PCOS Repair Protocol – by Tamika Woods

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.

PCOS (Polycystic Ovary Syndrome) affects about 1 in 5 women, and the general position of the medical establishment is “Oh dear, how sad; never mind”.

…which leaves a lot of people suffering with symptoms with little to no help.

This book looks to address that, and while it doesn’t claim to cure PCOS, it offers a system for managing (including: reducing) the symptoms. The author, a clinical nutritionist by academic background, tackles this in large part via being mindful about what one eats, in the context of the gut and endocrine system specifically.

It’s not just “have a gut healthy diet and eat foods with these nutrients”, though (although yes: also that). Rather, the author walks us through in-depth quizzes and lab testing advice, to advise the reader on how to understand the root cause of your PCOS symptoms, and then address each of those with an individualized management plan.

The style is on the low-end of pop-science, notwithstanding the clinically-informed content. For those who like a very chatty informal approach, you’ll find this one perfect. For those who don’t, well, you won’t find this one perfect, but you will most likely find it informative all the same.

Bottom line: if you or someone you care about (do you know 5 women?) has PCOS, the information in here could make a difference.

Click here to check out PCOS Repair Protocol, and suffer less!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • The Immune System Recovery Plan – by Dr. Susan Blum
  • Small Pleasures – by Ryan Riley
    Indulge in Small Pleasures for a mental health boost through comforting, restoring, and pleasurable recipes. Bring joy back to your kitchen!

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Chetna’s Healthy Indian – by Chetna Makan

    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.

    Indian food is wonderful—a subjective opinion perhaps, but a popular view, and one this reviewer certainly shares. And of course, cooking with plenty of vegetables and spices is a great way to get a lot of health benefits.

    There are usually downsides though, such as that in a lot of Indian cookbooks, every second thing is deep-fried, and what’s not deep-fried contains an entire day or more’s saturated fat content in ghee, and a lot of sides have more than their fair share of sugar.

    This book fixes all that, by offering 80 recipes that prioritize health without sacrificing flavor.

    The recipes are, as the title suggests, vegetarian, though many are not vegan (yogurt and cheese featuring in many recipes). That said, even if you are vegan, it’s pretty easy to veganize those with the obvious plant-based substitutions. If you have soy yogurt and can whip up vegan paneer yourself (here’s our own recipe for that), you’re pretty much sorted.

    The cookbook strikes a good balance of being neither complicated nor “did we really need a recipe for this?” basic, and delivers value in all of its recipes. The ingredients, often a worry for many Westerners, should be easily found if you have a well-stocked supermarket near you; there’s nothing obscure here.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to cook more Indian food and want your food to be exciting without also making your blood pressure exciting, then this is an excellent book for keeping you well-nourished, body and soul.

    Click here to check out Chetna’s Healthy Indian, and spice up your culinary repertoire!

    Share This Post

  • Statins: His & Hers?

    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 Hidden Complexities of Statins and Cardiovascular Disease (CVD)

    This is Dr. Barbara Roberts. She’s a cardiologist and the Director of the Women’s Cardiac Center at one of the Brown University Medical School teaching hospitals. She’s an Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine and takes care of patients, teaches medical students, and does clinical research. She specializes in gender-specific aspects of heart disease, and in heart disease prevention.

    We previously reviewed Dr. Barbara Roberts’ excellent book “The Truth About Statins: Risks and Alternatives to Cholesterol-Lowering Drugs”. It prompted some requests to do a main feature about Statins, so we’re doing it today. It’s under the auspices of “Expert Insights” as we’ll be drawing almost entirely from Dr. Roberts’ work.

    So, what are the risks of statins?

    According to Dr. Roberts, one of the biggest risks is not just drug side-effects or anything like that, but rather, what they simply won’t treat. This is because statins will lower LDL (bad) cholesterol levels, without necessarily treating the underlying cause.

    Imagine you got Covid, and it’s one of the earlier strains that’s more likely deadly than “merely” debilitating.

    You’re coughing and your throat feels like you gargled glass.

    Your doctor gives you a miracle cough medicine that stops your coughing and makes your throat feel much better.

    (Then a few weeks later, you die, because this did absolutely nothing for the underlying problem)

    You see the problem?

    Are there problematic side-effects too, though?

    There can be. But of course, all drugs can have side effects! So that’s not necessarily news, but what’s relevant here is the kind of track these side-effects can lead one down.

    For example, Dr. Roberts cites a case in which a woman’s LDL levels were high and she was prescribed simvastatin (Zocor), 20mg/day. Here’s what happened, in sequence:

    1. She started getting panic attacks. So, her doctor prescribed her sertraline (Zoloft) (a very common SSRI antidepressant) and when that didn’t fix it, paroxetine (Paxil). This didn’t work either… because the problem was not actually her mental health. The panic attacks got worse…
    2. Then, while exercising, she started noticing progressive arm and leg weakness. Her doctor finally took her off the simvastatin, and temporarily switched to ezetimibe (Zetia), a less powerful nonstatin drug that blocks cholesterol absorption, which change eased her arm and leg problem.
    3. As the Zetia was a stopgap measure, the doctor put her on atorvastatin (Lipitor). Now she got episodes of severe chest pressure, and a skyrocketing heart rate. She also got tremors and lost her body temperature regulation.
    4. So the doctor stopped the atorvastatin and tried rosovastatin (Crestor), on which she now suffered exhaustion (we’re not surprised, by this point) and muscle pains in her arms and chest.
    5. So the doctor stopped the rosovastatin and tried lovastatin (Mevacor), and now she had the same symptoms as before, plus light-headedness.
    6. So the doctor stopped the lovastatin and tried fluvastatin (Lescol). Same thing happened.
    7. So he stopped the fluvastatin and tried pravastatin (Pravachol), without improvement.
    8. So finally he took her off all these statins because the high LDL was less deleterious to her life than all these things.
    9. She did her own research, and went back to the doctor to ask for cholestyramine (Questran), which is a bile acid sequestrent and nothing to do with statins. She also asked for a long-acting niacin. In high doses, niacin (one of the B-vitamins) raises HDL (good) cholesterol, lowers LDL, and lowers tryglycerides.
    10. Her own non-statin self-prescription (with her doctor’s signature) worked, and she went back to her life, her work, and took up running.

    Quite a treatment journey! Want to know more about the option that actually worked?

    Read: Bile Acid Resins or Sequestrants

    What are the gender differences you/she mentioned?

    A lot of this is still pending more research—basically it’s a similar problem in heart disease to one we’ve previously talked about with regard to diabetes. Diabetes disproportionately affects black people, while diabetes research disproportionately focuses on white people.

    In this case, most heart disease research has focused on men, with women often not merely going unresearched, but also often undiagnosed and untreated until it’s too late. And the treatments, if prescribed? Assumed to be the same as for men.

    Dr. Roberts tells of how medicine is taught:

    ❝When I was in medical school, my professors took the “bikini approach” to women’s health: women’s health meant breasts and reproductive organs. Otherwise the prototypical patient was presented as a man.❞

    There has been some research done with statins and women, though! Just, still not a lot. But we do know for example that some statins can be especially useful for treating women’s atherosclerosis—with a 50% success rate, rather than 31% for men.

    For lowering LDL, it can work but is generally not so hot in women.

    Fun fact:

    In men:

    • High total cholesterol
    • High non-HDL cholesterol
    • High LDL cholesterol
    • Low HDL cholesterol

    …are all significantly associated with an increased risk of death from CVD.

    In women:

    …levels of LDL cholesterol even more than 190 were associated with only a small, statistically insignificant increased risk of dying from CVD.

    So…

    The fact that women derive less benefit from a medicine that mainly lowers LDL cholesterol, may be because elevated LDL cholesterol is less harmful to women than it is to men.

    And also: Treatment and Response to Statins: Gender-related Differences

    And for that matter: Women Versus Men: Is There Equal Benefit and Safety from Statins?*

    Definitely a case where Betteridge’s Law of Headlines applies!

    What should women do to avoid dying of CVD, then?

    First, quick reminder of our general disclaimer: we can’t give medical advice and nothing here comprises such. However… One particularly relevant thing we found illuminating in Dr. Roberts’ work was this observation:

    The metabolic syndrome is diagnosed if you have three (or more) out of five of the following:

    1. Abdominal obesity (waist >35″ if a woman or >40″ if a man)
    2. Fasting blood sugars of 100mg/dl or more
    3. Fasting triglycerides of 150mg/dl or more
    4. Blood pressure of 130/85 or higher
    5. HDL <50 if a woman or <40 if a man

    And yet… because these things can be addressed with exercise and a healthy diet, which neither pharmaceutical companies nor insurance companies have a particular stake in, there’s a lot of focus instead on LDL levels (since there are a flock of statins that can be sold be lower them)… Which, Dr. Roberts says, is not nearly as critical for women.

    So women end up getting prescribed statins that cause panic attacks and all those things we mentioned earlier… To lower our LDL, which isn’t nearly as big a factor as the other things.

    In summary:

    Statins do have their place, especially for men. They can, however, mask underlying problems that need treatment—which becomes counterproductive.

    When it comes to women, statins are—in broad terms—statistically not as good. They are a little more likely to be helpful specifically in cases of atherosclerosis, whereby they have a 50/50 chance of helping.

    For women in particular, it may be worthwhile looking into alternative non-statin drugs, and, for everyone: diet and exercise.

    Further reading: How Can I Safely Come Off Statins?

    Share This Post

  • The Green Roasting Tin – by Rukmini Iyer

    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.

    You may be wondering: “do I really need a book to tell me to put some vegetables in a roasting tin and roast them?” and maybe not, but the book offers a lot more than that.

    Indeed, the author notes “this book was slightly in danger of becoming the gratin and tart book, because I love both”, but don’t worry, most of the recipes are—as you might expect—very healthy.

    As for formatting: the 75 recipes are divided first into vegan or vegetarian, and then into quick/medium/slow, in terms of how long they take.

    However, even the “slow” recipes don’t actually take more effort, just, more time in the oven.

    One of the greatest strengths of this book is that not only does it offer a wide selection of wholesome mains, but also, if you’re putting on a big spread, these can easily double up as high-class low-effort sides.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to eat more vegetables in 2024 but want to make it delicious and with little effort, put this book on your Christmas list!

    Click here to check out The Green Roasting Tin, and level-up yours!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • The Immune System Recovery Plan – by Dr. Susan Blum
  • Fast. Feast. Repeat – by Dr. Gin Stephens

    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’ve reviewed intermittent fasting books before, so what makes this one different?

    The title “Fast. Feast. Repeat.” doesn’t give much away; after all, we already know that that’s what intermittent fasting is.

    After taking the reader though the basics of how intermittent fasting works and what it does for the body, much of the rest of the book is given over to improvements.

    That’s what the real strength of this book is: ways to make intermittent fasting more efficient, including how to avoid plateaus. After all, sometimes it can seem like the only way to push further with intermittent fasting is to restrict the eating window further. Not so!

    Instead, Dr. Stephens gives us ways to keep confusing our metabolism (in a good way) if, for example, we had a weight loss goal we haven’t met yet.

    Best of all, this comes without actually having to eat less.

    Bottom line: if you want to be in good physical health, and/but also believe that life is for living and you enjoy eating food, then this book can resolve that age-old dilemma!

    Click here to check out Fast. Feast. Repeat., and supercharge your health without sacrificing happiness!

    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:

  • Neuroaffirming care values the strengths and differences of autistic people, those with ADHD or other profiles. Here’s how

    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’ve come a long way in terms of understanding that everyone thinks, interacts and experiences the world differently. In the past, autistic people, people with attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) and other profiles were categorised by what they struggled with or couldn’t do.

    The concept of neurodiversity, developed by autistic activists in the 1990s, is an emerging area. It promotes the idea that different brains (“neurotypes”) are part of the natural variation of being human – just like “biodiversity” – and they are vital for our survival.

    This idea is now being applied to research and to care. At the heart of the National Autism Strategy, currently in development, is neurodiversity-affirming (neuroaffirming) care and practice. But what does this look like?

    Unsplash

    Reframing differences

    Neurodiversity challenges the traditional medical model of disability, which views neurological differences solely through a lens of deficits and disorders to be treated or cured.

    Instead, it reframes it as a different, and equally valuable, way of experiencing and navigating the world. It emphasises the need for brains that are different from what society considers “neurotypical”, based on averages and expectations. The term “neurodivergent” is applied to Autistic people, those with ADHD, dyslexia and other profiles.

