Dirty mind? Study suggests gut movement may flush excess material from our brains 36%

By Corinne Purtill0%

5/7/2026, 4:04:50 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Overconfidence Bias, Optimism Bias, and Ambiguity (Equivocation), with Post Hoc (False Cause) as the most egregious example at 20.4% saturation with 101 hits. Analysis detected 672 faulty-reasoning hits from 494 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 43.1% and a BS Rank of 36% (14,046 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 64.20% of the article peer group.

With each step you take, coordinated contractions in your abdominal muscles help keep you stable and upright. 
Now, new research finds that those gentle changes in tension and pressure also affect your brain, and may play a role in the organ’s overall health. 
Imaging in humans and other animal species has long shown that the brain gently moves inside the fluid-filled skull cavity, but it’s never been clear what, exactly, is propelling this motion, said neuroscientist Patrick Drew, a Penn State University professor and associate director of the Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences. 
Using advanced imaging, Drew’s team observed mice brains before and after the animals began walking. 
They realized that the brain actually moved just milliseconds before a mouse took a step  the brief moment when the animal’s abdominal muscles contracted in preparation for movement. 
To test the observation, they strapped pressure sensors around the bellies of lightly anesthetized mice and observed the brain when slight pressure was applied only to the abdominal muscles. 
The same motion followed. 
Breathing or cardiac activity didn’t trigger the same response. 
The connection, Drew and his colleagues determined, is the vertebral venous plexus, a network of veins that connects the abdomen to the spine in mice and humans alike. 
“It’s like a hydraulic system. 
It really is very much like the jacks that push your car up, or something that an excavator might have,” Drew said. 
“Whenever you tense those muscles, which you do whenever you make a movement ... that pushes blood into the spinal cord, it increases the pressure on your brain, and it moves your brain forward.” 
The paper, which was published April 27 in Nature Neuroscience, answers a puzzling question about the mechanism controlling this long-observed cerebral movement. 
It also puts forward hypotheses about why this belly-brain choreography exists. 
Drew and his team ran computer simulations of fluid’s motion in and around mouse brains. 
The kind of contraction generated by walking moves cerebrospinal fluid out of the brain, leading Drew to hypothesize that the mechanism plays an important role in flushing out protein waste and other unnecessary material. 
“It’s more speculative, but using simulations, we can see that this sort of motion should drive fluid movement and could help clear waste in the brain,” Drew said. 
In future research, Drew said, the team would like to explore whether the brain is detecting these mechanical signals, and how physical conditions like obesity affect the hydraulic relationship between the abdominal muscles and the brain. 
These current findings clarify the relationship between the brain and physical movement, illuminating fundamental mechanics that can apply to other research, said Michael Goard, an associate professor at UC Santa Barbara who studies sensory and spatial processing. 
“He did, what I think is a very thorough job figuring out what’s causing this movement in the case of locomotion and tying down the mechanical elements,” Goard said. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 3.0%Daily Pilot: 2.9%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 1.3%Daily Pilot: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 4.5%Corinne Purtill: 6.7%Daily Pilot: 3.5%Availability Heuristic4.5%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 1.7%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 20.0%Corinne Purtill: 4.1%Daily Pilot: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias20.0%This article: 0.4%Corinne Purtill: 5.7%Daily Pilot: 7.5%Framing Effect0.4%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 3.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 20.0%Corinne Purtill: 8.3%Daily Pilot: 3.6%Optimism Bias20.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 11.6%Daily Pilot: 7.8%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 2.2%Daily Pilot: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.9%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 1.9%Daily Pilot: 1.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 14.8%Corinne Purtill: 3.3%Daily Pilot: 5.1%Halo Effect14.8%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 5.3%Corinne Purtill: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Recency Bias5.3%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 1.2%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.9%Corinne Purtill: 9.3%Daily Pilot: 4.9%Appeal to Authority11.9%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 2.0%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.2%Corinne Purtill: 4.9%Daily Pilot: 4.4%Hasty Generalization2.2%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 1.8%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 4.9%Corinne Purtill: 4.1%Daily Pilot: 5.7%Appeal to Emotion4.9%This article: 5.3%Corinne Purtill: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Begging the Question5.3%This article: 20.4%Corinne Purtill: 5.7%Daily Pilot: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)20.4%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 7.3%Corinne Purtill: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Burden of Proof7.3%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 2.9%Daily Pilot: 2.8%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 18.2%Corinne Purtill: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)18.2%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 1.0%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.4%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.4%This article: 0.4%Corinne Purtill: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice0.4%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Corinne Purtill: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 4.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

494 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers62%attributed speech190writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 51 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 28 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 5 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 22 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 34 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 28 words • 0.0% coveragePatrick Drew • 36 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Goard • 37 words • 0.0% coverageMichael Goard • 29 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Patrick Drew

76%flagged-word coverage
238 attributed words78% of attributed speech49% writer coverage
0%2.5%5.0%Quote-first Misdirection-1.1 ptsWriter: 1.1%Patrick Drew: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-1.1 ptsWriter: 1.1%Patrick Drew: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.