This week’s assignment is to explain why the public should care. Specifically, why they should care about the article we read which covers Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, Lou Gehrig’s disease, and Cancer. This sort of question sets off my teacher training. When setting up a lesson, teachers are challenged to give a rational on why a student should care about that issue. But, I don’t think there is much purpose in arguing the importance of specific diseases without first arguing why should the public care about the neurochemistry behind a disease.
As I trudge further into my schooling I am often reminded of the phrase “Innocence is bliss”. As a youth I would find myself in the doctor’s office for some kind of minor issue. Usually these sessions would consist of a Q & A session followed by the prescribing of some drug. To me it almost seemed implied that this one drug was the best and only solution to solve my problem. This theory was put to the test when I was prescribed drugs for my acne, (which on its own I find ridiculous). 
At the time I didn’t even care enough to want to fix it. And, as if it had no consequence, I was quickly prescribed an oral drug. I was now putting medicine into my body to solve a problem that wasn’t really a problem. Here comes the interesting part. The positive effects on my acne were negligible, but after about 14 days on the drug I started experiencing horrific stomach pains. These pains left me unable to eat food for almost 24 hours, all just to “cure” a little acne. Looking back it seems quite foolish to introduce my one and only body to some biologically foreign chemical to solve something so small.
This experience leads me to add a bit to the previous phrase, now I would say “Innocence is bliss, yet the informed make the best decisions”. Now don’t get me wrong, I love the idea of having doctors. I am comforted by the fact that I am surrounded by many experts in the human body whose job it is to protect my health. Yet nobody knows the exact workings of the body, everyday there are new discoveries to how we function. In neurochemistry, the focus is on molecular pathways. A chemical pathway is sort of a domino effect, one molecule interacts with another which interacts with another….. and so on.
This domino effect has pros and cons to the medical world. Think of the last domino being the one that triggers the disease. This means that there are multiple places that medicine can intervene before that final domino is toppled. The same goes for molecular pathways. Many times a medicine is targeted at a specific point in the pathway to stop the disease from being triggered. Sadly, the con must come in. It is my regret to inform you this example is an oversimplification. Fixing our molecular pathways isn’t as easy as reaching in and removing a “domino”, Instead some sort of chemical reaction must take place in your body, usually by chemicals inside of pills. Many times the problem is that these chemicals don’t only react with the “trouble pathways” but they also react with “normal pathways” and this is where side effects come into play.
So picking the right molecule to target without disrupting other pathways can be a complicated thing. From what we know from research right now it isn’t easy/possible to determine the best way to handle a disease. So the next time a doctor hands you a pill, hopefully you will be more interested in finding out exactly what you are putting into your one and only body.
Tough Questions with Science: All the small things.
