Parkinson's disease, lights and melanocytes: looking beyond the retina.

Critical analysis of recent research suggesting that light pollution causes Parkinson's disease (PD) reveals that such a hypothesis is unsustainable in the context of therapeutic use of light in treating various neuropsychiatric conditions. Reinterpretation of their findings suggests that retinal damage caused by prolonged light exposure may have contributed to the observed enhancement of experimental PD. To test this hypothesis further, forty-two Sprague Dawley rats received microinjections of 6-hydroxydopamine (6-OHDA), 1-methyl-4-phenyl-2, 4, 6-tetrahydropyridine (MPTP), paraquat or rotenone into the vitreal mass in doses so minute that the effects could not be attributed to diffusion into brain. Significant changes in five motor parameters consistent with symptoms of experimental PD were observed. These findings support the interpretation that the retina is involved in the control of motor function and in the aetiology of PD.

Breaking away from dopamine deficiency: an essential new direction for Parkinson's disease.

For the past 40 years Parkinson's disease (PD) has been intrinsically associated with dopamine (DA) deficiency of the nigrostriatal DA system. One of the fundamental strengths of this theoretical approach is based on a presumed relationship between the degree of DA deficiency and the severity of motor impairment in the disease and its models. However, detailed examination of a substantial number of exemplary preclinical and clinical studies reveals that any such interpretation is overoptimistic and suggests that DA deficiency may be merely an epiphenomenon of a larger process underlying this disorder. Such a conclusion is based on numerous examples of miscarriage of basic principles of good scientific practice including (i) failure to thoroughly examine the adverse effects of DA replacement, (ii) drawing of statistical inference without recognising excessive spread of measure thereby lessening the importance of outliers, (iii) confounding independent and dependent variables within the scientific paradigm, (iv) overlooking fundamental principles of modern pharmacology, (v) confusing correlation with causation in linking cause and effect and (vi) disinclination to incorporate conflicting findings thereby infringing the quintessential scientific principle of tertium quid. This review demonstrates the inherent risks and dangers in the incontrovertible defence of DA deficiency theory and serves to address the ethical problems that emerge from the clinical application of scientific findings. There is increasing interest in new directions for PD research by dimming down the current emphasis on the importance of DA deficiency and its replacement. This would provide genuine hope and a new direction for the sufferers of a most debilitating disease.

A historical justification for and retrospective analysis of the systematic application of light therapy in Parkinson's disease.

For the past 40 years the primary purpose of therapeutics for Parkinson's disease (PD) has been to replace deficient dopamine (DA) in the nigrostriatal dopamine (NSD) system. Even in the presence of limited efficacy, abundant side effects and impoverished quality of life, the involvement of other systems in the aetiology and treatment of this disorder has been sorely neglected and the excessive use of DA replacement therapy (DART) continues on a global basis. Recent scientific work suggests that the retina plays a major role in NSD function and intimates light therapy in the management of PD. After a thorough review of historical evidence supporting this contention, a retrospective, open-label study on 129 PD patients, whereby they were monitored for a period extending for a few months to eight years, was carried out. Primary motor and non-motor symptoms were monitored using an objectified global rating scale and timed motor tests that were assessed at regular intervals for the duration of the study. Thirty-one patients with other neurological disorders (OND) served as controls to determine whether any therapeutic effects seen with light were generalizable across other conditions. Patients were classified as compliant (COM), semi-compliant (SCOM), or early quit (EQUIT; prematurely discontinued treatment). EQUIT patients showed deterioration, while the COM group improved on most parameters. The SCOM patients were not as good as the COM group. The OND group showed significant improvement in depression and insomnia, but exposure to light did not improve motor function. The total drug burden of PD patients maintained on light was less with fewer side effects than SCOM or EQUIT groups. These results confirm the value of the strategic application of light therapy with controlled doses of DART in PD and warrants further controlled investigation. That the symptomatic improvement continued as long patients remained in the program suggests that exposure to light, under a strict daily regimen, combined with controlled DART, actively slows or arrests the progressive degenerative process underlying PD.