SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " BRAIN " 1,661 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Tackling rare genetic disorders with patient-focused science
At MIT’s McGovern Institute for Brain Research, PhD candidate Shannon Knight is developing a novel gene therapy to tackle rare genetic conditions such as SYNGAP1 disorder.
The COVID-19 vaccine may offer brain cancer patients a surprise benefit
A recent shot of the COVID-19 vaccine doubled survival time in glioblastoma patients who had undergone tumor biopsy or surgery.
Alzheimer’s research is latest casualty in Trump administration war against ‘DEI’
Grant cancellations at leading research institutions appear to target the study of the impacts of racism on brain health
I measured my brain during one of the hardest business trips of my year. Here's what I learned about performance
The question to ask: Is this the version of my brain I want making this decision?
Many Smokers Unaware Of Heart, Brain Risks Of Smoking
By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Aug. 17, 2026 (HealthDay News) — Many smokers still haven’t absorbed the fact that smoking and secondhand smoke cause heart attacks and strokes, despite decades of messaging around tobacco’s health risks, a new study says. More than 90% know that smoking ...
Mind hacking: Stanford neuroscientist seeks to decode the brain’s toughest riddles
Stanford neuroscientist Karl Deisseroth is decoding the human brain to understand how our emotions are formed.
Sports leagues’ concussion guidelines must be broadened as brain health concerns rise
Many sporting leagues are trying to reduce concussion risk, but their policies mainly fail to mention a growing threat.
Sports leagues’ concussion guidelines must be broadened as brain health concerns rise
Many sporting leagues are trying to reduce concussion risk, but their policies mainly fail to mention a growing threat.
A little-known protein may be fueling Alzheimer’s — and scientists found a way to block it
An experimental Alzheimer’s compound prevented damaging protein clumps from forming in the brains of mice, helping nerve cells survive longer and reducing amyloid buildup. The treatment also appeared to improve heart health and slow some signs of aging, raising hopes for an entirely new way to combat dementia.
Chinese brain-reading AI model may predict depression risk 4 years in advance
Scientists from Shenzhen University used data studying teenagers’ responses to facial expressions to identify possible warning signs.
The No. 1 Hobby Most Highly Intelligent People Have, By A Psychologist
Brain games and chess don't build intelligence the way people assume. Here's the one everyday hobby psychology research keeps linking to a sharper mind.
‘Am I losing my mind?’: the science behind why psychedelic trips can feel like you’re going insane
Neuroscientist Michal Dubrovinsky studies challenging psychedelic experiences and the moment people fear they are losing control, while exploring how psilocybin may affect brain flexibility and movement learning
Scientists solve the mystery of a brain “switch” that can trigger weight loss in opposite ways
Scientists have uncovered why two seemingly opposite ways of targeting the same brain receptor can both promote weight loss. In mice, activating the GIP receptor in the brainstem reduced appetite, while blocking it in the hypothalamus removed a kind of “brake” on fullness signals. The discovery helps explain why very different obesity drugs can achieve similar results and suggests that carefully combining GIP-targeting treatments with GLP-1 drugs like those related to Wegovy and Ozempic could produce stronger effects.
FDA approves new Alzheimer’s PET imaging agent from Lantheus
Tauklarify, also known as MK-6240, is a radiodiagnostic agent indicated for positron emission tomography scans of adults suspected of having the degenerative brain disease.
Youth-associated protein helps restore healthy function in immune cells in the aging brain
Researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai have identified a role for the youth-associated protein TIMP2 in supporting the healthy function of microglia, the brain's resident immune cells.
Dallas Heat and Mental Health Effects
Dallas summers will wreck you. Pro tip: stay out of that air-conditioned bar.
Canada Invests $24 Million To Study Impact Of Cannabis On Brain Health
Canada's health ministry this week announced a $24 million investment in research examining how cannabis use affects users' brain health.
A sunscreen ‘gamechanger?’ What the science says about bemotrizinol
Stanford Health Care delivers the highest levels of care and compassion. SHC treats cancer, heart disease, brain disorders, primary care issues, and many more.
Science Says ‘Grandma Hobbies’ May Have Real Health Benefits
Knitting, gardening, and other hands on, old-fashioned activities can be more than just relaxing—here’s what they can do for your brain, mood, and more.
Immune cells flood into the aging brain, Stanford scientists discover
Scientists have discovered that the aging human brain may be far less isolated from the rest of the body than once believed. Stanford researchers found that large numbers of immune cells from the blood begin entering the brain as early as middle age, where they can transform into microglia, the brain’s specialized immune cells. The finding overturns a long-standing assumption that these cells remain largely separate from the body’s immune system throughout life.
What ‘super movers’ can teach us about healthier brains
“Super movers” who walked faster than normal were about half as likely to develop cognitive impairment, a new study found. Here’s what it may mean for healthy aging.
Too hot to think? You're not imagining it, heat really affects your brain
Extreme heat can make it harder to concentrate and make decisions.
A stress hormone may help the brain repair itself
A surprising stress-related signal may help the brain repair itself after injury. Researchers found that myelin-producing precursor cells rapidly release the stress hormone CRH near damaged brain tissue, helping control how those cells mature and rebuild protective nerve insulation. The same system also influences brain development and the thickness of myelin later in life. The findings could offer new clues about how early-life stress contributes to psychiatric disorders.
Fall Open Streets 2026 Celebrates Healthy Hearts, Healthy Brains
The Lawton-Fort Sill Open Streets Committee and its partnering agencies are proud to announce the Fall Open Streets event, happening September 19th, from 10:00 a.m. –&nb
What patients actually think about ‘minimally invasive’ brain implants
A new study polled people with treatment-resistant depression about what matters to them when it comes to brain implants for mental health.
Scientists discover a hidden brain rhythm that could improve Parkinson’s treatment
Scientists have pinpointed a brain network—and its distinctive electrical rhythm—that appears to drive the benefits of deep brain stimulation for Parkinson’s disease. The discovery could lead to more precise, personalized stimulation settings and better results for patients.
