Cleaning Up Your Mental Mess – by Dr. Caroline Leaf
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
First of all, what mental mess is this? Well, that depends on you, but common items include:
- Anxiety
- Depression
- Stress
- Trauma
Dr. Caroline Leaf also includes the more nebulous item “toxic thoughts”, but this is mostly a catch-all term.
Given that it says “5 simple scientifically proven steps”, it would be fair if you are wondering:
“Is this going to be just basic CBT stuff?”
And… First, let’s not knock basic CBT stuff. It’s not a panacea, but it’s a great tool for a lot of things. However… Also, no, this book is not about just basic CBT stuff.
In fact, this book’s methods are presented in such a novel way that this reviewer was taken aback by how unlike it was to anything she’d read before.
And, it’s not that the components themselves are new—it’s just that they’re put together differently, in a much more organized comprehensive and systematic way, so that a lot less stuff falls through the cracks (a common problem with standalone psychological tools and techniques).
Bottom line: if you buy one mental health self-help book this year, we recommend that it be this one
Click here to check out Cleaning Up Your Mental Mess, and take a load off your mind!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
Is cold water bad for you? The facts behind 5 water myths
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
We know the importance of staying hydrated, especially in hot weather. But even for something as simple as a drink of water, conflicting advice and urban myths abound.
Is cold water really bad for your health? What about hot water from the tap? And what is “raw water”? Let’s dive in and find out.
Myth 1: Cold water is bad for you
Some recent TikToks have suggested cold water causes health problems by somehow “contracting blood vessels” and “restricting digestion”. There is little evidence for this.
While a 2001 study found 51 out of 669 women tested (7.6%) got a headache after drinking cold water, most of them already suffered from migraines and the work hasn’t been repeated since.
Cold drinks were shown to cause discomfort in people with achalasia (a rare swallowing disorder) in 2012 but the study only had 12 participants.
For most people, the temperature you drink your water is down to personal preference and circumstances. Cold water after exercise in summer or hot water to relax in winter won’t make any difference to your overall health.
Myth 2: You shouldn’t drink hot tap water
This belief has a grain of scientific truth behind it. Hot water is generally a better solvent than cold water, so may dissolve metals and minerals from pipes better. Hot water is also often stored in tanks and may be heated and cooled many times. Bacteria and other disease-causing microorganisms tend to grow better in warm water and can build up over time.
It’s better to fill your cup from the cold tap and get hot water for drinks from the kettle.
Myth 3: Bottled water is better
While bottled water might be safer in certain parts of the world due to pollution of source water, there is no real advantage to drinking bottled water in Australia and similar countries.
According to University of Queensland researchers, bottled water is not safer than tap water. It may even be tap water. Most people can’t tell the difference either. Bottled water usually costs (substantially) more than turning on the tap and is worse for the environment.
What about lead in tap water? This problem hit the headlines after a public health emergency in Flint, Michigan, in the United States. But Flint used lead pipes with a corrosion inhibitor (in this case orthophosphate) to keep lead from dissolving. Then the city switched water sources to one without a corrosion inhibitor. Lead levels rose and a public emergency was declared.
Fortunately, lead pipes haven’t been used in Australia since the 1930s. While lead might be present in some old plumbing products, it is unlikely to cause problems.
Myth 4: Raw water is naturally healthier
Some people bypass bottled and tap water, going straight to the source.
The “raw water” trend emerged a few years ago, encouraging people to drink from rivers, streams and lakes. There is even a website to help you find a local source.
Supporters say our ancestors drank spring water, so we should, too. However, our ancestors also often died from dysentery and cholera and their life expectancy was low.
While it is true even highly treated drinking water can contain low levels of things like microplastics, unless you live somewhere very remote, the risks of drinking untreated water are far higher as it is more likely to contain pollutants from the surrounding area.
Myth 5: It’s OK to drink directly from hoses
Tempting as it may be, it’s probably best not to drink from the hose when watering the plants. Water might have sat in there, in the warm sun for weeks or more potentially leading to bacterial buildup.
Similarly, while drinking water fountains are generally perfectly safe to use, they can contain a variety of bacteria. It’s useful (though not essential) to run them for a few seconds before you start to drink so as to get fresh water through the system rather than what might have been sat there for a while.
We are fortunate to be able to take safe drinking water for granted. Billions of people around the world are not so lucky.
So whether you like it hot or cold, or somewhere in between, feel free to enjoy a glass of water this summer.
Just don’t drink it from the hose.
Oliver A.H. Jones, Professor of chemistry, RMIT University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
How To Engage Your Whole Brain
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The Stroke Of Insight That Nobody Wants
This is Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor. She’s a neuroanatomist, who, at the age of 37 (when she was a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard Medical School), had what she refers to as her “stroke of insight”.
That is to say, she had a massive stroke, and after a major brain surgery to remove a clot the size of a golf ball, she spent the next 8 years re-learning to do everything.
Whereas previously she’d been busy mapping the brain to determine how cells communicate with each other, now she was busy mapping whether socks or shoes should go on first. Needless to say, she got an insight into neuroplasticity that few people would hope for.
What does she want us to know?
Dr. Taylor (now once again a successful scientist, lecturer, and author) advocates for “whole brain living”, which involves not taking parts of our brain for granted.
About those parts…
Dr. Taylor wants us to pay attention to all the parts regardless of size, ranging from the two hemispheres, all the way down to the billions of brain cells, and yet even further, to the “trillions of molecular geniuses”—because each brain cell is itself reliant on countless molecules of the many neurochemicals that make up our brain.
For a quick refresher on some of the key players in that latter category, see our Neurotransmitter Cheatsheet 😎
When it comes to the hemispheres, there has historically been a popular belief that these re divided into:
- The right brain: emotional, imaginative, creative, fluid feeling
- The left brain: intellectual, analytical, calculating, crystal thinking
…which is not true, anatomically speaking, because there are cells on both sides doing their part of both of these broad categories of brain processes.
However, Dr. Taylor found, while one hemisphere of her brain was much more damaged than the other, that nevertheless she could recover some functions more quickly than others, which, once she was able to resume her career, inspired her model of four distinct ways of cogitating that can be switched-between and played with or against each other:
Meet The Four Characters Inside Your Brain
Why this matters
As she was re-learning everything, the way forward was not quick or easy, and she also didn’t know where she was going, because for obvious reasons, she couldn’t remember, much less plan.
Looking backwards after her eventual full recovery, she noted a lot of things that she needed during that recovery, some of which she got and some of which she didn’t.
Most notably for her, she needed the right kind of support that would allow all four of the above “characters” as she puts it, to thrive and grow. And, when we say “grow” here we mean that literally, because of growing new brain cells to replace the lost ones (as well as the simple ongoing process of slowly replacing brain cells).
For more on growing new brain cells, by the way, see:
How To Grow New Brain Cells (At Any Age)
In order to achieve this in all of the required brain areas (i.e., and all of the required brain functions), she also wants us to know… drumroll please…
When to STFU
Specifically, the ability to silence parts of our brain that while useful in general, aren’t necessarily being useful right now. Since it’s very difficult to actively achieve a negative when it comes to brain-stuff (don’t think of an elephant), this means scheduling time for other parts of our brain to be louder. And that includes:
- scheduling time to feel (emotionally)
- scheduling time to feel (gut feelings)
- scheduling time to feel (kinesthetically)
…amongst others.
Note: those three are presented in that order, from least basic to most basic. And why? Because, clever beings that we are, we typically start from a position that’s not remotely basic, such as “overthinking”, for example. So, there’s a wind-down through thinking just the right amount, thinking through simpler concepts, feeling, noticing one’s feelings, noticing noticing one’s feelings, all the way down to what, kinesthetically, are we actually physically feeling.
❝It is interesting to note that although our limbic system fucntions throughout our lifetime, it does not mature. As a result, when our emotional “buttons” are pushed, we retain the ability to react to incoming stimulation as though we were a two-year-old, even when we are adults.❞
~ Dr. Jill Taylor
Of course, sometimes the above is not useful, which is why the ability to switch between brain modes is a very important and useful skill to develop.
And how do we do that? By practising. Which is something that it’s necessary to take up consciously, and pursue consistently. When children are at school, there are (hopefully, ideally) curricula set out to ensure they engage and train all parts of their brain. As adults, this does not tend to get the same amount of focus.
“Children’s brains are still developing”—indeed, and so are adult brains:
The Brain As A Work-In-Progress
Dr. Taylor had the uncommon experience of having to, in many ways, neurologically speaking, redo childhood. And having had a second run at it, she developed an appreciation of the process that most of us didn’t necessarily get when doing childhood just the once.
In other words: take the time to feel stuff; take the time to quiet down your chatty mind, take the time engage your senses, and take it seriously! Really notice, as though for the first time, what the texture of your carpet is like. Really notice, as though for the first time, what it feels like to swallow some water. Really notice, as though for the first time, what it feels like to experience joy—or sadness, or comfort, or anger, or peace. Exercise your imagination. Make some art (it doesn’t have to win awards; it just has to light up your brain!). Make music (again, it’s about wiring your brain in your body, not about outdoing Mozart in composition and/or performance). Make changes! Make your brain work in the ways it’s not in the habit of doing.
If you need a little help switching off parts of your brain that are being too active, so that you can better exercise other parts of your brain that might otherwise have been neglected, you might want to try:
Enjoy!
Share This Post
Black Bean Hummus Panini
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
A recipe for a sandwich? Try it once, and you’ll see why. Welcome to your new favorite!
You will need
- 1 cup cooked-and-rinsed black beans (canned is fine)
- ⅓ cup hummus (you can use our Hero Homemade Hummus recipe)
- 4 thin slices of eggplant (or more if you like it meaty)
- 4 sun-dried tomatoes
- 2 slices of your favorite bread (you can use our Delicious Quinoa Avocado Bread recipe)
- A little olive oil, ideally sprayable
Method
(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)
1) Grill the eggplant slices until soft.
2) Spread hummus generously on one side of both slices of bread.
2) Add the black beans on top of one slice (the hummus will help them stay in place), followed by the sun-dried tomatoes and then the eggplant. Top with the other slice of bread, hummus-side down.
3) Coat (carefully, please) the inside of the panini press (both interior sides) with olive oil. If you don’t have sprayable oil, using a sheet of kitchen roll to apply the oil is a good way to do it without making a mess.
4) Grill the assembled sandwich, until the bread starts to brown and the insides are warm; this should take about 4 minutes.
Enjoy!
Want to learn more?
For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:
- Three Daily Servings of Beans?
- Chickpeas vs Black Beans – Which is Healthier?
- Lycopene’s Benefits For The Gut, Heart, Brain, & More
Take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
Water Water Everywhere, But Which Is Best To Drink?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Well Well Well…
In Tuesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your (health-related) opinion on drinking water—with the understanding that this may vary from place to place. We got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:
- About 65% said “Filtered is best”
- About 20% said “From the mains is best”
- About 8% said “Bottled is best”
- About 3% said “Distilled is best”
- About 3% said “Some other source is best”
Of those who said “some other source is best”, one clarified that their preferred source was well water.
So what does the science say?
Fluoridated water is bad for you: True or False?
False, assuming a normal level of consumption. Rather than take up more space today though, we’ll link to what we previously wrote on this topic:
You may be wondering: but what if my level of consumption is higher than normal?
Let’s quickly look at some stats:
- The maximum permitted safety level varies from place to place, but is (for example) 2mg/l in the US, 1.5mg/l in Canada & the UK.
- The minimum recommended amount also varies from place to place, but is (for example) 0.7mg/l in Canada and the US, and 1mg/l in the UK.
It doesn’t take grabbing a calculator to realize that if you drink twice as much water as someone else, then depending on where you are, water fluoridated to the minimum may give you more than the recommended maximum.
However… Those safety margins are set so much lower than the actual toxicity levels of fluoride, that it doesn’t make a difference.
For example: your writer here takes a medication that has the side effect of causing dryness of the mouth, and consequently she drinks at least 3l of water per day in a climate that could not be described as hot (except perhaps for about 2 weeks of the year). She weighs 72kg (that’s about 158 pounds), and the toxicity of fluoride (for ill symptoms, not death) is 0.2mg/kg. So, she’d need 14.4mg of fluoride, which even if the water fluoridation here were 2mg/l (it’s not; it’s lower here, but let’s go with the highest figure to make a point), would require drinking more than 7l of water faster than the body can process it.
For more about the numbers, check out:
Acute Fluoride Poisoning from a Public Water System
Bottled water is the best: True or False?
False, if we consider “best” to be “healthiest”, which in turn we consider to be “most nutrients, with highest safety”.
Bottled water generally does have higher levels of minerals than most local mains supply water does. That’s good!
But you know what else is generally has? Microplastics and nanoplastics. That’s bad!
We don’t like to be alarmist in tone; it’s not what we’re about here, but the stats on bottled water are simply not good; see:
We Are Such Stuff As Bottles Are Made Of
You may be wondering: “but what about bottled water that comes in glass bottles?”
Indeed, water that comes in glass bottles can be expected to have lower levels of plastic than water that comes in plastic bottles, for obvious reasons.
However, we invite you to consider how likely you believe it to be that the water wasn’t stored in plastic while being processed, shipped and stored, before being portioned into its final store-ready glass bottles for end-consumer use.
Distilled water is the best: True or False?
False, generally, with caveats:
Distilled water is surely the safest water anywhere, because you know that you’ve removed any nasties.
However, it’s also devoid of nutrients, because you also removed any minerals it contained. Indeed, if you use a still, you’ll be accustomed to the build-up of these minerals (generally simplified and referenced as “limescale”, but it’s a whole collection of minerals).
Furthermore, that loss of nutrients can be more than just a “something good is missing”, because having removed certain ions, that water could now potentially strip minerals from your teeth. In practice, however, you’d probably have to swill it excessively to cause this damage.
Nevertheless, if you have the misfortune of living somewhere like Flint, Michigan, then a water still may be a fair necessity of life. In other places, it can simply be useful to have in case of emergency, of course.
Here’s an example product on Amazon if you’d like to invest in a water still for such cases.
PS: distilled water is also tasteless, and is generally considered bad, tastewise, for making tea and coffee. So we really don’t recommend distilling your water unless you have a good reason to do so.
Filtered water is the best: True or False?
True for most people in most places.
Let’s put it this way: it can’t logically be worse than whatever source of water you put into it…
Provided you change the filter regularly, of course.
Otherwise, after overusing a filter, at best it won’t be working, and at worst it’ll be adding in bacteria that have multiplied in the filter over however long you left it there.
You may be wondering: can water filters remove microplastics, and can they remove minerals?
The answer in both cases is: sometimes.
- For microplastics it depends on the filter size and the microplastic size (see our previous article for details on that).
- For minerals, it depends on the filter type. Check out:
The H2O Chronicles | 5 Water Filters That Remove Minerals
One other thing to think about: while most water filtration jugs are made of PFAS-free BPA-free plastics for obvious reasons, for greater peace of mind, you might consider investing in a glass filtration jug, like this one ← this is just one example product on Amazon; by all means shop around and find one you like
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
For women with antenatal depression, micronutrients might help them and their babies – new study
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Julia J Rucklidge, University of Canterbury; Elena Moltchanova, University of Canterbury; Roger Mulder, University of Otago, and Siobhan A Campbell, University of Canterbury
Antenatal depression affects 15% to 21% of pregnant women worldwide. It can influence birth outcomes and children’s development, as well as increase the risk of post-natal depression.
Current treatments like therapy can be inaccessible and antidepressants can carry risks for developing infants.
Over the past two decades, research has highlighted that poor nutrition is a contributing risk factor to mental health challenges. Most pregnant women in New Zealand aren’t adhering to nutritional guidelines, according to a longitudinal study. Only 3% met the recommendations for all food groups.
Another cohort study carried out in Brazil shows that ultra-processed foods (UPF) accounted for at least 30% of daily dietary energy during pregnancy, displacing healthier options.
UPFs are chemically manufactured and contain additives to improve shelf life, as well as added sugar and salt. Importantly, they are low in essential micronutrients (vitamins and minerals).
The consumption of these foods is concerning because a nutrient-poor diet during pregnancy has been linked to poorer mental health outcomes in children. This includes depression, anxiety, hyperactivity, and inattention.
Increasing nutrients in maternal diets and reducing consumption of UPFs could improve the mental health of the mother and the next generation. Good nutrition can have lifelong benefits for the offspring.
However, there are multiple factors that mean diet change alone may not in itself be sufficient to address mental health challenges. Supplementing with additional nutrients may also be important to address nutritional needs during pregnancy.
Micronutrients as treatment for depression
Our earlier research suggests micronutrient supplements for depression have benefits outside pregnancy.
But until now there have been no published randomised controlled trials specifically designed to assess the efficacy and safety of broad-spectrum micronutrients on antenatal depression and overall functioning.
The NUTRIMUM trial, which ran between 2017 and 2022, recruited 88 women in their second trimester of pregnancy who reported moderate depressive symptoms. They were randomly allocated to receive either 12 capsules (four pills, three times a day) of a broad-spectrum micronutrient supplement or an active placebo containing iodine and riboflavin for a 12-week period.
Micronutrient doses were generally between the recommended dietary allowance and the tolerable upper level.
Based on clinician ratings, micronutrients significantly improved overall psychological functioning compared to the placebo. The findings took into account all noted changes based on self-assessment and clinician observations. This includes sleep, mood regulation, coping, anxiety and side effects.
Both groups reported similar reductions in symptoms of depression. More than three quarters of participants were in remission at the end of the trial. But 69% of participants in the micronutrient group rated themselves as “much” or “very much” improved, compared to 39% in the placebo group.
Participants taking the micronutrients also experienced significantly greater improvements in sleep and overall day-to-day functioning, compared to participants taking the placebo. There were no group differences on measures of stress, anxiety and quality of life.
Importantly, there were no group differences in reported side effects, and reports of suicidal thoughts dropped over the course of the study for both groups. Blood tests confirmed increased vitamin levels (vitamin C, D, B12) and fewer deficiencies in the micronutrient group.
Micronutrients were particularly helpful for women with chronic mental health challenges and those who had taken psychiatric medications in the past. Those with milder symptoms improved with or without the micronutrients, suggesting general care and monitoring might suffice for some women.
The benefits of micronutrients were comparable to psychotherapy but with less contact. There are no randomised controlled trials of antidepressant medication to compare these results.
Retention in the study was good (81%) and compliance excellent (90%).
Beyond maternal mental health
We followed the infants of mothers enrolled in the NUTRIMUM trial (who were therefore exposed to micronutrients during pregnancy) for 12 months, alongside infants from the general population of Aotearoa New Zealand.
This second group of infants from the general population contained a smaller sub-group who were exposed to antidepressant medication for the treatment of antenatal depression.
We assessed the neuro-behavioural development of each infant within the first four weeks of life, and temperament up to one year after birth.
These observational follow-ups showed positive effects of micronutrients on the infants’ ability to regulate their behaviour. These results were on par with or better than typical pregnancies, and better than treatments with antidepressants.
Infants exposed to micronutrients during pregnancy were significantly better at attending to external stimuli. They were also better able to block out external stimuli during sleep. They showed fewer signs of stress and had better muscle tone compared to infants not exposed to micronutrients.
They also displayed greater ability to interact with their environment. They were better at regulating their emotional state and had fewer abnormal muscle reflexes than infants exposed to antidepressant medication in pregnancy.
Reassuringly, micronutrients had no negative impact on infant temperament.
These findings highlight the potential of micronutrients as a safe and effective alternative to traditional medication treatments for antenatal depression.
The prenatal environment sets the foundation for a child’s future. Further investigation into the benefits of micronutrient supplementation would gives us more confidence in their use for other perinatal (from the start of pregnancy to a year after birth) mental health issues. This could provide future generations with a better start to life.
We would like to acknowledge the contribution of Dr Hayley Bradley to this research project.
Julia J Rucklidge, Professor of Psychology, University of Canterbury; Elena Moltchanova, Professor of Statistics, University of Canterbury; Roger Mulder, Professor of Psychiatry, University of Otago, and Siobhan A Campbell, Intern Psychologist, Researcher – Te Puna Toiora (Mental Health and Nutrition Research Lab), University of Canterbury
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
Almonds vs Pecans – Which is Healthier?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Our Verdict
When comparing almonds to pecans, we picked the almonds.
Why?
In terms of macros, almonds have more protein, carbs, and fiber, as well as the lower glycemic index. A strong start for almonds here, though pecans have more fat (and the healthy blend of fats is quite comparable from one nut to the other).
In the category of vitamins, almonds have more of vitamins B2, B3, B9, E, and choline, while pecans have more of vitamins A, B1, B5, B6, and K. Numerically that’s a tie, though the biggest margins of difference are for vitamins A and E, respectively, and we might want to prioritize almonds’ extra vitamin E, over pecans’ extra vitamin A, given that vitamin A is more easily found in large quantities in many foods, whereas vitamin E is not quite so abundant generally. So in short, either a tie or a slight win for almonds here.
When it comes to minerals, both contain a lot of goodness, but almonds have more calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, and selenium, while pecans have more copper, manganese, and zinc. A clear win for almonds, though as we say, pecans are also great for this, just not as great as almonds.
As a side-note, both of these nuts have been found to have anticancer properties against breast cancer cell lines. In all likelihood this means they help against other cancers too, but breast cancer is what the extant research has been for.
So, naturally, enjoy either or both (in fact, both is ideal). But if you want to choose one for nutritional density, it’s almonds.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: