Love can make our nerves grow, provided we do not give it longer than one year, says Wikipedia. Recent studies found that the concentration of the nerve growth factor (NGF) in the blood plasma is significantly higher in individuals that have been in a romantic relationship with another person for less than 12 months.


The encyclopedic poise has love coming with a serodiagnosis: NGF can increase our vasopressin, cortisol, and adrenocorticotropic hormone levels, thus to knock blood sugars and make us run for a candy. For maximum effect, romantic affection may be self-administered as often as metabolically desired, the only “doctor’s order” being to change the love at least once a year:


Plasma NGF levels were significantly lower in individuals who have maintained a long-lasting romantic relationship beyond 12 months, than those who weren’t in a romantic relationship at all.


This might be owing to the nerve growth factor (NGF) and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) interacting as in a cycle and keeping up the “feeling of love”, yet only for some time: cortisol shows inhibitory effects over NGF expression in the cerebral cortex, adds the resource.


It is not certain, if the romantic lifestyle would let pleasurable memories. Because NGF modulates nerve plasticity, neurogenesis, and axonal outgrowth, this may form permanent memories associating the loved one with the feeling of love during the course of the cycle, says Wikipedia.


For clarity, let us work out the term “adreno-corticotropic”. The British word “adrenaline” means the same as epinephrine.


The very epinephrine has been suspect in “voodo deaths”. The “psychogenic” or “psychosomatic” deaths were noted regardless of culture or geography, in camps, concentration and prisoner-of-war. Adrenal hyperactivity has been named for a factor. The hyperactivity may come with lesions.


In making memories, epinephrine would not have love for the closest association: Epinephrine may also play a role in elevating arousal and fear memory under particular pathological conditions including post-traumatic stress disorder, we can read in Wikipedia.

Let us think what love is. Everybody will have own conclusions, I can only present my notionality. Love is not fear. There is not any fight-or-flight or love-fear “mechanism” here. If I would go anxious, that would be about potential damage or loss of an object of affection. Love has to be harmonious. Love has to be a matter for my mind. Love has to be pleasure, for desirable lasting. Stress or other adverse experience cannot change what or who I love or do not love, obviously, except a situation the person I care for would become adverse to me. Love is a long-term emotional and intellectual attachment to involve active interest of no aggressive aspect.


I love language. I started my linguistic interest before I went to school. There is not a person, thing, cause, or matter I would hold for more important than my language skill (The Little Mermaid is just a story to most people, I think). Now, I never have and I could never need stress, for language.


In attaining neural synergism, personal congruity would matter in memory forming, as well as work. Further, natural neural chemistry and voltage operate on minim quantities. Already minor disturbances to inner chemical or electric equilibrium might be of adverse consequence to memory and other cognitive functions, in summary to deny validity to stimulus-response approaches, for language. Feel welcome to my defended graduation work in psycholinguistics.


For love of good nerves, Wikipedia fortunately has mention of physical exercise. 🙂



Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s