Author: Carlos Morales

The virtual meeting ends and you stretch, shuffling over to the snack cabinet. You see fruit snacks, cookies and raisins. The kitchen counter has a bowl of fruit. But you? You’re in the mood for something savory. Something with protein.

A new study published in Science suggests your body notices when you’re low on amino acids — and lets you know when you need protein. You can thank your gut-brain axis for that.

Like most animals, we can’t make our own amino acids in-house. These compounds act as building blocks throughout the body, making them essential for functions like tissue repair and hormone production. When we’re low on protein, our gut calls on two communication pathways: one through the nervous system, and the second through hormones. The first method is rapid, prompting us to seek protein quickly, while the second lasts longer, sustaining the protein-seeking behavior.

Researchers studied this in fruit flies and in mice. Notably, the behavior did not make flies and mice simply eat more — it decreased interest in sugars, like carbohydrates, while increasing attraction to protein-related nutrients. In fruit flies with unbalanced gut microbiomes, the behavior was stronger, meaning the microbiome itself might be responsible for guiding feeding behavior and nutrient availability.

In short, lacking certain nutrients does not result in a blanket feeling of hunger. Rather, animals are drawn toward foods that contain what their bodies need — and might even prioritize them.

That being said, if you find yourself craving ice cream … you probably just want ice cream.

Certain kinds of nerve damage have long been considered irreversible. Now, a study from researchers at the University of Cambridge might point toward a way to repair the irreparable.

As we get older, our brains and bodies take longer to heal from injury. This is especially the case with our central nervous system, the lightning rod between the spinal cord and the brain. Axons, the nerve fibers our neurons zip up and down on to carry messages and control muscle, are less likely to be able to recover from damage.

It means an injury to the brain — or spinal cord — has a greater chance of resulting in permanent paralysis.

In the study, researchers grew tiny brains the size of peas from stem cells. Then, they added on to the models, creating miniature versions of the brain-spinal system. Because the parts are separate in the body, scientists kept them apart in the lab, too.

The result? Axons grew from the brain cells to the spinal cord, bridging the gap. It created a working neural circuit that prompted microscopic groups of muscle cells to contract.

The organoids were maintained in the lab for more than 365 days. After the 150th day, however, researchers noticed a difference: the axons were less capable of regrowing. This points to a “biological switch” that flips once neurons begin maturing and creating synapses. When researchers blocked it, the axons went back to regenerating.

Although further research is necessary, scientists note this is a successful instance in which stem cell organoids mimicked real human systems. They may have been miniature, but potential impacts could be larger than life.

Put down the crossword puzzle and pick up the nasal spray.

While those of us interested in preserving our rapier wits and steel-trap memories have doubtlessly dabbled in puzzles, conversation and regular exercise, it is unlikely a nasal spray ever crossed our minds — or our noses — for that express purpose.

And yet, scientists from Texas have created a nasal spray they say soothes the persistent, low-grade brain inflammation associated with aging. This kind of inflammation, referred to as neuroinflammaging, is also considered a key driver of some neurodegenerative conditions.

Soothing this inflammation via a nasal spray could restore memory and help brains work better.

The treatment uses tiny transport molecules called extracellular vesicles. They typically ferry genetic information between cells; here, they were loaded up with microRNAs, which are responsible for the regulation of different signals throughout the brain. They helped target certain immune cells, the culprits behind the inflammation, and strengthened the mitochondria damaged by it. Improving how the powerhouses of the cell worked seemed to prompt brain cells to improve how they received information and stored it. Researchers called it “giving neurons their spark back.”

The effects lasted for months after just two doses. A caveat: thus far, this has only been tested in mice. It will be some time before the treatment makes it to noses without whiskers.

Why a nasal spray, you might ask? It’s simple. Your nose is a shortcut to the brain and its tissue — and it makes the treatment delivery much less invasive.

It’s nothing to sneeze at.

At first glance, directing lasers into your eyes does not seem appealing or particularly helpful. Yet LASIK eye surgeries have been successful — and even prolific — for a number of years. They work by “carving” tissue away from the cornea, thus reshaping the eye and correcting vision. Sometimes there are complications like dry eyes, halos and weakened eye structure.

Still, there are those among us who would prefer to see better without such drastic measures. Researchers from Occidental College and the University of California, Irvine are testing out a means of vision modification that would be less invasive and could avoid many of LASIK’s potential side effects.

The method? Electromechanical reshaping, or EMR. Light, electrical pulses.

The technique was discovered by accident. While one scientist was tinkering with living tissue as a potentially moldable material, he discovered a means of chemical modification. The cornea is rich in collagen, held together by charged molecules, and rich in water. Applying a small electrical current can result in a change to pH levels, loosening the structure of the collagen and changing the shape of the eye. When the pH returns to normal, the “new” shape remains.

Importantly, this method does not result in any true surgery, or removal of tissue. This means it would allow the cornea to maintain its structural integrity.

Like most cures of tomorrow, this one has some ways to go before being tested in people. Glasses, traditional contact lenses and LASIK surgery are still going to be your quickest options for better vision.

But we’re excited to see what happens.

French fries rarely get any good news.

The crispy, salty snack earns the ire of cardiologists and nutritionists alike. Now, though the fry’s greasy reputation has extended to the humble potato itself, new research suggests the tuberous vegetable’s villainous reputation might be unwarranted.

A study published in The British Medical Journal used data from 205,000 people across almost four decades, finding that consuming three servings of fries per week was associated with a higher risk of developing Type 2 diabetes. Eating the hardworking potato in its other forms, however — like being boiled, baked or mashed, did not result in any significant risk.

But no potato is perfect.

Though participants did not have diabetes or heart disease at the start of the study, 22,999 of them developed Type 2 diabetes over the 40-ish years of follow-up. Even after taking lifestyle and dietary factors into account, the team found that three servings of potatoes per week were associated with a 5% increase in the rate of Type 2 diabetes. French fries remained the worst offender, though, and were linked to a 20% increase in Type 2 diabetes.

When study participants switched out potatoes for whole grains, they lowered their diabetes risk by about 19%. White rice, by contrast, increased it.

Now, it’s important to note researchers emphasize that the takeaway should not be, “French fries cause diabetes directly.” Rather, people should still prioritize whole grains — and note that when it comes to the potato, it’s its preparation that counts. Skip the fryer, keep an eye on the butter and sprinkle a little salt.

Perhaps there’s hope after all.

Drinking before driving is not recommended. Neither is using cannabis. Now, to the surprise of hopefully very few, research confirms what we already suspected: For drivers, using both is worse than either alone.

A new study from the Johns Hopkins Medicine University School of Medicine found that not only do cannabis edibles combined with alcohol greatly impair driving, but the impairment is also more difficult to detect by standard field sobriety tests.

Because adding cannabis into the mix adds to the impairment from alcohol, researchers worry the legal intoxication limit of .08% breath alcohol level might not suffice when the second drug is involved. It’s not just an additive effect, they emphasize — it’s “synergistic.”

Researchers recruited adults between the ages of 21 and 55 for the study. During outpatient study sessions, they were given a brownie: one with THC, and one without. They also received an alcoholic drink or a placebo drink, and alcohol doses were adjusted per individual to produce a BAC of .05% or .08%.

Notably, participants had previous experience using both substances together in the past year, and had also reported binge drinking in the previous 90 days. Driving was tested via a simulator. Participants each underwent seven sessions, consuming cannabis alone, alcohol alone and both together. There were also placebo versions.

Combining the edibles with alcohol produced effects that were more severe … and lasted longer. People also felt more intoxicated when they consumed both substances together. Researchers hope the study spurs further research and attention from policymakers and public health officials.

And as usual, the best way to drive is sober.

The brain does many things. It is the most complex machine known to us. Its billions of cells are the control center for thought, memory and body movement. It helps regulate breathing, heart rate and temperature.

And yet, it still retains mystery. How does this clump of matter between our ears create consciousness? If you come up with an answer, you’ll soon have an appointment with the Nobel Prize board.

Oh, one other thing: It sways.

A recent study by Penn State scientists used mice and brain simulations to demonstrate that the organ moves within the skull during exercise. Your first reaction might be understandable — namely, that such a delicate instrument moving can’t be a good thing.

Researchers, however, say this sway is beneficial.

The study notes the brain is more mechanically connected to the rest of the body than previous generations of scientists realized. Investigators now believe that during exercise, abdominal contractions compress blood vessels supplying the spinal cord and brain.

It’s like a hydraulic system. This applies pressure that creates movement. Pretty simple.

This, in turn, causes the brain’s cerebrospinal fluid to slosh around, though perhaps not as notably as water in a bathtub when you bathe your dog. But the movement helps the clear fluid to wash over the brain.

That helps the fluid remove waste, which in turn reduces the risk of neurodegenerative disorders. The study’s authors suggest this is an important reason why exercise benefits cognitive function.

Scientists say it’s a gentle movement. Less of an energetic Charleston than a crawling waltz.

These findings, ultimately, are brought to you by, yes, the human brain.

Most of us who reach adulthood would not mind shaving a few years from how our bodies feel.

What if it were as easy as changing your diet for a month?

A new study from Australian researchers found that a four-week diet change was enough to make some older adults appear biologically younger.

A group of just over 100 generally healthy adults ranging in age from 65 to 75 participated in the study.

They were separated into four groups and randomly assigned one of four diets.

Of the diets, two were omnivorous, meaning they included plant and animal proteins. The others were semi-vegetarian, with 70% of the protein coming from plants.

Within each category, participants were assigned either a high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet or a low-fat, high-carb diet.

So, participants either ate an omnivorous, high-fat diet, an omnivorous high-carb diet, a semi-vegetarian, high-fat diet or a semi-vegetarian, high-carb diet.

Got all that? And of course, all we want to know is which diet will make us look and feel youngest. So, which was it?

Three of the diets resulted in positive changes. But the biggest changes came from the omnivorous, high-carb and low-fat diet. It included 14% protein, 28 to 29% fat and 53% carbohydrates.

The diet that resulted in the least change was the omnivorous, high-fat diet, because, as researchers noted, it was closest to what participants usually ate.

The researchers used biomarkers, things like lowered cholesterol or insulin levels, to calculate participants’ biological age.

And while it took just a month for most participants to see positive changes, sadly, the researchers said they have no idea how long the changes might last.