logo
Does methylene blue really have health benefits? Pharmacologist gives verdict

Does methylene blue really have health benefits? Pharmacologist gives verdict

Independent04-06-2025

The internet is abuzz with tributes to a liquid chemical called methylene blue that is being sold as a health supplement.
Over the past five or 10 years, methylene blue has come to be touted online as a so-called nootropic agent – a substance that enhances cognitive function. Vendors claim that it amps up brain energy, improves memory, boosts focus and dispels brain fog, among other supposed benefits.
Health influencers, such as podcaster Joe Rogan, have sung its praises. In February 2025, shortly before he was confirmed as Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared in a video squirting a blue liquid widely presumed to be methylene blue into a glass, though he never verbally endorsed the substance.
As a researcher studying inflammation and cancer, I investigate how dyes affect human health. Claims about methylene blue are alluring, and it's easy to buy into its promise. But so far, evidence supporting its health benefits is scant, and there are some serious risks to using the substance outside of medical practice.
What is methylene blue?
Methylene blue is a synthetic dye that exists as a dark green powder and takes on a deep blue colour when dissolved in water. My work and that of others suggest that many synthetic dyes widely used in foods and medicines can trigger potentially harmful immune system reactions in the body.
But unlike commonly used food dyes – one of which was recently banned by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration – methylene blue is not derived from petroleum, also known as crude oil. Instead, it comes from a different family of dyes, which isn't thought to have these health concerns.
Methylene blue was first synthesised in 1876 as a dye for textiles and was valued for its intense colour and ability to bind well to fabrics.
Soon after, German physician Paul Ehrlich discovered its ability to stain biological tissues and to kill the parasite that causes malaria, making it one of the first synthetic drugs used in medicine.
The chemical didn't gain widespread use as a malaria treatment because it was no more effective than quinine, the standard therapy at the time. But in the 1930s, the dye found a new use in testing the safety of raw or unpasteurized milk. If its blue colour faded quickly, the milk was contaminated with bacteria, but if it remained blue, the milk was considered relatively clean.
This safety test is now largely obsolete. But it works thanks to methylene blue's chemical superpower, which is that its molecules can swap electrons with other molecules, like a tiny battery charger.
How do doctors use it today?
That same chemical superpower enables some of methylene blue's medical uses. Most significantly, doctors use it to treat a rare blood disorder called methemoglobinemia, in which haemoglobin, an iron-rich protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen, takes on a different form that can't do the job. Methylene blue restores haemoglobin's function by transferring an electron.
Doctors also sometimes use methylene blue to treat the effects of carbon monoxide poisoning, septic shock or toxicities from drugs such as chemotherapy. It is also used as a surgical dye to highlight specific tissues, such as lymph nodes, or to identify where tissue is leaky and therefore may be damaged.
How does methylene blue affect the brain?
Methylene blue can enter the brain by crossing the protective tissue barrier that surrounds it. Researchers have also found that the chemical can protect and support mitochondria, cell structures that are often described as the powerhouses of the cell. Methylene blue may help mitochondria generate energy for cells to use. For these reasons, researchers are studying methylene blue's effect on the brain.
So far, most of what's known about the substance's effects on the brain comes from studies in rats and in cells grown in a lab dish, not in people. For example, researchers have found that methylene blue may improve learning, boost memory and protect brain cells in rats with a condition that mimics Alzheimer's disease.
Studies in rodents have also found that methylene blue can protect the brain from damage from brain injury. Other studies showed that methylene blue is useful in treating ischemic stroke in rats. However, no research to date has examined whether it protects people's brains from traumatic brain injury or stroke.
A handful of clinical trials have investigated the effects of methylene blue in treating aspects of Alzheimer's disease in people, but a 2023 review of these trials notes that their results have been mixed and not conclusive. A small study of 26 people found that a single low dose of the chemical boosted memory by about 7 per cent and increased brain activity during thinking tasks. Another study by the same researchers found that methylene blue changed how different parts of the brain connected, though it didn't improve thinking skills.
Although some studies in people have shown hints that methylene blue may be beneficial for some brain-related issues, such as pain management and neuropsychiatric disorders, such studies to date have been small. This suggests that while there may be patient circumstances where methylene blue is beneficial, researchers have not yet pinned down what those are.
Is methylene blue safe?
Methylene blue is generally safe when used under medical supervision. However, the chemical has some serious risks.
For one thing, it can interact with widely used medications. Methylene blue inhibits a molecule called monoamine oxidase, whose job is to break down an important brain chemical, serotonin. Many commonly used medications for treating anxiety and depression target serotonin. Taking the supplement along with these medicines can cause a condition called serotonin syndrome, which can lead to agitation, confusion, high fever, rapid heart rate, muscle stiffness and, in severe cases, seizures or even death.
In people with a rare genetic deficiency of an enzyme called G6PD, methylene blue can cause a dangerous condition in which red blood cells break down too quickly. At high doses, the chemical can also raise blood pressure or cause heart problems. Also, it's considered unsafe for pregnant or breastfeeding women because it may harm the fetus or baby.
Overall, while scientists have found hints of some fascinating properties of methylene blue, much larger, longer trials are needed to know if it truly works, what the right dose is and how safe it is over time.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Men's biological clock linked to IVF miscarriages
Men's biological clock linked to IVF miscarriages

Times

time3 hours ago

  • Times

Men's biological clock linked to IVF miscarriages

Men have a reproductive biological clock that makes miscarriages more likely in IVF pregnancies involving older fathers, research has found. Men are able to produce sperm throughout their lives, making it possible to conceive a child at any age — as proved by Al Pacino and Sir Mick Jagger, who became fathers again at the ages of 83 and 73 respectively. Male fertility is, however, known to decline with age. It was previously known that sperm from men over the age of 45 has a lower chance of successfully fertilising an egg during the IVF (in vitro fertilisation) process. Jagger with his son Deveraux, who was born when the singer was 73 and his partner Melanie Hamrick was 29 Now research has confirmed that the father's age remains a factor after a successful fertilisation, with a lower rate of live births through IVF for babies conceived by middle-aged men even if the egg came from a younger woman.

I'm a nutritionist - here are three foods you need to eat to boost your sex drive
I'm a nutritionist - here are three foods you need to eat to boost your sex drive

Daily Mail​

time6 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

I'm a nutritionist - here are three foods you need to eat to boost your sex drive

Many factors can affect sex drive, but what you eat can be more important than you think when it comes to getting steamy in the bedroom. Oysters, pumpkin seeds and chickpeas are the ultimate foods to boost your libido, a leading nutritionist has revealed. 'Sexual appetite is closely linked to overall health, and certain foods can help support normal hormone levels, blood flow, and energy—all key factors in maintaining a healthy sex drive,' says Lily Keeling, a nutritionist for healthy meal delivery firm Green Chef. So if your love life is feeling a little lacklustre, your diet could be to blame. Zinc-rich foods like oysters, pumpkin seeds, and chickpeas are especially important, as the nutrient is essential for testosterone production. And it's not just men that need to prevent their testosterone levels from getting low, the hormone is also key for women wanting to increase sexual desire. Zinc is also thought to increase dopamine levels, which can enhance feelings of pleasure. Oysters are famously an aphrodisiac and contain omega-3 fatty acids. This can improve blood flow to the sexual organs, which can help with issues like erectile dysfunction. Pumpkin seeds also contain the essential fat as well as magnesium which make for an added bonus for increasing your blood flow. They are packed with antioxidants like vitamin E which help protect sperm and the prostate from cell damage. Meanwhile, chickpeas can boost sex drive due to its B6 properties. The vitamin is known to regulate testosterone, but it also produces the 'feel-good' hormone dopamine which can increase desire and arousal. It also contains a plant-based chemical known as phytoestrogens, which is said to mimic the effects of estrogen. This can be especially helpful for menopausal women who experience low sex drive as a symptom of their declining estrogen levels.

Who is in charge at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?
Who is in charge at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?

The Guardian

time7 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Who is in charge at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?

Who is in charge at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)? The answer is more complicated than it may seem. With no confirmed or acting CDC director, Robert F Kennedy Jr has direct control over the agency, allowing him to sign off – or not – on vaccine recommendations, according to legal experts. Yet Kennedy, the secretary of the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), testified before a Senate committee in May that someone else is running the agency – creating confusion that could lead to legal challenges. 'There's not a CDC director or acting director. Essentially, RFK Jr is the director of the CDC,' said Paul Offit, professor of pediatrics at the University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine. Kennedy now has 'a lot more opportunity to actually influence the outcome of these decisions and to take actions in the absence of a Senate-confirmed director', said Renée Landers, professor and director of the health law program at Suffolk University Law School in Boston. The dismissal of 17 independent vaccine advisers and their replacement with less experienced advisers, some of whom have histories of anti-vaccine activism, is 'very concerning', especially given Kennedy's rejection of germ theory and his own anti-vaccine activism, Landers said. On Thursday, the independent vaccine advisers appointed by Kennedy voted to ban thimerosal, a preservative (also known as thiomersal) with a demonstrated safety record, from 4% of flu vaccines in the US. The remaining 96% of flu vaccines, as well as all other childhood vaccines, were already free of thimerosal out of an abundance of caution, despite decades of research indicating the preservative's safety. The move will make it harder for some people to access the flu vaccine. The recommendation would normally be taken up by the CDC director, either to reject, or to implement as official, guidance from the agency. But for now, those decisions go directly to Kennedy, who has already exercised these capabilities before. On 13 May, 'with pending confirmation of a new CDC Director', the health secretary adopted the recommendations for Chikungunya vaccines to be officially recommended by the CDC, according to the agency's website. Kennedy did not sign off on the committee's votes for two other vaccines against RSV and meningitis. Those vaccines, recommended in April by the independent advisers whom Kennedy dismissed this month, still have not gotten official CDC recommendations; it's not clear whether or when they will. Kennedy also recently directed the CDC to change its Covid vaccine recommendations, softening the recommendation for children and ending it for pregnant people entirely, despite strong evidence that pregnancy is a major risk factor for severe illness and death. 'It is concerning that the power vacuum leaves open his ability to make these decisions that are inconsistent with scientific consensus,' Landers said. Congress introduced a new law in 2023 that directors of the CDC must now undergo Senate confirmation. This appointment is the first time the CDC director has gone through the process. 'It is a little bit of uncharted waters,' Landers said. David Weldon was first nominated and then withdrawn hours before his Senate confirmation hearing in March. Susan Monarez served as acting director from 23 January until she was nominated on 24 March, at which point she stepped down. Once someone has been nominated for director, they cannot serve as acting director. Monarez testified in her Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday, but it's not clear when lawmakers will vote on the nomination, In the absence of an acting director, the head of HHS has control of the agency, according to the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998. Signing off – or not – on CDC recommendations cannot be 'delegated down' to other officials under the vacancies act, said Anne Joseph O'Connell, a professor at Stanford Law School; 'it can only go up' to the HHS secretary. 'What's unusual about this situation is that we generally think having exclusive duties go 'up' to the agency head when there is a lower-level vacancy is a good thing. But here many don't trust the secretary on these matters,' O'Connell said. Kennedy put forth a different name for who is in charge of the CDC in May testimony before the Senate's health, education, labor and pensions committee. 'Who is the acting CDC director?' Lisa Blunt Rochester, the Democratic senator from Delaware, asked. 'The acting director was Susan Monarez, but she is now up for permanent director, so she's been replaced by Matt Buzzelli,' Kennedy said, describing Buzzelli as 'a public health expert'. But there's no indication that Buzzelli, a lawyer who is listed as chief of staff in the office of the CDC director, is acting director, nor is he qualified for the position. 'Buzzelli cannot be the acting CDC head,' O'Connell said. He's not the first assistant to the CDC director, he's not Senate-confirmed, and he did not serve 90 days in the year before the last director of the CDC left, O'Connell said: 'There is no wiggle room.' The lack of clarity is compounded by the Trump administration's non-compliance with information requirements, experts said. The CDC, along with other agencies, is required to update each year an office of personnel management site about who holds which jobs, a deadline the agencies missed in March. Buzzelli 'has been carrying out some of the duties of the CDC Director as the Senior Official, as necessary, and is surrounded by highly qualified medical professionals and advisors to help fulfill these duties as appropriate', Andrew Nixon, HHS director of communications, told Stat News in May. (HHS did not respond to the Guardian's media inquiry.) Such actions could open the officials up to legal challenges. Without official documentation naming Buzzelli and other decision-makers to official positions, they would not have the designated authority to make certain decisions, which means their actions could be challenged. For instance, they may not be authorized to enter into new contracts or end prior agreements early with state, local, tribal and territorial governments – potentially opening up any such actions to lawsuits. 'The person who takes the action has to be someone lawfully appointed to the position. To the extent that agencies try to skirt that kind of requirement, it does leave the decisions vulnerable to legal challenge,' Landers said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store