The Joy Of Missing Out
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.
What this is not going to be: a sour grapes thing.
What this is going to be: an exploration of how the grass is greener on the other side of the fence wherever you water it
It’s easy to feel lonely and isolated, even in today’s increasingly-connected world. We’ve tackled that topic before:
How To Beat Loneliness & Isolation
One of the more passive (but still reasonable) ways of reducing isolation is to simply say “yes” more, which we discussed (along with other more active strategies) here:
When The World Moves Without Us… Can We Side-Step Age-Related Alienation?
But, is there any benefit to be gained from not being in the thick of things?
Sometimes some things associated with isolation are not, in reality, necessarily isolating. See for example:
But, the implications of embracing the “joy of missing out” are much more wide-reaching:
Wherever you are, there you are
You’ve probably read before the phrase “wherever you go, there you are”, but this phrasing brings attention to the fact that you already are where you are.
There are quite possibly aspects of your current life/situation that are not ideal, but take a moment to appreciate where you are in life. At the very least, you are probably in a safe warm dry house with plenty of food available; chances are you have plenty of luxuries too.
See also: How To Get Your Brain On A More Positive Track (Without Toxic Positivity)
And yet, it’s easy to have a fear of missing out. Even billionaires fear they do not have enough and must acquire more in order to be truly secure and fulfilled.
As it goes for material wealth, so it also goes for social wealth—in other words, we may worry about such questions as: on whom can we rely, and who will be there for us if we need them? Do we, ultimately, have enough social capital to be secure?
- For social media influencers, it’ll be follower counts and engagement.
- For the family-oriented, it might be the question of whose house a given holiday gets celebrated at, and who attends, and who does it best.
- In more somber matters, think about funerals, and those where “there was such a huge turnout” vs “almost nobody attended”.
It sure sounds a lot like a dog-eat-dog world in which missing out sucks! But it doesn’t have to.
So let’s recap: your current situation is probably, all things considered, not bad. There is probably much in life to enjoy. If people do not come to your holiday event, then those are not people who would have improved things for you. If people do not attend your funeral even, then well, you yourself will be late, so hey.
Right now though, you are alive, so…
Enjoy the moment; enjoy your life for you.
Invest in yourself. Better yourself. Improve your environment for yourself little by little.
We spend a lot of time in life living up to everyone’s expectations, often without stopping to question whether it is what we want, or sometimes putting aside what we want in favor of what is wanted of us.
- Sometimes, such ostensible altruism is laudable and good (the point of today’s article is not “be a selfish jerk”; sometimes we should indeed shelve our self-interest in favour of doing something for the common good)
- Sometimes, it’s just pointless sacrifice that benefits nobody (the point of today’s article is “there is no point in playing stressful, stacked games when you could have a better time not doing that”)
If you are about to embark on an endeavor that you don’t really want to, take a moment to seriously consider which of the above two situations this is, and then act accordingly.
For a deeper dive into that, you might like this book that we reviewed a while back:
The Joy of Saying No – by Natalie Lue
Enjoy!
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:
Master Your Core – by Dr. Bohdanna Zazulak
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 the category of “washboard abs”, this one isn’t particularly interested in how much or how little fat you have. What it’s more interested in is a strong, resilient, and stable core. Including your abs yes, but also glutes, hips, and back.
Nor is the focus on superhuman feats of strength, though certainly one could use these exercises to work towards that. Rather, here we see importance placed on functional performance, mobility, and stability.
Lest mobility and stability seem at odds with each other, understand:
- By mobility we mean the range of movement we are able to accomplish.
- By stability, we mean that any movement we make is intentional, and not because we lost our balance.
Functional performance, meanwhile, is a function of those two things, plus strength.
How does the book deliver on this?
There are exercises to do. Exercises of the athletic kind you might expect, and also exercises including breathing exercises, which gets quite a bit of attention too. Not just “do abdominal breathing”, but quite an in-depth examination of such. There are also habits to form, and lifestyle tweaks to make.
Of course, you don’t have to do all the things she suggests. The more you do, the better results you are likely to get, but if you adopt even some of the practices she recommends, you’re likely to see some benefits. And, perhaps most importantly, reduce age-related loss of mobility, stability, and strength.
Bottom line: a great all-rounder book of core strength, mobility, and stability.
Click here to check out Master Your Core and enjoy the more robust health that comes with it!
Share This Post
Shrimp vs Caviar – 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 shrimp to caviar, we picked the caviar.
Why?
Both of these seafoods share a common history (also shared with lobster, by the way) of “nutrient-dense peasant-food that got gentrified and now it’s more expensive despite being easier to source”. But, cost and social quirks aside, what are their strengths and weaknesses?
In terms of macros, both are high in protein, but caviar is much higher in fat. You may be wondering: are the fats healthy? And the answer is that it’s a fairly even mix between monounsaturated (healthy), polyunsaturated (healthy), and saturated (unhealthy). The fact that caviar is generally enjoyed in very small portions is its saving grace here, but quantity for quantity, shrimp is the natural winner on macros.
…unless we take into account the omega-3 and omega-6 balance, in which case, it’s worthy of note that caviar has more omega-3 (which most people could do with consuming more of) while shrimp has more omega-6 (which most people could do with consuming less of).
When it comes to vitamins, caviar has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B5, B6, B9, B12, D, K, and choline; nor are the margins small in most cases, being multiples (or sometimes, tens of multiples) higher. Shrimp, meanwhile, boasts only more vitamin B3.
In the category of minerals, caviar leads with more calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and selenium, while shrimp has more copper and zinc.
All in all, while shrimp has its benefits for being lower in fat (and thus also, for those whom that may interest, lower in calories), caviar wins the day by virtue of its overwhelming nutritional density.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
What Omega-3 Fatty Acids Really Do For Us
Take care!
Share This Post
Protein: How Much Do We Need, Really?
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.
Mythbusting Protein!
Yesterday, we asked you for your policy on protein consumption. The distribution of responses was as follows:
- A marginal majority (about 55%) voted for “Protein is very important, but we can eat too much of it”
- A large minority (about 35%) voted for “We need lots of protein; the more, the better!”
- A handful (about 4%) voted for “We should go as light on protein as possible”
- A handful (6%) voted for “If we don’t eat protein, our body will create it from other foods”
So, what does the science say?
If we don’t eat protein, our body will create it from other foods: True or False?
Contingently True on an absurd technicality, but for all practical purposes False.
Our body requires 20 amino acids (the building blocks of protein), 9 of which it can’t synthesize and absolutely must get from food. Normally, we get those amino acids from protein in our diet, and we can also supplement them by buying amino acid supplements.
Specifically, we require (per kg of bodyweight) a daily average of:
- Histidine: 10 mg
- Isoleucine: 20 mg
- Leucine: 39 mg
- Lysine: 30 mg
- Methionine: 10.4 mg
- Phenylalanine*: 25 mg
- Threonine: 15 mg
- Tryptophan: 4 mg
- Valine: 26 mg
*combined with the non-essential amino acid tyrosine
Source: Protein and Amino Acid Requirements In Human Nutrition: WHO Technical Report
However, to get the requisite amino acid amounts, without consuming actual protein, would require gargantuan amounts of supplementation (bearing in mind bioavailability will never be 100%, so you’ll always need to take more than it seems), using supplements that will have been made by breaking down proteins anyway.
So unless you live in a laboratory and have access to endless amounts of all of the required amino acids (you can’t miss even one; you will die), and are willing to do that for the sake of proving a point, then you do really need to eat protein.
Your body cannot, for example, simply break down sugar and use it to make the protein you need.
On another technical note… Do bear in mind that many foods that we don’t necessarily think of as being sources of protein, are sources of protein.
Grains and grain products, for example, all contain protein; we just don’t think of them as that because their macronutritional profile is heavily weighted towards carbohydrates.
For that matter, even celery contains protein. How much, you may ask? Almost none! But if something has DNA, it has protein. Which means all plants and animals (at least in their unrefined forms).
So again, to even try to live without protein would very much require living in a laboratory.
We can eat too much protein: True or False?
True. First on an easy technicality; anything in excess is toxic. Even water, or oxygen. But also, in practical terms, there is such a thing as too much protein. The bar is quite high, though:
❝Based on short-term nitrogen balance studies, the Recommended Dietary Allowance of protein for a healthy adult with minimal physical activity is currently 0.8 g protein per kg bodyweight per day❞
❝To meet the functional needs such as promoting skeletal-muscle protein accretion and physical strength, dietary intake of 1.0, 1.3, and 1.6 g protein per kg bodyweight per day is recommended for individuals with minimal, moderate, and intense physical activity, respectively❞
❝Long-term consumption of protein at 2 g per kg bodyweight per day is safe for healthy adults, and the tolerable upper limit is 3.5 g per kg bodyweight per day for well-adapted subjects❞
❝Chronic high protein intake (>2 g per kg bodyweight per day for adults) may result in digestive, renal, and vascular abnormalities and should be avoided❞
Source: Dietary protein intake and human health
To put this into perspective, if you weigh about 160lbs (about 72kg), this would mean eating more than 144g protein per day, which grabbing a calculator means about 560g of lean beef, or 20oz, or 1¼lb.
If you’re eating quarter-pounder burgers though, that’s not usually so lean, so you’d need to eat more than nine quarter-pounder burgers per day to get too much protein.
High protein intake damages the kidneys: True or False?
True if you have kidney damage already; False if you are healthy. See for example:
- Effects of dietary protein restriction on the progression of advanced renal disease in the modification of diet in renal disease study
- A high protein diet has no harmful effects: a one-year crossover study in healthy male athletes
High protein intake increases cancer risk: True or False?
True or False depending on the source of the protein, so functionally false:
- Eating protein from red meat sources has been associated with higher risk for many cancers
- Eating protein from other sources has been associated with lower risk for many cancers
Source: Red Meat Consumption and Mortality Results From 2 Prospective Cohort Studies
High protein intake increase risk of heart disease: True or False?
True or False depending on the source of the protein, so, functionally false:
- Eating protein from red meat sources has been associated with higher risk of heart disease
- Eating protein from other sources has been associated with lower risk of heart disease
Source: Major Dietary Protein Sources and Risk of Coronary Heart Disease in Women
In summary…
Getting a good amount of good quality protein is important to health.
One can get too much, but one would have to go to extremes to do so.
The source of protein matters:
- Red meat is associated with many health risks, but that’s not necessarily the protein’s fault.
- Getting plenty of protein from (ideally: unprocessed) sources such as poultry, fish, and/or plants, is critical to good health.
- Consuming “whole proteins” (that contain all 9 amino acids that we can’t synthesize) are best.
Learn more: Complete proteins vs. incomplete proteins (explanation and examples)
Share This Post
Related Posts
Ozempic vs Five Natural Supplements
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.
Semaglutide (GLP-1 agonist) drugs Ozempic and Wegovy really do work for losing weight, provided one then remains on these expensive drugs for life. Dr. Jin Sung recommends a supplements-based approach, instead.
Natural Alternatives
Dr. Sung recommends:
- Berberine, which increases production and secretion of GLP-1.
- Probiotics, which increase GLP-1 secretion. In particular he recommends Akkermansia municiphila which secretes P9, and this protein stimulates GLP-1 production and secretion.
- Psyllium, a soluble dietary fiber which will increase short-chain fatty acids which then help with increasing GLP-1.
- Curcumin, which enhances L-cell numbers, in turn promoting and increasing GLP-1 secretion. Also, curcumin may prolong gastric emptying, and increase insulin sensitivity.
- Ginseng, of which the bioactive compound stimulates secretion of GLP-1, and also has anti-diabetic effects.
Dr. Sung explains more about each of these in his video:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to know more?
You might enjoy our previous main feature looking at some of the pros and cons:
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:
How Much Difference Do Probiotic Supplements Make, Really?
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.
How Much Difference Do Probiotic Supplements Make?
There are three main things that get talked about with regard to gut health:
- Prebiotics (fibrous foods)
- Probiotics (things containing live “good” bacteria)
- Postbiotics (things to help them thrive)
Today we’ll be talking about probiotics, but if you’d like a refresher on general gut health, here’s our previous main feature:
Making Friends With Your Gut (You Can Thank Us Later)
What bacteria are in probiotics?
There are many kinds, but the most common by far are Lactobacillus sp. and Bifidobacteria sp.
Taxonomical note: “sp.” just stands for “species”. The first name is the genus, which contains a plurality of (sometimes, many) species.
Lactobacillus acidophilus, also written L. acidophilus, is a common species of Lactobacillus sp. in probiotics.
Bifidobacterium bifidum, also written B. bifidum, is a common species of Bifidobacterium sp. in probiotics.
What difference do they make?
First, and perhaps counterintuitively, putting more bacteria into your gut has a settling effect on the digestion. In particular, probiotics have been found effective against symptoms of IBS and ulcerative colitis, (but not Crohn’s):
- Probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: An Up-to-Date Systematic Review
- The role of probiotics in the prevention and treatment of IBS and other related diseases: a systematic review of randomized human clinical trials
- Safety and Potential Role of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG Administration as Monotherapy in Ulcerative Colitis Patients
- Probiotics for induction of remission in Crohn’s disease
Probiotics are also helpful against diarrhea, including that caused by infections and/or antibiotics, as well as to reduce antibiotic resistance:
- Probiotics for the prevention of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and children
- Probiotic approach to prevent antibiotic resistance
Probiotics also boost the immune system outside of the gut, too, for example reducing the duration of respiratory infections:
You may recallthe link between gut health and brain health, thanks in large part to the vagus nerve connecting the two:
The Brain-Gut Highway: A Two-Way Street
No surprises, then, that probiotics benefit mental health. See:
- The effects of probiotics on mental health and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
- A randomized controlled trial to test the effect of multispecies probiotics on cognitive reactivity to sad mood
- Clinical and metabolic response to probiotic administration in patients with major depressive disorder: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
There are so many kinds; which should I get?
Diversity is good, so more kinds is better. However, if you have specific benefits you’d like to enjoy, you may want to go stronger on particular strains:
Choosing an appropriate probiotic product for your patient: An evidence-based practical guide
Where can I get them?
We don’t sell them, but here’s an example product on Amazon, for your convenience.
Alternatively, you can check out today’s sponsor, who also sell such; we recommend comparing products and deciding which will be best for you
Enjoy!
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:
Gluten: What’s The Truth?
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.
Gluten: What’s The Truth?
We asked you for your health-related view of gluten, and got the above spread of results. To put it simply:
Around 60% of voters voted for “Gluten is bad if you have an allergy/sensitivity; otherwise fine”
The rest of the votes were split fairly evenly between the other three options:
- Gluten is bad for everyone and we should avoid it
- Gluten is bad if (and only if) you have Celiac disease
- Gluten is fine for all, and going gluten-free is a modern fad
First, let’s define some terms so that we’re all on the same page:
What is gluten?
Gluten is a category of protein found in wheat, barley, rye, and triticale. As such, it’s not one single compound, but a little umbrella of similar compounds. However, for the sake of not making this article many times longer, we’re going to refer to “gluten” without further specification.
What is Celiac disease?
Celiac disease is an autoimmune disease. Like many autoimmune diseases, we don’t know for sure how/why it occurs, but a combination of genetic and environmental factors have been strongly implicated, with the latter putatively including overexposure to gluten.
It affects about 1% of the world’s population, and people with Celiac disease will tend to respond adversely to gluten, notably by inflammation of the small intestine and destruction of enterocytes (the cells that line the wall of the small intestine). This in turn causes all sorts of other problems, beyond the scope of today’s main feature, but suffice it to say, it’s not pleasant.
What is an allergy/intolerance/sensitivity?
This may seem basic, but a lot of people conflate allergy/intolerance/sensitivity, so:
- An allergy is when the body mistakes a harmless substance for something harmful, and responds inappropriately. This can be mild (e.g. allergic rhinitis, hayfever) or severe (e.g. peanut allergy), and as such, responses can vary from “sniffly nose” to “anaphylactic shock and death”.
- In the case of a wheat allergy (for example), this is usually somewhere between the two, and can for example cause breathing problems after ingesting wheat or inhaling wheat flour.
- An intolerance is when the body fails to correctly process something it should be able to process, and just ejects it half-processed instead.
- A common and easily demonstrable example is lactose intolerance. There isn’t a well-defined analog for gluten, but gluten intolerance is nonetheless a well-reported thing.
- A sensitivity is when none of the above apply, but the body nevertheless experiences unpleasant symptoms after exposure to a substance that should normally be safe.
- In the case of gluten, this is referred to as non-Celiac gluten sensitivity
A word on scientific objectivity: at 10almonds we try to report science as objectively as possible. Sometimes people have strong feelings on a topic, especially if it is polarizing.
Sometimes people with a certain condition feel constantly disbelieved and mocked; sometimes people without a certain condition think others are imagining problems for themselves where there are none.
We can’t diagnose anyone or validate either side of that, but what we can do is report the facts as objectively as science can lay them out.
Gluten is fine for all, and going gluten-free is a modern fad: True or False?
Definitely False, Celiac disease is a real autoimmune disease that cannot be faked, and allergies are also a real thing that people can have, and again can be validated in studies. Even intolerances have scientifically measurable symptoms and can be tested against nocebo.
See for example:
- Epidemiology and clinical presentations of Celiac disease
- Severe forms of food allergy that can precipitate allergic emergencies
- Properties of gluten intolerance: gluten structure, evolution, and pathogenicity
However! It may not be a modern fad, so much as a modern genuine increase in incidence.
Widespread varieties of wheat today contain a lot more gluten than wheat of ages past, and many other molecular changes mean there are other compounds in modern grains that never even existed before.
However, the health-related impact of these (novel proteins and carbohydrates) is currently still speculative, and we are not in the business of speculating, so we’ll leave that as a “this hasn’t been studied enough to comment yet but we recognize it could potentially be a thing” factor.
Gluten is bad if (and only if) you have Celiac disease: True or False?
Definitely False; allergies for example are well-evidenced as real; same facts as we discussed/linked just above.
Gluten is bad for everyone and we should avoid it: True or False?
False, tentatively and contingently.
First, as established, there are people with clinically-evidenced Celiac disease, wheat allergy, or similar. Obviously, they should avoid triggering those diseases.
What about the rest of us, and what about those who have non-Celiac gluten sensitivity?
Clinical testing has found that of those reporting non-Celiac gluten sensitivity, nocebo-controlled studies validate that diagnosis in only a minority of cases.
In the following study, for example, only 16% of those reporting symptoms showed them in the trials, and 40% of those also showed a nocebo response (i.e., like placebo, but a bad rather than good effect):
This one, on the other hand, found that positive validations of diagnoses were found to be between 7% and 77%, depending on the trial, with an average of 30%:
Re-challenge Studies in Non-celiac Gluten Sensitivity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
In other words: non-Celiac gluten sensitivity is a thing, and/but may be over-reported, and/but may be in some part exacerbated by psychosomatic effect.
Note: psychosomatic effect does not mean “imagining it” or “all in your head”. Indeed, the “soma” part of the word “psychosomatic” has to do with its measurable effect on the rest of the body.
For example, while pain can’t be easily objectively measured, other things, like inflammation, definitely can.
As for everyone else? If you’re enjoying your wheat (or similar) products, it’s well-established that they should be wholegrain for the best health impact (fiber, a positive for your health, rather than white flour’s super-fast metabolites padding the liver and causing metabolic problems).
Wheat itself may have other problems, for example FODMAPs, amylase trypsin inhibitors, and wheat germ agglutinins, but that’s “a wheat thing” rather than “a gluten thing”.
That’s beyond the scope of today’s main feature, but you might want to check out today’s featured book!
For a final scientific opinion on this last one, though, here’s what a respected academic journal of gastroenterology has to say:
From coeliac disease to noncoeliac gluten sensitivity; should everyone be gluten-free?
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:
