Science

science already knows what happens to your brain

by

after one night intense partya phrase that can become common is “yesterday I drank so much that I have blackouts.” For years, popular culture has treated these episodes as the fact that alcohol is a kind of eraser of memories in our brain, but the reality is very different: It’s not that memories are erased, it’s that they never existed.. The notice. Our parents didn’t say it anymore: drinking a lot of alcohol and smoking controversial substances is something that can fry the brain. And they were partly right. different experts point out in connection with research and meta-analysis on alcohol consumption and brain health, which shed light on what exactly happens in our heads when we go too far. A blackout. What we usually call a ‘gap’, memory loss the morning after a drunken night, is technically anterograde amnesia, or blackout. During a blackout a person can continue talking, walking (not always straight) and even having apparently normal conversations, but your brain has stopped transferring information from short-term memory to long-term memory. The person responsible for all this It is in the hippocampus itselfa region of the brain that acts as the logistics center for our memories. They arrive here to be stored in long-term memory, which is what interests us to remember what we did the next morning. A chemical interference. When the blood alcohol concentration begins to rise rapidly, quite significant chemical interference occurs. In this case modulates NMDA and GABA receptors which alters the communication between neurons and interrupts the ‘Long-term empowerment‘ (LTP). The latter is the physical process by which neural connections are strengthened to consolidate a memory. In short: during a heavy drunk, the hippocampus is still on to store memories, but the ‘save button’ is completely switched off. Therefore, the next day no matter how hard we try: there is nothing to recover because nothing was recorded in the hippocampus. They fry the brain. If we recover the idea that our grandmothers and parents transmitted to us about the effect of alcohol on the brain, the reality is that neuroimaging studies show As in chronic users there is significant hippocampal atrophy. This does not mean that memories become like water, but rather that the volume of brain matter is decreased. As brain tissue shrinks due to neuronal and connectivity loss, the empty space is occupied by cerebrospinal fluid. And this can give us the myth that the memory turns into water or black spots appear on the imaging tests when they pass. The effect on young people. In this population it has traditionally been said that they can handle alcohol much better and with several drinks they continue to be in top shape. But scientifically a great paradox occurs: the adolescent and young brain is extremely plastic, which makes it much more vulnerable to external aggressions. This is why binge drinking in developing brains not only causes blackouts more easily, but can also generate persistent changes in brain structure. Science has shown in this case that even moderate consumption (more than 14 units per week) is linked to greater hippocampal atrophy and worse long-term cognitive performance. He doesn’t forget who he is. Excessive alcohol does not cause us to suddenly forget our names, something that would fall squarely into the realm of serious dementia. But what is clear is that the blackouts repeated are an obvious risk marker. Not only because of silent structural damage, but because of behavioral vulnerability: a person who is not creating memories is a person who has lost the ability to learn from the consequences of their actions in real time, drastically increasing the risk of accidents and dangerous decisions. Images | Nate Holland Alyona Yankovska In Xataka | Forgetting things is not a bug, it is a feature of your brain: how not remembering things makes us think better

Science is on the verge of achieving something that would end our human experience as we knew it: suffering

