Circulating Lipoproteins Are a Crucial Component of Host Defense against Invasive Salmonella typhimurium Infection

Contains fulltext : 79883.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Circulating lipoproteins improve the outcome of severe Gram-negative infections through neutralizing lipopolysaccharides (LPS), thus inhibiting the release of proinflammatory cytokines. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Low density lipoprotein receptor deficient (LDLR-/-) mice, with a 7-fold increase in LDL, are resistant against infection with Salmonella typhimurium (survival 100% vs 5%, p<0.001), and 100 to 1000-fold lower bacterial burden in the organs, compared with LDLR+/+ mice. Protection was not due to differences in cytokine production, phagocytosis, and killing of Salmonella organisms. The differences were caused by the excess of lipoproteins, as hyperlipoproteinemic ApoE-/- mice were also highly resistant to Salmonella infection. Lipoproteins protect against infection by interfering with the binding of Salmonella to host cells, and preventing organ invasion. This leads to an altered biodistribution of the microorganisms during the first hours of infection: after intravenous injection of Salmonella into LDLR+/+ mice, the bacteria invaded the liver and spleen within 30 minutes of infection. In contrast, in LDLR-/- mice, Salmonella remained constrained to the circulation from where they were efficiently cleared, with decreased organ invasion. CONCLUSIONS: plasma lipoproteins are a potent host defense mechanism against invasive Salmonella infection, by blocking adhesion of Salmonella to the host cells and subsequent tissue invasion

Integrating Positive and Clinical Psychology: Viewing Human Functioning as Continua from Positive to Negative Can Benefit Clinical Assessment, Interventions and Understandings of Resilience

In this review we argue in favour of further integration between the disciplines of positive and clinical psychology. We argue that most of the constructs studied by both positive and clinical psychology exist on continua ranging from positive to negative (e.g., gratitude to ingratitude, anxiety to calmness) and so it is meaningless to speak of one or other field studying the “positive” or the “negative”. However, we highlight historical and cultural factors which have led positive and clinical psychologies to focus on different constructs; thus the difference between the fields is more due to the constructs of study rather than their being inherently “positive” or “negative”. We argue that there is much benefit to clinical psychology of considering positive psychology constructs because; (a) constructs studied by positive psychology researchers can independently predict wellbeing when accounting for traditional clinical factors, both cross-sectionally and prospectively, (2) the constructs studied by positive psychologists can interact with risk factors to predict outcomes, thereby conferring resilience, (3) interventions that aim to increase movement towards the positive pole of well-being can be used encourage movement away from the negative pole, either in isolation or alongside traditional clinical interventions, and (4) research from positive psychology can support clinical psychology as it seeks to adapt therapies developed in Western nations to other cultures