People Can Taste Flavor With Smell Receptors, Not Just Taste Ones

According to the latest research, the flavor of food is also a result of cell receptors associated with smelling things.

Scientists from the Monell Center report that functional olfactory receptors, the sensors that detect odors in the nose, are also present in human taste cells found on the tongue. The findings suggest that interactions between the senses of smell and taste, the primary components of food flavor, may begin on the tongue and not in the brain, as previously thought.

“Our research may help explain how odor molecules modulate taste perception,” said study senior author Mehmet Hakan Ozdener, MD, PhD, MPH, a cell biologist at Monell. “This may lead to the development of odor-based taste modifiers that can help combat the excess salt, sugar, and fat intake associated with diet-related diseases such as obesity and diabetes.”

While many people equate flavor with taste, the distinctive flavor of most foods and drinks comes more from smell than it does from taste. Taste, which detects sweet, salty, sour, bitter, and umami (savory) molecules on the tongue, evolved as a gatekeeper to evaluate the nutrient value and potential toxicity of what we put in our mouths. Smell provides detailed information about the quality of food flavor, for example, is that banana, licorice, or cherry? The brain combines input from taste, smell, and other senses to create the multi-modal sensation of flavor.

Until now, taste and smell were considered to be independent sensory systems that did not interact until their respective information reached the brain. Ozdener was prompted to challenge this belief when his 12-year-old son asked him if snakes extend their tongues so they can smell.

In the study, published online ahead of print in Chemical Senses, Ozdener and colleagues used methods developed at Monell to maintain living human taste cells in culture. Using genetic and biochemical methods to probe the taste cell cultures, the researchers found that the human taste cells contain many key molecules known to be present in olfactory receptors.

They next used a method known as calcium imaging to show that the cultured taste cells respond to odor molecules in a manner similar to olfactory receptor cells.

Together, the findings provide the first demonstration of functional olfactory receptors in human taste cells, suggesting that olfactory receptors may play a role in the taste system by interacting with taste receptor cells on the tongue. Supporting this possibility, other experiments by the Monell scientists demonstrated that a single taste cell can contain both taste and olfactory receptors.

“The presence of olfactory receptors and taste receptors in the same cell will provide us with exciting opportunities to study interactions between odor and taste stimuli on the tongue,” said Ozdener.

In addition to providing insight into the nature and mechanisms of smell and taste interactions, the findings also may provide a tool to increase understanding of how the olfactory system detects odors. Scientists still do not know what molecules activate the vast majority of the 400 different types of functional human olfactory receptors.

Advertisements

Gratitude in the Workplace Improves Employee Health

It turns out that making people feel valued goes a long way.

If you knew that expressing gratitude to a colleague would improve their life and yours, would you do it more often?

A new study by Portland State University researchers — business professor David Cadiz, psychology professor Cynthia Mohr, and Alicia Starkey, a recent Ph.D. graduate in psychology — together with Clemson State University professor Robert Sinclair, exhibits a positive relationship between expressed workplace gratitude, physical health and mental health.

The study, “Gratitude reception and physical health: Examining the mediating role of satisfaction with patient care in a sample of acute care nurses,” shows that being thanked more often at work predicted better sleep, fewer headaches and healthier eating, because it improved nurses’ work satisfaction.

Improving Self-Care in a Stressful Work Environment

The study involved a group of Oregon nurses, a profession that has a particularly high rate of burnout. Cadiz discusses the findings and how applying the research can have a significant impact on quality of life and job retention by preventing stress-related illnesses and disease.

“Nurses tend to have a thankless job. It’s very physical, and they’re often being screamed at by patients who are at their lowest. When nurses receive gratitude, it boosts them,” Cadiz explains.

“This type of study helps us understand how to keep nurses in the workforce in a healthy way. Nurses strongly align their profession with their identity and often look out for patients more than themselves. The gratitude matches up with their identity, gives them satisfaction in a job well done and ultimately increases self-care.”

Many people inherently connect their identity to their job and feelings of appreciation within their roles. Employers who understand and react to this can create positive social and economic change.

Gratitude is Good Business

From an organizational, policy and leadership perspective, Cadiz says that employers should create formal or informal opportunities for people to express gratitude. Including gratitude in a business plan is an essential step that many business leaders miss, and that omission can have financial consequences.

“Employees that receive positive feedback are healthier, and that can impact the bottom line,” adds Cadiz. “Preventing headaches and other stress-related symptoms means fewer sick days, and, in this case, cuts down the cost of replacement nurses and overtime pay.”

These small changes can have a dramatic fiscal impact over time, which can result in more staff, better pay rates and increased benefits.

The big takeaway — express gratitude when you see someone doing a good job. A positive feedback loop impacts you and those around you, and can ultimately shape a healthier and happier community.

Some Drug Company Executives Criminally Charged in America’s Flawed Democracy

A major producer of opioids known as the Rochester Drug Cooperative has recently witnessed its executives criminally charged with illegally distributing controlled substances. With the prosecution of corporate criminals at a 20 year low in America, amidst a major wave of corporate crime — crime in the suites instead of crime in the streets — it is a notable development during the despair-ridden opioid crisis.

Much of this opioid crisis is attributable to the patent monopolies on prescription drugs, which enable American pharmaceutical companies to charge ridiculously high prices. A patent monopoly on a drug legally prevents competitors from producing or selling that drug, and the lack of governmental negotiation to rein in prices allows pharmaceutical companies to charge to a large extent whatever they want. Purdue Pharma would have had nowhere near as much incentive to market Oxycontin if it was sold at generic prices, but since they had a tremendous incentive, many communities have suffered as a result of the addictive drug.

The case of patent monopolies on prescription drugs such as Oxycontin is another example of the government using its power in a way that’s overall against the public interest. The government is not necessarily an evil or inefficient entity, as people sometimes believe or that propaganda might suggest. There is plenty of evidence that structured properly, the government can be a force for the common good — government-run programs such as Medicare and Social Security remain popular because they work well. The administrative overhead on Medicare is about 2 percent, while the administrative overhead on corporate health insurance is often 12 to 20 percent.

It is beneficial for much of the corporate sector if the public automatically despises the government and doesn’t pressure for public interest control of it. Unlike the corporate sector, where the boards of directors (those who run the corporations) are largely determined by top management, in a undemocratic process where one share of the corporation equates to one vote in the board of directors election, there is a built-in democratic process in the government. This built-in process of one person (rather than one share) and one vote may currently be quite dysfunctional, but it is a mechanism of democratic values nonetheless, and one of the things to be strengthened for an improved society.

About every year at least, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists meets to discuss the most significant threats to human societies, and if necessary they adjust their famous Doomsday Clock. The Doomsday Clock measures the probability of major catastrophe by the minute hand’s closeness to midnight, and it is now 2 minutes to midnight, the closest it has ever been since 1953, when America and Russia detonated thermonuclear weapons. In 2019, the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists added a third major problem to climate change and the potential of nuclear war — the breakdown of and threats to democracy. This is significant because lively and functioning democracy offers perhaps the only way to solve many of the world’s most serious problems.

Activism that is deservedly popular (and therefore democracy-based, or majority supported) is very often how things change for the better, from worker’s rights to new government programs and movements producing a beneficial change in public consciousness. Instead of only examining problems, it’s necessary to remember that to achieve progress.

Just 20 Minutes in Nature Reduces Stress Levels

A good prescription for a stressed out society.

Taking at least twenty minutes out of your day to stroll or sit in a place that makes you feel in contact with nature will significantly lower your stress hormone levels. That’s the finding of a study that has established for the first time the most effective dose of an urban nature experience. Healthcare practitioners can use this discovery, published in Frontiers in Psychology, to prescribe ‘nature-pills’ in the knowledge that they have a real measurable effect.

“We know that spending time in nature reduces stress, but until now it was unclear how much is enough, how often to do it, or even what kind of nature experience will benefit us,” says Dr. MaryCarol Hunter, an Associate Professor at the University of Michigan and lead author of this research. “Our study shows that for the greatest payoff, in terms of efficiently lowering levels of the stress hormone cortisol, you should spend 20 to 30 minutes sitting or walking in a place that provides you with a sense of nature.”

A free and natural stress-relieving remedy

Nature pills could be a low-cost solution to reduce the negative health impacts stemming from growing urbanization and indoor lifestyles dominated by screen viewing. To assist healthcare practitioners looking for evidence-based guidelines on what exactly to dispense, Hunter and her colleagues designed an experiment that would give a realistic estimate of an effective dose.

Over an 8-week period, participants were asked to take a nature pill with a duration of 10 minutes or more, at least 3 times a week. Levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, were measured from saliva samples taken before and after a nature pill, once every two weeks.

“Participants were free to choose the time of day, duration, and the place of their nature experience, which was defined as anywhere outside that in the opinion of the participant, made them feel like they’ve interacted with nature. There were a few constraints to minimize factors known to influence stress: take the nature pill in daylight, no aerobic exercise, and avoid the use of social media, internet, phone calls, conversations and reading,” Hunter explains.

She continues, “Building personal flexibility into the experiment, allowed us to identify the optimal duration of a nature pill, no matter when or where it is taken, and under the normal circumstances of modern life, with its unpredictability and hectic scheduling.”

To make allowances for busy lifestyles, while also providing meaningful results, the experimental design was novel in other aspects too.

“We accommodated day to day differences in a participant’s stress status by collecting four snapshots of cortisol change due to a nature pill,” says Hunter. “It also allowed us to identify and account for the impact of the ongoing, natural drop in cortisol level as the day goes on, making the estimate of effective duration more reliable.”

Nature will nurture

The data revealed that just a twenty-minute nature experience was enough to significantly reduce cortisol levels. But if you spent a little more time immersed in a nature experience, 20 to 30 minutes sitting or walking, cortisol levels dropped at their greatest rate. After that, additional de-stressing benefits continue to add up but at a slower rate.

“Healthcare practitioners can use our results as an evidence-based rule of thumb on what to put in a nature-pill prescription,” says Hunter. “It provides the first estimates of how nature experiences impact stress levels in the context of normal daily life. It breaks new ground by addressing some of the complexities of measuring an effective nature dose.”

Hunter hopes this study will form the basis of further research in this area.

“Our experimental approach can be used as a tool to assess how age, gender, seasonality, physical ability and culture influences the effectiveness of nature experiences on well-being. This will allow customized nature pill prescriptions, as well as a deeper insight on how to design cities and wellbeing programs for the public.”

Using Chronoprinting to Cheaply Detect Food and Drug Impurities

The world has long needed this valuable sort of development to safeguard people’s health.

If we could tell authentic from counterfeit or adulterated drugs and foods just by looking at them, we could save money and lives every year, especially in the developing world, where the problem is worst. Unfortunately, the technologies that can detect what a sample is made of are expensive, energy-intensive, and largely unavailable in regions where they are needed most.

This may change with a simple new technique developed by engineers from the University of California, Riverside that can detect fake drugs from a video taken as the sample undergoes a disturbance.

If you’ve ever used online photo tools, you’ve probably seen how these tools use image analysis algorithms to categorize your photos. By distinguishing the different people in your photos, these algorithms make it easy to find all the photos of your daughter or your dad. Now, in the journal ACS Central Science, researchers report they have used these algorithms to solve a very different problem: identifying fake medicines and other potentially dangerous products.

Called “chronoprinting,” the technology requires only a few relatively inexpensive pieces of equipment and free software to accurately distinguish pure from inferior food and medicines.

The World Health Organization says that about 10 percent of all medicines in low- and middle-income countries are counterfeit, and food fraud is a global problem that costs consumers and industry billions of dollars per year. Fraudulent food and drugs waste money and jeopardize the health and lives of their consumers. But detecting fakes and frauds requires expensive equipment and highly trained experts.

William Grover, an assistant professor of bioengineering in UC Riverside’s Marlan and Rosemary Bourns College of Engineering, and Brittney McKenzie, a doctoral student in Grover’s lab, wondered if it would be possible to distinguish authentic from adulterated drugs and food by observing how they behave when disturbed by temperature changes or other causes. Two substances with identical compositions should respond the same way to a disturbance, and if two substances appear identical but respond differently, their composition must be different, they reasoned.

McKenzie designed a set of experiments to test this idea. She loaded samples of pure olive oil, one of the world’s most commonly adulterated foods, and cough syrup, which is often diluted or counterfeited in the developing world, into tiny channels on a microfluidic chip, and chilled it quickly in liquid nitrogen. A USB microscope camera filmed the samples reacting to the temperature change.

McKenzie and Grover wrote software that converts the video to a bitmap image. Because the image showed how the sample changed over time, the researchers called it a “chronoprint.”

The team then used image analysis algorithms to compare different chronoprints from the same substance. They found that each pure substance had a reliable chronoprint over multiple tests.

Next, they repeated the experiment with samples of olive oil that had been diluted with other oils and cough syrup diluted with water. The adulterated samples produced chronoprints that were different from the pure samples. The difference was so big, so obvious, and so consistent the researchers concluded that chronoprints and image analysis algorithms can reliably detect some types of food and drug fraud.

“The significant visual differences between the samples were both unexpected and exciting, and with them being consistent we knew this could be a useful way to identify a wide range of samples,” McKenzie said.

Grover said their technique creates a powerful new connection between chemistry and computer science.

“By basically converting a chemical sample to an image, we can take advantage of all the different image analysis algorithms that computer scientists have developed,” he said. “And as those algorithms get better, our ability to chemically identify a sample should get better, too.”

The researchers used liquids in their experiments but note the method could also be used on solid materials dissolved in water, and other types of disturbance, such as heat or a centrifuge, could be used for substances that don’t react well to freezing. The technique is easy to learn, making highly trained experts unnecessary. Chronoprinting requires hobbyist-grade equipment and software downloadable for free from Grover’s lab website, putting it well within reach of government agencies and labs with limited resources.

Video on how this chronoprinting works: https://youtu.be/qbyE68qD2Zo

Mental Health Disorders Have Increased Significantly Among Teens and Young Adults

Mental health issues are one of the defining problems of this era.

The percentage of young Americans experiencing certain types of mental health disorders has risen significantly over the past decade, with no corresponding increase in older adults, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.

“More U.S. adolescents and young adults in the late 2010s, versus the mid-2000s, experienced serious psychological distress, major depression or suicidal thoughts, and more attempted suicide,” said lead author Jean Twenge, PhD, author of the book “iGen” and professor of psychology at San Diego State University. “These trends are weak or non-existent among adults 26 years and over, suggesting a generational shift in mood disorders instead of an overall increase across all ages.”

The research was published in the Journal of Abnormal Psychology.

Twenge and her co-authors analyzed data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, a nationally representative survey that has tracked drug and alcohol use, mental health and other health-related issues in individuals age 12 and over in the United States since 1971. They looked at survey responses from more than 200,000 adolescents age 12 to 17 from 2005 to 2017, and almost 400,000 adults age 18 and over from 2008 to 2017.

The rate of individuals reporting symptoms consistent with major depression in the last 12 months increased 52 percent in adolescents from 2005 to 2017 (from 8.7 percent to 13.2 percent) and 63 percent in young adults age 18 to 25 from 2009 to 2017 (from 8.1 percent to 13.2 percent). There was also a 71 percent increase in young adults experiencing serious psychological distress in the previous 30 days from 2008 to 2017 (from 7.7 percent to 13.1 percent). The rate of young adults with suicidal thoughts or other suicide-related outcomes increased 47 percent from 2008 to 2017 (from 7.0 percent to 10.3 percent).

There was no significant increase in the percentage of older adults experiencing depression or psychological distress during corresponding time periods. The researchers even saw a slight decline in psychological distress in individuals over 65.

“Cultural trends in the last 10 years may have had a larger effect on mood disorders and suicide-related outcomes among younger generations compared with older generations,” said Twenge, who believes this trend may be partially due to increased use of electronic communication and digital media, which may have changed modes of social interaction enough to affect mood disorders. She also noted research shows that young people are not sleeping as much as they did in previous generations.

The increase in digital media use may have had a bigger impact on teens and young adults because older adults’ social lives are more stable and might have changed less than teens’ social lives have in the last ten years, said Twenge. Older adults might also be less likely to use digital media in a way that interferes with sleep — for example, they might be better at not staying up late on their phones or using them in the middle of the night.

“These results suggest a need for more research to understand how digital communication versus face-to-face social interaction influences mood disorders and suicide-related outcomes and to develop specialized interventions for younger age groups,” she said.

Given that the increase in mental health issues was sharpest after 2011, Twenge believes it’s unlikely to be due to genetics or economic woes and more likely to be due to sudden cultural changes, such as shifts in how teens and young adults spend their time outside of work and school. If so, that may be good news, she said.

“Young people can’t change their genetics or the economic situation of the country, but they can choose how they spend their leisure time. First and most important is to get enough sleep. Make sure your device use doesn’t interfere with sleep — don’t keep phones or tablets in the bedroom at night, and put devices down within an hour of bedtime,” she said. “Overall, make sure digital media use doesn’t interfere with activities more beneficial to mental health such as face-to-face social interaction, exercise and sleep.”

Restructuring Markets to Give People Better Lives

Markets are always somehow structured by government policy, and it matters significantly whether those markets are structured to benefit the wealthiest at the expense of everyone else.

The standard liberal approach to economic policy is to support government programs that counteract the inequities gen- erated by the market. Unfortunately, this narrow focus on government programs has effectively given the right free rein to restructure the market to redistribute an ever-larger share of income to the rich and very rich. While tax and transfer policies are important, if liberals had not ignored, or in many cases supported, the ways in which the right was restructuring the market, the existing levels of poverty and inequality that the government needs to address would be far lower.

In other words, liberals need to spend at least as much time on the rules that structure the market as they do on government programs that redress the problems it creates. This is because the idea that the extremes of wealth and poverty we see are inherent outcomes of the market is wrong. These extremes are the result of the way in which the market has been structured by the government.

Let’s start off with, perhaps, the most explicit example of this structuring: patent and copyright monopolies, which are entirely a government invention. There is nothing “free market” about Bill Gates’s enormous fortune. It’s because the government will arrest anyone who mass produces computers with Microsoft software without first paying the company licensing fees.

The Microsoft story is not unique. Huge sectors of our economy exist in their current form because of government-granted patent or copyright monopolies, including the pharmaceutical industry, the medical equipment industry, and the entertainment industry. These monopolies are not just long-fixed rules of the game. Government policy has made them both longer and stronger over the last almost four decades.

This government hand is seen clearly in the prescription drug industry, which has caused renewed outrage among the public in recent years. Spending on prescription drugs hovered near 0.4 percent of GDP, with no discernible trend from 1960 to 1980, when the Bayh-Dole Act was passed into law. It passed the Senate by a huge, bipartisan 91-4 margin and was signed into law by President Carter.

Bayh-Dole allowed private companies to obtain patent rights on research sponsored by the government. Prior to Bayh-Dole, the government retained control over research that it funded. The change was especially important for the pharmaceutical industry, because the government funds a large amount of bio-medical research through the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and other agencies. Since Bayh-Dole became law, spending on prescription drugs has skyrocketed to more than $440 billion in 2018 (2.2 percent of GDP); more than five times the share of GDP it took up in 1980.

We have benefitted from increased private spending on research as a result of Bayh-Dole, but granting these monopolies was only one of many possible mechanisms to provide incentives for new innovations. This is simply not the free market; it is deliberate government policy.

The implications of this point are enormous. Another important example: We continually hear the refrain that workers need more education and skills to succeed in the modern economy, but the extent to which the economy rewards education and skills is also a matter of government policy, not the endogenous course of technology. If we envision a world with no patent and copyright protection, we would not have a slew of Silicon Valley millionaires and billionaires nor NIH alumni becoming biotech tycoons.

Of course, it is important that we have incentives for innovation and creative work, but the point is that government policy can make those incentives greater or smaller. If we want more equality, and arguably a more efficient economy, we could make patents and copyrights shorter and weaker and have more direct funding to put research and creative work in the public domain immediately after it is produced. The Human Genome Project is one model, where results are posted nightly. If we did this with research into drug development, new drugs could be sold as generics, costing a tiny fraction of the price of patent-protected medicine.

[…]

Finance is another area where government policy structured the market to support a bloated industry, one that creates large fortunes for a small number of people. The most dramatic incident in this respect was the massive bailout for the industry after the financial crisis. The magic of the market would have sent Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and other financial behemoths into bankruptcy.

Instead, Congress and the Federal Reserve Board raced to supply the necessary loans and guarantees to keep the major banks afloat. (No, we did not risk a second Great Depression without the bailout. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation could have kept the normal flow of payments going. And we learned the secret to escaping a severe depression almost 80 years ago with the start of World War II. It’s called “spending money.”)

Beyond the bailout, government policy has structured finance to support an incredibly inefficient industry that unnecessarily makes some people very rich. Government policy literally rewrote the rules on bankruptcy to support mortgage-backed securities and derivative trading. Also worth noting is the fact that the financial industry would be dramatically downsized if financial transactions were not exempted from the sort of sales tax imposed on most other items in the economy. Again, it is clearly the rules that government puts in place that give so much money to the big winners in finance, not anything intrinsic to the market.