Short Communication
Volume 1 Issue 3 - 2017
Transplant Psychology. Exploring the Fundamental Origins of Cell Memory and Personality
Jason Buttigieg1* and Duffy C2
1School of Physics and Astronomy, Clayton Campus, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia
2Counselling Psychology, Werribee, VIC, 3030, Australia
*Corresponding Author: Jason Buttigieg (Clinical Psychologist), School of Physics and Astronomy, Clayton Campus, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia.
Received: October 03, 2017; Published: October 21, 2017
Keywords: Transplant psychology; Personality traits; Cellular memory; Atomic signatures
Memory as described by Nobel Prize recipient Eric Kandel in 2000 is, “the pattern of functional interconnections of cells” (Kandel, 2001, p. 567). While the current scientific view is that memories in the brain are located in the synapses, there is good evidence presented in Verney’s (2014) paper that memories are also stored in the cell membrane of all cells, including neurons. This communication explores transplant psychology. Transplant psychology typically refers to the discipline of the pre- and postoperative psychological evaluation of patients who undergo transplantation (Kumnig & Jowsey-Gregoire, 2015). However, for the purpose of this communication the definition includes the notion that the patient’s personality changes in ways that parallels their donor’s personality following a transplant with the possibility that memory (particularly pertaining to personality) originates beyond the cell membrane and neurons. It is proposed that memory originates well within the realms of atomic signatures (i.e., magnetic wave forms produced by atomic activity) and that understanding these atomic signatures, including their origins, will help us explain the mysteries behind events linked to transplant psychology like personality transfer.
Transplant Psychology: Current Theory about Cell Memory
Cell memory theory addresses if, when and how a transplant recipient’s personality trait (traits are something about you that makes you "you") changes and is detailed in cases where a transplanted organ (like one’s heart) retains memory of the original person’s personality (The Mother, 1979). Cell memory theory notes that memories, including those pertaining to personality traits, can be stored in individual cells or organs, not just in the brain. There are few studies in this area. Two small but much quoted studies conducted in support of cell memory in transplant recipients, show that some cases do exist, that evidence new traits inherited by the recipient, from the donor. One study (Pearsall, Schwartz, & Russek, 2000), using open ended interviews (N = 10) showed that two to five personality parallels per case were observed following surgery involving the histories of the donors, including changes in food, music, art, sexual, recreational and career preferences. The other study, involving the interview of 47 transplant recipients indicated that just six per cent (three patients) reported a distinct change of personality due to their new hearts, incorporating fantasies that forced them to change feelings and reactions and accept those of the donor (Bunzel, Schmidl-Mohl, Grunbock, & Wollenek, 1992). Other anecdotal reports about traits of the donor being assumed by the recipient, are mostly from interviews and written about in magazine or newspaper articles, although less than ideal clinical evidence comes from anecdotal reporting of the experiences of an individual or of a small group of individuals. Statistically, these reports are effectively meaningless anecdotes and can only aid in identifying problems for study. However, the traditional aphorism, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence only means that not knowing something exists does not mean that it does not exist; it only means not knowing one way or the other. We are not aware of it yet and it is not yet part of our knowledge.
There is some evidence for cell memory (Verney, 2014, pg. 22) substantiated for other life forms, including flatworms (Emmons-Bell., et al. 2015) and Aplysia sea slugs (Kandel, 2001) and even slime mould of single celled organisms - named Physarum polycephalum (Saigusa, Tero, Nagagaki, & Kuramoto, 2008). Although, these examples do not generalize to humans, there is good evidence in these studies of non-human entities displaying cellular memory that could provide insight into personality trait transference. If this is correct, one can argue that all species on Earth are interconnected, which might explain why traits are similar across many life forms. After all, is it not ‘ironic’ that (typically) the Lioness hunts for, and thereby, gathers food, while human females (in conventional Western cultures at-least) often do the shopping? Currently, we have to rely on anecdotal interviewing techniques for any evidence of cell memory transference in transplant recipients. Those people, who report these new traits, were apparently not conscious of, or adept in, these traits of the donor, prior to their transplant procedure.
Looking for Suitable Evidence
Despite the intrigue regarding if, when and how a transplant recipient’s personality changes, there is no evidence as yet to confirm with 100% certainty that biological cells themselves do actually have such a memory. One can argue that typical of some sciences, especially psychology, that they rely heavily on formulating assumption (i.e., through regression analysis or Analysis of variance) to establish conclusion (and not 100% fact). Both assumption and fact serve many important roles-provided the context of their use is appropriately justified. Current psychology, for example, largely extrapolates scientific inferences on the basis of something it knows little about or, moreover, about notions that one can already assume an accurate answer for–without needing to research the notion (and waste research monies) in the first place. On this basis, is it not possible to then suggest that the atomic composition of biological cells determines their functionality, which in turn governs their neurological functionality and the neurological integrity of a person's biological make-up including their personality? In fact, evidence for this is gathering.
Human body cells come in many different sizes – small ones, like red blood cells, measure only 0.00076 mm (Thorpe & Thorpe, 2009) and larger ones, like liver cells, that can be about ten times larger. It is probably worth noting (at this point) that this detail is “fact” (not “assumption”). In our bodies, physiological processes are associated with the activity of specific organs such as lungs, heart and kidneys. In our cells, the same physiological functions are carried out by several dozen diminutive organ systems called organelles. Examples of organelles are the mitochondria, which are shown to function as “cellular power plants” because they generate most of the cell’s chemical energy. These organelles are also involved in other tasks such as regulating the cell cycle-cell growth, cellular differentiation and signaling, then eventual apoptosis (cell death). 
The fundamental origin of these organelles is molecules, which consist of macromolecules made up of tiny atoms including Hydrogen, Carbon, Nitrogen and Oxygen. Today, limited information beyond the structure of atoms is known, although scientific knowledge is continuing to progress beyond the composition of the atom and its sub-particles. It is possible that it is not the cells themselves that are responsible for the storage and transference of memory that has bearing on personality traits, since processes more fundamental than the cell exist. In addition to this, it is likely that the apparent similarity between a recipient and donor’s personality has nothing to do with a 'memory' per-se or even 'personality' at all. It is scientific fact that macromolecular mechanics is influenced by factors like heat, light and density. Thus, the cumulative effect of such factors might result in the atomic signatures that are potentially the sole cause of so-called “memory” and the apparently seemingly parallel personality features that transfer from one person to the next (or even “one life form to the next”!). Thus the cumulative effect of such factors may create the specific atomic signatures that work to replicate cellular functions, thoughts and behaviors across all life forms.
Atomic Signatures Store all Life Forms Including the Memory of Personality
In the absence of suitable (i.e., 100% accurate) evidence, one can only return to speculation, especially when searching for the seemingly hypothetical. From formulating speculation, intelligible hypotheses eventuate (sometimes) which pave the way for discovering the totally unknown – not the “already assumed”. From here, a reasonable question is whether atoms themselves (and their cumulative component parts including their originating factors) may be central to the memory of personality and if so – how? Currently, speculation supersedes science, as we do not yet have the technology to prove with 100% certainty that, the cumulative effect of such factors might result in the atomic signatures that result in ‘messages’ which code, store, transfer and manipulate information (via the manipulation of matter).
The cumulative energy released from these subatomic events and factors (which presumably includes dark matter/dark energy) produces atomic signatures that vary in intensity, frequency and timing. These signatures govern our macromolecular make-up and subsequent biology, including the cellular memory of personality. If this notion one day proves to be correct and the science is gradually progressing in this direction (Buttigieg., et al. 2017), then this might explain why and when a transplant recipient’s personality/trait changes, match the donor’s personality/traits. Even when such changes do not occur, this too may be supported by the author/s notion. For example, atomic signatures emitted by the organ donor may be nullified by the patient’s atomic signatures which ‘overpower’ the interference of foreign signatures–possibly in the same way science reveals how sound or water waves (standing wave ratios) can counteract one another when they compete for space as they travel through time. Alternatively, the cumulative effect of the macromolecular mechanics influenced by factors like heat, light and density do not equate a transplant recipient’s memory to that of their donors.
The search for atomic signatures in all life forms, including human memory and personality is essential. With this knowledge, it may be possible to remedy the personality traits that cause suffering and despair for some. The search for knowledge takes many paths and most knowledge starts with a simple notion or idea and then builds to become fact. This is something psychology can be credited for – it inspires thought and research that can occasionally reveal fact. The authors hope that their ideas encourage others to investigate the fundamental origins of cell memory and personality so that the boundaries distinguishing assumption from fact are better understood. Once the mysteries of atomic science are answered, few mysteries, including the workings of one’s personality, will remain. Upon the journey to solve such mysteries of atomic science, Buttigieg begins his next quest – to prove there is no such thing as chaos theory since, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!
  1. Bunzel B., et al. (1992). “Does changing the heart mean changing personality? A retrospective inquiry on 47 heart transplant patients”.   Quality Life Research 1.4 (1992): 251-256.
  2. Buttigieg JP., et al.   “Impact of Physics in Family Health Care: Fluorescence Spectroscopy”.Journal of Family Medicine Disease Prevention 3.051 (2017): 1-3
  3. Emmons-Bell M., et al. “Different Species-Specific Head Anatomies in GeneticallyWild-Type Girardia dorotocephala Flatworms”. International Journal of Molecular Sciences 16.11 (2015): 27865-27896.
  4. Kandel ER. “The molecular biology of memory storage: a dialogue between genes and synapses”. Science 294.5544 (2001): 1030-1038.
  5. Kandel ER. “Memory is described as the pattern of functional interconnections of cells. The molecular biology of memory storage. A dialog between genes and synapses”. Bioscience Reports 21.5 (2001): 565–611.
  6. Kumnig M and Jowsey-Gregoire S. “Preoperative psychological evaluation of transplant patients: challenges and solutions”.   Dove Medical Press Limited 7 (2015): 35-43.
  7. Pearsall P., et al.   “Changes in heart transplant recipients that parallel the personalities of their donors”. Integrative Medicine 2.2 (2000): 65-72.
  8. Saigusa T., et al. “Amoeba anticipate periodic evnts”. Physical Review Letters 100.1 (2008): 018101.
  9. The Mother. “Collected Works of the Mother”. Pondicherry; Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust5 (1979): 136.
  10. Thorpe E and Thorpe S. The Pearson General Studies Manual. For the UPSC Civil Services Preliminary Examination. Dorling Kindersley. India (2009).
  11. Verny T. “What Cells Remember: Toward A Unified Field Theory of Memory”. Journal of Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health 29.1 (2014): 16-29.
Citation: Jason Buttigieg and Duffy C. “Transplant Psychology. Exploring the Fundamental Origins of Cell Memory and Personality”. Current Opinions in Neurological Science 1.3 (2017): 181-184.
Copyright: © 2017 Jason Buttigieg and Duffy C. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.