Lifestyle
Chronic itch is miserable. Scientists are just scratching the surface
“There’s actual studies that show that itching is contagious,” journalist Annie Lowrey says. “Watching somebody scratch will make a person scratch.”
Kinga Krzeminska/Moment RF via Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Kinga Krzeminska/Moment RF via Getty Images
We’ve all had bug bites, or dry scalp, or a sunburn that causes itch. But what if you felt itchy all the time — and there was no relief?
Journalist Annie Lowrey suffers from primary biliary cholangitis (PBC), a degenerative liver disease in which the body mistakenly attacks cells lining the bile ducts, causing them to inflame. The result is a severe itch that doesn’t respond to antihistamines or steroids.
“It feels like being trapped inside your own body,” Lowrey says of the disease. “I always describe it as being like a car alarm. Like, you can’t stop thinking about it.”
PBC is impacts approximately 80,000 people in the U.S., the majority of whom are women. At its worst, Lowrey says, the itch caused her to dig holes in her skin and scalp. She’s even fantasized about having limbs amputated to escape the itch.

Lowrey writes about living with PBC in the Atlantic article, “Why People Itch and How to Stop It.” She says a big part of her struggle is coming to terms with the fact that she may never feel fully at ease in her skin.
“I talked to two folks who are a lot older than I was, just about like, how do you deal with it? How do you deal with the fact that you might itch and never stop itching? … And both of them were kind of like, ‘You put up with it, stop worrying about it and get on with your life,’” she says. “I think I was mentally trapped … and sometimes it’s like, OK, … go do something else. Life continues on. You have a body. It’s OK.”
Interview highlights
On why scratching gives us temporary relief
Scratching, it engenders pain in the skin, which interrupts the sensation of itch and it gives you the sense of relief that actually feels really good. It’s really pleasurable to scratch. And then when you stop scratching, the itch comes back. And the problem is that when you scratch or you damage your skin in order to stop the itch, to interrupt the itch, you actually damage the skin in a way that then makes the skin more itchy because you end up with histamine in the skin. And histamine is one of the hormones that generates itch within the body.
On the itch-scratch cycle
Histamine is an amazing chemical that does many, many, many things in our body and it’s part of our immune response. It leads to swelling so the body can come in to heal. And the scratching is meant to get whatever irritant was there off. And the itch-scratch cycle ends when the body heals. So I think that that’s all part of a natural and proper cycle. That’s part of our body being amazing at sensing what’s around it and then healing it. But we have some itch that’s caused by substances other than histamine. We’ve only started to understand that kind of itch recently. Similarly, we didn’t really … understand chronic itch very well until recently. And we’re in a period, I’d say in the last 20 years, of just tremendous scientific advancement in our understanding of itch.
On why itching is contagious
There’s actual studies that show that itching is contagious. So watching somebody scratch will make a person scratch. There’s this interesting question: Are people scratching empathetically in the way that we will mirror the movements of people around us, in the way that yawning is contagious or crying can be contagious? But it turns out that, no, it’s probably a self-protective thing. If you see somebody scratching, there’s some ancient part of your body that says that person might have scabies, that person might have some other infestation. I’m going to start scratching to get this off of myself because scratching is in part a self-protective mechanism. We want to get irritants off of the body, and that’s in part why we scratch.
On thinking of itch as a disease

When scientists said that itching is a disease in and of itself, what they meant was that chronic itching changes the body’s own circuitry in a way that begets more chronic itching. That implies that itching is not just a side effect, it’s a body process in and of itself. And so instead of just being a symptom … itch itself can kind of rewire the body and can be treated as a condition unto itself. And a lot of dermatologists see it that way. It’s often a symptom, often a side effect, but sometimes it’s really its own thing in the body.
On the social stigma around itching
If you saw somebody scratching themselves on the subway, would you go sit next to them? No, of course not. Just instinctively, I think you have that self-preservation mechanism. … It’s a really deep thing: Don’t get scabies. Don’t get bed bugs. Don’t get ticks on you. … I don’t think that people are trying to be cruel. I think there’s something deeply hardwired in there. … Like, don’t approach the mangy dog that looks like it has fleas all over it. Don’t approach the human that’s compulsively scratching themselves, which is socially coded in the same way that, like, chewing with your mouth open is. It’s not something that is an attractive thing to do.
On considering why so little attention paid to itch compared to pain
Pain is so awful and I would never say that there’s something ennobling about pain. But I think that there’s a certain amount of social respect [given] to people who are going through [pain], and itching — you kind of sound like a Muppet. … You look like a dog with fleas. It’s embarrassing to scratch yourself in public. It’s inappropriate to scratch yourself in public. I think people just kind of don’t take it very seriously. I’ve also thought a lot about how, like, if you had a chronic itching support group, everybody would come into it and then just start scratching themselves, and then make everybody else itchier by being in the simple presence of people who are itchy. It’s something that people suffer through alone.
On finding acceptance
I do think that even if I can’t quite come to terms with the itch, I have come to much better terms of the gift of being in a body that is getting sick, the gift of being in a body at all. … I always want to be careful to note … that I don’t think that illness is any kind of gift. And I don’t think that there needs to be upsides to bad things happening to people at all. But I do appreciate the insight that I’ve had into myself, even if I wish that I never had occasion to have it. …
You can endure a lot. Your body is going to fail you. It can feel completely crazy-making and obsessive and miserable. And you can survive it. You can just keep on breathing through it. You can do really amazing, wonderful things. And again, that’s not to say I think that it’s worth it, or that I’m taking the right lesson away from it. … Not everything needs to be a lesson. You don’t need to respond to things that are unfair and difficult in this fashion. But writing the piece led me to a much greater place of acceptance, and I really appreciated that.
Monique Nazareth and Anna Bauman produced and edited this interview for broadcast. Bridget Bentz, Molly Seavy-Nesper and Carmel Wroth adapted it for the web.
Lifestyle
‘How to Rule the World’ explores education and power at Stanford University
Students walk on the Stanford University campus on March 14, 2019, in Stanford, Calif.
Ben Margot/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Ben Margot/AP
When Theo Baker arrived at Stanford University a few years ago, he joined the student newspaper, following the path of his journalist parents, Peter Baker, a White House correspondent for The New York Times, and Susan Glasser, a writer for The New Yorker.
Through his reporting as a student journalist, he eventually broke a story about manipulated data in Stanford President Marc Tessier-Lavigne’s neuroscience research that helped lead to the university president’s resignation.
Theo Baker’s book, How to Rule the World: An Education in Power at Stanford University was released May 19. In it, Baker describes Stanford as a place where proximity to Silicon Valley gives rise to a parallel system of influence, recruitment and money, with investors looking to identify promising students almost as soon as they arrive on campus.
He told Morning Edition host Steve Inskeep there was “a sort of Stanford inside Stanford,” where elite students are drawn into an “alternate reality” of excess and access to cut corners.
In the interview, he discusses how Stanford is not just a university but also a pipeline where status and power can matter as much as ideas.
We reached out to Stanford University for comment and have not heard back.
Listen to the interview by clicking play on the blue box above.
Lifestyle
OTB Takes Full Control of Viktor & Rolf
Lifestyle
How having zero points in tennis — or ‘love’ — came to sound so sweet
The scoreboard shows the results of the women’s singles final match between Iga Swiatek of Poland and Amanda Anisimova of the U.S. at the Wimbledon Tennis Championships in London, Saturday, July 12, 2025.
Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP
Fifteen points in tennis? Nice. Thirty, 40 — even better. Advantage — that sounds good. “Love” — that also must be great, right? Well, not quite.
As the French Open rolls on and Serena Williams has announced her return to the sport, maybe you’ve been paying a little more attention to tennis. The sport’s scoring system is notably distinct, and can sometimes be hard to grasp for newcomers. But even tennis aficionados might not know why, or how, “love” became the unmistakable callout for zero points. For this installment of NPR’s Word of the Week, we’re exploring how a word that signifies trailing behind got such a sweet name.
“Love” comes from the heart — or an egg?
It’s hard to pinpoint when the first tennis ball went over the net. Tennis is a derivative of lots of other sports, such as “jeu de paume,” a handball game played in France, said JT Buzanga, the collections manager at the International Tennis Hall of Fame museum.

But tennis became a patented, official sport in 1874, said Steve Flink, a journalist whose tennis coverage got him inducted into the International Tennis Hall of Fame. It has retained its unique, mysterious scoring system ever since.
“By and large, the original system has held up almost entirely,” Flink said.
The use of “love” goes back to the late 18th century, said Jesse Sheidlower, a lexicographer. But it was used earlier than that in card games such as whist and bridge. Before the term made its way to tennis, the sport favored plain old “nothing,” or “nil,” he said.
Why love in the first place, though? Historians don’t really know for sure, but there are a few theories.
The French could have something to do with it. Some historians believe “love” derives from “l’oeuf,” which means “the egg” in French. Because eggs are shaped like zeros, terms such as “goose egg” and “duck’s egg” have been used in other contexts to mean zero, Sheidlower said.
It’s also possible English speakers mispronounced l’oeuf as “love.” But Sheidlower isn’t convinced that’s the answer.
“It’s the French equivalent of an English expression. But since that expression doesn’t appear in French, the French word wouldn’t have been used,” he said.
To be sure, France has had a lot of influence on tennis culture, Buzanga said. For example, “deuce” or a game tied at 40 points, comes from the French word for “two”: “deux.” But he prefers another prominent theory: that “love” comes from the idiom “for the love of the game.” Even if a player hasn’t scored, it doesn’t matter, because their heart is in it. It’s the theory Sheidlower said is the most plausible, because the idiom was used by the English before tennis was popularized.

Another variation of the “love of the game” theory is that the word could have come from the Dutch “lof,” or “honor” — or the Latin “amare,” meaning “to love,” Flink said.
But if tennis’ “love” doesn’t come from a French word, the theory at least has a French sensibility.
“I think the ‘for the love of the game’ is kind of romantic,” Buzanga said.
“Love” probably isn’t going anywhere
Tennis used to be a sport of leisure. The style of play has changed a lot over the years; players are more athletic and competitive, for instance, Flink said. But the rules of the sport are more steadfast, he said.
“There’s this incredible, enduring respect for tradition in tennis,” he said. “Changes are not made easily.”
There has been one major change in modern history: the tie-break. Matches can go on and on because players have to score two consecutive points to break a deuce, or by two games to break a tied set. But the onset of television meant matches would have to get shorter if the sport wanted to capture a larger audience, Flink said.

Change even came for “love.” An alternative sprouted up in the 1970s, and is still used today: “bagel,” named for its zero shape, Sheidlower said. Novices may say “zero,” and insiders will understand what they mean, but they “will needle them about it,” Flink said.
But “love” still prevails.
“People kind of like it,” Flink said. “It’s different. Why say zero when you can say love?”
-
Los Angeles, Ca26 minutes ago'Top Gun: Maverick' actor identified as victim stabbed to death in Tarzana
-
Detroit, MI48 minutes agoStorm chances return, which could impact Motor City Pride, graduations this weekend across Metro Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA56 minutes agoHilton campaigns in San Francisco as California primary votes still being counted
-
Dallas, TX1 hour agoCrews cover up AT&T branding as stadium becomes
-
Miami, FL1 hour agoMiami leaders gather for FIFA World Cup Host Committee Gala
-
Boston, MA1 hour agoPackage fire outside Boston’s Museum of African American History under investigation
-
Denver, CO1 hour agoRockies beat reporter Patrick Saunders to leave Denver Post
-
Seattle, WA1 hour agoSeattle granted NFL Franchise on this day 52 years ago