    Neuroaffirming care can take many forms depending on each person’s needs and context. It involves accepting and valuing different ways of thinking, learning and experiencing the world. Rather than trying to “fix” or change neurodivergent people to fit into a narrow idea of what’s considered “normal” or “better”, neuroaffirming care takes a person-centered, strengths-based approach. It aims to empower and support unique needs and strengths.

    girl sits on couch with colourful fidget toy
    Neuroaffirming care can look different in a school or clinical setting. Shutterstock/Inna Reznik

    Adaptation and strengths

    Drawing on the social model of disability, neuroaffirming care acknowledges there is often disability associated with being different, especially in a world not designed for neurodivergent people. This shift focuses away from the person having to adapt towards improving the person-environment fit.

    This can include providing accommodations and adapting environments to make them more accessible. More importantly, it promotes “thriving” through greater participation in society and meaningful activities.

    At school, at work, in clinic

    In educational settings, this might involve using universal design for learning that benefits all learners.

    For example, using systematic synthetic phonics to teach reading and spelling for students with dyslexia can benefit all students. It also could mean incorporating augmentative and alternative communication, such as speech-generating devices, into the classroom.

    Teachers might allow extra time for tasks, or allow stimming (repetitive movements or noises) for self-regulation and breaks when needed.

    In therapy settings, neuroaffirming care may mean a therapist grows their understanding of autistic culture and learns about how positive social identity can impact self-esteem and wellbeing.

    They may make efforts to bridge the gap in communication between different neurotypes, known as the double empathy problem. For example, the therapist may avoid relying on body language or facial expressions (often different in autistic people) to interpret how a client is feeling, instead of listening carefully to what the client says.

    Affirming therapy approaches with children involve “tuning into” their preferred way of communicating, playing and engaging. This can bring meaningful connection rather than compliance to “neurotypical” ways of playing and relating.

    In workplaces, it can involve flexible working arrangements (hours, patterns and locations), allowing different modes of communication (such as written rather than phone calls) and low-sensory workspaces (for example, low-lighting, low-noise office spaces).

    In public spaces, it can look like providing a “sensory space”, such as at large concerts, where neurodivergent people can take a break and self-regulate if needed. And staff can be trained to recognise, better understand and assist with hidden disabilities.

    Combining lived experience and good practice

    Care is neuroaffirmative when it centres “lived experience” in its design and delivery, and positions people with disability as experts.

    As a result of being “different”, people in the neurodivergent community experience high rates of bullying and abuse. So neuroaffirming care should be combined with a trauma-informed approach, which acknowledges the need to understand a person’s life experiences to provide effective care.

    Culturally responsive care acknowledges limited access to support for culturally and racially marginalised Autistic people and higher rates of LGBTQIA+ identification in the neurodivergent community.

    open meeting room with people putting ideas on colourful notes on wall
    In the workplace, we can acknowledge how difference can fuel ideas. Unsplash/Jason Goodman

    Authentic selves

    The draft National Autism Strategy promotes awareness that our population is neurodiverse. It hopes to foster a more inclusive and understanding society.

    It emphasises the societal and public health responsibilities for supporting neurodivergent people via public education, training, policy and legislation. By providing spaces and places where neurodivergent people can be their authentic, unmasked selves, we are laying the foundations for feeling seen, valued, safe and, ultimately, happy and thriving.

    The author would like to acknowledge the assistance of psychologist Victoria Gottliebsen in drafting this article. Victoria is a member of the Oversight Council for the National Autism Strategy.

    Josephine Barbaro, Associate Professor, Principal Research Fellow, Psychologist, La Trobe University

    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:

  • Taking A Trip Through The Evidence On Psychedelics

    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.

    In Tuesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your opinions on the medicinal use of psychedelics, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

    • 32% said “This is a good, evidence-based way to treat many brain disorders”
    • 32% said “There are some benefits, but they don’t outweigh the risks”
    • 20% said “This can help a select few people only; useless for the majority”
    • 16% said “This is hippie hogwash and hearsay; wishful thinking at best”

    Quite a spread of answers, so what does the science say?

    This is hippie hogwash and hearsay; wishful thinking at best! True or False?

    False! We’re tackling this one first, because it’s easiest to answer:

    There are some moderately-well established [usually moderate] clinical benefits from some psychedelics for some people.

    If that sounds like a very guarded statement, it is. Part of this is because “psychedelics” is an umbrella term; perhaps we should have conducted separate polls for psilocybin, MDMA, ayahuasca, LSD, ibogaine, etc, etc.

    In fact: maybe we will do separate main features for some of these, as there is a lot to say about each of them separately.

    Nevertheless, looking at the spread of research as it stands for psychedelics as a category, the answers are often similar across the board, even when the benefits/risks may differ from drug to drug.

    To speak in broad terms, if we were to make a research summary for each drug it would look approximately like this in each case:

    • there has been research into this, but not nearly enough, as “the war on drugs” may well have manifestly been lost (the winner of the war being: drugs; still around and more plentiful than ever), but it did really cramp science for a few decades.
    • the studies are often small, heterogenous (often using moderately wealthy white student-age population samples), and with a low standard of evidence (i.e. the methodology often has some holes that leave room for reasonable doubt).
    • the benefits recorded are often small and transient.
    • in their favor, though, the risks are also generally recorded as being quite low, assuming proper safe administration*.

    *Illustrative example:

    Person A takes MDMA in a club, dances their cares away, has had only alcohol to drink, sweats buckets but they don’t care because they love everyone and they see how we’re all one really and it all makes sense to them and then they pass out from heat exhaustion and dehydration and suffer kidney damage (not to mention a head injury when falling) and are hospitalized and could die;

    Person B takes MDMA in a lab, is overwhelmed with a sense of joy and the clarity of how their participation in the study is helping humanity; they want to hug the researcher and express their gratitude; the researcher reminds them to drink some water.

    Which is not to say that a lab is the only safe manner of administration; there are many possible setups for supervised usage sites. But it does mean that the risks are often as much environmental as they are risks inherent to the drug itself.

    Others are more inherent to the drug itself, such as adverse cardiac events for some drugs (ibogaine is one that definitely needs medical supervision, for example).

    For those who’d like to see numbers and clinical examples of the bullet points we gave above, here you go; this is a great (and very readable) overview:

    NIH | Evidence Brief: Psychedelic Medications for Mental Health and Substance Use Disorders

    Notwithstanding the word “brief” (intended in the sense of: briefing), this is not especially brief and is rather an entire book (available for free, right there!), but we do recommend reading it if you have time.

    This can help a select few people only; useless for the majority: True or False?

    True, technically, insofar as the evidence points to these drugs being useful for such things as depression, anxiety, PTSD, addiction, etc, and estimates of people who struggle with mental health issues in general is often cited as being 1 in 4, or 1 in 5. Of course, many people may just have moderate anxiety, or a transient period of depression, etc; many, meanwhile, have it worth.

    In short: there is a very large minority of people who suffer from mental health issues that, for each issue, there may be one or more psychedelic that could help.

    This is a good, evidence-based way to treat many brain disorders: True or False?

    True if and only if we’re willing to accept the so far weak evidence that we discussed above. False otherwise, while the jury remains out.

    One thing in its favor though is that while the evidence is weak, it’s not contradictory, insofar as the large preponderance of evidence says such therapies probably do work (there aren’t many studies that returned negative results); the evidence is just weak.

    When a thousand scientists say “we’re not completely sure, but this looks like it helps; we need to do more research”, then it’s good to believe them on all counts—the positivity and the uncertainty.

    This is a very different picture than we saw when looking at, say, ear candling or homeopathy (things that the evidence says simply do not work).

    We haven’t been linking individual studies so far, because that book we linked above has many, and the number of studies we’d have to list would be:

    n = number of kinds of psychedelic drugs x number of conditions to be treated

    e.g. how does psilocybin fare for depression, eating disorders, anxiety, addiction, PTSD, this, that, the other; now how does ayahuasca fare for each of those, and so on for each drug and condition; at least 25 or 30 as a baseline number, and we don’t have that room.

    But here are a few samples to finish up:

    In closing…

    The general scientific consensus is presently “many of those drugs may ameliorate many of those conditions, but we need a lot more research before we can say for sure”.

    On a practical level, an important take-away from this is twofold:

    • drugs, even those popularly considered recreational, aren’t ontologically evil, generally do have putative merits, and have been subject to a lot of dramatization/sensationalization, especially by the US government in its famous war on drugs.
    • drugs, even those popularly considered beneficial and potentially lifechangingly good, are still capable of doing great harm if mismanaged, so if putting aside “don’t do drugs” as a propaganda of the past, then please do still hold onto “don’t do drugs alone”; trained professional supervision is a must for safety.

    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: