Fasting may reset your body, but can it reset your mind? The new trend of dopamine fasting claims it can. And wait, there's more. This trend also works against dopamine resistance, implying that things that did not make you happier before will now do. You see, dopamine is a part of the brain's reward system and plays an important role in your pleasure reception. While this neurotransmitter is not directly linked to an individual's happiness, it triggers feelings of satisfaction, motivation and pleasure.

However, a person can also reach a stage of dopamine resistance if they continue to indulge in activities that trigger its frequent or constant release. In this case, the individual stops feeling the impact of this neurotransmitter and thus, does feel good or happy.

So does dopamine fasting work?

Dopamine fasting is a practice where individuals limit their exposure to activities or stimuli that typically provide a surge of dopamine. The idea behind dopamine fasting is to reset or recalibrate the brain's reward system. This is usually done by abstaining from gratifying things or experiences like social media, junk food, and even sex. Proponents of dopamine fasting argue that continual overstimulation from digital devices, social media, and easily accessible indulgences has numbed our brain's reward pathways. By regularly denying ourselves these dopamine triggers, the idea claims, we might restore our ability to acquire fulfilment from life's basic pleasures.

How Does Dopamine Imbalance Affect Your Mental Health?

Having low levels of dopamine can make you less motivated and excited about things. In Parkinson's disease, there is not enough dopamine in the areas of the brain important for movement. This leads to problems with muscle stiffness and movements such as walking.

The symptoms of a dopamine imbalance depend on what is causing the problem. They include physical symptoms such as:

• muscle cramps, spasms or stiffness
• digestion problems, such as constipation or reflux
• pneumonia
• trouble sleeping
• moving or speaking more slowly than usual

• feeling tired and unmotivated, or sad and lacking hope
• having low libido (sex drive)
• hallucinations (experiencing something that's not real)

How Can I Adjust My Dopamine Levels?

Adjusting dopamine levels is complicated, as it is involved in many different roles in the brain. Your doctor won't measure your dopamine levels directly, and there is no simple test to measure it. Your symptoms will be the clues that tell your doctor if you have too much or not enough dopamine. They will then prescribe medicines to adjust your dopamine level, based on your symptoms, and make adjustments based on how your body responds and how you feel.

ALSO READ: Not Just a Screen Time Fix: 5 Timeless Health Habits from the ’50s

Rates of binge drinking have raised among gen Z since their teenage years. As per a recent research by the UCL Centre for Longitudinal Studies (CLS), data from nearly 10,000 people born across the UK in 2000-02 who are taking part in the Millennium Cohort Study was analyzed. The research found that the gen Z is challenging their reputation as the "generation sensible".

What Did The Research Find?

The study found that 7 in 10, which is 63 per cent of 23-year-olds report binge drinking in the past year.

Nearly a third or around 29 per cent also said they did so at least monthly, which is up from 10 per cent at age 17.

The study also found that while drug use is relatively limited in the teenage years, by 20, almost half of them, or 49 per cent have used cannabis and a third, around 32 per cent have tried harder drugs like cocaine, ketamine and ecstasy.

Researchers compared substance use in the same group at ages 17 and 23. By 23, the share reporting binge drinking at least once in the past year rose by 15 percentage points, from 53% at 17 to 68%. Binge drinking refers to consuming six or more alcoholic drinks in one sitting.

Drug Use Among Gen Z Sees Sharp Rise

Drug use among Gen Z has increased substantially as they move from their teenage years into their early 20s. The share of young people who said they had tried cannabis rose by 18 percentage points between ages 17 and 23, climbing from 31 per cent to 49 per cent.

Use of harder drugs showed an even steeper rise. The proportion of young people who said they had experimented with harder substances more than tripled, increasing from 10 per cent at 17 to 32 per cent by the age of 23. Meanwhile, the number who reported using these drugs at least 10 times in the past year went up from 3 percent to 8 percent.

Gambling and Vaping Also Increasing

The study also examined other potentially addictive behaviors. Nearly a third of the group, about 32 per cent, reported gambling by the age of 23. However, only 4 percent described their gambling as problematic.

Vaping saw one of the most noticeable increases. Daily vaping rose sharply from 3 percent at age 17 to 19 per cent by age 23. In comparison, cigarette smoking remained relatively stable, increasing slightly from 8 per cent to 9 percent.

Study Questions the Idea That Gen Z Drinks Less

Lead author Dr Aase Villadsen said the findings challenge the common belief that younger generations are moving away from alcohol.

She explained that while recent reports have suggested Gen Z drinks less than earlier generations, the new study indicates that this may not hold true once some members of this generation reach their early 20s.

Although late adolescence and early adulthood are often periods of experimentation, Villadsen said the rise in binge drinking and drug use during the early 20s is concerning, especially if these behaviors begin to become long-term habits.

She noted that the sharp increase in these behaviors between adolescence and early adulthood highlights how risks can intensify during this stage of life.

Villadsen also stressed that prevention strategies should focus on groups that appear to be more vulnerable. For instance, young men were found to be about seven times more likely than women to report gambling problems and were also more likely to use harder drugs.

Experts Warn About Alcohol’s Impact on Young Brains

Dr Katherine Severi, chief executive of the Institute of Alcohol Studies, as reported by The Guardian, said young people are particularly vulnerable to alcohol’s effects because the brain continues to develop until the mid-20s.

She said it is worrying that despite frequent claims that younger generations drink less, the findings suggest that Gen Z drinkers in their early 20s may be consuming alcohol at similar or even higher levels than millennials did at the same age.

Severi also pointed to higher rates of heavy drinking among university students as a major concern. According to her, this reflects the influence of the broader alcohol environment rather than individual choices alone.

She explained that affordability, easy availability and heavy promotion of alcohol are major drivers of alcohol-related harm, and students are often exposed to all three.

Severi added that universities have a responsibility to ensure students can study and live in a safe environment. She also said commercial ties with alcohol companies, such as sponsorships of sports clubs or campus events, should not take priority over student health and wellbeing.

The findings come from Substance Use and Addictive Behaviours: Initial Findings From the Millennium Cohort Study at age 23, a briefing paper by Aase Villadsen and Emla Fitzsimons that will be published on the CLS website.

The United States has signed 24 bilateral health Memoranda of Understanding or MoUs with Latin America and African countries under the Trump administration's America First Global Health Strategy.

The first agreement with Panama is described as “strengthening Western hemisphere health security”, which it added is “a priority”. Thereafter, four Latin American agreements too involve smaller grants and focus on disease surveillance. Other 20 agreements all with African countries who have been previous recipients of health grants via the now disbanded US agency for International Development or USAID and decimated US President's Emergency Funds for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).

The five-year MoUs aim to quickly shift financial responsibility for key health services to national governments. In several countries, including Kenya, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), more than half of HIV programme funding has traditionally come from donors, particularly the United States. In the DRC, for instance, at least half of the antiretroviral medicines used have been financed by the US.

What Do These MoUs Comprise?

The transitional Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) signed between the United States and several countries come with a major condition. They require strong investment in infectious disease surveillance systems.

The goal is to ensure that pathogen information from outbreaks is shared with the US within a week. Officials say this helps detect global threats early and protect public health.

At the same time, it gives US pharmaceutical companies early access to pathogen data, allowing them to develop vaccines, medicines and diagnostics more quickly.

The US–DRC Health Agreement

The United States and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) signed their health MoU on 26 February. According to the US State Department, the agreement focuses on strengthening the country’s ability to detect and contain infectious disease outbreaks before they spread internationally.

• The focus reflects the country’s recent health challenges.
• The DRC has experienced several Ebola outbreaks in recent years.
• It is also dealing with the world’s largest mpox outbreak.

Funding Commitments

Under the agreement:

• The US will invest up to $900 million over five years
• The DRC will increase its health spending by $300 million

Most of the funding will support a national integrated surveillance and outbreak response system.

This includes:

• A laboratory network capable of detecting outbreaks within seven days
• Faster outbreak investigations and response systems
• Coordination between the US and other global health partners

The MoU also aims to modernize health data systems through electronic medical records, interoperable platforms, better trained community health workers and expanded services for HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, polio and maternal and child health.

Minerals Before Health

In several cases, health agreements were preceded by deals related to natural resources.

The United States and the DRC first signed a strategic partnership on critical minerals. The deal aims to secure supplies of minerals needed for commercial and defense industries.

The DRC is one of the world’s largest sources of rare earth minerals, including cobalt and copper. China has historically dominated the purchasing and processing of these resources.

Recently, the DRC has begun opening its mineral sector to US investors. According to Reuters, the government sent Washington a shortlist of state owned assets involving:

• manganese
• copper
• cobalt
• gold
• lithium

Guinea followed a similar path. It signed a minerals MoU with the US on 5 February, followed by a health MoU on 27 February. The health agreement prioritizes strengthening laboratory networks and improving biosafety standards by 2027.

Legal Pushback and Rejected Deals

Not all countries are comfortable linking health support to access to resources or data.

In the DRC, a group of lawyers has challenged the minerals agreement in the Constitutional Court. They argue that the deal violates the constitution and undermines national sovereignty over natural resources.

Zimbabwe also withdrew from negotiations with the US over a similar agreement.

Officials said the country was asked to share biological resources and outbreak data for years without any guarantee that vaccines, treatments or diagnostics developed from that data would be available to Zimbabwe if a future crisis occurred. They also said the US did not offer reciprocal sharing of its own epidemiological data.

Concerns in Kenya and Zambia

Kenya’s agreement with the United States has also faced legal hurdles. The country’s High Court halted the MoU after two court challenges questioned provisions that could allow the US access to patient data and pathogen information.

Zambia has also expressed reservations about its proposed health deal with Washington. The agreement stalled after the US linked the billion dollar package to cooperation in the country’s mining sector, particularly copper and cobalt.

Zambia has since asked for revisions, saying parts of the deal do not align with its national interests.

Critics Call the Policy “Extractive”

Some experts argue that these agreements reflect a broader shift in US global health policy.

Sophie Harman, professor of international politics at Queen Mary University of London, wrote in the BMJ that extraction appears to be central to the approach.

According to her analysis, the policy focuses less on improving global health outcomes and more on strengthening US economic and geopolitical interests, including competition with China.

She warns that countries entering such agreements could risk giving up resources or scientific data while gaining relatively limited health benefits.

Rare diseases may be individually uncommon, but together they represent a large and persistent care gap. More than 300 million people globally live with a rare condition, and when families and caregivers are counted, the impact touches over one billion lives. The economic burden is estimated to exceed $7 trillion each year.

In India, the challenge is compounded by geography, uneven specialist availability and the lifelong nature of many rare conditions. The question is no longer whether the system recognises the need, but whether it can deliver continuous care at scale.

Why Patients Still Struggle To Reach Care

For most rare disease patients, the hardest part is not always the science but the pathway to care. Diagnosis is often delayed, sometimes by years. Patients move between providers carrying incomplete records. Specialist centres are concentrated in a few large cities, forcing families to travel repeatedly for consultations that may last only minutes. This is both financially draining and clinically inefficient.

Telemedicine is beginning to ease some of this pressure. Virtual consultations allow specialists to extend their reach beyond metropolitan clusters. For families in tier two and tier three locations, this can mean earlier clinical input and fewer avoidable journeys.

Remote monitoring tools are also shifting care from episodic hospital visits to continuous oversight, which is particularly valuable for conditions that require close tracking over time.

Why Data Matters More Than Ever

If access is the visible challenge, data fragmentation is the structural one. Rare disease information remains scattered across hospitals, laboratories and individual case files. This weak visibility affects everything from prevalence estimates to therapy development. Policymakers struggle to size the problem accurately. Clinicians miss longitudinal patterns. Industry investment becomes harder to justify.

Digital health systems can address this by creating longitudinal patient records that follow individuals across providers. Even relatively modest steps such as strengthening diagnostic reporting or building disease registries can significantly improve coordination. For rare diseases, where patient numbers are small and widely dispersed, structured data is not a luxury. It is the backbone of effective care.

India’s Digital Opportunity

India has begun building the rails needed for this transition. The Ayushman Bharat Digital Mission is creating a national health data architecture anchored in unique health IDs and interoperable records. If applied rigorously to rare diseases, this infrastructure can support lifelong patient tracking, improve referral accuracy and give policymakers clearer visibility into disease burden.

Interoperability will determine how far this effort goes. The growing adoption of FHIR standards and API led systems is slowly allowing previously disconnected hospital platforms to exchange clinical information. For rare disease patients, whose care often spans multiple providers and years of follow up, this continuity is not technical detail. It is essential to safe treatment.

AI Moves From Promise To Practice

Artificial intelligence is also starting to show practical value. Globally, AI based clinical decision support tools are being used to flag potential rare disease cases hidden within routine health records. This matters because many rare conditions present with non specific symptoms and are frequently missed in early stages.

Collaborations between technology firms and pharmaceutical companies are demonstrating how electronic health record analysis, suspect patient lists and longitudinal data can help clinicians triage cases earlier for confirmatory testing. As these tools mature and integrate into routine workflows, they could significantly shorten the diagnostic odyssey that rare disease families currently endure.

Engaging Patients Beyond The Clinic

At the patient level, the shift is becoming more practical and visible. Tools that let people log symptoms, get medication reminders and share updates in real time are helping them stay more consistent with treatment, while giving clinicians better insight between visits. For lifelong conditions, this kind of day to day support brings care into the flow of everyday life, where most disease management actually happens.

Federated data models add an important layer of trust. By enabling analysis across multiple small patient populations without moving sensitive personal data, they address both privacy concerns and the sample size limitations that have historically slowed rare disease research.

From Pilots to Systems

Progress is visible across both public and private sectors. Regulated digital health platforms are already supporting rare disease programmes in several countries. Industry collaborations are using AI to detect conditions that often go undiagnosed for years. Public genomic databases are generating new diagnoses by enabling experts to build on shared evidence.

India’s immediate task is to move beyond isolated pilots. Telemedicine networks must be tied to referral protocols and reimbursement pathways. Digital registries must be built with strong governance and patient trust. AI tools need to be embedded into everyday clinical workflows rather than remaining demonstration projects.

Why Investment Makes Fiscal Sense

Poorly managed rare diseases create avoidable hospitalisations, lost productivity and long term care costs. Evidence increasingly shows that targeted investments in data systems, screening and coordinated care can reduce downstream expenditure. For low- and middle-income countries working within tight health budgets, these are not marginal gains.

India already has many of the building blocks needed to improve rare disease care, from expanding digital health infrastructure to growing AI capabilities and increasing policy focus. The real test now is disciplined execution.

Telemedicine networks must deepen their reach, patient registries need to become reliable and usable, data must move securely across systems, and clinicians should have decision support tools that fit into everyday practice. Taken together, these steps can meaningfully narrow today’s access gaps.

Digital health will not make rare diseases any less complex. But if implemented thoughtfully, it can reduce distance, shorten delays and bring much needed continuity to care journeys that are currently fragmented. For families managing lifelong conditions, that would be a tangible and much overdue shift.