Take a Break...

“Awake” Breaks Improve Memory

We’ve all heard reasons why taking a break is important.

• Athletes take breaks so their bodies can recover from strenuous workouts.
• Sick people take breaks to give themselves a chance to recuperate from their illnesses.
• School-aged children take recess breaks to help develop their bodies and important life skills like conflict resolution, sharing, and taking turns.
• Workers take breaks to help relieve their bodies of stress and their eyes from strain.

And now there may be one more important reason to take a break: Researchers believe doing so helps improve memory!

What’s an awake break?

For a long time, researchers have understood the connection between normal sleep and the brain’s ability to solidify memories. But new research suggests some interesting brain activity takes place when you take shorter “awake” breaks after learning something new. In a nutshell, briefly tuning out everything else going on in your surroundings may give your brain a chance to tune in to newly-learned information. And it seems that tuning in while awake helps with your brain’s ability to consolidate memories.

The process of consolidating memories involves a number of physical and psychological changes that take place inside the brain. These changes help the brain better organize and restructure newly-learned information before committing it to permanent memory. It’s a lot like the way databases sort information into neat little categories so it can be more easily retrieved later on.

The study boasting the potential power of awake rest involved 16 participants whose associative memories were tested. Participants were shown pairs of pictures with each pair involving a human face plus either a scene or an object. After viewing each pair of pictures, participants were told to take a brief rest during which time they could let their brains think of anything they wanted, but they could not fall asleep.


Twice, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) recorded activity in the hippocampus and the cortical regions of the brain; once during the task and again during the break period. Analysis of fMRI conducted while participants completed their tasks showed a lot of activity and seemed to support the idea that the brain was replaying the experiences. But it wasn’t enough to conclude that the experiences were being cemented to memory. That’s why researchers performed the second round of FMRI. Their observation of brain activity during the two different stages is what led them to start touting the benefits of taking awake rests to improve learning.

Was your kindergarten teacher right?

Remember back in kindergarten when your teacher made you take a rest each afternoon? Maybe you thought she was being mean. But meanness probably wasn’t the issue. Maybe your teacher witnessed firsthand a correlation between resting and your ability to retain information. And maybe she thought she was doing you a favor by asking you to rest!

What do you think? Could something like an awake break benefit your life?

Why not take a short break and find out!

Cell Phone Radiation & Alzheimer’s

Tests Involving Radiation Reveal Surprising Results

Some pretty interesting tests to see if and how different groups of mice were affected by the type of radiation emitted by cell phones was recently conducted by a team of scientists from the University of Florida. Testing was performed on different-aged mice as well as different-aged mice that had been genetically altered. Testing sought to determine whether this type of exposure worsened the progression of Alzheimer’s disease.

What is Alzheimer’s disease?

Named after the individual who first described this disease, Alzheimer’s is a progressive disease that destroys brain cells. Loss of memory results from the destruction and so do thinking and behaviour problems. All of this has a profound effect on the affected individual’s work life and social life, as well as the things the individual enjoyed doing. There currently is no cure for Alzheimer’s disease, which ranks #7 on the list of leading causes of death.

Study details

For 2 hours each day, both the normal mice and the group prone to developing an animal form of Alzheimer’s disease were exposed to electromagnetic radiation for two 1-hour periods. The exposure continued over a 9 month period. Included in the study were control groups of normal and genetically altered mice that weren’t exposed.


Rather than worsening the progression of Alzheimer’s, scientists were surprised when they realized the results were not what they had expected. Out of the two groups of mice studied, the mice prone to Alzheimer’s showed a slowing or reversal of the disease’s progress. Scientists also observed a change in amyloid, a protein fragment that Alzheimer’s specialists believe somehow blocks nerve cell communication, disrupts their activity, and causes the brain cell damage Alzheimer’s patients suffer.

The other group of normal mice actually showed an improvement in cognitive ability rather than a decline.

Controversy erupts!

As you’d expect, reactions to the results were all over the place. Some people laughed. Others expressed cautious acceptance. One individual warned that much more testing is needed before anyone jumps to any conclusions about using cell phone radiation to help slow or reverse the progression of Alzheimer’s. And others cooled the excitement by reminding us that the tests were performed on mice and that testing on humans may or may not lead to the same results.

Nonetheless, this is definitely exciting news for everyone involved in the effort to find a cure for Alzheimer’s, a disease that affects approximately four-and-a-half million individuals over age 65. If nothing else the study is certain to pique interest among other researchers to recreate the tests to see if similar results are achieved.

And it’s almost certain to add fuel to the ongoing debate over whether prolonged habitual cell phone use is a serious health issue. What if it turns out that radiation actually possess an as-of-yet undiscovered ability to blast away the plaque that leads to Alzheimer’s and improve memory? Wouldn’t that be interesting??

It sure would, and I say we should support scientists’ efforts, encourage their curiosity, and praise their outcomes, no matter how crazy they might sound!

Stem Cell Research

U.S. Pulls Out All The Stops Over Stem Cell Study

New administrations bring new priorities, and this seems to be the case with government-funded stem cell research. Previously banned during the Bush administration, research and funding has the full support of President Obama.

Rolling in cash from a $10 billion gift from the American Taxpayers, also known as the Obama Stimulus Plan, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) wasted no time doling out money to researchers chomping at the bit to make up for lost research time denied them by Mr. Bush.

Already 13 lines of cells have been approved for research, and 20 more are expected to be approved in the coming days. NIH Director Francis S. Collins says that this is just the beginning. There are 76 additional stem cells in the approval pipeline already, and researchers are expected to request approval on at least 254 more.

NIH: Spending our money on their favorite things

With more than U.S. $21 million disbursed already, researchers are standing in line for a slice of that juicy $10 billion pie.

But with unemployment at record-breaking levels, home foreclosures going through the roof, and food banks feeding more formerly middle class people than ever before, I wouldn’t blame you for wondering whether or not the government has its priorities straight.

Science vs. Morality

Opponents are quick to point out that scientific research requiring the destruction of human embryos is not something that taxpayer money should be spent on. Not to mention the fact that destroying embryos for the sake of scientific research crosses some moral boundaries.


But NIH Director Collins, both a geneticist as well as a practicing evangelical Christian, says he has no moral issues with it. So far he hasn’t been denied communion, like the youngest of the Kennedy politicians recently was.

Guidelines soften the blow (or so they would say)

President Obama’s lifting of stem cell research barriers was accompanied by a requirement for the NIH to develop “strict guidelines” dictating which stem cell lines are “ethically acceptable.” This includes limiting the harvesting of human embryos to lines resulting from excess fertility clinic embryos, prohibiting donors from getting paid to contribute their unborn, and requiring “excess” embryos be offered first to couples seeking fertility treatment. I hope this whole process isn’t being overseen by Acorn!

Stem cell research supporters cry “Foul”

Besides the ethical concerns, many opponents of stem cell research say that there is no clear medical evidence that research will result in any significant medical breakthroughs.

But an army of researches say stem cell research will provide insight into the root causes of the most serious human diseases. After that happens, they think it could be possible to discover cures for diabetes, Parkinson's disease, paralysis and others.

Somebody’s trying to fool somebody, but it’s too soon to tell.

In the meanwhile, researchers are aware that another presidential election is not too far away, which explains the push to get this deal done before the rules are changed again.

My question for you is: When is the line between science and morality crossed? And does stem cell research cross that line?

The Cause of Obesity?

The Potential Bacteria-Obesity Link

We’ve all heard countless times that the surest route to becoming overweight or obese is a diet high in fat and sugar. We’ve also heard advice suggesting we eat a plant-based diet, one that’s lower in fat and higher in the nutrients, if we want to lose weight.

It all sounds so obvious: Eat right and lose weight. But can losing weight really be that simple?

The answer, it seems, may be yes. And now, researchers may be one step closer to understanding why this is true.

Research conducted in St. Louis at the Washington University School of Medicine suggests that the reason has to do with the effect that the type of food consumed has on the bacteria living in the intestines. According to the research, microbes that have been linked to obesity appear to thrive when a diet high in fat and sugar is consumed. And that might affect how much weight and fat people gain.

Here’s how the research progressed

Four individuals, including Jeffery Gordon, the individual that first suggested a link between obesity and intestinal microbes, Peter Turnbaugh, a graduate student, Jeremy Faith and Vanessa Ridaura, both lab assistants, participated in the research.
The four set out to recreate in mice the intestinal environment found in humans that ate a low fat diet. They did this using stool samples since this is where gut microbial communities live. They transplanted human intestinal communities into germ-free mice, fed the mice a low fat diet, and then waited to see whether the human environment could be recreated. And it could.


Once researchers were confident this step was successful, they then switched the mice to a high fat/high sugar diet. Stool samples taken from the host mice were studied for several months, and from those studies, researchers were able to confirm that a microbial switch had in fact taken place when the mice experienced a change in diet.

A similar experiment was performed only this time, the germ free mice received gut microbial communities from humanized obese mice. Now, even though these mice were fed a low fat diet, the researchers observed that fat and weight gain occurred. Their studies also concluded that mothers may be able to pass their gut microbial communities to their offspring.

What does all this mean?

It means that there may be more to gaining weight than the foods we eat. Gordon’s research suggests that the types of microbes that live in our intestines have an effect on the caloric value of different foods. And that could be the cause of the problem.

Up until Gordon’s research, it was difficult to learn more about the causes of weight gain and obesity because it was difficult to control the factors that contribute to the problem like the environment, genetics and cultural differences. But now that Gordon has shown that the human intestinal environment can be replicated, and that it seems gut microbes and their genes can be passed between generations, two of the previously uncontrollable factors can now be more effectively studied.

And that means we may be closer to understanding the real causes of obesity and the opposite problem, malnutrition.

Stem Cell Research

$230 Million in Grants Awarded to Stem Cell Research

Besides being controversial I’ll admit, I don’t know a lot about stem cell research. So when I heard that $230 million worth of grants to further this type of research were recently awarded, I decided it was time to learn more about stem cells and the controversy surrounding them.

After only a little bit of digging, I had a pretty clear understanding of both sides of the issue. Stem cells show great promise in helping to understand and treat many serious diseases and impairments. This is due to a cell’s ability to differentiate into a number of specialized cells. In other words, stem cells can be turned into practically any type of tissue that has been damaged. Proponents of stem cell research believe stem cells can help people that have been diagnosed with:

• Heart disease
• Degenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s disease
• Cancer
• Spinal cord injury and other physical trauma
• Genetic diseases
• And more

Those not in favor of stem cells research are opposed to the use of stem cells in general, and in particular, use of embryonic stem cells. While both adult and embryonic stem cells have the ability to differentiate, studies show that stem cells harvested from embryos have a greater capacity to differentiate than do stem cells taken from adult tissue.

The problem is, before a human embryonic stem cell line can be created, a human embryo must be destroyed. And that causes most of the controversy. The embryo, even though it cannot exist outside the human body on its own, is believed by many to be the point at which life begins. Opponents oppose the killing of life in order to save a life.


Some researchers use embryos that are created in in-vitro fertility treatments but that were not used. Others use embryos from fetuses that have been aborted. These researchers argue that since the embryos would otherwise be destroyed, it is better to use them in a way that could save people’s lives.

Welcome news

The awarding of such a large dollar amount of grants came as welcome news to many, especially since stem cell funding is hard to come by these days. The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, created back in 2004 when California voters passed legislation to fund this type of research, is funding the grants it awarded to fourteen research teams in California. Grant amounts range from $5 million to $20 million. Most will not involve embryonic research.

The research grants will be used to study whether stem cells can potentially:

• Target and kill brain tumors
• Be modified to create HIV-resistant T cells
• Be genetically modified to treat epidermolysis bullosa, a skin disease
• Be taken from a patient’s heart and used to repair that person’s heart damage

Some of the grants will be used to develop medications may one day be able to kill leukemia and cancer stem cells.

This all sounds very exciting and promising but is nonetheless, still very controversial.

What’s your stand on stem cell research?

The Internet and the Elderly

Studies Suggest the Internet Can Keep You Young

For as far back as I can remember I’ve heard people talk about the importance of keeping the brain active as we age. I never paid much attention to this kind of talk. But now that I’m getting older, I find myself paying closer attention to all the advice aimed at slowing the aging process.

By the time we reach age 50, our brain has worked around-the-clock for nearly 18,250 days – without taking a single break! That’s around 438,000 hours which is an awful lot of mileage.

Although it’s not a muscle, the brain needs to be exercised to keep it fit and functioning properly. That’s why experts on aging often talk about the mind-boosting power of simple activities like doing crossword puzzles, playing chess and other mind-challenging games, and pleasure writing.

And now, researchers evaluating the results of a recent study of the effects of the Internet on elderly brain function are ready to encourage this age group to go online!


A summary of the study that’s getting people excited

The study involved 24 participants, half of whom used the Internet daily. The other half used the Internet only minimally. Participants ranged in age from 55 through 78. Before the study began, participants were given instructions on using the Internet to perform basic searches. During that time, fMRI scans (functional magnetic resonance imaging) were recording brain activity. At the end of the study, the scans were again performed on the participants.

In the first scan, activity was noted in the various regions of the brain that control reading, memory, visual ability, and language. When performing similar activities, those same regions were activated in the second scan. But this time, activity in two additional regions was noted. And this is what got researchers so excited.

