logo
This neuroscientist has the secret to tackling inflammation

This neuroscientist has the secret to tackling inflammation

Telegraph8 hours ago

Imagine a future where you no longer have to take a pill for your ill. No more monthly prescription charges or time-consuming trips to the doctor. No debilitating side-effects; all you'd need is an hour-long operation to insert a tiny electrical device in your chest and neck to calm the inflammation in your body.
Inflammation is a natural process, and a certain amount is healthy and necessary. When a person becomes ill or injured, their immune system sends out its 'first responders' – inflammatory cells which start to heal the injured tissue. For example, a fever is evidence that your immune system is working properly. However, if this process continues for too long, inflammation can harm healthy tissues, and lead to chronic illness.
Dr Kevin Tracey is a professor of neurosurgery at the Zucker School of Medicine in Long Island, New York, and the president and chief executive of the Feinstein Institute for Medical Research. 'Inflammation causes or contributes to the conditions that kill two thirds of people on the planet,' he says. 'Of the 60 million that die per year, 40 million die from inflammatory conditions such as heart disease, stroke, or cancer.'
The key to fighting inflammation, according to Dr Tracey, is stimulation of the vagus nerve.
The vagus nerve, which runs down your neck and into your chest and abdomen, is an anatomical 'superhighway' comprising a complex network of more than 200,000 fibres connecting the brain to vital organs. It is part of your parasympathetic nervous system, responsible for the body's 'rest and digest' functions.
Dr Tracey is something of a pioneer in this area, which he investigates in his new book, The Great Nerve: The New Science of the Vagus Nerve and How To Harness Its Healing Reflexes, and he claims to be one of the most highly cited living scientists in the world.
Scientists have known about the vagus nerve since the 16th century, but for Dr Tracey, a breakthrough came in 1998 when a laboratory experiment gone wrong led to an unexpected discovery. He and his colleagues accidentally injected a rat with an inflammatory toxin – and an anti-inflammatory drug simultaneously injected in its brain had a restorative effect. Until then, scientists thought that the brain and immune system did not communicate.
The groundbreaking discovery on that that day gave way to to Dr Tracey and his colleagues realising that the vagus nerve wasn't just something that impacted the brain; it also controlled inflammation and, as a result, all areas of our health – from gut health to joints – and stimulating it could reduce harmful inflammation. 'It's obvious, at least to me, that this mode of treatment will soon be able to help millions who are suffering with inflammatory illnesses,' says Dr Tracey.
A new era of medicine
Thanks to ongoing research into the vagus nerve, the next decade could see vastly improved treatment of inflammatory illnesses such as rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease. In fact, Dr Tracey's new bioelectronic treatment for rheumatoid arthritis – which like all vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) treatment works on the premise of 'turning off' an inflammatory molecule called TNF – is awaiting regulatory approval.
Since Dr Tracey's initial breakthrough, research into the vagus nerve has accelerated, giving rise to a field known as 'bioelectronic medicine', where treatments use electrical signals rather than drugs. A pacemaker is an example of bioelectronic medicine, as is VNS, which some experts describe as 'a pacemaker for the brain'.
VNS involves the implantation of a device that sends regular, mild pulses of electrical energy to your brain stem through your vagus nerve in your neck. After reaching your brainstem, the electrical charge is discharged to different areas of your brain to change the way brain cells work.
'Vagus nerve stimulation has saved lives,' says Dr Tracey. 'Many patients who turn to VNS have tried everything – they have run out of options.
'The advantages over medication are that it's more targeted than a pill, it has a short half-life – you can turn the treatment on and off – and it has fewer side-effects than many drugs,' he adds.
Where VNS does work, it works miraculously. Dr Tracey tells the story of a lorry driver in one of his trials whose hands and feet were so affected by rheumatoid arthritis, he was unable to work. A week after being implanted with a vagal nerve stimulator the size of a pain-killing tablet, the driver was back to his normal life, even playing tennis.
'Meeting him was one of the happiest days of my professional life,' says Dr Tracey. 'Few scientists have the privilege of inventing something and then shaking hands with a patient it has helped. We're now getting emails from patients who are desperate for help. In one rheumatoid arthritis trial, we had room for 242 participants, but 20,000 people applied.'
Should this new treatment be patented by the FDA in the United States, the chances of it rolling out internationally are high. 'There will be a surge of patient demand,' says Dr Tracey, who believes it could help 1,500,000 to two million rheumatoid arthritis patients in the US, and 17 million worldwide. 'Just imagine: a one-hour surgery rather than a lifetime on toxic drugs.'
Farther into the future, says Dr Tracey, there may even be a VNS treatment for dementia. 'The link between Alzheimer's and inflammation is often talked about, but not well understood,' he says. 'But there is some evidence that VNS can enhance learning or memory.'
Will VNS become mainstream?
Even Dr Tracey accepts that VNS is not a fail-safe treatment, and that it only benefits about two thirds of patients. He knows that many traditional doctors still raise their eyebrows.
'Early advocates of VNS may be criticised by those defending the status quo, and who will say the 'effect' size of VNS is too small,' he says. 'Other, less benign forces may also hinder the adoption of vagal nerve stimulation, because this idea has the potential to disrupt the pharmaceutical industry.'
He is keenly aware that it's not in the interests of big pharma to invest in trials for a product that will make their products redundant – hence Dr Tracey's trials are funded by venture capital.
'I actually wrote my book for doctors to read, as well as for laypeople,' he says. 'My mission is to shorten the adoption curve of a new technology. I'm an introvert rather than an extrovert: I don't want the limelight personally. But I want the facts to be in the limelight.'
In Dr Tracey's eyes, the facts are clear: it's a low-risk treatment, with a high reward for those who do respond. 'I expect that vagus nerve therapy, like every other therapy, will not work in 100 per cent of patients,' he says. 'VNS has three possible outcomes. Those who respond are in remission, and others are much better and need less medication.'
On those who do not respond at all, he says: 'There is still more work to do. But I fully expect that millions of people with inflammatory conditions will soon be helped by this therapy.' He dreams that it will become a preventative treatment, for conditions such as atherosclerosis, diabetes or cancer.
'For those people who have exhausted the gamut of drug treatments, VNS represents hope – from the woman whose arthritic hands are so twisted she cannot do up her blouse, to the man unable to work or play with his small children because of the debilitating pain in his wrists and hands.
'VNS is not a cure-all, but for many patients, it's a possible. And as a neurosurgeon and scientist, I love to chase the possible.'
DIY stimulation of the vagus nerve for stress and anxiety
What about the miracle cures we see everywhere on the internet, from meditating to breathwork and plunging into ice-water?
Dr Tracey has a healthy scepticism. 'A clinical trial of one or two subjects is more like a fairy tale with a happy ending than scientific proof that the cold makes you healthier and stronger,' he says. 'In some cases, there is deep science, in others, not that much.'
Regulated breathing seems to have more evidence than meditation or coldwater plunges. 'These things are important, but it's important not to overhype, or oversell them. It devalues the science that we do know. I don't want to dilute my vagus nerve work for over 30 years,' he says.
On the other hand, says Dr Tracey, if these methods work for you, they work for you. He meditates, takes cold showers, and practices deep breathing every morning.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

NHS faces paying more for US drugs to avoid future Trump tariffs
NHS faces paying more for US drugs to avoid future Trump tariffs

Telegraph

time2 hours ago

  • Telegraph

NHS faces paying more for US drugs to avoid future Trump tariffs

Britain faces paying more for US drugs as part of a deal to avoid future tariffs from Donald Trump. The NHS will review drug pricing to take into account the 'concerns of the president', according to documents released after a trade agreement was signed earlier this year. White House sources said it expected the NHS to pay higher prices for American drugs in an attempt to boost the interests of corporate America. A Westminster source said: 'There's an understanding that we would look at the drug pricing issue in the concerns of the president.' The disclosure is likely to increase concerns about American interference in the British health service, which has long been regarded as a flashpoint in trade talks. It comes after Rachel Reeves announced a record £29 billion investment in the NHS in last week's spending review. The Chancellor's plans will drive spending on the health service up towards 50 per cent of all taxpayer expenditure by the mid-2030s, according to economists at the Resolution Foundation. The Telegraph has also learnt that under the terms of the trade deal with America, the UK has agreed to take fewer Chinese drugs, in a clause similar to the 'veto' given to Mr Trump over Chinese investment in Britain. The White House has asked the UK for assurances that steel and pharmaceutical products exported to the US do not originate in China, amid fears the deal could be used to 'circumvent' Mr Trump's punishing tariffs on Beijing. Mr Trump is enraged by how much more America pays for drugs compared with other countries and considers it to be the same issue as he has raised on defence spending. Just as the US president has heaped pressure on European nations to increase the GDP share they allocate to defence, he thinks they should spend more on drug development. An industry source said: 'The way we've been thinking about it and many in the administration have been thinking about it, it's more like the model in Nato, where countries contribute some share of their GDP.' Britain and the US 'intend to promptly negotiate significantly preferential treatment outcomes on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients', the trade deal reads. Pharmaceutical companies are also pushing for reductions in the revenue sales rebates they pay to the NHS under the voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing, access and growth (VPAG) – a mechanism that the UK uses to make sure the NHS does not overpay. Non-US countries are 'free-riding' Last week, Albert Bourla, Pfizer's chief executive, said non-US countries were 'free-riding' and called for a US government-led push to make other nations increase their proportionate spend on innovative medicines. He said White House officials were discussing drug prices in trade negotiations with other countries. 'We represent in UK 0.3pc of their GDP per capita. That's how much they spend on medicine. So yes, they can increase prices,' Mr Bourla said. Industry sources said there was no indication yet on what the White House would consider to be a fair level of spending. Whatever the benchmark, Britain will face one of the biggest step-ups. UK expenditure on new innovative medicines is just 0.28pc of its GDP, roughly a third of America's proportionate spending of 0.78pc of its GDP. Even among other G7 nations, the UK is an anomaly. Germany spends 0.4pc of its GDP while Italy spends 0.5pc. Most large pharmaceutical companies generate between half and three quarters of their profits in the US, despite the fact that America typically makes up less than a fifth of their sales. This is because drug prices outside of the US can cost as little as 30pc of what Americans pay. Yet, pharmaceutical companies rely on higher US prices to fund drug research and development, which the rest of the world benefits from. A month ago, Mr Trump signed an executive order titled 'Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients', which hit out at 'global freeloading' on drug pricing. It stated that 'Americans should not be forced to subsidise low-cost prescription drugs and biologics in other developed countries, and face overcharges for the same products in the United States' and ordered his commerce secretary to 'consider all necessary action regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or precursor material that may be fuelling the global price discrimination'. Trung Huynh, the head of pharma analysis at UBS, said: 'The crux of this issue is Trump thinks that the US is subsidising the rest of the world with drug prices. 'The president has said he wants to equalise pricing between the US and ex-US. And the way he wants to do it is not necessarily to bring down US prices all the way to where ex-US prices are, but he wants to use trade and tariffs as a pressure point to get countries to increase their prices. 'If he can offset some of the price by increasing prices higher ex-US, then the prices in America don't have to go down so much.' Mr Huynh added: 'It's going to be very hard for him to do. Because [in the UK deal] it hinges on the NHS, which we know has got zero money.' Under VPAG, pharmaceutical companies hand back at least 23pc of their revenue from sales of branded medicines back to the NHS, worth £3bn in the past financial year. The industry is pushing for this clawback to be cut to 10pc, which would mean the NHS would have to spend around 1.54bn more on the same medicines on an annual basis. The Government has already committed to reviewing the scheme, a decision which is understood to pre-date US trade negotiations. A government spokesman said: 'This Government is clear that we will only ever sign trade agreements that align with the UK's national interests and to suggest otherwise would be misleading. 'The UK has well-established and effective mechanisms for managing the costs of medicines and has clear processes in place to mitigate risks to supply.'

Be aware of the hidden dangers of your guilty pleasures that could cause cancer, including being busy
Be aware of the hidden dangers of your guilty pleasures that could cause cancer, including being busy

Daily Mail​

time3 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

Be aware of the hidden dangers of your guilty pleasures that could cause cancer, including being busy

A sip of wine, a craving for pizza, having a full calendar may all seem like harmless aspects of life but a scientist has revealed such seemingly innocent actions could be putting you on the brink of developing cancer. University of California's Dr Raphael Cuomo claims chronic stress, fast food, alcohol, and drugs are an almost surefire way to set yourself up for a diagnosis with the disease later in life. In Dr Cuomo's new book Crave: The Hidden Biology Of Addiction And Cancer, he noted that the body's repetitive desire to indulge in junk food and addictive behaviors drove the body to the deadly condition: 'Crave reveals how modern habits like vaping, binge-eating, and daily cannabis use hijack our biology.' The expert added: 'These behaviors quietly damage the body's ability to repair itself. Over time, they open the door to cancer. It is not about genetics or bad luck. It is about the choices we make every day.' Over 600,000 Americans and more than 150,000 Brits die of various cancers every year. After studying 'millions of patient records' from across the University of California hospitals and spending months reviewing studies on cancer biology, Dr Cuomo revealed what he says are the top habits most likely to cause the destructive illness. Fast food Dr Cuomo called eating fast food 'slow poison', and noted that its effects could not be seen immediately but might cause long-term damage. Earlier this year, researchers tested more than 300 foods sold at restaurant chains and in grocery stores across America for two microscopic toxins that have been linked to cancer, infertility, and autism. They found that of all fast-food restaurants, the salad chain Sweetgreen and coffeehouse Starbucks scored poorest. Sweetgreen's Chicken Pesto Parm Salad and Starbucks' Matcha Latte was found to contain the highest amount of phthalates, a group of chemicals used to make plastics more flexible and transparent. Studies showed that phthalates, commonly used in food packaging material, imitate the body's hormones and interfere with the production of and response to natural hormones like estrogen and testosterone. Some phthalates were linked to certain cancers, particularly breast cancer and lymphoma. However, Dr Cuomo pointed towards fiber consumption as a critical part of reversing damage as it would help improve gut bacteria, reduce inflammation, and keep cells healthy. Smoking and drinking Smoking causes about 30 per cent of overall cancer deaths in the U.S. and is a leading cause of lung, brain, neck, and bladder cancer. Alcohol consumption's been linked to an increased risk of several types of cancer, including breast, colon, liver, and esophageal cancer. About 20,000 people die of booze-related cancers, annually. Researchers in Germany found that a combination of drinking and smoking significantly raised the risk of colon cancer in young Americans. Researchers analyzed two dozen studies, comparing regular drinkers and smokers with people who abstained from both. Just 100 cigarettes in a person's lifetime - the equivalent of one per week for two years - was linked to a 59 per cent higher risk of colon cancer compared to people who never smoked. They also found drinking alcohol every day raised the risk of developing early onset colon cancer by 39 per cent, even if it's just one or two drinks per day. Alcohol and smoking have both been linked to cancer in the past, as they release chemicals that destroy DNA and cause cells to mutate. Also, each daily can of beer or glass of wine further increased the chance by an additional two per cent. In his book, Dr Cuomo noted that deep sleep is the 'most underestimated tool' to improve damage caused by addictions, such as smoking and drinking. He explained that during consistent deep sleep, the body performs critical tasks such as repairing tissues, regulating hormones, consolidating memory, and clearing metabolic waste. Stress A 2024 study presented at the United European Gastroenterology congress by a group of Chinese researchers noted that a combination of chronic stress and anxiety has been linked to colorectal cancer in young people. They explained when a body is under frequent stress, a number of healthy bacteria that live in the gut start dying off, making it easier for cancer to move in. When the bacteria die off, tumors grow more quickly, leading to more aggressive, rapidly growing colorectal cancers. Research from Trinity College in Ireland suggested these bacteria support the body's immune system, can protect against virus and bacteria, and prevent damage in gut cells. Apart from this, chronic stress can lead to increased levels of cortisol and other stress hormones in the body that can promote cancer growth and its spread to various parts of the body. A constant state of stress can also weaken the immune system's ability to effectively fight off cancer cells. However, Dr Cuomo believes that there are ways to break free from all addictions and prevent cancer development in the body. He said: 'The real threat is not a single cocktail or slice of cake. It is the craving that drives you back again and again. 'That craving is what wears down your body's defenses. I tell people to test their control. Start with one week of abstention. Not forever. Just seven days. That short reset reveals a lot. 'You learn what your body depends on. During that time, focus on physical recovery. Sleep deeply. Move your body. Eat real food. 'Spend time with people you trust. Addiction thrives in isolation. Recovery begins with reconnection.' Additionally, Dr Cuomo suggested replacing the habit by engaging in some form of movement, such as taking regular walks.

EXCLUSIVE Researchers pinpoint key sexual change that puts America on course for 2050 catastrophe
EXCLUSIVE Researchers pinpoint key sexual change that puts America on course for 2050 catastrophe

Daily Mail​

time5 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

EXCLUSIVE Researchers pinpoint key sexual change that puts America on course for 2050 catastrophe

Women are having their first child older than ever, according to new data that suggests the already-shrinking US fertility rate could see further declines. A new CDC report analyzing births from 2016 through 2023 found that the average age of first-time moms rose by nearly a year - from 26.6 years old in 2016 to 27.5 years old in 2023. Similar increases were also observed among women having their second and third children, with the average age at birth rising by one year for second births and just short of a year for third and higher-order births. Maternal age has been rising for decades, as the fertility rate in the US has been failing - having plunged to another new low in 2023, with fewer women than at any point in history having children. The rate was 54.5 births per 1,000 women of childbearing age (15 to 44 years old) last year, a three percent fall compared to 56 in 2022. The number of babies born in the US also declined year-over-year, with just under 3.6 million live births. Dr Jamie Grifo, the program director at New York University Langone Fertility Center, told 'We're below zero population growth in the US, and have been for years. 'I think there will be a social factor. There will be a lot of issues that result from the lack of reproduction.' The number of first births at age 30 and older also grew by nearly 13 percent for mothers ages 30 to 34 (from 22.3 percent to about 25 percent) and 25 percent for mothers age 35 and older (from 10 percent to 12.5 percent) from 2016 to 2023 The most recent CDC data showed that in 2023, the total fertility rate fell to 1.62 births per woman, the lowest since the government began tracking the metric in the 1930s. Experts say the US is headed for a so-called 'underpopulation crisis' by 2050, when too few people are born to support its current economic system. A previous National Vital Statistics Report found that from 1970 to 2000, the average age of mothers in the US rose by 2.6 years, with the most significant increase occurring among first-time mothers - from 21.4 in 1970 to 25 in 2000. The number of first births at age 30 and older also grew by nearly 13 percent for mothers ages 30 to 34 (from 22.3 percent to about 25 percent) and 25 percent for mothers age 35 and older (from 10 percent to 12.5 percent) from 2016 to 2023. This could be due to the rise in availability of birth control, as well as a steadily growing number of women in the workforce who are prioritizing career over starting a family. The increase in age at the start of motherhood suggests that the fertility rate is set to fall further. The CDC data shows women on average in 2023 are having 25 percent fewer children than their mothers and 50 percent fewer than their grandmothers. Births among women in their twenties have dropped by nearly one-third. 'Monitoring trends in maternal age at birth is important because maternal age can impact the total number of births and population growth and is associated with birth outcomes for both mothers and infants,' the CDC researchers said. 'For example, higher maternal age is linked to smaller family size on average and may carry different health risks and benefits compared with younger maternal age.' Older maternal age, particularly past 35, increases some risks of pregnancy complications, including gestational diabetes and miscarriage, as well as genetic abnormalities in the baby, like Down syndrome. 'This long-term shift reflects changes in societal, educational, and economic factors influencing when women begin childbearing,' the researchers said. The foundation for higher birth ages was laid in 1960 with the debut of the birth control pill, giving women control for the first time of their childbearing years. In the years since, it's become more common for people to have children later in life for various reasons — from financial concerns and child care challenges to delaying marriage or partnership and focusing on education, careers, or personal time in early adulthood. Choosing not to have children has also become more socially accepted, with some data indicating that more people are making that choice. Some studies suggest that kids born to older parents — who tend to be college-educated and relatively affluent — often grow up to be healthier, better educated, and better behaved than peers with younger parents. And women who have children later in life report larger happiness boosts around and after their birth, compared to younger mothers. In a 2018 New York Times survey, about 25 percent of respondents said they had fewer children — or expected to — than they'd initially hoped for, often because of financial limitations or feeling they'd run out of time to reach their ideal family size.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store