Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

The challenges of studying (and treating) PTSD in chimpanzees

News Feed
Wednesday, June 5, 2024

Rachel the chimpanzee grew up in a suburban household under the care of an owner who treated her like a human child. She wore human clothes, ate human food, and took bubble baths. This went on until 1985 when, at the age of 3, Rachel’s owner felt she could no longer keep her animal instincts under control. Given up for adoption, Rachel eventually found herself at New York University’s Laboratory for Experimental Medicine and Surgery in Primates, where she stayed for more than 15 years. She spent most of that time in a cage by herself — when doctors weren’t conducting medical tests on her, including 39 liver-punch biopsies. According to government data, around 1,500 chimpanzees were used in biomedical research at any given time in the United States alone. Plans to abandon the controversial practice started in 2007, when the National Center for Research Resources announced it would stop funding breeding programs. The Great Ape Protection Act, which proposed to ban chimp testing altogether, made its way to Congress the following year, but it wasn’t until 2015 — after every other country in the world had already led the way — that this goal was finally achieved. The reason chimpanzees were used in research then is the same reason they are no longer used today. While their humanlike DNA — 98.5% identical to ours — made them ideal guinea pigs for the study of medical problems and infectious diseases, their increased brain capacity also rendered them susceptible to sustaining complex and lasting psychological damage. Although experts disagree on whether to call this post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the majority of chimps emerged from labs with symptoms reminiscent of the condition, including hypervigilance, disassociation, and self-harm. For years, caregivers and animal behaviorists at wildlife sanctuaries — which have taken on the “retired” medical animals — have worked to treat these symptoms, often to great success. At the same time, rehabilitation efforts remain riddled with unanswerable questions: How do chimpanzees experience traumatic events? Why do some individuals recover better or more quickly than others? Is it possible to apply human psychology to animals, even ones as closely related to us as chimps? Diagnosing PTSD Chimpanzee Jeannie arrived at LEMSIP when she was 22 years old. Records indicate that, like Rachel, she was originally kept as a human companion or pet. At LEMSIP she was subjected to a variety of invasive procedures, including vaginal washes, cervical and liver punches, and lymph node biopsies. She was infected with HIV, hepatitis NANB and hepatitis C. Following protocol, she was anesthetized by a dart gun before each procedure. In total, Jeannie was “knocked down” more than 200 times. Seven years into her time at LEMSIP, Jeannie had what researchers describe as a “nervous breakdown” that made further testing all but impossible. She suffered seizures and occasionally attacked her hands or feet as though they were not part of her own body. She arranged her food on the floor of her suspended cage instead of eating it. Whenever lab personnel approached her, she would scream, froth, salivate, urinate, defecate, roll back her eyes, and throw herself against all four sides of her confinement. Rachel also became increasingly difficult to work with. A 2008 study of PTSD in chimpanzees said researchers would exercise extreme caution to avoid “angry outbursts, strenuous lunges, and attempts to grab or injure those who approached.” Mostly, Rachel injured herself. “When I met her in 1997, she was having dissociative episodes,” says primate communication scientist Mary Lee Jensvold. “She would attack her hands and hit herself in the head. All the things we talk about with trauma in people, that’s exactly what was going on with her.” Great ape psychologist Gay Bradshaw, lead author of the 2008 study, made similar points. “Jeannie and Rachel lived under persistent environmental stress in an atmosphere of fear, unpredictability and nearly total lack of control over their world, with a perceived omnipresent threat of violence,” he wrote in the study. Bradshaw concluded their respective symptoms, even though they could only be observed externally, “were pathognomonic for dissociative and attachment disorders and for Complex PTSD.” Restoring Agency LEMSIP staff considered euthanizing Jeannie, and they would have put her down if the Fauna Foundation had not agreed to take her in instead. The Canadian wildlife sanctuary expected her to be a difficult chimp to work with, and they weren’t wrong. Jeannie was erratic and unpredictable, her mood switching between withdrawal and aggression on the turn of a dime. She was anorexic, asthmatic, immunocompromised, and uncoordinated, and her prescription medication was ineffective. Sanctuaries working with traumatized chimps often use prescriptions as part of their treatment plan. Drugs like Depo-Provera, a contraceptive injection used in this case to regulate Jeannie’s blood levels, help with physical ailments. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or SSRIS, which were given to Rachel, are used to treat both PTSD and other mental problems like depression or generalized anxiety disorder — two other conditions commonly observed in captive chimpanzees. In this, treatment plans for chimpanzees greatly resemble those of humans. However, medication forms but one small part of a larger puzzle. Drawing from both psychiatric literature on PTSD in humans as well as the study of chimpanzees living in the wild, sanctuary employees have identified a number of shared strategies to help traumatized chimps recover. The goal, according to Kris Pritchard, caregiver at the Georgia-based Project Chimps, is to ensure “their abnormal behaviors aren’t so bad that it’s affecting their daily life.” The first of these strategies revolves around building social connection: reintroducing chimpanzees who spent the better part of their life isolated in cages to interact with members of their own species. “We’re social critters,” says Jensvold, referring to both great apes and humans. “Connection makes us feel safe. When we don’t, we engage in dysregulated behavior, like self-injury, which in extreme cases become catatonic.” It’s possible that, like humans, chimps engage in such compulsory behavior to alleviate negative emotions like anxiety, anger and sadness, though this claim is yet to be investigated thoroughly. Because of their aggression, traumatized chimps at sanctuaries are typically introduced to the rest of the population while keeping them in separate compounds. Once they are released into the same space, they slowly engage in social behaviors such as grooming. This appears to have a positive impact on their mental health, with studies finding traumatized chimps who spent significant time at sanctuaries becoming “socially indistinguishable” from untraumatized ones. The second strategy concerns space. Wild chimpanzees live a mobile, semi-nomadic lifestyle, patrolling territories that can span up to 115 square miles. Although no sanctuary has access to such a large amount of land, they provide their chimps with significantly more physical space than the average zoo. Project Chimps’ 236 acres of forested terrain, for instance, allows its residents to engage in other types of behavior observed in the wild, such as making nests, fashioning tools, and foraging for food. The third and arguably most important strategy — closely connected to the first and second — is about agency. “Social environments are healing,” says Jensvold. “But I would argue that the experience of captivity and losing agency is in and of itself traumatic. I mean, imagine spending your whole life inside of a cage and being aware of that.”   Bradshaw notes that Jeannie and Rachel experienced a “total lack of control over their world,” making all their surroundings — even the safe ones — appear threatening. Agency can be partially restored through enrichment, a now widely accepted practice which Bradshaw’s research helped popularize. Put simply, it involves peppering the sanctuary grounds with objects the chimps can use however they like, whether that’s trees to climb on, branches to collect termites, tires to play with, or — in the case of one ape living at Project Chimps — a piece of cloth they can choose to carry around with them like a flag. Equally vital to restoring agency is giving chimps the freedom of movement. Or, in some cases, the freedom to not move. “We have a female named Gracie who doesn’t go outside her habitat,” says Pritchard. “She just stays inside her villa, which has a covered outdoor area, even when her whole community is off somewhere. That’s something we allow her to do, though. She lived her whole life indoors, so the outside could be perceived as startling.” While some abnormal behaviors subside over time, others persist. In some cases, sanctuary workers might make the decision not to push a certain chimp to alter the lifestyle they have become accustomed to, even if it is considered “unnatural.” Slippery Slope Treating traumatized chimpanzees presents various challenges, including basic communication. Although a few chimps understand and can communicate using basic American Sign Language, caregivers often have difficulty figuring out the meaning of other behaviors. Take, for example, a chimp who vocalizes and pulls at the bars of their enclosure when someone approaches. “It could be they have not seen that someone in a while and are upset,” says Pritchard. “Or it could be that they are excited to see them and want their attention.” Then there’s the question of why some chimps seem to recover better or more quickly than others. “I have heard of chimps biting themselves down on the bone,” says Jensvold. And yet, just as you can have “two soldiers experience a bomb blowing up and have only one come out of it with post-traumatic stress,” so too can you have two chimpanzees go through years of animal testing and arrive at sanctuaries with radically different dispositions and recovery rates. Jensvold points to a chimpanzee named Sue Ellen. Like Rachel, Sue Ellen spent 15 years in research, where she was involved in procedures on a weekly basis. Unlike Rachel, however, Sue Ellen “emerged pretty stable, even though her experience was arguably much worse.” Jeannie’s progress was moderate. Although her seizures never went away, they occurred once a month as opposed to daily, and while she never became actively involved in the community hierarchy, she did end up seeking out the company of other chimps. Studies on the mental wellbeing of captive chimps are limited. Not just because the subject is complicated, but also because the scientific community has yet to give it the attention it deserves. Some say research into animal suffering is slowed by pressure from Big Pharma, which sees the subject as a slippery slope. If chimps can suffer from PTSD, who is to say monkeys — whose demand in the animal testing world soared after the outbreak of COVID-19 — can’t sustain enduring and profound psychological trauma as well?

Apes used in animal testing often display symptoms of psychological trauma. Wildlife sanctuaries are helping them

Rachel the chimpanzee grew up in a suburban household under the care of an owner who treated her like a human child. She wore human clothes, ate human food, and took bubble baths. This went on until 1985 when, at the age of 3, Rachel’s owner felt she could no longer keep her animal instincts under control. Given up for adoption, Rachel eventually found herself at New York University’s Laboratory for Experimental Medicine and Surgery in Primates, where she stayed for more than 15 years.

She spent most of that time in a cage by herself — when doctors weren’t conducting medical tests on her, including 39 liver-punch biopsies.

According to government data, around 1,500 chimpanzees were used in biomedical research at any given time in the United States alone. Plans to abandon the controversial practice started in 2007, when the National Center for Research Resources announced it would stop funding breeding programs. The Great Ape Protection Act, which proposed to ban chimp testing altogether, made its way to Congress the following year, but it wasn’t until 2015 — after every other country in the world had already led the way — that this goal was finally achieved.

The reason chimpanzees were used in research then is the same reason they are no longer used today. While their humanlike DNA — 98.5% identical to ours — made them ideal guinea pigs for the study of medical problems and infectious diseases, their increased brain capacity also rendered them susceptible to sustaining complex and lasting psychological damage.

Although experts disagree on whether to call this post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), the majority of chimps emerged from labs with symptoms reminiscent of the condition, including hypervigilance, disassociation, and self-harm.

For years, caregivers and animal behaviorists at wildlife sanctuaries — which have taken on the “retired” medical animals — have worked to treat these symptoms, often to great success. At the same time, rehabilitation efforts remain riddled with unanswerable questions: How do chimpanzees experience traumatic events? Why do some individuals recover better or more quickly than others? Is it possible to apply human psychology to animals, even ones as closely related to us as chimps?

Diagnosing PTSD

Chimpanzee Jeannie arrived at LEMSIP when she was 22 years old. Records indicate that, like Rachel, she was originally kept as a human companion or pet. At LEMSIP she was subjected to a variety of invasive procedures, including vaginal washes, cervical and liver punches, and lymph node biopsies. She was infected with HIV, hepatitis NANB and hepatitis C. Following protocol, she was anesthetized by a dart gun before each procedure.

In total, Jeannie was “knocked down” more than 200 times.

Seven years into her time at LEMSIP, Jeannie had what researchers describe as a “nervous breakdown” that made further testing all but impossible. She suffered seizures and occasionally attacked her hands or feet as though they were not part of her own body. She arranged her food on the floor of her suspended cage instead of eating it. Whenever lab personnel approached her, she would scream, froth, salivate, urinate, defecate, roll back her eyes, and throw herself against all four sides of her confinement.

Rachel also became increasingly difficult to work with. A 2008 study of PTSD in chimpanzees said researchers would exercise extreme caution to avoid “angry outbursts, strenuous lunges, and attempts to grab or injure those who approached.”

Mostly, Rachel injured herself.

“When I met her in 1997, she was having dissociative episodes,” says primate communication scientist Mary Lee Jensvold. “She would attack her hands and hit herself in the head. All the things we talk about with trauma in people, that’s exactly what was going on with her.”

Great ape psychologist Gay Bradshaw, lead author of the 2008 study, made similar points. “Jeannie and Rachel lived under persistent environmental stress in an atmosphere of fear, unpredictability and nearly total lack of control over their world, with a perceived omnipresent threat of violence,” he wrote in the study. Bradshaw concluded their respective symptoms, even though they could only be observed externally, “were pathognomonic for dissociative and attachment disorders and for Complex PTSD.”

Restoring Agency

LEMSIP staff considered euthanizing Jeannie, and they would have put her down if the Fauna Foundation had not agreed to take her in instead. The Canadian wildlife sanctuary expected her to be a difficult chimp to work with, and they weren’t wrong. Jeannie was erratic and unpredictable, her mood switching between withdrawal and aggression on the turn of a dime. She was anorexic, asthmatic, immunocompromised, and uncoordinated, and her prescription medication was ineffective.

Sanctuaries working with traumatized chimps often use prescriptions as part of their treatment plan. Drugs like Depo-Provera, a contraceptive injection used in this case to regulate Jeannie’s blood levels, help with physical ailments. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or SSRIS, which were given to Rachel, are used to treat both PTSD and other mental problems like depression or generalized anxiety disorder — two other conditions commonly observed in captive chimpanzees. In this, treatment plans for chimpanzees greatly resemble those of humans.

However, medication forms but one small part of a larger puzzle. Drawing from both psychiatric literature on PTSD in humans as well as the study of chimpanzees living in the wild, sanctuary employees have identified a number of shared strategies to help traumatized chimps recover. The goal, according to Kris Pritchard, caregiver at the Georgia-based Project Chimps, is to ensure “their abnormal behaviors aren’t so bad that it’s affecting their daily life.”

The first of these strategies revolves around building social connection: reintroducing chimpanzees who spent the better part of their life isolated in cages to interact with members of their own species.

“We’re social critters,” says Jensvold, referring to both great apes and humans. “Connection makes us feel safe. When we don’t, we engage in dysregulated behavior, like self-injury, which in extreme cases become catatonic.” It’s possible that, like humans, chimps engage in such compulsory behavior to alleviate negative emotions like anxiety, anger and sadness, though this claim is yet to be investigated thoroughly.

Because of their aggression, traumatized chimps at sanctuaries are typically introduced to the rest of the population while keeping them in separate compounds. Once they are released into the same space, they slowly engage in social behaviors such as grooming. This appears to have a positive impact on their mental health, with studies finding traumatized chimps who spent significant time at sanctuaries becoming “socially indistinguishable” from untraumatized ones.

The second strategy concerns space. Wild chimpanzees live a mobile, semi-nomadic lifestyle, patrolling territories that can span up to 115 square miles. Although no sanctuary has access to such a large amount of land, they provide their chimps with significantly more physical space than the average zoo. Project Chimps’ 236 acres of forested terrain, for instance, allows its residents to engage in other types of behavior observed in the wild, such as making nests, fashioning tools, and foraging for food.

The third and arguably most important strategy — closely connected to the first and second — is about agency.

“Social environments are healing,” says Jensvold. “But I would argue that the experience of captivity and losing agency is in and of itself traumatic. I mean, imagine spending your whole life inside of a cage and being aware of that.”

 

Bradshaw notes that Jeannie and Rachel experienced a “total lack of control over their world,” making all their surroundings — even the safe ones — appear threatening.

Agency can be partially restored through enrichment, a now widely accepted practice which Bradshaw’s research helped popularize. Put simply, it involves peppering the sanctuary grounds with objects the chimps can use however they like, whether that’s trees to climb on, branches to collect termites, tires to play with, or — in the case of one ape living at Project Chimps — a piece of cloth they can choose to carry around with them like a flag.

Equally vital to restoring agency is giving chimps the freedom of movement. Or, in some cases, the freedom to not move.

“We have a female named Gracie who doesn’t go outside her habitat,” says Pritchard. “She just stays inside her villa, which has a covered outdoor area, even when her whole community is off somewhere. That’s something we allow her to do, though. She lived her whole life indoors, so the outside could be perceived as startling.”

While some abnormal behaviors subside over time, others persist. In some cases, sanctuary workers might make the decision not to push a certain chimp to alter the lifestyle they have become accustomed to, even if it is considered “unnatural.”

Slippery Slope

Treating traumatized chimpanzees presents various challenges, including basic communication. Although a few chimps understand and can communicate using basic American Sign Language, caregivers often have difficulty figuring out the meaning of other behaviors. Take, for example, a chimp who vocalizes and pulls at the bars of their enclosure when someone approaches. “It could be they have not seen that someone in a while and are upset,” says Pritchard. “Or it could be that they are excited to see them and want their attention.”

Then there’s the question of why some chimps seem to recover better or more quickly than others.

“I have heard of chimps biting themselves down on the bone,” says Jensvold. And yet, just as you can have “two soldiers experience a bomb blowing up and have only one come out of it with post-traumatic stress,” so too can you have two chimpanzees go through years of animal testing and arrive at sanctuaries with radically different dispositions and recovery rates.

Jensvold points to a chimpanzee named Sue Ellen. Like Rachel, Sue Ellen spent 15 years in research, where she was involved in procedures on a weekly basis. Unlike Rachel, however, Sue Ellen “emerged pretty stable, even though her experience was arguably much worse.”

Jeannie’s progress was moderate. Although her seizures never went away, they occurred once a month as opposed to daily, and while she never became actively involved in the community hierarchy, she did end up seeking out the company of other chimps.

Studies on the mental wellbeing of captive chimps are limited. Not just because the subject is complicated, but also because the scientific community has yet to give it the attention it deserves. Some say research into animal suffering is slowed by pressure from Big Pharma, which sees the subject as a slippery slope. If chimps can suffer from PTSD, who is to say monkeys — whose demand in the animal testing world soared after the outbreak of COVID-19 — can’t sustain enduring and profound psychological trauma as well?

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Contributor: 'Save the whales' worked for decades, but now gray whales are starving

The once-booming population that passed California twice a year has cratered because of retreating sea ice. A new kind of intervention is needed.

