Functional magnetic resonance imaging

All posts tagged Functional magnetic resonance imaging

Eating probiotic yoghurt relieves anxiety, says study – Telegraph.

Eating probiotic yoghurt twice a day could relieve anxiety and stress by reducing activity in the emotional area of the brain, a study has found.

Eating probiotic yoghurt twice a day could relieve anxiety and stress by reducing activity in the emotional area of the brain, a study has found.

Eating probiotic yoghurt twice a day could relieve anxiety and stress Photo: ROGER TAYLOR

Study participants who consumed yoghurt twice daily for a month showed lower levels of activity in the areas of the brain associated with emotion and pain, US researchers found, together with increased activity in areas associated with decision making.

Researchers have suggested that bacteria found in the gut send signals to the brain that can change over time depending on the person’s diet.

Previous studies showed that beneficial gut bacteria affected the brains of rats but no research has confirmed that the same effect happened in human brains.

Scientists had already found that the brain sends signals to the gut, which is why stress and other emotions can contribute to gastrointestinal symptoms. The new study of 36 women show that the signals also travel the opposite way.

The participants, all of healthy weight and aged between 18 and 53, were split into three groups, with one eating a yoghurt with live bacterial cultures twice a day for a month, another group eating a dairy product with no living bacteria, while the third group was given no dairy products at all.

The women all had a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain scans before and after the one-month study period, which included asking the participants to match a series of faces showing angry or fearful expressions on a computer screen to other faces that appeared, the Daily Mail reported.

The women who ate the probiotic yoghurt had reduced activity in the part of the brain that handles aspects of cognition and emotion, while the women who ate non-probiotic yoghurt or no dairy showed either no change or an increase in activity, the results showed.

Dr Emeran Mayer, who worked on the study, said it is possible that changing the composition of gut bacteria could lead to treatments for chronic pain disorders, as well as symptoms of brain conditions like autism, Parkinson’s, and Alzheimer’s disease, and could help improve mood symptoms over time.

Dr Kirsten Tillisch of UCLA’s School of Medicine, who led the study, said: “Time and time again we hear from patients that they never felt depressed or anxious until they started experiencing problems with their gut.

“Our study shows that the gut-brain connection is a two-way street.”

Vaughan Bell: the trouble with brain scans | Science | The Observer.

Many of the methods on which brain scan studies are based have been flawed – as one image of a dead salmon proved

An image of the brain of Kayt Sukel, who volunteered to have an orgasm while inside an fMRI scanner

An image of the brain of Nan Wise, who volunteered to have an orgasm while inside an fMRI scanner – but what do the beautiful colours really tell us?

Neuroscientists have long been banging their heads on their desks over exaggerated reports of brain scanning studies. Media stories illustrated with coloured scans, supposedly showing how the brain works, are now a standard part of the science pages and some people find them so convincing that they are touted as ways of designing education for our children, evaluating the effectiveness of marketing campaigns and testing potential recruits. Recently, to the chagrin of French scientists, politicians called for neuro-imaging to be used in the courts to decide on the guilt of criminals, after the technology made its dubious debut in the legal systems of India, Italy and the US.

This misplaced enthusiasm often stems from a misunderstanding about what brain scans tell us. The interpretation seems straightforward according to the popular press – the coloured blobs represent a “pleasure centre”, an “art centre” or perhaps a “love centre” – but none of this is true.

All of our experiences and abilities rely on a distributed brain network and nothing relies on a single “centre”. More than anything, the conclusions depend on the tasks volunteers undertake in the scanner and what each study tells us is limited. This small print has been repeated many times over by scientists. They bemoan how people misunderstand the subtleties and draw unwarranted conclusions. But now neuroscientists have had to come to terms with the fact that many of the methods on which brain scan studies are based have been flawed.

To understand where these flaws come from it’s important to know something about how data from the most common technique, functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging or fMRI, is analysed. The scanner creates a 3D map of the brain split up into tens of thousands of tiny blocks called voxels (like pixels but for volume) and each has a value that describes blood flow – used as a proxy for brain activity as more active areas need more oxygen. What you want to know is which bits of the brain are more active in certain tasks. Of course, the brain is changing all the time so scientists use statistics to check that changes in blood flow are due to the experimental tasks and not because of unrelated brain changes. The statistical problem is huge, however, as each scan has about 50,000 data points and thousands of scans are made in a single study.

Brain scanning technology is quickly approachi...

Brain scanning technology is quickly approaching levels of detail that will have serious implications

When we’re talking about millions of comparisons, a big problem is false positives. Imagine you are playing two roulette wheels. Clearly, the result of one doesn’t affect the outcome of the other but sometimes they’ll both come up with the same number just due to chance. Now imagine you have a roulette wheel for every point or voxel in the brain. A comparison of any two scans could look like some areas show linked activity when really there is no relationship. Ideally, the analysis should separate roulette wheels from genuine activity, but you may be surprised that hundreds if not thousands of studies have been conducted without such corrections. To illustrate the problem, Craig Bennett and his colleagues at the University of California did a spoof experiment on a dead salmon. The standard techniques showed “brain activity” in the deceased fish.

Further illustrating the issue, Edward Vul and Hal Pashler from the University of California showed that some researchers were producing conclusions by first picking out the best results and then seeing if there was a relationship between them. To return to our roulette analogy, it would be like discarding any results that weren’t in the range of numbers 1-5 and then using only these selected results to see if any of the same numbers came up, something that is suddenly much more likely. A recent study by Anders Eklund and colleagues from Linköping University in Sweden found that they could find spurious “brain activity” related to non-existent tasks with standard settings on the most popular fMRI analysis software.

Recent advances have tried to control these problems but researchers have become much more cautious. “Our default attitude to any new and interesting fMRI finding should be scepticism,” says Tal Yarkoni, a neuroscientist at the University of Colorado. “What’s particularly problematic,” he says, “is the amount of flexibility researchers have when performing their analyses… you have no idea how many things the researchers tried before they got something to work.” Psychologist Russ Poldrack, from the University of Texas, who has been at the forefront of correcting these issues, also highlights cultural issues. This flexible approach “also includes methods that are known by experts to be invalid, but unfortunately these still get into top journals, which only helps perpetuate them”. Yarkoni explains that “researchers have a big incentive to come up with exciting new findings”, meaning scientists are motivated to “torture” the data and journals are attracted by the media-friendly results.

In this light of this, stories about the discovery of “brain centres” fall flat and efforts to base public policy on brain scans become nothing short of ridiculous. But perhaps the most important problem is not that brain scans can be misleading, but that they are beautiful. Like all other neuroscientists, I find them beguiling. They have us enchanted and we are far from breaking their spell.

The secondary somatosensory cortex is colored ...

The secondary somatosensory cortex is colored green and the insular cortex brown in the top right portion of this image of the human brain. Primary somatosensory cortex is green in the top left. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Meditation nourishes the brain.

(NaturalNews) What is it about meditation that invokes so much mystery? When asked, people conjure images of difficult lotus positions, strange beliefs and exotic settings. Of course, none of that is necessary and the realities of a person sitting comfortably on their living room floor for a few minutes isn’t quite as interesting. Confounding public perceptions even more are the religious connotations that are sometimes connected to meditation. This only serves to further alienate people who could potentially benefit. This is unfortunate since it can easily be argued that prayer in any religion is a form of meditation. The practice of meditation has a long history in almost every major historical civilization and religion, yet there is so much that is not known.

When we look at the past philosophies and beliefs associated with meditation, we can understand the perspectives of the ancients according to contemporary science. Science has not replaced the old views; so far it has mostly served to strengthen many of the ancient beliefs. However, modern science has been able to fill in essential details of underlining processes.

It has been shown that meditation can increase pain tolerance (see below for sources). One study, published in the Journal of Neuroscience (2011), showed that meditation caused a 40% lowering of pain intensity and a 57% lowering of pain unpleasantness. That is impressive when you consider that morphine and other pain relieving drugs only lower these symptoms by about 25%. This relief came from subjects with no previous meditation experience who were taught basic meditation in a total of four 20 minute classes.

A number of studies that have utilized modern imaging technology, such as fMRI, have clearly shown that meditation increases blood flow to the brain and, with extended practice, actually makes significant changes to the brain’s physical structure. These changes can lead to increased efficiency and function in certain parts of the brain, such as heightened visuospatial processing and increased focus.

A Harvard Medical School study (2011) put subjects on a two-month course of meditation and then used fMRI to compare the brains of the mediators with the average brain. The results showed that the subjects had increased gray matter density “in brain regions involved in learning and memory processes, emotion regulation, self-referential processing, and perspective taking.”

In 2010, a University of Pennsylvania Medical Center study used SPECT (single-photon emission computerized tomography) to map out the differences in blood flow in the brain between people who meditate regularly and people who do not meditate at all. Specific regions of the brain were found to have more blood flow than those of the average person. “The observed changes associated with long-term meditation appear in structures that underlie the attention network and also those that relate to emotion and autonomic function.”

