Skip to main content

In the footsteps of William Harvey


William Harvey 1578-1657
Often our ‘gut instinct’ is to take a particular course of action but our ‘rational mind says no’, and often in hindsight we wish we had followed our ‘gut instinct’.  The heart figures prominently in our cultural expression of emotions. It is in our poetry and our literature. But is there a physiological explanation for this? Can the heart once again be centre-stage of our feelings? Do we really have ‘gut’ instincts? In a three-part series of videos by Voices from Oxford, Professor David Paterson, Associate Head of Medical Sciences at Oxford University, explores with Denis Noble a paradigm shift in the way we think about our heart and brain and the intimate neural connections between the two.

 Appropriately the filming is at Merton College where, as a result of the 17th Century English Civil War, William Harvey was briefly Warden. Harvey revolutionised our understanding of how the body works by describing the role of the heart as a pump, a mechanical device for circulating the blood round the body. His seminal work contributed over centuries to a “decoupling” of brain and heart, and of the heart from our concept of mind.   But as David Paterson explains the heart is “physically hard-wired by the nervous system”. It has a nervous network involved in its excitability.  The heart and brain are not “isolated islands”.
 
Understanding what these connections between brain and heart do is one of the big challenges for the 21st Century. Reductionism has driven science historically. We have “been very good at breaking things down” into organs, cells, molecules, but “the challenge now is to bring those parts back together, to reassemble them.” The potential for interdisciplinary work is “one of Oxford’s greatest strengths” but it is still “poorly tapped”. It is a challenge, Professor Paterson says Oxford University is well placed to address with opportunities for multidisciplinary interaction between sciences and the humanities and also with international collaboration.

This article also appeared on Voices from Oxford

In the footsteps of William Harvey

Ray Noble is News Editor of Voices from Oxford

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together.  Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team.  Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites.  All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature.  Nature is inherently creative.  Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis.  We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic.  "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,'  and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us.   Sticking together is more often the better approach.  This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest.   We don't

Noise pollution puts nature at risk

 "I just want a bit of peace and quiet!" Let's get away from all the hustle and bustle; the sound of endless traffic on the roads, of the trains on the railway, and the planes in the sky; the incessant drone; the noise. We live in a world of man-made noise; screeching, bellowing, on-and-on in an unmelodious cacophony.  This constant background noise has now become a significant health hazard.   With average background levels of 60 decibels, those who live in cities are often exposed to noise over 85 decibels, enough to cause significant hearing loss over time.  It causes stress, high blood pressure, headache and loss of sleep and poor health and well-being.   In nature, noise has content and significance.  From the roar of the lion, the laughing of a hyena,  communication is essential for life; as the warning of danger, for bonding as a group or a pair, finding a mate, or for establishing a position in a hierarchy - chattering works.  Staying in touch is vital to working

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba