What Are the Causes of Parkinson's Disease?
Parkinson's disease is a nervous system disorder impacting movement and balance, with the exact causes still under investigation, though it's known to involve the loss of dopamine-producing nerve cells in the brain.
Genetic factors, environmental exposures (such as pesticides), and the presence of Lewy bodies (abnormal protein clumps in the brain) are all potential contributors to the development of Parkinson's disease.
Age and biological sex also influence Parkinson's risk, with advanced age being the most significant risk factor, and individuals assigned male at birth showing a higher susceptibility to the disease.
Parkinson's disease is a chronic disorder of the nervous system, which is made up of pathways of cells and neurons that send and receive signals throughout your body.
As of 2017, around 1 million people lived with Parkinson's in the United States. And, according to the Parkinson's Foundation, that number is expected to rise to 1.2 million by 2030 — each year, approximately 60,000 new diagnoses occur in the United States.
Parkinson's disease is caused by the loss of nerve cells in a part of your brain called the substantia nigra. These cells control the production of the chemical dopamine. Dopamine helps control movement in your body. But when the cells are impaired, less dopamine is produced.
This condition isn't fatal, but it can cause severe symptoms that impact everyday movement and mobility.
Hallmark symptoms include tremors and trouble with gait and balance. These symptoms develop because the brain's ability to communicate is impaired.
Researchers aren't yet certain what causes Parkinson's. Read on to learn more about several factors that may contribute to the condition.
The genetics of Parkinson's
A 2020 study including 1,676 people with Parkinson's in mainland China suggested that genes play a role in the development of the condition. An estimated 10 to 15 percent of people with Parkinson's have a family history of the condition.
In fact, a number of specific genes have been linked to the development of Parkinson's.
How do genetics factor into Parkinson's in some families? According to Genetics Home Reference, one possible way is through the mutation of genes responsible for producing dopamine and certain proteins essential for brain function.
Some newer research from 2021 indicates that treatments could potentially be tailored to a person's specific genetic background. However, more research has to first be done on genetic forms of the condition.
Environmental causes of Parkinson's disease
There's some evidence that your environment can play a role in Parkinson's disease. Exposure to certain chemicals has been suggested as a possible link to the condition. These include:
pesticides such as insecticides
herbicides
fungicides
It's also possible that Agent Orange exposure may be linked to Parkinson's, according to VA Health Care.
Parkinson's has also been potentially linked to drinking well water in some older studies, such as one from 2009. However, a nationwide study from 2020 suggested that may not be the case. More research needs to be done to determine if well water is associated with increased risk.
Some research, such as a 2020 study performed in Morocco, also links consuming excessive manganese, a necessary trace mineral, to an elevated risk of Parkinson's disease.
Not everyone exposed to these environmental factors develops Parkinson's, though. Some researchers, such as the author of a 2017 study, theorize that a combination of genetics and environmental factors causes Parkinson's.
Lewy bodies
Lewy bodies are abnormal clumps of proteins found in the brain stem of people with Parkinson's disease.
These clumps contain a protein that cells are unable to break down. They surround cells in the brain and, in the process, interrupt the way the brain functions.
Clusters of Lewy bodies cause the brain to degenerate over time. This results in decreased motor coordination in people with Parkinson's disease.
Loss of dopamine
Dopamine is a neurotransmitter chemical that aids in passing messages between different sections of your brain. In people with Parkinson's, the cells that produce dopamine are impaired.
Without an adequate supply of dopamine, your brain is unable to properly send and receive messages. This disruption affects the body's ability to coordinate movement and results in trouble with walking and balance.
Age and sex factors
Aging also plays a role in Parkinson's disease. Advanced age is the most significant risk factor for developing Parkinson's disease, according to a 2014 research review.
Scientists believe that brain and dopamine function begin to decline as your body ages, per a 2016 review. This makes a person more susceptible to Parkinson's.
A person's sex can also play a role in Parkinson's. According to 2014 research, people assigned male at birth (referred to as 'men' in the study) are more susceptible to developing Parkinson's than those assigned female (referred to as 'women').
The disease also seems to be more aggressive in males, per a 2020 review. Some researchers, including the authors of a 2015 research paper, are looking into whether sex-specific differences decrease with age.
Occupations affecting risk
Research from 2009 suggested that certain occupations may put a person at greater risk for developing Parkinson's.
In particular, Parkinson's disease may be more likely among people who have jobs in welding, agriculture, and industrial work. This may be because they're exposed to toxic chemicals. However, study results have been inconsistent, according to 2010 research.
Ultimately, more research needs to be done.
Future research
Experts have some clues as to why Parkinson's disease develops, but there's still a lot that's unknown.
Early detection and treatment are key in minimizing symptoms of Parkinson's. Advanced technologies such as genetic research, stem cell research, and using so-called neurotrophic factors to revive brain cells show promise in exploratory research.
Though treatments can help you manage Parkinson's symptoms and improve your quality of life, a cure hasn't yet been found. And more research is needed to identify the exact role that genetics and environment play in causing this disease.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
3 days ago
- Newsweek
A Doctor's Plea From a Nation Asleep on Brain Disease
Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. As a physician who once treated pain, I now endure the unimaginable. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) has left me quadriplegic, dependent on a tracheostomy to breathe and a feeding tube to eat. Diagnosed at 35, my career ended abruptly. My family's story reveals the scale of the coming storm—my father battles Alzheimer's, my uncle succumbed to Parkinson's, and my grandmother to Lewy body dementia. We are not outliers; we represent a silent epidemic. Neurodegenerative diseases are surging, yet our nation slumbers, unaware of the devastation ahead. The public's complacency is by design, built on a statistical illusion. ALS, fatal since 1869, exemplifies this peril. With a median survival of 2-3 years, it strikes about 1 in 300 people in their lifetime, which predicts that over 1 million people now alive in the U.S. will succumb to ALS. Yet, under federal law, it is labeled "rare" because that definition is based on prevalence—a static snapshot of how many people are living with a disease at one time. Because ALS kills its victims so quickly, the number of living patients stays below the 200,000-person "rare" threshold. Its very lethality ensures it is never treated like the mainstream public health crisis it is. This paradox obscures a terrifying forecast: a projected 69 percent global increase in ALS cases by 2040. This illusion of rarity perpetuates a deadly inaction that extends to all brain diseases. Alzheimer's already affects over 7 million Americans and is projected to strike nearly 13 million by 2050, costing our economy $384 billion in 2025—and projected to nearly $1 trillion annually by mid-century. Exterior view of the headquarters of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Exterior view of the headquarters of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Getty Images The failure to confront this crisis stems from a Tale of Two Agencies within the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In 2017, Congress established the Oncology Center of Excellence (OCE), a dynamic hub that has revolutionized cancer treatment, accounting for 85 percent of all accelerated approvals in the last decade. This success is the result of focused will and resources; National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding for cancer has topped $7.2 billion, compared to $2.8 billion for neuroscience. Neurology has no such center. Lacking an institutional home, it is fragmented, slow, and characterized by a risk aversion unthinkable in oncology. This disparity persists because of the tragic nature of these diseases. In the 1980s, ACT UP activists staged "die-ins" to force a reluctant government to fight AIDS. Patients with ALS, Huntington's, or Alzheimer's cannot mount a similar protest—we are physically silenced and immobilized, unable to "seize the FDA." This vulnerability places a unique moral obligation on our leaders to act proactively on behalf of the voiceless. The new FDA leadership now arrives with bold promises of change, posing a question that haunts everyone touched by an untreatable neurological disease: Will this time be different? Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. vows to "sweep away barriers" and to "figure out new ways ... of accelerating approvals for drugs and treatments that treat rare diseases." FDA Commissioner Marty Makary has several times asked why it takes 10 years for a drug to get to market and proposes a "conditional approval" pathway based on a "plausible mechanism." Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Director Vinay Prasad promised to "take action at the first sign of promise for rare diseases." For the ALS community, these words are now a crisis of credibility. In a disease that has a median survival of 2-3 years, we are asking for regulatory flexibility for a treatment that began its Phase 1 trial in 2011 and was granted FDA Fast Track designation in 2014. As a petitioner on the July 3 citizens' petition for a stem cell therapy known as NurOwn, my community has presented the FDA with a clear test. Ultimately, we are seeking accelerated approval based on new, unprecedented survival data from an expanded access program—data that exceeds the extension of survival of many approved cancer therapies. But the initial request is simpler: invite the sponsor to resubmit its application for a full review. Ours is a request for due process to give a voice to the voiceless—the lowest possible bar for the Trump administration to demonstrate its promised flexibility. A clear, bipartisan solution has already failed once. The Neuroscience Center of Excellence Act, introduced in 2021 to replicate oncology's success for brain disease, stalled in committee. It is time for our leaders to find the political will that has been so catastrophically absent. Congress must immediately revive and pass the Neuroscience Center of Excellence Act. The FDA, in turn, must match its leaders' promises with action by granting our petition a review. The science is poised for breakthroughs, but it is being shackled by a broken system. For those of us on a deadline, this is not a policy debate. It is a death sentence. Awaken now, before this silent storm engulfs us all. The voiceless can't wait. Dr. Shahriar Minokadeh, a former anesthesiologist trained at Johns Hopkins and pain management at UC San Diego, types via an eye-gaze device. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
New York Post
3 days ago
- New York Post
Hidden sleep danger could increase risk of 172 diseases, major study reveals
Experts agree that seven to nine hours of sleep is ideal for most adults — but when it comes to your health, the total number of hours might not be the most important factor. In a major new study led by teams from Peking University and Army Medical University, sleep irregularity has been linked to an increased risk of 172 different diseases. The researchers analyzed nearly seven years of UK Biobank sleep data from 88,461 adults averaging 62 years of age, focusing on multiple traits that included nocturnal sleep duration, sleep onset timing, sleep rhythm and sleep fragmentation, according to a press release. They then compared that data to disease outcomes from the National Health Service, the Cancer Registry and the National Death Index. They found that for 92 diseases — Parkinson's disease and acute kidney failure — 20% of the risk was tied to poor sleep behavior. 5 In a major new study, sleep irregularity has been linked to an increased risk of 172 different diseases. Rene La/ – Forty-two diseases were linked to at least double the risk. Those included age-related frailty, gangrene, and fibrosis and cirrhosis of the liver. Poor sleep traits were linked to 1.5 times the risk of 122 diseases, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, respiratory failure, certain bone fractures and urinary incontinence. Inflammatory pathways were identified as one possible link between irregular sleep and disease. 'Some common diseases showed considerable attributable risk, such as Parkinson's disease, pulmonary heart disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, thyrotoxicosis (hyperthyroidism) and urinary incontinence,' the researchers wrote. The results were published in the journal Health Data Science. 5 They found that for 92 diseases — Parkinson's disease and acute kidney failure — 20% of the risk was tied to poor sleep behavior. New Africa – 'Our findings underscore the overlooked importance of sleep regularity,' said Prof. Shengfeng Wang, senior author of the study, in the release. 'It's time we broaden our definition of good sleep beyond just duration.' Ashley Curtis, PhD, assistant professor and director of the Cognition, Aging, Sleep, and Health (CASH) Lab in the College of Nursing at the University of South Florida, was not involved in the research but shared her reaction to the findings. 'This study contributes to the growing evidence supporting the critical role sleep plays as a key modifiable risk factor across a range of medical disorders, particularly in mid- to late-life,' she told Fox News Digital. 'However, this study also emphasizes that how we measure sleep matters in terms of what conclusions we make regarding its impact on health across the lifespan.' 5 Poor sleep traits were linked to 1.5 times the risk of 122 diseases. Andrii Lysenko – Curtis highlighted the difference between self-reported sleep patterns versus objective measurements captured by wearable devices. 'Better understanding these patterns is important, because it can impact recommendations regarding what aspects of sleep we should be monitoring more closely in terms of assessing the risk of future declines in health,' she said. 'Additionally, these findings provide insight into the specific physiological sleep-related mechanisms that may be driving comorbid disease trajectories.' Potential limitations 5 Inflammatory pathways were identified as one possible link between irregular sleep and disease. Sergey – The researchers noted several major limitations in this research. The most prevalent is that the study is not representative of the nationwide population, as the participants were mainly middle-aged or elderly and therefore more susceptible to certain diseases. The sleep data was also captured at only one single point in time. There is also a chance that external factors or 'reverse causation bias' affected the results, they stated. Curtis echoed these limitations, noting that sleep was only measured across one seven-day time period and did not consider variability in sleep patterns over time. 5 Curtis highlighted the difference between self-reported sleep patterns versus objective measurements captured by wearable devices. Serhii – 'Further, there was a lack of consideration of sleep disorders, such as insomnia or sleep apnea,' she told Fox News Digital. 'Given that both of these sleep disorders are highly prevalent in aging populations, there is a need for future studies that include a more comprehensive clinical assessment in order to fully elucidate the link between sleep disorder profiles and the risk of other medical comorbidities.' The research team plans to conduct future studies to confirm causality and to measure how sleep interventions may impact chronic disease outcomes. The study was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China, the National Natural Science Foundation of China and the Beijing Municipal Health Development Research Fund.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Yahoo
Massive Study Links 6 Sleep Traits to Risk of 172 Diseases
The way we sleep can reveal a great deal about our overall health. But while many of us focus on the hours of shut-eye we get, new research suggests we should pay more attention to the timing and consistency of our bedtime. Researchers have now found that those with the poorest sleep rhythms may face a 2.8-times-higher risk of Parkinson's disease, and a 1.6-times-higher risk of developing type 2 diabetes, compared to those with consistent patterns of wakefulness and sleep. The findings come from the sleep data of more than 88,000 people in the UK Biobank, and while the results can only reveal correlations, they could point future clinical research in new directions. Altogether, scientists at Peking University and the Army Medical University in China considered the health effects of six sleep traits: length, onset, rhythm, extent and efficiency of sleep, and frequency of wake-ups during the night. Related: During the average 6.8-year follow-up, 172 diseases were associated with these sleep characteristics, with many tied to just one trait. To make the findings more robust, the associations were successfully replicated using another large database: the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Across both analyses, sleep duration (as measured by wearable sensors) showed a relatively weak association with disease risk, despite the fact that in surveys, many participants expressed greater concern over how much they slept, rather than how they slept. Sleep rhythm, meanwhile, showed three times as many disease links as those associated with sleep duration and onset. In fact, it was associated with nearly half of the study's 172 diseases. The term 'sleep rhythm' essentially refers to cycles of wakefulness and sleep, from when a person goes to bed, to when they wake each and every day. A more robust and regular sleep rhythm seems to be tied to healthier outcomes. Senior author and epidemiologist Shengfeng Wang from Peking University argues it is "time we broaden our definition of good sleep beyond just duration." "The existing literature has disproportionately focused on sleep duration rather than other sleep traits," write the study authors, led by Yimeng Wang from China's Army Medical University. In the current study, the most erratic sleep rhythms, as opposed to the most consistent ones, were linked to type 2 diabetes, primary hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, acute kidney failure, and depression – to name just a few. One of the strongest associations was with Parkinson's disease, which previous studies have also linked to sleep disorders. Sleep onset and sleep quality were also associated with several diseases. Those who went to bed after 12.30 am, for instance, were 2.6 times more likely to develop liver cirrhosis compared to those who went to bed before 11.30 pm. In addition, the least efficient sleepers showed a nearly 1.8-fold increase in respiratory failure compared to those who slept the most efficiently. The data is based on wearable sleep monitors as well as subjective reports, and that seems to be an important combination. Nearly a quarter of self-reported 'long sleepers' actually slept fewer than 6 hours a night. The findings indicate that purely relying on surveys, as previous sleep studies have done, may not be reliable. "For example, some participants with difficulty falling asleep or keeping stable sleep may have spent a long time in bed but have short real sleep," the researchers explain. "As evidenced by our analyses, this dramatic misclassification of sleep duration has introduced substantial bias to the estimation of effect size for a number of diseases, including stroke, ischemic heart diseases, cardiovascular disease, and depressive episode and recurrent depressive disorder." "Our findings underscore the overlooked importance of sleep regularity," concludes Wang. The study was published in Health Data Science. Related News Common Viruses May Wake Dormant Breast Cancer Cells, Study Finds Study Reveals The Shocking Amount of Plastic We Breathe in Every Day Researchers Identified New Blood Group After 50 Year Mystery Solve the daily Crossword