by

The Holy Grail of modern pain medicine has always been the same: achieving the analgesic power of morphine without its side effects such as respiratory depression, addiction or tolerance. And although until now it seemed impossible, one study has suggested that the key is not to ‘numb’ the body, but to ‘attack’ the way the brain processes suffering. The study. A team led by Gregory Corder of the University of Pennsylvania has developed a gene therapy that acts as a “switch” for chronic pain. What is revolutionary is not just that it works, but how it does it: it eliminates the emotional distress of pain without erasing the protective physical sensation, keeping the patient safe but free from suffering. The problem is not feeling, it is suffering. Pain has two very clear components: one that is sensory, which is necessary to human survival (as it is to withdraw the hand when we get burned), and the other is the affective or the emotional. This second is what generates the feeling of constant suffering that can destroy the quality of life of a patient who lives with chronic pain or neuropathic pain that affects the nervous system, such as the hated ‘sciatica’. According to the study, titled, the researchers identified a specific group of neurons in the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). These neurons are sensitive to opioids and are responsible for encoding the “unpleasantness” of pain, and this is where they have tried to attack, but surgically and without pills. The tool used. The scientists used a tool known as DREADD (Designer Receptors Activated Exclusively by Designer Drugs). To do this, through a viral vector, they inserted synthetic receptors specifically into the cingulate cortex neurons of mice with neuropathic pain. From there, they administered a drug that has no effect called DCZ. This compound, despite not doing anything to the body in mice, acts as a key that “turns off” the neurons that have been modified in their brain in a very specific way. The result. The chronic pain behavior disappeared and they began to act like completely healthy animals. However, when exposed to an acute thermal stimulus, they were able to withdraw their paw. In this way, his survival system was working, but his anxiety system was completely turned off. The AI ​​that reads pain. One of the biggest challenges in pain research is that mice can’t tell us “it hurts a 7 out of 10,” which is why scientists classically relied on biased tests. But this is over thanks to an AI called LUPEwhich is a Deep Learning platform and has the ability to analyze hundreds of hours of video of mice moving freely. But what is relevant here is that it has the ability to detect spontaneous micro-behaviors associated with pain that the human eye would miss. Thanks to LUPE, the team was able to objectively confirm that the pain relief was real and not an error of human interpretation. The opioid crisis. The most promising thing about the study published a few days ago is the security profile. Unlike morphine, which generates tolerance, that is, more and more doses of medication are needed to have an effect, and addiction, this gene therapy is completely the opposite. In this way, it does not generate addiction, meaning that the mouse does not have to seek a higher dose to maintain that sensation and the effect remained stable. The arrival of humans. Although the success in mice is resounding, the jump to humans is complex, since we are really different and requires many more safety studies. However, the path is set. The team is already planning the next steps towards clinical trials, although it is something that may take many years to become a reality in our daily lives. Images | Sasun Bughdaryan In Xataka | We have accepted that sport is “medicine” for the body. Now science is discovering its side effects

We have accepted that sport is “medicine” for the body. Now science is discovering its side effects

by

Physical exercise can be prescribed as a drug in doctors’ offices, even though it is not packaged in a simple pill that we take. This is because the evidence behind it has made it more than clear that playing sports can prevent a large number of chronic diseasesI know even have a very good old age. But behind all this, too There is a negative part behind doing physical exercise. Its side effects. If we accept exercise as a drugwe must also accept that every drug has a leaflet, specific doses and of course some adverse effects. That is why as a society we have the problem of having begun to sell the fact of “exercising” in a generic way, ignoring the fine print that this task has, as recognized by the Spanish Heart Foundation itself. And it has a very simple solution: personalizing physical exercises per patient. The problem of metaphor. The slogan “exercise as medicine” is undoubtedly an excellent marketing campaign within the world of public health, but for science there are several important flaws. As different scientific studies point out, exercise does not act like a classic drugsince it does not have a predictable response in a patient as if it occurs as a pill. This forces us to always think that the effect can be very different for each person. In this way, by calling exercise a drug we can make invisible the diversity of individual responses. And there is no universal “squat pill”, since doing this exercise in a specific person can be very beneficial, but in another it can be be the origin of a pathology due to overload. And all because we throw ourselves into exercise without planning how to do it, since we find it very easy to pick up some weights and start building biceps. The damage numbers. We often hear that it is a great danger to stay sitting on the couch, and it is true because they are many diseases related to a sedentary lifestyle. But according to different studies done in the United States, people who meet or exceed the recommendations for moderate or vigorous exercise They have a 44 to 66% chance of developing musculoskeletal injuries. than subjects who remain inactive. In addition to this, although cardiovascular health improves with physical exercise because the heart reduces its heart rate, for example, the “maintenance cost” of the physical body increases dramatically with the amount of exercise done. A question of biases. Without a doubt, this is one of the most critical points that scientific literature reveals regarding the lack of transparency in clinical trials related to exercise. This is something that was seen in an analysis that included 103 trials on knee osteoarthritis, where it was found that 6% of the participants suffered direct damage from this exercise. But the most worrying thing is not the number, but the low information: many patients who abandon studies due to pain or discomfort are not classified as “victims of adverse effects”, which generates an artificially high perception of safety. This problem is repeated in oncology, where the motto “exercise is medicine in oncology” live with non-trivial adverse events which have forced us to propose much stricter monitoring systems to protect patients. We pass each other sometimes. The underlying problem in this case is undoubtedly recommending intensive or complex programs without a clear benefit/harm relationship compared to an alternative that is much simpler. But, on the other hand, we also fall into the phenomenon of “quaternary prevention” making medicine focus on avoiding harm from its own interventions. by overmedicalizingnullifying the benefits of physical exercise. The necessary consensus. In this way, the authors who popularized the concept of ‘exercise as medicine’ explicitly recognize that exercise is not without risks. Even the WHO itself In its guides it maintains that inactivity is the greatest population risk, but there is fine print that must be taken into account: Exercise should be ‘prescribed’ starting with a low intensity, and not opt ​​for maximum intensity from the first day. This causes a person who has spent years on a couch to begin to carry a lot of weight, for example, and end up injured. Pain is not always bad, and the patient must be educated so that they see that fatigue from the gym does not have to be medicalized with pills. Patients with cardiac risk must be evaluated to prevent uncontrolled exercise from aggravating the situation. Be supervised. The conclusion in this case is that exercise is obviously necessary and without a doubt it is one of the practices that can prevent the appearance of many diseases. But we always have to be aware of what we do. Loading the body with a large amount of exercise from minute 0 can cause significant injuries or the aggravation of diseases that are already present. In this way, the possibility of being in a gym with trainers who can advise on the progression curve that should be followed can be an interesting idea to have the benefit of exercise without the consequences of doing it aggressively. Images | Jonathan Borba In Xataka | Doing cardio or strength training: for science there is no debate about which is the ideal exercise after 50

