If you’ve ever heard of “brain orgasms,” it’s likely you’ve gone on a late-night YouTube binge after asking Google why your head gets tingly sometimes. The sensation, formally referred to as autonomous sensory meridian response or ASMR, is practiced by millions of “ASMRtists” who have devoted entire video channels to the phenomenon and its common triggers, which can be auditory, visible, or tactile.

Triggering someone else’s ASMR, whether by whispering, hair brushing, or turning pages, has been likened to foreplay, which shouldn’t be a surprise given the overt flirtatiousness of many ASMRtists. But experts and practitioners agree that for most people, ASMR isn’t a sexual response at all. Dr. Kat Van Kirk, certified sex therapist and resident relationship expert at Adam and Eve, defines it as “a euphoric experience that many say feels like a tingling sensation through the body. It often starts on the scalp and moves down the neck and upper spine.”


But if it’s not related to sex, what exactly is this warm, fuzzy feeling?

[youtube ratio=”0.5625″ position=”standard” ]

Since the first peer-reviewed study about ASMR was published in 2014, there is increasing support that the relaxing vibes may be due to the release of endorphins, oxytocin, and serotonin—similar to what happens in the body during orgasms, yes, but also to a baby being soothed by his or her mother. Conducted by Swansea University, the study’s findings were drawn from a poll of 475 people in various online ASMR groups, finding a significant correlation between watching and listening to ASMR stimuli and an improvement in mood, anxiety, and even pain.

“I learned about ASMR because people were mentioning it in the comments of our instructional massage videos,” says Corrina Rachel, a certified holistic health coach and ASMR practitioner. Her YouTube channels boast 2 million subscribers, including more than 270,000 ASMR devotees, with tingle-producing clips that have collectively drawn more than 82 million views.

[quote position=”left” is_quote=”true”]I think that people are looking for new sensations to experience intimately.[/quote]

“Between the vocal control I had learned as a singer and my obsession with creating a calming ambiance, I felt like I had always been an ASMRtist and just didn’t know it yet,” Rachel says. Everyone is triggered by different things, so virtually anything could be a trigger. I personally love the sound of wooden bowls, perhaps because it’s an earthly sound. I find it very grounding.” Rachel’s most popular video, with more than 3 million views, features her whispering into a microphone while massaging a blonde woman’s scalp and brushing her hair.

For those looking to experience the phenomenon for themselves, Dr. Craig Richard, an ASMR researcher, biopharmaceutical sciences professor, and ASMR University founder, suggests exposing yourself to a wide variety of content. “Finding specific triggers is like finding your favorite foods at a buffet,” he says, “You should sample widely to find those stimuli that best suit you.”

Opportunities to discover your triggers are much easier now that the ASMR community has moved far beyond its humble 2008 origins in online discussion groups, permeating a seemingly boundless variety of media and creative art platforms, from ASMR-inspired dances and commercials to whispered news reports.

According to Richard, becoming a successful ASMRtist is now a very competitive prospect, requiring a mix of natural talent and dedication. The artists who are the most genuine and consistent will continue to amass followers. “I strongly believe that ASMR videos are not a trend, but the discovery of a new media form which will continue to be prevalent because it taps into a human need to be soothed and relaxed,” he says.

[quote position=”full” is_quote=”true”]ASMR videos are not a trend, but the discovery of a new media form which will continue to be prevalent because it taps into a human need to be soothed.[/quote]

Van Kirk envisions ASMR being introduced in therapeutic applications—psychologically, medically, and in virtual reality. “I think that people are looking for new sensations to experience intimately and that any experience that promotes well-being and a calm nervous system without the use of pharmaceuticals is worthwhile. Especially now, when we’re looking at individuals in a more holistic manner,” she says.

Although more research needs to be done, Van Kirk says the physiological and psychological response is likely an evolutionary product of the nurturing and bonding tendencies mammals developed by caring for one another. This could explain why the vast majority of ASMRtists are female. “It’s not an all-women thing,” Rachel says, “but men tend to not talk as softly as women. I also think about the nurturing, motherly aspect that women are more inclined toward.”

[quote position=”right” is_quote=”true”]It’s not an all-women thing, but men tend to not talk as softly as women. [/quote]

Dr. Richard credits YouTube ASMRtists with contributing greatly to the initial understanding of ASMR. The sheer vastness, demographic diversity, and global representation of their followers has provided strong support that ASMR is a relatively common biological response rather than a cultural phenomenon. “I believe these video artists have helped to create the initial understanding about ASMR, which is being confirmed by scientific investigation,” he says.

If nothing else, ASMR is the likely result of the placebo effect, which has real physiological effects. For Rachel, ASMR is not so much about science as it is about being in the moment. “We live stressful lives these days, and most of us know that feeling of lying in bed at night unable to stop all the frantic thoughts and worries,” she says. “Auditory and visual triggers move our attention from those worried thoughts and put us in the moment, intensely focused on the tiny details that we usually don’t notice, such as the sound emitted when tapping on different objects or scratching different fabrics.”

Psychologists and other experts have committed to learning more about what triggers these reactions and, thanks to their work, we could be close to getting some answers. Since that first 2014 study, a second report was published in 2016, followed by nearly 10 other global ASMR research projects currently in progress recently completed. And Richard, along with his team, has launched an ongoing ASMR research survey, so far attracting more than 19,000 participants from over 100 countries.

[quote position=”left” is_quote=”true”]Watching an ASMR video in the middle of the day in a brightly lit office is like trying to enjoy cake while someone is yelling at you.[/quote]

But you don’t have to wait for concrete results to start your own ASMR experiment. If you’re anxious to know what triggers your “brain orgasms,” Adam and Eve has developed a quiz that can detect your sensitivity to certain sounds, sights, and movements.

But don’t be disappointed if you fall short. Not everyone has triggers, and your surroundings play a vital role. “Watching an ASMR video in the middle of the day in a brightly lit office may be like trying to enjoy a piece of cake while someone is yelling at you,” says Richard. “ASMR content is best experienced in a quiet and dimly lit place where the person can relax their body and mind to focus on the content.”

So, once you’ve found a quiet place and time to start experimenting ASMR, keep an open mind. Perhaps you’ll find yourself soothed by Corrina Rachel’s ear massage with intense wet mouth sounds or soft-spoken personal attention with gentle whispers. Or maybe the combination of relaxing sounds with adult coloring books will do the trick.

And as they say, if at first you don’t succeed, try Bob Ross. The painter’s hushed voice and methodical brush strokes are top ASMR triggers. And even if he doesn’t make you feel tingly, nothing could go wrong with a half hour or two of Bob at the canvas—right?

  • New Russian research suggests that the human lifespan could be up to 156 years
    Photo credit: CanvaResearchers found what's preventing us from living longer.
    ,

    New Russian research suggests that the human lifespan could be up to 156 years

    Humans can live much longer if certain barriers are addressed.

    According to the Guinness Book of World Records, the oldest person lived to the ripe age of 122 years old. Such a lifespan is an incredible feat, but what if the average person could beat that record by 34 years? Recent research done in Russia has led scientists to believe that the average human lifespan could be up to 156 years.

    The researchers at Skoltech Biomed Technologies Center developed a mathematical model that allowed them to “switch on” a variety of aging mechanisms. This allowed them to calculate a human’s lifespan where mortality risk never increased with age. After experimenting with different scenarios and conditions, they found the biggest barriers to longevity were caused by non-renewable tissues and somatic mutations.

    What are these barriers against longer life?

    Somatic mutations are DNA changes within a cell. They accumulate over time during a human’s life and cannot be reversed with any existing therapy. These DNA errors that pile up in our cells contribute to the aging process.

    Many human organs like the liver and skin continually replace cells and regrow damaged portions of themselves. However, there are two organs that can’t do this: the brain and the heart. Brain tissue (neurons) and heart tissue (cardiomyocytes) cannot regenerate. This proves to be the most prominent biological limit that shortens our lifespans. This explains why issues like dementia and heart disease are prominent causes of death and morbidity later in life. Since those organs’ tissues don’t replace damaged cells, they’re prone to irrevocably decline over time.

    “The key finding of the study is the discovery of substantial differences between tissue types. Neurons and cardiomyocytes, which lack the ability to divide, turned out to be the main limiting factors: when all other causes of aging are eliminated, somatic mutations alone reduce the theoretical median lifespan from 1,759 years (for a hypothetical non-aging human organism) to 156 years,” said Evgeny Efimov, a research intern at the Skoltech Biomed Technologies Center, researcher at AIRI, and one of the key authors of the study.

    This suggests that somatic mutations and DNA damage is what ultimately prevents humans from living indefinitely, even if our brains and hearts regenerated cells like other organs.

    So what’s next?

    Now knowing these biological limitations, the researchers hope to study other areas of aging impacting the human lifespan that could plausibly be reversed. This includes mitochondrial dysfunction, telomere shortening, epigenetic drift, and loss of proteostasis. 

    The hope is to have a clearer priority list of issues for future therapies to tackle. This is not just to possibly extend life, but to improve lives in general. By developing a fully comprehensive theory of aging, Skoltech hopes to pinpoint which aspects of aging are within our scope to address. After all, thoroughly studying each puzzle piece that makes up human life gives us a better understanding of the whole.

    Of course, other impactful factors in a person’s lifespan can be addressed today. As most know, things like diet, sleep, and exercise are among them. A person’s living environment can also negatively impact their lifespan if it doesn’t have clean air, access to clean water, and so on.

    For now, the best method for living long is to follow instructions from your physician. Whether you make it to 156 years or not, living well is best for whatever time you’re given.

  • Screen time guidelines for kids and adolescents have shifted as research paints a more nuanced picture
    Photo credit: PeopleImages/iStock via Getty ImagesWhat kids are doing on tablets seems to matter more than how long they use them.

    Concerns surrounding young people’s screen time are widespread.

    Australia became the first country to ban social media for users under 16 in December 2025, and DenmarkFrance and the U.K. have since announced similar restrictions to begin this year.

    In the U.S., as of mid-2026, more than 30 states have passed laws banning or restricting cellphones in K–12 classrooms; in 2023, the U.S. surgeon general issued a formal advisory on social media and children’s and adolescents’ mental health; and bestselling books tell parents that smartphones are “rewiring” their children’s brains.

    These concerns and policies are part of a quickly changing national and international conversation around how young people spend time on screens and its relationship to their overall health and development. My reading of the mounting research on this issue across disciplines is that the popular narrative blaming screens and smartphones for an adolescent mental health crisis runs well ahead of the current evidence.

    I study adolescent digital media use and its influence on social, emotional and academic outcomes. A growing body of research suggests that one-size-fits-all solutions are not the answer and that managing appropriate use of digital media needs to take into account a child’s developmental milestones, how parents and adults around them use media, and the ways kids use it to connect and learn with friends and family.

    Screen time: From monolith to multifaceted

    Wide adoption of digital media and the internet broadened the range of experiences young people could have online. At the same time, the digital age introduced newfound uncertainties. As with the advent of radio, comic books and arcades, adults worried about how children might interact with or be affected by internet use.

    In response, the American Academy of Pediatrics first recommended in 1999 that parents and caregivers keep children under 2 away from screens. In the decades since, professional guidance largely treated children’s media use as a behavior to be mitigated.

    Policies introduced by the academy in 2013 and 2016 continued to advise that school-age kids and adolescents – those ages 5 to 18 – be restricted to no more than two hours of “entertainment” screen time a day. The goal was to curb risks associated with heavy media use, among them disrupted sleep, online safety, cyberbullying and physical inactivity.

    Originally created for young people’s engagement with stationary media that tend to be confined to one room or context – for example, watching television – these hourly limits became outdated with the integration of smartphones and other digital devices into everyday life. Compared with watching television, online media was far more difficult to track and define, and more nuanced in its use.

    Developmentally beneficial activities such as educationsocializing and leisure have come to rely on the internet to extend and maintain face-to-face connections. Remote schooling and social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic only accelerated this digitization of daily life.

    In my view, adopting strict time limits and restrictions could pose risks to children’s well-beingautonomy and development, for example, by harming adolescent self-esteem.

    The latest guidelines

    In January 2026, the American Academy of Pediatrics retired its decade-old framework that had largely organized its advice around hourly screen limits. The new policy statement on children, adolescents and digital media diverges from this blanket approach. Instead, it suggests parents consider the larger picture in which this media use exists rather than lumping all screen use together.

    Similar to the World Health Organization’s 2019 guidance for children under 5, the American Academy of Pediatrics still advises that parents avoid screen media for children younger than 18 months. This recommendation is largely because extended use by children by themselves can be problematic for many young children, crowding out important developmental milestones.

    Both the World Health Organization and the American Academy of Pediatrics also recommend that when children under 24 months use screens, they should be limited to content and devices that encourage children and caregivers to interact. For ages 2 to 5, screen time – including TV and interactive apps on devices – may be extended to more solo use, provided it’s high-quality digital media designed around learning goals in mathematics and reading. But recreational use should be limited to roughly an hour per day.

    For school-age children and teens, the newest guidance has begun to step away from fixed screen time limits and asks families to weigh online activity in the context of everyday life.

    Doing so recognizes that a child’s digital experiences are shaped by diverse factors rather than the hours spent online. Current guidelines call on caregivers to distinguish among types of media, from television and social media to video games and interacting with artificial intelligence chatbots. They also call for taking into account a child’s individual characteristics, such as their interests and personality, family members’ own use of screens, and the type of content children are spending time on.

    Rethinking screen time

    Moving beyond strict screen time limits includes questioning the kind of digital activities kids and adolescents participate in. Do the activities encourage time spent interacting with others online, which can help young people develop important skills and competencies?

    Scrolling an algorithm-based, auto-playing video feed likely does not equate to the same opportunities as video-chatting with friends, creating digital art or working with teammates in a multiplayer game. Research suggests these different uses relate to development in different ways and can help kids develop varying skill sets pertaining to everyday life and schooling.

    Indeed, a large review of current research found that young people who take part in a range of digital activities, such as browsing the web, online gaming or interacting on social media, show positive associations with social connection, identity exploration, civic participation and learning.

    A woman and two small children look at tablet screen
    Parental involvement in young children’s screen time has developmental benefits. Cultura Creative/Tetra images via Getty Images

    Using these guidelines at home

    The current evidence suggests parents and caregivers are best positioned to be digital instructors. Cutting children off altogether can carry its own risks for social and emotional development. Caregiver mediation of children’s screen time can produce widely different outcomes and effects, depending on whether the guidance is supportive or controlling.

    Considering your own digital media use is the first step: Are family members engaging in problematic or heavy media use that children in the household might emulate? What applications and uses are most common in the family, and what positive or negative effects might they have, depending on the child’s age? How could these digital activities be safely integrated with other everyday experiences to increase their benefit for children? Conversely, what online time might be better spent on face-to-face experiences?

    The American Academy of Pediatrics’ Family Media Plan tool turns these ideas into concrete questions. For example, it recommends working out what each child needs from digital technology, what activities screens might be crowding out, and where their family or household can build in screen-free time. The recommendation is to talk with each child about why they are drawn to particular apps or online activities, what they encounter while browsing, and what might be lost when kids bring phones to gatherings such as mealtimes.

    The debate over young people’s screen time is not going away. But the most up-to-date guidelines, and the growing body of research behind them, make a strong case for a more holistic approach. The guidelines treat digital media as a complex, diverse and evolving environment that children need to learn to navigate in the digital age. The risks and rewards depend, as with any developmental setting, on the child, the content and what online time might be crowding out.

    This article originally appeared on The Conversation. You can read it here.

  • ER doctor and mom sets the record straight for parents of kids with e-bikes and e-scooters
    Photo credit: CanvaA boy rides an e-scooter, left, while a girl is examined in an emergency room.

    An emergency room doctor and fellow mom has been noticing a troubling trend: Many parents are giving their kids something more powerful than bicycles to get around the neighborhood. As a result, she’s seeing more children come into the ER with injuries sustained in e-bike and e-scooter crashes. She recently went online with a plea to parents and young riders.

    Dr. Meghan Elizabeth Beach Martin, known online as Dr. Beachgem, posted a video in her scrubs discussing her concerns after seeing so many children come into the hospital with e-bike injuries during the summer months. She’s worried that too many kids and parents don’t understand the proper safety precautions. As a mother herself, she even questions why children are allowed to ride these devices at all.

    In the video, the doctor explains that some e-bikes can reach speeds of up to 28 mph. She says that if an e-bike goes any faster than that, it’s technically classified as a motorcycle. At those speeds, she regularly sees children with traumatic injuries and broken bones after hitting bumps, cracks in the road, or other vehicles. Many of them aren’t wearing helmets or protective pads, and some are even riding barefoot, making their injuries even more severe. Martin’s video has gained traction on Reddit and elsewhere online.

    E-bikes and e-scooters, examined

    Martin isn’t the only professional seeing a growing problem. The American College of Surgeons reports that there are more than 20,000 e-bike-related injuries each year. Meanwhile, a University of California, San Francisco study found that e-bike injuries doubled annually from 2017 to 2022. The same study found that e-scooter injuries increased by 45% each year during the same period.

    Before riding an e-bike, it’s important to follow proper safety procedures. Make sure you and your child understand your area’s laws regarding e-bikes, including any minimum age requirements. Always wear a helmet and other protective gear when riding. Consider choosing an e-bike with safety features such as motor-interrupt brake levers and disc brakes. These are just a few of the many safety tips experts recommend.

    The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has similar safety tips for e-scooter riders. Wearing a helmet is one of its top recommendations, along with taking other basic precautions. The agency also recommends checking the brakes before riding and slowing down for bumps, cracks, and other road hazards.

    The vast majority of e-scooters and e-bikes are designed for only one rider, so avoid doubling up. Although laws vary by state and locality, wearing more protective gear is always the safer choice. Riders should also review local e-bike and e-scooter laws to make sure they are operating the vehicles safely and legally.

    A little research goes a long way toward making sure you and your children can ride safely. It’s also important for parents to understand that many e-bikes and e-scooters can travel at speeds that make them very different from a traditional bicycle. The last thing you want is for you or your child to become another emergency room statistic.

Explore More Health Stories

Health

Screen time guidelines for kids and adolescents have shifted as research paints a more nuanced picture

Care

ER doctor and mom sets the record straight for parents of kids with e-bikes and e-scooters

Health

May cause joy: The full-spectrum health benefits of dance 

Research

Why we crave company