, prof said that DNA was mostly empty space and did absolutely nothing. In addition, it was well known at that time that DNA and RNA only served as mapping and they had absolutely no other function. I told the prof that that kind of logic made zero sense. My rational was that cells will go towards the minimal energy usage and maintaining millions and even billions of base pairs is VERY expensive. I suggested in class that these HAD to do more than just sit around and be this way through "random mutation". Prof got mad at me and I lost a grade for that. 2 years later, a prof at CU happened on RNA cleaving itself. He got a Nobel for that.

      Now, I say that evolution will prefer simpler and yet, you and others say that it is not the case; that we have loads of left over material in our body. Well, when growing up, an appendix and spleen were taught as being vestigial organs, with little to no use. Things have changed even just a few days ago. Just because WE do not know of a function for cells, tissues, or an organ, does not mean that it is not being used. I am guessing that nearly all tissues/organs have important uses, or they would slowly disappear. Life that has lower energy requirements is far more likely to survive than one that requires loads of them (think of large dinos vs. the small mammals).

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    22. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      According to dict.org

      Chose:
      To make choice of; to select; to take by way of preference
      from two or more objects offered; to elect; as, to choose
      the least of two evils.
      ....

      And what is another term for Evolution? Natural something?

      The problem is that you are trying to apply a singular definition to a word that has multiple means. NATURE SELECTS (since it is natural selection), which is the same as saying that NATURE CHOOSES. That word does not mean that there was an intelligence behind it (note though, that it also does not preclude it either). In fact, natural SELECTION (or choice) is the very CORE of evolution. It is not random. There are pressures brought to bear on populations that naturally chooses.

      But, if you feel better with changing the word to selection, please feel free to do so. It will not matter in this case.

    23. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by armareum · · Score: 1

      And earlobes exist to ... maintain balance

      lol

      --
      Is this a rhetorical question?
    24. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by eric-x · · Score: 1

      awesome stories
      more please!!

    25. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> It has often occurred to me that, from an evolutionary standpoint, a great many things that aren't distinctly *negative* (that is, they don't particularly *negatively* impact survival/reproduction) could, once introduced into the genepool through random mutation, could continue to survive for a *very long time* before they *eventually* get removed from the genepool.

      one might call this "scaffolding"

    26. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      It doesn't even have to be lopped off. A friend of mine lost all use of one of his arms in a motorcycle wreck, and even though the limb is still there but the nerves were severed, he still feels pain. The doctors can't do anything about it.

    27. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by budgenator · · Score: 1

      When the thought "Wow I'm not screaming like a school girl" runs through your mind, you know your really fucked up.

      --
      Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
    28. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most men are able to produce milk if they try hard enough.

    29. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by pipingguy · · Score: 2, Funny

      'Tis but a scratch.

    30. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by motherpusbucket · · Score: 1

      The Phantom Limb can kill people with his residual sensations.
      Go Team Venture!

      --
      "You can't really dust for vomit" --Nigel Tufnel
    31. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by shiftless · · Score: 1

      for example, the vast majority of a human brain, or even the human DNA sequence, is unused.

      [citation needed]

    32. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      "Did you know men can breastfeed? Seriously. I read that somewhere. OK, I made it up. No, I read it somewhere, no, really. I wrote it down and then I read it. I believe everything I read. No, it's true. Men can breastfeed. Apparently you have to strap a couple cans of evaporated milk to your chest, and then you give the kid a can opener."
      -- Bob Sagat

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    33. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Tickling, I believe, is linked with touch. Your brain suppresses/mutes touches done to yourself, which is why most people can't tickle themselves.

      You can't tickle yourself with numb fingers either.

      And yet masturbation works.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    34. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      It's a well-believed fact!

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    35. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by holmstar · · Score: 1

      I know that the above is a crude joke, but with appropriate hormone supplements, men actually can develop working, ie: milk producing, mammary glands.

    36. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by holmstar · · Score: 1

      for example, the vast majority of a human brain, or even the human DNA sequence, is unused.

      As I understand it, we DO use 100% of our brain, but not necessarily all at the same time.

      Also, many sections of so called junk DNA have been found to serve a purpose after all; usually in regulating how genes that are adjacent to it are expressed. That probably isn't the case for all of it, but I doubt that it will be possible to say that "the vast majority" is junk.

    37. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>And yet masturbation works.

      Case in point.

      You can masturbate for free, and yet people hire hookers for handjobs. Why? It feels better to have someone else do it for you.

    38. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      A mutation that limited each parent to producing only one child in their lifetime would wipe itself out pretty quickly.

      Not if that child had N times more survival chance than a relative who could have N children.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    39. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      Not if that child had N times more survival chance than a relative who could have N children.

      No, even then the mutation will die out quickly. It takes two to reproduce. If each individual can only have one child, then even if every child lives to reproduce, the population will still shrink by half with each generation.

      Perhaps what you meant to say is that a mutation allowing individuals to have many children will also wipe itself out quickly if each child's chance of survival is too low.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    40. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by JSBiff · · Score: 1

      "It takes two to reproduce."

      No, it'd doesnt - at least, not in all species. In animals, it takes two to reproduce. There are plant species which 'vegetatively' reproduce - that is, part of the plant splits off and becomes a seperate plant (which happens to be a genetic 'clone' of the first plant). IIRC, most single-celled organisms reproduce by simply 'splitting' and cloning themselves.

      If you have a species which can reproduce like that, then the species could survive quite well even if each individual only cloned itself once - particularly if it has a sufficiently long lifespan - 1 becomes 2 becomes 3 becomes 4, etc.

    41. Re:Interesting from an evolution POV by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      True. I was referring to animals, since after all TFA is about animals.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  6. Uh by LeadLine · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So we know how we could (possibly) get rid of itches, but is there any research showing what purpose itching has?

    1. Re:Uh by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      I always thought it was obvious: remove epidermal defects.

      Dead skin, parasites etc.

    2. Re:Uh by causality · · Score: 1

      So we know how we could (possibly) get rid of itches, but is there any research showing what purpose itching has?

      Making you scratch?

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    3. Re:Uh by ILuvRamen · · Score: 1

      evolutionary anti-bug protection, duh. If we feel certain small nerve firings it's usually because of a bug landing on your skin and touching a hair or two so we scratch and the bug flies away. It doesn't come up much indoors these days of course.

      --
      Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
    4. Re:Uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My response to your diatribe is simply, all these people are idiots.

    5. Re:Uh by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Wow! I had no idea I had so many fans. Actaully I had forgotten that that feature of slashdot existed. Cool!

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  7. Itchy by parallel_prankster · · Score: 0

    So how many of you starting getting an itch after reading this article?

    1. Re:Itchy by zmollusc · · Score: 1

      Me.
      Also during the article. Right buttock.

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    2. Re:Itchy by pryoplasm · · Score: 1

      A minor itch. But it doesn't seem to be nearly as itch inducing as playind drums on Rock Band. For several test subjects and different testing times (my friends and I just messing around),there has yet to be a test where there was no itching involved. I know correlation =/= causation, but the statistics speak for themself....

      --
      Those who live by the sword, get shot by those who live by the gun...
    3. Re:Itchy by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      No child left behind program.

  8. Best fucking troll ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man, I wish I had your ability to tie the obviousness of itching to fucking Obama being evil. Think they'll name the new Godwin award after your ability here.

  9. Important and relevant research by rrohbeck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Remember, every successful FOSS project started with a developer who had an itch to scratch. Clearly we need more itching.

  10. This is old news by The_mad_linguist · · Score: 4, Informative

    Saw it in Science News last year. November 22, 2008.

    http://www.sciencenews.org/view/feature/id/38338/title/Itch

  11. Reason by sonicmerlin · · Score: 0

    So what would be the evolutionary reason for itchiness? My theory is that it provided a more acute sensation when something small (like a poisonous insect) was moving across one's skin. Or also perhaps an indicator of infection or disease?

  12. Eczema by TheLink · · Score: 3, Informative

    Would this help?

    http://www.webmd.com/skin-problems-and-treatments/eczema/news/20090427/bleach-baths-may-help-kids-with-ezcema

    Remember - use a _dilute_ solution. And consult a doc about this - maybe your eczema is different.

    --
    1. Re:Eczema by 6Yankee · · Score: 1

      I'll try anything once! Thanks for the link.

  13. Healing wounds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ok, so why do healing skin wounds itch?

    1. Re:Healing wounds? by Thiez · · Score: 1

      To convince you to lick them? Or maybe it doesn't have a purpose and it's merely something that isn't harmful. Interesting question.

  14. Torture by mr100percent · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I hope they don't use this to build the Agony Booth found in Star Trek.

    1. Re:Torture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they do...

  15. Does this actually change our conception? by Trepidity · · Score: 0, Troll

    This may certainly be interesting from a neuroscience point of view, but I would be troubled if anyone's conception of itching really changed because of a discovery about which neural pathways carry the signal. People who believe in a purely physical world governed by physical laws presumably already accept that everything that happens mentally is in some way or another implemented on our wetware. Is this really drawing some veil back: previously we thought itching was a magical sensation that came directly from fairies, but now we know it's "just neurons"? I would also be cautious about any particularly simplistic reductionist view: most of what goes on in the brain is much more complex than pop-science neuroscience discussions like to make out.

  16. I could have told them that after my dentist visit by mrjb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After a dentist visit with local anesthesia, I got bitten by a mosquito which caused a terrible itch on my cheek- but I couldn't feel my scratching to relief it. NOT FUN.

    --
    Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
  17. Stroking vs touch by TeknoHog · · Score: 1

    I recall a documentary where a woman had lost her sense of touch, but she still responded to stroking. The explanation was two different systems of nerves. A particularly interesting bit was that the sense of stroking was much slower, as if the signals only travelled around one meter per second. Given the fine line between stroking and tickling, this seems like the same phenomenon as in the article.

    --
    Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  18. Re:I could have told them that after my dentist vi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After a dentist visit with local anesthesia, I got bitten by a mosquito which caused a terrible itch on my cheek- but I couldn't feel my scratching to relief it. NOT FUN.

    very interesting, I would mod you up if I could.
    I assume that is because pressure sensitive neurons have been knocked out by the anaesthetic.

  19. Two Channel Interpretations by DynaSoar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A nice article and summary. Not entirely new nor inclusive of present theory unfortunately.

    Pain is handled by two channels: nocioception, the sensation itself, and the perceptual distress component. This can easily be seen in the actions of the agents affecting each. Sensation is blocked by anesthesia. Interpretation of the pain signal is altered by analgseia -- you may still feel a sensation but you don't care, or at lest you're not so bothered by it. There are different neural pathways and processes to handle these.

    It is likely that itching relates to pain in this fashion. The sensation of pressure or stretching of the skin in certain places would be common to all as their are receptors in the skin for these. A parallel pathway governing perceptual interpretation of that sensation, possibly the same one as for pain, would also exist. The resulting interpretation based on personal experience and/or genetically determined wiring would cause different interpretations of the same experience on different individuals, the same individual under different conditions, or (as is common) different locations on the same individual.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    1. Re:Two Channel Interpretations by Zerth · · Score: 1

      When I got my wisdom teeth out, I was given an analgesic instead of anesthesia. I knew it hurt like a bitch, but I thought it was the coolest thing ever, since it didn't bother me in the least.

      My dentist said he kind of regretted giving me the choice, because the assistant had to keep me from poking at the sockets and getting in the way.

      Man, was I wishing for some more analgesic when I only had painkillers the next day. I'd rather be in pain and not give a shit then have the choice between kinda hurts vs loopy.

  20. Allow me to connect the memes by bdwoolman · · Score: 1

    The car battery is hooked to the monkey's itchy phantom scrotum.

    Now. I want to know.

    Who screwed the monkey in the first place and got the first case of AIDS?

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
  21. a curse you should never wish on your worst enemy: by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Interesting

    the phantom itch

    http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/06/30/080630fa_fact_gawande?currentPage=all

    same neurological basis as a phantom limb, but far more rare (blessedly so)

    it is probably one of the greatest definitions of hell on earth. the itch that never, ever goes away:

    M. was willing to consider such possibilities. Her life had been a mess, after all. But the antidepressant medications often prescribed for O.C.D. made no difference. And she didn't actually feel a compulsion to pull out her hair. She simply felt itchy, on the area of her scalp that was left numb from the shingles. Although she could sometimes distract herself from it--by watching television or talking with a friend--the itch did not fluctuate with her mood or level of stress. The only thing that came close to offering relief was to scratch.
    "Scratching is one of the sweetest gratifications of nature, and as ready at hand as any," Montaigne wrote. "But repentance follows too annoyingly close at its heels." For M., certainly, it did: the itching was so torturous, and the area so numb, that her scratching began to go through the skin. At a later office visit, her doctor found a silver-dollar-size patch of scalp where skin had been replaced by scab. M. tried bandaging her head, wearing caps to bed. But her fingernails would always find a way to her flesh, especially while she slept.
    One morning, after she was awakened by her bedside alarm, she sat up and, she recalled, "this fluid came down my face, this greenish liquid." She pressed a square of gauze to her head and went to see her doctor again. M. showed the doctor the fluid on the dressing. The doctor looked closely at the wound. She shined a light on it and in M.'s eyes. Then she walked out of the room and called an ambulance. Only in the Emergency Department at Massachusetts General Hospital, after the doctors started swarming, and one told her she needed surgery now, did M. learn what had happened. She had scratched through her skull during the night--and all the way into her brain.

    ...

    The second theory seemed less likely. If the nerves to her scalp were dead, how would you explain the relief she got from scratching, or from the local anesthetic? Indeed, how could you explain the itch in the first place? An itch without nerve endings didn't make sense. The neurosurgeons stuck with the first theory; they offered to cut the main sensory nerve to the front of M.'s scalp and abolish the itching permanently. Oaklander, however, thought that the second theory was the right one--that this was a brain problem, not a nerve problem--and that cutting the nerve would do more harm than good. She argued with the neurosurgeons, and she advised M. not to let them do any cutting.
    "But I was desperate," M. told me. She let them operate on her, slicing the supraorbital nerve above the right eye. When she woke up, a whole section of her forehead was numb--and the itching was gone. A few weeks later, however, it came back, in an even wider expanse than before. The doctors tried pain medications, more psychiatric medications, more local anesthetic. But the only thing that kept M. from tearing her skin and skull open again, the doctors found, was to put a foam football helmet on her head and bind her wrists to the bedrails at night.
    She spent the next two years committed to a locked medical ward in a rehabilitation hospital--because, although she was not mentally ill, she was considered a danger to herself. Eventually, the staff worked out a solution that did not require binding her to the bedrails. Along with the football helmet, she had to wear white mitts that were secured around her wrists by surgical tape. "Every bedtime, it looked like they were dressing me up for Halloween--me and the guy next to me," she told me.
    "The guy next to you?" I asked. He had had shingles on his neck, she explain

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  22. Psoriasis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As someone who's dealt with psoriasis since the age of five I can only hope that they can use this knowledge to find a way to turn the fucking itching OFF. :(

  23. Obviously... by Moraelin · · Score: 1

    Obviously so did porn. Not sure if "scratch" is the right word there, though ;)

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  24. No, no, no... by Jay+L · · Score: 1

    Remember, every successful FOSS project started with a developer who had an itch to scratch.

    When I say a niche, I don't mean an itch like you have when you have an itch. I mean a niche like you have when you have a notch.

  25. Re:a curse you should never wish on your worst ene by Silentknyght · · Score: 1

    Mod parent up. Good link to an utterly fascinating article, though, from the article, it seems to suggest not so much that itch is a function of nerves/nerve endings insofar as itch is a function of the brain. The linked article even makes car analogies. A must read. :)

  26. that article actually changed my world by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

    i have tinnitus

    which, really, is "phantom hearing"

    i hear a steady tone all day, and its not in my ear, its in my brain. i've grown used to it, accepting the fact i'll have this my whole life, and so it doesn't really bother me that much anymore, i go whole weeks now barely paying it any attention, and your mind just edits it out of daily life

    but in the article they talk about the guy with the phantom limb pain... and they do a little trick with him standing perpendicular to mirror, and the brain sees two arms, and... voila, it resets the brain, no more phantom limb pain

    amazing! wtf!?

    i'm suddenly filled with hope for my tinnitus (false hope?)

    if only there were such a neurological sleight of hand like those mirrors in that article, like that, but for the ear instead

    i've been thinking about it... a movie of loud noise events without a soundtrack?

    i don't know, some way like those mirrors to draw attention to the brain that, in fact, there is no tone playing, you can turn that circuit off now, thank you very much

    but tinnitus is not uncommon, so me, or anyone else, who figures out the neurological sleight of hand like those mirrors and the phantom limb pain... to trick the brain into noticing: oh yeah, there is no tone playing, turn that off

    the person who does that for tinnitus will win a nobel in medicine and become a millionaire, i promise

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:that article actually changed my world by schweini · · Score: 1

      I just thought of an experiment:
      Assuming your tinnitus is a near-constant frequency sine wave, what happens if you try to cancel the imaginary sound out using an external sound?
      I have no idea whether it's even possible to try to sync soundwaves that exactly by hand/mind, but maybe you can hear/perceive some interference, at least?
      I'm not saying that this could be a cure for tinnitus, but me, at least, would be fascinated if imaginary sounds can interfere and maybe even cancel out physical sounds...

    2. Re:that article actually changed my world by acheron12 · · Score: 1

      IANAD, but if tinnitus is phantom hearing, then according to that itch article, the way to get rid of it would be to trick the brain into thinking that you can hear that frequency again - and thus can stop hearing it.

      E.g. if your tinnitus is only in one ear, you could try playing the same tone through headphones. Hopefully you would at least hear it through your healthy ear, tricking the brain into believing you're hearing it with both ears. Then you could play around with the volume, oscillating it between silence and some level close to your tinnitus, and see if the volume of your tinnitus begins to reduce too. (But be careful never to play the tone loudly enough for long enough to cause further damage.)

      If it's in both ears, that would be slightly more difficult. You could however try playing a sliding tone that oscillates in frequency from below to above your tinnitus, in the hope that as it 'moves past' the tinnitus frequency your brain will be tricked into thinking that this frequency is no longer (or at least is less) active.

      For this kind of experiment, a tone generator that lets you adjust frequency and volume, e.g. using x and y mouse movement would be useful. There's probably something like that on sourceforge; if not, it wouldn't be difficult to code.

      --
      there is no god but truth, and reality is its prophet
  27. yeah i thought about that by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    the problem is that it is equivalent in both ears. but i agree with you that twiddling around that frequency, some sort of volume/ frequency oscillations, might just jigger the neurological circuit into noticing. thanks! ;-)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  28. thats a good thought by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    noise cancellation by matching the frequencies and volumes is actually not that wacky, because the tone i hear is very high frequency, very low volume, perfectly constant and a perfect tone. meaning it is simple, not complex. so it wouldn't be difficult to match and cancel out

    however, the problem is, like a phantom limb, phantom hearing is deafness... its just that with tinnitus the matching circuitry in the brain is left in the on position rather than the off position

    the tiny hairs in my ear at that frequency are dead, they aren't sending any info to the brain. the sound i hear, although perfect and simple and telling me the noise is external, is all in my mind. so even if i matched everything perfectly, there's nothing that would transmit the antioscillation to my brain ;-(

    but thanks anyway ;-)

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  29. itching is an issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    god I hope they research this faster! iva had an itchy asshole for the last 10 years and cannot stop scratching, espeically at night when you're half asleep and dont know what your doing. it's not bacteria (taken pills) not 'roids, doctor cannot see any and cream doesnt help.

    This would be modded as funny if it werent so depressingly true. maybe it's all the sitting down working at PC terminals for like 12 years.

    Just in case you were all interested in my very personal medical problems.