Old vs. Young

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Much work on aging brains has focused on their failings, but two new studies look at how they succeed. In both a University of Michigan at Ann Arbor report on which brain regions respond to challenging tasks and a Johns Hopkins University look at older rats, researchers found that aging brains function differently than young brains.

Cindy Lustig of Ann Arbor used functional magnetic resonance imaging to observe the brains of young adults (aged 18 to 30) and seniors (65 to 92) as they tackled simple and difficult mental exercises. For the easy tasks, brain activity was very similar, but tougher challenges prompted differences. The seniors activated several frontal brain regions that the others did not. In addition, the younger people “turned off” parts of the brain not used during the tasks, but the elders kept those regions active. Lustig concludes that “older adults’ brains can indeed rise to the challenge, at least in some situations, but they may do so differently.”

Michela Gallagher of Johns Hopkins compared the brains of six-month-old rats with those age two (old by rat standards). Her team also divided the elder rats into age-impaired and age-unimpaired groups. When Gallagher compared the synapses—the tiny gaps between neurons where intercellular connections are made—she found that the impaired rats had lost the ability to adjust the activity of synapses appropriately but that the unimpaired rats had not. These connections are how memories are formed and preserved.

SA Mind Vol 17 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Old vs. Young” in SA Mind Vol. 17 No. 1 (), p. 10
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0206-10a

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe