Favorite music can reduce pain

Published February 15, 2024 – By Editorial staff
"Touching" or "bittersweet" music had the greatest effect on pain relief.

Listening to your favorite music can reduce pain by up to a quarter, according to a Canadian study. More emotional music was found to be the most effective for pain relief.

Music therapy can distract attention from pain, reduce pain intensity, reduce stress and anxiety, and even promote a sense of control. For example, a review study published in 2021 found that music could be effective in reducing anxiety, depression, and pain in cancer patients.

Reduced sensitivity to pain (also known as hypoalgesia) can occur when the sensation of pain is disrupted between where it starts (stimuli) and where it is recognized as pain by the conscious mind, explains Mathieu Roy, co-author of the study.

- The effects generally range between a 10 to 20 percent reduction, so similar to anti-inflammatory drugs, for instance., he says, according to the health website Every Day Health.

Different types of music compared

In the McGill University study, published in the journal Frontiers, the researchers wanted to take a closer look at what kind of music best reduces pain. The researchers recruited 63 healthy participants, 49 women and 14 men, with an average age of 21. The participants were asked to bring two pieces of music with them, one being their "favorite music of all time" and the other being something they would take with them to a desert island.

Participants then experienced moderately painful thermal stimuli on the inner forearm in a controlled laboratory environment, resulting in a sensation similar to a hot teacup being held against the skin. While being exposed to the pain, different pieces of music, and sometimes no music at all, were played for about seven minutes.

– We compared two different types of music: relaxing music that was taken from a music therapy application that’s been proved to be effective in prior studies, and self-selected preferred music, says Roy.

Relatively large effect

They found that the music chosen by the study participants had a much larger effect on immediate pain relief than the unfamiliar relaxing music.

– We had 20 to 25 percent pain reduction for the self-selected preferred music — so that's a relatively large effect compared to around 10 percent for the relaxing music app that the participants did not choose, says the researcher.

Next, the participants were asked to describe and categorize the music they selected for the study. The songs fell into four basic categories: energizing/activating, happy/encouraging, soothing/relaxing, and moving/bittersweet. The songs that were more moving/bittersweet had a greater effect on pain relief compared to songs in the other categories. These songs also produced more "musical shivering," which is also thought to help with pain. Shivering can manifest as goosebumps and is a psychophysiological response that can occur when listening to music, for example.

Researchers believe that listening to favorite music, especially songs that evoke strong emotions, can be effective for many types of pain. This may not be the case for headaches, where people often prefer silence, but it may be helpful for other types of pain, explains Roy.

TNT is truly independent!

We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.

Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…

Powerful new antibiotic discovered by accident

Published November 6, 2025 – By Editorial staff

Researchers have discovered an antibiotic that is more than 100 times stronger than previously thought – by studying a process that has been known for at least fifty years. The discovery could be a breakthrough in the fight against antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Antibiotics were discovered in 1928 by Alexander Fleming, but widespread use of the drug only began during World War II. Today, large amounts of antibiotics are used annually worldwide, which has led to higher resistance to the drug.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) means that bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites develop resistance to drugs, including antibiotics. It arises primarily through incorrect and excessive use of antibiotics, and is a problem that is increasing globally. It is therefore considered one of the most serious threats to global health.

Now researchers at the University of Warwick in the UK and Monash University in Australia have made an unexpected discovery while studying how the bacterium Streptomyces coelicolor produces the old antibiotic methylenomycin A. This bacterium has been one of the most studied in antibiotic research since the 1950s.

In simple terms, when cells produce chemical substances, they go through several intermediate stages before the final product is ready – rather like baking, where ingredients are mixed in a certain order. The researchers had the idea of testing these intermediate stages for antimicrobial activity. It turned out that one of them is significantly more powerful than the final product itself.

Methylenomycin A was originally discovered 50 years ago and while it has been synthesized several times, no-one appears to have tested the synthetic intermediates for antimicrobial activity!, says Professor Greg Challis at the University of Warwick, in a press release.

One hundred times more powerful

This intermediate stage, called pre-methylenomycin C lactone, proved to be a very powerful antibiotic – in fact one hundred times more effective than methylenomycin A against dangerous bacteria. It worked particularly well against bacteria that cause MRSA (methicillin-resistant staphylococcus infection) and VRE (vancomycin-resistant enterococci) – two of healthcare's worst nightmares.

Furthermore, the bacteria appeared to have great difficulty developing resistance to the new antibiotic. The discovery opens up a completely new avenue for antibiotic research, and the researchers have already developed a new method for producing the antibiotic in larger quantities, with preclinical trials as the next step.

This discovery suggests a new paradigm for antibiotic discovery. By identifying and testing intermediates in the pathways to diverse natural compounds, we may find potent new antibiotics, says Professor Challis.

“Eco-friendly” cattle feed may have negative climate impact

The exaggerated climate crisis

Published November 3, 2025 – By Editorial staff
Algae have been presented as "the solution" to methane emissions from cows, but the entire production chain paints a completely different picture.

Algae in cattle feed has been presented as a breakthrough in the fight against methane emissions from livestock. But new Swedish research shows that the real climate benefit may be minimal – or even negative. Energy-intensive production and long-distance transport risk canceling out any environmental gains achieved in the barn.

As climate alarmism has risen, cows have increasingly been accused of being real climate villains due to the methane emissions that occur when they burp and pass gas – which is why various schemes have emerged to solve this so-called problem. In 2022, for example, Prince Charles praised the British startup company Zelp for inventing a mask for cows to wear that would convert methane gas into water vapor. The cow mask is still under development but may likely become part of British cows' daily life.

However, the most talked-about solution has been the methane-reducing supplements implemented in cattle feed. The best known is Bovaer, which the Swedish-Danish dairy cooperative Arla has particularly been criticized for using, with both Danes and Swedes calling for a boycott of the company. Due to the strong criticism, the company is planning further studies to see how it affects cows' health, as well as the meat and milk.

Algae has been described as climate-smart

Another supplement being tested for cows is algae, which according to some studies has been shown to reduce methane emissions by between 30 and 90 percent. Now, however, research from KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm has shown that these figures may be highly misleading.

Adding algae to cattle feed has been overestimated as a quick solution to livestock emissions, says Jean-Baptiste Thomas, researcher at the Division of Water and Environmental Engineering at KTH, in a press release.

To measure climate impact, one must take into account how these algae are produced, processed, and how far they are transported. The algae are often dried or refined, which involves energy-intensive methods such as freeze-drying. Furthermore, there is of course an environmental impact when fossil fuels are used, Thomas argues.

Sometimes there is no climate benefit at all

The most common algae used is Asparagopsis, which has the greatest effect on methane emissions, but it is a tropical species. This means long-distance transport all the way to Sweden. Growing it locally in Sweden is not a good alternative either, as it would require artificial, energy-intensive land-based cultivation systems since the species is invasive.

The real climate benefit is much smaller – and sometimes there is no benefit at all, or it can even be worse, says Thomas.

Thomas still believes that algae can be of some use as a supplement in cattle feed, as long as the environmental impact is low. For example, it could be interesting to use by-products instead, but he emphasizes that algae alone cannot "transform the climate footprint of livestock". This study is the first to look at the entire chain for algae feed, something that surprises the researchers.

It's quite surprising, considering how much attention the issue has received for almost a decade. Perhaps it shows how eager we are to find quick technical solutions to the climate crisis, says Thomas.

Increased cancer risk linked to covid vaccines

The criticized covid vaccinations

Published November 1, 2025 – By Editorial staff
The overall risk of cancer diagnosis increased by 27 percent compared to those who had not received the COVID-19 vaccine.

A comprehensive South Korean study shows a correlation between covid vaccines and increased cancer incidence, particularly prostate cancer and lung cancer.

However, the researchers are cautious in their conclusions and careful to point out that the statistical correlations do not constitute proof of any causal relationship.

In the study, which has been published in Biomarker Research, researchers examined data from 8,407,849 people between 2021 and 2023, drawn from the Korean National Health Insurance Database. The participants were divided into two groups depending on whether they had received covid vaccines or not. The aim was to examine both the actual occurrence (incidence) of cancer and subsequent cancer risks one year after vaccination.

The results show that there were indications of increased risks for various cancer types one year after receiving any form of covid vaccine, compared to those who had not received it. The overall risk of cancer diagnosis increased by 27 percent compared to those who had not received covid vaccines.

Regarding specific cancer forms, the most pronounced risk increases were seen for prostate cancer, which increased by 69 percent, followed by lung cancer which increased by 53 percent. Furthermore, the risk of thyroid cancer increased by 35 percent and stomach cancer by 34 percent. Colorectal cancer showed a risk increase of 28 percent, while breast cancer increased by 20 percent.

These risk increases applied to diagnoses made within one year after vaccination, regardless of whether mRNA or non-mRNA vaccines were used. However, it is unclear which covid vaccines were included in the study.

Statistical correlations

The researchers emphasize, however, that the study's results do not provide evidence that covid vaccines cause cancer, but rather that these are "statistical correlations".

One possible explanation could be, for example, that covid-vaccinated individuals have likely undergone more medical check-ups and screenings, which increases the chance of detecting cancer early compared to those who have not received covid vaccines. However, one cannot say with certainty what causes this, only that there is a difference depending on covid vaccination status.

Study: Testosterone does not control men’s economic risk-taking

Published October 25, 2025 – By Editorial staff
The researchers tested nine different economic behaviors – from risk-taking to generosity – but found no difference between the groups.

Testosterone has no effect on men's economic decisions, according to the largest study to date in this field. One thousand Canadian men who received testosterone made the same decisions as those who received a placebo – a result that challenges previous research.

In the study, published in the scientific journal PNAS, 1,000 Canadian men aged 18 to 45 participated. The men were randomly assigned to receive either an 11-milligram dose of testosterone or a placebo in a double-blind study. Once the hormone began to take effect, the men participated in various experiments to measure risk-taking, generosity, competitiveness, and fairness preferences.

A total of nine different outcomes were measured, and the results showed that both groups behaved on average in the same way, regardless of whether they received testosterone or placebo – across all outcomes.

Our results provide strong evidence that short-term increases in testosterone have no meaningful impact on men's economic decisions, says Anna Dreber Almenberg, professor at the Department of Economics at the Stockholm School of Economics in Sweden, in a press release.

Largest study in the field

Previous studies have suggested that testosterone can influence the propensity to take risks or compete in economic situations, but this study shows that this is not necessarily the case. This study is also the largest of its kind in the field, with ten to twenty times more men participating than in previous studies.

However, the researchers emphasize that they only tested one dose and one time perspective in the men, which means that other possible effects could occur at different doses or time perspectives. Women were also not included in the trial.

The study is important because it directly challenges the idea that short-term fluctuations in testosterone levels explain why some people take greater economic risks, reject unfair offers, or act more competitively in life, says Justin M. Carré, professor at the Faculty of Arts and Science at Nipissing University in Canada.