Meditation can also foster positive emotions and give practitioners an increased ability to deal with emotions in general such as those associated with stress and anxiety.

A 2009 study published in Neuroimage from UCLA used MRI to compare long-time meditators with novices. In the veteran meditators, they found significantly larger gray matter volumes in the right orbito-frontal cortex, the right thalamus and the right hippocampus. “Both orbito-frontal and hippocampal regions have been implicated in emotional regulation and response control. Thus, larger volumes in these regions might account for meditators’ singular abilities and habits to cultivate positive emotions, retain emotional stability, and engage in mindful behavior.”

The most researched and clearly established benefit to mediation is the increased ability of attention and self-awareness. Although meditation is not yet fully understood, one thing is certainly clear: meditation nourishes the brain.

Jun. 17 2011 - 
fMRI scanner in the basement of Green Hall

Neuroscience is in many ways a discipline still in its infancy, making it ripe for claims that veer closer to science fiction than science. In this post I’ve taken a cut at describing five real-deal developments in neuroscience that are going to heat up in the years to come, along with implications pro and con.

1. Boosting Thought Control with Real-time Brain Feedback

Research conducted this year shows that people control their thoughts more effectively when they can see how their brain reacts.  While in an fMRI machine, study participants were told to complete a set of mental tasks that either raised or lowered introspective thought (introspection requires higher-order, abstract thinking; non-introspection focuses on bodily sensations). They were simultaneously shown a real-time scan of their brains and could clearly see how part of their prefrontal cortex reacted when they worked on a task.

Participants with access to the brain scan significantly improved their brain regulation to successfully perform the tasks. A control group without access to the scan showed no improvement.

This is a development with a lot of upside. It’s plausible that we’ll eventually have a brain feedback app that clues us in when we’re losing focus or need to change mental direction. We’re obviously a long way from there, but the first step has been taken.

2. Changing Behavior with Non-invasive Brain Stimulation

Researchers in Taiwan recently found that applying a weak electrical current over the front of study participants’ scalps for just ten minutes significantly improved their ability to control their behavior.  The current is thought to “jump start” impulse control in a section of the prefrontal cortex called the pre-supplementary motor area.

The research also showed that the opposite effect can be induced by using the electrical current to suppress impulse control.  Brain stimulation is not new (deep brain stimulation has been around a long time), but non-invasive stimulation or suppression of behavior that actually works is cutting edge.

On the positive side, this could be the beginning of new therapies to treat ADHD and a buffet of impulsivity disorders without medications and their side effects. The fear is it could also be the beginning of non-invasive mind control techniques; plenty of paranoia fodder here to work with.

3. Erasing Targeted Memories

We’ve heard about memory manipulation for ages, but in the last couple of years it has made the transition from theory to practice.  A handful of credible studies have shown that memory can indeed be erased using procedures that involve removal or manipulation of specific proteins in the brain.  Down the road, it’s possible that we’ll be able to target specific memories for erasure.

In very recent research, Israeli scientists showed that they can erase memories linked to drug addiction, thereby removing one of the most confounding factors in addiction treatment.  That study speaks to the upside of memory erasure, along with the benefits of erasing traumatic memories. But targeted memory erasure begs a slew of ethical questions, not the least of which is whether we’re ready to accept the consequences of neutralizing part of what makes us human.

4. Altering Moral Judgments with Magnetism

Research of the last couple decades has shown that injuries to a part of the brain called the right temporoparietal junction (RTPJ), located at the brain’s surface above and behind the right ear, can change a patient’s moral judgments. When these patients are asked to answer morally challenging questions that weigh the life of one person against others, they consistently make utilitarian decisions without feeling the least bit uneasy. Their moral judgments about life and death, so vexing to most of us, become clinical and routine.

Researchers have recently found that they can induce a similar effect using magnetism (transcranial magnetic stimulation, or TMS) to disrupt RTPJ activity. When participants were exposed to magnetic “bursts” from a TMS device, their judgments about what is morally permissible significantly changed. For example, they were more likely to say that intending to harm another was morally permissible if the other person luckily avoided becoming a victim; they considered the intention of the first person to be irrelevant.  The effect was only temporary, but the implications are massive. Most of us consider moral judgment a higher order thought process, but this research shows that it can be tweaked by a weak magnetic field in a matter of minutes.

This development stirs multiple fears, but one that immediately comes to mind is the possibility of tuning down moral apprehension even lower and creating synthetic psychopaths.  On the other hand, perhaps there’s a good case to be made that some of us could use a little tuning down.