Science has investigated why we bite our nails or leave everything until the last minute: “controlled explosions”

by

Biting our nails until it hurts, bingeing on junk food after a stressful day either open TikTok just when we have to start workingit is not an irritating habit that we would like to erase from our daily lives. But the reality is that science is beginning to see these behaviors in a radically different way: as a protection strategy for the organism. The brain seeks survival. As pointed out by different experts such as clinical psychologist Charlie Heriot-Maitland, author of Controlled Explosions in Mental Healthour brain prefers to inflict controlled “microdamage” on itself rather than face a greater and unpredictable threat. And the premise from which affective neuroscience and evolutionary psychology start is forceful: our brain is not programmed for us to be happy, but it is programmed to seek survival. Which is precisely what we did thousands of years ago when we tried to hunt or flee from predators. Systems that are still very present in our genetics. A hypersensitive system. This threat detection system is hypersensitive today. In the modern world we do not have to flee from a predator, but criticism from the boss or the fear of failing in a project activates the same alarms that a predator in the savanna activated in our ancestors. And faced with this unbearable stress, the brain looks for an escape route that acts as a “safety valve.” This is what Heriot-Maitland calls “controlled explosions.” Nail biting. Why can something as absurd as biting your nails or picking your skin be “protective”? The key is predictability. And in a chaotic world and an emotional, abstract and difficult to manage threat, cause us a little physical damage (like biting a cuticle), causes the brain to divert attention towards a specific, real stimulus and, above all, under our control. In this way it works as a “costly signal”, since we prefer a small and known damage to cushion emotional pain that we perceive as potentially devastating. Procrastinating is not laziness. scientific literature speaks in this sense of the self-handicapping (self-limitation), which suggests that we put obstacles on ourselves to protect our self-esteem. This way, if you stop studying for an exam and fail, you can tell yourself, “I failed because I didn’t study.” It’s a small damage to your ego. However, if you study to the maximum and fail, the conclusion is much more painful: “I failed because I am not capable.” The brain prefers the narrative of lack of effort (microdamage) rather than facing the threat of incompetence that poses greater emotional damage to anyone. It is not exclusive to us. In nature, there are numerous social insects that resort to defensive self-immolation in order to save their colony, as we already saw. In our case, the mechanism is something like this: we sacrifice our current well-being, such as physical health, to reduce a perceived long-term risk. The problem is that this system is designed for life or death situations, not to manage the chronic stress of the 21st century. In this way, what began as a useful defense ends up becoming a self-defeating pattern that generates more anxiety than it relieves. How to avoid it. If we understand that modern nails or procrastination are defense mechanisms, the solution changes completely. In this way, modern therapies, such as Compassion Focused Therapy, They propose that the first step It is not fighting against the habit, but understanding the reason for its existence. The most important thing in this case is not to punish yourself, since self-criticism is perceived by the brain as other threatens more, which reinforces the need to resort to the destructive habit to calm down. In this way, if we generate security, the brain will not have the need to cause these “controlled explosions.” Images | Sander Sammy Tim Gouw In Xataka | Procrastination is one of the great temptations of the mind. There are techniques to avoid it, according to science

Science reveals that the weight returns four times faster than with a diet

by

The era of “miracle” drugs to treat obesity is entering a phase of crude scientific maturity, thanks to the time that has passed since its launch on the market. In this way, despite the years with big headlines pointing to great weight losses with Ozempic, science is now able to provide more answers to the key question What we should ask ourselves: what happens when we stop pricking ourselves? The problem. When a drug is newly released to the market, long term effects It is something that is not known exactly, since patients need to be taking them long enough to see the effects they cause. And above all the effect that exists when the drug is removed from the body. To answer this with Ozempic we have a study led by the University of Oxford which is not minor at all, since it has analyzed more than 9,300 adults in 37 different clinical trials. And the conclusion they have been able to draw is quite clear: patients regain weight when they stop treatment at a rate of 0.4 kg per month. The comparison. At first glance, this figure seems really low, but if we compare it with other methods to lose weight, we see that the magnitude of the problem is not minuscule. The study itself indicates that in behavioral programs, such as a diet and an increase in physical activity, the effect after its withdrawal is an increase of 0.1 kg per month. This way, the rebound effect of slimming drugs It causes you to return to your initial weight in approximately a year and a half, while a change in eating and sports behavior takes around four years. New generation drugs. But this is a simple average between the different medications on the market. This implies that within GLP-1 agonists we can see that the most powerful drugs also have a much greater rebound effect. For example, in the case of Wegovy or Mounjaro, where the initial loss was 14.7kg, the rebound was seen to shoot up to 0.8kg per month. An effect that tells us that the body tries to recover lost ground at twice the speed of previous generation drugs. Cardiovascular health. Beyond the aesthetic, science pointed out that these drugs had the ability to reduce the risk of heart attacks and improve the metabolic health. But it seems these effects are completely temporary. Specifically, the study has seen that approximately a year and a half after stopping the medication, the majority of cardiometabolic markers return to their levels before starting treatment. For example, blood pressure increases, diabetes markers reverse their improvement, and total cholesterol also returns to its risk levels. Why the rebound is so fast. The answer to this could lie in our own biology. Science believes that this effect is due to the fact that by injecting massive doses of GLP-1 agonists (a hormone that is produced in small quantities when we eat) we could be destabilizing our own cell receptors. Or we would even be blocking our body’s natural production of this hormone that gives us satiety. That is why when withdrawing the drugthe system does not have the ability to produce this hormone again in the same way as before (as if it had to turn the system back on) and that is why the body’s satiety system goes deaf. The result? Well, logically, the appetite returns with great intensity, causing the patient to eat much more food, since they are not satiated and in this way the weight increases again. The myth of the magic bullet. There are hardly any miracles in medicine, even though we say that these drugs are. And the reality is that these drugs are not the definitive solution for obesity, since real data indicates that the majority of patients stop treatment after 12 months due to its high cost, the fatigue of injecting or side effects. But in addition, there is no awareness that this treatment is a simple aid to self-regulation, but that logically it must be accompanied by a dietary change and physical activity that must be continued once the treatment is finished. If not, we can be sure that the injections will be of absolutely no use. A paradigm shift. This meta-analysis marks a turning point. Science tells us that GLP-1 is extraordinarily effective, but it is not a cure. If we treat them as a six-month “crash plan”, we are condemning the patient to a more aggressive yo-yo effect than any miracle diet of the past. The solution, according to Qi Sun and the Oxford researchers, is not only in the syringe, but in public policy: taxes on ultra-processed foods, aid in the purchase of fruits and vegetables, and urban planning that encourages exercise. Without a change in environment, the drug is just a temporary truce in a war the body is programmed to win. Images | David Trinks Towfiqu barbhuiya In Xataka | If you want a “miracle” weight loss drug, you no longer turn to Ozempic: the competition is beginning to surpass it

Washing chicken “to clean it” sounds hygienic. Science says it’s a bad idea (and very dangerous)

by

“Chicken should never be washed.” This time, it was Higinio Gómez (one of the most renowned gourmet polleros in Spain) who reopened the debate in an interview in El País. But the issue is recurrent and inexplicably generates very opposing positions: from those convinced that washing chicken is a way to “remove germs or dirt” to those who, rightly, say that it is a terrible idea. But, as Gómez himself would say in his establishment, ‘let’s go in parts’. What’s wrong with the chicken? Let’s start with the most basic: nothing happens to the chicken. The risk linked to ‘washing chicken’ has nothing to do with the chicken itself. It has to do with cross contamination: the bacteria from raw chicken (which would be eliminated during preparation) transfer to the hands, sink, countertops, and various utensils. Often, in fact, when washing chicken we end up putting those bacteria in foods that are ready to eat. The EFSA estimated in billions of euros annually the impact of pollution Campylobacter (a bug especially linked to chicken). Sometimes it’s because you cook it wrong, yes; but often it is due to handling raw food without any type of rigor. What the evidence says. In a now classic observational study by the North American USDA, was discovered that, in fact, what I just explained was what really happened: among those who washed the chicken, 60% contaminated the sink and up to 26% ended up transferring bacteria to the salad. And, in fact, we already have experimental studies that explain the mechanism: beyond the obvious, “washing generates droplets capable of transferring bacteria and increasing environmental pollution” And why do people insist on washing it? That’s a good question with numerous answers: from the cultural and historical heritage (after all, when the chicken was slaughtered at home, washing did make more sense) to a lack of sense of control that ends up turning against us. Let’s be practical: How to avoid cross contamination when cooking chicken? Separate raw chicken from other foods: It is a good idea to keep the chicken raw separated from other foods. This is always true, but especially with all those that are consumed raw (such as fruits and vegetables). Use different utensils: We have talked about it with the cutting boardsbut it is especially effective advice with knives and other utensils. In fact, the recommendation is that, if we do not have several sets of utensils, wash them carefully between uses with hot water and soap. Wash hands and surfaces thoroughly: After handling raw chicken, you should not only wash your hands with soap and hot water for at least 20 seconds; Instead, we should disinfect all surfaces with which it has been in contact. Image | Christian Guillen / Imani In Xataka | Washing raw chicken increases risk of foodborne infection

Women consistently sleep worse than men. And science has finally discovered why it is

by

For years we have been able to have a perception in many homes: the women tend to sleep worse, wake up more and feel more tired than men. This is something that for a long time has been dismissed as a subjective perception, but Science has now wanted to close the debate, pointing out that it is not only a perception, but that there is a gender gap documented. The data. The Global Sleep Survey 2025carried out on a massive sample of more than 30,000 people in 13 countries, has produced a key figure: 38% of women have problems falling asleep more than three times a week, compared to 29% of men. Something that in Spain is not a very different situation, since according to the cross-sectional studies recently published in Naturewomen have much higher scores on the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), indicating worse subjective quality. In this way, while 44.6% of Spanish women report poor sleep quality, in men the figure drops to 30.1%. A paradox. Tests with motion sensors suggest that women sometimes have higher “sleep efficiency” on paper, but it is perceived as greater exhaustion. The person responsible for this is the sleep fragmentationwhich is related to constant waking up or even in mothers due to having to get up to care for a baby, for example. The hormonal factor. It is undoubtedly one of the big differences that exist between men and women, since estrogen and progesterone levels fluctuate drastically during the menstrual cycle, pregnancy or menopause. In the specific case of menopause it can be seen as a drop in the level of estrogen, in addition to produce alterations in bone formationalso increases the immediate degradation of rest. The data indicates that 51% of the Menopausal women suffer from sleep disordersshown a big difference: 44% of women in this stage report serious problems compared to 33% of non-menopausal women. If we go to pregnancywe see something similar with physical (from discomfort) and hormonal disruptions that create a pattern of alertness that often doesn’t fully recover until years after childbirth. The mental load. Beyond the hormonal load, the social factor is, perhaps, the most difficult to correct. One of the most important is the role that women have in many cases regarding the care of other people. According to the data compiled by the University of Michigan and diverse reviews on BMJ Openemployed women wake up twice as often as their partners to care for children or dependent relatives, even when they are the main breadwinners of the home. This “caretaker” role keeps the brain in an “alert” situation, making it attentive to whether a baby cries at night or a dependent family member has any need. This causes 76% of caregivers to report poor sleep quality.since the brain cannot unconsciously disconnect to monitor the well-being of the environment. Its consequences. Poor sleep not only means being tired the next day, but also has more serious clinical consequences. One of the most important is the increase in the probability of having a metabolic diseasesuch as diabetes. In addition, it increases accelerated cognitive deterioration and causes an increase in anxiety and depression disorders. And what is interesting in this case is that the female brain in sleep deprivation is more vulnerable to emotional dysregulation. The solution. The scientific community, from the Sleep Research Institute (IIS) to publications in Frontiers in Psychiatryagrees that it is not enough to increase “sleep hygiene” by leaving your cell phone before going to sleep, for example. It mainly aims at social therapy, making changes in the structure of the home that avoid fragmentation of sleep by getting up to take care of someone, for example. But logically, if you are in a perimenopause situation, you should also choose to go to the doctor to receive pharmacological treatment whenever there is significant hormonal deregulation. Images | Slaapwijsheid.nl In Xataka | If you fall asleep in less than five minutes, you don’t have a “superpower”: it’s a warning signal from your brain

Science has discovered that the original “home” of primates was the cold of the north

by

The mental image is almost universal: an ape-like ancestor jumping among vines in a hot, humid jungle. For almost a century, paleoanthropology has assumed that primates are children of the tropics, however, an ambitious study published in PNAS by researcher Jorge Avaria-Llautureo and his team has blown up this paradigm, since they have seen that the primates were not looking for the sun. The ‘Tropical Dogma’. Until now, the predominant theory regarding evolution pointed out that primates evolved in warm, stable climateswhere food, such as fruits, were available all year round. In this way, it would only be millions of years later when some species had ventured into more hostile climates such as extreme cold. A great twist of script. Science has changed this paradigm by analyzing data from none other than 66 million years of history. To do this they have crossed the fossil record with climatic reconstructions that were made with great precision to see that the ancestors of all current primates originated in environments that had significantly low temperatures. Nothing to do with the tropical and arid landscapes that we may have had in mind until now. Survival training. How is it possible that a species that we associate with the jungle was born in areas that today would be equivalent to temperate or even boreal forests? The answer is in the adaptability. Science points in this case to the fact that early primates lived at high latitudes in the northern hemisphere, as is Eurasia and North America. And at that time, they were not constant paradises, since the animals had to deal with months of cold where the plants did not bear fruit. Your adaptation. This forced primates to stop being “fruit specialists” and become generalists capable of eating insects, shoots or bark, when the weather got bad enough. And this was crucial for their biology, since their metabolism was forced to adapt to these extreme conditions, which resulted in a brutal competitive advantage when they finally expanded. The researchers point out that this metabolic adaptation to tolerate adverse climates was the basis on which their evolutionary success was based. The paradox of the Tropics. If they were born in the cold, why do almost everyone live on the equator today? The study reveals a fascinating phenomenon: southward migration. And as the global climate changed, primates moved towards tropical bands. There they found an environment where their ‘survival kit’, which was developed in very harsh conditions, allowed them to thrive with great ease. That is why the Tropics were not where primates were made, but rather it is where they diversified explosively because, compared to the north, life there was much easier and they had a large amount of food. In short, the tropics were a refuge for biodiversity, but the spark that makes us primates was lit in the cold. Change the rules of the game. In addition to seeing the past differently with this new study, it also forces us to look at the future differently. Specifically, understanding how species moved between thermal niches over millions of years is vital to predicting how today’s primates will respond to climate change. global warming accelerated. But it also lets us see that if primates have an important history of resistance to cold and seasonal scarcity, it opens the door to our own ability as humans to colonize all corners of the planet as a form of evolution. Images | Anthony In Xataka | Human evolution has not stopped: in fact, there are reasons to think that it is more accelerated than ever

