Oxytocin is a hormone that is usually associated with empathy, bonding, trust etc. While researching for my CAJ, I often stumbled upon articles that mentioned it, or nicknaming it a "love drug", "cuddle chemical", "moral molecule" and "bonding hormone". Oxytocin sounds like a very beneficial hormone we humans (and other mammals) posses. But what is oxytocin actually responsible for?
In a nutshell:
During childbirth it is responsible for uterine contraction which facilitates giving birth After childbirth: During lactationoxytocin is releasedfor a smooth muscle contraction. It also is responsible for the maternal bonding process between mother and child. Bonding: It is not only relevant for maternal bond but for bonding between living creatures in general. Oxytocin evokes the desire to connect physically and is released during contact with a person or fluffy animal. In addition, it is known for its release during sexual orgasm. Lying: When in contact with other people in a group, the hormone makes one's focus shift from oneself as an individual to the benefits of the entire group. In a double-bling study, where one group inhaled oxytocin and the other one a placebo, the results showed that the hormone boosts dishonest behavior if it is advantageous for the group. Autism: Scientists hope that in the future oxytocin will be a possible treatment for children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). As these children have difficulties with upholding eye-contact, and therefore with cooperation and interaction with other human beings the hormone, when inhaled, could be the key for establishing the ability for social behavior in autistic children.
It is common knowledge that the media sometimes outlines stories or facts slightly more different than they actually are. That is what journalists always did and always will do, we all know that. However, we must be aware that in articles, in particular on scientific issues, some news or advancements may be misinterpreted.
Some of you have perhaps encountered some ("scientific") articles claiming that eating walnuts will make you smarter or orange juice will reduce aggressiveness in a person. (These examples are exaggerated by me) Nonetheless, we read them because everyone wants to become more intelligent or less grumpy in an easy way. Everyone knows that those claims can't, in fact, be entirely true but weirdly we want to believe them.
The other day I was reading THIS article by Jeremy Laurance, the author on health issues in "The Independent", about the findings by neuroscientist Molly Crockett. She and her colleagues conducted an experiment how serotonin, a neurotransmitter, could influence people's decisions when they are treated unfairly. They gave a lemon-flavored and protein-rich artificial drink to participants and this drink contained tryptophan, which is the preliminary stage of serotonin. The results suggested that people with low serotonin levels are more likely to avenge themselves than those with a high one.
Laurance mentions in his article that if you eat a sandwich you will get a pay rise. This argument does not speak in favor of the article's logos. Also, he only gains credibility in using the phrase "scientists have found" and in describing Molly Crockett's experiment. However, he draws rather far-fetched conclusions which were definitely not part of Crockett's results. On the other hand, Laurance appeals a great deal to the readers empathy in illustrating how easy it is to successfully make decisions. You only have to eat a simple cheese sandwich to make all your dreams come true.
Here is Crockett's explanation on this matter:
She talks about:
Who she is and what she does
her experiment founding: when tryptophan was low people are more likely to take revenge
the headlines that came out after they conducted the experiment
how tryptophan can also be found in cheese and chocolate which grabbed people's attention
how oversimplifying of scientific data happens all the time
neuroscience appearing more and more in marketing
if there is a image of a brain next to something, it will sell better
jumping into conclusions based on brain activity in one specific region which actually has many different functions
a scientist who claims boosting oxytocin increases trust and cooperation in people
which is only one side of the coin
SPECT imaging, including radioactive injection in order to track blood flow in the brain
neuroscience is not able to track mental illnesses from a single brain scan yet
there is potential for neuroscience to do all the amazing things many scientists or marketing-oriented people claim to be possible
but neuroscience is not there yet and we should bring something into question before taking it as it is
And here is a picture of a cool brain. Maybe my post will be more appealing for you to read (and comment on) now.
It seems like a day as any other in India. Not so for the judge who is responsible for the repeated gang-rape case trial which is taking place this afternoon in the Mumbai High Court. Nervously, she is pacing back and forth in her office just before she is to announce the sentence for the three offenders. “Their defence lawyers tried to play the they-are-still-so-young-card”, she explained. “But I don’t sees why to such gruesome and diabolical rapes one should show any mercy.”
Tucking her documents under one arm and carrying her bag, the judge made her way back to the courtroom through the hallway. Muffled shouts can be distinguished from outside, where protesters are insisting on women’s safety in India.
The new law on rape penalty was intensified in 2013, which included a death penalty for repeat offenders. Vijay Mohan Jadev, 19, Mohammed Kasim Hafeez Sheikh, 21, and Mohammed Salim Ansari, 28 were found guilty for gang raping, first a 19.year old phone receptionist last summer and a second time a 22-year-old photojournalist. The very second after the judge passed the sentence, chaos erupted in the courtroom, a mother started to swear hysterically and so was brought outside and the men accepted their fate as they wrier escorted away.
