Bacteria aids in Memory Storage and Anxiety Reduction

Introduction:

Recent studies show that changes in gut bacteria make mice less anxious and lowering levels of cortisol, the stress hormone. In humans, the link between gut bacteria and mental health is very evident. The wide range of the many microbes living in the gut affect people's physical health as well as their mental health. New research performed in England discovered that probiotics/prebiotics-strains of good bacteria- in the gut change the way in which people process emotional information, subsequently providing strong evidence that the changes in gut bacteria have anti-anxiety affects. Scientists are studying whether it would be possible to treat anxiety and/or depression with these strains of good bacteria or even improve the response to psychiatric drugs that these individuals take. Researcher, Philip Burnet, from Oxford University postulates these possibilities. There are still many studies that need to be conducted before these hypothesis can be proven as safe as well for the mental health of humans. (B)

This is not the first time that a study was conducted to further investigate the interaction between the nervous system and the gut. Nervous system signaling molecules also live in the intestines of the gut (aka: neurotransmitters) that are also found in the brain. Serotonin also known as the happy hormone is found in both locations. Researchers from Ireland in University College Cork gave a group of healthy men doses of 'Bifido-bacterium longum 1714' as the researchers noted responses to somewhat stressful situations. They found that certain probiotic bacteria might not only be helpful with anxiety but also improve memory. (A)

Research:

In a recent study from England, a larger group than those in Ireland were tested, 45 healthy individuals ranging from ages 18 to 45.  These individuals either took a prebiotic or a placebo everyday for the following 3 weeks. At the end of the 3rd week, they had to complete several computer tests to see how well they processed emotional information. (B)

Those who took the prebiotic paid less attention to negative words and more to positive ones. Those who took the placebo were more likely to pay attention to the negative information than than individuals who had been taking the prebiotic for 3 weeks. The results showed that people who take medications for anxiety or depression have a similar effect to those who took the prebiotic who reported to have less anxiety about negative stimuli. (B)

Another study conducted in Chicago by the Society for Neuroscience had 22 healthy males of ages ranging from 18 to 40 were given a placebo for 4 weeks and then a probiotic for the same amount of time. (Or vice versa) The subjects were to take numerous tests and questionnaires that would report anxiety measured by 'Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory' to the researchers. (A)

One test had the participants memorizing patterns within boxes in which those that took the probiotic showed improved performance. To test stress responses, the participants were asked to put their hands in ice cold water for 3 minutes. All showed an increase in anxiety, but those taking the probiotic had less severe of an increase in anxiety compared to those who had been taking the placebo. These tests also showed that cortisol- the stress hormone- was lower during the stressful situations. The participants were also asked to use an online questionnaire to report their daily stress levels. Towards the end of the study, decreased levels of stress levels were found in those who took probiotics. (A)

 The loopholes of this study, such as testing only men, unable to provide evidence that the bacterium made it to the GI tract (which could be shown through stool samples), nor were potential mechanisms that show patterns were investigated. The researchers did not use women in this study because their menstrual cycles could affect the cortisol levels making the study more difficult to attain clear results.  They also believe that the release of molecules from the bacteria interact with nerve fibers. (A)

Results:

Subsequently,  the study found that those who took the prebiotics had lower levels of cortisol in thier salvia when they woke up in the morning. High cortisol levels have been linked with stress, anxiety and depression. However, there were no changes in the levels of stress and anxiety which could have been due to the fact that the volunteers did not take the prebiotic long enough to have an effect. Their already low levels of stress and anxiety could have also been the reason. (B)

However, a 2011 study from France found that people who took probiotics for 30 days did have reduced levels of psychological distress. Because this is just one study, its findings need to be confirmed in future research. In a 2013 study, UCLA researchers gave women milk with or without probiotics, and then scanned their brains while they viewed photos of people with emotional facial expressions. Those who took the probiotics had less activity in their brains in areas involved in processing emotions, compared with those who did not take the probiotic. (B)

 Links:
(A) http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/probiotic-bacteria-may-help-reduce-anxiety-and-boost-memory-performance
(B) http://www.livescience.com/49248-gut-bacteria-mental-health.html

*These images do not belong to me- they were found on various tumblr sites! Please let me know if any are yours and I will give you credit for them! Thanks so much~

GMOs

 In a democratic society the role of the government is to create the right environment for the economic growth and improvement of general welfare. Private enterprises play a fundamental role in the economic development. Most of innovations and investments are made in the private sector. Among the main drives for people working in the private sector is the profit that they make for their shareholders. Shareholders who are owners of such companies and other people connected to them have the same interests in growing and profits and this is how interest groups are created.

Most of the time narrow interests of these groups are put above the general wellbeing. For example, to increase the profits private companies strive to maintain monopolistic status by using all means possible. This allows them to maintain prices high that the people will pay for their products. These interest groups can include insurance companies that insure people, software companies like Apple and Microsoft or other. In other cases, private companies try to hide the negative effects that their productive processes have on the environment. BP, for example, took short cuts in the process of drilling underwater and avoided the required work to take safety measures and protect the environment. As a result it was the society that had to absorb all the costs of oil spill that happened few years ago.

The same situation is with the companies that burn coal or other fuel contributing to the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. In other more extreme cases their products may cause direct harm to animals or even humans. Because disclosing such things and spending money to curb such effects they try to manipulate the elected officials using the lobbyist companies and making laws that allow their activities even though population may be hurt.

The role of the government is to regulate all the private companies’ activities in order people’s safety and wellbeing is guaranteed. It is always the public and its wellbeing that the government should take care off first and then the interest groups. Many times this requires fighting against the interest groups and their representatives, the lobbyist. The government is always under the effect of lobbyist and the population may not have its representatives to fight for them. Monsanto is one of the companies that has the same characteristics and attributes of the big companies that are driven toward profits.

Major food manufactures should strive to educate the public by allowing them to become part of the process of making new products or in this case, GMO foods. Farmers have manipulated their crops with genetic modifications such as fermentation, as well as, the selection of desired traits. Genetic engineering is simply a new form of genetic modification that transfers genes from one plant species to another. The transfer of DNA, a non foreign substance, from one species to another, is simply a modified way to attain an organism with preferred traits.

Genetically modified organism or GMO is by definition, ‘an organism, with the exception of human beings, in which the genetic material has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination.’ (1)

Instead of mating two plants to get an offspring, plants are now being bred in a laboratory by having DNA from another organism inserted to get the desired traits. This is a type of genetic engineering that involves plants and the foods we consume.  The usage of GMO technology allows for farmers to attain a desired genotype in the next offspring, as opposed to traditional breeding that takes up to several generations to get an offspring with a desired trait. Not only would farmers have to wait several generations for such an offspring, they would also have to wait for the plant to sexually mature before they too can be bred. GMO technology is more predictable and time efficient. (4)

The question is how healthy is genetically engineered food for us?

Anti-GMO organizations argue that the genotypes that transgenic technology produces could never exist in nature as scientists are transferring genes from animals to microbes or plants, making this method of larger food production more unpredictable.

There have not been enough studies on GM foods to be considered safe or unhealthy for people to eat. However, this could be due to the fact that the company Monsanto has restricted independent research on their genetically engineered crops by patenting their crops. (5)

These genetically engineered foods could pose unknown health threats such as proteins within GM foods that could trigger an allergic reaction. The closest side effects to any recorded death or illness due to the consumption of genetically engineered foods was in 1996 when an increase of low birth weight babies, infertility, and an increase in cancer was noted in the United States (5).

The latest anti-GMO campaign is blaming an increase in childhood cancers on GMOs. The National Cancer Institute tracking childhood cancer rates indicates an increase in childhood cancers. Although the rates of cancer have increased it is hard to say whether it is due solely to GM foods. There are many factors that can contribute to the increased rates of cancer and these factors can be diet, pollution, genetic makeup of parents, medical history, medications, and tobacco.

There was an experiment conducted in Scotland on rats that were only fed GM potatoes that contained the gene lectin that suffered internal organ damage. (2) The study was conducted poorly with a species of rats that are known to develop cancer and lacks sufficient proof against GM foods. Therefore, there needs to be more research for the short term as well as the long term effects of these genetically engineered foods.

GM crops allow for farmers to benefit while pesticide resistance lowers the need for harsh and dangerous chemicals to be used. Consumers can benefit from these crops which can provide better taste, increased nutritional value, and can last a longer period of time. GM crops could be the answer to world hunger. These crops allow for farmers to produce larger crops that are profitable for farmers in the marketplace. These GM crops are nutrition enhanced which could help with malnutrition worldwide.

However, in developing countries much of their problems stem from corruption within the government itself where the defying problems are inequality, poverty, and the minimal amount of available land and food. The cost of GM seeds that these farmers would need to grow larger crops with a decreased amount of pesticides could backfire. Multinational corporations that control the market for the GM seeds could increase hunger rates forcing farmers to become reliant on these corporations.

The technology needed to provide GM foods to the people can make food accessible to almost all people including the poor. However, the companies that own GM technology also benefit from the production of GM foods. These biotech companies can easily become monopolies using their GMO technology to gain large profits from farmers that will inevitably have to pay for the purchase of GM seeds. (3)

There are benefits and risks to everything, but I believe that having genetically engineered foods could be the answer to the problems that occur world-wide and not in just America. Starvation and malnutrition could be a part of history instead of a leading cause of death in poverty stricken areas. It is true that companies like Monsanto could easily become monopolies expensively charging farmers for GM seeds in order to gross large profits and patent their crops so to prevent further research. But, with the governments job to protect human rights and the dignity of its people there should be laws restricting some of these companies’ powers so that the consumer as well as farmers can benefit not just these monopolies.

GMO products should be labeled under ingredients because people should have the right to know what they are consuming. Both Parties, pro-GMO and anti-GMO, try to manipulate the public’s opinion through the media.  Conquering ignorance will lead to direct benefits to the people. In order to accomplish this we need to educate people and make them involved in such decision processes.

It is important to educate people and public perception so that they can make their own choice in what is healthy. In the process of educating the public, it could ignite more research and more funding for studies on GMO products that could one day help starving people in America as well as developing countries around the world.

1. (http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalsusedforfood/a/Arguments-For-And-Against-Genetically-Modified-Organisms.htm )
2. (http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/gmos_india/pro_con2.html )
3. (http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalsusedforfood/a/Arguments-For-And-Against-Genetically-Modified-Organisms.htm )
4.  http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/07/15/5-genetically-modified-foods-you-should-never-eat-150434
5. (http://animalrights.about.com/od/animalsusedforfood/a/Arguments-For-And-Against-Genetically-Modified-Organisms_2.htm )
6.  *I do not own these images, they were found on various tumblr sites. Please let me know if any are yours and I will give you credit for them. Thanks so much!