Scientist search brain for origins of risk-taking

imgres

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

At Stanford University, a rat faces a choice. If it presses one lever, it gets a fixed amount of sugar liquid. If it presses a second lever, it usually gets less but occasionally wins a sweet bonanza. This choice between a safe bet and a risky gamble is one of life’s most recurring and most important. It affects whether an animal gets a meal or a teenager drunkenly climbs behind a wheel, whether an entrepreneur rakes in the cash or a global financial system collapses. And, if the Stanford rats are any indicator, it’s a choice whose outcome can be predicted and controlled.

By studying the brains of these rodents, Kelly Zalocusky from Stanford University has identified a specific group of neurons that are involved in risky decision-making. Their activity reveals whether a rat is about to make a safe choice or take a punt on a bigger payoff. And by silencing these neurons at the right time, Zalocusky’s team, led by Karl Deisseroth, could instantly (and temporarily) convert the risk-taking rodents into risk-avoiders.

If the same applies to humans, the study may have implications for treating addictive disorders. But perhaps more importantly, it reveals something about how we make decisions and where our attitudes toward risk come from. It’s not about what we gain from winning, but about how we deal with losing.

Read full, original post: Scientists Can Now Watch the Brain Evaluate Risk

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

wuhan institute of virology main entrance
​​COVID lab leak? Making a case that the Wuhan market origins theory is wrong
Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-9.44.03-AM
Viewpoint: Embryos are becoming the newest battleground of love, loss, and legal uncertainty
Screenshot-2026-06-16-at-10.02.22-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Industrial food’ primer—Challenging the dangerous delusions of the alternative food movement
Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-11.57.12-AM
Viewpoint: Raw milk and the myth of safety—ProPublica exposes the growing anti-homogenization movement
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-16-2026-10_01_45-AM-2
Viewpoint—Recursive self-improvement: AI leader Anthropic calls for AI slowdown
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-9-2026-01_11_37-PM
Turmeric supplements: More risks than benefits
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-16-2026-10_29_11-AM
What’s behind Anthropic’s warning about the accelerating development of AI
Screenshot-2026-06-18-at-11.41.51-AM
Viewpoint—Protecting baloney science: Far right senators move to protect the phony homeopathy industry
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-4-2026-03_07_27-PM
AAP v. Kennedy: While a court challenge grinds on, RFK Jr. quietly advances his anti-vaccine conspiracy agenda
newborn infant baby mother
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: The truth about vitamin K shots
Screenshot-2026-06-18-at-2.52.05-PM
Activist organization accuses Trump of protecting methane-generating stripper wells to benefit billionaire and donor Jeffrey Hildebrand 
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-15-2026-02_31_28-PM-2
Trump-appointed cancer panel head backed by supplement and anti-vaccine companies promotes discredited support for ivermectin as a potential cure
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.