Research Paper

Hastings 1

Victoria Hastings

K. Piper

ENG 132

Research paper

            Cellular Memory is the theory that memory cells are stored not only in our brain,

but also in organs throughout the body (Anderson, T.). The theory proposes that these

cells contain clues to our personalities including taste, music, academia, everyday habits,

and other links to a persons identity (Anderson, T.). Since the discovery that

neuropeptides exist in all tissues of our body, the theory of cellular memory has sparked

much controversy, debate, and research. Although it is uncertain if the neuropeptides

found in all organs are capable of storing memories as the brain does, many organ

transplant recipients similarly report experiencing preferences unfamiliar to their usual

liking (Anderson, T.). There is evidence however that organs in the nervous system do

store memories through combinatorial coding by nerve cells (Takeuchi, L.). As

recognized by a Nobel Prize in 2004, these coded memories where found to enable

olfactory senses to recognize odors (Takeuchi, L.). Research suggests that major organs

such as the heart, kidney, and liver are known to contain large amounts of neurons

(Takeuchi, L.). Acquired combinatorial memories in such networks may enable

transplanted organs to recognize and respond to habits familiar of its donor  (Takeuchi,

L.).

            The theory of Cellular Memory has support from both sources, each recognizing

that neurons, and the nervous system play a vital role in supporting evidence. Both

sources also recognize that such cells have potential to store traits of the original donor,

and for recipients to potentially experience, or respond to these traits. Although the

Hastings 2

second source specifically indicates that heart, kidney, and liver transplant recipients are

more likely to experience cellular memory due to large amounts of neurons found in

these organs, the first source does not acknowledge this claim. However, in 2005 an

article released on a study on organ transplants and Cellular Memory supports this claim.

The article also adds that lung transplant recipients are also more likely to experience

cellular memory (Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD Russek, L.). “Behaviors and

emotions are known to be modulated by the interactive communications between these

organs and the sympathetic and parasympathetic systems” (Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz,

G., PHD Russek, L.). All three sources support research that a recipients behaviors and

emotions can be influenced by their body’s interaction with a transplanted organ. Such

claims have been supported by case studies of transplant recipients and their experiences

(Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD Russek, L.).

Dr. Gary Schwartz has documented studies of cellular memory in more than

seventy-four patients. He is also credited to documenting the first study of cellular

memory, experienced by heart transplant recipient Claire Sylvia (Linton, K.). His studies

have supported the theory of Cellular Memory in that many recipients indicate accurate

recollections of people, events and places, as well as the donors likes and dislikes and

behavioral tendencies (Linton, K.). Claire Sylvia had identified her donor being a man

named Tim, in which she had acquired his liking for chicken nuggets, green peppers, and

beer shortly following her transplant (Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD Russek, L.).

Sylvia also reported having unusual feelings of aggression and anger, very much unlike

her usual character (Linton, K.). After many interviews with the donors family, and

Hastings 3

Sylvia, Schwartz had concluded that there was no evidence of Sylvia knowing any of

these traits of her donor, and that she was indeed indicating behaviors and memories of

her donor (Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD Russek, L.).

            Both sources refer to the same case study, each supporting the others claims of the

recipient experiencing similar traits, behaviors and memories to the donor. Although

neither article confirms that Sylvias donors name was indeed Tim, it is recognized by a

third source, and mentioned in her book, Change of Heart, that the donors name was

indeed accurate (MD Dossey, L.). The third source also provides information on another

case study of a liver transplant recipient. Donna Doey reported changes in food

preferences as well a new love for classical music shortly after receiving a liver transplant

(MD Dossey, L.). After interviews with Doeys donors family, it was revealed that the

liver donor had played violin since childhood and frequently listened to classical music

(MD Dossey, L.). All three sources acknowledge a connection between characteristics

exhibited by the donor, and the recipient after organ transplantation. 

            Although there are many well documented case studies of Cellular Memory,

many doctors and researchers argue that these changes in preferences and characteristics

are due to anti-rejection medications taken by transplant recipients. Anti-rejection drugs

such as Gengraf have many side effects, specifically noting changes in dietary

preferences, as well as psychiatric changes (PHD Taylor, A.). Such psychiatric side

effects include depression, insomnia, anxiety, confusion, decreased libido, emotional

lability, impaired concentration, increased libido, nervousness, paranoia, and somnolence

(Vincent, D.).  It is believed by many researchers that recipients inaccurately report

Hastings 4

experiencing Cellular Memory because they confuse these side effects with Cellular

Memory symptoms (Vincent, D.).  Both sources support each others claims by

referencing the same anti-rejection medication, Gengraf, and its dietary and psychiatric

side effects. In addition to the counter argument that changes in a recipients preferences

and characteristics are due to anti-rejection medications, the difficulty in following a case

study is also documented. Cellular Memory case studies are often hard to follow due to

the constant reproduction of cells. As cells reproduce, the donors cells diminish due to

reproduction with larger populations of the recipients cells (Lanza, R.). As this occurs,

symptoms of Cellular Memory become less and less frequent (Lanza, R.). The first

source also acknowledges this argument as it mentions the short time span in which

cellular memory is often experienced. Symptoms of Cellular Memory rarely extend over

a two year period due to the constant reproduction of cells (Vincent, D.). Also noted in

this source, The Hospital Grapevine Theory is proposed. The Hospital Grapevine Theory

is the theory that recipients are able to subconsciously piece together information about

their donors due to conversations of healthcare staff around them, creating new patterns

of familiarity (Vincent, D.).This theory is also supported by a study done by Dr. Pearsall

with patients under the influence of anesthesia (Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD

Russek, L.).

            Although you may choose to agree or disagree with the evidence supporting

cellular memory, there is no denying it is a fascinating theory. Due to my fathers

experience in a case study of Cellular Memory with his 2001 liver transplant, I have often

wondered about other potential theories providing explanations for such phenomena.

Hastings 5

Although in no way am I discrediting the symptoms my father has previously exhibited,

or any other case study providing evidence, I am simply curious in exploring other

theories. I believe it is important to promote the theory of Cellular Memory, as well as

other theories providing explanations for symptoms. I believe exploring other theories is

important in order to educate other recipients and their families in order to one day find a

solution to these symptoms.

In 1980 my father contracted hepatitis through a needle stick while he was working as a

registered nurse in Austin, Texas. His health slowly deteriorated, with little hope of him getting

better. In 2000 he was put on the national liver transplant list, but it wasn’t until January of 2001

that our prayers where answered. Literally overnight our lives had changed and my fathers future  

looked brighter. Although my family was not familiar with the theory of cellular memory at the

time, I can still recall the first symptoms my father exhibited.

Within the first week following his transplant, my mother and I had noticed a change in

my fathers diet, as well as his vocabulary. A strict vegetarian for about thirty years, my father

began to crave cheeseburgers and junk food, specifically anything from Wendys. My mother,

whom has been happily married to my father for almost forty years now, noticed a change in her

husbands vocabulary. I specifically recall him using unfamiliar words and my mother asking him

how to spell the word then looking it up in the dictionary, only to find that he had used the word

correctly as well as spelled it correctly. My dad had no recollection of where he heard the word,

or how he knew its meaning or correct spelling. Although odd, we simply didn’t think much of

these signs at the time. It wasn’t until about three months after the transplant that my father

developed night terrors. He recalled vivid dreams of a young woman named Karen, her two

Hastings 6

sisters and a car accident. These dreams where so realistic that my father was recommended by

his doctor to seek help from a psychiatrist, whom diagnosed him with PTSD (Post Traumatic

Stress Disorder). He was recommended to attend regular support group meetings for transplant

recipients and their families. This is when we first learned about cellular memory and that other

families where experiencing very similar symptoms. Although these symptoms have since

diminished, we often wonder if these where characteristics of the donor, or if there is another

explanation for these strange occurrences.

            Among more recent proposals of explanations of symptoms exhibited by recipients,

similar to that of Cellular Memory, involves amino acid chains known as neuropeptides. This

theory is known as Pattern Recognition. Candace Pert discovered that these neuropeptides can be

found on the surface of the heart and function as receptors transmitting messages between neural

organs throughout the body (Anderson, T.). Pert suggests that these amino acids carry emotional

signals transmitted by such organs as a response to patterns of their environment (Anderson, T.).

Although some argue the similarity between the Pattern Recognition Theory and Cellular

Memory, one may also argue how these emotional signals are transported by such amino acids

since nerve fibers are disconnected in the process of transplantation. Pert specifically explains

that the heart and brain communicate through nerve fibers that run along the spinal cord, in a

heart transplant these connections are cut and take a very long amount of time before they

reconnect in the organ recipient (Takeuchi, L.).  However, these neuropeptides have been found

to function independently sending neurological impulses to the brain by alternate pathways,

creating a new patterns of emotions in the transplant recipient (Takeuchi, L.). Pert also makes a

clear note that her theory is not suggesting that organs generate messages, as in earlier theories of

Hastings 7

Cellular Memory, but rather carries/transmits them back to the brain (Anderson, T.).  This theory

suggests a possible explanation for recipients displaying more emotional, or behavioral

symptoms, however does not provide any reason or evidence for changes in dietary or color

preferences (Takeuchi, L.).   

            Another theory proposing new patterns of emotions and familiarity in transplant

recipients is known as The Hospital Grapevine Theory. This theory proposes that new patterns of

familiarity are due to a recipients subconscious reasoning, or piecing together of donor

information by overhearing conversations of healthcare staff (Vincent, D.). Although this theory

reasonably notes that hospitals do not directly disclose donor, or recipient information in order to

protect both parties, the theory suggests that discussions may have taken place while the patient

was under anesthesia (Vincent, D.).  Supporting this claim, Dr. Pearsall has conducted case

studies on a persons ability to recollect conversations taken place while under anesthesia

(Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD Russek, L.).

Some may disagree with such case studies  regarding supporting evidence due to the fact

that they are generally not available to the public. I was unable to find any specific information

on actual case studies regarding Pearsalls research due to patient confidentiality reasons,

however  it is my understanding that Pearsalls work on this matter has been documented and

published by The San Francisco Medical Society. This theory suggests that by a recipient

overhearing conversations, primarily under anesthesia, they are able to absorb and reason

information disclosed by surrounding staff. Recipients may later consider reasoning of these

subconscious details as familiar memories or actual details of past experiences, people, or places

(Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD Russek, L.). This theory then reasonably suggests that

Hastings 8

such patterns of familiarity experienced by the recipient are then able to trigger an emotional

response  (Vincent, D.). This emotional response may be responsible for a change in behavior,

specifically noting a change in behavioral tendencies, as well as new preferences or interests in

hobbies, academia, and music (Vincent, D.). Although this theory shows supporting evidence for

an explanation of recipients showing symptoms similar to that of cellular memory, it does not

mention any change in dietary preferences, or acknowledge any relationship between  the donor

and recipient on a cellular level.

            In fact, the only theory I found that mentioned a change in dietary preferences was a

theory based on side effects of immune suppressant drugs. Anti rejection medications, or

immune suppressants such as Gengraf, are necessary to prevent organ rejection in recipients

(Lanza, R.). Many sources I found attribute such behavioral changes and symptoms similar to

Cellular Memory as side effects of the drug Gengraf  (Lanza, R.). Pearsall and Russek both

acknowledge the potential psychiatric side effects of this drug, duly noting side

effects include depression, insomnia, anxiety, confusion, decreased libido, emotional

lability, impaired concentration, increased libido, nervousness, paranoia, and somnolence

(Pearsall, P., PHD Schwartz, G., PHD Russek, L.). Dietary side effects are also noted as

many recipients taking the drug reported experiencing an increased desire for sweet or salty

foods (Vincent, D.).  Although surprisingly I did not find any counter arguments for this theory,

as I suspected I would find, I did find information that this drug that suggested evidence due to

its potency it has been known to act as a psychotropic stimulant (Lanza, R.). Research has shown

that the drug Gengraf has been known to enhance perception, potentially allowing recipients to

Hastings 9

recall long forgotten memories and confuse them with symptoms of Cellular Memory

(Lanza, R.).

After researching such alternative explanations to Cellular Memory, I have found that

each is indeed valuable in their own way. In my personal opinion however, I believe that the

most promising alternative explanation to unusual symptoms reported by recipients involves side

effects of the commonly prescribed anti-rejection drug Gengraf. My father has been prescribed

this drug and taken it daily since his liver transplant. I recall that at the time of his transplant, the

immune suppressant drug was new and there where not nearly as many known side effects as

there are today. Although there are symptoms exhibited by my father that I am not sure the side

effects of Gengraf can account for, I am happy to see that more research on this matter is being

introduced  to the public. As more research is introduced, and possible explanations are

examined, I have faith that the transplant community will soon find a solution to these unusual

occurrences experienced by transplant recipients.