The problem with animal experimentation is not a lack of ethics, it is that science still does not have a plan B

by

Scientific research is very necessary for a society to advance with new treatments to alleviate diseases, for example. But there is a big problem behind it that still lingers and that for many people may be incomprehensible: the use of laboratory animals to test these new advances before doing them in humans. And, as recognized by the Spanish scientific community: “we would use alternative methods if we could.” A paradox. Although we live in a time in which artificial intelligence and bioengineering dominate the current paradigm of society, we continue to depend on a frame designed in 1959 to validate whether a drug is safe or not. This happens for the use of animal experimentationwhich has been a major ethical conflict within science for years. The problem is that despite all the advances that exist, the use, for example, of a laboratory mouse cannot be replaced due to the lack of an alternative that is as complete as this one. The problem. The regulatory framework that is currently on the table focuses on the 3R principle proposed by Russell and Burch more than 60 years ago: Replacement, Reduction and Refinement. A theory that a priori seems quite noble, since In a few words it can be summarized in: if you can not use animals, don’t use them; If you have to use them, use as few as possible; and if you use them, do them as little damage as possible. However, as science itself has analyzed, this framework has become ‘procedural’. That is to say, it has become a list of bureaucratic tasks that legitimizes the use of animals under the pretext that it is a necessary evil that we must assume to continue advancing as a society. The ethics. The bioethical analyzes carried out on this matter focus on the type of studies that are approved to use animals. And it is not analyzed at this point whether it will contribute much or little to scientific knowledge, but rather how the proposed experiment is designed. This way, if an experiment is well designed, it is approved to use animals. All this despite the fact that their contribution to knowledge is marginal or insignificant. Something that creates an “ethical hole”: we continue to assume certain animal harm in exchange for an uncertain or diffuse human benefit. The great promise. If ethics pushes us to change, technology should give us the tool to do so. This is where NAMs (New Approach Methods) come into play, which focus on AI simulations of organisms, organs on a chip or organoids. In this way, we can understand this advance as the cultivation of mini-brains or human kidneys in the laboratory to work with them. Something that on paper seems like a great idea, since we would be testing drugs with human cells directly, eliminating the problem of testing on a different species. The problem. When we go down to the technical detail, we find a large wall in front of us. As the experts explainthese technologies cover specific niches, such as the damage that a drug can do to the liver, but they cannot replicate the entire film. Because an organism is not only the effect on an organ, but how all the systems that we have interconnected influence. The problems encountered They can mainly be summarized in several points: There is no possibility of creating a blood system that cleans the tissue and nourishes it as occurs in the real organism. There is no immune or nervous system that can react to the drug or generate pain in an organ. In a chip with an ‘organ’ inside, the effect of the drug cannot be simulated several years from now. Prohibited areas. With all these points, there are fields as important as autoimmune diseases (when the body attacks its own cells) where These models are irreplaceable. All this because it is necessary to see the simultaneous interaction of all the organs in a living being. Regulation. Currently there are different organizations that try to prevent a drug from killing a person, such as the FDA in the United States and the EMA in Europe. Both agencies to approve a trial of a drug in humans demand massive security data that are taken from the animals themselves. In this way, the alternatives are not used massively because they are not validated by these organizations that require the use of animal models in their standards. An attitude that perpetuates the system, which for many is truly crazy, since science depends on animals if it wants to continue developing drugs that improve the lives of citizens. All this because no committee places more value on the life of a mouse than that of a human. The future. In the short term we will not see a big change in this aspect. Organoids and AI It does not seem that they are going to suddenly replace animal modelsbut will act as complementary systems to reduce the number used in laboratories. Images | Matthew Mejia In Xataka | Researchers removed Instagram and TikTok from 300 young people to see if their anxiety decreased. The results speak for themselves

We have been failing with New Year’s resolutions for decades. Science says it’s because we don’t know how to “cheat”

by

January starts with a predictable ritual: paying gym membership, fill the fridge with kale or buy paintbrushes for a new hobby. It is the “clean slate effect” that defines Professor Katy Milkman. Human beings do not perceive time linearly, but rather like chapters of a novel. The New Year is the “Black Friday” of new beginnings; a symbolic border that makes us believe that the “me” of last year—the one who didn’t know how to draw a line without looking like a preschooler—has finally died. In fact, 4,000 years ago the Babylonians they already made promises at the Akitu festival to appease their gods. The difference is that they sought to avoid divine wrath and we simply sought to avoid the guilt in the mirror. The autopsy of a failure foretold. Despite our enthusiasm, the statistics are devastating. According to the media Selphonly one in five people manages to stick to their long-term resolutions. Most of us throw in the towel before the month is over, because we always make the same mistake: wanting to be a different person overnight. We want to eat healthy, meditate, travel and be experts in some subject, all at the same time. The problem is that we focus obsessively on the result (losing 10 kilos) and not on the process (enjoying the taste of a new recipe). Added to this is what psychologist Kimberley Wilson describes how the danger of “forbidden words”. Using terms like “always” or “never” puts us in an “all or nothing” trap. If work gets complicated on a Wednesday and you can’t go to paint or eat a pizza, you feel like the entire year is a failure. It’s tunnel vision that ignores that life is, by definition, unpredictable. Furthermore, today we have a new enemy: metrics. As behavioral experts saywe have gone “from enjoyment to performance.” We no longer read for pleasure, but to update the counter. goodreads; We do not run for health, but to not break the streak of Strava. This culture of productivity applied to leisure turns our hobbies into a second working day. If the app says we haven’t complied, guilt appears. The science of “traps”: The method of temptation. What if the key to compliance was not military discipline, but rather being a little “cheatful”? Katy Milkman, behavior change expert, confesses her own trick in an interview with the Washington Post: he “temptation bundling” (temptation pairing). When he was a student, he hated exercising but loved Harry Potter. His solution was to allow himself to listen to the audiobooks of the saga only while he was at the gym. “It made me want to go to work out,” he explains. It’s basically using a guilty pleasure to “bribe” our brain into a healthy habit. This idea is complemented by the “Habit Stacking” (habit stacking). Instead of reaching for willpower you don’t have, “glue” your new purpose to something you already do automatically. Want to learn that paint stroke? Do a five-minute sketch right after your morning coffee. Want to finish that Pinterest scarf? Do ten rows while watching your favorite Netflix series. You don’t add effort, you just take advantage of the architecture of your current routine. Less “goals”, more “values”. From Harvard University, Dr. Aisha Usmani suggests that we see change as “shaping a sculpture”: It is done by removing pieces of stone little by little, not all at once. Cognitive science tells us that if you want to paint, don’t set out to do one canvas a day; Start with one a week. And above all, align your goals with your personal values, not with external pressure. If crochet stresses you, perhaps it does not respond to your value of “creativity”, but rather to an aesthetic imposition. According to Usmani, We must ask ourselves every day: “Is this still important to me?” If the answer is no, adjusting course is not failure, it is being flexible. Self-compassion as a strategy. We cannot forget the weight of the treatment we give to ourselves. As the psychologist Ángel Rull explains in his columnmany resolutions are born from “being fed up with oneself” and not from self-care. If you join the gym because you hate your body, there is a good chance you will quit. If you do it to feel more energetic, the commitment changes. Another interesting note is how we talk about our setbacks. A recent study highlights the difference between saying that we didn’t “have time” and that we didn’t “make time.” While the first sounds like an external excuse, the second implies active control over our agenda: if we didn’t do it today, we can decide to do it tomorrow. According to this research, focusing the cause of failure on external factors and not on our lack of will is the best lifesaver for our confidence. A more human 2026. In short, we are not computers that restart on January 1st. The real change is not about saturating our to-do list, but about transforming initial fatigue into real self-care. If this year you want to start lifting some weights or for your painting stroke to gain firmness, science gives you permission to be a strategist: combine effort with pleasure through temptation bundlingopt for small things—because a page read will always be better than an abandoned book—and accept that perseverance necessarily includes days of hiatus. In the end, perhaps the best resolution for this year is not to become an “optimized” version of ourselves, but to stop treating ourselves as a defective project that must be fixed by decree. The key to success this year lies not in military discipline, but in the ability to begin to see ourselves as someone who is simply trying to live with a little more presence, realistic tools and, above all, a little less guilt. Image | freepik Xataka | Neither board games nor karaoke: ‘Word on Beat’ is the new king of the living room and proof that we prefer rhythmic chaos

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.