Easing Election Stress & Anxiety

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.

At the time of writing, the US is about to have a presidential election. Most of our readers are Americans, and in any case, what the US does tends to affect most of the world, so certainly many readers in other countries will be experiencing stress and anxiety about it too.

We’re a health science publication, not a political outlet, so we’ll refrain from commenting on any candidates or campaign policies, and we’d also like to be clear we are not urging you to any particular action politically—our focus today is simply about mental health.

First, CBT what can be CBT’d

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) is far from a panacea, but it’s often a very good starting point. And when it seems the stakes are high, it’s easy to fall into such cognitive distortions as “crystal ball” and “catastrophization”, that is to say, predicting the future and feeling the impact of that (probably undesired version of the) future, and also feeling like it will be the end of the world.

Recognizing these processes and how they work, is the first step to managing our feelings about them.

Learn more: The Art of Being Unflappable (Tricks For Daily Life)

Next, DBT what can be DBT’d

A lot of CBT hinges on the assumption that our assumptions are incorrect. For example, that our friend does not secretly despise us, that our spouse is not about to leave us, that the symptoms we are experiencing are not cancer, and in this case, that the election outcome will not go badly, and if it does, the consequences will be less severe than imagined.

But… What if our concerns are, in fact, fully justified? Here’s where Dialectic Behavior Therapy (DBT) comes in, and with it, what therapists call “radical acceptance”.

In other words, we accept up front the idea that maybe it’s going to be terrible and that will truly suck, and then either:

  • there’s nothing we can reasonably do about it now (so worrying just means you’ll suffer twice), or
  • there is something we can reasonably do about it now (so we can go do that thing)

After doing the thing (if appropriate), defer processing the outcome of the election until after the election. There is no point in wasting energy to worry before then. In a broadly two-party system where things are usually close between those two largest parties, there’s something close to a 50% chance of an outcome that’s, at least, not the worst you feared.

Learn more: CBT, DBT, & Radical Acceptance

Lastly, empower yourself with Behavioral Activation (BA)

Whatever the outcome of any given election, the world will keep turning, and the individual battles about any given law or policy or such will continue to go on. That’s not to say an election won’t change things—it will—but there will always still be stuff to do on a grassroots level to make the world a better place, no matter what politician has been elected.

Being involved in doing things on a community level will not only help banish any feelings of despair (and if you got the election outcome you wanted, it’ll help you feel involved), but also, it can give you a sense of control, and can even form a part of the “ikigai” that is often talked about as one of the pillars of healthy longevity.

Learn more: What’s Your Ikigai?

And if you like videos, then enjoy this one (narrated by the ever soothing-voiced Alain de Botton):

Watch now: How To Escape From A Despairing Mood (4:46) ← it also has a text version if you prefer that

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Escape Self-Sabotage
  • Anticancer: A New Way Of Life – by Dr. David Servan-Schreiber
    Dr. Servan-Schreiber’s “Anticancer” guides readers on shaping a body environment resistant to cancer, blending personal experience with scientific insight for holistic wellbeing.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Is Sugar The New Smoking?

    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.

    It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!

    Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!

    In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!

    As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!

    So, no question/request too big or small 😎

    ❝Could you do a this or that of which. Is worse, smoking cigarettes or having a sweet tooth? Also, perhaps have us evaluate one part of newsletter at a time, rather than overall. I especially appreciate your book reviews and often find them through my library system.❞

    We’re glad you enjoy the book reviews! We certainly enjoy reading many books to write about them for you.

    As for the idea having readers evaluate one part of the newsletter at a time, rather than overall, there is a technical limitation that embedded polls are very large, data-wise, so if we were to do a poll for each section, the email would then get clipped by gmail and other email providers. However, you are always more than welcome to do as you’ve done, and include comments about what section(s) you took the most value from.

    Now, onto your main question/request: as it doesn’t quite fit the usual format for our This vs That section, we’ve opted to do it as a main feature here 🙂

    So, let’s get into it…

    Not a zero-sum game

    First, let’s be clear that for most people there is no pressing reason that this should be an either/or decision. There is nothing inherent to quitting either one that makes the other loom larger.

    However, that said, if you’re (speaking generally here, and not making any presumptions about the asker) currently smoking regularly and partaking of a lot of added sugar, then you may be wondering which you should prioritize quitting first—as it is indeed generally recommended to only try to quit one thing at a time.

    Indeed, we wrote previously, as a guideline for “what to do in one what order”:

    Not sure where to start? We suggest this order of priorities, unless you have a major health condition that makes something else a higher priority:

    1. If you smoke, stop
    2. If you drink, reduce, or ideally stop
    3. Improve your diet

    About that diet…

    Worry less about what to exclude, and instead focus on adding more variety of fruit/veg.

    See also: Level-Up Your Fiber Intake! (Without Difficulty Or Discomfort)

    That said, if you’re looking for things to cut, sugar is a top candidate (and red meat is in clear second place albeit some way below)

    That’s truncated from a larger list, but those were the top items.

    You can read the rest in full, here: The Best Few Interventions For The Best Health: These Top 5 Things Make The Biggest Difference

    The flipside of this “you can quit both” reality is that the inverse is also true: much like how having one disease makes it more likely we will get another, unhealthy habits tend to come in clusters too, as each will weaken our resolve with regard to the others. Thus, there is a sort of “comorbidity of habits” that occurs.

    The good news is: the same can be said for healthy habits, so they (just like unhealthy habits) can support each other, stack, and compound. This means that while it may seem harder to quit two bad habits than one, in actual fact, the more bad habits you quit, the more it’ll become easy to quit the others. And similarly, the more good habits you adopt, the more it’ll become easy to adopt others.

    See also: How To Really Pick Up (And Keep!) Those Habits

    So, let’s keep that in mind, while we then look at the cases against smoking, and sugar:

    The case against smoking

    This is perhaps one of the easiest cases to make in the entirety of the health science world, and the only difficult part is knowing where to start, when there’s so much.

    The World Health Organization leads with these key facts, on its tobacco fact sheet:

    • Tobacco kills up to half of its users who don’t quit.
    • Tobacco kills more than 8 million people each year, including an estimated 1.3 million non-smokers who are exposed to second-hand smoke.
    • Around 80% of the world’s 1.3 billion tobacco users live in low- and middle-income countries.
    • In 2020, 22.3% of the world’s population used tobacco: 36.7% of men and 7.8% of women.
    • To address the tobacco epidemic, WHO Member States adopted the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) in 2003. Currently 182 countries are Parties to this treaty.
    • The WHO MPOWER measures are in line with the WHO FCTC and have been shown to save lives and reduce costs from averted healthcare expenditure.

    Source: World Health Organization | Tobacco

    Now, some of those are just interesting sociological considerations (well, they are of practical use to the WHO whose job it is to offer global health policy guidelines, but for us at 10almonds, with the more modest goal of helping individual people lead their best healthy lives, there’s not so much that we can do with the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, for example), but for the individual smoker, the first two are really very serious, so let’s take a closer look:

    ❝Tobacco kills up to half of its users who don’t quit.❞

    A bold claim, backed up by at least three very large, very compelling studies:

    ❝Tobacco kills more than 8 million people each year, including an estimated 1.3 million non-smokers who are exposed to second-hand smoke.

    The WHO’s cited source for this was gatekept in a way we couldn’t access (and so probably most of our readers can’t either), but take a look at what the CDC has to say for the US alone (bearing in mind the US’s population of a little over 300,000,000, which is just 3.75% of the global population of a little over 8,000,000,000):

    smoking causes more than 480,000 deaths [in the US] annually, with an estimated 41,000 deaths from secondhand smoke exposure, and it can reduce a person’s life expectancy by 10 years. Quitting smoking before the age of 40 reduces the risk of dying from smoking-related disease by about 90%❞

    If we now remember that third bullet point, that said “Around 80% of the world’s 1.3 billion tobacco users live in low- and middle-income countries.”, then we can imagine the numbers are worse for many other countries, including large-population countries that have a lower median income than the US, such as India and Brazil.

    Source for the CDC comment: Tobacco-Related Mortality

    See also: AAMC | Smoking is still the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S.

    We only have so much room here, but if that’s not enough…

    More than 100 reasons to quit tobacco

    The case against sugar

    We reviewed an interesting book about this:

    The Case Against Sugar – by Gary Taubes

    But suffice it to say, added sugar is a big health problem; not in the same league as tobacco, but it’s big, because of how it messes with our metabolism (and when our metabolism goes wrong, everything else goes wrong):

    From Apples to Bees, and High-Fructose Cs: Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?

    The epidemiology of sugar consumption and related mortality is harder to give clear stats about than smoking, because there’s not a clear yes/no indicator, and cause and effect are harder to establish when the waters are so muddied by other factors. But for comparison, we’ll note that compared to the 480,000 deaths caused by tobacco in the US annually, the total death to diabetes (which is not necessarily “caused by sugar consumption”, but there’s at least an obvious link when it comes to type 2 diabetes and refined carbohydrates) was 101,209 deaths due to diabetes in 2022:

    National Center for Health Statistics | Diabetes

    Now, superficially, that looks like “ok, so smoking is just under 5x more deadly”, but it’s important to remember that almost everyone eats added sugar, whereas a minority of people smoke, and those are mortality per total US population figures, not mortality per user of the substance in question. So in fact, smoking is, proportionally to how many people smoke, many times more deadly than diabetes, which currently ranks 8th in the “top causes of death” list.

    Note: we recognize that you did say “having a sweet tooth” rather than “consuming added sugar”, but it’s worth noting that artificial sweeteners are not a get-out-of-illness-free card either:

    The Problem With Sweeteners

    Let’s get back to sugar though, as while it’s a very different beast than tobacco, it is arguably addictive also, by multiple mechanisms of addiction:

    The Not-So-Sweet Science Of Sugar Addiction

    That said, those mechanisms of addiction are not necessarily as strong as some others, so in the category of what’s easy or hard to quit, this is on the easier end of things—not that that means it’s easy, just, quitting many drugs is harder. In any case, it can be done:

    When It’s More Than “Just” Cravings: Beat Food Addictions!

    In summary

    Neither are good for the health, but tobacco is orders of magnitude worse, and should be the priority to quit, unless your doctor(s) tell you otherwise because of your personal situation, and even then, try to get multiple opinions to be sure.

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Tribulus Terrestris For Testosterone?

    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.

    (Clinical) Trials and Tribul-ations

    In the category of supplements that have enjoyed use as aphrodisiacs, Tribulus terrestris (also called caltrop, goat’s head, gokshura, or puncture vine) has a long history, having seen wide use in both Traditional Chinese Medicine and in Ayurveda.

    It’s been used for other purposes too, and has been considered a “general wellness” plant.

    So, what does the science say?

    Good news: very conclusive evidence!

    Bad news: the conclusion is not favorable…

    Scientists are known for their careful use of clinical language, and it’s very rare for a study/review to claim something as proven (scientists leave journalists to do that part), and in this case, when it comes to Tribulus’s usefulness as a testosterone-enhancing libido-boosting supplement…

    ❝analysis of empirical evidence from a comprehensive review of available literature proved this hypothesis wrong❞

    ~ Drs. Neychev & Mitev

    Strong words! You can read it in full here; they do make some concessions along the way (e.g. mentioning unclear or contradictory findings, suggesting that it may have some effect, but by an as-yet unknown mechanism if it does—although some potential effect on nitric oxide levels has been hypothesized, which is reasonable if so, as NO does feature in arousal-signalling), but the general conclusion is “no, this doesn’t have androgen-enhancing properties”:

    Pro-sexual and androgen enhancing effects of Tribulus terrestris L.: Fact or Fiction

    That’s a review though, what about taking a look at a representative RCT? Here we go:

    ❝Tribulus terrestris was not more effective than placebo on improving symptoms of erectile dysfunction or serum total testosterone❞

    ~ Dr. Santos et al.

    Read more: Tribulus terrestris versus placebo in the treatment of erectile dysfunction: A prospective, randomized, double-blind study

    As a performance-enhancer in sport

    We’ll be brief here: it doesn’t seem to work and it may not be safe:

    Insights into Supplements with Tribulus Terrestris used by Athletes

    From sport, into general wellness?

    Finally, a study that finds it may be useful for something!

    ❝Overall, participants supplemented with TT displayed significant improvements in lipid profile. Inflammatory and hematological biomarkers showed moderate beneficial effects with no significant changes on renal biomarkers. No positive effects were observed on the immune system response. Additionally, no TT-induced toxicity was reported.

    In conclusion, there was no clear evidence of the beneficial effects of TT supplementation on muscle damage markers and hormonal behavior.❞

    ~ Dr. Fernández-Lázaro et al.

    Read more: Effects of Tribulus terrestris L. on Sport and Health Biomarkers in Physically Active Adult Males: A Systematic Review

    About those lipids…

    Animal studies have shown that it may not only improve lipid profiles, but also may partially repair the endothelial dysfunction resulting from hyperlipidemia:

    Influence of Tribulus terrestris extract on lipid profile and endothelial structure in developing atherosclerotic lesions in the aorta of rabbits on a high-cholesterol diet

    Want to try some?

    In the unlikely event that today’s research review has inspired you with an urge to try Tribulus terrestris, here’s an example product on Amazon

    If on the other hand you’d like to actually increase testosterone levels, then we suggest:

    Topping Up Testosterone? ← a previous main feature did earlier this year

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Passion Fruit vs Persimmon – 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 passion fruit to persimmon, we picked the passion fruit.

    Why?

    You may be wondering: “what is this fruit passionate about?” and the answer is: delivering nutrients of many kinds!

    Looking at the macros first, passion fruit has a little more protein and a lot more fiber, while persimmon has more carbs. This means that while persimmon’s glycemic index isn’t bad, passion fruit’s glycemic index is a lot lower.

    In terms of vitamins, passion fruit has a lot more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B6, B9, E, K, and choline, while persimmon has more vitamin C. For the record passion fruit is also a good source of vitamin C, with a cup of passion fruit already giving a day’s daily dose of vitamin C, but persimmon gives twice that. Still, that’s a 8:1 win for passion fruit.

    When it comes to minerals, passion fruit has more copper, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while persimmon has more calcium and iron, meaning a 6:2 win for passion fruit.

    Adding up the three convincing individual victories shows a clear overall win for passion fruit.

    Enjoy (passionately, even)!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Escape Self-Sabotage
  • 4 Ways Vaccine Skeptics Mislead You on Measles and More

    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.

    Measles is on the rise in the United States. In the first quarter of this year, the number of cases was about 17 times what it was, on average, during the same period in each of the four years before, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Half of the people infected — mainly children — have been hospitalized.

    It’s going to get worse, largely because a growing number of parents are deciding not to get their children vaccinated against measles as well as diseases like polio and pertussis. Unvaccinated people, or those whose immunization status is unknown, account for 80% of the measles cases this year. Many parents have been influenced by a flood of misinformation spouted by politicians, podcast hosts, and influential figures on television and social media. These personalities repeat decades-old notions that erode confidence in the established science backing routine childhood vaccines. KFF Health News examined the rhetoric and explains why it’s misguided:

    The No-Big-Deal Trope

    A common distortion is that vaccines aren’t necessary because the diseases they prevent are not very dangerous, or too rare to be of concern. Cynics accuse public health officials and the media of fear-mongering about measles even as 19 states report cases.

    For example, an article posted on the website of the National Vaccine Information Center — a regular source of vaccine misinformation — argued that a resurgence in concern about the disease “is ‘sky is falling’ hype.” It went on to call measles, mumps, chicken pox, and influenza “politically incorrect to get.”

    Measles kills roughly 2 of every 1,000 children infected, according to the CDC. If that seems like a bearable risk, it’s worth pointing out that a far larger portion of children with measles will require hospitalization for pneumonia and other serious complications. For every 10 measles cases, one child with the disease develops an ear infection that can lead to permanent hearing loss. Another strange effect is that the measles virus can destroy a person’s existing immunity, meaning they’ll have a harder time recovering from influenza and other common ailments.

    Measles vaccines have averted the deaths of about 94 million people, mainly children, over the past 50 years, according to an April analysis led by the World Health Organization. Together with immunizations against polio and other diseases, vaccines have saved an estimated 154 million lives globally.

    Some skeptics argue that vaccine-preventable diseases are no longer a threat because they’ve become relatively rare in the U.S. (True — due to vaccination.) This reasoning led Florida’s surgeon general, Joseph Ladapo, to tell parents that they could send their unvaccinated children to school amid a measles outbreak in February. “You look at the headlines and you’d think the sky was falling,” Ladapo said on a News Nation newscast. “There’s a lot of immunity.”

    As this lax attitude persuades parents to decline vaccination, the protective group immunity will drop, and outbreaks will grow larger and faster. A rapid measles outbreak hit an undervaccinated population in Samoa in 2019, killing 83 people within four months. A chronic lack of measles vaccination in the Democratic Republic of the Congo led to more than 5,600 people dying from the disease in massive outbreaks last year.

    The ‘You Never Know’ Trope

    Since the earliest days of vaccines, a contingent of the public has considered them bad because they’re unnatural, as compared with nature’s bounty of infections and plagues. “Bad” has been redefined over the decades. In the 1800s, vaccine skeptics claimed that smallpox vaccines caused people to sprout horns and behave like beasts. More recently, they blame vaccines for ailments ranging from attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder to autism to immune system disruption. Studies don’t back the assertions. However, skeptics argue that their claims remain valid because vaccines haven’t been adequately tested.

    In fact, vaccines are among the most studied medical interventions. Over the past century, massive studies and clinical trials have tested vaccines during their development and after their widespread use. More than 12,000 people took part in clinical trials of the most recent vaccine approved to prevent measles, mumps, and rubella. Such large numbers allow researchers to detect rare risks, which are a major concern because vaccines are given to millions of healthy people.

    To assess long-term risks, researchers sift through reams of data for signals of harm. For example, a Danish group analyzed a database of more than 657,000 children and found that those who had been vaccinated against measles as babies were no more likely to later be diagnosed with autism than those who were not vaccinated. In another study, researchers analyzed records from 805,000 children born from 1990 through 2001 and found no evidence to back a concern that multiple vaccinations might impair children’s immune systems.

    Nonetheless, people who push vaccine misinformation, like candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., dismiss massive, scientifically vetted studies. For example, Kennedy argues that clinical trials of new vaccines are unreliable because vaccinated kids aren’t compared with a placebo group that gets saline solution or another substance with no effect. Instead, many modern trials compare updated vaccines with older ones. That’s because it’s unethical to endanger children by giving them a sham vaccine when the protective effect of immunization is known. In a 1950s clinical trial of polio vaccines, 16 children in the placebo group died of polio and 34 were paralyzed, said Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and author of a book on the first polio vaccine.

    The Too-Much-Too-Soon Trope

    Several bestselling vaccine books on Amazon promote the risky idea that parents should skip or delay their children’s vaccines. “All vaccines on the CDC’s schedule may not be right for all children at all times,” writes Paul Thomas in his bestselling book “The Vaccine-Friendly Plan.” He backs up this conviction by saying that children who have followed “my protocol are among the healthiest in the world.”

    Since the book was published, Thomas’ medical license was temporarily suspended in Oregon and Washington. The Oregon Medical Board documented how Thomas persuaded parents to skip vaccines recommended by the CDC, and reported that he “reduced to tears” a mother who disagreed.  Several children in his care came down with pertussis and rotavirus, diseases easily prevented by vaccines, wrote the board. Thomas recommended fish oil supplements and homeopathy to an unvaccinated child with a deep scalp laceration, rather than an emergency tetanus vaccine. The boy developed severe tetanus, landing in the hospital for nearly two months, where he required intubation, a tracheotomy, and a feeding tube to survive.

    The vaccination schedule recommended by the CDC has been tailored to protect children at their most vulnerable points in life and minimize side effects. The combination measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine isn’t given for the first year of a baby’s life because antibodies temporarily passed on from their mother can interfere with the immune response. And because some babies don’t generate a strong response to that first dose, the CDC recommends a second one around the time a child enters kindergarten because measles and other viruses spread rapidly in group settings.

    Delaying MMR doses much longer may be unwise because data suggests that children vaccinated at 10 or older have a higher chance of adverse reactions, such as a seizure or fatigue.

    Around a dozen other vaccines have discrete timelines, with overlapping windows for the best response. Studies have shown that MMR vaccines may be given safely and effectively in combination with other vaccines.

    ’They Don’t Want You to Know’ Trope

    Kennedy compares the Florida surgeon general to Galileo in the introduction to Ladapo’s new book on transcending fear in public health. Just as the Roman Catholic inquisition punished the renowned astronomer for promoting theories about the universe, Kennedy suggests that scientific institutions oppress dissenting voices on vaccines for nefarious reasons.

    “The persecution of scientists and doctors who dare to challenge contemporary orthodoxies is not a new phenomenon,” Kennedy writes. His running mate, lawyer Nicole Shanahan, has campaigned on the idea that conversations about vaccine harms are censored and the CDC and other federal agencies hide data due to corporate influence.

    Claims like “they don’t want you to know” aren’t new among the anti-vaccine set, even though the movement has long had an outsize voice. The most listened-to podcast in the U.S., “The Joe Rogan Experience,” regularly features guests who cast doubt on scientific consensus. Last year on the show, Kennedy repeated the debunked claim that vaccines cause autism.

    Far from ignoring that concern, epidemiologists have taken it seriously. They have conducted more than a dozen studies searching for a link between vaccines and autism, and repeatedly found none. “We have conclusively disproven the theory that vaccines are connected to autism,” said Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz, an epidemiologist at the University of Wollongong in Australia. “So, the public health establishment tends to shut those conversations down quickly.”

    Federal agencies are transparent about seizures, arm pain, and other reactions that vaccines can cause. And the government has a program to compensate individuals whose injuries are scientifically determined to result from them. Around 1 to 3.5 out of every million doses of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine can cause a life-threatening allergic reaction; a person’s lifetime risk of death by lightning is estimated to be as much as four times as high.

    “The most convincing thing I can say is that my daughter has all her vaccines and that every pediatrician and public health person I know has vaccinated their kids,” Meyerowitz-Katz said. “No one would do that if they thought there were serious risks.”

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    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:

  • Easing Lower Back Pain

    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.

    Lower back pain often originates from an unexpected culprit: your pelvis. Similar to how your psoas can contribute to lower back pain, when your pelvis tilts forward due to tight hip flexors, it can misalign your spine, leading to discomfort and pain. As WeShape shows us in the below video, one simple stretch can help realign your pelvis and significantly ease lower back pain.

    Why Your Pelvis Matters

    Sitting for long periods causes your hip flexors to shorten, leading to an anterior pelvic tilt. This forward tilt puts pressure on your spine and SI joint, causing pain and discomfort in the lower back. To help resolve this, you can work on correcting your pelvic alignment, helping to significantly reduce this pressure and alleviate related pain. And no, this doesn’t require any spinal cord stimulation.

    Easy Variations for All

    A lot of you recognise the stretch in this video; it’s quite a well-known kneeling stretch. But, unlike other guides, WeShape also provides a fantastic variation for those who aren’t mobile enough for the kneeling variation

    So, if you can’t comfortably get down on the ground, WeShape outlines a brilliant standing variation. So, regardless of your mobility, there’s an option for you!

    See both variations here:

    Excited to reduce your lower back pain? We hope so! Let us know if you have any tips that you’d like to share with us.

    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:

  • Dating apps could have negative effects on body image and mental health, our research shows

    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.

    Around 350 million people globally use dating apps, and they amass an estimated annual revenue of more than US$5 billion. In Australia, 49% of adults report using at least one online dating app or website, with a further 27% having done so in the past.

    But while dating apps have helped many people find romantic partners, they’re not all good news.

    In a recent review, my colleagues and I found using dating apps may be linked to poorer body image, mental health and wellbeing.

    Dikushin Dmitry/Shutterstock

    We collated the evidence

    Our study was a systematic review, where we collated the results of 45 studies that looked at dating app use and how this was linked to body image, mental health or wellbeing.

    Body image refers to the perceptions or feelings a person has towards their own appearance, often relating to body size, shape and attractiveness.

    Most of the studies we included were published in 2020 onwards. The majority were carried out in Western countries (such as the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia). Just under half of studies included participants of all genders. Interestingly, 44% of studies observed men exclusively, while only 7% included just women.

    Of the 45 studies, 29 looked at the impact of dating apps on mental health and wellbeing and 22 considered the impact on body image (some looked at both). Some studies examined differences between users and non-users of dating apps, while others looked at whether intensity of dating app use (how often they’re used, how many apps are used, and so on) makes a difference.

    More than 85% of studies (19 of 22) looking at body image found significant negative relationships between dating app use and body image. Just under half of studies (14 of 29) observed negative relationships with mental health and wellbeing.

    The studies noted links with problems including body dissatisfaction, disordered eating, depression, anxiety and low self-esteem.

    A man leaning against large windows of an apartment.
    Dating apps are becoming increasingly common. But could their use harm mental health? Rachata Teyparsit/Shutterstock

    It’s important to note our research has a few limitations. For example, almost all studies included in the review were cross-sectional – studies that analyse data at a particular point in time.

    This means researchers were unable to discern whether dating apps actually cause body image, mental health and wellbeing concerns over time, or whether there is simply a correlation. They can’t rule out that in some cases the relationship may go the other way, meaning poor mental health or body image increases a person’s likelihood of using dating apps.

    Also, the studies included in the review were mostly conducted in Western regions with predominantly white participants, limiting our ability to generalise the findings to all populations.

    Why are dating apps linked to poor body image and mental health?

    Despite these limitations, there are plausible reasons to expect there may be a link between dating apps and poorer body image, mental health and wellbeing.

    Like a lot of social media, dating apps are overwhelmingly image-centric, meaning they have an emphasis on pictures or videos. Dating app users are initially exposed primarily to photos when browsing, with information such as interests or hobbies accessible only after manually clicking through to profiles.

    Because of this, users often evaluate profiles based primarily on the photos attached. Even when a user does click through to another person’s profile, whether or not they “like” someone may still often be determined primarily on the basis of physical appearance.

    This emphasis on visual content on dating apps can, in turn, cause users to view their appearance as more important than who they are as a person. This process is called self-objectification.

    People who experience self-objectification are more likely to scrutinise their appearance, potentially leading to body dissatisfaction, body shame, or other issues pertaining to body image.

    A woman using a dating app.
    Dating apps are overwhelmingly image-centric. Studio Romantic/Shutterstock

    There could be several reasons why mental health and wellbeing may be impacted by dating apps, many of which may centre around rejection.

    Rejection can come in many forms on dating apps. It can be implied, such as having a lack of matches, or it can be explicit, such as discrimination or abuse. Users who encounter rejection frequently on dating apps may be more likely to experience poorer self-esteem, depressive symptoms or anxiety.

    And if rejection is perceived to be based on appearance, this could lead again to body image concerns.

    What’s more, the convenience and game-like nature of dating apps may lead people who could benefit from taking a break to keep swiping.

    What can app developers do? What can you do?

    Developers of dating apps should be seeking ways to protect users against these possible harms. This could, for example, include reducing the prominence of photos on user profiles, and increasing the moderation of discrimination and abuse on their platforms.

    The Australian government has developed a code of conduct – to be enforced from April 1 this year – to help moderate and reduce discrimination and abuse on online dating platforms. This is a positive step.

    Despite the possible negatives, research has also found dating apps can help build confidence and help users meet new people.

    If you use dating apps, my colleagues and I recommend choosing profile images you feel display your personality or interests, or photos with friends, rather than semi-clothed images and selfies. Engage in positive conversations with other users, and block and report anyone who is abusive or discriminatory.

    It’s also sensible to take breaks from the apps, particularly if you’re feeling overwhelmed or dejected.

    If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14. The Butterfly Foundation provides support for eating disorders and body image issues, and can be reached on 1800 334 673.

    Zac Bowman, PhD Candidate, College of Education, Psychology & Social Work, Flinders 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: