Does Scientific Research Actually Support That Product?
Here’s One Way to Tell
The Guardian reports: ‘GABA is the off switch of the brain’: Is it also the answer to better sleep, sobriety and less anxiety? (The article is paywalled, but I’m quoting relevant parts here).
Gamma-aminobutyric acid, or GABA, is the neurotransmitter the brain naturally uses to reduce its neural activity. As the article puts it, GABA is “the brain’s off switch.”
The article asks, could a beverage that enhances GABA activity, like Sentia, mimic the desirable effects of alcohol, providing the sociability of an alcohol buzz without the hangover?
It sounds plausible. We’ve long known that alcohol increases the effects of GABA in the brain. More GABA means reduced neural firing, which reduces inhibition and eases anxiety.
This sequence of events is a biological “mechanism”: a series of biochemical reactions through which something we do or consume changes the way we feel or behave. Enhancing GABA is a mechanism through which alcohol makes us feel less anxious.
So, would any specific product that increases GABA in the brain make us less anxious?
Not necessarily.
Most product sellers want you to assume the answer is “yes.” But actually, it depends on several factors:
How much of the product actually gets into the brain?
Does the product contain the correct dose – enough to affect the brain, but not enough to cause harm?
How much of the benefit comes from the product, and how much from the placebo effect?
It’s not enough to know the product’s mechanism works. You need to test the product directly.
Why do you have to test a product to know if it works?
How Much GABA Gets Into the Brain?
One of the most common problems with developing an effective drug is ensuring it will get into the brain in the first place. Normally, only very small molecules can pass through the walls of brain cells, which function as a “blood brain barrier.”
Renger Witkamp, a professor in nutritional biology at Wageningen University quoted by the Guardian, says consuming GABA orally is not particularly effective. “What we see, if you give someone a large amount of Gaba, is that it is quickly taken up in your blood, but that peak very rapidly disappears, in as little as half an hour. Gaba is a natural compound, so our body has all kinds of systems and enzymes that are constantly keeping it in balance.”
Some amount of the drug in the gut eventually affects the brain, says Dr. David Nutt, a former neuroscientist and government drug policy adviser whose company GABA Labs produces the GABA-enhancing beverage Sentia [1].
“The gut has a lot of Gaba receptors, and Gaba affects gut function. And if you change gut function, then the nerves from the gut to the brain are changed, and therefore the brain is changed.” GABA may also interact with the microbiome, which links the gut and the brain. In other words, any effect of taking GABA orally would be indirect.
What’s the Correct Dose?
The product has to contain enough of the product to affect humans – much more than a homeopathic dose. It must also contain the correct amount to affect the individual taking it. People also vary a lot in weight and metabolism, so the amount of drug that works for one person may have no effect on another, and may be toxic to a third person.
Reputable drug manufacturers try to figure out a “standard dose” that will allow most people to safely benefit at least a bit. However, in the case of GABA-containing supplements, no “standard dose” exists. Your supplement could easily lack enough of the product to affect you at all.
Of course, I’m assuming here that the product actually works by the mechanism claimed. However, the makers or advertisers might be guessing which mechanism actually drives their product. If they’re wrong, all bets are off).
How to See Through a Common Trick Marketers Play
Here's one way marketers falsely claim their product is “scientifically shown to work”.
They offer a list of studies that allegedly support their product. However, if you look at the study titles, you’ll notice they don’t mention the product at all.
That’s because the studies didn’t test this specific product.
Instead, the studies support the general mechanism the product uses. So, a GABA supplement website might offer a list of dozens of papers showing that GABA reduces anxiety.
That information only shows that the product is based on a plausible mechanism. It might work… but we’ve seen how many ways a product might not do what was advertised.
Marketers hope you won’t look at the research articles, or you’ll be too intimidated by the jargon to see they’re irrelevant.
This trick applies to more than just consumables like supplements, faux alcoholic beverages, or Gaba “mental balance chocolate”.
You can also find it in ads for therapies, like exercise programs or developmental disability treatments. For example:
auditory training programs for sensory processing disorder and auditory processing disorder;
intensive early autism interventions.
…
Now you’re familiar with this trick, you won’t fall for empty claims that a product is “scientifically supported.” You know to ask, does research support this product, or just its general mechanism?
What do you think?
Have you seen products use this trick of claiming non-existent scientific support?
How much does it matter to you whether a food, supplement, or therapy has been tested in scientific studies? Are there cases where you might use a product that hasn’t (yet) been scientifically shown to work?
Also, have you tried any of these products? If so, what did you think? I’d love to try that Japanese “mental balance” chocolate, myself!
Leave a comment below and let me know.
Footnote
[1] Sentia’s creators went so far as to create 50 new molecules to tap into a number of known biological mechanisms. Out of all the GABA-enhancing beverages, they have pretty good odds of working as intended.
You might also be interested in…
Paywalls begone! How to get almost any research article free
This post started out as a reply to Jim Hoerrick’s post complaining about paywalls for articles in research journals.
Meta-Analyses Show "What the Research Says" Even Though All Studies Don't Say the Same Thing
Edited 2/18/24, replacing the main image and making small text edits, and on 2/19/24 to fix a typo noticed by an alert reader. Sorry for the repeated emails!
Meta-Analysis 101: How to Develop a Research Question and Decide What Evidence is Relevant
We’ve seen that meta-analyses are a way of using statistics to discover “what the research says” about the size and direction of a cause-and-effect relationship. To understa…
I heard about the drink that David Nutt has helped create - is it actually on the market yet? Have you tried it?
For everything else you say in your paper, alas it is almost always some sham thing.
Have you seen products use this trick of claiming non-existent scientific support?
I'm sure I have. I'm all too aware of deceptive marketing. I basically treat anything in an advertizement as a lie.
How much does it matter to you whether a food, supplement, or therapy has been tested in scientific studies?
It matters a tremendous amount to me. I trust the FDA. Well, at least I used to, back when it was fully staffed. I want more than just peer-reviewed studies, as they're being shown to be ever increasingly fraudulent, even before the AI information apocalypse. I like my studies vetted by knowledgeable regulatory authority.
Are there cases where you might use a product that hasn’t (yet) been scientifically shown to work?
I think ashwagandha has been shown to work and be safe, but not by the FDA so I take my internet research with a grain of salt. I know I don't know enough to vet or validate the study. I take the pill, and can feel its effects clearly. It's the only dietary supplement I've ever even tried. I'm exceedingly suspicious of those, and this one as well. But I hurt and it helps.