Children with traumatic experiences have a higher risk of obesity – but this can be turned around

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.

Children with traumatic experiences in their early lives have a higher risk of obesity. But as our new research shows, this risk can be reduced through positive experiences.

Childhood traumatic experiences are alarmingly common. Our analysis of data from nearly 5,000 children in the Growing Up in New Zealand study revealed almost nine out of ten (87%) faced at least one significant source of trauma by the time they were eight years old. Multiple adverse experiences were also prevalent, with one in three children (32%) experiencing at least three traumatic events.

Childhood trauma includes a range of experiences such as physical and emotional abuse, peer bullying and exposure to domestic violence. It also includes parental substance abuse, mental illness, incarceration, separation or divorce and ethnic discrimination.

We found children from financially disadvantaged households and Māori and Pasifika had the highest prevalence of nearly all types of adverse experiences, as well as higher overall numbers of adversities.

The consequences of these experiences were far-reaching. Children who experienced at least one adverse event were twice as likely to be obese by age eight. The risk increased with the number of traumatic experiences. Children with four or more adverse experiences were nearly three times more likely to be obese.

Notably, certain traumatic experiences (including physical abuse and parental domestic violence) related more strongly to obesity than others. This highlights the strong connection between early-life adversity and physical health outcomes.

PickPik, CC BY-SA

Connecting trauma to obesity

One potential explanation could be that the accumulation of early stress in children’s family, school and social environments is associated with greater psychological distress. This in turn makes children more likely to adopt unhealthy weight-related behaviours.

This includes consuming excessive high-calorie “comfort” foods such as fast food and sugary drinks, inadequate intake of nutritious foods, poor sleep, excessive screen time and physical inactivity. In our research, children who experienced adverse events were more likely to adopt these unhealthy behaviours. These, in turn, were associated with a higher risk of obesity.

Despite these challenges, our research also explored a promising area: the protective and mitigating effects of positive experiences.

We defined positive experiences as:

  • parents in a committed relationship
  • mothers interacting well with their children
  • mothers involved in social groups
  • children engaged in enriching experiences and activities such as visiting libraries or museums and participating in sports and community events
  • children living in households with routines and rules, including those regulating bedtime, screen time and mealtimes
  • children attending effective early childhood education.

The findings were encouraging. Children with more positive experiences were significantly less likely to be obese by age eight.

For example, those with five or six positive experiences were 60% less likely to be overweight or obese compared to children with zero or one positive experience. Even two positive experiences reduced the likelihood by 25%.

Children playing with basketballs
Positive childhood experiences such as playing sports or visiting libraries can lower the risk of obesity. Getty Images

How positive experiences counteract trauma

Positive experiences can help mitigate the negative effects of childhood trauma. But a minimum of four positive experiences was required to significantly counteract the impact of adverse events.

While nearly half (48%) of the study participants had at least four positive experiences, a concerning proportion (more than one in ten children) reported zero or only one positive experience.

The implications are clear. Traditional weight-loss programmes focused solely on changing behaviours are not enough to tackle childhood obesity. To create lasting change, we must also address the social environments, life experiences and emotional scars of early trauma shaping children’s lives.

Fostering positive experiences is a vital part of this holistic approach. These experiences not only help protect children from the harmful effects of adversity but also promote their overall physical and mental wellbeing. This isn’t just about preventing obesity – it’s about giving children the foundation to thrive and reach their full potential.

Creating supportive environments for vulnerable children

Policymakers, schools and families all have a role to play. Community-based programmes, such as after-school activities, healthy relationship initiatives and mental health services should be prioritised to support vulnerable families.

Trauma-informed care is crucial, particularly for children from disadvantaged households who face higher levels of adversity and fewer positive experiences. Trauma-informed approaches are especially crucial for addressing the effects of domestic violence and other adverse childhood experiences.

Comprehensive strategies should prioritise both safety and emotional healing by equipping families with tools to create safe, nurturing environments and providing access to mental health services and community support initiatives.

At the family level, parents can establish stable routines, participate in social networks and engage children in enriching activities. Schools and early-childhood education providers also play a key role in fostering supportive environments that help children build resilience and recover from trauma.

Policymakers should invest in resources that promote positive experiences across communities, addressing inequalities that leave some children more vulnerable than others. By creating nurturing environments, we can counterbalance the impacts of trauma and help children lead healthier, more fulfilling lives.

When positive experiences outweigh negative ones, children have a far greater chance of thriving – physically, emotionally and socially.

Ladan Hashemi, Senior Research Fellow in Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

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!

Recommended

  • We’re only using a fraction of health workers’ skills. This needs to change
  • What’s the difference between shyness and social anxiety?
    Diving into the nuances of shyness vs. social anxiety, their similarities, differences, and the importance of understanding both for effective interventions.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Think you’re good at multi-tasking? Here’s how your brain compensates – and how this changes with age

    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’re all time-poor, so multi-tasking is seen as a necessity of modern living. We answer work emails while watching TV, make shopping lists in meetings and listen to podcasts when doing the dishes. We attempt to split our attention countless times a day when juggling both mundane and important tasks.

    But doing two things at the same time isn’t always as productive or safe as focusing on one thing at a time.

    The dilemma with multi-tasking is that when tasks become complex or energy-demanding, like driving a car while talking on the phone, our performance often drops on one or both.

    Here’s why – and how our ability to multi-task changes as we age.

    Doing more things, but less effectively

    The issue with multi-tasking at a brain level, is that two tasks performed at the same time often compete for common neural pathways – like two intersecting streams of traffic on a road.

    In particular, the brain’s planning centres in the frontal cortex (and connections to parieto-cerebellar system, among others) are needed for both motor and cognitive tasks. The more tasks rely on the same sensory system, like vision, the greater the interference.

    This is why multi-tasking, such as talking on the phone, while driving can be risky. It takes longer to react to critical events, such as a car braking suddenly, and you have a higher risk of missing critical signals, such as a red light.

    The more involved the phone conversation, the higher the accident risk, even when talking “hands-free”.

    Generally, the more skilled you are on a primary motor task, the better able you are to juggle another task at the same time. Skilled surgeons, for example, can multitask more effectively than residents, which is reassuring in a busy operating suite.

    Highly automated skills and efficient brain processes mean greater flexibility when multi-tasking.

    Adults are better at multi-tasking than kids

    Both brain capacity and experience endow adults with a greater capacity for multi-tasking compared with children.

    You may have noticed that when you start thinking about a problem, you walk more slowly, and sometimes to a standstill if deep in thought. The ability to walk and think at the same time gets better over childhood and adolescence, as do other types of multi-tasking.

    When children do these two things at once, their walking speed and smoothness both wane, particularly when also doing a memory task (like recalling a sequence of numbers), verbal fluency task (like naming animals) or a fine-motor task (like buttoning up a shirt). Alternately, outside the lab, the cognitive task might fall by wayside as the motor goal takes precedence.

    Brain maturation has a lot to do with these age differences. A larger prefrontal cortex helps share cognitive resources between tasks, thereby reducing the costs. This means better capacity to maintain performance at or near single-task levels.

    The white matter tract that connects our two hemispheres (the corpus callosum) also takes a long time to fully mature, placing limits on how well children can walk around and do manual tasks (like texting on a phone) together.

    For a child or adult with motor skill difficulties, or developmental coordination disorder, multi-tastking errors are more common. Simply standing still while solving a visual task (like judging which of two lines is longer) is hard. When walking, it takes much longer to complete a path if it also involves cognitive effort along the way. So you can imagine how difficult walking to school could be.

    What about as we approach older age?

    Older adults are more prone to multi-tasking errors. When walking, for example, adding another task generally means older adults walk much slower and with less fluid movement than younger adults.

    These age differences are even more pronounced when obstacles must be avoided or the path is winding or uneven.

    Older adults tend to enlist more of their prefrontal cortex when walking and, especially, when multi-tasking. This creates more interference when the same brain networks are also enlisted to perform a cognitive task.

    These age differences in performance of multi-tasking might be more “compensatory” than anything else, allowing older adults more time and safety when negotiating events around them.

    Older people can practise and improve

    Testing multi-tasking capabilities can tell clinicians about an older patient’s risk of future falls better than an assessment of walking alone, even for healthy people living in the community.

    Testing can be as simple as asking someone to walk a path while either mentally subtracting by sevens, carrying a cup and saucer, or balancing a ball on a tray.

    Patients can then practise and improve these abilities by, for example, pedalling an exercise bike or walking on a treadmill while composing a poem, making a shopping list, or playing a word game.

    The goal is for patients to be able to divide their attention more efficiently across two tasks and to ignore distractions, improving speed and balance.

    There are times when we do think better when moving

    Let’s not forget that a good walk can help unclutter our mind and promote creative thought. And, some research shows walking can improve our ability to search and respond to visual events in the environment.

    But often, it’s better to focus on one thing at a time

    We often overlook the emotional and energy costs of multi-tasking when time-pressured. In many areas of life – home, work and school – we think it will save us time and energy. But the reality can be different.

    Multi-tasking can sometimes sap our reserves and create stress, raising our cortisol levels, especially when we’re time-pressured. If such performance is sustained over long periods, it can leave you feeling fatigued or just plain empty.

    Deep thinking is energy demanding by itself and so caution is sometimes warranted when acting at the same time – such as being immersed in deep thought while crossing a busy road, descending steep stairs, using power tools, or climbing a ladder.

    So, pick a good time to ask someone a vexed question – perhaps not while they’re cutting vegetables with a sharp knife. Sometimes, it’s better to focus on one thing at a time.The Conversation

    Peter Wilson, Professor of Developmental Psychology, Australian Catholic University

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts!

    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.

    Time to go nuts for nuts!

    Nuts, in popular perception, range from “basically the healthiest food anyone can eat” to “basically high calorie salty snacks”. And, they can be either!

    Some notes, then:

    • Raw is generally better that not
    • Dry roasted is generally better than the kind with added oils
    • Added salt is neither necessary nor good

    Quick tip: if “roasted salted” are the cheapest or most convenient to buy, you can at least mitigate that by soaking them in warm water for 5 minutes, before rinsing and (if you don’t want wet nuts) drying.

    You may be wondering: who does want wet nuts? And the answer is, if for example you’re making a delicious cashew and chickpea balti, the fact you didn’t dry them before throwing them in won’t make a difference.

    Now, let’s do a quick run-down; we don’t usually do “listicles” but it seemed a good format here, so we’ve picked a top 5 for nutritional potency:

    Almonds

    We may have a bias. We accept it. But almonds are also one of the healthiest nuts around, and generally considered by most popular metrics the healthiest.

    Not only are they high in protein, healthy fat, fiber, vitamins, and minerals, but they’re even a natural prebiotic that increases the populations of healthy gut bacteria, while simultaneously keeping down the populations of gut pathogens—what more can we ask of a nut?

    Read more: Prebiotic effects of almonds and almond skins on intestinal microbiota in healthy adult humans

    Pistachios

    Not only are these super tasty and fun to eat (and mindful eating is all but guaranteed, as shelling them by hand slows us down and makes us more likely to eat them one at a time rather than by the handful), but also they contain lots of nutrients and are lower in calories than most nuts, so they’re a great option for anyone who’d like to eat more nuts but is doing a calorie-controlled diet and doesn’t want to have half a day’s calories in a tiny dish of nuts.

    See: Effects of Pistachio Consumption in a Behavioral Weight Loss Intervention on Weight Change, Cardiometabolic Factors, and Dietary Intake

    Walnuts

    Popularly associated with brain health (perhaps easy to remember because of their appearance), they really are good for the brain:

    Check it out: Beneficial Effects of Walnuts on Cognition and Brain Health

    Cashews

    A personal favorite of this writer for their versatility in cooking, food prep, or just as a snack, they also do wonders for metabolic health:

    Learn more: The Effect of Cashew Nut on Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

    Brazil nuts

    The most exciting thing about these nuts is that they’re an incredibly potent source of selenium, which is important not just for hair/skin/nails as popularly marketed, but also for thyroid hormone production and DNA synthesis.

    But don’t eat too many, because selenium is definitely one of those “you can have too much of a good thing” nutrients, and selenium poisoning can make your hair (however beautiful and shiny it got because of the selenium) fall out if you take too much.

    Know the numbers: Brazil nuts and selenium—health benefits and risks

    Bottom line on nuts:

    • Nuts are a great and healthful part of almost anyone’s diet
      • Obviously, if you have a nut allergy, then we’re sorry; this one won’t have helped you so much
    • Almonds are one of the most healthful nuts out there
    • Brazil nuts are incredibly potent, to the point where moderation is recommended
    • A handful of mixed nuts per day is a very respectable option—when it comes to food and health, diversity is almost always good!

    Share This Post

  • What Is Earwax & Should You Get Rid Of It?

    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.

    Earwax (cerumen) forms in the outer ear canal when dead skin cells mix with oily sweat (a specialty of the apocrine glands) and sebum, a fatty substance mostly associated with facial oiliness. But, does it have a purpose, or is it just a waste product?

    Nature is (mostly) best in this case

    Earwax plays an important role in ear health, acting as a natural lubricant that prevents dryness and itchiness, trapping debris and microbes, and forming a protective barrier for the ear canal. It even contains proteins that help fight bacterial infections.

    As for removal: the body has a natural mechanism for removing excess earwax: as skin cells grow, they migrate outward, carrying earwax with them.

    In contrast, manual removal of earwax can do more harm than good. Using swabs or other items often pushes wax deeper, risks damaging the ear canal, and disrupts its protective barrier, potentially leading to infection.

    Ear candling, which claims to extract earwax, not only does not work (its main premise has been actively disproven and clinical evidence shows unequivocally that it doesn’t work by any mysterious method either; it just plain doesn’t work), but also can cause injuries and will tend to leave more harmful debris behind than was there originally.

    For those prone to earwax buildup, over-the-counter eardrops can help soften wax for natural removal, and medical professionals have safe methods to clear blockages if necessary.

    To maintain ear health, it’s best to clean only the outer ear with a damp cloth, limit the use of earplugs or earbuds, and generally leave earwax alone unless it causes discomfort or hearing issues.

    For more on all of this, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Ear Candling: Is It Safe & Does It Work? ← the answer is “no and no”, but the science may interest you

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • We’re only using a fraction of health workers’ skills. This needs to change
  • Mythbusting The Mask Debate

    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 The Mask Debate

    We asked you for your mask policy this respiratory virus season, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

    • A little under half of you said you will be masking when practical in indoor public places
    • A little over a fifth of you said you will mask only if you have respiratory virus symptoms
    • A little under a fifth of you said that you will not mask, because you don’t think it helps
    • A much smaller minority of you (7%) said you will go with whatever people around you are doing
    • An equally small minority of you said that you will not mask, because you’re not concerned about infections

    So, what does the science say?

    Wearing a mask reduces the transmission of respiratory viruses: True or False?

    True…with limitations. The limitations include:

    • The type of mask
      • A homemade polyester single-sheet is not the same as an N95 respirator, for instance
    • How well it is fitted
      • It needs to be a physical barrier, so a loose-fitting “going through the motions” fit won’t help
    • The condition of the mask
      • And if applicable, the replaceable filter in the mask
    • What exactly it has to stop
      • What kind of virus, what kind of viral load, what kind of environment, is someone coughing/sneezing, etc

    More details on these things can be found in the link at the end of today’s main feature, as it’s more than we could fit here!

    Note: We’re talking about respiratory viruses in general in this main feature, but most extant up-to-date research is on COVID, so that’s going to appear quite a lot. Remember though, even COVID is not one beast, but many different variants, each with their own properties.

    Nevertheless, the scientific consensus is “it does help, but is not a magical amulet”:

    Wearing a mask is actually unhygienic: True or False?

    False, assuming your mask is clean when you put it on.

    This (the fear of breathing more of one’s own germs in a cyclic fashion) was a point raised by some of those who expressed mask-unfavorable views in response to our poll.

    There have been studies testing this, and they mostly say the same thing, “if it’s clean when you put it on, great, if not, then well yes, that can be a problem”:

    ❝A longer mask usage significantly increased the fungal colony numbers but not the bacterial colony numbers.

    Although most identified microbes were non-pathogenic in humans; Staphylococcus epidermidis, Staphylococcus aureus, and Cladosporium, we found several pathogenic microbes; Bacillus cereus, Staphylococcus saprophyticus, Aspergillus, and Microsporum.

    We also found no associations of mask-attached microbes with the transportation methods or gargling.

    We propose that immunocompromised people should avoid repeated use of masks to prevent microbial infection.❞

    Source: Bacterial and fungal isolation from face masks under the COVID-19 pandemic

    Wearing a mask can mean we don’t get enough oxygen: True or False?

    False, for any masks made-for-purpose (i.e., are by default “breathable”), under normal conditions:

    However, wearing a mask while engaging in strenuous best-effort cardiovascular exercise, will reduce VO₂max. To be clear, you will still have more than enough oxygen to function; it’s not considered a health hazard. However, it will reduce peak athletic performance:

    Effects of wearing a cloth face mask on performance, physiological and perceptual responses during a graded treadmill running exercise test

    …so if you are worrying about whether the mask will impede you breathing, ask yourself: am I engaging in an activity that requires my peak athletic performance?

    Also: don’t let it get soaked with water, because…

    Writer’s anecdote as an additional caveat: in the earliest days of the COVID pandemic, I had a simple cloth mask on, the one-piece polyester kind that we later learned quite useless. The fit wasn’t perfect either, but one day I was caught in heavy rain (I had left it on while going from one store to another while shopping), and suddenly, it fitted perfectly, as being soaked through caused it to cling beautifully to my face.

    However, I was now effectively being waterboarded. I will say, it was not pleasant, but also I did not die. I did buy a new mask in the next store, though.

    tl;dr = an exception to “no it won’t impede your breathing” is that a mask may indeed impede your breathing if it is made of cloth and literally soaked with water; that is how waterboarding works!

    Want up-to-date information?

    Most of the studies we cited today were from 2022 or 2023, but you can get up-to-date information and guidance from the World Health Organization, who really do not have any agenda besides actual world health, here:

    Coronavirus disease (COVID-19): Masks | Frequently Asked Questions

    At the time of writing this newsletter, the above information was last updated yesterday.

    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:

  • Dandelion Greens vs Collard Greens – 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 dandelion greens to collard greens, we picked the dandelion greens.

    Why?

    Collard greens are great—they even beat kale in one of our previous “This or That” articles!—but dandelion greens simply pack more of a nutritional punch:

    In terms of macros, dandelions have slightly more carbs (+3g/100g) for the same protein and fiber, and/but the glycemic index is equal (zero), so those carbs aren’t anything to worry about. Nobody is getting metabolic disease by getting their carbs from dandelion leaves. In short, we’re calling it a tie on macros, though it could nominally swing either way if you have an opinion (one way or the other) about the extra 3g of carbs.

    In the category of vitamins, things are more exciting: dandelion greens have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B6, B7, B9, C, E, and K, while collard greens have more vitamin B5. An easy and clear win for dandelions.

    Looking at the minerals tells a similar story; dandelion greens have much more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc, while collard greens have slightly more manganese. Another overwhelming win for dandelions.

    One more category, polyphenols. We’d be here until next week if we listed all the polyphenols that dandelion greens have, but suffice it to say, dandelion greens have a total of 385.55mg/100g polyphenols, while collard greens have a total of 0.08mg/100g polyphenols. Grabbing a calculator, we see that this means dandelions have more than 4819x the polyphenol content that collard greens do.

    So, “eat leafy greens” is great advice, but they are definitely not all created equal!

    Let us take this moment to exhort: if you have any space at home where you can grow dandelions, grow them!

    Not only are they great for pollinators, but also they beat the collard greens that beat kale. And you can have as much as you want, for free, right there.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Collard Greens vs Kale – Which is Healthier?

    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:

  • Nudge – by Richard Thaler & Cass Sunstein

    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 often in life do we make a suboptimal decision that ends up plaguing us for a long time afterwards? Sometimes, a single good or bad decision can even directly change the rest of our life.

    So, it really is important that we try to optimize the decisions we do make.

    Professors Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein look at all kinds of decision-making in this book. Their goal, as per the subtitle, is “improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness”.

    For the most part, the book concentrates on “nudges”. Small factors that influence our decisions one way or another.

    Most importantly: that some of them are very good reasons to be nudged; others, very bad ones. And they often look similar.

    Where this book excels is in highlighting the many ways we make decisions without even thinking about it… or we think about it, but only down a prescribed, foreseen track, to an externally expected conclusion (for example, an insurance company offering three packages, but two of them exist only to direct you to the “correct” choice).

    A weakness of the book is that in some aspects it’s a little inconsistent. The authors describe their economic philosophy as “libertarian paternalism”, and as libertarians they’re against mandates, except when as paternalists they’re for them. But, if we take away their labels, this boils down to “some mandates can be good and some can be bad”, which would not be so inconsistent after all.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to better understand your own decision-making processes through the eyes of policy-setting economists (especially Sunstein, who worked for the White House Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs) whose job it is to make sure you make the “right” decisions, then this is a very enlightening book.

    Click here to check out Nudge and improve your decision-making clarity!

    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: