“Over one hundred years ago, Sir Charles Sherrington descr


“Over one hundred years ago, Sir Charles Sherrington described a population of spinal cord interneurons (INs) that connect multiple spinal cord segments and participate in complex or ‘long’ motor reflexes. These neurons were subsequently termed propriospinal neurons (PNs) and are known to play a crucial role in motor control and sensory processing. Recent

work has shown that PNs may also be an important substrate for recovery from spinal cord injury (SCI) as they contribute to plastic reorganisation of spinal circuits. The location, inter-segmental projection pattern and sheer number of PNs mean that after SCI, a significant number of them are capable of ‘bridging’

an incomplete spinal cord lesion. When these properties are combined with the capacity of PNs to activate and coordinate locomotor Epigenetic Reader Domain inhibitor central pattern generators (CPGs), it is clear they are ideally placed to assist locomotor recovery. Here we summarise the anatomy, organisation and function of PNs in the uninjured spinal cord, briefly outline the pathophysiology of SCI, describe how PNs contribute to recovery of motor function, and finally, we discuss the mechanisms that underlie PN plasticity. We propose there are two major challenges for PN research. The first is to learn more about ways we can promote PN CB-839 in vitro plasticity and manipulate the ‘hostile’

micro-environment that limits regeneration in the damaged spinal cord. The second is to study the cellular/intrinsic properties of PNs to better understand their function in both the normal and injured spinal cord.

This article is part of IKBKE a Special Issue entitled ‘Synaptic Plasticity & Interneurons’. Crown Copyright (C) 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved,”
“Mass media campaigns are widely used to expose high proportions of large populations to messages through routine uses of existing media, such as television, radio, and newspapers. Exposure to such messages is, therefore, generally passive. Such campaigns are frequently competing with factors, such as pervasive product marketing, powerful social norms, and behaviours driven by addiction or habit. In this Review we discuss the outcomes of mass media campaigns in the context of various health-risk behaviours (eg, use of tobacco, alcohol, and other drugs, heart disease risk factors, sex-related behaviours, road safety, cancer screening and prevention, child survival, and organ or blood donation). We conclude that mass media campaigns can produce positive changes or prevent negative changes in health-related behaviours across large populations.

Comments are closed.