Recently, while sailing with friends on San Francisco Bay, I enjoyed the sight of harbor porpoises, cormorants, pelicans, seals and sea lions — and then the spouting plume and glistening back of a gray whale that gave me pause. Too many have been seen inside the bay recently.California’s gray whales have been considered an environmental success story since the passage of the 1972 Marine Mammal Protection Act and 1986’s global ban on commercial whaling. They’re also a major tourist attraction during their annual 12,000-mile round-trip migration between the Arctic and their breeding lagoons in Baja California. In late winter and early spring — when they head back north and are closest to the shoreline, with the moms protecting the calves — they can be viewed not only from whale-watching boats but also from promontories along the California coast including Point Loma in San Diego, Point Lobos in Monterey and Bodega Head and Shelter Cove in Northern California.In 1972, there were some 10,000 gray whales in the population on the eastern side of the Pacific. Generations of whaling all but eliminated the western population — leaving only about 150 alive today off of East Asia and Russia. Over the four decades following passage of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the eastern whale numbers grew steadily to 27,000 by 2016, a hopeful story of protection leading to restoration. Then, unexpectedly over the last nine years, the eastern gray whale population has crashed, plummeting by more than half to 12,950, according to a recent report by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the lowest numbers since the 1970s.Today’s changing ocean and Arctic ice conditions linked to fossil-fuel-fired climate change are putting this species again at risk of extinction.While there has been some historical variation in their population, gray whales — magnificent animals that can grow up to 50 feet long and weigh as much as 80,000 pounds — are now regularly starving to death as their main food sources disappear. This includes tiny shrimp-like amphipods in the whales’ summer feeding grounds in the Arctic. It’s there that the baleen filter feeders spend the summer gorging on tiny crustaceans from the muddy bottom of the Bering, Chuckchi and Beaufort seas, creating shallow pits or potholes in the process. But, with retreating sea ice, there is less under-ice algae to feed the amphipods that in turn feed the whales. Malnourished and starving whales are also producing fewer offspring.As a result of more whales washing up dead, NOAA declared an “unusual mortality event” in California in 2019. Between 2019 and 2025, at least 1,235 gray whales were stranded dead along the West Coast. That’s eight times greater than any previous 10-year average.While there seemed to be some recovery in 2024, 2025 brought back the high casualty rates. The hungry whales now come into crowded estuaries like San Francisco Bay to feed, making them vulnerable to ship traffic. Nine in the bay were killed by ship strikes last year while another 12 appear to have died of starvation.Michael Stocker, executive director of the acoustics group Ocean Conservation Research, has been leading whale-viewing trips to the gray whales’ breeding ground at San Ignacio Lagoon in Baja California since 2006. “When we started going, there would be 400 adult whales in the lagoon, including 100 moms and their babies,” he told me. “This year we saw about 100 adult whales, only five of which were in momma-baby pairs.” Where once the predators would not have dared to hunt, he said that more recently, “orcas came into the lagoon and ate a couple of the babies because there were not enough adult whales to fend them off.”Southern California’s Gray Whale Census & Behavior Project reported record-low calf counts last year.The loss of Arctic sea ice and refusal of the world’s nations recently gathered at the COP30 Climate Summit in Brazil to meet previous commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions suggest that the prospects for gray whales and other wildlife in our warming seas, including key food species for humans such as salmon, cod and herring, look grim.California shut down the nation’s last whaling station in 1971. And yet now whales that were once hunted for their oil are falling victim to the effects of the petroleum or “rock oil” that replaced their melted blubber as a source of light and lubrication. That’s because the burning of oil, coal and gas are now overheating our blue planet. While humans have gone from hunting to admiring whales as sentient beings in recent decades, our own intelligence comes into question when we fail to meet commitments to a clean carbon-free energy future. That could be the gray whales’ last best hope, if there is any.David Helvarg is the executive director of Blue Frontier, an ocean policy group, and co-host of “Rising Tide: The Ocean Podcast.” He is the author of the forthcoming “Forest of the Sea: The Remarkable Life and Imperiled Future of Kelp.”

Pills that communicate from the stomach could improve medication adherence

MIT engineers designed capsules with biodegradable radio frequency antennas that can reveal when the pill has been swallowed.

In an advance that could help ensure people are taking their medication on schedule, MIT engineers have designed a pill that can report when it has been swallowed.The new reporting system, which can be incorporated into existing pill capsules, contains a biodegradable radio frequency antenna. After it sends out the signal that the pill has been consumed, most components break down in the stomach while a tiny RF chip passes out of the body through the digestive tract.This type of system could be useful for monitoring transplant patients who need to take immunosuppressive drugs, or people with infections such as HIV or TB, who need treatment for an extended period of time, the researchers say.“The goal is to make sure that this helps people receive the therapy they need to help maximize their health,” says Giovanni Traverso, an associate professor of mechanical engineering at MIT, a gastroenterologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and an associate member of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.Traverso is the senior author of the new study, which appears today in Nature Communications. Mehmet Girayhan Say, an MIT research scientist, and Sean You, a former MIT postdoc, are the lead authors of the paper.A pill that communicatesPatients’ failure to take their medicine as prescribed is a major challenge that contributes to hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths and billions of dollars in health care costs annually.To make it easier for people to take their medication, Traverso’s lab has worked on delivery capsules that can remain in the digestive tract for days or weeks, releasing doses at predetermined times. However, this approach may not be compatible with all drugs.“We’ve developed systems that can stay in the body for a long time, and we know that those systems can improve adherence, but we also recognize that for certain medications, we can’t change the pill,” Traverso says. “The question becomes: What else can we do to help the person and help their health care providers ensure that they’re receiving the medication?”In their new study, the researchers focused on a strategy that would allow doctors to more closely monitor whether patients are taking their medication. Using radio frequency — a type of signal that can be easily detected from outside the body and is safe for humans — they designed a capsule that can communicate after the patient has swallowed it.There have been previous efforts to develop RF-based signaling devices for medication capsules, but those were all made from components that don’t break down easily in the body and would need to travel through the digestive system.To minimize the potential risk of any blockage of the GI tract, the MIT team decided to create an RF-based system that would be bioresorbable, meaning that it can be broken down and absorbed by the body. The antenna that sends out the RF signal is made from zinc, and it is embedded into a cellulose particle.“We chose these materials recognizing their very favorable safety profiles and also environmental compatibility,” Traverso says.The zinc-cellulose antenna is rolled up and placed inside a capsule along with the drug to be delivered. The outer layer of the capsule is made from gelatin coated with a layer of cellulose and either molybdenum or tungsten, which blocks any RF signal from being emitted.Once the capsule is swallowed, the coating breaks down, releasing the drug along with the RF antenna. The antenna can then pick up an RF signal sent from an external receiver and, working with a small RF chip, sends back a signal to confirm that the capsule was swallowed. This communication happens within 10 minutes of the pill being swallowed.The RF chip, which is about 400 by 400 micrometers, is an off-the-shelf chip that is not biodegradable and would need to be excreted through the digestive tract. All of the other components would break down in the stomach within a week.“The components are designed to break down over days using materials with well-established safety profiles, such as zinc and cellulose, which are already widely used in medicine,” Say says. “Our goal is to avoid long-term accumulation while enabling reliable confirmation that a pill was taken, and longer-term safety will continue to be evaluated as the technology moves toward clinical use.”Promoting adherenceTests in an animal model showed that the RF signal was successfully transmitted from inside the stomach and could be read by an external receiver at a distance up to 2 feet away. If developed for use in humans, the researchers envision designing a wearable device that could receive the signal and then transmit it to the patient’s health care team.The researchers now plan to do further preclinical studies and hope to soon test the system in humans. One patient population that could benefit greatly from this type of monitoring is people who have recently had organ transplants and need to take immunosuppressant drugs to make sure their body doesn’t reject the new organ.“We want to prioritize medications that, when non-adherence is present, could have a really detrimental effect for the individual,” Traverso says.Other populations that could benefit include people who have recently had a stent inserted and need to take medication to help prevent blockage of the stent, people with chronic infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, and people with neuropsychiatric disorders whose conditions may impair their ability to take their medication.The research was funded by Novo Nordisk, MIT’s Department of Mechanical Engineering, the Division of Gastroenterology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, and the U.S. Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), which notes that the views and conclusions contained in this article are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the United States Government.

Costa Rica Rescues Orphaned Manatee Calf in Tortuguero

A young female manatee washed up alone on a beach in Tortuguero National Park early on January 5, sparking a coordinated effort by local authorities to save the animal. The calf, identified as a Caribbean manatee, appeared separated from its mother, with no immediate signs of her in the area. Park rangers received the first […] The post Costa Rica Rescues Orphaned Manatee Calf in Tortuguero appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

A young female manatee washed up alone on a beach in Tortuguero National Park early on January 5, sparking a coordinated effort by local authorities to save the animal. The calf, identified as a Caribbean manatee, appeared separated from its mother, with no immediate signs of her in the area. Park rangers received the first alert around 8 a.m. from visitors who spotted the stranded calf. Staff from the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC) quickly arrived on site. They secured the animal to prevent further harm and began searching nearby waters and canals for the mother. Despite hours of monitoring, officials found no evidence of her presence. “The calf showed no visible injuries but needed prompt attention due to its age and vulnerability,” said a SINAC official involved in the operation. Without a parent nearby, the young manatee faced risks from dehydration and predators in the open beach environment. As the day progressed, the Ministry of Environment and Energy (MINAE) joined the response. They decided to relocate the calf for specialized care. In a first for such rescues in the region, teams arranged an aerial transport to move the animal safely to a rehabilitation facility. This step aimed to give the manatee the best chance at survival while experts assess its health. Once at the center, the calf received immediate feeding and medical checks. During one session, it dozed off mid-meal, a sign that it felt secure in the hands of caretakers. Biologists now monitor the animal closely, hoping to release it back into the wild if conditions allow. Manatees, known locally as manatíes, inhabit the coastal waters and rivers of Costa Rica’s Caribbean side. They often face threats from boat strikes, habitat loss, and pollution. Tortuguero, with its network of canals and protected areas, serves as a key habitat for the species. Recent laws have strengthened protections, naming the manatee a national marine symbol to raise awareness. This incident highlights the ongoing challenges for wildlife in the area. Local communities and tourists play a key role in reporting sightings, which can lead to timely interventions. Authorities encourage anyone spotting distressed animals to contact SINAC without delay. The rescue team expressed gratitude to those who reported the stranding. Their quick action likely saved the calf’s life. As investigations continue, officials will determine if environmental factors contributed to the separation. For now, the young manatee rests under professional care, a small win for conservation efforts in Limón. The post Costa Rica Rescues Orphaned Manatee Calf in Tortuguero appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

New Records Reveal the Mess RFK Jr. Left When He Dumped a Dead Bear in Central Park

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says he left a bear cub's corpse in Central Park in 2014 to "be fun." Records newly obtained by WIRED show what he left New York civil servants to clean up.

This story contains graphic imagery.On August 4, 2024, when now-US health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was still a presidential candidate, he posted a video on X in which he admitted to dumping a dead bear cub near an old bicycle in Central Park 10 years prior, in a mystifying attempt to make the young bear’s premature death look like a cyclist’s hit and run.WIRED's Guide to How the Universe WorksYour weekly roundup of the best stories on health care, the climate crisis, new scientific discoveries, and more. At the time, Kennedy said he was trying to get ahead of a story The New Yorker was about to publish that mentioned the incident. But in coming clean, Kennedy solved a decade-old New York City mystery: How and why had a young black bear—a wild animal native to the state, but not to modern-era Manhattan—been found dead under a bush near West 69th Street in Central Park?WIRED has obtained documents that shed new light on the incident from the New York City Department of Parks and Recreation via a public records request. The documents—which include previously unseen photos of the bear cub—resurface questions about the bizarre choices Kennedy says he made, which left city employees dealing with the aftermath and lamenting the cub’s short life and grim fate.A representative for Kennedy did not respond for comment. The New York Police Department (NYPD) and the Parks Department referred WIRED to the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (NYDEC). NYDEC spokesperson Jeff Wernick tells WIRED that its investigation into the death of the bear cub was closed in late 2014 “due to a lack of sufficient evidence” to determine if state law was violated. They added that New York’s environmental conservation law forbids “illegal possession of a bear without a tag or permit and illegal disposal of a bear,” and that “the statute of limitations for these offenses is one year.”The first of a number of emails between local officials coordinating the handling of the baby bear’s remains was sent at 10:16 a.m. on October 6, 2014. Bonnie McGuire, then-deputy director at Urban Park Rangers (UPR), told two colleagues that UPR sergeant Eric Handy had recently called her about a “dead black bear” found in Central Park.“NYPD told him they will treat it like a crime scene so he can’t get too close,” McGuire wrote. “I’ve asked him to take pictures and send them over and to keep us posted.”“Poor little guy!” McGuire wrote in a separate email later that morning.According to emails obtained by WIRED, Handy updated several colleagues throughout the day, noting that the NYDEC had arrived on scene, and that the agency was planning to coordinate with the NYPD to transfer the body to the Bronx Zoo, where it would be inspected by the NYPD’s animal cruelty unit and the ASPCA. (This didn’t end up happening, as the NYDEC took the bear to a state lab near Albany.)Imagery of the bear has been public before—local news footage from October 2014 appears to show it from a distance. However, the documents WIRED obtained show previously unpublished images that investigators took of the bear on the scene, which Handy sent as attachments in emails to McGuire. The bear is seen laying on its side in an unnatural position. Its head protrudes from under a bush and rests next to a small patch of grass. Bits of flesh are visible through the bear’s black fur, which was covered in a few brown leaves.Courtesy of NYC Parks

U.S. Military Ends Practice of Shooting Live Animals to Train Medics to Treat Battlefield Wounds

The 2026 National Defense Authorization Act bans the use of live animals in live fire training exercises and prohibits "painful" research on domestic cats and dogs

U.S. Military Ends Practice of Shooting Live Animals to Train Medics to Treat Battlefield Wounds The 2026 National Defense Authorization Act bans the use of live animals in live fire training exercises and prohibits “painful” research on domestic cats and dogs Sarah Kuta - Daily Correspondent January 5, 2026 12:00 p.m. The U.S. military will no longer shoot live goats and pigs to help combat medics learn to treat battlefield injuries. Pexels The United States military is no longer shooting live animals as part of its trauma training exercises for combat medics. The 2026 National Defense Authorization Act, which was enacted on December 18, bans the use of live animals—including dogs, cats, nonhuman primates and marine mammals—in any live fire trauma training conducted by the Department of Defense. It directs military leaders to instead use advanced simulators, mannequins, cadavers or actors. According to the Associated Press’ Ben Finley, the bill ends the military’s practice of shooting live goats and pigs to help combat medics learn to treat battlefield injuries. However, the military is allowed to continue other practices involving animals, including stabbing, burning and testing weapons on them. In those scenarios, the animals are supposed to be anesthetized, per the AP. “With today’s advanced simulation technology, we can prepare our medics for the battlefield while reducing harm to animals,” says Florida Representative Vern Buchanan, who advocated for the change, in a statement shared with the AP. He described the military’s practices as “outdated and inhumane” and called the move a “major step forward in reducing unnecessary suffering.” Quick fact: What is the National Defense Authorization Act? The National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, is a law passed each year that authorizes the Department of Defense’s appropriated funds, greenlights the Department of Energy’s nuclear weapons programs and sets defense policies and restrictions, among other activities, for the upcoming fiscal year. Organizations have opposed the military’s use of live animals in trauma training, too, including the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. PETA, a nonprofit animal advocacy group, described the legislation as a “major victory for animals” that will “save countless animals from heinous cruelty” in a statement. The legislation also prohibits “painful research” on domestic cats and dogs, though exceptions can be made under certain circumstances, such as interests of national security. “Painful” research includes any training, experiments or tests that fall into specific pain categories outlined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. For example, military cats and dogs can no longer be exposed to extreme environmental conditions or noxious stimuli they cannot escape, nor can they be forced to exercise to the point of distress or exhaustion. The bill comes amid a broader push to end the use of live animals in federal tests, studies and training, reports Linda F. Hersey for Stars and Stripes. After temporarily suspending live tissue training with animals in 2017, the U.S. Coast Guard made the ban permanent in 2018. In 2024, U.S. lawmakers directed the Department of Veterans Affairs to end its experiments on cats, dogs and primates. And in May 2025, the U.S. Navy announced it would no longer conduct research testing on cats and dogs. As the Washington Post’s Ernesto Londoño reported in 2013, the U.S. military has used animals for medical training since at least the Vietnam War. However, the practice largely went unnoticed until 1983, when the U.S. Army planned to anesthetize dogs, hang them from nylon mesh slings and shoot them at an indoor firing range in Maryland. When activists and lawmakers learned of the proposal, they decried the practice and convinced then-Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger to ban the shooting of dogs. However, in 1984, the AP reported the U.S. military would continue shooting live goats and pigs for wound treatment training, with a military medical study group arguing “there is no substitute for the live animals as a study object for hands-on training.” In the modern era, it’s not clear how often and to what extent the military uses animals, per the AP. And despite the Department of Defense’s past efforts to minimize the use of animals for trauma training, a 2022 report from the Government Accountability Office, the watchdog agency charged with providing fact-based, nonpartisan information to Congress, determined that the agency was “unable to fully demonstrate the extent to which it has made progress.” The Defense Health Agency, the U.S. government entity responsible for the military’s medical training, says in a statement shared with the AP that it “remains committed to replacement of animal models without compromising the quality of medical training,” including the use of “realistic training scenarios to ensure medical providers are well-prepared to care for the combat-wounded.” Animal activists say technology has come a long way in recent decades so, beyond the animal welfare concerns, the military simply no longer needs to use live animals for training. Instead, military medics can simulate treating battlefield injuries using “cut suits,” or realistic suits with skin, blood and organs that are worn by a live person to mimic traumatic injuries. However, not everyone agrees. Michael Bailey, an Army combat medic who served two tours in Iraq, told the Washington Post in 2013 that his training with a sedated goat was invaluable. “You don’t get that [sense of urgency] from a mannequin,” he told the publication. “You don’t get that feeling of this mannequin is going to die. When you’re talking about keeping someone alive when physics and the enemy have done their best to do the opposite, it’s the kind of training that you want to have in your back pocket.” Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.