Researchers Say It’s Time To Ask A Different Question About Dementia

When we think of dementia, symptoms like memory loss and confusion might spring to mind. And that’s completely reasonable – dementia is a condition that progressively affects memory and thinking.

But researchers think there are other parts to the picture.

People with dementia can have periods of “paradoxical lucidity”, or moments when a long-term dementia patient’s brain seems to briefly snap back to what it once was. Carers say moments like these are common.

They can last for minutes or hours and may make a dementia patient’s loved one feel as if, for a while at least, the “fog lifted”.

Dr Heather E. Whitson, a professor of neuroscience, the director of the Duke Ageing Centre, and co-director of the Duke/UNC Alzheimer’s Disease Research Centre, said: “I really think that a lot of what we learn about these dramatic episodes could have bearing on better cognition and better outcomes throughout the disease.”

She is one of many academics who’ll join the Lucidity in Alzheimer’s and Dementia (LEAD) Network.

What is LEAD Network?

The upcoming project, due to start this autumn, aims to create a standard definition of lucidity, understand how it affects caregivers and families, and work out the mechanisms behind lucid periods.

Some reports suggest that triggers like music may help to induce these states of clarity among dementia patients. But the team behind LEAD Network want more hard science to explain what’s really going on during clearer spells.

It’s even hoped that working out why lucidity happens in dementia could help researchers find ways to protect us from the condition, and even recover memories.

“We’ve spent decades focused on preventing dementia and treating dementia,” Whitson stated. “This research asks a different question: What allows moments of preserved function to emerge, even in the setting of advanced disease?”

Researchers think periods of lucidity could mean functional parts of the brain remain – it may be a question of access

Lucidity among long-term dementia patients may have to do with what’s been called the brain’s “substrate”, or the hidden, underlying part of the brain that still seems capable of regular, or better-than-usual, function.

Dr Whitson said that the times when a person with advanced dementia is able to remember a loved one or sing every chorus of a song “suggest there is still some preserved substrate there. It means that a profound part of their self – which dementia took away – is still there”.

Maybe research like the one she and others are set to undertake could make accessing that “substrate” more predictable and reliably possible.

The professor claimed, “Neuroscientists often frame cognitive resilience as your mind’s ability to hang on to a capacity even though there is brain damage.

“But lucid episodes tell us that even when a capacity seems as if it’s lost, it may not be lost forever.”

Share Button

This 10-cent heart drug cuts hospitalizations by 25%

A low dose of digoxin may help people with heart failure avoid hospitalization and reduce the risk of death, according to three studies led by UMCG cardiologists Dirk Jan van Veldhuisen, Kevin Damman, and Peter van der Meer. The researchers believe the new findings could eventually influence heart failure treatment guidelines and make this inexpensive medication available to many more patients.

Heart failure is a serious and growing health problem. More than 500,000 people in the Netherlands are estimated to have the condition, and that number is expected to increase in the years ahead. In people with heart failure, the heart cannot pump blood as effectively as it should. This can lead to severe shortness of breath, fatigue, and repeated trips to the hospital.

Digoxin Could Join the ‘Fantastic Four’

Standard heart failure care currently relies on a combination of four medications, commonly known as the ‘Fantastic Four.’ Cardiologists have long investigated whether digoxin could provide additional benefits as a fifth treatment.

Three UMCG studies now provide evidence supporting that possibility. The findings were published in publications including Nature Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) and were also presented at the ESC Heart Failure Congress in Barcelona.

Heart Failure Hospitalizations Fell by 25%

One of the studies included 1,000 people with heart failure who were treated at 43 centers across the Netherlands. Half received a low dose of digoxin in addition to their usual treatment for an average of three years, while the other half received a placebo.

Among those taking digoxin, deaths from cardiovascular disease and worsening heart failure were reduced (by 19%). However, that individual result did not reach statistical significance.

The researchers then combined the findings with data from two earlier studies in a meta-analysis, creating a much larger group of patients. With the additional data, they found that digoxin produced a meaningful and statistically significant benefit, even when patients were already taking the four standard heart failure medications.

The clearest benefit was a reduction in hospital admissions for heart failure, which fell by an average of 25%. Low-dose digoxin was also found to be safe and relatively easy to use.

Problems Increased After Digoxin Was Stopped

A third study followed approximately 600 of the original 1,000 participants who had been assigned either digoxin or placebo.

Researchers found that people who had been taking digoxin and then had to stop experienced significantly more problems during the first six weeks compared with people who had never taken the drug. Among 288 patients, 14 were hospitalized or died.

According to the researchers, this finding does not directly prove that digoxin is effective. Still, they considered the size and timing of the effect both impressive and surprising.

A Heart Failure Drug That Costs Less Than Ten Cents a Day

The researchers believe the results of the three studies could eventually lead to changes in heart failure guidelines, potentially allowing many more patients to receive digoxin.

Its low price makes the findings especially notable. Digoxin has been used in medicine for centuries and costs less than ten cents per day. By comparison, many newer heart failure medications cost several euros each day.

Why a Low Dose of Digoxin Matters

Digoxin (digitalis) is the oldest and least expensive medicine used to treat heart failure. At a low dose, the drug primarily works by reducing several harmful compensatory responses that occur when the heart is struggling. For example, digoxin suppresses stress hormones (such as adrenaline) in the blood, which can benefit the heart.

Higher doses of digoxin were commonly prescribed in the past. Those doses caused heart muscle cells to contract more strongly, but that effect ultimately proved less helpful. For a weakened heart muscle, reducing strain is preferable to forcing it to work harder.

During the past 25 to 30 years, several effective new treatments for heart failure have become available. As a result, digoxin use has steadily declined, and only about 15 percent of heart failure patients now receive it.

Earlier research had already suggested that patients given low doses of digoxin did considerably better than those receiving higher doses. Until the new UMCG research, however, randomized, prospective studies had not directly investigated and confirmed this effect.

Funding Made the Digoxin Studies Possible

Research involving older and inexpensive medications can be difficult to fund, even when those drugs have the potential to improve patient care while lowering costs.

Hartstichting therefore provided 3 million euros for this research through its collaboration with ZonMw as part of the Good Use of Medicines program.

Share Button

As A Teen, I Wrote A Famous Musician A Fan Letter. 23 Years After His Death, I Finally Got A Response

When I was 17 years old, I wrote Elliott Smith a fan letter.

It was the year 2000, and I was a high school senior in Dallas. I had never written a fan letter to anyone, but I felt connected to Elliott, despite the fact that we didn’t really have that much in common.

He was, after all, a man in his 30s who had tattoos and wore an assortment of black band tees, while I was a teenage girl who shopped at Abercrombie & Fitch. He sang about drinking and drugs; I hadn’t even tried my first beer.

He had the aura of a defiant nonconformist, while I was a pleaser and overachiever, writing for the school paper, singing in the choir, and joining an endless stream of extracurriculars and clubs to pad my college applications.

But Elliott seemed like the quiet type, and so was I, with high social anxiety and low self-esteem. He seemed like an outcast, and I often felt out of place and lonely in the Texas suburb where I grew up, even with family and friends around me.

He seemed sad; I was a bit sad too.

But what really mesmerised me most about Elliott was his vulnerability. He laid himself so bare in his music, and when I listened to his songs, it felt like reading a diary. It wasn’t just the lyrics – it was his soft singing style, his careful finger-picking, the way he layered vocal tracks so tenderly. I felt like I knew him, like I was a friend he trusted with his secrets.

I wanted to reach out to Elliott to thank him, and convey how important his music was to me. I found an address for his record label, Kill Rock Stars, in the liner notes of one of his CDs, and I mailed the letter. And then I waited.

Months passed, and no response. Maybe I sent it to the wrong address, I thought. I never really expected to hear back, but I did wonder if he even got it.

Graduation came and went. I headed off to college. Elliott didn’t release any new albums.

And in 2003, he died violently and tragically at the age of 34.

The subject line read “Fwd: Elliott Smith biography.” My former boss had passed along a message that was sent to my old work email – the one associated with my maiden name, which no one had called me in years. It was 2023, and I had recently turned 40.

The email was from a writer named Jamie Fisher, who said she was working on a biography about Elliott Smith.

“I’m wondering if you’re the same Kirby Van Amburgh who wrote a fan letter to him around 2000,” she wrote. “His family still has the letter, and I was wondering whether you got a response.”

I sucked in my breath. This means Elliott got my letter! I thought. He must have read it, right? And if he kept it, maybe it meant something to him.

I responded to Jamie immediately. Even though I hadn’t gotten anything from Elliott, she still wanted to talk to me, so we set up a time to chat on the phone the next week.

Before our phone call, Jamie also sent me a photo of my letter to Elliott. It was handwritten on notebook paper, both sides. In the letter, I wrote that I was a 17-year-old girl who had bought all of his CDs.

I think your music is really addictive. It’s so original and creative. I’ve never heard anything like it.

I shared that I liked to play the piano and guitar and sing. I told him that he was an inspiration to me, that listening to his music encouraged me to create my own style.

I try to write my own songs and make them as unique and personal to me as your work is to you.

But I didn’t want to be a musician as a career, I said.

I want to be a writer.

I praised him some more and said that even if my letter never reached him, it was OK.

You are worth the time it took to write this, and you’ll keep kicking ass.

I told him he was incredible and thanked him. I signed it with a “Sincerely.”

If Elliott did in fact read the letter, I could see why he kept it. I’m sure it was refreshing to get something so wholesome.

Elliott Smith.

C Brandon via Getty Images

Elliott Smith.

In the days that followed, I went up into the attic and pulled out my old high school diaries, skimming the pages for mentions of Elliott. I had written about him several times: I journalled about buying my first Elliott Smith CD and hearing the spidery notes of Speed Trials trickling through the speakers of my Magnavox boombox. And I wrote about my letter, saying, “I hope he gets it. I hope he likes it!”

When we finally got on the phone, Jamie asked if I had continued with my writing or music, and I told her about my winding career path: I was a teacher for several years, then worked at a nonprofit for the next decade. I had dabbled in freelance writing here and there, but it never went anywhere. At one point, I wrote a novel for kids, but it was never published.

I told her I had recently transitioned to a job as a writer for a market research company, which I really enjoyed because I got to write every day, albeit in a different way than I envisioned when I was 17.

I talked about my songwriting and how I was in a musical duo with my friend Todd in the early aughts. We put out an EP, some singles, and even a couple of music videos, filmed in Todd’s backyard. It was all just for fun, but it was also a bit stressful sharing my songs and putting myself on display like that.

I explained that creative writing – both on paper and in music – was emotionally difficult for me. Unlike writing for business, when I wrote anything personal, I felt an intense fear of being exposed. I put so much of myself in my fiction, essays, poems and songs. I was terrified of releasing them for public consumption because any rejection of my creative work felt like a rejection of me as a person. Perhaps that’s why I was so in awe of Elliott: he shared so much of himself in his art, in a way that I never quite could.

After a while, Jamie paused and said that she didn’t reach out to me just because of the book. There was another reason.

“Elliott wrote you a response.”

I literally burst into tears.

He did? I choked out. Jamie started crying too.

She said that Elliott’s letter was in the box with my letter. She didn’t know why he never sent it. Maybe he didn’t have a stamp and then forgot about it. At any rate, it was there, waiting to be found.

Jamie read the letter to me over the phone.

Dear Kirby, I read your letter and it made me happy – thanks.

Elliott wished me success with my writing, whatever success meant to me personally. He talked about his love of reading and recommended an author he was really into at the moment, Mikhail Bulgakov. He shared that he sometimes secretly wished he was a writer instead of a musician, as his music so often diverged from mainstream tastes.

He thanked me for adding a little brightness to his day.

I’m glad you see creativity in yourself, the world needs as much of it as it can get, so go out and kick ass!

He signed it with a heart.

The author with her husband and daughter (2025).

Photo Courtesy Of Kirby Rock

The author with her husband and daughter (2025).

After my call with Jamie, I felt a surge of inspiration. Since having my daughter three years earlier, I had stopped going to my writing group, and I hadn’t written a song or even played my instruments in a long time. But now I felt the urge to return to my writing and music, even if for no other purpose than bringing me joy.

In the months that followed, I brought my guitar down from the attic. I played Old MacDonald Had A Farm for my daughter over and over, building the calluses back up on my fingers. I wrote her an original song about handwashing, Scrubbly Bubs and Bubs and Scrubs (which was well received). Last year, along with my husband and two other dads, I played a three-song acoustic set of Raffi covers for our kids’ class at school. It was thrilling to see them laughing and clapping and dancing, a crowd of generous and adoring fans.

I rejoined my writing group. I wrote a little book about potty training for my daughter (which was less well received). I revisited a short story about alien abduction that I had initially drafted and abandoned several years earlier. I wrote a bad poem about the lizards on my back porch. I wrote this essay. Now I write and write and continue to write.

After I told one friend about Jamie’s call, he asked if I was upset that I never got the letter when I was a teen. I said no. Strangely, I was almost thankful that Elliott never sent the letter. It felt like his words were meant for me at age 40, not age 17. I received his encouragement when I really needed it – not when I was already full of excitement and hope and possibility, but later in life, when I needed to be reminded of the spark inside of me.

I wrote to Elliott years ago to thank him. And in a way, I wrote this to thank him again.

Nobody Broke Your Heart, an intimate biography of Elliott Smith by Jamie Fisher, will be released by Penguin Random House on Aug. 25.

Do you have a compelling personal story you’d like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we’re looking for here and send us a pitch at pitch@huffpost.com.

Share Button

Physicists discover a hidden gluon structure inside protons that could rewrite textbooks

New findings from the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) are challenging a familiar picture of what gives protons one of their defining quantum properties. The results suggest that gluons, the particles that act as the glue holding quarks together, may play a key role in carrying and conserving baryon number.

The evidence comes from high-energy particle collisions at RHIC, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science user facility for nuclear physics research that operated at DOE’s Brookhaven National Laboratory from 2000 to early 2026. According to the new study, published in Science, baryon number may be associated with a Y-shaped “junction” of gluons connecting the proton’s three main quarks. If confirmed, that would challenge the long-standing assumption that baryon number belongs exclusively to those quarks.

“Traditionally, scientists have assumed that each of the three main ‘valence’ quarks inside a proton or neutron carries one-third of the baryon number,” said Zhangbu Xu, a professor at Kent State University with a joint appointment at Brookhaven Lab.

A Decades-Old Idea About Gluons

Physicists first proposed the baryon junction, also called a gluon junction, in the 1970s as a way to describe how gluons connect the valence quarks inside a proton. In 1996, four years before RHIC began operating, Dmitri Kharzeev, a theoretical physicist at Stony Brook University and Brookhaven Lab, proposed that this junction might do something even more fundamental. Rather than the valence quarks carrying baryon number, the junction itself could be responsible.

The STAR collaboration has now developed a way to test that possibility using several types of collisions produced at RHIC.

“Using data collected from different types of particle collisions at RHIC, our results suggest that the baryon number is not simply carried by individual quarks,” Xu added. “Our findings strongly support the idea that baryon number is more favorably carried and transported by gluons, the particles that hold quarks together, when arranged in this special configuration.”

Why Baryon Number Matters

Determining what actually carries baryon number matters far beyond the internal structure of a proton. In RHIC collisions, conservation of baryon number means that the total number of baryons, three-quark particles such as protons and neutrons, must remain unchanged before and after the collision. The same conservation principle also applies on the scale of the universe.

“Since the Big Bang, the number of protons and neutrons all together never changes as a function of time,” said Nicole Lewis, a STAR physicist at Rice University who started this project as a postdoc at Brookhaven Lab in 2020. “The reasons for this conservation are not well understood. It’s one of the mysteries of the universe, related to why we have more matter than antimatter,” she said.

Baryon number conservation also has a much more tangible consequence. It helps explain the extraordinary stability of protons, which form a central part of atomic nuclei and do not appear to decay under ordinary circumstances.

“It’s believed that the lifetime of a proton is longer than the lifespan of the universe,” Lewis said. “This allows atomic nuclei to form and be stable — which means matter, as we interact with it in the universe, can exist.”

A More Complicated Proton

The possibility that gluons carry baryon number would overturn the standard simplified description found in many textbooks. In that picture, a proton has a baryon number of plus one, divided equally among its three main valence quarks. Each quark therefore carries plus one third of the baryon number, much as the proton’s electric charge is distributed among its three valence quarks.

But real protons are much more complicated than that simplified model suggests.

“In the naïve quark model, there are three quarks inside a proton, but nothing else,” said Tommy Tsang, formerly a postdoc at Kent State University, now at DOE’s Argonne National Laboratory. “But if we look at details inside, there are not only three quarks but also a lot of gluons interacting, connecting between those quarks, and there are also quarks and antiquarks that pop up from the vacuum, so it’s actually a really complex object.”

Quantum chromodynamics (QCD), the theory used to describe these interactions, has been highly successful in explaining the strong force that acts among quarks and gluons. Even so, models inspired by QCD often need additional assumptions to reproduce some of the particle patterns observed when RHIC smashes nuclei together at nearly the speed of light.

An Unexpected Excess of Baryons

One observation in particular caught the STAR team’s attention. The detector repeatedly records more baryons than antibaryons emerging sideways from the collisions, perpendicular to the direction of the incoming beams.

“In the STAR detector, we consistently see an excess of baryons coming out of the collisions perpendicular to the direction of the colliding beams,” Tsang said. “The fact that we end up with more baryons than antibaryons — or more matter than antimatter — is not surprising since our collisions start with matter,” he said.

These extremely energetic collisions convert tremendous amounts of energy into thousands of newly created particles. What puzzled the researchers was not simply that more baryons than antibaryons were produced. It was where the excess baryons appeared.

If valence quarks alone carried the baryon number, explaining the excess away from the beamline would require all three valence quarks from one colliding proton to stop near the center of the detector. They would then have to undergo a conversion from matter into energy and back into matter, producing new baryons that move outward perpendicular to the beam.

The STAR researchers suspected there might be another explanation.

Electric Charge Provides a Test

The team found a way to investigate the mystery by taking advantage of another property of valence quarks: electric charge. Scientists compared the net baryon number measured in different RHIC nuclear collisions with the way electric charge was redistributed in those same events.

“Measuring the electric charge coming out perpendicular to the collision gives you a definitive way of measuring how many quarks are stopped and transformed into new particles,” said Zebo Tang, a professor at the University of Science and Technology of China who led a group of students performing data analyses and model simulations.

The comparison revealed a striking mismatch. Researchers observed roughly twice as many baryons as should have been produced based on the electric charge associated with stopped quarks.

According to models based on QCD, that means too few quarks were being stopped to account for all the baryons appearing in the detector.

That left an important question: What was carrying the extra baryon number?

The STAR physicists argue that gluons offer a possible answer, specifically the three-pronged gluon junction that connects the proton’s valence quarks.

How the Gluon Junction Could Carry Baryon Number

The proposed mechanism depends on what happens when protons inside colliding nuclei reach enormous energies. According to the STAR team, the “gluon junction” or “baryon junction” that links the quarks may be much easier to stop in a collision than the three quarks themselves.

If the junction is stopped, its energy can be converted into newly produced baryons that travel outward in directions perpendicular to the beams. Meanwhile, the valence quarks that were previously connected by the junction can continue moving forward along the beampipe.

Understanding why requires looking at the changing internal structure of a proton as its energy increases.

“The baryon junction is always there even as protons are accelerated to higher and higher energy,” Prithwish Tribedy, a STAR physicist at Brookhaven Lab. “But at high energy, gluons within the proton split and multiply.”

As the number of gluons increases, the proton’s momentum becomes spread among more of them. Each individual gluon, including those forming the junction, therefore carries a smaller portion of the proton’s total momentum. The valence quarks, however, continue to carry much of the proton’s forward motion.

As a result, when the collision occurs, the comparatively slower three-pronged gluon junction should be easier to stop and convert into new particles than the rapidly moving quarks.

Stopping one connected structure is also simpler than stopping three separate quarks, making such an interaction more likely, according to Tribedy.

“In the collision, the baryon junction gets held behind, and the quarks continue on,” he noted.

Building New Particles After the Collision

Quarks and gluons cannot remain isolated, so after the collision they quickly combine with other particles.

In a simplified example, a quark continuing down the beampipe could join with an antiquark and form a two-quark particle called a meson. At the same time, the three-pronged gluon junction could behave somewhat like a Y-shaped magnet, drawing in three newly created quarks from the vacuum and producing a new baryon.

Actual RHIC collisions are considerably more violent and complex.

“Even though we start with nuclei that contain roughly 100 protons and 100 neutrons, these collisions create thousands of new particles; 99% of the energy is transformed into new particles,” said Rongrong Ma, a Brookhaven Lab physicist.

The STAR team found that collisions producing larger numbers of particles also showed a greater excess of “midrapidity” baryons compared with predictions based on the simpler picture in which quarks alone carry baryon number.

The fact that so many of these baryons emerge perpendicular to the beamline provides strong evidence, according to the researchers, that the baryon junction exists and plays an important role in transporting baryon number.

Rethinking a Fundamental Property of Matter

The results suggest that one of the proton’s defining quantum properties may not reside solely in its three valence quarks. Instead, the gluon structure connecting those quarks could be central to how baryon number is carried through energetic collisions.

“Our research challenges the long-held idea that baryon number is simply divided among and carried by the three quarks,” said Ma. “This new understanding reshapes how we think about the structure of matter and deepens our knowledge of the most fundamental element that is responsible for the universe in its current form.”

The research was supported by the DOE Office of Science, the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), and numerous international agencies and organizations listed in the scientific paper. Researchers also used the Open Science Grid, which is supported directly by NSF, along with computing resources at Brookhaven Lab’s Scientific Data and Computing Facilities and the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), another DOE Office of Science user facility located at DOE’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Share Button

Scientists reveal why walking gets so much harder with age

New Australian research is shedding light on why walking often becomes slower and more tiring with age. The findings suggest that the body gradually gives up some movement efficiency in favor of staying stable and upright.

Led by researchers at Flinders University and the University of Canberra, the study found that aging is associated with a “safety-first” walking strategy. This approach emphasizes stability instead of speed and energy efficiency, helping explain why older adults may fatigue more quickly and also face a greater risk of falling.

Researchers analyzed movement data from 107 healthy adults between the ages of 26 and 86. They found small but meaningful age-related differences in how the ankle and nearby muscles manage each step.

How the Ankle Changes With Age

Lead author and sport and exercise technology expert Dr. Cody Lindsay says the ankle is essential for maintaining balance while also helping propel the body forward.

“As we get older, the body starts to favor stability over efficiency,” says Dr. Lindsay, from the Flinders Caring Futures Institute.

“That helps keep us upright, but it also makes walking more of an effort.”

The researchers found that older adults are more likely to activate opposing muscles around the ankle at the same time. This pattern is known as co-contraction. It makes the ankle joint stiffer and can improve stability when the foot contacts the ground.

However, Dr. Lindsay says this comes at a cost.

“Stiffening the joint makes walking safer, but it also means the muscles are working harder without generating as much forward movement,” he says.

Older participants also generated less push-off power with each step. As a result, their strides were shorter, and their walking speeds were slower.

A Safety First Strategy for Walking

Co-author Associate Professor Maarten Immink says the findings point to a wider change in the way the body manages movement as people grow older.

“The nervous system adopts a safety-first approach, compensating for age-related changes by favoring stability over performance,” says Associate Professor Immink, Lead of the Active Lives Research Program within the Caring Futures Institute at Flinders University.

“These changes can also increase fatigue and make walking longer distances more challenging, while reducing the ability to recover from trips or slips — a key factor in falls among older adults.”

“Even gradual changes can affect confidence and independence, and people may notice they tire more quickly or feel less steady, especially on uneven ground.”

Exercise May Help Preserve Mobility

The findings also suggest possible ways to help people maintain mobility as they age.

Rather than focusing only on building strength, the researchers say exercise programs should also emphasize balance and coordination while paying attention to how different muscles work together during each step.

“For older Australians, simple actions can make a difference, including regular physical activity, balance exercises such as tai chi, lower-leg strengthening and activities that challenge coordination,” says Dr. Lindsay, from Flinders’ College of Health and Enablement.

“Staying active is one of the most important things people can do, and small, consistent exercises can help you stay confident, mobile and independent for longer.”

The researchers hope these findings can contribute to improved prevention and rehabilitation strategies designed to reduce falls and support healthy aging.

Share Button

I Added A Baking Staple To My Chickpeas, And It Made Them Silkier And Creamier Than Ever

I’ve been banging on about the merits of slow cookers, especially during a heatwave, all summer.

Even though they’re usually associated with stodgy winter dishes, their lower temperature and enhanced insulation mean they don’t warm your kitchen up as much as you’d expect.

Alongside a delicious coconut lentil soup and some Greek-inspired mains, I’ve been batch-cooking my own chickpeas, too. (Yes, canned is easier, but tinned chickpeas are also designed to keep their shape in the container, meaning they’re never quite soft enough for dishes like hummus).

Still, it wasn’t until last week that I tried a long-standing trick to make them softer, creamier, and more delicious – and I wish I’d started years before.

Add baking soda to your chickpeas

Hummus, chickpeas

Amy Glover / HuffPost UK

Hummus, chickpeas

I usually add garlic, salt, and chilli to my chickpea water for a bit of added flavour. Salt might have a small advantage in softening them, but for the best results, you need baking soda.

