
Alcohol vs THC
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 😎
❝Can you do the pros and cons of thc vs alcohol?❞
We can!
First let’s note: this is certainly a case of “the lesser evil”, as both come with health risks.
As for the benefits, for both the main reason people take them is for relaxation—or to frame it the other way around: for relief from stress, anxiety, or other psychological woes. In more overt cases of self-medication, it can be in pursuit of alleviating physical pain.
Taking the “pros” in isolation, it’s reasonable to say that THC is, for most people, the winner. Enjoying the positive effects requires much smaller doses than alcohol, as it’s much more potent, mg for mg.
It’s also worth noting that for some people (such as those in great pain), it may well be that the benefits subjectively outweigh the risks, and in a subset of those people (such as those with terminal illness and a life expectancy being measured in weeks or days), the benefits may outweigh any risks.
Writer’s anecdote: once upon a very long time ago, my grandfather was dying—in hospital, and the prognosis was “it’s going to be today or maybe tomorrow”. He (a lifelong lover of Scotch whisky) wanted a Scotch; the hospital staff forbade it. There is a kind of logic there—if it made him sick, they could be blamed for making his last hours miserable and I’m sure they imagined headlines of being blamed for making a dying man sick with strong alcohol. Nevertheless, some Scotch was smuggled in for him by a member of his family. Was he fine? Well, no, he died. But that was already expected, and respecting his choice was deemed more important by the family. Was it the right choice? Who’s to say? But it was certainly an understandable, and contextually rational one, in a “what’s the worst that can happen” setting.
All this to say, for some people the pros may subjectively outweigh any potential cons.
See also: Science-Based Alternative Pain Relief: When Painkillers Aren’t Helping, These Things Might
The other “pros” of THC are more a matter of “it’s less bad than alcohol”, so let’s look at the cons:
The lesser evil?
There is a wealth of scientific evidence that alcohol is very bad for pretty much everything. Yes, even for heart health, yes, even the famous “small glass of red”: Can We Drink To Good Health?
For how that myth got started, see French biochemist Jessie Inchauspé’s explanation: Are You Making This Alcohol Mistake?
Alcohol also increases all-cause mortality at any dose (even “low-risk drinking”): Alcohol Consumption Patterns and Mortality Among Older Adults
…and the World Health Organization has declared that the only safe amount of alcohol is zero: WHO: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health
But what of alcohol and cancer? According to the American Association of Cancer Research’s latest report, more than half of Americans do not know that alcohol increases the risk of cancer, which you can read more about here: How Much Alcohol Does It Take To Increase Cancer Risk?
Meanwhile, there is a paucity of high-quality evidence for THC (good or bad). That’s not to say that the science hasn’t been done at all, but it is to say that while decades of “the war on drugs” might have done nothing to curtail drug use, the illegality of such in many places (especially the US) really slowed down scientific research to a crawl. So, we have to make do with much weaker evidence, and a lot of unanswered questions.
One thing we can say is that the risk of developing a substance use disorder is much lower for THC than for alcohol:
See: Prevalence of Marijuana Use Disorders in the United States Between 2001–2002 and 2012–2013
If you prefer just the stats without the science, here’s the CDC’s rendering of that: Addiction (Marijuana or Cannabis Use Disorder)
So, that’s a point in THC’s favor.
What about heart health? Both substances are popularly considered relaxing, and as such, by “common sense”, good for the heart. We’ve shown above how the opposite is true in the case of alcohol, so how does THC stack up?
We discussed, a little while back, new research that showed that cannabis users have a higher risk of heart attacks, even among younger and otherwise healthy individuals. This is based on analyzing data from 4,636,628 relatively healthy adults.
Specifically, the data showed that even young healthy cannabis users get:
- Sixfold increased risk of heart attack
- Fourfold increased risk of ischemic stroke
- Threefold increased risk of cardiovascular death, heart attack, or stroke
There’s nuance to this (and none of it is favor of cannabis), and you can read about that here: Cannabis & Heart Attacks
Nevertheless, those numbers are worse than the numbers for alcohol, so that’s a point in alcohol’s favor.
How about brain health? Well, neither are fabulous in the long-run, but putting them head-to-head in this category is essentially a matter of “it destroys neurons” (alcohol) vs “cannabis use disorder can cause problems especially if for example someone is already prone to psychosis, but occasional use is not* significantly associated with such problems” (THC).
*On a big data level, anyway. Of course anything can happen for an individual, and science rarely speaks in absolutes in this regard.
Learn more about each of these: How Does Alcohol Cause Blackouts? vs Cannabis & Mental Health: Good Or Bad?
So that’s another point in THC’s favor.
How do they compare for sleep disruption? Since both are used by many people to help get to sleep, but both disrupt the quality of that sleep once there, this can be an important consideration.
The short version is: alcohol is bad for all aspects of sleep, while THC increases delta-wave deep sleep (restorative rest), but does this at the cost of REM sleep: Sweet Dreams Are Made of THC (Or Are They?)
So, given that’s “all bad” for alcohol and “mixed bag” for THC, we’re going to say THC wins on this one.
Yes, there’s a lesser evil:
On balance, this means that for most people, THC has somewhat more potent benefits, and relatively fewer/lesser risks, than alcohol.
If you’d like to quit alcohol, check out: How To Reduce Or Quit Alcohol
If you’d like a reassuring timeline of how long it takes for various body parts/systems to recover from alcohol, see: What Happens To Your Body When You Stop Drinking Alcohol
Finally, before you take up the use of THC, if you haven’t already, you might want to swing by: Cannabis Myths vs Reality
…for some important considerations not covered above as they didn’t change the head-to-head comparison.
Take care!
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:
-
Midwives Blame California Rules for Hampering Birth Centers Amid Maternity Care Crisis
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.
Jessie Mazar squeezed the grab handle in her husband’s pickup and groaned as contractions struck her during the 90-minute drive from her home in rural northeastern California to the closest hospital with a maternity unit.
She could have reached Plumas District Hospital, in Quincy, in just seven minutes. But it no longer delivers babies.
Local officials have a plan for a birth center in Quincy, where midwives could deliver babies with backup from on-call doctors and a standby perinatal unit at the hospital, but state health officials have yet to approve it.
That left Mazar to brave the long, winding road — one sometimes blocked by snow, floods, or forest fires — to have her baby. Women across California are facing similar ordeals as hospitals increasingly close money-losing maternity units, especially in rural areas.
Midwife-operated birth centers offer an alternative for women with low-risk pregnancies and can play a crucial role in filling the gap left by hospitals’ retreat from obstetrics, maternal health advocates say.
Declining birth rates, staffing shortages, and financial pressures have led 56 California hospitals — about 1 in 6 — to shutter maternity units over the past dozen years.
But midwives say California’s regulatory regime around birth centers is unnecessarily preventing new centers from opening and leading some existing facilities to close. Obtaining a license can take as long as four years.
“All they’ve essentially done is made it more dangerous to have a baby,” said Sacramento midwife Bethany Sasaki. “People have to drive two hours now because a birth center can’t open, so it’s more dangerous. People are going to be having babies in cars on the side of the road.”
Last month, state Assembly member Mia Bonta introduced legislation to streamline the regulatory process and fix what she calls “a broken system” for licensing birth centers.
“We know that alternative birth centers lead to often better outcomes, lower-risk births, more opportunity for children to be born healthy, and also to lower maternal mortality and morbidity,” she said.
The proposed bill would remove various bureaucratic requirements, though many details have yet to be finalized. Bonta introduced the bill in its current form as a jumping-off point for discussions about how to expedite licensing.
“It’s a starting place,” said Sandra Poole, health policy advocate for the Western Center on Law & Poverty, a co-sponsor of the legislation.
For now, birth centers struggle with a gantlet of rules, only some clearly connected to patient safety. Over the past decade, the number of licensed birth centers in California dropped from 12 to five, according to Bonta.
Plumas County officials are trying to address one key issue: how far a birth center can be from a hospital with a round-the-clock obstetrics unit. State regulations say it can be no more than a 30-minute drive, a distance set when many more hospitals had maternity units.
The first-of-its-kind “Plumas model” aims to take advantage of flexibility provisions in the law to address the obstacle in a way that could potentially be replicated elsewhere in the state.
But the hospital’s application for a birth center and a perinatal unit has been “languishing” with the California Department of Public Health, which is “looking for cover from the legislature,” said Robert Moore, chief medical officer of Partnership HealthPlan of California, a Medi-Cal managed-care plan serving most of Northern California. Asked about the application, a CDPH spokesperson said only that it was under review.
The goal should be for all women to be within an hour’s drive of a hospital with an obstetrics unit, Moore said. Data shows the complication rate goes up after an hour and even higher after two hours, he said, while the benefit is less compelling between 30 and 60 minutes.
Numerous other regulations have made it difficult for birth centers to keep their doors open.
Since August, birth centers in Sacramento and Monterey have had to stop operating because their heating ducts failed to meet licensing requirements. The facilities fall under the same state Department of Health Care Access and Information regulations as primary care clinics, though birth centers see healthy families, not sick ones, and don’t need hospital-grade ventilation, said midwife Caroline Cusenza.
She had spent $50,000 remodeling the Monterey Birth & Wellness Center to include state-required items, such as nursing and hand-washing stations and a housekeeping closet. In the end, a requirement for galvanized steel heating vents, which would have required opening the ceiling at an unaffordable cost, prompted her heart-wrenching decision to close.
“We’re turning women away in tears,” said Sasaki, who owned Midtown Birth Center in Sacramento. She bought the building for $760,000 and spent $250,000 remodeling it in a way she believed met all licensing requirements. But regulators would not license it unless the heating system was redone. Sasaki estimated it would have cost an additional $50,000 to bring it into compliance — too much to keep operating.
She blamed her closure on “regulatory dysfunction.”
Legislation signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year could ease onerous building codes such as those governing Sasaki’s and Cusenza’s heating systems, said Poole, the health policy advocate.
The state has taken two to four years to issue birth center licenses, according to a brief by the Osher Center for Integrative Health at the University of California-San Francisco. The state Department of Public Health “works tirelessly to ensure health facilities are able to be properly licensed and follow all applicable requirements within our authority before and during their operation,” spokesperson Mark Smith said.
Bonta, an Oakland Democrat who chairs the Assembly’s health committee, said she would consider increasing the allowable drive time between a birth center and a hospital maternity unit as part of her new legislation.
The state last updated birth center regulations more than a decade ago, before hospitals’ mass exodus from obstetrics. “The hurdle is the time and distance standards without compromising safety,” Poole said. “But where there’s nothing right now, we would say a birth center is certainly a better alternative to not having any maternal care.”
Moore noted that midwife-led births in homes and birth centers are the mainstay of obstetric care in Europe, where the infant mortality rate is considerably lower than in the U.S. More than 98% of American babies are born in hospitals.
Babies delivered by midwives are more likely to be born vaginally, less likely to require intensive care, and more likely to breastfeed, the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative has found. Midwife-led births also lead to fewer infant emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and neonatal deaths. And they cost far less: Birth centers generally charge one-quarter or less of the average cost of about $36,000 for a vaginal birth in a California hospital.
If they catered only to private-pay clients, Cusenza and Sasaki could have continued operating without licenses. They must be licensed, however, to receive payments from Medi-Cal and some private insurance companies, which they needed to remain in business. Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid health insurance program, which covers low-income residents, paid for about 40% of the state’s births in 2022.
Bonta has heard reports from midwives that the key to getting licensed is hunting down the right state health department advocate. “I don’t believe that we should be building resources based on the model of ‘Where’s Waldo?’ in finding a champion inside CDPH,” she said.
Lori Link, director of midwifery at Plumas District Hospital, believes the Plumas model can turn what’s become a maternity desert into an oasis. Jessie Mazar, whose son was born in September without complications at a Truckee hospital, would welcome the opportunity to deliver her planned second child in Quincy.
“That would be convenient,” she said. “We’re not holding our breath.”
This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.
USE OUR CONTENT
This story can be republished for free (details).
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.
This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
-
Gum disease, decay, missing teeth: why people with mental illness have poorer oral health
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.
People with poor mental health face many challenges. One that’s perhaps lesser known is that they’re more likely than the overall population to have poor oral health.
Research has shown people with serious mental illness are four times more likely than the general population to have gum disease. They’re nearly three times more likely to have lost all their teeth due to problems such as gum disease and tooth decay.
Serious mental illnesses include major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder and psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia. These conditions affect about 800,000 Australians.
People living with schizophrenia have, on average, eight more teeth that are decayed, missing or filled than the general population.
So why does this link exist? And what can we do to address the problem?
mihailomilovanovic/Getty Images Why is this a problem?
Oral health problems are expensive to fix and can make it hard for people to eat, socialise, work or even just smile.
What’s more, dental issues can land people in hospital. Our research shows dental conditions are the third most common reason for preventable hospital admissions among people with serious mental illness.
Meanwhile, poor oral health is linked with long-term health conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, some cancers, and even cognitive problems. This is because the bacteria associated with gum diseases can cause inflammation throughout the body, which affects other systems in the body.
Why are mental health and oral health linked?
Poor mental and oral health share common risk factors. Social factors such as isolation, unemployment and housing insecurity can worsen both oral and mental health.
For example, unemployment increases the risk of oral disease. This can be due to financial difficulties, reduced access to oral health care, or potential changes to diet and hygiene practices.
At the same time, oral disease can increase barriers to finding employment, due to stigma, discrimination, dental pain and associated long-term health conditions.
It’s clear the relationship between oral health and mental health goes both ways. Dental disease can reduce self-esteem and increase psychological distress. Meanwhile, symptoms of mental health conditions, such as low motivation, can make engaging in good oral health practices, including brushing, flossing, and visiting the dentist, more difficult.
And like many people, those with serious mental illness can experience significant anxiety about going to the dentist. They may also have experienced trauma in the past, which can make visiting a dental clinic a frightening experience.
Separately, poor oral health can be made worse by some medications for mental health conditions. Certain medications can interfere with saliva production, reducing the protective barrier that covers the teeth. Some may also increase sugar cravings, which heightens the risk of tooth decay.
Some medications people take for mental health conditions can affect oral health. Gladskikh Tatiana/Shutterstock Our research
In a recent study, we interviewed young people with mental illness. Our findings show the significant personal costs of dental disease among people with mental illness, and highlight the relationship between oral and mental health.
Smiling is one of our best ways to communicate, but we found people with serious mental illness were sometimes embarrassed and ashamed to smile due to poor oral health.
One participant told us:
[poor oral health is] not only [about] the physical aspects of restricting how you eat, but it’s also about your mental health in terms of your self-esteem, your self-confidence, and basic wellbeing, which sort of drives me to become more isolated.
Another said:
for me, it was that serious fear of – God my teeth are looking really crap, and in the past they’ve [dental practitioners] asked, “Hey, you’ve missed this spot; what’s happening?”. How do I explain to them, hey, I’ve had some really shitty stuff happening and I have a very serious episode of depression?
What can we do?
Another of our recent studies focused on improving oral health awareness and behaviours among young adults experiencing mental health difficulties. We found a brief online oral health education program improved participants’ oral health knowledge and attitudes.
Improving oral health can result in improved mental wellbeing, self-esteem and quality of life. But achieving this isn’t always easy.
Limited Medicare coverage for dental care means oral diseases are frequently treated late, particularly among people with mental illness. By this time, more invasive treatments, such as removal of teeth, are often required.
It’s crucial the health system takes a holistic approach to caring for people experiencing serious mental illness. That means we have mental health staff who ask questions about oral health, and dental practitioners who are trained to manage the unique oral health needs of people with serious mental illness.
It also means increasing government funding for oral health services – promotion, prevention and improved interdisciplinary care. This includes better collaboration between oral health, mental health, and peer and informal support sectors.
Bonnie Clough, Senior Lecturer, School of Applied Psychology, Griffith University; Amanda Wheeler, Professor of Mental Health, Griffith University; Caroline Victoria Robertson, Research Fellow, Griffith Research Centre for Mental Health, Griffith University; Santosh Tadakamadla, Professor & Head of Dentistry and Oral Health, La Trobe University, and Steve Kisely, Professor, School of Medicine, The University of Queensland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
When oil refineries burn, here’s what happens to your lungs and heart
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 fire at a major oil refinery in the Victorian city of Geelong has now reportedly been extinguished. But with thick smoke from the blaze lingering in the air on Thursday, many residents in Geelong and surrounding areas will understandably be worried.
What is released into the air when a refinery burns? And is the smoke bad for your health?
For most people, serious long-term health effects are unlikely. However, there can be short-term risks, and some groups are more vulnerable than others. So here’s what to look out for and how to stay safe.
Benny Young/Facebook What is in the air when an oil refinery burns?
Smoke from an oil refinery fire is made up of many different pollutants. The exact mix depends on what material is burning, how hot the fire is, and how long it lasts.
Typically, these fires release fine particles, known as PM2.5 and PM10, which are small enough to travel deep into the lungs.
They can also release toxic gases such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide, along with volatile organic compounds including benzene.
For people living further from the fire, fine particles are typically the main concern because they can travel long distances and linger in the air.
What are the health risks?
For most healthy adults living in the area, short-term exposure to these pollutants will cause irritation rather than lasting harm.
You may notice sore or watery eyes, a scratchy throat, coughing, headaches or a feeling of chest tightness. These symptoms are unpleasant but usually settle once air quality improves and exposure is reduced.
This kind of exposure is very different from the long-term occupational exposure experienced by refinery workers or emergency responders, for whom risks of cancer and lung diseases are much higher and better studied.
Who is most at risk?
When air quality worsens, people with existing lung conditions such as asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease are more likely to experience symptom flare-ups.
Smoke particles can irritate already inflamed airways, leading to increased breathlessness and coughing. For those with existing respiratory conditions, this may mean needing to use reliever medications more frequently than normal.
Those with heart disease are also at greater risk as air pollution can place extra strain on the cardiovascular system, increasing the risk of chest pain, irregular heartbeat and heart failure.
Older people are also generally more sensitive to poor air quality because they are more likely to have chronic diseases and their heart and lungs might not work as well as they did when they were young.
Children have the greatest risk of developing health issues in the longer term, as their lungs are still developing. But the risks from an isolated exposure, such as the Geelong fire, are relatively low.
Some studies suggest repeated or prolonged exposure to air pollution during pregnancy may increase the likelihood of adverse outcomes for babies, such as low birth weight. But again, the risk for pregnant people from an isolated incident such as this is low.
These kind of events often make people worry about cancer risk. But based on what we know, being exposed in the short term, from a single fire, does not meaningfully increase your risk of developing cancer – though these kinds of events are difficult to study, so evidence remains limited.
Cancers associated with oil refinery emissions are linked to years or decades of exposure, usually among workers and those in heavily polluted environments.
So while monitoring the air pollution and for any health issues is still necessary, it’s important to keep the risk in perspective.
Continued follow-up of workers directly involved in firefighting or cleanup will be essential, as their exposure levels are likely to be much higher than those in the surrounding community.
How to protect yourself from smoke
There are practical steps people can take to reduce their exposure if smoke or poor air quality persists.
It sounds obvious, but the less time you spend outside in smoke, the lower your risk of health issues cause by smoke inhalation.
Staying indoors with windows and doors closed can significantly reduce your exposure to particles, especially if air conditioning is set to recirculate indoor air.
If you have asthma or other chronic lung diseases, it’s important to keep your reliever close at hand, follow your existing written action plan, and seek medical advice early if symptoms worsen. This can prevent more serious flare-ups.
Well-fitting P2 or N95 masks can reduce inhalation of fine particles when worn correctly. Loose-fitting surgical or cloth masks provide much less protection against smoke.
Residents in and around Geelong concerned about air quality can check real-time monitoring data for the area at the Victorian Environment Protection Authority website.
If your symptoms worsen or persist, you should speak to a health-care professional, and in emergency always call triple 0.
Brian Oliver, Professor, School of Life Sciences, University of Technology Sydney and Peter J. Irga, Assistant Professor (Senior Lecturer) in Air and Noise Pollution, University of Technology Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Fat – by Aubrey Gordon
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.
There are books aplenty to encourage and help you to lose weight. This isn’t one of those.
There are also books aplenty to encourage and help you to accept yourself and your body at the weight you are, and forge self-esteem. This isn’t one of those, either—in fact, it starts by assuming you already have that.
There are fair arguments for body neutrality, and fat acceptance. Very worthy also is the constant fight for bodily sovereignty.
These are worthy causes, but they’re for the most-part not what our author concerns herself with here. Instead, she cares for a different and very practical goal: fat justice.
In a world where you may be turned away from medical treatment if you are over a certain size, told to lose half your bodyweight before you can have something you need, she demands better. The battle extends further than healthcare though, and indeed to all areas of life.
Ultimately, she argues, any society that will disregard the needs of the few because they’re a marginal demographic, is a society that will absolutely fail you if you ever differ from the norm in some way.
All in all, an important (and for many, perhaps eye-opening) book to read if you are fat, care about fat people, are a person of any size, or care about people in general.
Pick Up Your Copy of “What We Don’t Talk About When We Talk About Fat”, on Amazon Today!
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:
-
Stiff Hips? This Is What Will Change That
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.
Dr. Alyssa Lu shows us how:
It’s in your hips
Most adults lose up to half of their hip mobility, which makes everyday movements like squatting, standing, and walking feel harder.
If that’s you, then the bad news is that stretching alone won’t fix it, because your your hips need controlled movement and strength in multiple directions, not just passive stretching.
Self-test for hip mobility: sit and place your ankle over your opposite knee—if this feels stiff or uncomfortable, your hip external rotation is dangerously limited.
This is a problem, because your hips need both external rotation for positions like crossing your legs and internal rotation for walking, running, and squatting.
So, with that in mind, here are some exercises that cover those:
- External rotation incline drill: put the outside of your knee on a raised surface, and hinge your hips forwards while keeping your back tall, then press your knee down, and return to the start position using your glutes.
- Internal rotation band PNF drill: lie on your stomach with a band around your foot, pull your hip into internal rotation, hold, gently resist, relax, and repeat.
- Long lunge hip flexor drill: step into a long lunge, squeeze your back glute to open the front of your hip; you can lift your back knee slightly or leave it on the floor, per your preference.
- Wide-stance deep squat hold: take a wide stance with your toes slightly outward, sit down between your hips while keeping your torso tall; you can use support if you need to.
For more on all of this plus visual demonstrations, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like:
Zero Experience Needed: The Beginner Hip Mobility Reset
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:
-
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!
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:










