By Sujata Gupta Anne-Laure Le Cunff was something of a wild child. As a teenager, she repeatedly disabled the school fire alarm to sneak smoke breaks and helped launch a magazine filled with her teachers’ fictional love lives. Later, as a young adult studying neuroscience, Le Cunff would spend hours researching complex topics but struggled to complete simple administrative tasks. And she often obsessed over random projects before abruptly abandoning them. Then, three years ago, a colleague asked Le Cunff if she might have attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, a condition marked by distractibility, hyperactivity and impulsivity. Doctors confirmed her colleague’s suspicions. But fearing professional stigma, Le Cunff — by then by then a postdoctoral fellow in the ADHD Lab at King’s College London — kept her diagnosis secret until this year. Le Cunff knew all too well about the deficits associated with ADHD. But her research — and personal experience — hinted at an underappreciated upside. “I started seeing … breadcrumbs pointing at a potential association between curiosity and ADHD,” she says. People within the ADHD community have long recognized that the condition can be both harmful and helpful. Researchers, though, have largely focused on the harms. And those studying treatments tend to define success as a reduction in ADHD symptoms, with little regard to possible benefits. That’s starting to change. For instance, Norwegian researchers asked 50 individuals with ADHD to describe their positive experiences with the disorder as part of an effort to develop more holistic treatments. People cited their creativity, energy, adaptability, resilience and curiosity, researchers reported in BMJ Open in October 2023. © Society for Science & the Public 2000–2025.

Keyword: ADHD; Attention
Link ID: 29932 - Posted: 09.17.2025

By Kenneth Chang After decades of brain research, scientists still aren’t sure whether most people see the same way, more or less — especially with colors. Is what I call red also red for you? Or could my red be your blue? Or maybe neon pink? If it were possible to project what I see directly into your mind, would the view be the same, or would it instead resemble a crazy-hued Andy Warhol painting? “That’s an age-old question, isn’t it?” said Andreas Bartels, a professor of visual neuroscience at the University of Tübingen in Germany. But scientists do have a good understanding of which parts of the brain handle vision. They have even figured out where various vision-processing tasks are performed, like recognizing what is moving, identifying colors and adjusting to different lighting conditions. Amazingly, it is even possible to deduce what you’re seeing by looking at an M.R.I. scan showing which parts of your brain are lighting up. “That comes out of the world of science fiction, or one would think, right?” Dr. Bartels said. “It’s amazing that this is possible, but this always has happened in individual brains.” That is, researchers pulled off this sleight of science with individuals. They would first show a subject lying in the M.R.I. machine a series of images, mapping out how that person’s brain responded. After that initial training, the researchers could randomly show one of the images and, based on just the brain activity, make a good guess at what the image was. In new research, Dr. Bartels and Michael Bannert, a postdoctoral researcher in Dr. Bartels’ laboratory, used that technique to provide a partial answer to the question of whether most of us have a shared sense of colors. They put 15 people, all with standard color vision, in an M.R.I. machine. The volunteers viewed expanding concentric rings that were red, green or yellow. © 2025 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Vision; Consciousness
Link ID: 29925 - Posted: 09.10.2025

By Claudia López Lloreda The process of making a decision engages neurons across the entire brain, according to a new mouse dataset created by an international collaboration. “Many, many areas are recruited even for what are arguably rather simple decisions,” says Anne Churchland, professor of neurobiology at University of California, Los Angeles and one of the founding members of the collaboration, called the International Brain Laboratory (IBL). The canonical model suggests that the activity underlying vision-dependent decisions goes from the visual thalamus to the primary visual cortex and association areas, and then possibly to the frontal cortex, Churchland says. But the new findings suggest that “maybe there’s more parallel processing and less of a straightforward circuit than we thought.” Churchland and other scientists established the IBL in 2017 out of frustration with small-scale studies of decision-making that analyzed only one or two brain regions at a time. The IBL aimed to study how the brain integrates information and makes a decision at scale. “We came together as a large group with the realization that a large team effort could be transformative in these questions that had been kind of stymieing all of us,” Churchland says. After years of standardizing their methods and instrumentation across the 12 participating labs, the IBL team constructed a brain-wide map of neural activity in mice as they complete a decision-making task. That map, published today in Nature, reveals that the activity associated with choices and motor actions shows up widely across the brain. The same is true for the activity underlying decisions based on prior knowledge, according to a companion paper by the same team, also published today in Nature. © 2025 Simons Foundation

Keyword: Attention; Brain imaging
Link ID: 29918 - Posted: 09.06.2025

Ian Sample Science editor A three-minute brainwave test can detect memory problems linked to Alzheimer’s disease long before people are typically diagnosed, raising hopes that the approach could help identify those most likely to benefit from new drugs for the condition. In a small trial, the test flagged specific memory issues in people with mild cognitive impairment, highlighting who was at greater risk of developing Alzheimer’s. Trials in larger groups are under way. The Fastball test is a form of electroencephalogram (EEG) that uses small sensors on the scalp to record the brain’s electrical activity while people watch a stream of images on a screen. The test detects memory problems by analysing the brain’s automatic responses to images the person sees before the test. “This shows us that our new passive measure of memory, which we’ve built specifically for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis, can be sensitive to those individuals at very high risk but who are not yet diagnosed,” said Dr George Stothart, a cognitive neuroscientist at the University of Bath, where the test was developed. The trial, run with the University of Bristol, involved 54 healthy adults and 52 patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). People with MCI have problems with memory, thinking or language, but these are not usually severe enough to prevent them doing their daily activities. Before the test, volunteers were shown eight images and told to name them, but not specifically to remember them or look out for them in the test. The researchers then recorded the participants’ brain activity as they watched hundreds of images flash up on a screen. Each image appeared for a third of a second and every fifth picture was one of the eight they had seen before. © 2025 Guardian News & Media Limited

Keyword: Alzheimers; Attention
Link ID: 29914 - Posted: 09.03.2025

Hannah Devlin Science correspondent Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder medication is linked to significantly lower risk of suicidal behaviours, substance misuse, transport accidents and criminality, according to a study of the wider outcomes of treatment. The research, based on the medical records of nearly 150,000 people in Sweden, suggested that the drugs could have meaningful benefits beyond helping with the core symptoms of ADHD. Although the study was not a randomised trial – and so cannot definitively prove that medication caused improved outcomes – it adds to evidence of the substantial value of treatment. “We found that ADHD medication was associated with significantly reduced rates of first occurrences of suicidal behaviours, substance misuse, transport accidents and criminality,” said Prof Samuele Cortese, a child and adolescent psychiatrist and researcher at the University of Southampton. “Our results should inform the debate on the effects and safety of ADHD medications.” After accounting for factors including age, sex, education level, psychiatric diagnoses and medical history, ADHD medication was associated with reduced rates of a first occurrence of four of the five outcomes investigated: a 17% reduction for suicidal behaviour, 15% for substance misuse, 12% for transport accidents and 13% for criminality. It is well established that ADHD, thought to affect about 5% of children and 2.5% of adults worldwide, is linked to higher rates of mental health problems including suicide, substance misuse and accidental injuries. People with ADHD are also disproportionately represented within the criminal justice system. © 2025 Guardian News & Media Limited

Keyword: ADHD; Depression
Link ID: 29888 - Posted: 08.16.2025

Mariana Lenharo In late 2005, five months after a car accident, a 23-year-old woman lay unresponsive in a hospital bed. She had a severe brain injury and showed no sign of awareness. But when researchers scanning her brain asked her to imagine playing tennis, something striking happened: brain areas linked to movement lit up on her scan1. The experiment, conceived by neuroscientist Adrian Owen and his colleagues, suggested that the woman understood the instructions and decided to cooperate — despite appearing to be unresponsive. Owen, now at Western University in London, Canada, and his colleagues had introduced a new way to test for consciousness. Whereas some previous tests relied on observing general brain activity, this strategy zeroed in on activity directly linked to a researcher’s verbal command. The strategy has since been applied to hundreds of unresponsive people, revealing that many maintain an inner life and are aware of the world around them, at least to some extent. A 2024 study found that one in four people who were physically unresponsive had brain activity that suggested they could understand and follow commands to imagine specific activities, such as playing tennis or walking through a familiar space2. The tests rely on advanced neuroimaging techniques, so are mostly limited to research settings because of their high costs and the needed expertise. But since 2018, medical guidelines have started to recommend using these tests in clinical practice3. Since these methods emerged, scientists have been developing ways to probe layers of consciousness that are even more hidden. The stakes are high. Tens of thousands of people worldwide are currently in a persistent unresponsive state. Assessing their consciousness can guide important treatment decisions, such as whether to keep them on life support. Studies also suggest that hospitalized, unresponsive people with hidden signs of awareness are more likely to recover than are those without such signs (see, for example, ref. 4). © 2025 Springer Nature Limited

Keyword: Consciousness
Link ID: 29875 - Posted: 08.02.2025

By Tim Bayne One of the key scientific questions about consciousness concerns its distribution. We know that adult humans have the capacity for consciousness, but what about human neonates, bees or artificial intelligence (AI) systems? Who else—other than ourselves—belongs in the “consciousness club,” and how might we figure this out? It is tempting to assume, as many do, that we need a theory of consciousness to answer the distribution question. In the words of neuroscientists Giulio Tononi and Christof Koch, “we need not only more data but also a theory of consciousness—one that says what experience is and what type of physical systems can have it.” This is what philosopher Jonathan Birch has labeled the “theory-heavy” approach to the distribution problem. But there are serious issues with the theory-heavy approach. One is that we don’t have a consensus theory of consciousness. In a highly selective review that Anil Seth and I published in 2022, we listed no fewer than 22 neurobiological theories of consciousness. This overabundance of theories could reasonably be ignored if most agreed on fundamental questions in the field, such as which systems have the capacity for consciousness or the question of when consciousness first emerges in human development, but they don’t. A further problem with the theory-heavy approach is that in order to speak to the distribution problem, a theory cannot be restricted to consciousness as it occurs in adult humans, but must also apply to human infants, nonhuman animals, synthetic biological systems and AI. But because theories are largely based on data drawn from the study of adult humans, there will inevitably be a gap between the evidence base of a general theory and its scope. Why should we think that a theory developed in response to adult humans applies to different kinds of systems? © 2025 Simons Foundation

Keyword: Consciousness
Link ID: 29874 - Posted: 08.02.2025

Katie Kavanagh How does your brain wake up from sleep? A study of more than 1,000 arousals from slumber has revealed precisely how the brain bestirs itself during the transition to alertness1 — a finding that might help to manage sleep inertia, the grogginess that many people feel when hitting the snooze button. Recordings of people as they woke from the dream-laden phase of sleep showed that the first brain regions to rouse are those associated with executive function and decision-making, located at the front of the head. A wave of wakefulness then spreads to the back, ending with an area associated with vision. The findings could change how we think of waking up, says Rachel Rowe, a neuroscientist at the University of Colorado Boulder, who was not involved with the work. The results emphasize that “falling asleep and waking up aren’t simply reverse processes, but really waking up is this ordered wave of activation that moves from the front to the back of the brain”, whereas falling asleep seems to be less linear and more gradual. The study was published today in Current Biology1. The wide-awake brain shows a characteristic pattern of electrical activity, recorded by sensors on the scalp — it looks like a jagged line made up of small, tightly packed peaks and valleys. Although the pattern looks similar during rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, when vivid dreams occur, this stage features a lack of skeletal-muscle movement. The peaks are taller during most stages of non-REM sleep, which ranges from light to very deep slumber. Scientists already knew that the ‘awakened’ signature occurs at different times in different brain regions, but common imaging techniques did not allow these patterns to be explored on a precise timescale. © 2025 Springer Nature Limited

Keyword: Sleep; Attention
Link ID: 29864 - Posted: 07.19.2025

By Dan Falk I’ve been fascinated by time for as long as I can remember. In my undergraduate physics classes, time always lurked in the background—it was the “t” that the professors sprinkled into their equations—but it was never quite clear what time actually was. Years later, I wrote a book about time, but even with chapters on Newton and Einstein, and a solid dose of philosophy, something was missing. Nautilus Members enjoy an ad-free experience. Log in or Join now . For starters, we know clocks and watches work, but how do we tell time? If you’re watching network TV and a commercial break begins, you know you have time to use the bathroom or perhaps make a sandwich—in fact, you can probably arrange to be back in front of the TV just as the ads are ending. What makes you so good at judging these intervals of time? I figured that Dean Buonomano, being a neuroscientist, might have some of the answers. Buonomano is known for developing the idea that the key mechanism is not a single clock-like structure in the brain but rather networks of neurons working together, known as “neural dynamics.” But as Buonomano sees it, the brain does much more than keep track of time; in fact, it might be said to create it. It’s thanks to our brains that we feel time’s “flow,” even though nothing in physics points to such a flow out there in the world. Perhaps even more crucially, the brain allows us to engage in “mental time travel”—the ability to recall past events and imagine future happenings. This capability, he argues, was essential in shaping humanity’s path from the African savannah to today’s globe-spanning civilization. © 2025 NautilusNext Inc.,

Keyword: Attention
Link ID: 29851 - Posted: 07.12.2025

Humberto Basilio Mindia Wichert has taken part in plenty of brain experiments as a cognitive-neuroscience graduate student at the Humboldt University of Berlin, but none was as challenging as one he faced in 2023. Inside a stark white room, he stared at a flickering screen that flashed a different image every 10 seconds. His task was to determine what familiar object appeared in each image. But, at least at first, the images looked like nothing more than a jumble of black and white patches. “I’m very competitive with myself,” says Wichert. “I felt really frustrated.” Cognitive neuroscientist Maxi Becker, now at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, chose the images in an attempt to spark a fleeting mental phenomenon that people often experience but can’t control or fully explain. Study participants puzzling out what is depicted in the images — known as Mooney images, after a researcher who published a set of them in the 1950s1 — can’t rely on analytical thinking. Instead, the answer must arrive all at once, like a flash of lightning in the dark (take Nature’s Mooney-images quiz below). Becker asked some of the participants to view the images while lying inside a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanner, so she could track tiny shifts in blood flow corresponding to brain activity. She hoped to determine which regions produce ‘aha!’ moments. Over the past two decades, scientists studying such moments of insight — also known as eureka moments — have used the tools of neuroscience to reveal which regions of the brain are active and how they interact when discovery strikes. They’ve refined the puzzles they use to trigger insight and the measurements they take, in an attempt to turn a self-reported, subjective experience into something that can be documented and rigorously studied. This foundational work has led to new questions, including why some people are more insightful than others, what mental states could encourage insight and how insight might boost memory. © 2025 Springer Nature Limited

Keyword: Attention; Learning & Memory
Link ID: 29844 - Posted: 06.28.2025

By Katrina Miller Take a look at this video of a waiting room. Do you see anything strange? Perhaps you saw the rug disappear, or the couch pillows transform, or a few ceiling panels evaporate. Or maybe you didn’t. In fact, dozens of objects change in this video, which won second place in the Best Illusion of the Year Contest in 2021. Voting for the latest version of the contest opened on Monday. Illusions “are the phenomena in which the physical reality is divorced from perception,” said Stephen Macknik, a neuroscientist at SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University in Brooklyn. He runs the contest with his colleague and spouse, Susana Martinez-Conde. By studying the disconnect between perception and reality, scientists can better understand which brain regions and processes help us interpret the world around us. The illusion above highlights change blindness, the brain’s failure to notice shifts in the environment, especially when they occur gradually. To some extent, all sensory experience is illusory, Dr. Martinez-Conde asserts. “We are always constructing a simulation of reality,” she said. “We don’t have direct access to that reality. We live inside the simulation that we create.” She and Dr. Macknik have run the illusion contest since 2005. What began as a public outreach event at an academic conference has since blossomed into an annual competition open to anyone in the world. They initially worried that people would run out of illusions to submit. “But that actually never happened,” Dr. Martinez-Conde said. “What ended up happening instead is that people started developing illusions, actually, with an eye to competing in the contest.” © 2025 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Vision; Attention
Link ID: 29843 - Posted: 06.28.2025

Myrian Wares for Quanta Magazine You’ve just gotten home from an exhausting day. All you want to do is put your feet up and zone out to whatever is on television. Though the inactivity may feel like a well-earned rest, your brain is not just chilling. In fact, it is using nearly as much energy as it did during your stressful activity, according to recent research. Sharna Jamadar (opens a new tab), a neuroscientist at Monash University in Australia, and her colleagues reviewed research from her lab and others around the world to estimate the metabolic cost of cognition (opens a new tab) — that is, how much energy it takes to power the human brain. Surprisingly, they concluded that effortful, goal-directed tasks use only 5% more energy than restful brain activity. In other words, we use our brain just a small fraction more when engaging in focused cognition than when the engine is idling. It often feels as though we allocate our mental energy through strenuous attention and focus. But the new research builds on a growing understanding that the majority of the brain’s function goes to maintenance. While many neuroscientists have historically focused on active, outward cognition, such as attention, problem-solving, working memory and decision-making, it’s becoming clear that beneath the surface, our background processing is a hidden hive of activity. Our brains regulate our bodies’ key physiological systems, allocating resources where they’re needed as we consciously and subconsciously react to the demands of our ever-changing environments. “There is this sentiment that the brain is for thinking,” said Jordan Theriault (opens a new tab), a neuroscientist at Northeastern University who was not involved in the new analysis. “Where, metabolically, [the brain’s function is] mostly spent on managing your body, regulating and coordinating between organs, managing this expensive system which it’s attached to, and navigating a complicated external environment.” © 2025 Simons Foundation.

Keyword: Attention; Brain imaging
Link ID: 29825 - Posted: 06.07.2025

Nicola Davis Science correspondent Whether it is doing sums or working out what to text your new date, some tasks produce a furrowed brow. Now scientists say they have come up with a device to monitor such effort: an electronic tattoo, stuck to the forehead. The researchers say the device could prove valuable among pilots, healthcare workers and other professions where managing mental workload is crucial to preventing catastrophes. “For this kind of high-demand and high-stake scenario, eventually we hope to have this real-time mental workload decoder that can give people some warning and alert so that they can self-adjust, or they can ask AI or a co-worker to offload some of their work,” said Dr Nanshu Lu, an author of the research from the University of Texas at Austin, adding the device may not only help workers avoid serious mistakes but also protect their health. Writing in the journal Device, Lu and colleagues describe how using questionnaires to investigate mental workload is problematic, not least as people are poor at objectively judging cognitive effort and they are usually conducted after a task. Meanwhile, existing electroencephalography (EEG) and electrooculography (EOG) devices, that can be used to assess mental workload by measuring brain waves and eye movements respectively, are wired, bulky and prone to erroneous measurements arising from movements. By contrast, the “e-tattoo” is a lightweight, flexible, wireless device. © 2025 Guardian News & Media Limited

Keyword: Attention; Stress
Link ID: 29815 - Posted: 05.31.2025

By Laura Dattaro One of Clay Holroyd’s mostly highly cited papers is a null result. In 2005, he tested a theory he had proposed about a brain response to unexpected rewards and disappointments, but the findings—now cited more than 600 times—didn’t match his expectations, he says. In the years since, other researchers have run similar tests, many of which contradicted Holroyd’s results. But in 2021, EEGManyLabs announced that it would redo Holroyd’s original experiment across 13 labs. In their replication effort, the researchers increased the sample size from 17 to 370 people. The results—the first from EEGManyLabs—published in January in Cortex, failed to replicate the null result, effectively confirming Holroyd’s theory. “Fundamentally, I thought that maybe it was a power issue,” says Holroyd, a cognitive neuroscientist at Ghent University. “Now this replication paper quite nicely showed that it was a power issue.” The two-decade tale demonstrates why pursuing null findings and replications—the focus of this newsletter—is so important. Holroyd’s 2002 theory proposed that previously observed changes in dopamine associated with unexpectedly positive or negative results cause neural responses that can be measured with EEG. The more surprising a result, he posited, the larger the response. To test the idea, Holroyd and his colleagues used a gambling-like task in which they told participants the odds of correctly identifying which of four choices would lead to a 10-cent reward. In reality, the reward was random. When participants received no reward, their neural reaction to the negative result was equally strong regardless of which odds they had been given, contradicting the theory. © 2025 Simons Foundation

Keyword: Attention; Learning & Memory
Link ID: 29814 - Posted: 05.31.2025

By Chris Berdik Yale psychiatrist Albert Powers didn’t know what to expect as he strolled among the tarot card readers, astrologers, and crystal vendors at the psychic fair held at the Best Western outside North Haven, Connecticut, on a cloudy November Saturday in 2014. At his clinic, Powers worked with young people, mostly teenagers, who had started hearing voices. His patients and their families were worried that the voices might be precursors of psychosis such as schizophrenia. Sometimes, they were. But Powers also knew that lots of people occasionally heard voices — between 7 and 15 percent of the population, according to studies — and about 75 percent of those people lived otherwise normal lives. WHAT I LEFT OUT is a recurring feature in which book authors are invited to share anecdotes and narratives that, for whatever reason, did not make it into their final manuscripts. In this installment, journalist Chris Berdik shares a story that didn’t make it into his recent book “Clamor: How Noise Took Over the World and How We Can Take It Back” (Norton, 272 pages). He wanted to study high-functioning voice hearers, and a gathering of psychics seemed like a good place to find them. If clinicians could better distinguish voice hearers who develop psychosis and lose touch with reality from those who don’t, he thought, then maybe he could help steer more patients down a healthier path. Powers introduced himself to the fair’s organizer and explained the sort of person he hoped to find. The organizer directed him to a nearby table where he met a smiley, middle-aged medium. The woman had a day job as an emergency services dispatcher, but the voices made frequent appearances in her daily life, and her side hustle was communicating with the dead.

Keyword: Schizophrenia; Attention
Link ID: 29809 - Posted: 05.28.2025

Dobromir Rahnev Is it possible to upload the consciousness of your mind into a computer? – Amreen, age 15, New Delhi, India The concept, cool yet maybe a little creepy, is known as mind uploading. Think of it as a way to create a copy of your brain, a transmission of your mind and consciousness into a computer. There you would live digitally, perhaps forever. You’d have an awareness of yourself, you’d retain your memories and still feel like you. But you wouldn’t have a body. Within that simulated environment, you could do anything you do in real life – eating, driving a car, playing sports. You could also do things impossible in the real world, like walking through walls, flying like a bird or traveling to other planets. The only limit is what science can realistically simulate. Doable? Theoretically, mind uploading should be possible. Still, you may wonder how it could happen. After all, researchers have barely begun to understand the brain. Yet science has a track record of turning theoretical possibilities into reality. Just because a concept seems terribly, unimaginably difficult doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Consider that science took humankind to the Moon, sequenced the human genome and eradicated smallpox. Those things too were once considered unlikely. As a brain scientist who studies perception, I fully expect mind uploading to one day be a reality. But as of today, we’re nowhere close. Learn about the latest, most interesting health and science research © 2010–2025, The Conversation US, Inc.

Keyword: Consciousness; Robotics
Link ID: 29803 - Posted: 05.24.2025

By Sara Novak Just a few weeks after they hatch, baby male zebra finches begin to babble, spending much of the day testing their vocal chords. Dad helps out, singing to his hatchlings during feedings, so that the babies can internalize his tune, the same mating refrain shared by all male zebra finches. Soon, these tiny Australian birds begin to rehearse the song itself, repeating it up to 10,000 times a day, without any clear reward other than their increasing perfection of the melody. The baby birds’ painstaking devotion to mastering their song led Duke University neuroscientist Richard Mooney and his Duke colleague John Pearson to wonder whether the birds could help us better understand the nature of self-directed learning. In humans, language and musical expression are thought to be self-directed—spontaneous, adaptive and intrinsically reinforced. In a study recently published in Nature, the scientists tracked the brain signals and levels of dopamine, a neurotransmitter involved in reward and movement, in the brains of five male baby Zebra finches while they were singing. They also measured song quality for each rendition the birds sang, in terms of both pitch and vigor, as well as the quality of song performance relative to the bird’s age. What they found is that dopamine levels in the baby birds’ brains closely matched the birds’ performance of the song, suggesting it plays a central role in the learning process. Scientists have long known that learning that is powered by external rewards, such as grades, praise or sugary treats, is driven by dopamine—which is thought to chart the differences between expected and experienced rewards. But while they have suspected that self-directed learning is likewise guided by dopamine, it had been difficult to test that hypothesis until now. © 2025 NautilusNext Inc.,

Keyword: Attention; Sexual Behavior
Link ID: 29800 - Posted: 05.24.2025

By Gina Kolata Dr. Geoffrey Manley, a neurosurgeon at the University of California, San Francisco, wants the medical establishment to change the way it deals with brain injuries. His work is motivated in part by what happened to a police officer he treated in 2002, just after completing his medical training. The man arrived at the emergency room unconscious, in a coma. He had been in a terrible car crash while pursuing a criminal. Two days later, Dr. Manley’s mentor said it was time to tell the man’s family there was no hope. His life support should be withdrawn. He should be allowed to die. Dr. Manley resisted. The patient’s brain oxygen levels were encouraging. Seven days later the policeman was still in a coma. Dr. Manley’s mentor again pressed him to talk to the man’s family about withdrawing life support. Again, Dr. Manley resisted. Ten days after the accident, the policeman began to come out of his coma. Three years later he was back at work and was named San Francisco Police Officer of the Month. In 2010, he was Police Officer of the Year “That case, and another like it,” Dr. Manley said, “changed my practice.” But little has changed in the world of traumatic brain injuries since Dr. Manley’s patient woke up. Assessments of who will recover and how severely patients are injured are pretty much the same, which results in patients being told they “just” have a concussion, who then have trouble getting care for recurring symptoms like memory lapses or headaches. And it results in some patients in the position of that policemen, who have their life support withdrawn when they might have recovered. Now, though, Dr. Manley and 93 others from 14 countries are proposing a new way to evaluate patients. They published their classification system Tuesday in the journal Lancet Neurology. © 2025 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Brain Injury/Concussion; Consciousness
Link ID: 29798 - Posted: 05.21.2025