There’s some interesting science behind the addition. When you add the baking staple to chickpea water, it slowly replaces the legumes’ rigid calcium ions with bendier sodium ions.

And the alkaline nature of baking soda also breaks down the bonds that hold their pectins (a type of plant fibre) together.

Combined, those factors mean that baking soda makes chickpeas soft, squidgy, and almost fudgy.

Their skins also soften and even begin to flake away depending on how long you cook them. That, I find, is especially useful for hummus – though I like a looser, softer chickpea for things like salads and chickpea curries, too.

Chickpeas in the slow cooker: then in a curry

Amy Glover / HuffPost UK

Chickpeas in the slow cooker: then in a curry

I was amazed by how well the trick worked. Compared to chickpeas I’d stewed for hours, those cooked with baking soda became softer much faster – and eliminated that harder centre I could never quite coax into silky perfection.

How much baking soda should I add to my chickpeas?

You don’t need much to see impressive results. I use about a teaspoon per 500g of dry chickpeas, but some recipes halve that.

The amount you’ll need to add depends, partly, on how long you’re cooking chickpeas for. If you’re making them on the hob, more baking soda will be better; however in the slow cooker, where they stew for hours, try less.

Serious Eats notes that you don’t have to spend hours on the method if you don’t have time. You can soften tinned chickpeas using baking soda, too: just drain them, add enough liquid to cover them, and whack in some baking soda while they boil. Half a teaspoon per 400g can of chickpeas should do the job.

Test the chickpeas as they cook to make sure they haven’t collapsed completely. Once they’ve reached the desired texture, you can remove them and drain them.

This has an added benefit: the chickpea water from baking-soda-cooked legumes is a bit bitter and unpleasant. So, if you need to use this for your recipe, you can save the liquid from the can and use that later on.

Share Button

What’s driving men to get penis fillers, despite the risks?

Men who have had the procedure can expect 10-20% more girth for the next six to nine months – but it can go wrong.

Share Button

Scientists detect a surprising shift in human blood as CO2 rises

Rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may already be influencing human biology. New research has identified long-term changes in blood chemistry that appear to track rising atmospheric CO2, raising concerns that an important blood marker could approach the upper end of its healthy range within the next several decades.

The findings may be particularly important for children and teenagers. Because their bodies are still developing, younger generations are expected to experience the greatest lifetime exposure to elevated atmospheric CO2.

Decades of Blood Data Reveal a Shift

In a study published in Air Quality, Atmosphere and Health, scientists from The Kids Research Institute Australia, Curtin University and The Australian National University (ANU) examined more than 20 years of U.S. population health data. They found persistent changes in several measures of blood chemistry that closely followed the upward trend in atmospheric CO2.

The researchers used information from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), analyzing blood test results from roughly 7,000 people at two-year intervals between 1999 and 2020.

Since 1999, average serum bicarbonate levels have increased by about 7 percent. Bicarbonate is a blood marker closely associated with carbon dioxide in the body. During the same period, average levels of calcium and phosphorus decreased.

Those biological trends occurred as atmospheric CO2 climbed from about 369 parts per million (ppm) in 2000 to more than 420 ppm today.

Study author Associate Professor Alexander Larcombe said the results indicate that the body may already be adjusting to changes in the composition of the atmosphere.

“What we’re seeing is a gradual shift in blood chemistry that mirrors the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide, which is driving climate change,” A/Prof Larcombe said.

How the Body Responds to More CO2

Bicarbonate is essential for regulating the body’s acid-base balance. As CO2 increases, the body can retain additional bicarbonate to help keep blood pH stable. Although this response helps preserve that balance, maintaining it over long periods could have physiological effects.

“If current trends continue, modeling indicates average bicarbonate levels could approach the upper limit of today’s accepted healthy range within 50 years,” A/Prof Larcombe said

“Calcium and phosphorus levels could also reach the lower end of their healthy ranges later this century.”

Humans evolved when atmospheric CO2 concentrations were approximately 280 to 300 ppm. During the past decade, atmospheric levels have risen by an average of about 2.6 ppm each year, while 2024 alone saw an increase of 3.5 ppm.

Fellow Author Dr Phil Bierwirth, a retired environmental geoscientist affiliated with the ANU Emeritus Faculty, emphasized that the study does not establish a direct cause-and-effect relationship. However, he said the consistency of the changes across a large population warrants attention.

“I actually think that what we are seeing is because our bodies are not adapting,” Dr Bierwirth said.

“It appears we are adapted to a range of CO2 in the air that may now have been surpassed.

“The normal range maintains a delicate balance between how much CO2 is in the air, our blood pH, our breathing rate and bicarbonate levels in the blood.

“As CO2 in the air is now higher than humans have ever experienced, it appears to be building up in our bodies. Maybe we can never adapt such that it is vitally important to limit atmospheric levels of CO2.”

A Potential New Dimension of Climate Risk

The researchers say the results suggest that rising atmospheric CO2 could represent a form of climate-related risk that is different from more familiar threats such as heatwaves, extreme weather and sea-level rise.

According to A/Prof Larcombe, increasing CO2 may need to be considered not only as an environmental concern, but also as a long-term public health factor that should be monitored.

