The Mirror Model. A Rosetta Stone for Biology.

By Sandro Guerra García. 

 

Disclaimer

The idea that will be discussed in this article could unsettle readers who are not comfortable with controversial views. The mirror model is an unconventional thesis, and the uncommon nature of its claim can seem ridiculous, uninformed, and even delusional. Nonetheless, the hypothesis that will be put forward is consistent with evidence that should not be overlooked, and the proposed experiments could lead to uncontroversial proof of its validity.

 

Abstract

The mirror model is, in essence, a very simple idea; it is a model that synthesizes the incredible complexity of life into an elemental equivalence principle, or, as the name indicates, a mirror effect. This principle could be explained as a phenomenon similar to an equation. An equation is a statement with 2 parts divided by an equals sign. These 2 parts may look completely different at first glance, but they are indeed equivalent statements; they are 2 expressions of the same principle. The mirror model proposes that something very similar happens in complex life forms. It states that the body, like an equation, consist of 2 fundamental parts: the head and the body, and all the structures in the head are iterated onto the body.

At first, this idea may not make sense because the head does not look at all like the rest of the body. Furthermore, the brain is made out of nerve tissue, and the organs inside the abdomen and the thorax consist of a completely different set of tissues that have nothing to do with the brain; in fact, they do not even have the same origin. This idea also seems to contradict the Ed Lewis model of development by mosaics, which is the leading model of development today. How, therefore, can we resolve this tissue discrepancy, and how can we reconcile these two seemingly incongruent models? These questions are indeed highly relevant, and they will be addressed as the model is described.

 

Introduction

Biology today is usually concerned with very tiny things. This approach has been very successful so far, and thanks to the detail-oriented work of many eminent scientists, we are able to grasp concepts such as DNA, Hox genes, epigenetics, and many others. But even though we know so much about many details, we still lack a complete, comprehensive picture of how the body takes shape. We do not understand how a duet of cells is able to transform coherently into the immense orchestra that is the human body. The strategy of the mirror model to tackle this problem is to take a step back, look at the big picture, and try to identify meaningful patterns hiding in plane sight.

To better understand how the mirror model may work we have to look at the pre-embryonic process. Humans develop from a “sandwich” of 3 germinal tissues; the ectoderm, mesoderm, and endoderm. The ectoderm divides into 2 parts; one part forms the skin and the other forms the nervous system. The mesoderm is responsible for the formation of the skeletal, muscular, and circulatory systems. The endoderm creates the lungs, liver, and digestive tract. If this model is correct, then the endoderm would follow the same principles to create the guts as the ectoderm follows to create the brain, producing what I call a mirror effect. I am not implying this happens simultaneously. I am aware these alleged mirror structures do not develop at the same rate, but I believe they do follow a similar morphogenic principle. On the other hand, the structures that develop from the mesoderm should also follow this mirror effect, but in this case the mesoderm mirrors itself instead of other germinal tissue. Therefore, the structures of mesodermal origin in the head would have counterparts that also have a mesodermal origin in the body. Organs of mesodermal origin, such as the heart, kidneys, reproductive organs, and their respective counterparts, can be key to understanding the dynamics of this model. For this reason, I will devote special attention to these alleged mirror structures and explain why I believe these associations reinforce the coherence of this hypothesis.

To better explain the mirror model, I have created 3 catalogs of parallel structures. The first deals mostly with the skeletal system and its alleged analogous structures. The second one deals with the structures in the head and their alleged counterparts in the body, and the third one deals with heart and its alleged analogous structures in the head. I have gathered a body of evidence that support many of these parallels in the form of syndromes, symptoms, functional connections, mutations, and the surprising results of an experiment on the sexual behavior of rodents performed at Harvard University.  I am aware that it is unconventional to include elements of the methods, and conclusion sections as part of the introduction. But, we live in an era where time is of the essence, and readers need substantial reasons to remain engaged. For the readers convenience I have summarized the catalogs and the evidence on this section including links with references and further information on the phenomena used as support. All this information will be reintroduced in the Discussion section as the catalogs are further explained. Because no experiment has yet been done to test this hypothesis the Discussion section will be introduced first followed by the Methods section, which will contain general guidelines to future experiments, along with the initial observations that lead me to create this model.

 

Table 1: Alleged counterparts within the skeletal system:

Skull Rest of the skeleton
Orbits of the skull Obturator foramina
Frontal bone Rectus sheet/bone marrow on the ribs and crest of the ilium
Parietal bones Rib cage and bone marrow on this area
Occipital bone Sternum and manubrium
Sphenoid bone and cervical vertebrae Sacrum bone and part vertebral column
Maxilla Superior extremities
Mandible Part of inferior extremities
Teeth Nails
Temporal bone Ilium
Pterygoid plates Scapula

 

Table 2: Alleged counterparts in the head and the torso:

Head Torso
Cerebellum Lungs
Eye pineal complex Heart thymus complex
Pituitary gland Liver
Optic chiasma Gallbladder
Putamen Stomach (under consideration)
Hypothalamus Pancreas (under consideration)
Hippocampus Small intestine (under consideration)
Cerebrum Colon
Auditory system Kidneys
Lips Anus
Nasal cavity Vagina
Nasal meautus Penis/clitoris
Palatine tonsils Testicle and ovaries (under consideration)

  

Table 3: alleged counterparts in the Ocular-Pineal Complex and the Heart-Thymus Complex

Ocular-Pineal Complex Heart-Thymus Complex
Right and left eyes Heart ventricles
Ciliari muscle Papillary muscle
Zonular fibers Cordeae tendineae
Muscles that control the movement of the eye and eyelids Exterior layers of cardiac muscles
Pineal gland Thymus gland

 

Evidence Summary and References Material:

  • Tooth and nail syndrome (TNS) supports the parallel established between the teeth and the nails by the model:

https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=17699

  • The antennapedia mutation in Drosophila supports the parallel established between the maxillary and the extremities by the model:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2850265

  • The reflection of congenital heart disease symptoms on the eyes supports the parallel established between the heart and the eyes by the model:

https://www.rebuildyourvision.com/blog/vision-conditions/cardiovascular-diseases-eyes/

https://www.nature.com/articles/6701408

  • The reflection of pituitary malfunction on the liver supports the parallel established between these structures by the model:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15057893

  • The correlation found between dementia and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) supports the parallel established between the cerebrum and the colon by the model:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4701489/

  • The correlation found between colorectal cancer and the decline in cognitive function supports the parallel established between the cerebrum and the colon by the model:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683012/

  • The correlation shown between the kidneys and the auditory system by branchiootorenal syndrome supports the parallel established between these structures by the model:

https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/branchiootorenal-branchiootic-syndrome

  • The correlation shown between the reproductive organs and the olfactory system by Kallmann syndrome supports the parallel established between these structures by the model:

https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/kallmann-syndrome

  • The correlation shown between the reproductive organs and the olfactory system by the abundant presence of erectile tissue on the nose supports the parallel established between these structures by the model:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erectile_tissue

  • The parallel established between the reproductive organs and the olfactory system is also supported by the results of an experiment on the sexual behavior of rodents performed at Harvard University by Dr. Catherine Dulac, Dr. Jennings Xu, and Dr. Tali Kimchi.

Short comprehensive article on the experiment: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2007-08-06/sex-not-on-the-brain-but-in-the-nose-study/2522574

Original scholarly paper by Dr. Catherine Dulac, Dr. Jennings Xu, and Dr. Tali Kimchi: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6163439_A_functional_circuit_underlying_male_sexual_behaviour_in_the_female_mouse_brain

 

Discussion

Catalog 1—The Skeletal System

When we look at the skeletal system, it is difficult to see the resemblance between the skull and the rest of the skeleton. However, there is a hint that gives everything away, and that is, as previously mentioned, the remarkable similarity between the obturator foramina and the orbits of the skull. After identifying these 2 structures, everything starts to fall into place. But there is a problem: if the obturator foramina are counterparts to the orbits of the skull, there should be an analogous frontal bone covering the abdomen, which is not the case. This apparent incongruence helps make an important point. I do not believe everything is expressed in a 1-to-1 relationship; otherwise, animals like snakes or fish would not fit into this model. Some organs and bones could be latent or expressed to a lesser degree. Fortunately, this seems to be the case with the inferior frontal bone because it would be very uncomfortable to walk with a bone over the abdomen. In this case, instead of a solid counterpart to the frontal bone, there are 2 analogous structures. One is the rectus sheet, which is the white tissue covering the abdominal muscles, and the other is the abundant bone marrow found in the crest of the ilium. So far, no one has been able to explain the reason for the significant presence of marrow in this area. However, if the mirror model is correct, this abundance of marrow would be justified by the absence of the counterpart of the frontal bone, and the marrow would be the expression of this latent structure.

SkullFig.1. Orbits of the skull compared to obturator foramina.