The adult brain can repair itself better than scientists thought
The adult brain may be far better at repairing itself than scientists once believed. In mice, researchers discovered a special group of support cells called astrocytes that respond to damaged brain tissue by rebuilding lost cellular networks. Rather than simply moving into the injured area, these cells perform a remarkable maneuver: they create new nuclei and send them traveling through long cellular extensions to repopulate damaged regions.
Ozempic may have revealed the brain’s hidden “craving center”
Ozempic-like drugs appear to weaken more than hunger—they may also reduce cravings for alcohol and other addictive substances. Scientists are increasingly tracing this effect to the lateral septum, a brain region that helps connect memories and surroundings with rewarding experiences. Packed with GLP-1 receptors, it may act as a crucial control point between thinking about a reward and feeling compelled to pursue it. The discovery could open new approaches to treating addiction as well as obesity.
Why more women are turning to creatine for muscle, brain health, energy
Needed Women's Creatine is a women-focused creatine monohydrate supplement designed to support muscle health, cognitive function and cellular energy.
Survey shows Americans want to start brain health habits earlier
A new national survey commissioned by The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center finds most U.S. adults believe brain health habits should begin before age 40.
Man Covers Car in Special Wrap That Breaks Flock Cameras' Electronic Brains
A researcher has come up with a special, computer-generated pattern wrap that can allow a car to evade detection from Flock's cameras.
Dietitian Shares No. 1 Plant-Based Protein to Boost Brain Health
These anti-inflammatory plant foods are also packed with protein.
AI-Native, Not AI-Sprinkle: Why AI Is A Business Change, Not A Technology Change
Companies unlock AI’s biggest productivity gains not by adding AI tools to existing workflows, but by redesigning teams, roles and daily work around AI. The broader lesson, argues Bob Morse, co-founder and managing partner of Strattam Capital, is that achieving transformational gains like 3x productivity requires CEO- and board-backed organizational change — not merely technology adoption.
Scientists scanned 14 canine brains. They found another reason to love dogs
The research shows why you must smile at every dog you see on the street.
How Jefferson Health is testing new treatment for brain disorder: "It's amazing"
Scientists Think One of Earth’s Simplest Organisms May Work like a Giant Brain
One of Earth’s oldest plants appears to pass electrical messages through its dense green mats.
'Bachelorette' alum Joe Amabile gives health update on brain tumor
"Bachelor in Paradise" alum Joe Amabile and his wife Serena Pitt both shared updates on his health after a brain tumor surgery.
Theme Park Controversy Proves Obsession Broke Everyone’s Brains
A controversial Halloween Horror Nights decision has fans debating whether a horror victim should be turned into a terrifying scare actor.
We should smile at our dogs - a new scientific study reveals why
Scientists have worked out what is going on inside a dog's brain when it sees a human smiling or scowling.
We should smile at our dogs - a new scientific study reveals why
Scientists have worked out what is going on inside a dog's brain when it sees a human smiling or scowling.
Peptides talk is everywhere: But what does the science say?
Stanford Health Care delivers the highest levels of care and compassion. SHC treats cancer, heart disease, brain disorders, primary care issues, and many more.
COMMENTARY: Knowles recognizes pressure of new job
Walk down the aisle was a no-brainer for new Tennessee defensive coordinator.
Jülich Showcases Research at Düsseldorf Science Night
11 August 2026How can we calculate fire? What does the brain reveal about a person? And why can a garden hose sound like a trombone? At the 6th
Why Your Brain Feels Broken All the Time (And What Science Says You Can Do About It)
It’s not just a lack of willpower—new research shows modern life creates an evolutionary mismatch that wrecks our focus, and here is how to fix it.
Long COVID Linked to Lasting Damage in The Brain's Dopamine System
The virus can cause serious damage.
Bruce Willis' wife backs California bill to track rare brain disease
Emma Heming Willis, wife of actor Bruce Willis, visited the California State Capitol this week to advocate for legislation that would add frontotemporal dementia (FTD) to the state’s neurodegenerative disease registry.
What if The Brain Doesn't Create Consciousness? Scientist Proposes It Might Be The Fabric of Reality Itself
Our brains hurt....
AI framework rooted in cognitive science could complete tasks more efficiently
In recent years, computer scientists have developed a wide range of artificial intelligence (AI) models that can rapidly recognize patterns in data, generate content and solve other computational problems. ...
Is watching too much TV bad for your brain? Possibly
Watching a lot of television was linked to smaller brain volume in areas important for language and thinking, new study finds. Here’s what that means.
Allegheny Health Network first in Western Pa. to offer GammaTile brain cancer treatment
Trailblazing technology offered at Allegheny General Hospital in Pittsburgh’s North Side is helping patients with operable brain metastases live longer. Allegheny Health Network neurosurgeon Matthew J. Shepard is the first physician in Western Pennsylvania to use GammaTile, an FDA-approved treatment that uses collagen disks about the size of postage stamps
Britney Spears says she ‘failed as a mother’ because son believes in science, slams parents
In a new social media post, Britney Spears says she ‘failed as a mother’ because her son believes in science and also slams her parents, saying she was ‘brainwashed into an ignorant system.’
Britney Spears says she ‘failed as a mother’ because son believes in science, slams parents
In a new social media post, Britney Spears says she ‘failed as a mother’ because her son believes in science and also slams her parents, saying she was ‘brainwashed into an ignorant system.’
Business Alum Builds a Marketplace for Cultural Style
Weddings, birthdays and celebrations often inspire people to wear attire that reflects their heritage and traditions. Through digital technologies, custom fashion — created to exact personal preferences and specifications — has provided an avenue for these occasions. But the growing field lacks standardization or best practices. Enter NOMAJI, the brainchild of Cal State Fullerton College of Business […]
Dayton Business Journal: New Raj Soin College of Business dean pushes for experiential learning, AI integration and collaboration
Rajneesh Suri is an engineer at heart: he sees a problem, brainstorms a solution, designs an implementation strategy full of tests and experimentation, and analyzes the results for a solution. This mindset allows him to bring fresh ideas to his … Continue reading →
These 3 health factors can delay dementia for 13 years, long-term study finds
Healthy blood vessels can protect your brain as well as your heart.
Back-to-school brain health: Expert tips to boost learning and memory
A UAB neuroscientist shares evidence-based tips on sleep, stress management and study strategies that can improve learning, memory and academic performance throughout the school year.
Wearable ultrasound patch boosts REM sleep without drugs or surgery
A new wearable patch may help people reach REM sleep faster and remain there longer without medication or surgery. In a study of 28 participants, the device shortened the time to REM by 43 minutes and extended it by about 16 minutes. Researchers also observed signs of improved stress regulation and changes in brain circuits tied to emotion.
Scientists discover a brain cycle that may explain why learning eventually stalls
For many who have struggled to learn a new language or instrument, it's a familiar pattern: They make rapid progress at first, then hit a plateau that no amount of diligent practice or concentration seems ...
E-scooters far more dangerous than motorbikes or cycles, analysis suggests
Study of accidents in England and Wales shows e-scooter riders three times more likely to suffer traumatic brain injury than bikers
The new science of brain workouts, beyond Sudoku and crosswords
Emerging evidence suggests that only certain types of training produce meaningful benefits, and those benefits may differ between men and women.
The new science of brain workouts, beyond Sudoku and crosswords
Emerging evidence suggests that only certain types of training produce meaningful benefits, and those benefits may differ between men and women.
Nearly half of dementia cases may be linked to risks you can change
A long-term brain study found that common risks such as smoking, high blood pressure, heart disease, and high blood lipids were strongly linked to damage associated with vascular dementia. The findings suggest that healthier lifestyle choices could help delay dementia by reducing several harmful brain changes at once.
World’s most-used weedkiller disrupts honeybee brains
Glyphosate was long thought to be safe for honeybees because they lack the enzyme the chemical targets in weeds. However, researchers found that exposed bees foraged 13 percent less after only three days and showed changes in brain chemicals linked to behavior. Across a whole hive, that decline could reduce honey production, weaken pollination, and threaten long-term survival.
Scientists discover the brain cells that keep you motivated
A group of brain cells called orexin neurons appears to help us keep working when reaching a reward becomes increasingly difficult. Blocking their activity weakened motivation in rats, pointing to a possible new target for understanding why people sometimes struggle to sustain goal-directed behavior.
Will online sports betting worsen gambling addiction in Wisconsin?
Evidence shows similarities in what happens in the brains of people with gambling and substance use disorders. so why do we treat them differently?
PET imaging links psychosis to Alzheimer's-related brain findings
New imaging research suggests that many adults who develop psychosis-related hallucinations or delusions later in life show brain changes associated with AD and other neurodegenerative disorders.
80-million-year-old snake brain reveals a surprising evolutionary secret
An exceptionally preserved snake fossil from Brazil reveals that early snakes were far more diverse than scientists once thought. Detailed brain reconstructions show that Tametara mirim was adapted for burrowing, while another ancient snake was suited to life above ground. Other fossils point to marine lifestyles as well. By 80 million years ago, snakes were already experimenting with very different habitats and sensory systems.
The Beauty Of Settled Science
Commenters convinced me I made a subtle mis-step in my framing of Psychology Research Is Mostly Fine. My framing emphasized that social priming studies had failed to replicate, but that many other subfields of psychology hadn’t. This naturally led commenters to point to failed replications in other subfields. Although none of these were as bad as social priming, few or none were entirely problem-free. Instead of emphasizing the difference between social priming and other subfields, I should have emphasized the difference between settled science and novel research. Here are some of my favorite psychology findings: The brain is sculpted by reinforcement learning, and a key driver of this learning is a prediction-error-based algorithm located in the nucleus accumbens and implemented through dopamine. Psychedelic drugs exert their effects through 5-HT2A receptors, pointing to a role for these receptors in some sort of construct like the balance between priors and new evidence. Certain cognitive functions are localized to certain brain areas (for example, impulse control to the frontal lobes; linguistic structure to Broca’s area, linguistic meaning to Wernicke’s area. But injure one of these areas, or render a certain function useless (eg a blind person having no more use for their visual cortex), and these mappings can gradually shift - suggesting that neurons are general-purpose compute whose specialization is a contingent fact about convenience and efficiency rather than a necessity. Most personality traits and general capabilities are about 50% genetic and 50% random, with little role for family environment or childhood history, with a few notable exceptions like partisan preference. Recent research complicates this story, but the further you go from this basic picture, the gnarlier the chains of indirect causation you require. Neurons fire together in “brain waves”, whose exact frequency corresponds with the character of consciousness; These divide neurons into natural subpopulations and linked graphs. The gamma rhythm corresponds surprisingly well to items in conscious awareness. GABA receptors seem to be involved in something like relaxation. By hitting different GABA receptors in different ways, you can modulate the exact type of relaxation you produce. Hitting GABA-A directly is too powerful and can cause dangerous levels of sedation, but allosteric modulation of GABA is an incredibly fruitful strategy that underlies drugs from benzos to barbituates to alcohol. If you know your GABA-A subunits, you can target specific subtypes of relaxation; for example, Ambien hits GABA-A1 and induces sleep. Memory divides somewhat fuzzily into bins of immediate-sensory, short-term, and long-term, with separate retrieval and storage functions, and separate systems for declarative vs. procedural learning. These can be harmed selectively, usually by hippocampal injury, so that some patients can remember their life stories but not form new long-term memories, or learn new skills like bike-riding but not new facts. The exact substrate of memory is unclear but seems to involve new synaptic connections between neurons in at least some way. The ability of modern psychology and psychiatry to treat mental illness is real but limited. SSRIs work for half or slightly fewer than half of patients; antipsychotics work with extreme side effects; benzodiazpines work but produce addiction and tolerance in many (not all) people. Most supplements are stuck in Poor Quality Study Replication Crisis Hell, but melatonin and l-theanine stand out as especially promising. Psychotherapy works with moderate effect size, but (with a few exceptions) seems to be more about the relationship with the provider than the details of the therapy itself. Mental hospitalization can sometimes defuse immediate crises but work less well than mental hospitals would like, with some studies showing overall negative effects. Schizophrenia is mostly genetic, but risk also increases with prenatal infection (especially rubella) and obstetric complications; there is suggestive evidence for roles of social stress and drug use (with psychedelics and marijuana making things worse, and nicotine if anything making things better). Bipolar and schizophrenia are so closely linked on a pathophysiological level that it seems like they might be the same disease; on the clinical level, they do seem to follow two separate courses/prognoses but can sometimes surprise clinicians by eg someone who seemed condemned to permanent schizophrenia unexpectedly recovering. The brain’s native reinforcement learning algorithms cash out in the phenomena of classical and operant conditioning; different reinforcement schedules reinforce at different levels, which can be exploited by bad actors to make especially compelling products (eg slot machines). None of these are immune to doubt. A few are speculative; one or two are genuinely unorthodox. But they’re all a step above one p = 0.049 paper that might not replicate. If they get overturned, they’ll be overturned by the same sort of genuine scientific shift that replaced Ptolemy with Copernicus or Lamarck with Darwin, not some sort of sordid discovery about someone entering random numbers into a spreadsheet. In 2008, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote about The Beauty Of Settled Science: If you only care about scientific issues that are controversial, you will end up with a head stuffed full of garbage. The media thinks that only the cutting edge of science is worth reporting on. How often do you see headlines like “General Relativity still governing planetary orbits” or “Phlogiston theory remains false”? So, by the time anything is solid science, it is no longer a breaking headline. “Newsworthy” science is often based on the thinnest of evidence and wrong half the time—if it were not on the uttermost fringes of the scientific frontier, it would not be breaking news. Scientific controversies are problems so difficult that even people who’ve spent years mastering the field can still fool themselves. That’s what makes for the heated arguments that attract all the media attention. Worse, if you aren’t in the field and part of the game, controversies aren’t even fun. Don’t be embarrassed to read elementary science textbooks, either. If you want to pretend to be sophisticated, go find a play to sneer at. If you just want to have fun, remember that simplicity is at the core of scientific beauty [...] A steady diet of science news is bad for you: You are what you eat, and if you eat only science reporting on fluid situations, without a solid textbook now and then, your brain will turn to liquid. Psychology isn’t centrally the new paper in Annals Of Recently-Breaking News saying that an n=5 study showing that large portion sizes increase support for terrorism. Psychology is centrally ideas like brain waves, GABA receptors, reinforcement learning, twin studies, and connectionism. People who think differently are worrying too much about BREAKING NEWS!!!, and should stop. The key distinction isn’t “recent research in social psychology” vs. “recent research in cognitive/bio/behavioral psychology”, as my essay last week unfortunately implied. It’s recent research in general vs. the deposit of settled science, battle-tested hypotheses, and carefully-earmarked speculation. And part of the reason social priming in particular was such a disaster was that it defied that heuristic, building itself up over hundreds of studies until it approached or even entered the pantheon of settled science - before collapsing (5-HTTLPR was also sort of like this). This isn’t a claim that settled science is always right - Freud was “settled science” for a long time - just that there’s an intuitive distinction between the level of credence you should have in the existence of power posing vs. the existence of Broca’s Area. (I compounded this error by calling the last post “Psychology Research Is Mostly Fine”, which suggested I was talking about the new research rather than the settled science. I actually meant to distinguish between research-psychology-the-field vs. clinical-psychology-aka-therapy, but this framing unintentionally pushed against the point I wanted to make) Some commenters on the previous article understood this point, but challenged its weight. It’s very cool, they said, to know how many neurons are in which brain lobe, but the main way that Psychology affected their lives was through bad clickbait studies used to buttress dumb policies; some p = 0.049 study says that exposure to microaggressions makes minorities’ brains shrivel into raisins, and now their company has to implement punitive DEI or be sued for hazardous work conditions. I won’t dispute this as an accurate description of how the sausage gets made, but it’s worth examining the trains of thought that connect this observation to a campaign against psychology in general: The dumb woke psychology was wrong and bad, and I don’t have good heuristics for distinguishing dumb woke psychology from other psychology, so I’m going to assume it’s all wrong and bad. The dumb woke psychology was wrong and bad; it seems useful to punish/discredit psychology as a whole to assist my campaign against it, so for propaganda purposes I will try to discredit psychology as a whole. To people in the first camp, my response is: come on, your heuristics aren’t that bad. “Microaggressions makes minorities’ brains shrivel up like raisins” is in the woke category; “the hippocampal theta rhythm seems to be associated with both memory and pathfinding, suggesting an unexpected yet surprisingly compelling relationship between the two” is in the not-woke category, don’t play dumb here. To people in the second camp, my response is: deliberately exaggerated propaganda campaigns are bad and this is a confession, not an excuse. Inability to view science through anything but a political lens was what got us into this problem; doubling down on it is a temporary solution but a recipe for permanent disaster. If you pronounce entire fields of science to be acceptable collateral damage in your campaign against bad political actors, you will alienate not just scientists but patients, clinicians, and general lovers of truth. Instead, you can say the thing you mean - that woke partisans shouldn’t try to occupy and exploit the otherwise-noble science of psychology for their own political gain - and wage the same campaign with a halo rather than a comic-book-villain goatee. From the font of oracular wisdom that is Weird Sun Twitter: [ Vessel Of Spirit@VesselOfSpirit i love you all conditionally but i love the good part of you unconditionally. even if it becomes a very small part 2:11 AM · Jan 22, 2015 1 Reply · 5 Reposts · 29 Likes ](https://x.com/VesselOfSpirit/status/558084551772471298) This is how I feel about psychology1, too, but with a touch more optimism. The good part of psychology is enormous, a hoard of endless treasures. You just have to look past the headlines! 1 To play devil’s advocate - should one always be so magnamious? Astrology? Phrenology? These seem different in that their entire orientation was flawed from the start; they didn’t simply fail to find the correct constellation-personality connections, the whole project of searching for connections between constellations and personality was doomed from the start. More difficult might be asking the same question about education research, which is notoriously bad. I don’t know enough about education research to know if there’s some settled science of correct and enlightening results lurking in the background beyond the day-to-day froth of poorly-conducted and politically-motivated studies. I think if it’s 90% bad, 10% good, it’s correct to call it bad as a compact way of communicating a useful truth; I think psychology is better than that, but admit it’s a tough judgment call.
Here's what happens to your brain when you stop drinking alcohol
Though even relatively low levels of drinking can cause harm, the brain can recover to an extent if you stop or cut back, evidence shows.
16 Weird Facts That'll Stick In Your Brain Forever
Can't wait to whip one of these out at a dinner party 10 years from now.
‘Doctor’ El-Sayed’s bizarre health hustle raises campaign headache: ‘Moon Juice Brain Dust’
Abdul El-Sayed criticized Mehmet Oz for selling health products as a doctor, then used his own medical credentials to promote supplements and devices.
Alexander Rakhlin named director of the MIT Statistics and Data Science Center
Alexander ‘Sasha’ Rakhlin, the Distinguished Professor in Data, Systems, and Society, IDSS and Brain and Cognitive Sciences at MIT, has been named the next director of the MIT Statistics and Data Science Center.
Amid trend in health optimization, Berkeley scientists focus on brain optimization
What’s a healthy body without a healthy brain? Neurologists, neuroscientists and psychologists unite to find metrics for brain health and effective training to improve it.
In memory care deserts, senior centers can help close the gap in brain-related healthcare
Specialized health care for brain-related issues can be lacking in rural areas, but collaborative, community-based approaches can help address these inequities.
How the brain finds order in visual chaos
Study of ensemble perception in mice finds that the early visual cortex does more than just relay information
Rowing Science: Your Brain on Telemetry? Rowing and Math in 2026
A 2023 study found that doing math problems while rowing the erg caused rowing performance and mecha
Diabetes Drug Used For More Than 60 Years Found to Unexpectedly Affect The Brain
A hidden pathway is emerging.
Thousands of people in China have had banned Alzheimer's surgery
Surgery that aims to enhance the clearance of Alzheimer's-associated proteins from the brain has been banned in China, but only after thousands of people had the procedure
Scientists discover why poor sleep may harm some brains more
A gene involved in the brain’s overnight cleaning system may change how strongly poor sleep affects Alzheimer’s-related brain changes. The findings point toward more personalized prevention strategies based on both genetics and sleep habits.
Chicago advocates step up for brain health and a future without Alzheimer’s
Content oversight provided by Studio 1847 Alzheimer’s disease reshapes families and demands immense resilience. Yet a growing wave of scientific optimism is changing approaches to brain health. Local volunteers Ellen Gudjonis and …
AI Cognitive Health Startup Mantis Biotech Rethinks How Women Are Diagnosed
The AI Catching Brain Fog, ADHD, And Dementia Between Doctor Visits
What your walking speed may reveal about your brain health
A new study of adults 80 and older found a striking link between walking pace and later cognitive decline — but the takeaway isn’t simply to speed up.
Essential brain health tips as you age
Discover five simple brain health tips that can support memory, cognitive function, and overall well-being as you age
Lung tumor signals may tamp down food intake
Researchers found that a high-fat diet in mice amplifies nerve signals between certain lung cancers and the brain, leading to reduced appetite and weight loss.
The new "science golden age" looks suspiciously like a grift
This edition of PN is made possible by paid subscribers. Become one ⬇️ 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 The Trump regime is trying to usher in a “Golden Age in Science” where scientific research is run like a Trump family business, artificial intelligence is all that matters, profit is everything, and expertise is for chumps. Or at least that’s the vision emerging from a new 123-page “Report to the President” from Michael Kratsios, the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. In a normal administration, you could probably skip over learning about a science policy document — but this is no normal administration, and this is no normal science policy document. Instead, it’s Trump’s attempt to end the actual golden age of science that was kicked off in 1945 with the publication of '“The Endless Frontier” by Vannevar Bush. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) [ Harmeet Dhillon demonstrates danger of posting through it ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Liz Dye · Jul 29 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/harmeet-dhillon-portland) Bush, at President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s request, laid out a vision of federal support for science that centered on funding universities to do basic research, saying that as long as those institutions were “vigorous and healthy and their scientists are free to pursue the truth wherever it may lead, there will be a flow of new scientific knowledge to those who can apply it to practical problems in Government, in industry, or elsewhere.” Kratsios’s report is supposed to be the successor to Bush’s, and even apes the format, but this isn’t really a document about science policy. It’s one about ending science research as we know it in favor of shoveling cash at big tech companies. While it might be temping to wave this away as an aspirational policy document, Trump has already begun to shift billions in research funds to AI projects and has taken a hatchet to science funding across the board. He’s teed up the shift Kratsios proposes here, and since neither Congress nor the Supreme Court seem inclined to stop him from doing whatever he wants with taxpayer money, it isn’t doomering or hyperbole to say we are staring down the barrel of a world where the only “science” the government intends to support is for-profit tech and defense advancements. Science for dummies Part of how you can tell this isn’t a document about science is that you are immediately faced with an absolute wall of business-speak of the worst sort. Did you know we must “tightly couple our science and technology enterprises to ensure that groundbreaking ideas invented in the United States are rapidly prototyped, tested, manufactured, and scaled domestically”? You do now! That tone isn’t surprising, because Kratsios has no background in science or research. He has a bachelor’s in political science and spent most of his career working for Peter Thiel at Thiel Capital. After a stint in the first Trump administration as Chief Technology Officer, where he also did not do any science, Kratsios was tasked in 2020 with overseeing the Pentagon’s research budget for a brief time, a position that, as the Wall Street Journal put it, “carries a great deal of power in terms of dictating investment allocations.” He spent the Biden years at Scale AI as “head of strategy,” which you will also note is neither a science nor a research job. But Scale AI has contracts with the Department of Defense and, as the Washington Post wrote in 2023, “has been aggressively pitching itself as the company that will help the US military in its existential battle with China.” And now you have the necessary background for our new golden age, which is going to be a golden age of taking money away from scientists and universities and giving it to companies like Scale AI. A note from Aaron: Working with brilliant contributors like Lisa takes resources. If you aren’t already a paid subscriber, please become one to support our work. 👇 Subscribe In a genuinely galling move, Katsios spends a lot of time slamming universities because of “administrative burdens on researchers” and the “well-documented inefficiencies” in academia, the message being that those damn universities waste the time of amazing researchers with paperwork. Except it’s the administration that is attempting to impose inefficient, unnecessary burdens on those researchers with a proposed Office of Management and Budget rule that would require senior political appointees to approve every science grant and ensure it aligns with Trump’s personal priorities. Researchers would also have to seek prior government approval to attend conferences or publicize their research. And political appointees could terminate any grant at any time if they feel like it. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) [ The murder of expertise ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) Lisa Needham · Jun 11 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/omb-rule-science-funding) But when it comes to AI, we’re going to “restore permissionless innovation.” The report proposes to give lucky ducky innovators a pile of cash up front for grants lasting five years or longer, saying “awards should be fully-funded in year one, with all resources earmarked upfront, to minimize administrative burdens and reduce pressure for researchers to generate intermediate results to secure continued funding.” Yeah, wouldn’t want to have to make the Very Special Tech Bros show results or get money parceled out year by year like the plebes at universities. The report also proposes that we should have “fast grants” with “simplified applications requiring just a few pages of writing” because that is definitely how science works, just writing a bit off the dome and getting some cash. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) [ Tech elites are turning AI into ChatGPTrump ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Paul Waldman · July 29, 2025 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-ai-action-plan-altman-llms) Oh, and we should have prizes and challenges, where multiple teams compete. The proposed prizes include incentives like “advance procurement commitments,” which means the federal government agrees to buy whatever is being developed. There’s also “regulatory fast-tracking,” making sure all those great AI thingies don’t have to wait too long to be unleashed on a market. These aren’t incentives to do science. These are incentives to develop things with tax dollars that you can then sell to the government for more tax dollars. In the suggestion that might be the most unhinged, the most very opposite of how both government and research work, our new age will include “golden tickets.” That’s where an individual reviewer in an agency — yes, just one person — can “recommend unconventional proposals that may not pass consensus-driven review panels” because somehow this will “surface valuable ideas too divisive for committees and attract higher quality reviewers by empowering them to exercise independent scientific judgment.” Yes, that’s saying that a random person in an agency should be able to shovel money at some idea even if it can’t pass a review panel, and that the opportunity to do so will attract better employees because apparently all the best minds in science are chomping at the bit to be allowed to unilaterally fund AI research based on their personal vibes. But that isn’t at all how actual science works, and actual scientists aren’t unhappy about review panels. They work collaboratively, not siloed in some secret race to create the next AI chatbot. A 2020 study by the National Bureau of Economic Research examined whether peer review panels succeed in helping agencies predict which research ideas will best advance science. Peer review was better at finding “diamond in the rough” applicants than a single government program official. How about that. Trump always wants a taste It’s painfully clear that what Katsios is trying to do here is turn the whole of government science research and funding into the sort of “move fast and break things” paradigm that is the hallmark of big tech. That method works to line the pockets of tech executives, but it isn’t science. There’s a reason the government funds different kinds of research than private tech companies do. What Katsios either fails to understand or deliberately ignores is that the federal government is the main funder of basic research precisely because it can take a long time for it to bear fruit and is not intended to be profitable as such. “Basic” here does not mean rudimentary or simple, but rather research that is designed to advance scientific knowledge instead of achieving a specific outcome or product. Big tech companies don’t widely fund that sort of research, because it doesn’t make them money. Industry dollars account for only about 20 percent of basic research funding, while the government contributes around 60 percent. Big tech companies and startups do, however, rely on and benefit from that basic research. A 2019 study found that 35 percent of all patents obtained by venture-backed startups from 1976 to 2016 cited federally supported research. Basic research funded by the NIH contributed to every single drug the FDA approved from 2010 to 2016. [ ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) [ The Saudi nuclear farce and governance by whim and meme ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Noah Berlatsky · Jul 27 [ Read full story ](https://www.publicnotice.co/p/trump-saudi-nuclear-deal) Unlike inventing the next ChatGPT, actual science is slow and iterative. Government funding of research that, on its face, would not appear to lead to any big new invention is actually what underpins those big new inventions. If the government hadn’t funded research into desert lizard venom, we wouldn’t know about semaglutide, and we wouldn’t have Ozempic. If research scientists hadn’t studied how bees optimize nectar foraging within a colony, we wouldn’t have the algorithm that assigns internet traffic across computer servers. The report assiduously ignores that a symbiotic, profitable relationship between the federal government, universities, and private companies already exists. Each federal research dollar generates about $1.50 to $3.00 in long-term economic benefits. The $36 billion the government awarded in NIH research funding in fiscal year 2025 generated $94 billion in new economic activity. Trump’s proposed new golden age is intended to strip those billions from universities, resulting in the dismantling of departments and the shuttering of labs. But Katsios has a plan for that: Universities should just become trade schools to churn out no-show STEM degrees! “Require universities and community colleges to embed practical technical training and externships into STEM curricula. Let hands-on experience and industry credentials count toward degrees.” It’s quite the feat to, on the one hand, strip schools of funding for scientific research while simultaneously demanding to control what is taught and, oh, also, colleges need to give degrees to employees at big tech companies just for being employees at big tech companies. The new golden age would also exacerbate the brain drain Trump’s policies have already caused. Nature found that in the first quarter of 2025, US scientists submitted 32 percent more job applications abroad than in 2024. A March 2025 poll by Nature of roughly 1,600 scientists found that over 1,200 said they were considering leaving the country. Europe is investing $565 million to make it a “magnet for researchers” and provide funding for scientists who relocate. The new golden age is also about embedding Trump’s xenophobia into the fabric of American science. The report complains of an “over-reliance on foreign students” that “creates a security challenge our institutions are ill-equipped to address” and that a “reliance on foreign talent sidelines American students.” This is, to put it mildly, nonsense. International students pay far higher tuition and often receive no financial aid. Their tuition dollars are what make it possible for American students to get financial aid. In the 2023-2024 school year alone, international students contributed $43.8 billion to the US economy and supported over 378,000 jobs. Those 1.1 million international students accounted for only six percent of the total number of students in higher education that year, but were such an economic engine that for every three international students, one job was created or supported. It’s impossible not to wonder whether part of Trump’s loathing for universities and their leading role in scientific research is that there is no way for him to corrupt the process and make money off it in the same way he can by giving millions and billions to Silicon Valley types who, in turn, give him millions in cash. There’s no way for his children to invest in universities that the government then gives no-bid contracts to, fattening the family’s bottom line, which is pretty much the Trump sons’ current venture capital practice. Trump and Katsios’s view of science is narrow, cramped, and wrong. We’re not in a crisis, we’re not a failed state. We’ve been a science superpower for decades, and the only thing that threatens that is Donald Trump. Tech bros are already living high off the hog in this administration. They don’t need any more of our tax dollars. Hopefully this new golden age never comes to pass. Thanks for reading Public Notice. This post is public so feel free to share it. Share We’ll be back with more tomorrow. If you appreciate today’s PN, please do your part to keep us free by signing up for a paid subscription. 🚀 Subscribe to PN 🚀 Thanks for reading, and for your support.
What if the brain does not create consciousness?
Christof Koch is taking on one of science’s deepest mysteries: how the brain creates conscious experience, or whether it creates it at all. He argues that materialism has yet to solve this “hard problem” and will explore puzzling phenomena such as near-death experiences and terminal lucidity. His work points toward the possibility that consciousness may be woven into reality itself.
Apple’s Siri Got an A.I. Brain Transplant. Try These 5 Prompts to Get Acclimated.
An upgrade transformed the beleaguered virtual assistant into a modern chatbot. It’s imperfect but worth trying.
Rethinking How Babies Communicate
Explore UC Davis research on how infants communicate through signs and how young brains develop during early childhood, including in children with autism.
Daily eating habit linked to better brain health in older adults, new research suggests
A six-month trial found that older women who ate within eight to nine hours daily showed cognitive improvements beyond what weight loss alone provided.
Could you use a refresher on AI in healthcare? Here are 5 retention ticklers
Don’t be embarrassed. Like computer hardware, the human brain tends to perform byte retrieval a little slower after ingesting deluges of data every day for years.
Limiting sugar before age two linked to better brain health
Study suggests less sugar in early life is good for long-term brain health, but the evidence is not conclusive.
The Science Behind the AI Panic Is Shakier Than You Think
A column by Sascha Lobo Is AI making us dumb? So asked DER SPIEGEL on its cover a while ago. After a few weeks of recovery and a therapeutic intervention with the help of my AI, I feel able to respond. That’s a bit unfair, of course; the article itself is more nuanced than the loud cover, the image of a schoolkid with dull prompt questions, or the subtitle: “AI is conquering the schools, and educators fear a disaster.” The short answer to “Is AI making us dumb?” is: no. The long answer is more interesting, and even carries a preliminary glimmer of the spectacular. Unfortunately, it requires a detour into the sphere of artificial intelligence, into the mogul-field terrain of technology assessment, the attention economy, and the destructive virus of cultural pessimism. Along with narrowing the scope to AI’s effects on education and work rather than on intelligence. Because the honest version of the question would be: Does AI help us learn and work, or not? Generative AI, which set off the still-ongoing hype with ChatGPT, has only existed in relevant distribution since late 2022, early 2023. For a technology-driven transformation of people and society, that is extremely short. For that reason alone, research is still in its infancy. And technology assessment is not a fast discipline anyway. Prominent voices from Elizabeth Eisenstein to RAND to Tom Wheeler say we still cannot conclusively judge the consequences of the printing press. Its invention is a mere 580 years back, and some scholars would rather not circulate assessments that might have to be retracted in two or three hundred years. We’re Going Through Growing Pains A phenomenon that already caused upheaval in social media research makes serious assessment of AI’s consequences even harder: the “moving target” problem of LLM-ology, as the linguist Sean Trott called it in 2025. AI develops so quickly and so unpredictably that researchers often end up studying snapshots of the past. There are concepts, from morphological analysis to anticipatory governance, for keeping research, planning, and regulation halfway meaningful anyway. But even with those, universally valid statements are rare. DER SPIEGEL - The German View is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Subscribe We should therefore treat findings about the interplay between humans and AI as far more procedural and situational. Unfortunately, this challenge comes at the worst possible time. We are going through growing pains: AI’s everyday impact has grown very large very fast, and with it the longing for guidance. Annoyingly, the body of solid knowledge has not exploded along with it. Experts cannot be moved to broad consensus on even banal statements about AI. Sascha Lobo, born in 1975, is an author and strategy consultant focusing on the internet and digital technologies. Together with Jule Lobo, he explores the debates of the day in the podcast “Feel the News – Was Deutschland bewegt” (”What Moves Germany”). Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang says software developers are dying out. Bill Gates considers coders one of only three professions that will survive the AI tsunami. Top tech economists find virtually irrefutable arguments both for and against an AI bubble. The same naturally applies to the structurally youth-hostile debate over whether AI is good or bad for young people. The gap between the demand for insight and the supply of solid knowledge creates an orientation vacuum. This vacuum of AI cluelessness is filled, as the attention economy described by Georg Franck in 1998 would have it, with half-knowledge (funnily enough, often AI-generated), marketing, and self-marketing. After all, infinite money is at stake, along with academia’s best current shot at global fame. But this iridescent froth of interpretation operates more by the algorithmic principles of the digital public sphere than by seriously earned insight. That is why dramatized, fear-feeding claims about AI are so promising. It tempts parts of academia into distorted drivel, and parts of the media then sensationalize the published drivel once more. Was the Research Aimed at a Desired Result? How badly this can influence academia and public perception is demonstrated by one of the most-discussed studies on AI’s effects: “Your Brain on ChatGPT.” The MIT study by Nataliya Kosmyna also gets plenty of space in the SPIEGEL cover story. What was measured and interpreted: lower brain activity in people who write with AI assistance, compared to people who only google or write without any tools. As is common with preprints, the study has not yet been peer-reviewed, and it contains substantial weaknesses that experts have sharply criticized. The first round had 54 participants in three groups, the second only 18, who reportedly also came from MIT’s own orbit. There was no preregistration (committing in advance to what you want to find out with which data). In their analysis, Stanković et al. even discovered an opposite effect that the study does not further explain. Some measurement data has not (yet) been published. And the EEG analysis method used is considered too imprecise to support such far-reaching conclusions. The biggest criticism, though, is the