Ageless Aging – by Maddy Dychtwald
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.
Maddy Dychtwald, herself 73, has spent her career working in the field of aging. She’s not a gerontologist or even a doctor, but she’s nevertheless been up-to-the-ears in the industry for decades, mostly as an organizer, strategist, facilitator, and so forth. As such, she’s had her finger on the pulse of the healthy longevity movement for a long time.
This book was written to address a problem, and the problem is: lifespan is increasing (especially for women), but healthspan has not been keeping up the pace.
In other words: people (especially women) are living longer, but often with more health problems along the way than before.
And mostly, it’s for lack of information (or sometimes: too much competing incorrect information).
Fortunately, information is something that a woman in Dychtwald’s position has an abundance of, because she has researchers and academics in many fields on speed-dial and happy to answer her questions (we get a lot of input from such experts throughout the book—which is why this book is so science-based, despite the author not being a scientist).
The book answers a lot of important questions beyond the obvious “what diet/exercise/sleep/supplements/etc are best for healthy aging” (spoiler: it’s quite consistent with the things we recommend here, because guess what, science is science), questions like how best to prepare for this that or the other, how to get a head start on preventative healthcare for some things, how to avoid being a burden to our families (one can argue that families are supposed to look after each other, but still, it’s a legitimate worry for many, and understandably so), and even how to balance the sometimes conflicting worlds of health and finances.
Unlike many authors, she also talks about the different kinds of aging, and tackles each of them separately and together. We love to see it!
Bottom line: this book is a very good one-stop-shop for all things healthy aging. It’s aimed squarely at women, but most advice goes for men the same too, aside from the section on hormones and such.
Click here to check out Ageless Aging, and plan your future!
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:
-
The Dopamine Myth
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The Dopamine Myth
There’s a popular misconception that, since dopamine is heavily involved in addictions, it’s the cause.
We see this most often in the context of non-chemical addictions, such as:
- gambling
- videogames
- social media
And yes, those things will promote dopamine production, and yes, that will feel good. But dopamine isn’t the problem.
Myth: The Dopamine Detox
There’s a trend we’ve mentioned before (it got a video segment a few Fridays back) about the idea of a “dopamine detox“, and how unscientific the idea is.
For a start…
- You cannot detox from dopamine, because dopamine is not a toxin
- You cannot abstain from dopamine, because your brain regulates your dopamine levels to keep them correct*
- If you could abstain from dopamine (and did), you would die, horribly.
*unless you have a serious mental illness, for example:
- forms of schizophrenia and/or psychosis that involve too much dopamine, or
- forms of depression and/or neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s (and several kinds of dementia) in which you have too little dopamine
- bipolar disorder in which dopamine levels can swing too far each way
See also: Dopamine fasting: misunderstanding science spawns a maladaptive fad
Myth: Dopamine is all about pleasure
Dopamine is a pleasure-giving neurotransmitter, but it serves more purposes than that! It also plays a central role in many neurological processes, including:
- Motivation
- Learning and memory
- Motor functions
- Language faculties
- Linear task processing
Note for example how someone taking dopaminergic drugs (prescription or otherwise; could be anything from modafinil to cocaine) is not blissed out… They’re probably in a good mood, sure, but they’re focused, organized, quick-thinking, and so forth! This is not an ad for cocaine; cocaine is very bad for the health. But you see the features? So, what if we could have a little more dopamine… healthily?
Dopamine—à la carte
Let’s look at the examples we gave earlier of non-chemical addictions that are dopaminergic in nature:
- gambling
- videogames
- social media
They’re not actually that rewarding, are they?
- Gamblers lose more than they win
- Gamers cease to care about a game once they have won
- Social media more often results in “doomscrolling”
This is because what prompts the most dopamine is actually the anticipation of reward… not the thing itself, whose reward-pleasure is very fleeting. Nobody looks back at an hour of doomscrolling and thinks “well, that was fun; I’m glad I did that”.
See the science: Liking, Wanting and the Incentive-Sensitization Theory of Addiction
But what if we anticipated a reward from things that are not deleterious to health and productivity? Things that are neutral, or even good for us?
Examples of this include:
- Sex! (remember though, it’s not a race to the finish-line)
- Good, nourishing food (bonus: some foods boost dopamine production nutritionally)
- Exercise/sport (also prompts release of endorphins, win/win!)
- Gamified learning apps (e.g. Duolingo)
- Gamified health/productivity apps (anything with bells and whistles and things that go “ding” and measure streaks etc)
Want to know more?
That’s all we have time for today, but you might want to check out:
10 Best Ways to Increase Dopamine Levels Naturally ← Science-based and well-sourced article!
Share This Post
-
Cure – by Dr. Jo Marchant
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The subtitle here, “a journey into the science of mind over body”, prompts an immediate question: is this book actually about science?
And yes, yes it is. It’s not about “positive energy” or “tapping into your divine essence” or anysuch. It’s about science, and scientific studies.
The author’s PhD is in genetics and medical microbiology, not metaphysics or something.
For those of us who read a lot of clinical studies about a lot of things (hi, regular researcher/writer here), we’re very used to placebo being used as a control in medical science.
“This drug performed no better than placebo” is generally considered a disappointing statement… But what if the placebo was already having a profound effect? Shouldn’t that be worthy of note too?
Dr. Marchant looks at more than just drugs, though, and also looks into the science (complete with EEGs and such) of hypnosis and virtual reality.
The writing style here is very accessible without skimping on science. This is to be expected; Dr. Marchant also has an MSc in science communication, and spent a time as senior editor of New Scientist magazine.
This isn’t a how-to book, but there are some practical takeaways too, specific things we can do to augment (or avoid sabotaging) any medications we take, for example.
Bottom line: placebo effect (and its evil twin, the nocebo effect) has a profound impact on all of us whether we want it or not, so we might as well learn about how it works and how to leverage it. This book gives a very good, hard science grounding.
Click here to check out “Cure” and get the most out of whatever you take (or do) for your health!
Share This Post
-
The Midlife Cyclist – by Phil Cavell
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.
Whether stationary cycling in your living room, or competing in the Tour de France, there’s a lot more to cycling than “push the pedals”—if you want to get good benefits and avoid injury, in any case.
This book explores the benefits of different kinds of cycling, the biomechanics of various body positions, and the physiology of different kinds of performance, and the impact these things have on everything from your joints to your heart to your telomeres.
The style is very much conversational, with science included, and a readiness to acknowledge in cases where the author is guessing or going with a hunch, rather than something being well-evidenced. This kind of honesty is always good to see, and it doesn’t detract from where the science is available and clear.
One downside for some readers will be that while Cavell does endeavour to cover sex differences in various aspects of how they relate to the anatomy and physiology (mostly: the physiology) of cycling, the book is written from a male perspective and the author clearly understands that side of things better. For other readers, of course, this will be a plus.
Bottom line: if you enjoy cycling, or you’re thinking of taking it up but it seems a bit daunting because what if you do it wrong and need a knee replacement in a few years or what if you hurt your spine or something, then this is the book to set your mind at ease, and put you on the right track.
Click here to check out The Midlife Cyclist, and enjoy the cycle of life!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Why scrapping the term ‘long COVID’ would be harmful for people with the condition
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The assertion from Queensland’s chief health officer John Gerrard that it’s time to stop using the term “long COVID” has made waves in Australian and international media over recent days.
Gerrard’s comments were related to new research from his team finding long-term symptoms of COVID are similar to the ongoing symptoms following other viral infections.
But there are limitations in this research, and problems with Gerrard’s argument we should drop the term “long COVID”. Here’s why.
A bit about the research
The study involved texting a survey to 5,112 Queensland adults who had experienced respiratory symptoms and had sought a PCR test in 2022. Respondents were contacted 12 months after the PCR test. Some had tested positive to COVID, while others had tested positive to influenza or had not tested positive to either disease.
Survey respondents were asked if they had experienced ongoing symptoms or any functional impairment over the previous year.
The study found people with respiratory symptoms can suffer long-term symptoms and impairment, regardless of whether they had COVID, influenza or another respiratory disease. These symptoms are often referred to as “post-viral”, as they linger after a viral infection.
Gerrard’s research will be presented in April at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. It hasn’t been published in a peer-reviewed journal.
After the research was publicised last Friday, some experts highlighted flaws in the study design. For example, Steven Faux, a long COVID clinician interviewed on ABC’s television news, said the study excluded people who were hospitalised with COVID (therefore leaving out people who had the most severe symptoms). He also noted differing levels of vaccination against COVID and influenza may have influenced the findings.
In addition, Faux pointed out the survey would have excluded many older people who may not use smartphones.
The authors of the research have acknowledged some of these and other limitations in their study.
Ditching the term ‘long COVID’
Based on the research findings, Gerrard said in a press release:
We believe it is time to stop using terms like ‘long COVID’. They wrongly imply there is something unique and exceptional about longer term symptoms associated with this virus. This terminology can cause unnecessary fear, and in some cases, hypervigilance to longer symptoms that can impede recovery.
But Gerrard and his team’s findings cannot substantiate these assertions. Their survey only documented symptoms and impairment after respiratory infections. It didn’t ask people how fearful they were, or whether a term such as long COVID made them especially vigilant, for example.
Tens of thousands of Australians, and millions of people worldwide, have long COVID.
New Africa/ShutterstockIn discussing Gerrard’s conclusions about the terminology, Faux noted that even if only 3% of people develop long COVID (the survey found 3% of people had functional limitations after a year), this would equate to some 150,000 Queenslanders with the condition. He said:
To suggest that by not calling it long COVID you would be […] somehow helping those people not to focus on their symptoms is a curious conclusion from that study.
Another clinician and researcher, Philip Britton, criticised Gerrard’s conclusion about the language as “overstated and potentially unhelpful”. He noted the term “long COVID” is recognised by the World Health Organization as a valid description of the condition.
A cruel irony
An ever-growing body of research continues to show how COVID can cause harm to the body across organ systems and cells.
We know from the experiences shared by people with long COVID that the condition can be highly disabling, preventing them from engaging in study or paid work. It can also harm relationships with their friends, family members, and even their partners.
Despite all this, people with long COVID have often felt gaslit and unheard. When seeking treatment from health-care professionals, many people with long COVID report they have been dismissed or turned away.
Last Friday – the day Gerrard’s comments were made public – was actually International Long COVID Awareness Day, organised by activists to draw attention to the condition.
The response from people with long COVID was immediate. They shared their anger on social media about Gerrard’s comments, especially their timing, on a day designed to generate greater recognition for their illness.
Since the start of the COVID pandemic, patient communities have fought for recognition of the long-term symptoms many people faced.
The term “long COVID” was in fact coined by people suffering persistent symptoms after a COVID infection, who were seeking words to describe what they were going through.
The role people with long COVID have played in defining their condition and bringing medical and public attention to it demonstrates the possibilities of patient-led expertise. For decades, people with invisible or “silent” conditions such as ME/CFS (myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome) have had to fight ignorance from health-care professionals and stigma from others in their lives. They have often been told their disabling symptoms are psychosomatic.
Gerrard’s comments, and the media’s amplification of them, repudiates the term “long COVID” that community members have chosen to give their condition an identity and support each other. This is likely to cause distress and exacerbate feelings of abandonment.
Terminology matters
The words we use to describe illnesses and conditions are incredibly powerful. Naming a new condition is a step towards better recognition of people’s suffering, and hopefully, better diagnosis, health care, treatment and acceptance by others.
The term “long COVID” provides an easily understandable label to convey patients’ experiences to others. It is well known to the public. It has been routinely used in news media reporting and and in many reputable medical journal articles.
Most importantly, scrapping the label would further marginalise a large group of people with a chronic illness who have often been left to struggle behind closed doors.
Deborah Lupton, SHARP Professor, Vitalities Lab, Centre for Social Research in Health and Social Policy Centre, and the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society, UNSW Sydney
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:
-
It’s Not Hysteria – by Dr. Karen Tan
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.
Firstly, who this book is aimed at: in case it wasn’t clear, this book assumes you have, or at least have had, a uterus. If that’s not you, then well, it’ll still be an interesting read but it won’t be about your reproductive health.
Secondly, about that “reproductive health”: it’s mostly not actually about reproductive health literally, but rather, the health of one’s reproductive organs and the things that they affect—which is a lot more than the ability to reproduce!
Dr. Tang takes us on a (respectably in-depth) tour of the relevant anatomy, before moving on to physiology, before continuing to pathology (i.e. things that can go wrong, and often do), and finally various treatment options, including elective procedures, and the pros and cons thereof.
She also talks the reader through talking about things with gynecologists and other healthcare providers, and making sure concerns are not dismissed out-of-hand (something that happens a lot, of course).
The style throughout is quite detailed prose, but without being difficult at all to read, and (assuming one is interested in the topic) it’s very engaging.
Bottom line: if you would like to know more about uteri and everything that is (or commonly/unfortunately) can be attached to them, the effects they have on the rest of the body and health, and what can be done about things not being quite right, then this is a good book for that.
Click here to check out It’s Not Hysteria, and understand more of what’s going on down there!
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:
-
Dried Apricots vs Dried Prunes – 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 dried apricots to dried prunes, we picked the prunes.
Why?
First, let’s talk hydration. We’ve described both of these as “dried”, but prunes are by default dried plums, usually partially rehydrated. So, for fairness, on the other side of things we’re also looking at dried apricots, partially rehydrated. Otherwise, it would look (mass for mass or volume for volume) like one is seriously outstripping the other even if some metric were actually equal, just because of water-weight in one and not the other.
Illustrative example: consider, for example, that the sugar in a bunch of grapes or a handful of raisins can be the same, not because they magically got more sugary, but because the water was dried out, so per mass and per volume, there’s more sugar, proportionally.
Back to dried apricots and dried prunes…
You’ll often see these two next to each other in the heath food store, which is why we’re comparing them here.
Of course, if it is practical, please by all means enjoy fresh apricots and fresh plums. But we know that life is not always convenient, fruits are not in season growing in abundance in our gardens all year round, and sometimes we’re stood in the aisle of a grocery store, weighing up the dried fruit options.
- Apricots are well-known for their zinc, potassium, and vitamin A.
- Prunes are well-known for their fiber.
But that’s not the whole story…
- Apricots outperform prunes for vitamin A, and also vitamins C and E.
- Prunes take first place for vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, and K, and also for minerals calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, and zinc.
- Prunes also have about 3x the fiber, which at the very least offsets the fact that they have 3x the sugar.
Once again, sugar in fruit is healthy (sugar in fruit juices is not*, though, so enjoy prunes rather than just prune juice, if you can) and can take its rightful place as providing a significant portion of our daily energy needs, if we let it.
*It’s the same sugar, just the manner of delivery changes what it does to our liver and our pancreas; see:
Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?
In summary…
Dried apricots are great (fresh are even better), and yet prunes outperform them by most metrics on a like-for-like basis.
Prunes have, on balance, a lot more vitamins and minerals, as well as more fiber and energy.
Want to get some?
Your local supermarket probably has them, and if you prefer having them delivered to your door, then here’s an example product on Amazon
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: