Natural killer cells in patients with severe chronic fatigue syndrome.

Maintenance of health and physiological homeostasis is a synergistic process involving tight regulation of proteins, transcription factors and other molecular processes. The immune system consists of innate and adaptive immune cells that are required to sustain immunity. The presence of pathogens and tumour cells activates innate immune cells, in particular Natural Killer (NK) cells. Stochastic expression of NK receptors activates either inhibitory or activating signals and results in cytokine production and activation of pathways that result in apoptosis of target cells. Thus, NK cells are a necessary component of the immunological process and aberrations in their functional processes, including equivocal levels of NK cells and cytotoxic activity pre-empts recurrent viral infections, autoimmune diseases and altered inflammatory responses. NK cells are implicated in a number of diseases including chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS). The purpose of this review is to highlight the different profiles of NK cells reported in CFS patients and to determine the extent of NK immune dysfunction in subtypes of CFS patients based on severity in symptoms.

Ethics Commission examines moral distinctions in using life supports.

Deciding to Forego Life-Sustaining Treatment, a report of the President's Commission for the study of Ethical Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research, examines four common medical-ethical distinctions. The report highlights the 1980 Declaration on Euthanasia and closely follows Catholic moral teaching on the following. Death by action versus omitting to act. The commission rejects the idea that a physician who fails to act should not be held responsible for a patient's death. Failing to resuscitate, for example, or to take other steps to prolong life, are just as much causes of death as a lethal injection. The health profession's traditional duty to act on the patient's behalf precludes any distinction between acts and omissions. Withdrawing versus withholding treatment. Acknowledging that initiating treatment may create an obligation to continue treatment, the commission suggests that distinguishing between withholding and withdrawing could encourage undertreatment and overtreatment. Fear of being unable to withdraw unsuccessful treatment could lead to physicians' failing to treat patients who might benefit from the therapy. Ordinary versus extraordinary means. The commission upholds this distinction. It suggests, however, that the phrase "proportionate versus disproportionate" better describes the moral issue involved in selecting treatments that, in relation to their expected benefits, impose no excessive burden on the patient or family. Regarding intended versus unintended consequences, the commission departs from Catholic tradition. It fails to acknowledge the significance of physicians' intentions. What matters instead, according to the commission, is whether physicians act within their authority as defined by society. Thus, the commission suggests, the use of pain medications that may cause death can be socially and legally acceptable.

Ambiguities in 'killing' and 'letting die'.

In a recent article Carla Kary (1980) attempts to show that there can be a significant moral difference between instances of killing and letting die. I shall maintain in Section I that Kary's argument is somewhat weakened by her failure to note an important ambiguity in the notion of killing a person. I shall also argue in Section II that a similar ambiguity affects the notion of letting someone die, and that failure to note this latter ambiguity also weakens the position developed by Robert Coburn (1980) with regard to defective newborns.

KIE: Atkinson analyzes two articles in the December 1980 issue of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, one by Carla Kary on "A moral distinction between killing and letting die," and one by Robert Coburn on "Morality and the defective newborn." He concludes that the positions of both authors are weakened by ambiguities in their conceptualization of the difference between killing and letting die.