By Mac Shine The brain is an endlessly dynamic machine; it can wake you from sleep, focus your attention, spark a memory or help you slam on the brakes while driving. But what makes this precision possible? How can the brain dial up just the right amount of alertness or inhibition, and only when it’s needed? A new study, out today in Nature, may have found part of the answer in an unlikely place: a cluster of small, largely overlooked inhibitory neurons nestled next to one of the brain’s most powerful arousal hubs, the locus coeruleus (LC). Led by Michael R. Bruchas, a neuroscientist at the University of Washington, the study is a tour de force in neural sleuthing, employing methods ranging from viral tracing and electrophysiology to imaging and behavior to map an elusive cell population known as the pericoeruleus. In a world where we’re constantly being pinged, alerted, nudged and notified, the ability to not react—to gate our arousal and filter our responses—may be one of the brain’s most underappreciated superpowers. Here I discuss the results with Bruchas—and what he and his team found is remarkable. Far from being a passive neighbor to the LC, the pericoeruleus appears to act as a kind of micromanager of arousal, selectively inhibiting different subgroups of LC neurons depending on the behavioral context. If the LC is like a floodlight that bathes the brain in noradrenaline—raising alertness, sharpening perception and mobilizing attention—then the pericoeruleus may be the finely-tuned lens that directs where and when that light shines. It’s a subtle but powerful form of control, and one that challenges traditional views of how the LC operates. For decades, the LC has been thought of primarily as a global broadcaster: When it fires, it releases norepinephrine widely across the cortex, preparing the brain for action. But this new work is the latest in a recent line of inquiry that has challenged this simplicity—suggesting that the system is more complex and nuanced than previously thought. “We’re beginning to see that the locus coeruleus doesn’t just flood the brain with arousal – it targets specific outputs, and the pericoeruleus plays a key role in gating that process,” said Li Li, one of the co-first authors of the paper and a former postdoctoral researcher in Bruchas’ lab, now assistant professor of anesthesiology at Seattle Children’s Hospital. © 2025 Simons Foundation

Keyword: Attention
Link ID: 29787 - Posted: 05.14.2025

By Asher Elbein True friends, most people would agree, are there for each other. Sometimes that means offering emotional support. Sometimes it means helping each other move. And if you’re a superb starling — a flamboyant, chattering songbird native to the African savanna — it means stuffing bugs down the throats of your friends’ offspring, secure in the expectation that they’ll eventually do the same for yours. Scientists have long known that social animals usually put blood relatives first. But for a study published Wednesday in the journal Nature, researchers crunched two decades of field data to show that unrelated members of a superb starling flock often help each other raise chicks, trading assistance to one another over years in a behavior that was not previously known. “We think that these reciprocal helping relationships are a way to build ties,” said Dustin Rubenstein, a professor of ecology at Columbia University and an author of the paper. Superb starlings are distinctive among animals that breed cooperatively, said Alexis Earl, a biologist at Cornell University and an author of the paper. Their flocks mix family groups with immigrants from other groups. New parents rely on up to 16 helpers, which bring chicks extra food and help run off predators. Dr. Rubenstein’s lab has maintained a 20-year field study of the species that included 40 breeding seasons. It has recorded thousands of interactions between hundreds of the chattering birds and collected DNA to examine their genetic relationships. When Dr. Earl, then a graduate student in the lab, began crunching the data, she and her colleagues weren’t shocked to see that birds largely helped relatives, the way an aunt or uncle may swoop in to babysit and give parents a break. © 2025 The New York Times Company

Keyword: Evolution; Emotions
Link ID: 29780 - Posted: 05.10.2025