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

ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-7-2026-01_57_55-PM
Viewpoint: Europe’s rejection of air conditioning is the poster child for misunderstanding how to mitigate the impact of climate change
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-8-2026-12_32_48-PM
Viewpoint: SCOTUS strikes a blow against junk science in Bayer glyphosate case. Will it deter mass tort litigators?
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-1-2026-12_37_08-PM
Viewpoint: Trump poised to politicize all U.S.-supported science research
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-30-2026-10_27_31-AM
Viewpoint: Europe clears the way for gene-edited crops — but fear-driven restrictions still slow their full potential
Screen-Shot-at-PM-pe-vra-kipgaprbdo-vd-ms-jpule-n-jqqaxf-l-e
Viewpoint: Will new breeding techniques help make European agriculture more competitive?
Screenshot-2026-07-08-at-11.25.14-AM
AI being mobilized to target misinformation about vaccines–on AI
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-1-2026-03_33_49-PM
‘Alternative’ cancer treatments that could kill you
Screenshot-2026-07-08-at-2.14.27-PM
Belief in unproven dietary regimes, vitamins, and crank therapies is putting patients’ health in danger and increasing the risk of getting cancer
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-25-2026-12_23_17-PM
No, Bill Gates did not secretly engineer ticks to promote veganism
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-10-2026-09_12_58-AM
X rolls out direct messages to users who interact with misinformation
DtAieAIkCZy-uchn-oqg
Viewpoint: In the science misinformed grifter game plan, the organic-food-is-healthier myth might be the worst.
ChatGPT-Image-Jul-7-2026-12_01_35-PM
Viewpoint: 21 worthless wellness trends inspired by RFK, Jr.’s ill-informed MAHA followers that can harm or even kill you.
d a ca e c c beb x
Facts & Fallacies podcast: The 'woke' crusade against anthropology? Dr. Elizabeth Weiss
glp menu logo outlined

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