Postmodernism, the Acute Phase Response, and Interpretation of Data a
I. Kushner
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1989.tb24017.x
IF: 6.499
1989-06-01
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Abstract:While thumbing through the Autumn 1988 issue of The Key Reporter, I was struck by an article by Calvin 0. Schrag, the George Ade Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Purdue, that dealt with postmodernism.' This term refers to a group of attitudes and values; a mind-set; a way of seeing the world that has achieved dominance in art, literature, philosophy, and even science in our era. According to Schrag, postmodernism steers clear of unifying principles. It is characterized by an emphasis on pluralism, heterogeneity, multiplicity, and diversity. As we have seen, these are precisely the attributes that characterize the acute phase response. It is reassuring to recognize that we are right in the mainstream of our zeitgeist. Postmodernism, though, is subject to errors in interpretation; you can push postmodernism too far. Because postmodernism avoids unifying principles and emphasizes shifting paradigms, uncertainty, and unpredictability, it comes perilously close to stark relativism, in which anything goes. Such a posture is inappropriate; it cannot result in meaningful or valid art, literature, philosophy, or, certainly, science. Over the last few years, there have been two major sources of confusion in acute phase response studies that may have led to errors in interpretation of data, particularly when conclusions have been generalized to extend beyond the specific experimental systems that have been employed. Confusion has resulted from ( 1 ) an inadequate understanding of how cytokines affect cells and (2) an inadequate appreciation of the limitations of the model systems we have been using. The appearance of multicellular organisms in the course of evolution and the consequent need to assure a smoothly functioning organizational structure dictated the need for intercellular messengers. Our understanding of the mode of function of the nonendocrine messengers, which we now refer to as cytokines, is currently undergoing significant revision, as recently reviewed by Sporn and Roberts.' At first, cytokines were presumed to have a single cell source, a single target, and a single specific function. Nomenclature reflected these views: lymphokina originated in lymphocytes, interleukins conveyed information from one white cell to another, growth factors stimulated growth of target cells, and neuropepfides acted on elements of the nervous system. It is now apparent that these presumptions were too limited. Increasing numbers of cytokines have been shown to have multiple cellular sources, multiple targets, and multiple functions.