Addressing the Global Brain Health Crisis

In 2021, an estimated 3.4 billion people—about 43% of the global population—were affected by neurological conditions, resulting in approximately 11.1 million deaths. With the rising prevalence of stroke, dementia, and late-life depression—three of the most significant neurological disorders among aging populations—experts warn of an impending “gray tsunami.” A recent commentary published in Circulation urges a nationwide initiative to enhance brain health.

“The field of neuroscience has seen remarkable progress, deepening our understanding of neurological disorders and the crucial connection between cardiovascular and brain health,” stated Dr. Mitchell S.V. Elkind, a leading stroke neurologist and past president of the American Heart Association (AHA). “To fully harness these advancements for public health, we require a national commitment that prioritizes research, public awareness, healthcare education, and policy advocacy.”

Moving Beyond Disease Prevention

The commentary emphasizes the need to shift from a healthcare model focused solely on preventing brain disorders to a broader perspective—one that fosters positive cognitive development and mental wellness. The concept of “brain capital” is central to this discussion. Brain capital refers to the economic and societal advantages of nurturing cognitive skills, social adaptability, creativity, and entrepreneurial thinking, all of which contribute to overall productivity.

Regions with underfunded education, limited arts programs, and poor nutrition create a “brain-negative” economy, hampering cognitive growth and development. According to the authors, prioritizing brain capital could yield significant returns by fostering healthier neurological and mental conditions from youth through adulthood.

A Public Policy Approach to Brain Health

The commentary calls for a paradigm shift in how society views brain health—moving beyond its narrow association with disease and instead adopting a proactive approach that optimizes brain development in early life and preserves cognitive function in later years. This requires a robust public policy agenda that spans an individual’s lifespan.

“Brain health policies must be rooted in comprehensive, interdisciplinary science and address life-stage transitions,” noted Dr. Harris Eyre, a neuro-policy expert at Rice University. “Advocacy efforts should not only tackle health disparities but also integrate stakeholders from beyond medicine, incorporating perspectives from education, economics, and broader societal frameworks.”

A national strategy emphasizing brain capital would offer far-reaching benefits, both for individual well-being and economic growth. Dr. Cheryl Pegus, an AHA board member, highlighted the organization’s leading role in advancing this agenda through research, education, and policy advocacy at various governmental levels.

While the perspectives shared in the commentary reflect those of its individual authors, they underscore an urgent call for collective action in shaping a future where brain health is a national priority.

Commentary by SuppBase columnist Alice Winters

The concept of “brain capital” is an intriguing, if somewhat abstract, addition to the conversation around neurological health. It attempts to position brain health as an economic imperative, which is a savvy framing in a world where policymaking often hinges on financial considerations. However, while the idea is compelling, it lacks concrete strategies for implementation. How exactly does one “invest” in brain capital?

One glaring omission in this discussion is the role of lifestyle interventions beyond policy—particularly nutrition, exercise, and supplementation. Brain health is not just about macro-level investments in education and arts programs; it is deeply influenced by individual choices regarding diet, sleep, and physical activity. The commentary could have benefitted from a discussion of emerging research on neuroprotective supplements, such as omega-3 fatty acids, flavonoids, and adaptogens, which have shown promise in supporting cognitive function and preventing decline.

Furthermore, while the authors stress the importance of interdisciplinary approaches, the execution of such an agenda remains vague. Policy shifts require not only scientific consensus but also political will, public buy-in, and sustained funding. Without clear roadmaps, the risk is that “brain capital” remains a theoretical construct rather than a tangible public health strategy.

Finally, while the commentary acknowledges socioeconomic disparities, it does not adequately address how to bridge these gaps. A real commitment to brain health must include accessible and affordable interventions for lower-income populations, who are disproportionately affected by poor nutrition, educational inequities, and environmental stressors. Without addressing these core issues, any national initiative will likely fall short of its ambitious goals.

Overall, the push for a broader, policy-driven approach to brain health is commendable, but the practical details require further refinement. To truly make an impact, future discussions must incorporate actionable strategies, a clearer integration of lifestyle factors, and a commitment to accessibility for all socioeconomic groups.