Stress-induced Fos-like Immunoreactivity in the Pons and the Medulla Oblongata of Rats

Immunoreactivity of the immediate early gene c-fos was used to investigate changes in the activity of brainstem neurons in response to acute stressors like immobilization, formalin-induced pain, cold exposure, hemorrhage and insulin-induced hypoglycemia. Different stressors induced Fos-like immunoreactivity in different pontine and medullary neurons. A single, 3 hour immobilization was found to be a very strong stimulus that activated brainstem catecholaminergic (tyrosine hydroxylase-immunopositive) neurons and cells in the raphe and certain pontine tegmental nuclei, as well as in the reticular formation. Pain, induced by a subcutaneous injection of formalin was also effective on catecholamine-synthesizing neurons and on others cells in the nucleus of the solitary tract. Cold exposure activated cells mainly in the sensory spinal trigeminal and parabrachial nuclei and in the so-called "pontine thermoregulatory area". Moderate Fos-like immunoreactivity was induced by a hypotonic (25%) hemorrhage in medullary catecholaminergic neurons, the nucleus of the solitary tract and the Barrington nucleus. Among stressful stimuli used, insulin-induced hypoglycemia elicited the smallest Fos activation in the lower brainstem. The present observations indicate that different stressors may use different neuronal pathways in the central organization of the stress response.     

The fallout: What happens to whistleblowers and those accused but exonerated of scientific misconduct?

Current DHHS regulations require that policies and procedures developed by institutions to handle allegations of scientific misconduct include provisions for “undertaking diligent efforts to protect the positions and reputations of those persons who, in good faith, make allegations.” Analogously, institutions receiving PHS funds are required to protect the confidentiality of those accused of such misconduct or, failing that, to restore their reputations if the allegations are not confirmed. Based on two surveys, one of whistleblowers and one of individuals accused but exonerated of scientific misconduct, this paper examines how well the system works to protect both sets of participants in cases of alleged misconduct. Contrary to popular impressions created by notorious cases, substantial minorities of both whistleblowers and exonerated scientists experience no adverse outcomes at the time the allegations are made and pursued. During this period, however, whistleblowers report more negative outcomes and more severe negative outcomes than their accused but exonerated counterparts. In the longer run, majorities of both groups report little impact on different aspects of their careers or professional activities, though those who report any impacts generally report negative ones. The accused but exonerated, however, appear to fare worse than whistleblowers in impacts on several aspects of their personal lives; their mental health, physical health, self-esteem, and self-identity.