Search This Blog

Monday, April 21, 2025

'Higher Ed is Fighting Back!'

 


“Harvard is fighting back.”

There was a time when more colleges had ROTC units, producing soldiers, sailors, and pilots every year, patriotically rallying to the cause in wartime, fighting for their country.

It’s been a long time since that was the norm.

Since the 1960s and 1970s, our nation’s colleges have been identified with pacifism.  The idea that an American college would do any fighting at all sounds more like Ancient History than Current Events.

But now the professors of Harvard Yard are fighting mad.  They’re holding press conferences and firing off op-eds, trying to rally other colleges to their cause.

And what is their “cause”?  Unlimited government funding, free from the limitations of a desperately needed federal austerity program.

The college is willing to fight — against our own virtually bankrupt federal government — to keep the cornucopia of federal taxpayer-funded checks flowing, when President Donald Trump is trying to shut off the spigot.

Since the Executive Branch issues a lot of checks to Harvard — and to most colleges, in fact, to darned near all of them — the Trump administration has put its foot down.  They have determined that since part of their mandate is to bring common sense back to our country, this is no time to fund a bunch of overpaid countercultural Marxist rabble-rousers.  It’s no time to enable their worst inclinations, from race- and sex-based hiring to forcing “girls’ sports” to include boys, from sitting back while student groups abuse their Jewish classmates to actively facilitating the selling out of their country through partnerships with hostile foreign governments.

So yes, the Trump administration is cutting off some of the checks.  And as it turns out, Harvard University doesn’t believe that ferociously biting the hand that feeds it for years beyond count ought to be grounds for ending the gravy train.

What will be the general public’s reaction? I wonder.

For generations, parents have watched their children’s applications be rejected while students with worse preparation, worse grades, and worse test scores have been accepted to elite colleges, causing their own children to have to settle for lesser schools as their punishment for being white or Asian or middle-class or normal.

For generations, parents have stared at their children’s course descriptions and reading lists, horrified at the dreck being assigned for full course credit, the once noble institution of higher education having long ago plummeted to a nadir by offering pretend majors like “Gender Studies” and “Multi-Cultural Inquiry.”

And we’ve seen all this go on, as their prices climbed higher and higher, charging whatever a subsidized market will bear.  Too many colleges brazenly encourage their students to take on outrageous levels of debt — obligations certain to hang over the heads of most of their graduates for decades — as the coursework hardly ever prepares a student for legitimate careers that would actually enable them to pay back these loans.

If you were one of these parents — and you probably are — who’ve watched your children emerge from those ivy-covered dens of iniquity awash in debt, unprepared for life and robbed of their values — are you likely to side with these pompous college spokesmen or with the president you’ve now voted for three times?

If we have this fight in the public eye, then be prepared for everything to be exposed.

  • Our nations’ colleges and universities are estimated to have upwards of a trillion dollars in endowments.  Harvard alone has over $50 billion. And still they keep begging their alumni for donations as if they were paupers on a street corner.
  • Despite sitting on Midas-level hoards, our most expensive colleges remain prohibitive even during recessions.  While a few institutions — such as Purdue and Hillsdale — stand out for trying to keep tuition increases down, the majority have happily raised their tuition, room, and board far beyond the rate of inflation for decades, enabling those endowments to just grow and grow.
  • The more prestigious a school is, the more it values foreign students, because those customers rarely need to be discounted.  The children of Middle Eastern sheiks, communist Chinese apparatchiks, and European Union bureaucrats can pay the full price, so America’s colleges look less and less like America every year.  Why take a normal kid from suburban Cincinnati, rural South Carolina, or the plains of Nebraska, whose FAFSA requires a discounted rate, when you can instead take a kid from Beijing whose father sits on Xi Jinping’s politburo, and whose political connections might help the college develop some big deal?
  • And speaking of foreign deals, long gone are the days when colleges were quiet buildings with classrooms devoted to the liberal arts — history, economics, language, literature, etc.  Today’s schools aspire to being known as “research universities” — which require expensive collaborations with private companies involved in the manufacturing, inventing, and improving of products and technologies.  Such fields are usually patent-protected or even export-controlled for national security reasons, but these colleges are notorious for playing fast and loose with both private and public intellectual property concerns, often resulting in the transfer of sensitive knowledge to our nation’s biggest enemies.
  • Just as at least a million foreign students attend American colleges each year, the many American public and private universities (at least 77 at last count) with foreign campuses ensure that a similar number of American students spend a semester or more on their colleges’ distant foreign campuses.  These hundreds of foreign campuses cause massive foreign money to pour into the American higher education system, and that money comes with strings, ranging from professor exchanges to situating cultural centers near our campuses, spreading philosophies such as jihad and Marxism even in the communities outside the colleges themselves.
  • Since October 7, 2023, we have watched with shock as our universities spawned huge anti-Israel and anti-Jewish protests, clearly “astroturfed” with outside money but populated by both current foreign students and huge numbers of former students who have been overstaying their visas. These protests showed not only how our lax immigration policy has caused us to lose track of these former students when their visas expired, but also how mistaken the liberal theory is that welcoming foreigners here en masse for college would “civilize and democratize” them.  Many of these protesters were as hateful and violent in Chicago or New York as they would have been back home in Syria or Saudi Arabia.
  • And even the colleges that were once religious institutions, with boys-only and girls-only dorms to protect our youth from the dangers of sex, drink, and drugs, are now at the forefront of a libertine lifestyle that would horrify their colleges’ founding ministers and seminarians — the dorms rampant with STDs, pregnancies and abortions, and the girls’ sports teams forced to give their awards to men in drag.

That’s what this federal money has been propping up all these years.  The colleges demand more joint research projects to give away to our enemies, more foreign elites’ children to corrupt our own, more opportunities to practice such bigotry as DIE and BDS, free rein to depress the once-high standards of academia even more than they have already done.

For generations now, far too many of our colleges and universities have been funding an increasingly hostile tumor in the body politic.  We want to value them for the good work they do in producing great engineers, scientists, doctors, and inventors, but the balance between these positives and their plethora of societal negatives is off kilter.

It’s time to end the gravy train.

And if our colleges really want to fight this out in the public square, as if the above sample of the case against them weren’t enough, let’s have at it.

John F. Di Leo is a Chicagoland-based international transportation manager, trade compliance trainer, and speaker.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/04/higher_ed_is_fighting_back.html

Democrats Dying on the Most Desolate Hills

 


The phrase “the hill you choose to die on” is an expression meaning a belief, opinion, or position that one is fiercely committed to defending, even when it is impractical or contrary to one’s long-term goals. It suggests a willingness to fight or resist to the point of losing, rather than pivoting, conceding, or compromising.

In the political world, most players lack conviction or principles. They are swayed by the political winds, the latest opinion polls, or the size of the most recent campaign contributions they receive. Their positions are primarily situational, influenced by their proximity to the next reelection bid or which Sunday morning talk show has invited them as guests.

Democrats, finding themselves in the minority during President Donald Trump’s second term, are attempting to stem their political bleeding by choosing odd hills to stand on in an effort to bolster their political appeal ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. Fortunately for Trump and his party, Democrats are selecting sinkholes rather than hills.

As Trump settles into his three-month groove, Democrats are grasping at political straws, trying to derail the Trump train. Rasmussen Reports shows Trump with a solid 50 percent approval rating among likely US voters.

A new Daily Mail poll places his current approval rating at 54 percent, tying with his all-time highest. This is after the recent tariff chaos.

YouTube screen grab

Start with immigration and Trump’s deportation of illegal aliens. According to a Pew Research Center poll, “Of the roughly 51% of adults who support at least some deportation of illegal immigrants, nearly all support deporting those who commit violent crimes, according to the poll.”

Democrats are standing up for criminal illegal aliens and ignoring the victims of such crimes. When President Trump acknowledged one such victim in his recent congressional address, all Democrats sat on their hands, refusing to stand or applaud.

More recently, the White House acknowledged and honored the mother of Rachel Morin, who was raped and murdered by an illegal alien from El Salvador. Corporate media, which serve as an arm of the Democrat party, devoted zero minutes of coverage to this story.

Yet these networks spent over an hour covering the “Maryland Man” deported to El Salvador. This pillar of his Maryland community was actually alleged to be an active member of the MS-13 gang and was in America illegally. This alleged wife-beater, with a previous deportation order, is the new George Floyd or Trayvon Martin for the Democrats, a hero, a role model.

Garcia is also “suspected of partaking in labor/human trafficking, according to Homeland Security Investigations memo.” Are Democrats truly hitching their wagon to this guy? Yes, they are.

Rather than supporting the millions of Americans living paycheck to paycheck, prominent Democrats are pinning their hopes on sympathy for this illegal alien thug. Senator Chris Van Hollen beclowned himself by flying to El Salvador, at the expense of US taxpayers, to plead for the thug’s return to the US.

Garcia was reportedly being held in El Salvador’s notorious CECOT prison, a “Maryland man” whisked away by the bad Orange Man to face torture and abuse. Imagine a day later seeing Van Hollen with his new BFF dressed in country club plaid, sharing drinks with the Maryland Senator. He was “miraculously risen from the dead,” as El Salvador President Nayib Bukele observed.

Supporting criminal illegal aliens over his constituents is nothing new for Senator Von Hollen. He voted no on the Laken Riley Act, which mandates the federal detention of illegal immigrants who are accused of theft, burglary, assaulting a law enforcement officer, and any crime that causes death or serious bodily injury.

Democrats want to die on the hill of criminal illegal aliens and condemn any Americans who advocate for the safety and well-being of themselves and their families.

Recall when the Clinton administration sent a SWAT team to deport 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez back to Cuba? Not an allegedly wife-beating criminal alien gang member, but a young child. Do you remember any Democrat senators flying to Cuba to demand his release? I don’t either.

An elder Democrat strategist who worked in the Clinton White House when young Elian was deported had no problem with that, but today is fully supportive of the wife-beating thug returning to the US, calling it Democrats’ “top agenda.”

Is this a hill Democrats want to die on? Illegal aliens also influence our elections. Which side are Democrats on in this fight?

Only four Democrats voted for the SAVE Act, which aims to prevent illegal aliens from voting in U.S. elections. How do voters feel about the SAVE Act?

Rasmussen Reports asked and discovered that 64 percent of likely US voters favor the Act, including 50 percent of Democrats and 58 percent of unaffiliated voters. Democrats believe they are dying on a hill but are instead falling into a deep hole of their own making.

Another hill on which the Democrats are willing to die is transgenderism. An Ipsos/NY Times survey found, “Nearly 80 percent of Americans don’t want men playing in women’s sports.”

Where are Democrats, the party that stood up for women by wearing pink pussy hats eight years ago? They are now sitting for women regarding this 80-20 issue, “U.S. Senate Democrats block bill banning transgender athletes from women’s school sports.”

Democrats are the party that supports full-term abortion, up to and including the moment of birth. Only 22 percent of Americans say, “Abortion should be available any time during a pregnancy.” Once again, Democrats find themselves on the wrong side of a 20/80 issue.

Democrats bribed and shamed Americans into purchasing and driving electric vehicles to save the whales, Bambi, or whatever. Now they are keying Teslas and setting charging stations on fire.

On certain issues, Democrats receive a bit of Republican support, but they are fully committed and willing to stand firm, while indecisive Republicans gauge the political climate.

Democrats want no end to the Ukraine war, which is, in reality, a US proxy war against Russia and, by the way, we are losing. They are firmly against Elon Musk’s DOGE commission, which aims to identify waste, fraud, and abuse in government. How many voters want their hard-earned tax dollars wasted on nonsense?

Taxes are nirvana for Democrats, while they react to any government spending cuts as the devil recoils when sprinkled with holy water.

Election integrity is another issue on which Democrats are on the losing side. Rasmussen Reports found, “60 percent favor requiring paper ballots.” The SAVE Act, as mentioned above, represents another step toward secure elections, and Democrats are uniformly against this.

Gallup ranked the issues most important to voters in the 2024 election. At the top were Republican concerns, including the economy, democracy in the U.S., terrorism and national security, immigration, and education.

The two least important issues to voters were climate change and transgender rights, both of which are core issues that Democrats have staked their careers on.

Fortunately, President Trump is tuned in to the American voter, reflecting his significant win last November. Republicans would be wise to hitch their wagons and fortunes to Trump and the issues important to voting Americans.

Messaging is important, given that virtually all cable, network, and print media align closely with the Democrat party. These issues are easy to understand, and Republicans need to present their case clearly and simply.

Trump represents just one voice, and some voters are put off by his bluntness and bravado. All elected Republicans ought to advocate for the MAGA agenda.

Scott Jennings, the sole voice of reason and sanity on CNN, asks this simple question: “Why does the American left fall in love with the worst people?” The same left looks upon honest, hard-working, and wholesome Americans with contempt and scorn.

If the Democrats choose to die on the hill of frivolous and unpopular issues, then get out of their way and let them see how that plays out in about 19 months.

Brian C Joondeph, MD, is a physician and writer.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/04/democrats_dying_on_the_most_desolate_hills.html

Bukele turns his troll power towards Maduro, offers him an exchange

 


Much of the global left is wailing about the imprisonment of repatriated gang members into the famous CECOT high-security prison of El Salvador. They're yelling torture, they're yelling human rights violations, they're howling about due process. Democrat congressmembers are falling all over themselves to join the flights to San Salvador. Sen. Chris Van Hollen has made a complete fool of himself. 

None of this has escaped the mind of Venezuela's Marxist dictator, Nicolas Maduro, who's another member of the global left, crying crocodile tears about the Venezuelan gangbangers now shipped to that facility.

And El Salvador's popular President Nayyib Bukele is watching that, drawing a new troll target on the detested Venezuelan dictator to prove he's as aggrieved as he claims to be.

He put out this tweet:

Google Translate:

Mr. @NicolasMaduro, you have said on numerous occasions that you want the Venezuelans back and free.
 
Unlike you, who have political prisoners, we don't have political prisoners. All the Venezuelans we have in custody were detained as part of an operation against gangs like the Tren de Aragua in the United States.
 
Unlike our detainees, many of whom have committed murder, others have committed rape, and some have even been arrested multiple times before being deported, your political prisoners have committed no crime. The only reason they are imprisoned is because they opposed you and your electoral fraud.
 
However, I want to propose a humanitarian agreement that includes the repatriation of 100% of the 252 Venezuelans who were deported, in exchange for the release and delivery of an identical number (252) of the thousands of political prisoners that you hold. Among them are Rafael Tudares, Edmundo González's son-in-law; journalist Roland Carreño; lawyer and activist Rocío San Miguel; Mrs. Corina Parisca de Machado, mother of María Corina Machado, who is subjected to daily intimidation and has her access to basic services such as electricity and water sabotaged; as well as the four political leaders seeking asylum in the Argentine embassy and other Venezuelan political prisoners.
 
Also included are the nearly 50 detained citizens of other nationalities: American, German, Dominican, Argentine, Bolivian, Israeli, Chilean, Colombian, Ecuadorian, Spanish, French, Guyanese, Dutch, Iranian, Italian, Lebanese, Mexican, Peruvian, Puerto Rican, Ukrainian, Uruguayan, Portuguese, and Czech. Our Foreign Ministry will send formal correspondence.
 
God bless the people of Venezuela.
So, wow.
 
He's offered to use the left's beloved gang members as bargaining chips to get real hostages out of dictatorial prisons. The left's lionization of these thugs has made that offer possible. Love your gang members and thugs? Want to see them back in your home country? Then it should be simple: Give Bukele your political prisoners and he'll be happy to give you your thugs back.
 
To the extent that Maduro has dispatched some of these thugs as foot soldiers to the states to wreak mayhem, he might actually want them. But it's also likely that he's as happy to have them out of the country as anyone, having emptied his prisons to be rid of them, telling them to head north, meaning, his likely refusal of President Bukele's offer pretty well exposes his hypocrisy and crocodile tears.
 
Either way, he's on the spot, either way, he loses the public relations war he's been trying to leverage.
 
Bukele plays that game even better than he does.
 
Checkmate, commie. You're out of your league with Bukele.

Why More People Are Testing Their Blood Without A Doctor

 by Sheramy Tsai via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The scale doesn’t lie—but it doesn’t tell the whole story.

You might be eating better, exercising more, and still seeing the same number each morning. It’s frustrating, discouraging, and, as it turns out, possibly misleading.

For decades, weight has been treated as a primary marker of health. But a number on the scale says little about inflammation, cardiovascular risk, or metabolic dysfunction—factors that often shift before any visible weight loss appears.

That’s why more people are turning to at-home biomarker testing—health tracking that looks beneath the surface, revealing internal changes long before they’re visible in the mirror or on the scale.

Colin Godby, an engineer and father of two, tested his blood out of curiosity, not concern. What he found was unexpected—and alarming.

The at-home test revealed that Godby had hereditary hemochromatosis, a genetic condition that causes iron to accumulate in the body. Left untreated, it can lead to liver disease, heart problems, and other complications. It was a diagnosis standard labs hadn’t caught—and likely wouldn’t have.

“I’d been chalking up fatigue and joint pain to getting older,” he said. “But this gave me answers. Real ones.”

What stood out to Godby wasn’t just the result—it was the realization that he might never have discovered the issue through routine care. He hadn’t planned to see a doctor, and even if he had, a ferritin test likely wouldn’t have been part of a standard workup.

“I realized how blind I was to the nuance of my health,” said Godby. “And how likely it would be for many other people to also have potential issues they might not know about.”

From COVID-19 Swabs to Full Panels

During the pandemic, millions swabbed their noses at home and waited for COVID-19 test results—an experience that introduced many to the idea of testing health at home.

COVID normalized the idea that you could test yourself and act on the results,” said Jordan Moradian, a product and growth manager at SiPhox Health, a direct-to-consumer testing company, in an interview with The Epoch Times.

Even before the pandemic, health tracking was gaining traction among wellness enthusiasts. COVID-19 accelerated the trend, Moradian said, fueled by renewed interest in immunity, more time at home, and popular science voices like Andrew Huberman.

Today, companies like SiPhox, Everlywell, LetsGetChecked, and QuestHealth offer clinical-grade diagnostics at home. Tests typically use finger-prick or saliva samples to measure everything from blood sugar and inflammation to hormones and cholesterol—and deliver results in days.

The global home testing market, valued at more than $10.5 billion in 2024, is projected to nearly double by 2030, according to Grand View Research. The growth reflects a shift toward preventive, patient-led care—emphasizing early detection, frequent monitoring, and personal agency.

Beyond the Doctor’s Office

At-home blood testing gives people more control over their health, often filling gaps left by conventional care.

Most annual checkups include only basic labs—typically a lipid panel and perhaps a comprehensive metabolic panel. However, these often exclude markers of inflammation, insulin resistance, hormone balance, or cardiovascular risk. As a result, early signs of chronic disease may go unnoticed.

Many people turn to at-home biomarker tracking to test markers their physicians may not typically order,” Moradian said.

In places where diagnostics are limited, these tools offer a fuller health picture before a clinical visit.

The appeal is not just access, but speed. Instead of waiting months for a follow-up panel, users can adjust their lifestyle and retest within weeks, getting near real-time feedback on what’s working.

Moradian identified three groups driving demand: people recovering from health scares who want early warnings; younger, data-driven users testing diets or supplements; and those in “medical deserts” with limited access to care.

Some of the most revealing data come from what routine checkups miss, he said. Many users discover elevated ApoB—a key heart disease marker—even with normal cholesterol. Others uncover hormonal imbalances, such as low testosterone, rarely screened for in standard exams.

For many, this internal data becomes more than diagnostic—it becomes personal. The numbers link daily choices to real biological change.

Motivation in the Metrics

The bathroom scale is slow to move and quick to frustrate. Blood work, by contrast, offers internal proof that change is happeningeven before it’s visible. A drop in blood sugar, a dip in inflammation, or a hormone shift can be more motivating than what’s seen in the mirror.

“Improvements in biomarkers almost always come before visible weight changes,” said Dr. Robert Lufkin, a physician and author of “Lies I Taught in Medical School,” in an email interview with The Epoch Times. “Tracking blood sugar or inflammation offers real-time feedback—often before any physical changes show up.”

Moradian sees the same pattern. “Biomarker tracking offers a holistic view of one’s health,” he said. “When someone pursues weight loss, they can also see parallel improvements in blood pressure or kidney function—changes that would otherwise go unnoticed if they focused solely on the scale.”

This ‘whole-picture’ perspective is hugely motivating,” he added. “Seeing multiple indicators trend positively reinforces that lifestyle changes are working even before outward, easily visible progress appears.”

In a culture obsessed with appearance, internal markers offer a deeper kind of progress:one rooted in biology, not vanity.

How Accurate Are At-Home Tests?

As at-home blood testing grows, many wonder if the results are as reliable as those from a doctor’s office. Companies like SiPhox say yes—if the right standards are met.

A common misconception is that at-home testing isn’t as accurate or reliable as clinical testing,” Moradian said. “In reality, reputable at-home tests employ rigorously validated methodologies and must meet strict regulatory standards.

SiPhox processes tests through Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments and College of American Pathologists-accredited labs, which are federally certified for accuracy and oversight. The company reports a 95 percent to 99 percent match with standard venous draws, benchmarked quarterly against labs like LabCorp and Quest Diagnostics.

However, not all tests meet these standards. Experts urge consumers to look past marketing and ask key questions: Is the lab certified? Are the tests validated? Do clinicians review results?

The Association for Diagnostics & Laboratory Medicine (ADLM) supports at-home testing only through certified labs that provide clear explanations and follow-up options.

“Consumer-directed laboratory testing can provide valuable information,” said Anthony Killeen, the group’s president, in a press release. However, he emphasized that it must be used appropriately and with support from qualified professionals.

ADLM has also warned about quality gaps, calling for tighter regulation of misleading or poorly validated tests. As the industry grows, the group’s message is clear: Convenience must not come at the cost of accuracy.

The Limits of At-Home Testing

At-home blood testing offers fast, easy access to health data and the promise of early detection. However, experts warn that more data doesn’t always lead to better outcomes.

One risk is over-testing. Like daily weigh-ins, frequent checks of glucose or inflammation can fuel anxiety over normal fluctuations.

Frequent testing without proper context can lead to anxiety, overanalysis, and obsession with small, normal fluctuations,” said Lufkin. “Not every spike or dip is meaningful—bodies are dynamic.”

Another challenge is interpretation. Without a doctor’s guidance, users may make diet or supplement decisions based on a single number.

“Self-monitoring is intended to complement professional medical advice, not replace it,” said Moradian. “We encourage users to share their biomarker data with their health care providers, fostering collaborative decision-making.”

A 2020 review in Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine echoed this concern, noting that consumers “may not know the risks or what significance a result has.” In some cases, false positives led to unnecessary procedures, added costs, and anxiety.

Privacy is another issue. A 2023 study published in JAMA Internal Medicine found that fewer than half of direct-to-consumer companies followed HIPAA guidelines. Only four allowed users to delete their data, while over half admitted they could share it for research or with third parties.

Cost is another barrier. While tests may appear cheaper than lab visits, a full panel can cost $75 to $300, and few are covered by insurance. For frequent users, the price adds up quickly.

Your Body, Your Baseline

At-home testing shifts the focus from population averages to personal baselines—moving health tracking from what works for most to what works for you.

This idea underpins “N=1 medicine,” a growing movement in which individuals act as their own experiments. Instead of relying on annual checkups or generic advice, users collect data, track trends, and make changes based on what works for them.

But where to begin?

Lufkin recommends starting with a foundational lab panel that includes fasting insulin, fasting glucose, HbA1c (a longer-term marker of blood glucose levels), triglycerides and HDL (to calculate the ratio), CRP (a marker of inflammation), LDL-C, and vitamin D.

“These give a snapshot of your metabolic and inflammatory status—far more informative than weight or BMI,” he said.

Once you have your baseline, Lufkin advises a gradual, focused approach:

  • Pick one change, such as cutting added sugar, walking after meals, or improving sleep.
  • Track how you feel—energy, mood, cravings, and digestion often shift before lab numbers do.
  • Retest every three to six months to monitor trends and confirm your direction.

“Even small improvements confirm that your efforts are working—long before the mirror shows it,” he said.

Ultimately, at-home testing isn’t about micromanaging every fluctuation. “You don’t need to be perfect—just curious,” Lufkin said. “Let data guide your next best step. That’s real empowerment.”

https://www.zerohedge.com/medical/why-more-people-are-testing-their-blood-without-doctor

Building 'cellular bridges' for spinal cord repair after injury

 Capitalizing on the flexibility of tiny cells inside the body's smallest blood vessels may be a powerful spinal cord repair strategy, new research suggests.

In mouse experiments, scientists introduced a specific type of recombinant protein to the site of a spinal cord injury where these cells, called pericytes, had flooded the lesion zone. Once exposed to this protein, results showed, pericytes change shape and inhibit the production of some molecules while secreting others, creating "cellular bridges" that support regeneration of axons—the long, slender extensions of nerve cell bodies that transmit messages.

Researchers observed axon regrowth in injured mice that received a single treatment injection of the growth-factor protein, and the animals also regained movement in their hind limbs. An experiment involving  suggests the results are not restricted to mice.

"There's a lot more that can be learned and a lot that can be expanded, but the more we worked on this, the more stunned we really were by the potency of this single treatment and how effective it was," said senior study author Andrea Tedeschi, associate professor of neuroscience in The Ohio State University College of Medicine. "This finding goes beyond spinal cord injury—it has implications in  and stroke, and neurodegenerative diseases as well."

The work underscores how important blood vessel restoration is to recovery of neurological function after a spinal cord injury, researchers said.

"Spinal cord injuries are severe not only because they prevent transmission of information across the site of the injury, but because all of the vasculature structure and function is also compromised," said first study author Wenjing Sun, assistant professor of neuroscience at Ohio State. "Even if you are able to reestablish neuronal connectivity from one end to the other, the overall effect will still not be maximized unless you take care of everything else that falls apart."

The study is published in the journal Molecular Therapy.

Previous research suggesting pericytes interfere with spinal cord injury recovery had led some scientists to recommend clearing them from the lesion site to aid repair. But  has indicated pericytes' properties change when they're exposed to a protein called platelet-derived growth factor BB (PDGF-BB)—which is one way tumors generate their own blood supply. In cancer, the aim is to block PDGF-BB signaling.

Earlier neuroscience research also indicated that pericytes are highly "plastic," meaning they are very responsive to changes in the microenvironment—including the presence of PDGF-BB. Tedeschi and colleagues saw potential to harness that cell-protein relationship to stabilize the vasculature surrounding a spinal cord injury. In the process, they found the newly sprouted blood vessels established a pathway for regenerated axons to follow.

Starting with imaging studies, the team showed that when a spinal cord is severed, pericytes migrate into the injury site over time but don't promote growth of functional blood vessels that are needed to support axon regeneration.

In cell-culture experiments, the researchers established a "carpet" of pericytes, added PDGF-BB, and then placed a layer of adult mouse  on top and evaluated how much axons grew in 24 hours. The treated axons grew nearly as much as healthy axons extend under normal conditions.

PDGF-BB alone did not produce this result. Instead, experiments showed that pericytes combined with the growth factor rearranged fibronectin, a multifunctional adhesive glycoprotein that plays a critical role in tissue repair, cell attachment and motility. The cells themselves also change shape, becoming more elongated.

"We know these cells are going to infiltrate and deposit at the lesion epicenter. These elongated fiber structures that they become are far more permissive in promoting axons to regenerate from one end to the other and bypass the injury," Tedeschi said.

"To extend the clinical relevance of our findings, we cultured mouse neurons on top of human pericytes that were exposed to PDGF-BB, and that was sufficient to trigger a growth-promoting effect, suggesting that this might really be a generalized phenomenon that is not restricted to mice."

Turning to experiments in animals with spinal cord injury, researchers waited for seven days after the injury—the equivalent of about nine months in a human adult—before injecting a single dose of PDGF-BB at the injury site. Analysis of tissue four weeks after the injury showed that the PDGF-BB injection produced robust axon regenerative growth compared to the axon response in injured control mice.

"When we looked at the formation of these pericyte structures that crossed the injury site, we saw the treatment promoted the growth of these bridges. And most if not all of these regenerating axons were able to escape the injury site by riding these cellular bridges that have formed in response to PDGF-BB administration," Sun said.

Electrophysiological and movement assessments of injured animals treated with PDGF-BB detected sensory activity beyond the lesion site and showed the mice regained better control of their hind limbs compared to control mice. The animals were also less sensitive to a non-painful stimulus, suggesting they did not experience the neuropathic pain that is often triggered by a spinal cord injury.

Analysis of the presence of inflammatory proteins during the repair process suggested that PDGF-BB administration not only promotes axon regeneration, but also reduces inflammation. RNA sequencing showed that spinal cord injury led to decreased  by pericytes, but that the cells retained their core properties and did not convert into a different kind of cell—for example, a cell type that could end up being destructive to the injury environment.

"There was a decrease in some classical pericyte markers, but a gain of some additional function linked to the attempt to rebuild cellular bridges and functional vessels," Sun said. "From the overall gene signature in our data, they're still classified as a ."

Because Tedeschi, Sun and colleagues have previously shown in mice that gabapentin promotes regeneration of neural circuits after spinal cord injury, there's potential to consider a multipronged approach to therapy, Sun said.

"We could combine both—modulating intrinsic properties of adult neurons with a drug, and what we are doing here, modulating the non-neuronal environment to produce cellular interactions that provide a more permissive substrate for the neuron to grow on," she said.

More work is planned to determine the precise timing for administration of PDGF-BB—with the presumption that pericytes take some time to migrate to the injury—as well as the ideal concentration of the treatment and a potential time-released delivery system.

More information: Wenjing Sun et al, In vivo programming of adult pericytes aids axon regeneration by providing cellular bridges for SCI repair, Molecular Therapy (2025). DOI: 10.1016/j.ymthe.2025.04.020


https://medicalxpress.com/news/2025-04-cellular-bridges-spinal-cord-injury.html

'Alzheimer's risk factors can impact cognition in adults as young as 24'

 A new study from Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health and the Columbia Butler Aging Center suggests that risk factors and biomarkers related to Alzheimer's disease are associated with cognition much earlier in life than previously recognized. The study highlights significant associations between cognition and Alzheimer's disease risk factors as young as ages 24 to 44 and underscores the importance of early prevention.

This is the first study to systematically examine Alzheimer's disease risk factors, including biomarkers related to  in a large group of generally healthy middle-aged individuals in the U.S. The findings are published in The Lancet-Regional Health Americas.

"Previously, research on Alzheimer's disease risk factors has focused on individuals aged 50 and older," said Allison Aiello, Ph.D., James S. Jackson Healthy Longevity Professor of Epidemiology in the Butler Aging Center and Columbia Mailman School. "The potential impact of our findings is substantial, offering clinicians and health researchers a clearer understanding of the early emergence of Alzheimer's disease risk factors and their association with cognition before middle age.

According to Aiello, the results reveal that several well-established risk factors and  are linked to cognitive function even before midlife. These earlier life associations provide a baseline for predicting long-term trajectories of cognitive decline. "Additionally, we learned that certain Alzheimer's risk factors—such as , ATN (amyloid, tau, neurodegeneration), and immune biomarkers—are present and related to cognition in individuals in their forties and even earlier."

Aiello and colleagues used the Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Aging, and Incidence of Dementia (CAIDE) score, which covers factors like age, education, sex, , body mass index, cholesterol, , and the gene variant apolipoprotein E ε4 allele (APOE ε4) which is a  for Alzheimer's disease.

Data were analyzed from Waves IV and V of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), which tracked a nationally representative cohort of adolescents since 1994–1995 through multiple follow-up waves. About half of the participants in Wave IV were female (48.4–52.1%), and just over 70% (71.4–72.5%) were white.

In particular, Wave IV consisted of data from up to 11,449 individuals aged 24–34. The researchers conducted in-home interviews, cognitive tests, physical exams, and gathered blood samples from 4,507 participants. In Wave V, both in-person and web/mail surveys were directed to participants aged 34–44.

The total of 1,112 participants who received in-home interviews were given cognitive tasks such as immediate word recall, delayed word recall, and backward digit span and provided a sample for . Scores on the cognitive tasks were linked to the overall CAIDE score in 529 individuals at Wave V.

"Exploring the relationship between the CAIDE score and cognitive function in young adulthood and early midlife in the U.S., showed that significant associations with cardiovascular risk factors can be observed well before age 50," Aiello explained.

Furthermore, biologically—genetic, neurological, immune, and inflammatory biomarkers have been implicated in Alzheimer's disease risk. The amyloid (A), tau (T), and neurodegeneration (N) biomarkers—collectively known as ATN—are increasingly viewed as promising indicators for predicting Alzheimer's disease risk in older populations.

ATN biomarker and several immune markers showed associations with cognitive function before midlife. However, a key genetic risk factor, APOE, did not appear to affect participants in these middle years and may not become evident until later in life.

"Our overall findings suggest that blood-based biomarkers associated with Alzheimer's disease are linked to differences in cognitive function decades before clinical symptoms and impairments even appear, highlighting the importance of early prevention strategies across the life course," Aiello noted.

"Identifying the early pathways to Alzheimer's disease and cognitive impairment before older age is critical to slowing the expected rise of Alzheimer's disease in the coming decades."

Co-authors are Jennifer Momkus, Chantel L. Martin, Lauren Gaydosh, Y. Claire Yang, Taylor Hargrove, and Kathleen Mullan Harris, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Rebecca C. Stebbins, Butler Columbia Aging Center; Yuan S. Zhang and Adina Zeki Al Hazzouri, Butler Columbia Aging Center and Mailman School of Public Health.

More information: Allison E. Aiello et al, Risk factors for Alzheimer's disease and cognitive function before middle age in a U.S. representative population-based study, The Lancet Regional Health—Americas (2025). DOI: 10.1016/j.lana.2025.101087


https://medicalxpress.com/news/2025-04-alzheimer-factors-impact-cognition-adults.html