5. Controlling microRNA to Make Brain Cells Death-resistant

Like tiny toggle switches, microRNA are powerful molecules that silence the activity of as many as two-thirds of all human genes.  In recent years they have emerged as key players in neurobiological development and disease.  This year, researchers at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, made the remarkable discovery that microRNA may also be able to make brain cells resistant to programmed death, or “apoptosis.”

A huge amount of the human brain’s neurons die as we undergo normal growth and development.  A portion, however, do not die, and they live on for the long haul.  No one has been sure why those neurons survive the destructive “pruning” phase that eliminates droves of other neurons. The current research indicates that microRNA are at the heart of neuron survival, acting to essentially turn off the apoptosis mechanism that leads to cell death.

The upside is that if microRNA can be controlled in the brains of patients with neurological diseases such as Alzheimer’s, ALS and Parkinson’s, then we may be able to halt the cell destruction those diseases cause and effectively stop the disease before the damage is done. It’s important to note that this research was conducted using mice, but it’s also the first to make this discovery in any mammalian brain and a promising initial step.

Five Big Developments in Neuroscience to Watch – David DiSalvo – Neuropsyched – Forbes.

Bat in flight

The part of the brain used by people who can “see like a bat” has been identified by researchers in Canada.

Some blind people have learned to echolocate by making clicking noises and listening to the returning echoes.

A study of two such people, published in PLoS ONE, showed a part of the brain usually associated with sight was activated when listening to echoes.

Action for Blind People said further research could improve the way the technique is taught.

Bats and dolphins bounce sound waves off their surroundings and by listening to the echoes can “see” the world around them.

Some blind humans have also trained themselves to do this, allowing them to explore cities, cycle and play sports.

Brain scan Researchers looked at two patients who use echolocation every day. EB, aged 43, was blinded at age 13 months. LB, 27, had been blind since age 14.

They were recorded echolocating, while microphones were attached to their ears.

The recordings were then played while their brain activity was being recorded in an fMRI machine.

Increased activity in the calcarine cortex was discovered.

Dr Lore Thaler, from University of Western Ontario, said: “This suggests that visual brain areas play an important role for echolocation in blind people.”

The study looked at only two people so cannot say for certain what happens in the brains of all people who learn the technique, but the study concludes: “EB and LB use echolocation in a way that seems uncannily similar to vision.”

Susie Roberts, rehabilitation officer at Action for Blind People, said: “This research into brain activity and echolocation is very interesting and improves our understanding of how some visually impaired people may be processing information to help them navigate safely.

“Further investigation may help to improve the way the technique is taught to people in the future, potentially improving their mobility and independence.”

BBC News – Human brain’s ‘bat sight’ found.

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data related to unfair proposals. (Credit: Katarina Gospic, Erik Mohlin, Peter Fransson, Predrag Petrovic, Magnus Johannesson, Martin Ingvar. Limbic Justice—Amygdala Involvement in Immediate Rejection in the Ultimatum Game. PLoS Biology, 2011; 9 (5): e1001054 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001054)

ScienceDaily (May 4, 2011) — A new study from the Karolinska Institute and Stockholm School of Economics shows that the brain has built-in mechanisms that trigger an automatic reaction to someone who refuses to share.

In the study publishing in the online open access journal PLoS Biology, the subjects’ sense of justice was challenged in a two-player monetary fairness game, and their brain activity was simultaneously measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). When bidders made unfair suggestions as to how to share the money, they were often punished by their partners even if it cost them. This reaction to unfairness could be reduced by targeting one specific brain region, the amygdala.

The study is based on the universal human behaviour to react with instant aggression when another person behaves unfairly and in a manner that is not in the best interest of the group. The researchers had 35 subjects play a money-based fairness game, in which one player suggests to another how a fixed sum of money is to be shared between them; the other player can then either accept the suggestion and take the money, or reject it, in which case neither player receives anything.

“If the sum to be shared is 100 SEK kronor and the suggestion is 50 each, everyone accepts it as it is seen as fair,” says Dr Katarina Gospic. “But if the suggestion is that you get 20 and I take 80, it’s seen as unfair. In roughly half the cases it ends up with the player receiving the smaller share rejecting the suggestion, even though it costs them 20 SEK.”

Previous research has suggested that the area controlling the ability to analyse and make financial decisions is located in the prefrontal cortex and insula. Using fMRI, however, the researchers saw that the brain area controlling for fast financial decisions was actually located in the amygdala, an evolutionary old and therefore more primitive part of the brain that controls feelings of anger and fear.

To explore these results further, the subjects were either given the anti-anxiety tranquilliser Oxazepam or a placebo while playing the game. The researchers found that those who had received the drug showed lower amygdala activity and a stronger tendency to accept an unfair distribution of the money -despite the fact that when asked, they still considered the suggestion unfair. In the control group, the tendency to react aggressively and punish the player who had suggested the unfair distribution of money was directly linked to an increase in activity in the amygdala. A gender difference was also observed, with men responding more aggressively to unfair suggestions than women byshowing a correspondingly higher rate of amygdalic activity. This gender difference was not found in the group that received Oxazepam.

“This is an incredibly interesting result that shows that it isn’t just processes in the prefrontal cortex and insula that determine this kind of decision about financial equitability, as was previously thought,” says Professor Martin Ingvar. “Our findings, however, can also have ethical implications since the use of certain drugs can clearly affect our everyday decision-making processes.”

This work was funded by the Swedish Research Council, The Barbro and Bernard Osher Foundation, The Swedish Agency for Innovation Systems

(VINNOVA), The Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research, The Jan Wallander and Tom Hedelius Foundation, The Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research, The Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation and the Karolinska Institute.

Sense of justice built into the brain, imaging study shows.

A fMRI scan showing regions of activation in o...

Image via Wikipedia


ScienceDaily (May 3, 2011)Ecstasy — the illegal “rave” drug that produces feelings of euphoria and emotional warmth — has been in the news recently as a potential therapeutic. Clinical trials are testing Ecstasy in the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder.

But headlines like one in Time magazine’s health section in February — “Ecstasy as therapy: have some of its negative effects been overblown?” — concern Ronald Cowan, M.D., Ph.D., associate professor of Psychiatry.

His team reports in the May issue of Neuropsychopharmacology that recreational Ecstasy use is associated with a chronic change in brain function.

“There’s tension in the fields of psychiatry and psychotherapy between those who think Ecstasy could be a valuable therapeutic that’s not being tested because of overblown fears, and those who are concerned about the drug’s potentially harmful effects,” Cowan said.

“We’re not on one side or the other; we’re just trying to find out what’s going on in the brain — is there any evidence for long-lasting changes in the brain?”

The message in news reports needs to be accurate, Cowan said. His team’s studies suggest that the current message should be: “If you use Ecstasy recreationally, the more you use, the more brain changes you get.”

Cowan and his colleagues examined brain activation during visual stimulation, using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), in subjects who had previously used Ecstasy (but not in the two weeks prior to imaging) and in subjects who had not previously used Ecstasy.

They found increased brain activation in three brain areas associated with visual processing in Ecstasy users with the highest lifetime exposure to the drug. The findings were consistent with the investigators’ predictions based on results from animal models: that Ecstasy use is associated with a loss of serotonin signaling, which leads to hyper-excitability (increased activation) in the brain.

The hyper-excitability suggests a loss in brain efficiency, Cowan said, “meaning that it takes more brain area to process information or perform a task.”

The investigators found that this shift in brain excitability did not return to normal in subjects who had not used Ecstasy in more than a year.

“We think this shift in cortical excitability may be chronic, long-lasting, and even permanent, which is a real worry,” Cowan said, noting that the Ecstasy users in the study are young (18 to 35 years old). “The question is what will happen to their brains as they age over the next 60 years.”

Cowan said that the pattern of hyper-excitability is similar to that observed in fMRI studies of individuals at risk for, or with early, Alzheimer’s disease.

“I’m not saying that these people are at increased risk for dementia, but that there’s a loss of brain efficiency in both recreational Ecstasy use and early Alzheimer’s.”

The findings suggest that brain hyper-excitability (increased activation in fMRI scans) may be a useful biomarker for Ecstasy-induced neurotoxicity, which the investigators will continue to study.

“Our goal is to be able to let people know whether or not the drug is causing long-term brain damage,” Cowan said. “That’s really critical because millions of people are using it.”

The 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health estimated that 14.2 million individuals 12 years or older in the United States had used Ecstasy in their lifetime; 760,000 people had used Ecstasy in the month prior to being surveyed.

Cowan is also interested in determining the doses of Ecstasy that are toxic, and whether there are genetic vulnerabilities to toxicity. If clinical trials show that the drug has therapeutic benefits, it’s critical to know the risks, he said.

The research was supported by the National Science Foundation, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute of Mental Health, and the National Center for Research Resources.

Ecstasy associated with chronic change in brain function.

Animation of an MRI brain scan, starting at th...

Image via Wikipedia

Wednesday, 4 May 2011

Don’t worry – and it might happen. Worrying may be a key to survival; a first step in the body’s defence strategy when faced with threats. Pioneering research using brain scanners has located the worry centre of the brain and suggests for the first time that it is an area involved in survival and the assessment of threats and risks.


The same team of researchers has also shown that drugs used to treat worry or anxiety disorder have an effect on humans’ defensive reactions.

“Feelings like worry and anxiety may be unpleasant, but it seems they are part of our defensive repertoire and help keep us safe and it is only when they become exaggerated do they represent an illness,” says Dr Adam Perkins of King’s College London. “Our ultimate aim is to improve the detection, diagnosis and treatment of illnesses, such as anxiety, where there are unusually strong and debilitating forms of worry.”

Fear has been linked to the “flight or fight” response, which prepares the body to confront the threat or run away, by triggering physiological changes including a tensing of muscles ready for action and a faster heartbeat to get more blood flowing.

It’s now suggested worry may have evolved as an earlier reaction, as a way of assessing potential threats before fear kicks in.

Worry or anxiety has been defined as an unpleasant emotional state involving apprehension, dread, distress, and uneasiness. Fear is similar, but involves a specific object. In the new research , scientists set out to find out what happens in the human brain when we worry. No similar research has been carried out on humans.

Dr Perkins and his team developed a video game designed to produce similar anxiety effects in humans as those induced in animals. It is a computerised human version of a task used to measure defensive reactions in rodents. The 12 men and women each played the game while inside an MRI scanner. Scientists used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to track activity in the brain when the men and women were completing the computer game.

When areas of the brain increase their activity, the amount of oxygen that they use increases and that can be detected with fMRI.

The main theory the scientists set out to test was that the hippocampus would become highly active when people were in the phase of the computer game when they were anxious or worrying. This area of the brain was previously thought to be associated primarily with long-term memory and spatial awareness. Initial results support the hypothesis and bigger studies are now planned. The hippocampus also plays a role in the fight-or-flight response by triggering physiological changes including a tensing of muscles ready for action and a faster heartbeat to get more blood flowing to the brain and muscles.

Nerve cells pass the perception of a threat to the hypothalamus, which sends signals down the spinal cord to the adrenal glands and chemical messengers are released which results in the stress hormone, cortisol. It in turn orchestrates a cascade of physiological responses which result in an increase in blood pressure and sugar levels and a suppression of the immune system. Cortisol sets fatty acids free to be transformed into energy for muscles: ready for action. Anxiety and excessive worry were once thought to be wholly learned, but we are now realising they may be caused by alterations in the functioning of brain systems that evolved to control defensive reactions,” says Dr Perkins.

“We have shown that the hippocampus is involved and that suggests that worry is part of the human defensive response. We knew fear was part of that repertoire, which is linked to flight-or-fight reactions, but it now seems worry is, too, with the hippocampus as the worry control centre in the brain, which is activated when we are in a situation of potential threat.”


As well as providing new insight into the functioning of worrying and anxiety, the findings of the research, part-funded by AXA, may lead to new treatments which target the hippocampus. Professor Stephen Williams, head of neuroimaging at the Institute of Psychiatry, at King’s College, where the work was carried out, said: “This study investigates for the first time the role of the human hippocampus in a realistic risk assessment situation using functional magnetic resonance imaging.

“These are very exciting results and could lead to the development of new therapies in the treatment of anxiety disorders focusing on the hippocampus.” Worry, which has long been a source of fascination, intrigue, and challenge for poets, philosophers and psychiatrists alike, is universal, but research is increasingly showing wide individual variations.

Most people are in the middle of the “worry continuum”. They fret about money, children and everyday things, but it doesn’t interfere with their daily lives. In fact, mild-to-moderate anxiety has been shown to have tangible benefits. A study of patients having minor surgery showed that those with moderate anxiety did better post-operatively than those with high or low anxiety levels. One theory is that moderate anxiety about real threats helps people cope with those challenges. There are those who worry all the time and for whom anxiety is a disabling, excessive, irrational dread of everyday situations.

One in 10 people is estimated to suffer at some time from one or more of the big five anxiety disorders – generalised anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, panic disorder, social phobia and post-traumatic stress disorder.

It also emerged that there are people who worry less than normal. People with ADHD, for example, may have lower levels of anxiety and so too may psychopaths. Low levels are also found in risk-takers.

“Worrying is important, but it should not be seen in isolation,” says Dr Perkins.

“Anxiety doesn’t bring happiness, but it can bring success, especially when combined with intelligence.

“Biographical information about Charles Darwin, for example, suggests he was plagued for much of his adult life with severe anxiety, but he was also substantially more intelligent than the average person.

“As a result, although he appears to have felt miserable much of the time, his superior intellectual ability meant his anxiety was channelled into the highly-important work of worrying about the origin of species rather than some trifling matter, such as whether or not his socks matched his trousers. Someone with the same levels of anxiety as Darwin, but half his IQ, might well have ended up roaming the streets and eating from bins.


“People who worry and are also blessed with high IQ tend to be visionaries, planners, creators and inventors. People who do not worry much at all, but are also highly intelligent, tend to be the successful implementers in frontline, stressful situations. For example, fighter pilots typically have low levels of trait anxiety and are able to operate their planes on highly-dangerous combat missions, the mere thought of which would give an anxiety-prone person sleepless nights.”

Worry has been linked to physical health problems. In research at the University of Leiden in The Netherlands, teachers had their heart rate monitored 24 hours-a-day and kept a log of when they had episodes of worrying. Results show that when they were worrying, their heart rate increased by 2.55 beats a minute and variability went down by 5.76 milliseconds. Two hours after the episode, the heart rate was still 1.52 beats per minute higher.

The findings are important because heart rate is a measure of how hard the heart is working and a higher rate means it is having to work harder. Increased rates and reduced heart rate variability have both been linked to a higher risk of heart problems.

While some worrying is necessary and protective, both too little and too much, it seems, can be hazardous.

Excessive worrying is not only potentially unhealthy, it has absolutely no value and purpose.

As the American novelist Alice Caldwell Rice, put it: “It ain’t no use putting up your umbrella ’til it rains.”

Does stress help us succeed? – Features, Health & Families – The Independent.

ScienceDaily (Apr. 15, 2011)

Researchers already know that alcohol dependence (AD) is strongly associated with impaired impulse control or, more precisely, the inability to choose large, delayed rewards rather than smaller but more immediate rewards. Findings from a study using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate the neural basis of impulsive choice among individuals with alcohol use disorders (AUDs) suggest that impulsive choice in AD may be the result of functional anomalies in widely distributed but interconnected brain regions that are involved in cognitive and emotional control.

Results will be published in the July 2011 issue of Alcoholism: Clinical & Experimental Research and are currently available at Early View.

“Individuals with AD score higher on questionnaires that measure impulsivity — for example, ‘I act without thinking’ — are less able to delay gratification, and are less able to inhibit responses,” said Eric D. Claus, a research scientist with The Mind Research Network and first author of the study.

Given that impulsive choice in AUDs has been associated with impairment of frontal cortical systems involved in behavioral control, Claus explained, this study was designed to examine the neural correlates of one specific aspect of impulsivity, the ability to delay immediate gratification and instead choose rewards in the future.

“We investigated this choice process in individuals with alcohol use problems ranging from alcohol abuse to severe AD that required treatment,” said Claus. “This is the largest study to date that has investigated the neural correlates of impulsive choice in AD, which enabled us to examine the full range of AUDs instead of only examining extreme group differences.”

Claus and his colleagues examined 150 individuals (103 males, 47 females) with various degrees of alcohol use. All of the participants completed a delay discounting task — during which two options were presented, a small monetary (e.g., $10) reward available immediately or a larger monetary reward (e.g., $30) available in time (e.g., two weeks) — while undergoing fMRI. Impulsive choice was defined as the selection of the more immediate option.

“We showed two things,” said Claus. “We replicated previous research by showing that AUD severity was associated with a greater tendency to discount future rewards. In addition, we showed that when individuals with more severe AUDs did delay gratification, they engaged the insula and supplementary motor area — regions involved in emotional processing and response conflict — to a greater degree than individuals with less severe AUDs. In summary, these findings suggest that the dysfunction in these regions is graded and increases as a function of AUD severity, rather than operating as an all-or-none function.”

“This work showed that the brains of alcoholics don’t behave all that differently from the brains of non-alcoholics during delay discounting but that the alcoholic brain had to work harder when they chose the delayed reward,” said Daniel W. Hommer, chief of the Section of Brain Electrophysiology & Imaging at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. “Many different studies have shown similar results, that is, alcoholics have a greater increase in brain blood flow to perform the same task as non-alcoholics.”

“The current study suggests that the neural dysfunction underlying impulsive choice seems to increase with AD severity,” added Claus. “Now that we know that this neural dysfunction is associated with impulsivity, the next steps are to determine whether this impulsivity predates the onset of AD and whether neural measures of impulsivity can predict who will respond best to particular types of treatment. Further, the particular neural dysfunction that we observed indicates that individuals with more AD may be more impulsive because their brain is aversive to delay gratification, and not because it is rewarding to be impulsive. Clinicians might need to deal directly with the aversion of choosing future benefits over immediate ones.”

“The most important thing about this paper is that it leads you to question what people mean by impulsive behavior and how should it be measured,” said Hommer. “The field has defined increased discounting of time — failure to delay gratification — as a good measure of impulsiveness, but the results reported in this paper say ‘Wait a minute, delay discounting does not correspond to what is usually meant by impulsiveness.’ Rather, brain activity during a delay discounting task looks more like how the brain responds during conflicted decision-making than it does during rapid, unconflicted choice of a highly valued goal.” Hommer added that this sort of debate is important to researchers, forcing them to think more carefully about what they mean by impulsive choice.

Researchers link alcohol-dependence impulsivity to brain anomalies.


ScienceDaily (Apr. 20, 2011)If a friend or relative won $100 and then offered you a few dollars, would you accept this windfall? The logical answer would seem to be, sure, why not? “But human decision making does not always appear rational,” said Read Montague, professor of physics at Virginia Tech and director of the Human Neuroimaging Laboratory at the Virginia Tech Carilion Research Institute.

According to research conducted over the last three decades; only about one-fourth of us would say, “Sure. Thanks.” The rest would say, “But that’s not fair. You have lots. Why are you only giving me a few?” In fact, people will even turn down any reward rather than accept an ‘unfair’ share.

Unless they are Buddhist meditators, in which case — fair or not — more than half will take what is offered, according to new research by Ulrich Kirk, research assistant professor with the Human Neuroimaging Laboratory at Virginia Tech; Jonathan Downar, assistant professor with the Neuropsychiatry Clinic and the Centre for Addition and Mental Health at the University of Toronto; and Montague, published in the April 2011 issue of Frontiers in Decision Neuroscience.

Their research shows that Buddhist meditators use different areas of the brain than other people when confronted with unfair choices, enabling them to make decisions rationally rather than emotionally. The meditators had trained their brains to function differently and make better choices in certain situations.

The research “highlights the clinically and socially important possibility that sustained training in mindfulness meditation may impact distinct domains of human decision making,” the researchers write.

The research came about when Montague wondered whether some people are capable of ignoring the social consideration of fairness and can appreciate a reward based on its intrinsic qualities alone. “That is,” he said, “can they uncouple emotional reaction from their actual behavior?”

Using computational and neuroimaging techniques, Montague studies the neurobiology of human social cognition and decision-making. He and his students recruited 26 Buddhist meditators and 40 control subjects for comparison and looked at their brain processes using functional MRI (fMRI) while the subjects played the “ultimatum game,” in which the first player propose how to divide a sum of money and the second can accept or reject the proposal.

The researchers hypothesized that “successful regulation of negative emotional reactions would lead to increased acceptance rates of unfair offers” by the meditators. The behavioral results confirmed the hypothesis.

But the neuroimaging results showed that Buddhist meditators engaged different parts of the brain than expected. Kirk, Downar, and Montague explained that “The anterior insula has previously been linked to the emotion of disgust, and plays a key role in marking social norm violations, rejection, betrayal, and mistrust. In previous studies of the ultimatum game, anterior insula activity was higher for unfair offers, and the strength of its activity predicted the likelihood of an offer being rejected. In the present study, this was true for controls. However, in meditators, the anterior insula showed no significant activation for unfair offers, and there was no significant relationship between anterior insula activity and offer rejection. Hence, meditators were able to uncouple the negative emotional response to an unfair offer, presumably by attending to internal bodily states (interoception) reflected by activity in the posterior insula.”

The researchers conclude, “Our results suggest that the lower-level interoceptive representation of the posterior insula is recruited based on individual trait levels in mindfulness. When assessing unfair offers, meditators seem to activate an almost entirely different network of brain areas than do normal controls. Controls draw upon areas involved in theory of mind, prospection, episodic memory, and fictive error. In contrast, meditators instead draw upon areas involved in interoception and attention to the present moment. …This study suggests that the trick may lie not in rational calculation, but in steering away from what-if scenarios, and concentrating on the interoceptive qualities that accompany any reward, no matter how small.”

Functional MRI shows how mindfulness meditation changes decision-making process.