Slow breathing training reduces resting blood pressure, probably by modifying central autonomic control, but evidence for this is lacking. The pressor response to static handgr ip exercise is a measure of autonomic control and the aim of this study was to determine whether slow breathing training modulates the pressor responses to exercise of untrained muscles. Twenty hypertensive patients trained for 8 weeks, 10 with unloaded slow breathing (Unloaded) and 10 breathing against an inspiratory load of 20 cm H 2 O (Loaded). Ten subjects were untrained controls. Subjects performed a 2 min handgrip pressor test (30 % MVC) pre - and post- training, and blood pressure and heart rate (HR) were measured before the contraction, at the end and following 2 min recovery. Resting systolic (sBP) and HR were reduced as a result of tra ining, as reported previously. After training there was both a smaller pressor response to hand grip exercise and a more rapid recovery of sBP and HR compared to pre -training. There were no changes in the Controls and no differences between the Unloaded and Loaded groups. Combining the two training groups, the sBP response to handgrip exercise after training was reduced by 10 mm Hg (95 % CI: - 7, - 13) and HR by 5 bpm (95 % CI: - 4, - 6), all p<0.05. These results are consistent with slow breathing training modifying central mechanisms regulating cardiovascular function., C. U. Jones, B. Sangthong, O. Pachirat, D. A. Jones., and Obsahuje bibliografii
We have investigated slow inactivation in a rat axonal K+ channel, the I channel. Using voltage steps to potentials between -70 mV and +80 mV, from a holding potential of -100 mV, we observed a marked slowing of inactivation at positive potentials: the time constant was 4.5±0.4 s at -40 mV (mean ± S.E.M.), increasing to 14.7±2.0 s at +40 mV. Slowed inactivation at positive potentials is not consistent with published descriptions of C-type inactivation, but can be explained by models in which inactivation is preferentially from closed states (which have been developed for Kv2.1 and some Ca2+ channels). We tested two predictions of preferential closed-state models: inactivation should be more rapid during a train of brief pulses than during a long pulse to the same potential, and the cumulative inactivation measured with paired pulses should be greater than the inactivation at the same time during a continuous pulse. The I channel does not behave according to these predictions, indicating that preferential closed-state inactivation does not explain the slowing of inactivation we observe at positive potentials. Inactivation of the I channel therefore differs both from C-type inactivation, as presently understood, and from the inactivation of Kv2.1., A. Babes, E. Lörinczi, V. Ristoiu, M.L. Flonta, G. Reid., and Obsahuje bibliografii
V rámci filosofie věd panuje široká shoda na tom, že druhá polovina 20. století složila „labutí píseň“ pozitivismu. Milton Friedman a Paul Samuelson, dva klíčoví autoři k metodologii ekonomie v daném časovém období, přitom tento vývoj ve filosoifi vědy prý nikdy nereflektovali. Pozitivistická východiska – v prvé řadě v podobě redukcionistického přístupu – jsou tudíž stále přítomna ve vlivných teoretických konceptech rozvinutých ekonomy hlavního proudu. Značný počet autorů však v současnosti sdílí náhled, že tyto koncepty v nezanedbatelné míře přispěly k vývoji, jenž ústil ve finanční krizi, vrcholící v letech 2008 a 2009. Předkládaný článek se proto táže, zda to byla právě krize – v níž mnozí spatřují empirické zamítnutí řady pozitivistických konceptů – která napsala „labutí píseň“ pozitivismu v ekonomii hlavního proudu., It has been widely accepted that philosophers of science wrote a “swansong” for positivism during the second half of the 20th century. Milton Friedman and Paul Samuelson, major contributors in the field of economic methodology at the time, the argument goes, did never reflect the demise. Therefore, positivist roots – primarily in the form of reductionist approach – are still to be found in influential theoretical concepts developed by mainstream economists. However, quite a large number of scholars currently share the view that these concepts contributed in a nonnegligible manner to the development leading to the financial crisis culminating in 2008 and 2009. the article thus asks if it is the crisis – seen by many as an empirical rejection of many positivistic concepts – that wrote a “swansong” for positivism in mainstream economics., and Lukáš Kovanda.