Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://dr.iiserpune.ac.in:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/5416
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDIWEKAR, MANAWAen_US
dc.contributor.authorWatve, Milinden_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-12-14T09:41:59Z
dc.date.available2020-12-14T09:41:59Z
dc.date.issued2020-12en_US
dc.identifier.citationPeerJ.en_US
dc.identifier.issn2167-8359en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://dr.iiserpune.ac.in:8080/xmlui/handle/123456789/5416
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.10396en_US
dc.description.abstractBackground : In biomedicine, inferring causal relation from experimental intervention or perturbation is believed to be a more reliable approach than inferring causation from cross-sectional correlation. However, we point out here that even in interventional inference there are logical traps. In homeostatic systems, causality in a steady state can be qualitatively different from that in a perturbed state. On a broader scale there is a need to differentiate driver causality from navigator causality. A driver is essential for reaching a destination but may not have any role in deciding the destination. A navigator on the other hand has a role in deciding the destination and the path but may not be able to drive the system to the destination. The failure to differentiate between types of causalities is likely to have resulted into many misinterpretations in physiology and biomedicine. Methods : We illustrate this by critically re-examining a specific case of the causal role of insulin in glucose homeostasis using five different approaches (1) Systematic review of tissue specific insulin receptor knock-outs, (2) Systematic review of insulin suppression and insulin enhancement experiments, (3) Differentiating steady state and post-meal state glucose levels in streptozotocin treated rats in primary experiments, (4) Mathematical and theoretical considerations and (5) Glucose-insulin relationship in human epidemiological data. Results : All the approaches converge on the inference that although insulin action hastens the return to a steady state after a glucose load, there is no evidence that insulin action determines the steady state level of glucose. Insulin, unlike the popular belief in medicine, appears to be a driver but not a navigator for steady state glucose level. It is quite likely therefore that the current line of clinical action in the field of type 2 diabetes has limited success largely because it is based on a misinterpretation of glucose-insulin relationship. The insulin-glucose example suggests that we may have to carefully re-examine causal inferences from perturbation experiments and set up revised norms for experimental design for causal inference.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPeerJen_US
dc.subjectPhysiologyen_US
dc.subjectSteady stateen_US
dc.subjectGlucose homeostasisen_US
dc.subjectCausalityen_US
dc.subject2020en_US
dc.subject2020-DEC-WEEK2en_US
dc.subjectTOC-DEC-2020en_US
dc.titleDriver versus navigator causation in biology: the case of insulin and fasting glucoseen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Biologyen_US
dc.identifier.sourcetitlePeerJen_US
dc.publication.originofpublisherForeignen_US
Appears in Collections:JOURNAL ARTICLES

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.