Enhancement of Meditation Analgesia by Opioid Antagonist in Experienced Meditators.

OBJECTIVE: Studies have consistently shown that long-term meditation practice is associated with reduced pain, but the neural mechanisms by which long-term meditation practice reduces pain remain unclear. This study tested endogenous opioid involvement in meditation analgesia associated with long-term meditation practice. METHODS: Electrical pain was induced with randomized, double-blind, cross-over administration of the opioid antagonist naloxone (0.15-mg/kg bolus dose, then 0.2-mg/kg per hour infusion dose) with 32 healthy, experienced meditation practitioners and a standardized open monitoring meditation. RESULTS: Under saline, pain ratings were significantly lower during meditation (pain intensity: 6.41 ± 1.32; pain unpleasantness: 3.98 ± 2.17) than at baseline (pain intensity: 6.86 ±1.04, t(31) = 2.476, p = .019, Cohen's d = 0.46; pain unpleasantness: 4.96 ±1.75, t(31) = 3.746, p = .001, Cohen's d = 0.68), confirming the presence of meditation analgesia. Comparing saline and naloxone revealed significantly lower pain intensity (t(31) = 3.12, p = .004, d = 0.56), and pain unpleasantness (t(31) = 3.47, p = .002, d = 0.62), during meditation under naloxone (pain intensity: 5.53 ± 1.54; pain unpleasantness: 2.95 ± 1.88) than under saline (pain intensity: 6.41 ± 1.32; pain unpleasantness: 3.98 ± 2.17). Naloxone not only failed to eliminate meditation analgesia but also made meditation analgesia stronger. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term meditation practice does not rely on endogenous opioids to reduce pain. Naloxone's blockade of opioid receptors enhanced meditation analgesia; pain ratings during meditation were significantly lower under naloxone than under saline. Possible biological mechanisms by which naloxone-induced opioid receptor blockade enhances meditation analgesia are discussed.

Mindfulness-Meditation-Based Pain Relief Is Not Mediated by Endogenous Opioids.

Mindfulness meditation, a cognitive practice premised on sustaining nonjudgmental awareness of arising sensory events, reliably attenuates pain. Mindfulness meditation activates multiple brain regions that contain a high expression of opioid receptors. However, it is unknown whether mindfulness-meditation-based analgesia is mediated by endogenous opioids. The present double-blind, randomized study examined behavioral pain responses in healthy human volunteers during mindfulness meditation and a nonmanipulation control condition in response to noxious heat and intravenous administration of the opioid antagonist naloxone (0.15 mg/kg bolus + 0.1 mg/kg/h infusion) or saline placebo. Meditation during saline infusion significantly reduced pain intensity and unpleasantness ratings when compared to the control + saline group. However, naloxone infusion failed to reverse meditation-induced analgesia. There were no significant differences in pain intensity or pain unpleasantness reductions between the meditation + naloxone and the meditation + saline groups. Furthermore, mindfulness meditation during naloxone produced significantly greater reductions in pain intensity and unpleasantness than the control groups. These findings demonstrate that mindfulness meditation does not rely on endogenous opioidergic mechanisms to reduce pain. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Endogenous opioids have been repeatedly shown to be involved in the cognitive inhibition of pain. Mindfulness meditation, a practice premised on directing nonjudgmental attention to arising sensory events, reduces pain by engaging mechanisms supporting the cognitive control of pain. However, it remains unknown if mindfulness-meditation-based analgesia is mediated by opioids, an important consideration for using meditation to treat chronic pain. To address this question, the present study examined pain reports during meditation in response to noxious heat and administration of the opioid antagonist naloxone and placebo saline. The results demonstrate that meditation-based pain relief does not require endogenous opioids. Therefore, the treatment of chronic pain may be more effective with meditation due to a lack of cross-tolerance with opiate-based medications.

Evidence for a fixed capacity limit in attending multiple locations.

A classic question concerns whether humans can attend multiple locations or objects at once. Although it is generally agreed that the answer to this question is "yes," the limits on this ability are subject to extensive debate. According to one view, attentional resources can be flexibly allocated to a variable number of locations, with an inverse relationship between the number of selected locations and the quality of information processing at each location. Alternatively, these resources might be quantized in a "discrete" fashion that enables concurrent access to a small number of locations. Here, we report a series of experiments comparing these alternatives. In each experiment, we cued participants to attend a variable number of spatial locations and asked them to report the orientation of a single, briefly presented target. In all experiments, participants' orientation report errors were well-described by a model that assumes a fixed upper limit in the number of locations that can be attended. Conversely, report errors were poorly described by a flexible-resource model that assumes no fixed limit on the number of locations that can be attended. Critically, we showed that these discrete limits were predicted by cue-evoked neural activity elicited before the onset of the target array, suggesting that performance was limited by selection processes that began prior to subsequent encoding and memory storage. Together, these findings constitute novel evidence supporting the hypothesis that human observers can attend only a small number of discrete locations at an instant.

Military deployment human exposure assessment: urine total and isotopic uranium sampling results.

Currently the Department of Defense (DoD) does not use exposure biomarkers to measure service members' exposure to environmental chemicals. Blood and urine exposure biomarkers for volatile organic compounds (VOC), selected heavy metals, depleted uranium (DU), and chemical warfare agents are currently available but have not been field tested or validated by the DoD in military deployments as a tool to document exposures. The Military Deployment Human Exposure Assessment Study, a prospective cohort of 46 soldiers deployed to Bosnia, was designed to field test blood and urine exposure biomarkers as a mechanism to document exposures to these chemicals during military deployments. Blood and urine were collected before, during, and after deployment. Standard questionnaire, environmental, and occupational monitoring data collection methods were conducted for comparison to the exposure biomarker results. This article compares and reports the pre-, during, and postdeployment urine total and isotopic uranium measurements and compares them to perceived exposures captured on questionnaire, to environmental data collected by the United Nations Environmental Program in Bosnia, and to standard U.S. urine uranium reference levels (CDC, 2003). Additionally, the questionnaire and environmental and occupational measurements are reported. The results of the study indicate that exposure biomarkers may be a valuable tool to the DoD in exposure and risk assessment with regard to environmental and occupational exposures to uranium.

Derivation of risk based wipe surface screening levels for industrial scenarios.

The environmental characterization of building interiors and other surfaces has generally been performed with wipe-sampling because it is a non-destructive technique. There is no consensus, however, as to the interpretation of the results of wipe-sampling. Specifically, there is not a standardized method to determine if chemicals found at sampled levels pose a threat to human health. A methodology was developed, based on acceptable health risk levels, to derive screening levels for evaluating wipe-sampling results pertaining to industrial scenarios. The methodology was based on the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region IX Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) approach; a multi-exposure methodology commonly used for evaluating soil concentrations. PRGs are the USEPA determined health based goals for soil preliminary remediation efforts. Probabilistic techniques were used to conduct a sensitivity analysis of the methodology to determine which variables drive the ultimate screening levels. Discrete values were then selected based on standard industrial scenarios common to the US Army. The wipe surface screening levels reported are for use as preliminary guidelines which help to determine whether further sampling or cleanup are necessary. The levels are not meant as cleanup or compliance criteria.

The recommended role of exposure biomarkers for the surveillance of environmental and occupational chemical exposures in military deployments: policy considerations.

A lack of individual exposure information limited the evaluation of exposure-outcome relationships after the Gulf War. Exposure concerns during Operation Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom deployments have increased interest in individual environmental and occupational chemical exposure assessment. Currently, deployment assessments are conducted using intermittent ambient air monitoring, occasional focused evaluations based on these results, and postdeployment questionnaire documentation of exposure and/or health concerns. Although this strategy is an improvement over previous practice, it has limitations, including a reliance on evidence of an acute problem, to initiate in-depth health evaluation. Exposure biomarkers may have the potential to overcome some of the limitations of current environmental and occupational exposure assessment tools. This article examines current exposure assessment methods, reviews emerging technologies, and recommends a phased approach to introducing exposure biomarkers into a comprehensive occupational and environmental health surveillance program.