We usually recommend probiotics for gut health, but gut health actually affects the entire body. As an example, a new randomized controlled trial suggests that the probiotic strain Lacticaseibacillus paracasei PS23 can meaningfully improve sleep quality, though it fell short of reducing perceived stress.

The six-week study, published in Annals of General Psychiatry in October 2025, enrolled 45 office workers experiencing moderate to high stress levels. Participants took either 20 billion CFU of L. paracasei PS23 or a placebo daily. While the probiotic group saw no significant reduction in stress compared to placebo, they did experience notable improvements in overall sleep quality. Specifically, participants in the probiotic group fell asleep faster, stayed asleep more easily, and showed improvements in trait anxiety (the baseline tendency to experience anxious feelings, as opposed to situational anxiety triggered by specific events).

The results echo findings from a 2022 study of clinical nurses under high stress, which also examined PS23. That earlier trial found anxiety improvements were limited to participants with the highest stress levels, suggesting the strain’s effects may depend on who’s taking it and what you’re measuring.

The gut-brain axis (the bidirectional communication network between the digestive system and the central nervous system) has become one of the more promising areas of nutritional research. Probiotics that influence this pathway, sometimes called “psychobiotics,” are of particular interest for their potential effects on mood, anxiety, and sleep. PS23 appears to sit in this category, though the evidence base remains thin.

The takeaway? If you’re struggling with sleep quality, probiotics (in particular, L. paracasei PS23) may be worth watching as more research develops. But anyone hoping a single probiotic will meaningfully reduce their stress levels should temper expectations. As with most things in the supplement world, the answer is nuanced, and more data is needed.

Photo by Daniel on Unsplash

I love fruit juice, and in theory, it should be good for you. Unfortunately, it probably isn’t, for many reasons.

A big problem with fruit juices is their high sugar-to-fiber ratio. Fiber is important because it helps the body moderate how it processes sugar. Hitting the body with a ton of sugar without any fiber is just not the best idea.

On a related note, I recently came across this study. A large meta-analysis looking at 22 studies and nearly 236,000 people found that drinking more sugar-sweetened beverages like soda is linked to a higher risk of gout.

The research pulled together data from cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies. People who drank more sugary drinks had about 33% higher odds of elevated uric acid levels and 21% higher odds of developing gout.

Fruit juice showed a more mixed picture—it was associated with somewhat higher uric acid levels, but the connection to actual gout wasn’t as clear.

The likely culprit here is fructose, which is a major component of sugar and can directly raise uric acid levels. What’s interesting is that not all fruit juices are created equal in this regard. Orange juice might be less problematic because it’s packed with vitamin C and flavonoids that could offset some of the fructose effect. Apple juice, on the other hand, is high in fructose without as much vitamin C to balance things out, so it may have more impact on uric acid.

Here’s something to think about next time you’re scrolling your phone in bed or leaving the hallway light on: a major study suggests that exposure to light at night might be raising your risk of heart disease.

Researchers tracked nearly 89,000 adults in the UK for almost a decade. Instead of relying on estimates or questionnaires, they had participants wear wrist-mounted light sensors for a week to measure their actual light exposure. Then they followed up through medical records to see who developed cardiovascular problems.

The results were striking. People with the highest nighttime light exposure had a 42% higher risk of heart attack, 45% higher risk of heart failure, and roughly 28% higher risk of stroke and atrial fibrillation compared to those who kept things dark at night. And this wasn’t explained away by other factors—the researchers accounted for age, weight, diet, exercise, smoking, sleep quality, shift work, and even genetic predisposition to heart disease. The association still held.

So what’s going on? Light is the main signal that sets your body’s internal clock. When light hits your eyes at night, it can throw off the normal rhythms that regulate everything from blood pressure to metabolism. Your blood pressure is supposed to dip while you sleep, but nighttime light can prevent that drop. It can also push your nervous system into a more stressed state and mess with how your body handles glucose and fats. Over time, these disruptions may take a toll on your cardiovascular system.

What makes this study particularly relevant is that the light levels involved weren’t unusual. We’re not talking about working night shifts under fluorescent lights. The exposures that showed up as risky came from everyday sources—phone screens, bedside lamps, streetlight creeping through the curtains. Things most of us encounter regularly.

The study isn’t perfect. Measuring light for just one week might not capture someone’s typical long-term habits, and observational research can’t prove cause and effect with certainty. But the findings are consistent with what we know about circadian biology, and the dose-response pattern (more light, more risk) adds credibility.

The practical takeaway? Dimming the lights in the evening, using blackout curtains, and putting away screens before bed aren’t just good sleep hygiene—they might be good for your heart too.

Photo by Jakub Żerdzicki on Unsplash

Tattoos may cause permanent changes to the immune system and affect how the body responds to vaccines, according to research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

An international research team found that tattoo ink travels through the lymphatic system and accumulates in lymph nodes, often within minutes of being applied. More concerning, the ink appears to remain there for life — even if the tattoo is later removed.

In experiments on mice, researchers observed chronic inflammation in lymph nodes, the death of macrophages (white blood cells critical to immune function), and altered responses to vaccinations. Notably, tattooed mice showed a weaker response to COVID-19 vaccines but a stronger response to influenza vaccines, suggesting the effects vary depending on vaccine type.

Scientists first noticed the immune effects accidentally while working with mice that had been tattooed for unrelated experiments. They then conducted focused research using standard commercial inks in black, red, and green.

The team described their work as the most extensive study to date on tattoo ink’s effect on immune response. With at least one in five people globally now having a tattoo, researchers say the findings raise significant public health questions.

“Our results are crucial in informing toxicology programs, policymakers, and the general public regarding the potential risk of the tattooing practice associated with an altered immune response,” the authors wrote.

The study adds to growing concerns about tattoo safety. Recent research published in BMC Public Health found that people with large tattoos may face three times the risk of developing lymphoma compared to those without tattoos.

Researchers are calling for further study to inform regulatory frameworks around tattoo ink safety, though they acknowledge that tattooing shows no signs of slowing down as a cultural practice.

Photo by Collins Lesulie on Unsplash

I have noticed something remarkable over the past few months: many of my financially comfortable friends have reached their breaking point with health insurance.

It is not hard to understand why. In many cases, they are getting hit with huge increases, and those with families are facing renewal premiums of $3-4K/month.

Never before have I heard so many people talking about self-insurance. The thinking goes like this: Rather than spending $30-$50K on health care insurance, just put that money in an account and pay cash for medical bills. Over the years, even if a huge emergency arises, there will be money in the account to pay for it.

Self-insuring is appealing for many reasons:

• There is no doubt that cash payers get better prices than those paying through insurance. That sounds insane, but it is true regardless.
• Health insurance covers many things we may never want/need. This drives up the price. And on the flip side, it does not cover many things that we would like it to cover (like supplements!).
• The risk of a serious health event is modest, especially for young, healthy people.

For many, the decision of whether to have or not have insurance is unfortunately made for them because they simply can’t afford it. But if you can afford it, I am not going to encourage you to self-insure (go without health insurance) unless you have a lot (millions of dollars) of disposable cash. Here is why:

• Even young and healthy people have health emergencies, including cancer, heart attacks, car wrecks, and other accidents. While the risk is low, it is not insignificant. As a rule of thumb, you could plan on about a 10% chance per household member of having a significant health emergency in the next 10 years.
• These events can easily cost in the millions of dollars and are real debts that can/will destroy your financial life, affecting your ability to get loans and possibly driving you into bankruptcy.
• Generally speaking, health insurance premiums are subsidized for those with lower incomes and offer tax advantages for those with higher incomes. When you figure out the actual cost, while still expensive, health insurance is a bit more palatable.

Please don’t ever forget what health insurance is for. It is not primarily about paying for routine office visits. It is rather about protecting you from financial ruin in the case of a health crisis. And, if you are reading this, you have the risk of a health crisis.

If you want to protect yourself but simply cannot afford traditional health insurance, a middle ground exists: health-sharing plans. While they are not technically insurance, these plans do have a long history of paying large claims, and they cost a fraction of the cost.

There are many of these health sharing plans on the market right now. I don’t know enough about any of them to recommend particular ones, but you can find them easily online.

Photo by Towfiqu barbhuiya on Unsplash

I am not anti-alcohol. I live and operate in communities where alcohol is prominent, and I probably consume 1-2 drinks in a typical week.

In fact, I lean toward the belief that alcohol has many positive benefits related to community. Alcohol has been a social lubricant for thousands of years.

On the other hand, I want to make two quick points about alcohol. First, since the beginning of the world, it’s probably never been more hip not to drink alcohol. No one should feel pressure to drink, at least in the USA, because a considerable percentage of the population does not drink.

Second, there has never been a better time to get quality non-alcoholic beverages. In other words, you can sip fancy cocktails that are non-alcoholic with your friends. You can buy non-alcoholic wine and beer. Here in Atlanta, we actually have non-alcoholic bars and non-alcoholic “liquor” stores.

With that in mind, I want to talk about a recent study, which, for some unknown reason, the Department of Health and Human Services recently decided not to publish.

A draft of the report, known as the Alcohol Intake and Health Study, was published for public comment in January and is available online.

Here are some pretty shocking conclusions.

Major Health Risks Begin at One Drink Daily

Researchers discovered that consuming just one alcoholic drink per day increases the risk of developing multiple cancers—including breast, liver, colorectal, pharyngeal, and esophageal cancer—as well as liver cirrhosis. The study linked alcohol to over 200 health conditions ranging from mental health disorders to heart disease and digestive diseases.

While one drink daily slightly reduced stroke risk, this modest benefit was negated by occasional consumption of more than one drink. The risks escalate dramatically: people drinking more than seven drinks weekly face a 1-in-1,000 risk of alcohol-related death, jumping to 1-in-100 for those consuming nine or more drinks weekly.

Perhaps most striking, men who increase from one to two drinks daily face a 40-fold increase in mortality risk from alcohol-related diseases.

Two Types of Health Impact

Alcohol affects health through immediate effects—hangovers, workplace fatigue, drunk-driving dangers, and injuries—and long-term consequences, including chronic disease development. Beyond disease, alcohol influences brain function, mood, digestion, and energy levels.

Industry Influence

While this study was suppressed, the government selected a competing study to inform US advisory guidelines on alcohol. It aligns with current guidelines (one drink daily for women, two for men).

Some panelists behind this alternative report have financial ties to the alcohol industry, raising concerns about industry influence.

In other words, the fox is likely in charge of watching the hen house.

Path Forward

The suppression of the report is unfortunate. People deserve access to rigorous scientific information to make informed decisions about alcohol consumption.

However, we are all personally responsible for our health, regardless of what information (or misinformation) comes from the government.

Those wanting to reduce drinking can gradually cut back (fewer drinks per occasion or fewer drinking days), pay attention to alcohol-by-volume percentages in beverages, or switch to non-alcoholic alternatives.

The good news? There has never been a favorable time to do so.

Photo by Sérgio Alves Santos on Unsplash