According to researchers, those two hotbeds of activity are known to play a key role in working memory and the skills used in making decisions. The study suggests that even after a short period of Internet usage, patterns of brain activity change, and functioning is enhanced. Skill level does not seem to matter so even beginner Internet users can benefit.

What does seem to matter is the type of activity being performed. In assigning the task of using the Internet as a research tool, activation of those two additional regions appear to be what helped participants hang on to important information and extract what they needed from the mess of other audio and visual information they encountered while performing their online searches.

When the Internet is used for other purposes however, like online shopping or Internet gambling, different regions of the brain may be engaged, like those that trigger addictions. And that’s not good.

The moral of this story?

It seems the Internet can be effective in keeping your brain engaged and active, two key components of maintaining its ability to function properly no matter what your age. Just be careful how you use it!

Please feel free to comment on this post.

Safety of pesticides on our food

Lush green lawns…

Vibrant, flawless produce…

Amber waves of grain…

All this beauty can only mean one thing: Pesticides.

Weed killers, bug killers, and fungal killers have become such a huge part of our lives that most of us don’t even think about them. But perhaps it’s time to take a closer look at what’s keeping our communities looking so good.

And that something is pesticides.

There was a time not long ago when people were very aware of the health and environments problems associated with pesticides. That was back in the 60s when the potential dangers of widespread DDT use made headlines. Developed back in the 1940s, DDT was the first man-made pesticide to mount an effective battle against disease-carrying insects. Once the solution became available, everyone rushed to take advantage of it.

Over time though, insects developed resistance to DDT, and humans and animals began developing tumors. What had been previously viewed as a farmer’s best defense was suddenly being looked at as a potential killer. People started blaming DDT for all sorts of things, and massive studies of its potential dangers were launched. DDT’s use in the U.S. was banned in the 70s, and the fury began to subside.

Then new dangers emerged.

One was a pesticide called Lindane. Believed to cause a number of neurological issues including seizures and nervous system damage, Lindane was disallowed for agricultural use in 2006. Plenty of other controversial pesticides exist, including many with scary-sounding names like carbofuran and methyl parathion.


Since the fallout over DDT, the focus has been on pesticide safety. Frequent pesticide testing takes place by product manufactures, governmental agencies, and independent groups. As you’d expect, results are all over the board, depending who conducted the tests. Many potentially dangerous pesticides are still in use, especially in countries that lack strict governmental oversight. In the U.S., use of some pesticides has been cancelled, while use of others is restricted.

It’s not easy to ban or curtail use of a pesticide though. Pesticides play a key role in keeping our global population fed by keeping crop devastation to a minimum. Like everything, with the good comes the bad. The chemicals in pesticides seep into the ground, contaminate the soil and are absorbed by future crops’ root systems. Rain washes pesticides into waterways where they contaminate fish and other marine life.

But food production is crucial to our survival. And none of us want to find worms in our corn or fungus in our fruit. So far, the benefits of pesticide use continue to outweigh the risks. That’s why pesticide use continues.

What’s a consumer to do?

Going organic is one option, but it’s costly, and not always safer since labeling can be confusing. You can also take care to choose only healthy-looking produce. Avoid fruit and vegetables with visible bruises, holes, and rotting. Thoroughly washing food with water before using and properly preparing them will decrease pesticide residue. Equally important is to eat a variety of food.

Finally, know the source. If you can, start growing your own. That way you have total control over what goes into your body!

The Dangers of Lasik Eye Surgery

FDA Taking a Closer Look at Lasik Eye Surgery

I wear contact lenses, and like others with impaired vision, I was really excited when I first heard about Lasik eye surgery. The thought of never again having to mess around with contact lenses or wear eye glasses definitely caught my attention. But the cost and the lack of long-term studies brought me back to reality and the daily chore of caring for contacts.

Now it seems that decision may have been a smart decision since the FDA recently announced plans to take a closer look at the negative effects of this popular eye surgery.

The way laser eye surgery corrects vision is really pretty amazing. A trained surgeon uses a specially-designed laser known as a Lasik laser to permanently reshape the cornea in one or both eyes. That’s really all there is to it.

After numbing the eye, a surgical knife is used to cut a thin circular flap in the cornea. Then the laser is pointed at the cornea. Under the surgeon’s command, the laser pulses and vaporizes corneal tissue until the shape needed to correct vision is obtained. When finished, the flap is put back into position so the eye can heal. In 95% of the procedures, the patient is able to see clearly in just a few days.

What about the remaining five percent?

Maybe it’s the relative simplicity that keeps patients from worrying about the procedure’s potential side effects. Before you can even get laser eye surgery, you have to be evaluated to determine whether you’re a good candidate. From there, the eye is mapped and the risks explained. An appointment is made and about 15 minutes after it starts, the procedure is finished.


But not every patient’s vision is better after laser eye surgery. While it may not seem like a lot, the FDA reports nearly 140 complaints over the course of 8 years beginning in 1998 through 2006. In general, these complaints involve the known risks including dry eyes, blurred or double vision, and at nighttime, the appearance of halos surrounding objects.

Study overview

The FDA study isn’t intended to put an end to the procedure. Rather, the goal is to better understand the risks, including the number of patients that experience them. That, officials believe, may lead to changes that could result in fewer patient-reported problems after surgery.

Phase 1, which is already underway, involves creating a web-based questionnaire intended to help assess the surgical outcomes patients report. Answers will also be used to help assess patients’ quality of life following Lasik eye surgery.

Phase 2 focuses on evaluating satisfaction levels and resulting quality of life issues of patients at the Naval Refractive Surgery Center.

The 3rd phase will broaden the quality of life evaluation by conducting a clinical study designed to track the outcome of patients that had the procedure performed at select centers. The study is expected to continue through 2012.

Until then, I think I’ll keep fumbling with my contact lenses and eye glasses. What about you?

Map Your Genetic Code

A DNA Chip to Map Your Genetic Code?

That’s exactly what researchers at IBM are working on. But why?

Right now the goal is to see whether such an idea is even feasible. That’s the first step and that’s what researchers will be focusing on over the next few years. Everyone will be able to map their DNA

If it turns out that the idea IS feasible, average citizens, folks like you and me, may be able to have our DNA mapped as easily as testing blood-sugar levels with a glucose meter. We won’t have to travel thousands of miles to a specialized medical center, either. When the technology becomes available (if it becomes available) mapping our DNA is something we’ll be able to do right in the neighborhood doctor’s office!

The goal is to be able to deposit a DNA strand sample into a genome reader, which is basically a silicon chip with tiny electrodes that help trap DNA molecules, and in seconds, have the chip read DNA characteristics including measurement and sequencing. If all turns out as hoped, the DNA chip will be small enough to be inserted into a device that you can hold in your hands.

Welcome life extender?

Such an idea seems so science fiction and so big-brother, but the way the technology will be used sounds very promising. Researchers hope that such a device will go a long way towards personalizing medicine and patient care, both of which show huge potential for extending human life.

Proponents of the DNA chip believe the technology can put an end to the unnecessary deaths that result from the side effects of inappropriate medicine. Proponents also hope that the availability of affordable, quick and easy genetic mapping can help detect disease and help an individual adapt their lifestyle to their specific genetic makeup. Such a device could also assist with fixing genetic errors before they have a chance to develop into a full-blown disease.


More than humans stand to benefit from such an invention. It’s quite possible that in addition to human DNA, the chip may be able to sequence other types of DNA including animal, vegetable and bacterial.

Or veiled invasion of your privacy?

Those opposed to DNA mapping, and there are many, fear that they will not have any control over the way the technology will be used. Certainly the possibilities outlined above are very encouraging. But undoubtedly there will be individuals and groups that will use the information derived from this technology for other than the intended beneficial purposes.

Knowing whether an individual has or is susceptible to certain diseases can lay the groundwork for employment and insurance discrimination. It can lead to missed job opportunities, frivolous lawsuits, higher costs for health insurance, and worse, removal of potentially at-risk body parts before something like cancer has a chance to take hold.

Like it or not, the technology is advancing and may very soon be headed to a doctor’s office near you! So let me ask this:

If you had the chance right now to map your DNA, would you take it? Why or why not?

A New Treatment For Erectyle Dsyfunction

New Hope for an Embarrassing Problem

Listen up all you men out there…

If you suffer from Erectile Dysfunction (ED) and have not responded favorably to drugs and other treatments, you may soon have another option.

That’s what the people at Meditronic, Inc. hope according to a press release dated October 13th. The press release announced that the company has initiated a feasibility study to determine whether the same type of stent inserted into blocked arteries can be effective in treating ED symptoms. The plan is to insert the stents into the pelvic vessels that supply blood to the penis. Once in place, the stents will elute a drug that the company believes may help preserve the functionality of the lining of the vessel into which it is inserted.

Vascular disease resulting from deterioration of this lining has been confirmed to be the cause of ED in a large number of cases. So it makes sense that if you can keep these important vessels functioning properly, you may also be able to reduce the number of people experiencing ED symptoms.

This study isn’t about meditation!

The feasibility study being headed up by Meditronic is referred to simply as ZEN. And that’s good since ZEN is much easier to say than Zotarolimus-Eluting Peripheral Stent System for the Treatment of Erectile Dysfunction in Males with Sub-Optimal Response to PDE5 Inhibitors, which is the full title of this study.

The feasibility study will include 50 men and will be a collaborative effort by 10 medical facilities located throughout the U.S. As the name of the study suggests, participants will be chosen based on a prior unfavorable response to the category of drugs called PDE5 Inhibitors.

You may know these drugs by their more common names Viagra, Levitra and Cialis. Participants will be studied over the course of a year. The goal of the study is to investigate whether stents can help ED sufferers respond better to PDE5 inhibitors and determine whether the stents might be an effective approach to treatment.


A safe, effective treatment that really works

That is Medtronic’s goal. If all goes as planned, the tiny, mesh Medtronic stent could be available as early as 2011. If successful, demand for this safe and effective treatment option likely will be great given that approximately 25,000 men fail to get relief from pills.

There are a few second and third line therapies to choose from including devices like vacuum pumps and penile implants, as well as self-injected medicines. The problem with these options is that they’re invasive and inhibit spontaneity. Needless to say, that makes them less desirable options.

If you suspect ED

Talk to your doctor. He or she will want to learn more about the symptoms you’re experiencing and their history. A physical exam is important in determining your overall state of health. Based on the history and exam, the doctor may order tests to rule out medical issues that may be contributing to your suspected ED. If ED is suspected, your doctor likely will refer you to a urologist, endocrinologist, neurologist, sex therapist or other type of counselor.

If this embaressing problem has caused a strain in your relationship, please let us know how you feel.

A Vaccine to End Cocaine Addiction

Is there Really a Vaccine to End Cocaine Addiction?

Not yet, but that’s what some doctors at Yale University’s School of Medicine are testing. So let me see if I have this right. They’re saying that a possible way to end cocaine addiction is to purposefully give a person more cocaine. Hmmm.

The way vaccines work is pretty interesting. You introduce a troublesome virus into your system. From there, the body begins the process of developing immunity to the virus by creating antibodies (an immune response). Once the immune system has learned to fight off the invader, it has the ability to mount an effective defense the next time the invader is encountered.

How the cocaine vaccine works

After reading more about the testing of 115 participants over 12 weeks, it appears that the cocaine vaccine that was tested functions a bit differently. In 21 of the 55 participants that actually completed the study, results show that the cocaine vaccine, (which is actually not pure cocaine but rather a cocaine-like substance called succinylnorcocaine!), did produce an immune response.

But in the case of the cocaine vaccine, the antibodies produced by the vaccine had the ability to block the brain from feeling the effects of the drug. The antibodies were able to bind to the cocaine and keep it in the bloodstream. With the drug stuck in the bloodstream, it was not able to reach the brain or any other organs.


If there’s no euphoric effect, why bother?

It appears that the cocaine vaccine’s success is based on the participant’s inability to feel the effects of the drug. In other words, there was no “high.” And that makes sense. If you use cocaine but don’t feel any different afterwards, why would you bother wasting any more money on the drug or any more time doing it?

So in this case, the immune system is actually doing what it does best which is protecting the body. But does the vaccine offer enough protection to actually help an addict kick his or her cocaine habit?

The study reports reduced use of cocaine in 53% of the participants that received the active vaccine versus just 23% that received the placebo. The numbers are impressive, and suggest the cocaine vaccine and boosters may be helpful in preventing relapses. However, it’s a bit early to draw any definitive conclusions regarding its use as an addiction ender.

To build on the promising news reported at the end of this study, doctors hint at expanding the study in an effort to confirm the results. If they’re confirmed, a cocaine vaccination could be available in a few years.

What about vaccines to combat other addictions?

And that’s great news for people looking for help with their addictions. But what has doctors even more excited is the potential to use vaccines to help combat other addictions. Vaccines for other addictive drugs have been developed for animals including vaccines for dealing with addictions to nicotine, heroine and methamphetamines. All that’s left now is to conduct tests of these other vaccines on humans and await the news!

Do you know someone from suffering an addiction to drugs or alcohol, do you think in the next few years this would be something they would be interested in? Let us know what you think.