“We’re not saying people are suddenly going to become unwell when we cross a certain threshold,” he said.

“But this suggests there may be gradual physiological changes occurring at a population level, and that’s something we should be monitoring as part of future climate change policy.”

The researchers recommend monitoring the composition of the atmosphere together with biological markers across populations. Tracking both alongside established climate indicators could help scientists determine how slow environmental changes affect human biology over periods of decades.

CO2 Reduction Could Have Health Implications

Cutting CO2 emissions remains essential for limiting global warming. The findings also raise the possibility that lowering emissions could have an additional role in protecting long-term human health.

The researchers argue that potential physiological effects from rising CO2 should therefore be considered in future discussions about climate policy, alongside its established environmental consequences.

Associate Professor Larcombe is part of the Wal-yan Respiratory Research Centre, a partnership between The Kids Research Institute Australia, Perth Children’s Hospital and Perth Children’s Hospital Foundation.

Share Button

When gut microbes run low on fiber, they may start eating you

Plant based diets support health in several ways, including benefits for the gut, immune system, metabolism, and cardiovascular system. Part of that effect comes from encouraging a diverse population of bacteria in the intestines. Scientists have long known that dietary fiber contributes to these benefits because gut microbes help break it down. Plants also contain colorful “phytochemicals” that help protect them from environmental threats and may influence human health. Even so, researchers are still working to understand exactly how gut bacteria process the many components of plant foods and how those interactions produce beneficial effects.

Two studies led by Ludwig Princeton’s Jenna AbuSalim and Director Joshua Rabinowitz offer new insight into that process. One appears in the current issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, while the other was published in Nature Metabolism in June. The first study found that plant fiber and certain plant proteins can change microbial metabolism in ways that increase beneficial metabolites while reducing harmful ones. The second showed that several biologically important metabolites usually credited to gut microbes can also be produced in substantial amounts by mammalian metabolism.

“There’s growing interest across medical disciplines in manipulating the human microbiome or using its metabolic products themselves for therapy,” said Rabinowitz. “Diet holds great promise for controlling the microbiome and its outputs. But to devise effective therapeutic interventions, we need to understand what aspects of the diet control which microbial outputs.”

How Plant Foods Shift Gut Metabolites

In the PNAS study, Rabinowitz, AbuSalim and their colleagues examined how plant based foods influence phenol metabolites. Gut bacteria create these compounds when they digest the amino acids tyrosine and phenylalanine, but the resulting metabolites can have very different effects on health.

Phenylpropionate and hippuric acid are produced when bacteria process phenylalanine, and they are associated with gut health and healthy body weight. By contrast, p-cresol sulfate and phenol sulfate come from tyrosine and have been linked to worse outcomes in cancer patients as well as systemic toxicity in people with kidney disease.

“Our studies showed that both the fiber and indigestible proteins from plants — which we call ‘proteins imitating fiber,’ or Prif — shift the balance of phenol metabolites from the harmful kind made from tyrosine to the healthful variety derived from phenylalanine,” said AbuSalim.

Fiber has long been recognized as an important part of a healthy diet, but indigestible plant proteins have received far less attention. AbuSalim, Rabinowitz and their colleagues found that these proteins are processed by gut microbes and can alter both the makeup of the microbiome and the host’s metabolism. Working together with indigestible plant fiber, they can also change the metabolic activity of gut bacteria in ways that favor the production of beneficial phenols.

When Gut Bacteria Turn to the Gut Lining

To trace where these compounds came from, the researchers labeled proteins with stable (non-radioactive) isotopes and followed their digestion in the mouse gut. They found that the “bad” phenols were produced when bacteria consumed proteins from the host, including proteins found in the mucus lining of the gut. The good phenols, in contrast, came almost entirely from indigestible proteins in the diet (Prif).

Fiber reduced the bacterial breakdown of the gut’s mucus lining, which in turn lowered production of the harmful phenols. Prif increased the amount of dietary protein that reached gut microbes, giving them more material to produce the beneficial phenols.

“We think Prifs represent an emerging class of dietary nutrients that shape the composition of the gut microbiome and could have a far-reaching influence on metabolic health,” said AbuSalim.

“Food packaging may eventually list Prif right below fiber,” said Rabinowitz.

Rethinking Where Gut Metabolites Come From

The Nature Metabolism study focused on the origins of phenol metabolites as well as indole metabolites, which are produced from the amino acid tryptophan. Like phenols, indoles are being studied for their possible therapeutic value.

Indole metabolites have been connected to a wide range of diseases, including inflammatory bowel disease, neurodegenerative disorders, and cancer. In cancer research, they have been found to affect processes that include cancer metastasis and anti-tumor immune responses.

Scientists had generally assumed that phenols and indoles were produced only by gut bacteria. AbuSalim, Rabinowitz and their colleagues decided to test that assumption. Researchers have been especially interested in dietary and probiotic approaches that might increase beneficial indole metabolites. But those strategies may need to be reconsidered if mammalian metabolism, rather than microbes, is responsible for much of what circulates in the body.

Using isotope tracing in mice, rats and human cells, the researchers found that mammalian metabolism can produce many indole and phenol metabolites on its own. These included important compounds such as indole-3-lactate and indole-3-acetate.

In mice, circulating levels of these metabolites remained high even after antibiotic treatment disrupted the microbiome. A similar pattern appeared in samples from patients taking antibiotics, including cancer patients. At the same time, metabolites made exclusively by microbes, including indole-3-propionate and p-cresol sulfate, declined after antibiotic treatment.

New Clues for Diet and Microbiome Therapies

Together, the two studies provide a clearer picture of where phenol and indole metabolites come from and how they are produced. The findings could influence the development of therapies designed to raise or lower specific metabolites.

They also add important detail to scientists’ understanding of how diet interacts with the microbiome. Knowing which foods influence particular microbial products could eventually help researchers design more precise dietary, probiotic, or metabolic interventions.

“Beyond that,” said Rabinowitz, “a clearer picture of how different foods interact with the microbiome to modulate the production of bacterial metabolites will help sharpen the guidance nutritionists and doctors can give to people for disease prevention and therapy.”

These studies were funded by the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, the National Institutes of Health, the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the Princeton Alliance for Collaborative Research and Innovation, Princeton University.

Aside from his post as Director of the Princeton Branch of the Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Joshua Rabinowitz is Professor in the Department of Chemistry & Lewis-Sigler Institute for Integrative Genomics and a member of the Rutgers Cancer Institute.

Share Button

Scientists solve the mystery of a brain “switch” that can trigger weight loss in opposite ways

Cambridge researchers have uncovered why both activating and blocking the same brain receptor can promote weight loss. The findings may help scientists develop obesity treatments that are more effective and potentially work better in combination.

The mouse study, published in Nature Metabolism, found that the outcome depends on which part of the brain is targeted. Activating the receptor in the brainstem reduced appetite, while blocking the same receptor in the hypothalamus produced a similar weight loss effect through a different mechanism.

More than a billion people around the world are living with obesity, a condition that raises the risk of diseases including type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. Losing weight can reduce some of these risks, but achieving substantial weight loss through diet and exercise alone can be difficult.

How Modern Weight Loss Drugs Target the Brain

A new generation of weight loss medications has emerged in recent years that act on specific receptors involved in appetite. By influencing these receptors, the drugs can reduce food intake, promote weight loss, and help regulate blood sugar.

Several widely used medications, including Wegovy and Ozempic, activate a protein receptor called the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1R).

Other obesity treatments act on both GLP-1R and another receptor known as the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor (GIPR). This second target has presented scientists with an unusual puzzle.

Some medications, including Mounjaro and Zepbound, activate GIPR. Others, such as MariTide, block it. Despite producing opposite effects on the same receptor, both approaches can help promote weight loss.

Researchers at the Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, set out to understand why. Their experiments in mice revealed that the two types of GIPR drugs work through different regions of the brain. The researchers also found that these approaches can increase weight loss when paired with certain GLP-1-based weight loss medicines.

Tracking GIPR Activity in Different Brain Regions

To identify the brain regions responsible for these effects, the team used genetically engineered mice in which GIPR had been selectively removed from specific areas.

One group lacked GIPR in the brainstem, the region at the base of the brain just above the spinal cord that is involved in appetite and nausea. Another group lacked the receptor in the hypothalamus, an important brain region involved in regulating hunger and body weight. A third group consisted of normal, unmodified mice that served as controls.

The scientists treated the animals with different combinations of a GIPR agonist (which activates the receptor), a GIPR antagonist (which blocks the receptor) and a GLP-1 drug. They then monitored food consumption, body weight, fat mass, blood sugar control and brain activity.

Comparing the different groups allowed the team to pinpoint where each treatment was acting.

The results showed that GIPR agonists primarily work through the brainstem. Activating GIPR in this region reduced appetite and led to lower body weight.

Blocking a Brain Brake on Fullness

GIPR antagonists followed a different route.

Instead of acting primarily through the brainstem, the researchers found that blocking GIPR promoted weight loss through the hypothalamus. In this region, GIPR appears to function as a kind of ‘brake’ that limits how strongly the brainstem responds to signals indicating that the body is full.

Blocking the receptor effectively releases that ‘brake’, allowing fullness signals to have a stronger effect.

The researchers also found evidence that blocking GIPR could enhance the effects of emerging medicines that target the amylin receptor. This suggests that GIPR antagonists might eventually be useful for strengthening several different classes of obesity treatments.

Clues to More Powerful Obesity Drug Combinations

The results help explain why treatments such as MariTide can be effective. MariTide, currently in phase 3 clinical trials, combines GIPR antagonism with GLP-1 receptor agonism.

Understanding how these separate pathways interact could also help researchers design more effective combinations of obesity medicines in the future.

Dr. Jo Lewis, the study’s first author from the Institute of Metabolic Science at the University of Cambridge, said: “Understanding which brain circuits respond to these medications – and how they do so – could help us design better drugs that produce more weight loss with fewer side effects, and which might work in combination with other obesity medicines to even greater effect.

“Our work also strengthens the idea that the brain is central to obesity treatment. Obesity drugs are not acting simply on the gut or pancreas. Instead, they have important effects on specific, identifiable brain circuits that regulate appetite and food intake.”

The research was funded by the Medical Research Council and Wellcome.

Share Button