Can sound waves help you lose weight? This technique may trick fat cells
In a new study, Japanese researchers found that acoustic sound waves can influence how our cells behave — including halting fat development.
'Since sound is non-material, acoustic stimulation is a tool that is non-invasive, safe and immediate, and will likely benefit medicine and healthcare,' corresponding author Masahiro Kumeta said in a statement.
Advertisement
3 A discovery out of Japan could one day help people manage their metabolism in a noninvasive way.
JFontan – stock.adobe.com
Sound is more than just noise — it's made up of mechanical waves that create tiny vibrations traveling through the air, water or even tissue.
We've long known that animals use sound vibrations in their bones to communicate and gather important information about their surroundings, but scientists are only now beginning to understand how sound affects us on a deeper, cellular level.
Music for your cells
Advertisement
The new research builds on a 2018 study by Kumeta and his team that found that sound waves can influence genes involved in bone formation and wound healing.
'To investigate the effect of sound on cellular activities, we designed a system to bathe cultured cells in acoustic waves,' Kumeta said.
They tested three sounds on muscle cells taken from mice: white noise, a 440 Hz tone (the 'A' note on a piano) and a high-pitched 14 kHz tone (close to the highest pitch most people can hear).
3 Sound waves create tiny vibrations that can change cellular activity.
Creative Cat Studio – stock.adobe.com
Advertisement
The results were striking. After just two hours of sound exposure, 42 genes had changed. After 24 hours, an impressive 145 genes showed altered activity.
The way the cells responded depended on the frequency, intensity and pattern of the sound wave. The response also varied based on the type of cell.
The most significant finding of the study was that the sound waves stopped adipocyte differentiation — the process where preadipocytes (precursor cells) turn into mature fat cells that store fat.
Advertisement
When exposed to the sound vibrations, the researchers found that many preadipocyte cells didn't mature into fat cells as expected. Those that did mature contained about 15% less fat than normal.
This effect was seen whether the cells were exposed to continuous sound for three days or just two hours of sound each day over three days.
3 The new study suggests that sound waves can prevent fat cells from maturing.
Getty Images
Though still in its early stages, researchers said this breakthrough may one day lead to new non-invasive treatments that could aid with everything from managing metabolism to speeding wound healing.
Kumeta's team isn't alone in exploring the potential of acoustics for health. At Stanford University, researchers are using sound waves to rearrange heart cells that are too tightly packed, improving nutrient flow.
Meanwhile, acoustic wave therapy — which sends vibrations into our tissues — is already being used to treat conditions like chronic pain, erectile dysfunction and soft-tissue injuries by boosting circulation and reducing inflammation.
Next up, Kumeta and his team want to experiment with tuning sound waves to target specific cell types, opening the door for more tailored, non-invasive treatments.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Over 23,000 Are Floored By This Text About A MAGA Voter Who Supported Cutting Medicaid... Until He Realized His Children Use It
As you likely know, Donald Trump signed his One Big, Beautiful Bill into law earlier this month, which includes major reductions in federal support for Medicaid. Ultimately, as reported by NPR, this will lead to about 12 million more people being without health insurance by 2034. It doesn't take much brain power to understand why that would be a very, very bad thing. Saul Loeb / Getty Images Related: Regardless, some people still struggle with the concept. One such person is the focus of this text exchange that recently went viral on Reddit: In a retelling of a recent conversation between their brother and themself, this texter wrote, "I mentioned in the family chat that 300,000 kids in Iowa are on Medicaid - they will all lose coverage." "My brother is like: well it least it's not touching Hawk-i, that's what my kids are on," they continued. For those outside of Iowa, the state's Medicaid and children's health insurance program is largely known by its nickname: Healthy and Well-Kids in Iowa or... hawk-i. So, upon learning his children's healthcare is in jeopardy, the brother responds with, "What? They better not." Related: This is all made worse by the fact that the brother, apparently, has been a big proponent of cutting Medicaid. "Dude has been banging the drum for this stupid spending bill for weeks and didn't even realize he was rooting for his own kids losing their insurance," the texter concludes. Mining through the nearly 1,500 comments, a common frustration came from those who have seen stories of people voting against their own interests too many times before. "It's the same thing with people who love the Affordable Care Act, [but] hate 'Obamacare,' and didn't spend the five seconds required to realize that they're the same thing," user Successful_Jelly_213 wrote. Others questioned the brother's morality and wondered aloud why he was OK with children losing their health insurance (as long as they weren't his kids). "So just to clarify, he's good with the other 300,000 kids losing their healthcare, just not his own kids," Sharpymarkr posed. Related: "He never had a single thought about other people. The whole thing was about himself," Prosthemadera agreed. "Whether someone else's family will suffer, how many people will die, he doesn't give a shit." "If your first response to cutting healthcare is 'I'm not affected,' then you're just not a good person, and that doesn't change just because you suddenly care to be against it once you find out you are actually affected. You're just being a selfish, self-centered asshole who will vote Republican again next time because this was never about making the world better." Additionally, "I'm 57 years old, no children, not religious. I have never taken a dime in Medicaid, food stamps, Section 8, or any public programs. I've never even filed for unemployment. But I want my tax dollars to help that guy's kids get healthcare and schooling, and housing. Guess I'm a libtard," weenie2323 said. Elsewhere in the comments, people shared similar stories of dealing with their own MAGA family members: Related: "This is my mom," cheongyanggochu-vibe said. "My disabled brother is on Medicaid, which is supplemented by her state. She thinks that because he gets it from the state, he will be fine (even though the funds are majority federal)." "When he gets axed, she will blame her Democratic governor and lawmakers because she doesn't realize how profoundly she benefits from being in a blue state she hates the leaders of." "A colleague of mine lives in Utah, and he meets the threshold for Medicaid; everything is covered. I asked him, 'Say, aren't you worried about this bill working its way through Congress? You could lose your healthcare.' He said, 'What, no, that's for waste fraud and abuse, I'm on the state health care, not Medicaid.'" "I said, 'Uhh, that IS Medicaid, they just don't call it that because of the political stigma.' Absolute deadpan silence," BeautifulTall7833 said. Overall, little sympathy was expressed. "I hope cutting his own child's healthcare was worth it," WeirdProudAndHungry said. "Medicaid literally saved my life. Fuck these people," MidnightNo1766 added. What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments. Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds: Solve the daily Crossword
Newsweek
3 hours ago
- Newsweek
Saving the World's Rainforests Isn't Rocket Science. Here's How to Do It
Advocates for ideas and draws conclusions based on the interpretation of facts and data. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. As diplomats and activists scramble to secure hotel rooms in Belém, Brazil for the next U.N. COP30 in the Brazilian Amazon, one of the biggest problems our planet faces is how to protect the world's last remaining rainforests—nature's most powerful climate solution. Despite the 29 previous COPs, attended by thousands of scientists, politicians, and activists, forests are still being destroyed at an ever-increasing rate, lost to massive cattle ranching, palm oil, illegal logging, mining, land-grabs, and man-made fires, which are ravaging the Amazon, Congo, and everywhere in-between. A rainforest in Darien province, Panama is pictured. A rainforest in Darien province, Panama is pictured. Eric Lafforgue/Art in All of Us/Corbis via Getty Images Tropical rainforests are the cradle of life on Earth—and the world's lungs. By converting carbon dioxide to oxygen on a massive scale, rainforest conservation should be at the forefront of action to save our planet from climate change and ecological collapse. While international conservation groups can play a supporting role, it is national governments who must take responsibility for protecting our last pristine forests and marine ecosystems. Fancy billion-dollar carbon capture machines, or "breakthrough" technologies for climate mitigation, or reforestation with billions of young trees, will never come close to the power of old-growth tropical rainforests to protect biodiversity and simultaneously provide the oxygen the planet and humans need to survive. The destruction of the Amazon and Congo, this year at its highest level in decades, and the rapid loss of Southeast Asia's rainforests, is pushing the limits of our planet's ability to survive in the face of rising oceans, global warming, catastrophic extinction events, desertification, and unsustainable urban development and land use. Very few developing countries are fighting back successfully, and showing us that we can indeed save our rainforests. Despite supposedly unstoppable global forces—such as demand for hamburgers or chocolate spread—a few nations have stopped the burning, protected their rainforests, and are now busy increasing their size. One small but proud nation, Panama, shows how it can be done. It starts, inevitably, with political will. In Panama's case, this is the recently elected government of President José Raúl Mulino. Since being elected into office last year, Panama's government has undertaken unprecedented steps to protect the country's rainforests, wildlife, and marine ecosystems. Steps taken by Panama in the past year include enacting a province-wide illegal logging moratorium in Darien to stop anarchic cutting and clearing of tropical rainforests until a new permitting system is deployed, while hiring, equipping, and training 240 new national park rangers with the trucks, boats, and equipment they need—with an additional 50 rangers on the way. Panama has also made use of new technologies like satellite monitoring, marine radars, cellular trail cameras, and systems like EarthRanger and Skylight, to increase the effectiveness in terrestrial and marine reserve protection. A large effort is underway to support Indigenous communities like the Naso Kingdom to protect their 400,000-hectare Comarca. Also, nature and ecotourism are now a leading strategy for the country's sustainable development. Another critical policy response focuses on the government itself. Panama has restructured the Environment Ministry to remove non-effective officials and return to the field and build awareness to motivate Panamanians to protect their natural treasures. In addition to rainforest protection, Panama is protecting the Eastern Tropical Pacific Marine Corridor (CMAR), one of the world's largest marine reserves. By using satellites to monitor this vast area, 16 illegal fishing boats were interdicted last month in the Cordillera de Coiba Marine Protected Area, the largest bust in the country's history. Unlike other governments dependent on international aid from the U.S. and Europe, Panama is leading by financing nature protection from its own government budget. Outside help comes as critical co-investment, not handouts creating more dependency. Global Conservation is assisting Panama by supporting advanced protection systems and training for the country's largest national parks—Darien, La Amistad, and Coiba—and the Naso indigenous territory, some of the most important forests and marine ecosystems in Mesoamerica. This year, Global Conservation assisted Darien National Park to train 25 new rangers and helped 28 rangers at Coiba National Marine Park to inaugurate and deploy a powerful Marine Radar system, installed to identify and interdict illegal fishing within the marine reserve. While Panama still faces tremendous conservation challenges, it's well on its way to meeting these challenges head-on, and solving them. Taking concrete steps to protect the forest and securing real budgets for enforcement is something akin to a revolution in nature protection. In most developing countries in which Global Conservation works, the typical story involves a handful of rangers, with little more than a broken-down truck or boat, struggling heroically but in vain to protect the parks from unscrupulous logging syndicates and thousands of miners, without any training, zero political support, and no resources. As diplomats and officials prepare to travel to Belém and spend two weeks arguing over climate, making, as is typical of COPs, progress at glacial speed, other nations must show how to get things done now. The Panama Solution is an example of the way forward for immediate, effective, and much needed rainforest and marine protection by a small developing nation, which is replicable in almost any country in the world. The time is now to be bold and to protect our forests and seas—our greatest nature-based solution to solve the climate crisis. Juan Carlos Navarro is minister of Environment of Panama. Jeff Morgan is executive director of Global Conservation. The views expressed in this article are the writers' own.
Forbes
14 hours ago
- Forbes
Why Millions Of Managers Are Becoming Obsolete—It's Not Rocket Science
Halo neuroscience CTO Brett Wingeier talks about the science to optimize brain and muscle ... More connections Liz Hafalia/The San Francisco Chronicle via Getty Images) Earlier this month, Steve Blank, adjunct professor at Stanford University, wrote a wonderful article, 'Blind to Disruption -- The CEOs Who Missed the Future,' It was about the thousands of carriage firms in the early 20th century that vanished almost overnight when new technology made their way of doing things obsolete. Today, millions of managers face similar risks of obsolescence as almost everything that they have been doing for the last hundred years is less and less relevant. Spoiler alert: the risk is not principally AI. A New Branch Of Expertise: Neuroeconomics? There are of course many voices offering help. You've probably heard of macroeconomists and microeconomists. Now make way for the latest group of economists. They call themselves neuroeconomists. They are performing sophisticated scientific studies of the human brain with the goal of enhancing the quality of managerial decision-making. They begin with a basic framework that sounds sensible. Take the one proposed by A. Rangel, C. Camerer, and P. R. Montague and published in the National Library of Medicine. It divides the process of decision-making into five stages. First, what is the problem to be addressed? Second, what are the values to be assigned to possible courses of action?. Third, what is the action to be taken? Fourth, how valuable was the decision taken? Finally, what lessons are there for the future? The Key Problem Is What Is The Problem Most of the available work of neuroeconomics is so far focused on highly technical neurological analysis of steps 2-5. But guess what? The principal problem in management today lies elsewhere. It concerns the first step: what is the problem to be addressed? For more than a century, the central problem addressed by management has been how to maximize profits by cutting costs. That's the basis of mainstream economics. It's the reason Ronald Coase won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1991: firms exist to reduce transaction costs and enhance profits. You can read almost any introductory economics textbook and see that this insight is still so obvious that alternatives are not even considered. Management theory has been on a similar track for at least the last half century. Management has been principally focused on increasing profits to maximize shareholder value. That was the official position of the U.S. Business Roundtable for decades. Business schools still teach it. Most of the processes, systems, and mindsets of traditional management are still in place in big firms. So that is the problem that managers are required to solve, whether they like it or not. The Shift From Cutting Costs To Creating Value For Customers Just as in the early 20th century, the world has changed. The primary dynamic of a business has shifted from increasing efficiency by cutting costs to expanding demand by creating more value. Value creating enterprises emerged from the combination of two elements: first, entrepreneurs began using digital technology and AI to deliver exponentially more value than traditionally-managed firms; and second, digital technology gave customers the power to demand more value from businesses. The killer insight: value-creating enterprises not only satisfy customers: they make much more money than firms focused on making money. As a result, the primary goal of fast-growing businesses has shifted from cost-cutting and profits to value creation for customers. Because the potential gains from value creation dwarf any potential gains from efficiency, value creation for customers has become the primary goal of fast-growing businesses today. Meanwhile, profit-seeking firms that still focus primarily on improving efficiency and cost-cutting generate below-average value and are having difficulty in surviving. Two-thirds of the famous blue=chip firms in the Dow Jones Industrial Average are now performing below average (See the table below) Why AI Will Make The Divide Even More Dire In one sense, the explosion of AI represents a massive opportunity for management. Those firms already focused on delivering more value to customers will likely use AI to increase the benefits for customers and heap further riches on their firms. By contrast, AI will likely be used by managers still operating in a traditional mode as a way to cut costs even faster. The approach will likely aggravate the obsolescence of traditional managers and the firms that they manage. The difference in outcomes of the two groups of managers is largely unrelated to different neurological circuits in the brain. It's not rocket science or even neuroscience that's at stake here. The traditional managers are simply trying to solve the wrong problem. If these budding neuroeconomists would focus their research on the central challenge today, namely, the goal of the firm, their work could move from merely 'interesting' to profoundly 'useful'. And read also How Value Creation Resolves The Contradictions Of Running A Business Millions Of Managers Are Becoming Obsolete: Master Value Creation Now Table: 5-year total returns of firms in the Dow Jones Industrial Average: July 9, 2025 Five-year total returns of firms in the Dow Jones Industrial Average
