What Makes a Viral Story? Study Takes a Look Into Readers Brains

Credit: Antonio Guillem/Shutterstock

When news articles get published, they may start a life of their own. Some get buried under the deluge of online content, while a lucky few go viral. The judges in this popularity contest are readers, who decide whether or not to share an article. But how do they decide?

It turns out, people share articles that make them look good and help them improve their social bonds, according to a new study published today in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

In the study, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania looked at the brain activity of 80 college students while they read the titles and abstracts of 80 New York Times articles, published in the health section. These articles had been shared a combined total of 120,000 times — via Facebook, Twitter and email — by real readers, according to the data gathered by the Times. [10 Things You Didn't Know About the Brain]

The researchers found a specific brain activity pattern that was linked to how often the articles were shared in the real world.

"We looked at parts of their brain that helped determine how valuable, self-relevant and socially relevant a piece of information is," said Emily Falk, the study’s senior author and the director of Penn's Communication Neuroscience Lab.

The findings suggest that people are interested in reading or sharing content that connects to their own experiences, Falk said. "They share things that might improve their relationships, make them look smart or empathic or cast them in a positive light."

The findings could help researchers get a better understanding of the psychology of sharing. Understanding how ideas spread can be used to increase the shareability of information that promotes well-being and decreases the sharing value of false information, Falk said.

"My lab mostly focuses on health behavior change," Falk said. "It's fine if you can have a health message that gets one person to change their behavior, but it's even better if you get them to go and tell their friends."

What your brain activity can reveal

Previous studies have looked into the psychology of sharing by asking people about their reasons for sharing an article. But such surveys suffer from several limitations. For example, people may not be aware of all their own mental processes in real time. Or, they might shy away from admitting that they shared an article because they thought it made them look smart.

"That's where the neuroscience comes in," said the study's first author Christin Scholz, a communication researcher at the university. "It helps us to measure the thought processes in real time as they are happening, without having to ask people to introspect and report what they have been thinking. While we can't read people's mind, brain imaging can give us some insights that are complimentary to other measures, like surveys."

The team focused on three brain regions: The first is a part of the brain that helps us determine the overall value of a piece of information. The second part determines whether something is relevant to our own lives. The third is the brain area people use to understand other people's thoughts and feeling. [5 Interesting Facts about Human Cooperation]

They found that activity in two of those areas — the self-relevant region and the social region — combine into a signal that is then used by the brain to determine the value of sharing a piece of information.

Compared with traditional surveys, this combined value signal better explained how much articles get shared, the researchers said.

People are different and hold different values, but they likely also share some common thought processes, Scholz said. For example, one person may think that an article might help her friend, while another may want to discuss the article with his or her friends. What both of these thoughts have in common is the social element.

"I don't think every single person interprets an article the same way, but I think the advantage of using neural data here is that it helps identify the greatest common denominator behind sharing," Scholz said.

Brain imaging is expensive, and it’s unlikely that it would be used to assess the shareability of each single article. Rather, it’s a tool that can reveal hidden brain mechanisms and inform those who aim to craft messages that reach more people, she said.

"In terms of health messages, for example, instead of giving specific instructions, perhaps we should make content that allows people to help others or encourages them to have a good conversation with somebody," Scholz says.

Editor's Recommendations

• 9 Odd Ways Your Tech Devices May Injure You

Read More »

Penicillin: Discovery, Benefits and Resistance

Penicillin is a drug used to fight bacterial infection. Its accidental discovery ushered in a new age of medicine. It was hailed as a "miracle drug" that would eradicate infectious diseases. Today, there are many types of natural and synthetic types of penicillin, which are used to treat a wide range of ailments. However, over the years, some bacteria have become resistant to penicillin, making some infections difficult to treat.

Discovery

It isn't really known who first realized that mold contained medicinal qualities, but it is acknowledged that ancient Egyptians would poultice wounds with moldy bread, according to the American Chemical Society (ACS).

Alexander Fleming, a professor of bacteriology in London, is credited with discovering penicillin in 1928. Returning from vacation, he started cleaning up his messy lab and noticed that some petri dishes containing Staphylococcus bacteria had been contaminated with a mold, Penicillium notatum, which was inhibiting the growth of the bacteria, according to Dr. Howard Markel in a column for PBS NewHour. Fleming researched the juice produced by the mold and determined that it killed many types of bacteria. His team then went on to isolate pure penicillin from the mold juice.

"When I woke up just after dawn on September 28, 1928, I certainly didn't plan to revolutionize all medicine by discovering the world's first antibiotic, or bacteria killer. But I guess that was exactly what I did," Fleming later wrote about his discovery. 

Fleming didn't have the resources to fully develop his discovery. Other bacteriologists tried to purify penicillin but failed. Finally, in 1939, Howard Florey, a pathology professor at Oxford University, read Fleming's paper in the British Journal of Experimental Pathology, and he and his colleagues worked to purify and create useable penicillin. 

After churning out around 132 gallons (500 liters) of mold filtrate per week and testing on animals, they were finally able to try the new drug on a human. On February 12, 1941, Albert Alexander got the first dose of penicillin, according to the ACS. The treatment started to heal him of a life-threatening infection in just a few days. Unfortunately, the Oxford team ran out of the drug before Alexander was completely healed, and he died. 

A close-up of penicillin growing in a flask, circa 1943.

Credit: Everett Historical/Shutterstock


The first successful treatment happened a year later in 1942. It was given to Anne Miller, a patient at New Haven Hospital in Connecticut who had suffered a miscarriage and developed an infection that led to blood poisoning. 

During World War II, penicillin was mass-produced and used to fight infections among soldiers. Throughout history, infections had killed more soldiers than battle injuries, Markel wrote. "In World War I, the death rate from bacterial pneumonia was 18 percent; in WWII, it fell to less than 1 percent."

In 1945, Fleming, Florey and Florey's teammate, Ernst Chain, received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their discovery of penicillin. [The 10 Noblest Nobel Prize Winners of All Time]

Benefits

Penicillin is given to patients with an infection caused by bacteria. As an antibiotic, it inhibits the growth of bacteria or kills it. It does this by preventing bacterial enzymes from creating cell wall growth. It also activates other enzymes so that they will break down the cell walls of microorganisms, as well, according to Encyclopedia Britannica. 

Sometimes penicillin is also prescribed to help medical problems not related to bacterial infections, such as leptospirosis, chlamydia in pregnant women, helicobacter pylori-associated gastritis or peptic ulcer disease, gas gangrene, Lyme disease and typhoid fever, according to the Mayo Clinic.

Different kinds of penicillin are used for various infections. Some types of penicillin are amoxicillin, ampicillin, penicillin G and penicillin V. 

Warnings

Though penicillin has saved many lives, it isn't always helpful for everyone. For example, some people have penicillin allergies that can cause hives, rashes, itching, anaphylaxis and other symptoms.

Beyond allergies, penicillin is becoming less useful over time. At least 2 million people in the United States become infected with bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics each year, and at least 23,000 people die as a result, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 

Simply using antibiotics creates resistance, according to the CDC. While antibiotics kill bacteria causing illness, they also kill "good" bacteria that protect the body from infection. The drug-resistant bacteria grow and take over, and some bacteria give their drug resistance to other bacteria. Resistant germs spread to other patients from unclean hands or surfaces. 

For this reason, antibiotics should only be used to treat infections, and should not be prescribed for viruses, according to the Mayo Clinic. 

And yet, many sore throats and upper respiratory infections that are caused by viruses are often prescribed antibiotics to treat these illnesses because it is a perceived quick fix, said Dr. Saul R. Hymes, medical director for Pediatric Antimicrobial Stewardship at Stony Brook Children's Hospital. 

"Overall, there is a major problem with inappropriate antibiotic prescribing in the United States," said Hymes. "Recent studies by Katherine Fleming-Dutra and Adam Hersh in 2016 have shown anywhere from 30 to 50 percent of all outpatient prescriptions for antibiotics for common conditions like ear infections, sore throat and other upper respiratory-type infections are inappropriate."

Read More »

Are Any Fad Diets Actually Healthy? What the Research Shows

With so many diet fads around these days, how do you know which ones are actually good for you?

In a new review of studies covering about 40 years, researchers attempted to dispel the hype surrounding some popular diet trends and to outline what experts really know about a heart-healthy diet. They presented what might be considered the "best" dietary pattern for reducing the risk of heart disease, and explained why consumers should be wary of nutrition fads such as antioxidant pills and juicing.

The bottom line: A heart-healthy diet is one that's high in fruits, vegetables, whole grains and legumes, and includes nuts in moderation. Heart-healthy diets may also include limited amounts of lean meat, fish, low-fat and nonfat dairy products, and liquid vegetable oils, the researchers said. In contrast, people should avoid saturated, trans and solid fats; sodium; added sugars; and refined grains. [7 Tips for Moving Toward a More Plant-Based Diet]

"There is a growing consensus that a predominantly plant-based diet that emphasizes green, leafy vegetables; whole grains; legumes; and fruit is where the best improvements are seen in heart health," study co-author Dr. Andrew Freeman, a cardiologist and director of cardiovascular prevention and wellness at National Jewish Health hospital in Denver, said in a statement. On the other hand, "there is a great amount of misinformation about nutrition fads, including antioxidant pills, juicing and gluten-free diets," Freeman said.

The review of studies had the following conclusions about these popular diet trends:

Juicing: There are few studies that have compared the benefits of juicing your fruits and vegetables with the benefits of consuming them whole, according to the review. In addition, "the process of juicing concentrates calories," which makes it much easier to ingest too many, the researchers said. Until more studies are available, the researchers recommend consuming whole fruits and vegetables. Juicing should be reserved for situations in which people aren't getting enough fruits and vegetables in their daily diet, they said. If people do juice, they should be careful not to consume too many calories from the juice, and they should avoid adding additional sugars, such as honey, the researchers recommended. [6 Potential Dangers of Juice Cleanses and Liquid Diets]

Antioxidant supplements: Rigorous studies have not found any benefits on heart health from taking high-dose antioxidant supplements. The current evidence shows fruits and vegetables are the healthiest and most beneficial source of antioxidants, the researchers said.

Gluten-free diets: People with celiac disease, gluten sensitivity or a wheat allergy should avoid gluten. But there's no evidence that avoiding gluten will help people without these conditions lose weight or have any benefit on heart health, the researchers said.

Coconut and palm oils: Coconut oil and palm oil are high in saturated fatty acids, which are fats that are known to raise people's blood cholesterol levels, according to the American Heart Association. There's little evidence that these oils are beneficial for heart health, and some studies even suggest that palm oil may increase heart disease risk, the researchers said. For these reasons, the use of coconut oil and palm oil should be discouraged, the researchers concluded. In contrast, liquid vegetable oils, such as olive oil, are linked with heart-health benefits, such as lower levels of "bad cholesterol" and higher levels of "good cholesterol," the researchers said. Still, these oils are high in calories and should be used in moderation.

Nuts: Nuts can be part of a heart-healthy diet, but people should be careful not to consume too many nuts, because they are high in fats and calories, the researchers said.

The researchers noted that there are challenges in studying the role of nutrition in the prevention of diseases, and these challenges may lead to conflicting findings, thus resulting in confusion of which diets are healthy.

For example, people who have healthy diets often also engage in other healthy behaviors, such as getting regular exercise and avoiding smoking, and it can be hard to separate the effects of these behaviors from those of a diet, Freeman said.

In addition, some studies rely on people's memories of what they ate on a certain day, and these memories aren't always reliable, he said. New technologies, such as smartphones, may allow people to do a better job of recording what they ate, and lead to more robust evidence for nutrition research, the researchers said.

The review is published today (Feb. 27) in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology
.

Read More »

Are Viruses we talks about alive? - read

Are viruses, like the Zika virus pictured above, truly alive?

Credit: AuntSpray/Shutterstock

Viruses are infectious, tiny and nasty. But are they alive?

Not really, although it depends on what your definition of "alive" is, two infectious disease doctors told Live Science.

Advertisement

Living beings, such as plants and animals, contain cellular machinery that allows them to self-replicate. In contrast, viruses are free forms of DNA or RNA that can't replicate on their own. [What If We Eradicated All Infectious Disease?]

Advertisement

Rather, viruses need to invade a living organism to replicate, said Dr. Otto Yang, a professor of medicine and microbiology, immunology and molecular genetics at the David Geffen School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles.

"[Viruses are] packaged RNA or DNA," Yang told Live Science. "They make more copies of themselves by hijacking the machinery of cells to replicate themselves."

Advertisement

Is it alive?

Countless philosophers and scientists have debated how to define whether something is alive. According to the seven characteristics of life, all living beings must be able to respond to stimuli; grow over time; produce offspring; maintain a stable body temperature; metabolize energy; consist of one or more cells; and adapt to their environment.

However, some life-forms don't fit every single characteristic. Most hybrid animals, such as mules (a cross between a donkey and a horse), can't reproduce because they are sterile. Moreover, rocks can grow, albeit in a passive way, with new material flowing over them. But this classification problem goes away when a simpler definition of "life" is used.

"Take a cat, a plant and a rock, and leave them in a room for days," said Amesh Adalja, an infectious disease physician and an affiliated scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in Baltimore. "Come back, and the cat and the plant will have changed, but the rock will essentially be the same," he said.

Like a rock, most viruses would be fine if they were left indefinitely in a room, Adalja said. In addition, he noted that living beings have self-generated and self-sustaining actions — meaning they can seek out sustenance and behave in self-preserving ways. In other words, "they're taking actions to further their lives, [such as] a plant sprouting its roots to find water or an animal looking for food," Adalja said.

Something that is not alive, such as a virus, does not have self-generated or self-sustaining actions, he said.

"I don't think viruses qualify as being alive. They are, in essence, inert unless they come into contact with a living cell," Adalja said. "There are some characteristics of viruses that put them on the borderline [of being alive] — they have genetic material: DNA or RNA. It's not the same thing as a rock, but it's clearly not the same thing as even bacteria, in terms of that self-sustaining and self-generated action." [Could Humans Live Without Bacteria?]

Yang agreed, saying, "Without a cell, a virus cannot reproduce. And so from that standpoint, it's really not alive, if you consider life to be something that can reproduce by itself independently."

However, "if you loosen up your definition of life to something that can make copies of itself with help, then you could call it alive," Yang said.

It's thought that some of the very first life-forms on Earth were RNA molecules, as "RNA molecules, under the right conditions, can make copies of themselves," Yang said. "Viruses maybe evolved from that ancestor, but lost the capability to self-replicate."

Read More »