Reversing memory loss via gut-brain communication

(med.stanford.edu)

102 points | by mustaphah 3 hours ago ago

21 comments

  • inanutshellus 2 hours ago ago

    Everyone's "poo-pooing" the article because the title doesn't mention mice, but, FWIW, stories of gut biota affecting humans behavior have been documented for a while.

    Memory gain is noteworthy, which is the article's "wow" factor, but everyone's just knee-jerk smirking so ... here's a few random articles to gross you out about the wild world of trading microbiota and, for better or worse, changing your personality:

      * "My butt made me crave candy."[1]
      * "Gee, I'm not bipolar anymore thanks to my husband's butt juice infusion."[2]
    
    Crazy, right?

       [1] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-behavioral-microbiome/202404/hacking-an-individuals-personality-through-their-gut-contents
    
       [2] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-28/faecal-microbiota-transplant-credited-with-curing-bipolar/105541522
    • hbcondo714 2 hours ago ago

      I would recommend the site https://gutbrainaxistherapeutics.com for learning more about Microbiota Transplant Therapy (MTT) and its opportunities, especially for Autism and Pitt-Hopkins Syndrome.

    • jimkleiber 43 minutes ago ago

      There was a South Park episode about this years ago where everyone was trying to get it from Tom Brady.

    • 1shooner 2 hours ago ago

      This seems to be a recent anti-science meme to dismiss studies that use mouse models. I'm sure there is an interesting line of discussion about the strengths and limits of those models, but that's probably a complex, nuanced thread to pull, not something you blow off with a hand-waving internet comment.

      • inanutshellus an hour ago ago

        To some degree the other posts are just pointing out the misleading "assumed protagonist" of the title (which doesn't mention mice) but I was surprised to see that the majority of posts boiled down to "eek! mice!"

      • znpy 23 minutes ago ago

        I bet it started with people trying to 1-up other commenters via the usual “achtually…” and then proceeding with the “in mice” notice.

  • mustaphah an hour ago ago

    Yeah, it's a mouse study, but there are tons of human studies backing the whole gut-brain connection. There are even a bunch of books on it [1][2].

    What's really cool is that the paper used low-dose capsaicin (just 5 μg/kg injected), and it completely restored hippocampal FOS activity and memory in older mice. Basically, that's the same stuff you get in cayenne pepper supplements - pretty easy to get your hands on.

    [1] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/28837738-the-mind-gut-co...

    [2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/35210457-the-psychobioti...

  • seethishat an hour ago ago

    IMO people should eat more fiber. A lot more fiber. It cleans the gut, the liver, absorbs cholesterol, slows insulin response and makes you feel full longer. The microbes in our guts need it to function.

    Rather than jumping from one fad diet to another, just eat what you like and be sure to get a lot of fiber each day.

    • jstanley an hour ago ago

      > eat what you like and be sure to get a lot of fiber each day

      Sure sounds like another fad diet.

      • nomel an hour ago ago

        The charitable interpretation is "just eat more fiber, regardless of the rest"

      • vablings 27 minutes ago ago

        This has been the recommendation for general health for as long as I have been alive. Fiber is really important and there are plenty of easy healthy options that are cheap, unlike the astroturfed beef checkoff primal diet

    • memonkey an hour ago ago

      The post is about a scientific study and your response is your opinion with nothing else to back it up?

      • igleria 43 minutes ago ago

        they IMO are trying to help by giving good ideas to keep a healthy gut. Add that to the study and at least to me, it´s a nice idea.

        btw people, do drink water to keep up with the fiber. Otherwise it might not help.

  • nothrowaways 22 minutes ago ago

    > They showed that colonizing the guts of young mice with this bacterial species inhibited their performance on the object recognition and maze escape tasks, and that this deficit correlated with a reduction of activity in the hippocampus.

  • riazrizvi 33 minutes ago ago

    Great info. This is one of those things that it is much faster for an individual to take into their own hands to prove out, rather than waiting for the system to provide us with an answer. Too many decision makers who are unlikely to all be aligned with our own individual interests.

  • dharmatech 18 minutes ago ago

    The book

    "Why Isn't My Brain Working?"

    by Datis Kharrazian

    published in 2014 talked about this over a decade ago.

  • fnord77 2 hours ago ago

    ... in mice. So if any of this held in humans, I think you'd see reversal of old-age memory problems in people treated with antibiotics that kill Parabacteroides goldsteinii.

    As far as I know, no such effect has been observed.

    And this article claims inflamation from that strain, the NIH claims otherwise: "Parabacteroides goldsteinii is a next-generation probiotic gut bacterium with significant anti-inflammatory and metabolic benefits, often reduced in obese or diseased states. "

    • vidarh 2 hours ago ago

      It's possible the specifics are different but that the overall idea still could work for humans. It seems worth at least exploring.

  • theusus 2 hours ago ago

    Mice mice mice. Tell me when you test on humans

  • maxall4 2 hours ago ago

    I smell bad data. This sounds too good to be true and most studies of this kind have turned out to be false a few years down the line.

    Edit: one of many examples: https://www.science.org/content/article/journal-retracts-inf...

    • IshKebab an hour ago ago

      It doesn't seem to link to any data at all so we can't check, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised if they used the "standard" P=0.05.

      I think for something this unexpected you'd want a much lower P.