suspicion of an activism-driven study. In an interview with Time, lead author Kosmyna said she published the study immediately, rather than after full peer review, because she feared politicians might otherwise decide to put ChatGPT in kindergartens. She considers that absolutely harmful. It is legitimate to hold such a view. It just seems unscientific to approach a study with it, and then to design the setup so that the chance of a fitting desired result remains as high as possible. Ideologies Collide It is not easy to separate genuine AI insights from studies that trivialize and weaken well-founded AI criticism. The same goes for the opposing, AI-enthusiastic narratives, because the pro-AI side works against it with billions in resources. Ideologies collide, fed by egos, PR strategies, moral posturing, and once-in-a-lifetime opportunities. Doomsday marketing makes the search even harder: AI companies can profit from warnings about the dangers of AI, whether through the notoriety of apocalypse narratives or because, in some target groups, danger translates into power. Some seemingly negative findings are therefore quite welcome in the AI industry. If you try to get at the findings presumably less influenced by interest groups, the picture in education seems relatively clear: AI can improve educational outcomes when the right AI is used the right way, namely pedagogically. Simply dumping an AI chatbot into a classroom, by contrast, accomplishes little. Huge surprise. But something else is also obvious: whether they are allowed to or not, kids use AI for school, which is why the controlled integration of AI tools into education is, in the medium term, entirely without alternative. In the world of work, the landscape of findings is more complex and requires more differentiation. A series of serious studies points to an AI effect that suits neither the alarmists, regulation fetishists, and AI opponents, nor the trillion-dollar corporations with their armada of paid scientists, PR professionals, and ecosystems: working with AI helps the inexperienced (at least for now) considerably more than it helps the pros, in certain fields of work, and provided they know how to use it correctly. Missing Domain Knowledge Among the experienced, the professionals, and the high flyers, by contrast, despite frequent time savings, partially negative effects and new problems are emerging. Take the jagged frontier problem: AI solves task A brilliantly and fails completely at task B, even though both look similar even to professionals. Or the verification-cost problem, in which AI’s greater productivity gets eaten up by the enormous effort of checking its output. Or the illusion of competence, because AI makes new domains seem easily penetrable, until you painfully discover that deep domain knowledge is missing. Taken as a whole, the effects of working with AI do lean positive. But the promise that AI works as a turbocharger for everyone and boosts practically everything simply refuses to materialize. The AI magic the world has been feeling since ChatGPT arrived in late 2022 has so far barely shown up in most companies’ numbers. The consulting firm McKinsey has coined a term for this, the “gen AI paradox,” and believes that work processes and corporate structures would have to be rebuilt quite fundamentally to realize AI’s benefits at scale. Reuters just reported that only 3.3 percent of Microsoft’s customers have subscribed to the AI package Copilot. That may be down to the product; in other areas we continue to see soaring successes and new AI triumphs. But after the first quarter of 2026, disillusionment is the word for all too many AI projects at traditional companies: because the promised revolution of AI agents has so far failed to arrive or been postponed, and because of the leveling effect that many of the studies cited here suggest. Against Inequality The societal effects, on the other hand, appear rather encouraging. Many previous technologies operated on the Matthew principle, named for the Gospel verse about giving to those who already have: they tended to reward the more competent and more privileged. AI, however, seems more often to have an equalizing effect once a threshold of access and education is crossed. Some anecdotal insights point in this direction, for example, how an unemployed man in Leipzig successfully defended himself in court in 2025 against fraud accusations from Germany’s federal employment agency — without a lawyer, armed only with ChatGPT. The AI made mistakes and cited invented court rulings, but in the end the man walked away unpunished. And a key capability of artificial intelligence is its capacity to learn: set up correctly and fed with data, it can keep getting better. It is a question of time, or more precisely of AI innovations and training data, until even free AI chatbots write better legal briefs than law graduates with perfect exam scores. Whether that will make anyone dumb is something the world’s press will surely inform us of in due time. Subscribe Leave a comment
How brain cells restore healthy growth and connections after a disease-causing genetic deletion
Scientists at Virginia Tech's Fralin Biomedical Research Institute at VTC have discovered how an experimental therapy can help brain cells overcome the effects of a disease-causing genetic deletion. Instead ...
This eating habit could help boost brain health, study finds
The study was a six month clinical trial and its findings were presented at NUTRITION 2026, the annual meeting of the American Society for Nutrition.
iPhone 18 Pro could be a no-brainer upgrade for lots of users
iPhone 18 Pro is coming soon, and there are several reasons why it could prove an especially popular upgrade choice this year.
Miffy Expands into Location-Based Entertainment Across Asia
Mercis and WildBrain CPLG partner to bring Miffy and Friends to theme parks, family entertainment centers and resorts across China, South Korea and beyond.
World-class Jodrell Bank is under threat and UK risks a physics brain drain
Funding crisis could lead to an exodus that would be a blow for British science and national growth
Your Brain Really Can Learn to Multitask – And Scientists Just Revealed How
"This really is true multitasking."
Dementia affecting younger persons strikes Hispanics more than previously thought, UT Health San Antonio-led study shows
Educational disparities contribute to diagnostic delays of frontotemporal dementia Contact: Steven Lee, (210) 450-3823, lees22@uthscsa.edu SAN ANTONIO, July 27, 2026 – A form of dementia that strikes younger people is more common in Hispanics than previously thought, according to a new study led by researchers at UT Health San Antonio, the academic health center of […]