An article at Forbes describes Celacade technology by Mississauga, Ontario based Vasogen, Inc., an immune modulation therapy to treat chronic heart failure. This therapy is “using a modified sample of a patient’s own blood to trick the immune system into fighting cardiac inflammation.”
The company describes some details of this treatment:

Our Celacade™ technology, currently in phase III clinical development for the treatment of chronic heart failure and peripheral arterial disease, is being developed to target the chronic inflammation associated with cardiovascular disease. Our Celacade technology is designed to deliver oxidative stress to a sample of a patient’s own cells during a brief outpatient procedure, which is administered monthly. During the procedure, a small sample of blood is collected into our Celacade single-use disposable cartridge, exposed to controlled oxidative stress using our Celacade medical device technology, and then re-administered to the patient intramuscularly.
Oxidative stress is a factor known to induce cell apoptosis, or programmed cell death. During apoptosis, signalling molecules, including phosphatidylserine (PS), normally present on the inner surface of the cell membrane, become exposed on the cell surface. The PS molecules interact with specific PS receptors on the surface of antigen presenting cells (APCs) of the immune system, including macrophages and dendritic cells. The interaction with macrophages leads to an up-regulation in the production of the anti-inflammatory cytokines IL-10 and TGF-β. Dendritic cells that interact with apoptotic cells remain immature and, in the presence of anti-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-10 and TGF-β, cause the differentiation of some naive T cells to regulatory T cells. These traffic through the tissues and inhibit inflammatory cells such as T1 cells by a process that includes cell-cell interaction and the production of anti-inflammatory cytokines by the regulatory T cells. The end result is a reduction in tissue levels of inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α, IL-6, IFN-γ, and IL-1β, and a down-regulation of chronic inflammation.

More at Vasogen…

Interesting research from a Nobel-winning Dr. Linda Buck and her team at Howard Hughes Medical Institute:

Whenever you inhale the aroma of vanilla, the neurons in your brain “light up” with a characteristic pattern of activity. It turns out that pattern is, perhaps unsurprisingly, unique from the pattern of brain activity associated with a whiff of skunk spray.
The process of smelling an odor begins with odorant receptors that are located on the surface of nerve cells inside the nose. When an odorant receptor detects an odor molecule, it triggers a nerve signal that travels to a way station in the brain called the olfactory bulb. Signals from the olfactory bulb, in turn, travel to the brain’s olfactory cortex. Information from the olfactory cortex is then sent to many regions of the brain, ultimately leading to the perceptions of odors and their emotional and physiological effects.
Although there are about a thousand different types of odorant receptors in mice, Buck and her colleagues discovered in previous studies that each individual olfactory neuron in the nose only bears a single type of odorant receptor. Independent studies in the Buck and Axel laboratories further showed that signals from neurons with the same type of odorant receptor converge at two specific spots in the olfactory bulb, such that individual structures in the olfactory bulb, called glomeruli, each receive neuronal input from only one type of odorant receptor.
Earlier studies of the olfactory cortex by Buck’s group indicated that in contrast to the straightforward mapping of inputs from odorant receptors onto the glomeruli, however, the mapping of odorant receptor inputs onto the olfactory cortex was quite complex.
“We had found that inputs from one type of odorant receptor are targeted to several loose clusters of neurons at specific locations in the cortex,” said Buck. In sharp contrast to the olfactory bulb, where signals from different receptors are segregated, inputs from different odorant receptors overlap extensively in the cortex. Moreover, individual cortical neurons are likely to get inputs from many different odorant receptors.”
Buck’s group previously showed that each odorant is recognized by a combination of receptors, and that each receptor can recognize multiple odorants. “So, the odorant receptor family is being used combinatorially,” she said. “Just like letters of the alphabet are used in different combinations to form different words, the odorant receptors are used in different combinations to detect different odorants and encode their unique identities.”
In the new studies, Buck and her colleagues sought further information about how the brain translates these combinatorial receptor codes into distinctive odor perceptions. Because of the complex patterns of receptor inputs in the cortex, it was impossible to predict how odors might be represented in this structure. They therefore decided to investigate the patterns of activity that were triggered by a range of odorants in the olfactory cortex of mice.
“We wanted to find out whether inputs from receptors that recognized the same odorant are all targeted to the same places in the cortex, producing a distinctive spatial map for the odorant,” she said. “Or, whether the inputs from these receptors are sent to different locations in the cortex, resulting in a more distributed representation of the odorant.”
To explore this question, the researchers exposed mice to each of a wide range of odorants–including apple, skunk, floral, fishy, urine, vanilla, musk, woody, garlic, and chocolate. After each mouse was exposed to an odor, the scientists then proceeded to isolate the animal’s olfactory cortex and map neural activity by measuring the activity of a marker gene called c-Fos in individual neurons across this entire structure.
“We found that a single odorant does not just stimulate one or two spots in the cortex,” said Buck. “Instead it stimulates a very small subset of neurons that are sparsely distributed over a relatively large area. We found that different odorants stimulate different patterns, but the patterns for different odorants partially overlap.”
Importantly, said Buck, the research team found that, despite this very complex patterning, the odor representations are very similar among individuals. “This may explain why odors elicit similar responses in different individuals. For example, most people don’t like the smell of skunk odor, but they do like the smell of chocolate,” she said.

The press release…
Would like to learn more? A fascinating lecture by Dr. Richard Axel (co-winner of the Nobel) titled “Scents and Sensibility: Towards a Molecular Logic of Perception” is available in video format from Columbia University.
(hat tip: BrainBlog)

A research team from The Scripps Research Institute and the Genomics Institute of the Novartis Research Foundation discovered that pungency of garlic can largely be attributed to a particular compound, and its effects on thermoreceptor proteins located in the mouth:

Despite garlic’s popularity, the compounds responsible for its pungency, as well as the receptors through which we perceive those compounds, have remained unknown. In their new work, the researchers found that raw, but not baked, garlic was capable of eliciting responses from two so-called TRP (“trip”) channels, TRPV1 and TRPA1, which belong to a remarkable family of receptors that can be activated by temperature and chemicals. Some TRP channels, including TRPA1 and TRPV1, respond to both temperature and chemical compounds: TRPV1 is known to respond to noxious (painful) heat and to the pungent component of chili peppers, whereas TRPA1 is activated by noxious cold and by pungent compounds found in cinnamon oil, mustard oil, and wintergreen oil. These past findings, as well as the present work, indicate that thermosensitive TRP channels play a key role in the phenomenon of chemesthesis (the somatosensory contribution to the sense of taste), which is experienced, for example, in the heat of chili peppers or the coolness of peppermint. Both TRPV1 and TRPA1 are found in pain-sensing neurons that innervate the mouth and tongue.
The researchers went on to identify the sulfide compound allicin, an unstable chemical found in bruised, cut, or crushed garlic, as the chemical responsible for the activation of TRPV1 and TRPA1 and as the likely key chemical component responsible for garlic’s pungency. Allicin is converted to a variety of more stable sulfide compounds over time or with heating, in correspondence with the significantly milder taste of roasted garlic. Garlic’s pungency most likely evolved as a defense mechanism against browsing by animals, and indeed many animals–though clearly not all humans–are known to be repelled by it.

The press report…
The journal article…