Jump to content

Talk:Oxytocin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.175.127.171 (talk) at 15:52, 16 February 2010 (→‎Evidence for significant CNS entry of oxytocin by nasal spray.: Autism study re Inhaled Oxytocin.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Caresses and chocolate

I have heard that this substance 1. is produced by the mere caress of the skin 2. that it exists in quantity in chocolate

Could anyone verify or refute this?

I have no idea. How about Googling for it, and reporting your findings here? I don't think a "mere caress" is enough - stimulation of the nipple is the main impetus for oxytocin release. I really doubt this mammalian hormone is present in chocolate at all. Breastfeeding mothers would certainly notice this! JFW | T@lk 11:23, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Does this apply to the male nipple as well? ThVa (talk) 15:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that Oxycodone has a noteriety section. Would this story be suitable for a similar section, here? This story has been circulated as an internet myth where they claim that they are looking for suspects with tender nipples. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.true-crime/browse_frm/thread/93aa3dbd06bcb311/3bc3ac07429d89a0

Oops! Thieves take wrong drug - Police say 4 men searching for 'Oxy' stole hormone used to induce labor. By Diane Frederick, Indianapolis Star, August 25, 2001

NOBLESVILLE, Ind. -- Four men on a misguided quest for the heroinlike drug OxyContin instead scored the similar-sounding but pharmaceutically distinct oxytocin, authorities say.

Heh. JFW | T@lk 13:58, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Boston Globe article

Ombudsman (talk · contribs) linked to an article in the Boston Globe about responses to threatening faces before and after administration of oxytocin. The reference in question is Kirsch P, Esslinger C, Chen Q, Mier D, Lis S, Siddhanti S, Gruppe H, Mattay VS, Gallhofer B, Meyer-Lindenberg A. Oxytocin modulates neural circuitry for social cognition and fear in humans. J Neurosci 2005;25:11489-93. PMID 16339042.

I'm not sure if this shouldn't be covered in the article body instead. External links is not really the place to announce new research findings. JFW | T@lk 22:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Function vs Action

I changed the "function" heading in the article because that word implies teleology. I substituted "action" as a word without teleological conotations, but I suspect there are other words which could serve at least as well, and there may be problems with "action" which I did not think of. Osmodiar 02:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basic linguistic fact: "purpose" implies teleology, "function" does not. -- 98.108.196.223 (talk) 19:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone removed the nice diagram of Oxytocin and discussion of its amino acid structure. I will try to return it to the way it was. Sammyj

If you were to actually look at the link you would find out that it is a valuable addition to the external link section, being a reprint of an article featured in The Economist along with detailing oxytocins in different animals (such as voles). It isn't biased, and I don't see why it keeps getting reverted. If anyone were to ask me the reason why I keep reverting it back though, I will answer truthfully that I believe it helps wikipedia and am sick that people judge my edits without actually viewing them. Chooserr 06:40, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Whitehouse.com analogy roughly means that just because this site was lucky in getting oxytocin.org registered, it doesn't mean it is illustrative of this article. The material on the site misrepresents oxytocin research and is quite hopeless as a resource. JFW | T@lk 07:07, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well I'm glad that I finally can get the reference, but I really don't see how it misrepresents the research. Just looking over it it seems to be factual enough, the front page is a reprint of an article from the Economist. Chooserr 23:34, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the site oxytocin.org looks quite suspect. But is the article in The Econmist suspect just because of it's inclusion on oxytocin.org? True, it may be opinion-based, but it is not unheard of on Wikipedia to have a 'popular references' section for various things. Why not brain chemicals as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.142.175 (talk) 05:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Learning

I modified the following paragraph

Learning and memory functions have been claimed to be affected by centally-administered oxytocin, mainly from experiments performed in the 1970's. (Gimpl 2001)

Looking at the cited reference http://physrev.physiology.org/cgi/content/full/81/2/629#SEC6_6 , the studies are mainly from the 80s and 90s, and the qualifier "have been claimed" seems to be designed to discount these studies, which I don't think is justified. AxelBoldt 16:52, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Learning, discussion

Between the mid 1960's and early 1980's there was considerable interest in work, mainly conducted in Utecht by de Wied and his co-workers, of apparent effects of oxytocin and vasopressin on learning and memory. These were amongst the first reports of central effects of peptides, and coincided with the emerging recognition of central peptidergic systems. However, problems emerged: some other leading laboratories could not repeat the effects in controlled conditions that excluded other effects of the peptides; others recognised that the peptides influence blood pressure and circadian rhythms and other had other motivational effects. While it is now clear that oxytocin and vasopressin have some very important central actions, there are few active researchers who believe that there are specific effects on memory. The cited review by Gimpl contains a single paragraph on learning and memory that ends "However, the wide variety of observed effects has also led to the suggestion that OT has a more general effect on the cortical arousal rather than a specific effect limited to a certain stage of information processing ". Gimple and Fahrenholz are leading experts on oxytocin receptor mechanisms, and the review is naturally focussed on molecular biology of the receptor rather than on the functions of oxytocin. Because of the history of associating oxytocin and vasopressin with learning and memory there are still often mentions of these effects. However if you search for reviews on learning and memory, you will find in them little mention of vasopressin and oxytocin. A qualification is that some more recent work talks of oxytocin having effects on social memory; this is a very different issue to the disputed effects on cognitive performance. As oxytocin certainly affects social interactons and social recognition, whether there is a separable effect on social memory is not clear. Gleng 20:19, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Has anyone checked the expression of V1a/V1b/V2 and oxytocin receptors in neural tissue, as well as affinity of these hormones for other receptors? The whole thing becomes untenable if no CNS receptors can be identified for either peptide. JFW | T@lk 21:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are no V2 receptors in the CNS, but V1a, V1b and oxytocin receptors are expressed densely in many discrete regions of the brain - in many regions of the limbic system, septum, amygdala, many hypothalamic nuclei, brainstem and spinal cord. The prairie/montane vole work of Tom Insel, Larry Young and Sue Carter (published in several articles in Nature and other leading journals) began after recognising a marked difference in CNS oxytocin receptor distribution between species. The behavoral actions of oxytocin and vasopressin can be blocked by specific antagonists. Some work (especially earlier work) however has used very high doses of oxytocin and vasopressin and these have to be questonable as physiological effects. Do you want references? Gleng 22:21, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I was just curious. You're obviously into this thing. I would suggest sticking to undisputed findings, and reserving a small section for matters still under investigation. JFW | T@lk 22:37, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amino Acid Sequence

anybody else find it confusing that the sequence for vasopressin is listed on this page with the differences underlined? I think it would be significantly less confusing to have the oxytocin sequence listed and to keep the underlining to show its relation to vasopressin. --64.235.212.60 05:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, less than 5 minutes later i changed it. if there's a problem, change it back but i think it's better this way.--64.235.212.60 05:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oxytocin for Sale as a 'trust drug'

I've seen a few websites selling oxytocin as if you could use it to make people trust you or potential mates to feel attracted to you (by using it yourself and giving it to others). Is there any basis to the claim? Could you give someone oxytocin (hypothetically) and it would work to make them trust you?

--Two studies have been done in which oxytocin was sprayed into the nostrils. I would imagine that the oxytocin you see advertised is either degraded or wasn't present in the first place. If you could get some authentic oxytocin and prepared it properly, and were able to spray it into someones nose, there might be a slight increase in trust. For how long and how strong is not known.

Probably a scam. oxytocin doesn't cross the blood-brain barrier; the intranasal route depends upon the belief that it's possible to bypass the barrier this way, but very large amounts are needed. Gleng 22:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some reason FOX news is heralding Oxytocin as the best thing since SSRI's? According to FOX and a spate of segments they've been showing, several resident medical "specialists" are defending claims that it's a panacea for virtually every known social phobia or anxiety. They also seem to be claiming knowledge of research showing intravenous doses readily cross the BBB where "a single dose works for weeks". # Bare URL: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,371023,00.html B.Soto (talk) 09:52, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Estrogen/Testosterone interaction

I've read that estrogen is required for any 'bonding effect' to occur and that the presence of testosterone mutes the effect. See for example:

"Meanwhile, elevated testosterone can suppress oxytocin and vasopressin. There is good evidence, Dr Fisher said, that men with higher testosterone levels tend to marry less often, be more abusive in their marriage, and divorce more regularly" from http://www.mcmanweb.com/love_lust.htm

...and...

"What does this have to do with oxytocin and bonding? Estrogen enhances the effects of oxytocin while testosterone mutes them. The battle of the sexes is triggered by hormones -- men and women do love differently." http://www.hugthemonkey.com/2006/09/you_say_estroge.html

Sorry, don't have any links to peer-reviewed research for this yet but that's probably only because I've not dug very deep so far.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.28.147.243 (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Bush appointee and oxytocin

http://www.alternet.org/rights/44411/ AlterNet link</A>

http://feministing.com/archives/006076.html Feministing blog link

http://www.digbysblog.blogspot.com/2006_11_01_digbysblog_archive.html#116373868117148083 Hullabaloo blog link</A>

Who is this lunatic Dr. Eric Keroack and why is he telling us oxytocin is the chemical that makes "good" relationships work, and that sex decreases the levels of oxytocin, thereby making sex detrimental to said relationships? And why the hell is he now the Bush administration appointee to oversee Title X funding, which handles federal funding of family planning and reproductive health? This is madness on an epic scale -- not to mention intellectually insulting, just check out the PowerPoint slides -- and is worth discussion for inclusion in this site. You can bet that a lot of confused people hearing Dr. Keroack's insane yammering about oxytocin will be checking this article to find out more about it. Black Max

In reference

"Paquin J et al.(2002) Oxytocin induces differentiation of P19 embryonic stem cells to cardiomyocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:9550-5 PMID 12093924" correct with that: "Paquin J, Danalache BA et al.(2002) Oxytocin induces differentiation of P19 embryonic stem cells to cardiomyocytes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:9550-5 PMID 12093924"

because in PNAS article is mentioned †J.P. and B.A.D. contributed equally to this work.

References for BBB non-crossing/projecting neurons?

Oxytocin secreted from the pituitary gland cannot re-enter the brain because of the blood-brain barrier Instead, the behavioral effects of oxytocin are thought to reflect release from centrally projecting oxytocin neurons, different from those that project to the pituitary gland

Does anyone have a reference for these 'thoughts' (have they been actually proven in vitro?) I do have the article "The oxytocin receptor system: structure, function, and regulation." (Gimpl G, Fahrenholz F. Physiol Rev. 2001 Apr;81(2):629-83. [1]), if it might be there.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.143.32 (talk) 08:09, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orgasm While Nursing

When my wife was nursing our children, she occasionally had orgasms while doing so. Other women in the support group she attended reported similar experiences. Has this been explored in the literature? Virgil H. Soule (talk) 07:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)zbvhs[reply]

Fenugreek lacks reference

There needs to be a reference for the fenugreek claim. ThVa (talk) 15:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt a peer-reviewed citation showing an effect of this herbal "medicine" exists. If one is found, we could revisit. AlbertHall (talk) 19:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be confused with Oxycontin

I've actually see people get confused over this, even to the point of theft. See http://www.newsoftheweird.com/weirdplanet/wp010827.html , and search for oxytocin. And there is a not to be confused with Oxytocin on the Oxycontin page.Naraht (talk) 00:59, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I admit there there maybe a very few numbskulls that may be confused, that might even go to the oxycontin page and see oxytocin listed and come away thinking it is a synonym. I just don't believe we need to clutter this entry with nearly useless info. As I said, then why not oxygen, for example. There must be someone confused by that as well. AlbertHall (talk) 19:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I take oxytocin nasally as a treatment for Asperger's Syndrome (and yes, it has a very substantial impact, IMHO), and easily 1/3 of all people I mention oxytocin to think it's related to oxycontin. Munkeegutz (talk) 19:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I hope they are just kidding you...P.S. just curious, but is the intranasal oxytocin obtained via a doctor's prescription from a legitimate pharmacy? Or online somewhere? AlbertHall (talk) 15:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Recent(?) study by Angeliki Theodoridou on the effects of oxytocin on truthfullness and attractiveness of strangers

I haven't find the paper if there is any, but here's relatively good source. http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16932-love-hormone-boosts-strangers-sex-appeal.html

May I suggest that this study is mentioned in the article? --Deleet (talk) 07:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New review by Lee et al.

This looks like it'd be a good source for Oxytocin.

  • Lee HJ, Macbeth AH, Pagani JH, Scott Young W (2009). "Oxytocin: the great facilitator of life". Prog Neurobiol. 88 (2): 127–151. doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2009.04.001. PMID 19482229.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Eubulides (talk) 21:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence for significant CNS entry of oxytocin by nasal spray.

I don't know what idiot put this here, but it is completely false. For evidence try the incredible amount of studies showing psychological changes resulting from nasal administration of OT. Or if you can get access to this article, it just about proves it...

Born, J., Lange, T., Kern, W., McGregor, G., Bickel, U., & Fehm, H. (2002, June). Sniffing neuropeptides: a transnasal approach to the human brain. Nature Neuroscience, 5(6), 514. Retrieved August 3, 2009, from Academic Search Premier database.

I'm pretty sure that I've come across similar studies that used oxytocin nasal spray as opposed to vasopressin nasal spray. In any case, ask any biochemist or neuroscientists if they think that the fact that vasopressin can propagate along the olfactory nerves that OT will as well.

The Born et al. paper is a nice one. However, the fact remains that although studies report effects of intranasal ocytocin, they are not proof that the effects are due to CNS access of the sprayed oxytocin. This might seems like a trivial point, but proof is still lacking.AlbertHall (talk) 12:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I had a study 'proving' it I would have noted that it has been proven. But there is evidence, which I provided. The OT wiki page explicitly says there is no evidence, when that is false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.217.36 (talk) 03:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, consider this situation: a large dose of insulin is given and the person goes unconscious. I believe your logic would then lead you to conclude that insulin goes to the brain to cause this effect. In fact, the insulin acts at the liver (among other places) to reduce serum glucose which then leads to unconsciousness. The effects of oxytocin on human behavior may indeed be due to direct travel into the appropriate brain sites, but it may be that oxytocin acts peripherally (vagus nerve?) to cause the behaviors (if they turn out, in fact, to be replicable). AlbertHall (talk) 18:39, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then why don't injection, or any other form of administration, have the same effects as the nasal spray? Though, of course you are right; it could be a secondary chemical or neural actor that cause the psychological effects, but just a little bit of common speculation will tell you that OT nasal sprays penetrate into the CNS. In any case, the only way to find this out is to do some experimentation, and for some reason no one has done it.
In actuality, there are iv administration studies claiming effects on social behaviors, especially with autism. AlbertHall (talk) 17:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why hasn't anyone tried to experiment with OT nasal sprays the way Born et al. did with the other neuropeptides? It makes me wish I had a phd... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.84.217.36 (talk) 03:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to avoid any confusion, the paper by Born et al:
examines melanocortin, vasopressin, and insulin but not OT. OT is mentioned in the caption to Figure 1 of the above paper, but only to point out that their analytical method for detecting the other peptides does not cross react with OT. Boghog (talk) 06:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just read this. I don't know what to do with the info: http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=oxytocin-may-alleviate-some-autism-10-02-16 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.175.127.171 (talk) 15:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC) Here's another article referencing same Autism results, says it was administered as an inhalent: http://www.dbtechno.com/health/2010/02/16/oxytocin-hormone-may-benefit-adults-with-autism/[reply]

Understandability of article

I can't understand section 1 and subsection 1.1 of this article because I don't have the necessary scientific background. I find the other sections understandable and interesting. I would like to put sections 1 and 1.1 at the end. I think it would be wonderful if someone would rewrite those sections so the general public could understand them. Any thoughts on this? DBlomgren (talk) 23:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also found the "synthesis, storage and release" section difficult to digest. Per your suggestion, I have moved both sections toward the end of the article. In addition, I have inserted an introductory sentence at the beginning of the section which hopefully makes it a little easier to understand. Cheers. Boghog (talk) 07:05, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad you agreed. Thank you for being bold. DBlomgren (talk) 04:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mice

I came across some interesting citations on oxytocin in mice and the lack of it affecting so-called "social amnesia". Maybe it's already covered here, but I thought I'd mention it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ [1]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Oxytocin&oldid=344421922"