On top of the abdomen, we find the ribcage, and if the counterpart of the frontal bone occupies the abdominal area, then the obvious counterpart for the ribs would be the parietal bones. But the parietal bones are 2 solid plates, and the ribs are a collection of individual bones. However, the ribs, like the ilium, also exhibit an abundant presence of bone marrow that has eluded the comprehension of experts. The presence of marrow in this area suggests that the ribs have the potential to be 2 solid plates, similar in shape to their alleged counterpart. This association explains the mysterious marrow that has puzzled scientists for many years.

thorax headFig. 2. Superior view of an infant skull compared to frontal view of thoracic and pelvic areas of the skeleton. Red areas on the right image indicates presence of bone marrow.

Following this order, the sternum and the manubrium are counterparts to the occipital bone. The ilium is a counterpart to the temporal bones. The arms and legs are mirror structures to the maxilla and mandible, respectively. The scapula is parallel to the pterygoid plates. The sphenoid and possibly the cervical vertebrae are a counterpart to the sacrum bone and the rest of the vertebral column, and the clavicles are probably a counterpart of the hyoid bone.

The teeth are structures of ectodermal origin, but since they are always depicted as part of the skeletal system, I have decided to include them in this catalog, and the most obvious counterparts for the teeth are the nails.

 

ScapulaFig. 3. Pterygoid plates compare to the sacapula.
Skull mirrorFig. 4. Human skull compared of an artistic rendition of the rest of the skeleton arranged as a skull according to the parameters stated by this model.

 

Table 1: Alleged counterparts within the skeletal system:

Skull Rest of the skeleton
Orbits of the skull Obturator foramina
Frontal bone Rectus sheet/bone marrow on the ribs and crest of the ilium
Parietal bones Rib cage and bone marrow on this area
Occipital bone Sternum and manubrium
Sphenoid bone and cervical vertebrae Sacrum bone and part vertebral column
Maxilla Superior extremities
Mandible Part of inferior extremities
Teeth Nails
Temporal bone Ilium
Pterygoid plates Scapula

 

The first piece of evidence related to the relationships established by this model is a genetic disorder called tooth and nail syndrome TNS. People with this condition exhibit poor formation of both the teeth and nails. The affliction generated by this condition on these alleged mirror structures supports the association established by the model between these structures. You can learn more about TSN in the following article: https://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=17699

Perhaps one of the most important pieces of evidence for this model is hiding in plain sight. The antennapedia mutation was the key to one of the most significant breakthroughs in the history of science. It was instrumental to proving Ed Lewis’s theory of development by mosaics. Antennapedia is a gene first discovered in Drosophila, which controls the formation of the legs during development. The mutation of this gene can trigger the formation of legs in place of antennae. Contrary to popular belief, the antennapedia mutation is not really a mutation of the antennae; it is a mutation of the fly’s maxillary, of which the antennae are substructures. This fact is highly significant because it is consistent with the relationship established by this model between the maxillary and superior extremities, and it can lead to further evidence on the validity of this hypothesis. You can learn more about the antennapedia mutation and confirm the claim about the fly’s maxillary in the following article. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2850265

 

antenapediaFig. 5. Normal Drosophila Compared to a Drosophila with the antennapedia mutation.

 

anthenapedia Fig. 6. Drosophila with affected by the antennapedia mutation compare to an artistic rendition of how a human may look if affected by a similar mutation.

 

Catalog 2—Parallels of Structures on the Head and the Alleged Counterparts in the Torso

In this catalog, I will address the analogous structures in descending order with respect to the organs in the torso. This, I believe, will make the content clearer and easier to follow.

The first organ we find looking at the body in descending order are the lungs. The lungs are one of the organs that best resemble their alleged counterpart: the cerebellum. If we look at a cross-section of these organs, we observe a fractal pattern in both cases: a tree-like structure on the cerebellum called the arbor vitae very much resembles the similar fractal shape created by the bronchi as they branch out to create the lungs. The lungs are responsible for the process of respiration. On the other hand, the cerebellum does not control respiration; the breathing process is an involuntary reflex controlled by the hypothalamus. However, it has been found that deep nuclei within the cerebellum are responsible for respiratory modulation http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12879972. The cerebellum is mainly responsible for coordinating movements. However, respiration is an important factor in establishing coherent movement. Movements usually fall into a rhythm synced with the breathing process. This may not be obvious to many scientists, but it is something that athletes, musicians, and dancers know very well. A study conducted in the department of physiology at the University of Zurich in Switzerland by P. Bernasconi and J. Kohl showed that: “The degree of co-ordination during running increased slightly but not significantly with increasing work load and could be increased significantly by paced breathing.”1 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1143984/ According to this study respiration seems to be a significant factor in establishing coordination in movement, and this reinforces my suspicion of the lungs been a mirror counterpart to the cerebellum.

Lungs cerebellumFig. 7. Lungs and bronchi compared to the cerebellum and cross-section of the cerebellum.

 

Right between the lungs is the heart. The counterpart of the heart is not easy to identify, since there are no structures in the head that seem to resemble this organ. But the first thing to take notice of in this case is the cytological origin of this structure. Unlike most of the organs in the torso, the heart does not develop from the endoderm; it develops instead from the mesoderm. For this reason, it is logical to infer that the heart’s counterpart should also have a mesodermal origin. This dramatically reduces the prospects for an alleged mirror structure.

After careful examination of several structures of mesodermal origin within the head, I have concluded that the best candidates for the counterparts of the heart, as well as the thymus gland, are the eyes and pineal gland. Like the heart, the eyes are mainly formed by mesodermal tissue. Furthermore, the eyes are basically 2 hollow spheres, which resemble the structure of the heart’s ventricles. This comparison is not too convincing at first glance, but a cross-section of the heart compared with cross-sections of the eyes shows remarkable similarities. Inside the eyes, there is a set of muscles called the ciliary body. These muscles connect to a set of fibers called the zonular fibers that are also connected to the lenses. The function of these structures is to pull the lens to focus the eye. Similarly, inside the heart, there are a number of muscles called papillary muscles. These muscles connect to a set of tendons called the chordae tendineae, which also connect to the heart valves. The function of these structures is to pull open the heart’s valves. Looking at both sets of structures reveals a remarkable resemblance between the ciliary body and the zonular fibers on one hand and the papillary muscles and chordae tendineae on the other. See Fig.8.

Heart lensFig. 8. Comparison of papillary muscles and cordae tendineae in the heart to cilliary body and zonular fibers in the eyes.

 

An important piece of evidence to support the analogy between the eyes and the heart or the ocular-pineal complex and the heart is the reflection of symptoms of cardiovascular diseases on the eyes. It has been found very recently that serious heart conditions can be accurately diagnosed just by looking at the patient’s eyes. In a study published by Springer Nature, by A M MansourF F BitarE I TraboulsiK M KassakM Y ObeidA Megarbane, and H I Salti concluded that “patients with congenital heart disease (CHD) are at a high risk for ocular pathology and need screening for various ocular abnormalities.”2 You can learn more about this phenomenon in these articles: http://www.rebuildyourvision.com/blog/vision-conditions/cardiovascular-diseases-eyes/ Also see: http://www.nature.com/eye/journal/v19/n1/full/6701408a.html

As previously mentioned, I not only associate the eyes with the heart, but also believe the eyes and the pineal gland are intrinsically related, and together they form a structure I call the oculo-pineal complex. I believe this complex is the mirror counterpart to both the heart and the thymus gland. I relate the pineal gland to the eyes because it has been found that most lizards, frogs, salamanders, certain bony fish, sharks, and lampreys possess an undeveloped third eye, also called the parietal or pineal eye. This pineal eye possesses a lens, and even a retina, that in many cases developed as an evagination of the pineal gland. More information on the parietal, or pineal, eye can be found in the following article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parietal_eye

I relate the thymus gland to the heart because of the connection found between the pineal gland and the eyes, the proximity of the thymus gland to the heart, and the resemblance I can observe between the pineal and thymus glands. The pineal gland is known for the production of melatonin, which is associated with the circadian rhythm. The circadian rhythm is regulated by the perception of light and by the hypothalamus, which also regulates the cardiac rhythm, along with many other involuntary functions of the body. The role of the hypothalamus in this relationship is still unclear to me, but I focus on the pineal gland because it seems to be the structure that induces sleep, which is relevant for answering a very important question: Is there a functional connection between the ocular-pineal and the cardio-thymus complexes? The main function of the heart is to pump blood, which is obviously not a function that can be attributed to the eyes. However, there is another significant connection between these structures. The heart produces the biggest electric field in the body, the intensity of which is modulated during each heartbeat. The brain also produces a potent electric field, but the peaks and valleys of this field are modulated by the circadian rhythm, which, as previously mentioned, seems to be associated with the pineal gland. This electric parallelism has led me to believe that the circadian rhythm is nothing more than a superior version of the heartbeat, or the heartbeat the lower version of the circadian rhythm. The association between these electric cycles can be central to understanding the mechanisms of this model. I believe the circadian rhythm and the heart beat are not only parallel phenomena, they are also the engine of this model and the process of development.

 

Pineal reptiliansFig. 19. Pineal eye in reptilian.
 ThymusFig. 10. Comparison between thymus and pineal glands.

 

It has been found that the process of mitosis involves charge; this is not very well understood yet, but it has been observed that microtubules are charged when they assemble to connect to kinetochores. You can learn more about this observation on the following article: https://europepmc.org/abstract/pmc/pmc2726302 . The knowledge of this electric phenomenon has led to the development of cancer therapies known as tumor-treating fields, or TTFields https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpyWgNPrvGA . This therapy inhibits cell division by the use of external electric fields that interfere with the formation of microtubules. This relationship between mitosis and electromagnetism allows us to speculate that the presence of a major electromagnetic cycle could be an excellent mechanism to regulate cell division during development. With both the heartbeat and circadian rhythm, major fluctuations of the electric fields around the heart and the brain can be observed. But what if these 2 fluctuating cycles exist not as a consequence of the organs but the organs as consequence of these cycles? What if these electromagnetic cycles exist even before the process of organogenesis, and what if these cycles are the organizing force behind development? If this hypothesis is correct, this phenomenon should be observable. More information on a possible of an experiment to test this hypothesis can be found on the Methods section.

 

Table 3: alleged counterparts in the Ocular-Pineal Complex and the Heart-Thymus Complex 

Ocular-Pineal Complex Heart-Thymus Complex
Right and left eyes Heart ventricles
Ciliari muscle Papillary muscle
Zonular fibers Cordeae tendineae
Muscles that control the movement of the eye and eyelids Exterior layers of cardiac muscles
Pineal gland Thymus gland

 

Right below the lungs are the liver and gallbladder. I believe the analogous structures to the liver and the gallbladder are the pituitary gland and optic chiasma, respectively. I have reached this conclusion mainly because of the remarkable physical resemblance between these structures. It is also important to highlight that both the liver and the pituitary gland have important endocrine functions. Furthermore, liver problems like nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) have been associated with hypopituitarism. You can learn more about this association in the following article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15057893

LiverFig. 11. Comparison between pituitary glands and optic chiasma on the left, to the liver and gal the gallbladder on the right.

 

Next to the liver and the gallbladder is the stomach. From this point forward, there is a discrepancy I have not been able to resolve yet. The brain has 2 hemispheres, and we only seem to have 1 digestive tract. For this reason, the structures in the digestive tract seem to have 2 counterparts in the head instead of just 1. I do not claim to understand the reason for this discrepancy. I have speculated that the yolk sac could be the missing counterpart, but I am still uncertain on this issue. I am also unsure about assigning counterparts to organs such as the stomach, pancreas, small intestine, and spleen. I have speculated that the stomach could be a counterpart to the putamen because of their resemblance in shape. I have associated the hippocampus with the small intestine because of its proximity to the putamen and have also associated the pancreas with the hypothalamus because they are both part of the endocrine system. However, in all these cases, I have a lower degree of confidence in the validity of these associations because of the lack of significant evidence to support these alleged parallels.

Unlike other organs in the digestive tract, the colon seems to have a clearer functional connection to its alleged counterpart. Diseases like colon cancer and irritable bowel syndrome have an impact on higher cognitive functions associated with the cerebrum. Irritable bowel syndrome has been linked with dementia, and patients with colorectal cancer show a decline in cognitive abilities. You can learn more about these relationships between Irritable bowel syndrome has and dementia on the following article:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4701489/ You can learn more about the decline in cognitive function in patients with colorectal cancer on the following article: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5683012/ All these coincidences have led me to a strong suspicion that the cerebrum and the colon may indeed be mirror counterparts.

One of the greatest questions in science is the question of cognition. What is it, how does it work, and how does it come about? To answer these questions, scientists for many years have concentrated on conducting all kinds of studies on the brain. However, from the perspective of the mirror model, this is like trying to understand a soccer game by looking at only half of the arena. The position of the model on this issue is very different. The digestive tract has more than 100 million neurons intrinsically connected with the brain. Why do we have so many neurons in what seems to be a long tube for processing food? If this model is correct, all these connections suddenly make a lot more sense, but the perspective of the model on the cognition question goes further. I believe the body is something like a violin or a guitar. To operate one of these instruments, the musician does not just manipulate one side of the instrument. To make music with a guitar, a musician forms chords at the neck of the guitar with one hand while strumming the strings between the sound hole and bridge with the other hand. The coordination of these 2 actions produces what we perceive as music. I believe something very similar could be happening with the nervous system. Specifically, to produce the “music” we call cognition, we operate not only the brain but the entire nervous system. However, like the guitar, the most significant parts of this operation consist of the coordination between the neurons in the guts and the neurons in the brain. This hypothesis may be refuted bay arguing that there is not enough time for nerve impulses in the gut to travel all the way to the brain to simultaneously produce a thought. Therefore, let us go back to the guitar metaphor. To play a guitar, one does not do the same thing with both hands at the same time. The hands do complementary actions; one hand forms a chord by pressing certain strings at the neck, and the other hand strums the strings to play the notes. The important part here is that one hand makes it possible for the correct notes to be played by the other hand. I think something similar happens on the body. In this analogy, the neck of the guitar would be the gut, and the bridge would probably be the brain. I believe the process of thinking consists of opening channels or “pressing strings” at the gut level, so the brain is then able to play the “chords” we call thoughts. This would explain why we so often see emotional distress reflected in the gut and diseases of the gut affecting the brain.

ColonFig. 12. Comparison between the colon, and cross-section of the colon on the left, to the cerebrum and cross-section of the cerebrum on the right.

 

The kidneys, along with the heart, are among the special organs in the body that develop from the mesoderm. The heart was previously associated with the eyes, which are known as sensory organs. Therefore, it would make sense if the alleged counterparts to the kidneys were not only of mesodermal origin but sensory organs as well. There is a syndrome called branchiootorenal syndrome (BOR), which is an autosomal dominant condition that disrupts the development of tissues in the neck and causes malformations of the ears and kidneys, caused by loss of function of the SIX1 and EYA1 genes. You can find more information on BOR on the following article: https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/branchiootorenal-branchiootic-syndrome This serendipitous coincidence has reinforced my suspicion that the ears are the mirror counterpart to the kidneys. If we look at a cross-section of the kidney and a cross-section of the cochlea, (see Fig. 13) some significant resemblances are noticeable. But this is not all, according to Oxford Medicine Online: “Malformations of the external ear may signal renal disease, but it is actually the disorders of the inner ear which reflect molecular pathways that are also crucial for kidney development. In a number of monogenic renal diseases, renal dysplasia is associated with deafness. Disorders of the kidney and inner ear are also linked in complex syndromes such as the human ciliopathies. In some cases, the loss of specific genes affects shared transport physiology, basement membrane assembly, or energy metabolism. The kidney and cochlea have a common susceptibility to toxins that are selectively concentrated by comparable uptake mechanisms in the two tissues.”3 http://oxfordmedicine.com/view/10.1093/med/9780199592548.001.0001/med-9780199592548-chapter-170

 

Lungs-RecoveredFig. 13. Comparison between kidney, and cross-section of the kidney on the left, and the cerebrum and cross-section of the cerebrum on the right.

 

ORBFig. 14. On the left kidneys damaged by branchiootorenal syndrome, on the right ears affected by the same disorder.

 

Following the sequence of organs of mesodermal origin are the reproductive organs. If the alleged counterparts of the kidneys and the heart are sensory organs, it is logical to infer that the counterparts to the reproductive organs also follow this pattern. Thus, if the counterpart to the heart is the eyes and the counterpart to the kidneys is the ears, the choice for a counterpart to the reproductive organs is between the tactile and olfactory systems. The tactile system is distributed throughout the body and includes the reproductive organs, so it does not make too much sense as a viable counterpart. On the other hand, the olfactory system seems to share many parallels with the reproductive organs. The nose, like the vagina, is a humectated cavity, and in many animals, sense of smell plays a major role in sexual arousal and partner selection. However, perhaps one of the most remarkable coincidences between these structures is that the reproductive organs and nose are the 2 places in the body where most of the erectile tissue is found, a coincidence that is not at all trivial. More information on the presence of erectile tissue in the nose can be found in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erectile_tissue. It is also important to point out that the reproductive organs are located on the pubic arch, which is the place where the nose would be if it is assumed that the obturator foramina is the counterpart of the eye sockets. Another significant association between these organs is made evident by Kallmann syndrome. Kallmann syndrome is a condition characterized by delayed or absent puberty and impaired sense of smell. Even more interesting is the fact that, occasionally, Kallmann syndrome occasionally affects the auditory system, along with the kidneys, structures that are also homologous in the model. More information on Kallmann syndrome can be found in this article: https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/kallmann-syndrome. Furthermore, a study conducted at Harvard University by Dr. Catherine Dulac, Dr. Jennings Xu, and Dr. Tali Kimchi showed that engineered mutation of a structure in the noses of mice, called the vomeronasal organ, triggers unusual sexual behavior in the subjects. This study is particularly significant not only because it supports the parallel established by the model, but also because it suggests that the validity of these alleged mirror structures can be tested in a lab using genetic engineering. More information on Dr. Catherine Dulac, Dr. Jennings Xu, and Dr. Tali Kimchi’s experiment can be found in these articles: Short comprehensive article on the experiment: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2007-08-06/sex-not-on-the-brain-but-in-the-nose-study/2522574 Original scholarly paper by Dr. Catherine Dulac, Dr. Jennings Xu, and Dr. Tali Kimchi: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6163439_A_functional_circuit_underlying_male_sexual_behaviour_in_the_female_mouse_brain

SexFig 14. Comparison between reproductive organs on the left, to elements of the olfactory system and the mouth on the right.

 

Table 2: Alleged counterparts in the head and the torso:

Head Torso
Cerebellum Lungs
Eye pineal complex Heart thymus complex
Pituitary gland Liver
Optic chiasma Gallbladder
Putamen Stomach (under consideration)
Hypothalamus Pancreas (under consideration)
Hippocampus Small intestine (under consideration)
Cerebrum Colon
Auditory system Kidneys
Lips Anus
Nasal cavity Vagina
Nasal meautus Penis/clitoris
Palatine tonsils Testicle and ovaries (under consideration)

 

Methods

If we can learn something from Ed Lewis and many other outstanding scientists, it is that good science is usually based on simple comprehensive principles that are often counterintuitive. Sometimes to really understand things, it is not enough to look hard at all the details. Sometimes it is necessary to take a step back and see the broader picture. This is precisely how this model started to take shape. One day I came across an image of the pelvic bone with the intestines exposed right on top. I thought it looked just like a skull with the frontal bone removed. At first, I only thought it was funny, but I could not stop thinking about this picture. The holes in the pelvic bone looked too much like the eye sockets, and the intestines like the cerebrum. These resemblances were hard to dismiss. (Now I consider the colon the counterpart to the cerebrum, but it took me a while to get to this conclusion.) I started to take this coincidence more seriously, and I asked myself: What if the obturator foramina (the holes on the pelvic bone) are indeed eye sockets? What if it is not just an amusing resemblance? I began to look further into this idea, and I started to put together many other strange coincidences that related structures in the body to structures in the head. Today, I have concluded that not only is the obturator foramina indeed an iteration of the eye sockets and the colon an iteration of the cerebrum, I now believe the whole body is in fact an iteration of the head. I am sure that it can be difficult for a serious scientist to entertain the possibility of an idea as bizarre as this. But, I hope that given the number and significance of the evidence listed, along with the experiments that will be proposed in this section, I will be able to convey an argument worthy of consideration. I am not a geneticist or a neuroscientist, so the observations that will be proposed will be general outlines. One of the purposes of this article is to find the funding and technical support to complete the design of these experiments, and test validity of these ideas.

Genetic experiments.

It is logical to wonder how can this model help us understand life and its organizing principles when it seems to contradict the accepted theory of development? I do not think the Ed Lewis model is wrong; I think it is incomplete. I believe this idea I call the mirror model is a superstructure that encompasses development by mosaics and the Hox genes Dr. Lewis so accurately predicted. The mirror model proposes a symmetry principle consistent with a series of mutations gathered here as evidence. These mutations involve anomalies in specific genes that can be used as templates to engineer similar alterations in other parts on the body. If the hypothesis proposed here is correct, these modifications should trigger mutations that will be consistent with the predicted mirror structures, unveiling an aspect of the Lewis model not yet observed. Perhaps the most obvious subject to perform these experiments is the drosophila, since the antennapedia mutation is one of the most significant phenomena supporting this model. However, syndromes like TNS, BOR, and Kallmann, should also be consider for this experiment as well as the participation of other subjects.

Observation on the Circadian Rhythm and the Heartbeat as Leading Morphogenic Cycles.

I previously proposed that the heartbeat and the circadian rhythm could be leading electro-morphogenic cycles that could be found at the pre-embryonic stage. I believe these 2 electromagnetic centers could guide the development of the embryo by controlling the mitotic process through the peaks and valleys of their cycles. I believe that if the electric distribution of a fertilized egg is continuously monitored during the entire process of development, the presence of these electromagnetic centers will be detected. I have also speculated that these electromagnetic centers could begin as 1 pole, and periodically divide into many other sub-poles to guide the formation of different organs as the embryo complexifies. However, I also believe the heartbeat and circadian rhythm will be the leading centers of this process and will always have a hire voltage than any other electromagnetic center that may be found.

Experiment on the Relation Between the Guts and the Brain.

On the previous section it was proposed that cognitive processes were the product not only of the brain, but of the interactions between the neurons on the digestive tract with the neurons on the brain. To illustrate this alleged phenomenon the body was compared to a guitar where 2 side of the instrument need to be operated in order to produce what we perceive as music. In the same way a guitar has different strings to produce different tones, the brain is divided into areas with specialized functions. If this hypothesis is correct, reflections of specific functions of the brain should be observed in the neurons attached to the counterpart of the brain proposed by this model. To test this idea, the head and the torso of a subject should be monitored while performing discrete actions associated with specific areas of the brain. The monitoring of this actions can be done with a combination of an EEG for the head and a dense distribution of electrodes throughout the torso. The same experiment can be repeated with an MRI scan of the whole body to observe different aspects of the reactions during the activities. One of the effects that will be expected is the reflection of Brodmann areas among the neurons distributed throughout the colon; since this organ has been identified here as a mirror counterpart to the cerebrum.

 

Note to the reader

This has been a brief text considering the complexity and depth of the subject. Certainly, much more can be said about specific aspects of the model. I am aware that not all the organs in the body have been addressed and that this alleged mirror effect can have apparent variations among different species, and even different kingdoms. However, I hope the reader has been able to grasp the significance of the evidence that has been put forward, despite the unconventional nature of the hypothesis. The broad number of tangible connections that support this model cannot be regarded as trivial or random if observed from an impartial, honest, and objective perspective. So far, I have managed to put together this idea, despite many limitations in budget, time, and expertise, but the research necessary to test the validity of this model cannot be done singlehandedly. The purpose of this article is to capture the attention and the imagination of brave and adventurous scientists willing to sail into uncharted territory. I cannot offer grants or any benefits at the moment, but the implications of this idea could be far reaching, and the benefits that might unfold from it are in my opinion worthy of consideration.

 

 Literature Cited

 

  1. Analysis of co-ordination between breathing and exercise rhythms in man. By Bernasconiand J. Kohl: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1143984/

 

  1. Cardiovascular Diseases and the Eyes. By A M Mansour,F F BitarE I TraboulsiK M KassakM Y ObeidA Megarbane, and H I Salti: https://www.rebuildyourvision.com/blog/vision-conditions/cardiovascular-diseases-eyes/

 

  1. Oxford Medicine online. Kidneys/ear syndromes: http://oxfordmedicine.com/view/10.1093/med/9780199592548.001.0001/med-9780199592548-chapter-170

 

 

Author

Sandro Guerra García

If you have any questions about this hypothesis, you are welcome to leave a comment or e-mail me at sandro_guerragarcia@hotmail.com. I will do my best to answer at my earliest convenience.

 

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “The Mirror Model. A Rosetta Stone for Biology.

  1. This design is wicked! You definitely know how to keep a reader amused.
    Between your wit and your videos, I was almost moved
    to start my own blog (well, almost…HaHa!) Excellent job.
    I really enjoyed what you had to say, and more than that, how you presented it.
    Too cool!

    Like

  2. Thank you for some other great article. Where else could anyone get that
    type of information in such an ideal way of writing?
    I have a presentation subsequent week, and I am at the look
    for such information.

    Like

    1. Hello Porker Asia, sorry it took me so long to reply. I don’t usually review the comment section. I really don’t think you’ll be able to find more information about this theory in other places. The patterns discussed here have not been observe by any one else, at least I haven’t seen this observations in other places, and I have done some research. The only thing I can suggest is to look into the links I use as supporting material in the article if you wan further information on these alleged parallels.
      This theory also seem to be consistent with parallels stablished by eastern medicine. I don’t use this information as a reference because it can be ambiguous, and is not useful for taking measurements. But if you want to know more about it, you can definitely look for relations between the nose and sex, or the ears and the kidneys in eastern medicine. I don’t have any specific link I can recommend but it may be interesting to look in to it in more depth.

      Kind regards.

      Sandro.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s