
Are You A “Weekend Warrior”?
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.
First, let’s define the term: for our purposes today (and indeed, for the science we will discuss), a “weekend warrior” is someone who gets in 150 minutes or more of moderate to vigorous exercise in just one or two sessions per week.
Some more parameters for our discussion today:
- a “regularly active” person also does 150 minutes or more of moderate to vigorous exercise, but spread over three or more sessions
- an “inactive” person is someone who does under 150 minutes of moderate to vigorous exercise per week.
You can probably guess already that the “inactive” person is going to be less healthy, and if you guessed that, then you guessed correctly.
But, what about the other two?
Head to head
Researchers (Dr. Zhiyuan Wu et al.) looked at 51,650 US adults with type 2 diabetes, found that both weekend warrior and regular exercise patterns (per the above definitions) reduced risk of death.
Compared to inactive people…
- weekend warriors had a 21% lower all-cause mortality risk
- regularly active people had a 17% lower all-cause mortality risk
Not only that, but when we look at cardiovascular mortality specifically, the gap widens, and…
- weekend warriors had a 33% lower cardiovascular death risk
- regularly active people had a 19% lower cardiovascular death risk
You can read the paper in full, here: Association of Weekend Warrior and Other Physical Activity Patterns With Mortality Among Adults With Diabetes: A Cohort Study
Why does this happen? What happened to advice such as that from The Doctor Who Wants Us To Exercise Less, & Move More?
It’s unclear, but the researchers hypothesize that weekend activities may be longer, more social, outdoors, or higher intensity compared with weekday gym workouts—all of which can make a difference.
We at 10almonds would also not that the limitations listed in the paper,
❝Physical activity was self-reported and assessed at a single time point❞
…may play a part too. The kind of person who spends their weekends mountain-biking may well say “No, I don’t really do any exercise in the rest of the week” because, comparatively to the weekend, they’re not—even if in fact, due in part to their extra fitness, they’re quite possibly moving more than their non-weekend-warrioring counterparts who, not having the weekend of mountain-biking to point to, start totting up all the other things they do during the week, that the weekend warriors also did but left unmentioned as superfluous. But this too is just a hypothesis, to be clear.
What is clear, and is not hypothetical, is that both exercise patterns significantly reduce all-cause mortality.
In short, it is best to go with which ever works for you and your preferred lifestyle, because ultimately, the best exercise is the exercise that you’ll actually do.
For example:
- How Useful Is “Exercise Snacking”, Really? ← for light bites
- How To Do HIIT (Without Wrecking Your Body) ← for getting intense
Want to learn more?
If you don’t love organized, intentional workouts, then consider:
No-Exercise Exercise! ← for how to get in a lot of exercise without it feeling like it
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:
-
Can You Change Your Sleep Schedule?
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 is science to it:
To take arms against a sea of sleepiness and, by opposing, end it?
While people can be broadly categorized into “early birds” or “night owls”, most fall somewhere along a spectrum determined by their circadian system.
This circadian rhythm is regulated by nerve cell clusters in the hypothalamus, which detect light through your eyes and synchronize your body’s internal clock with the day-night cycle. This circadian system acts like a conductor, coordinating hormone release and helping organs function in sync, while managing the necessary transitions between wakefulness and sleep.
Note: the circadian system can’t directly force sleep, but it predicts when you’ll need rest based on your habitual light exposure and sleep patterns, then prepares your body by releasing hormones such as melatonin. This means that if you consistently go to bed at the same time, melatonin production typically begins about two hours beforehand to promote sleepiness.
Early birds vs night owls: early birds generally experience a cortisol surge just before waking, while night owls often reach peak cortisol levels around 30 minutes after getting up.
There is inherent difficulty in fighting biology: maintaining a schedule that strongly opposes your natural preferences is challenging, and a single disrupted night can quickly shift your circadian timing back towards its baseline.
So the options become:
- Go with the flow and end up wherever it takes you (can be dangerous if life’s responsibilities mean that this results in irregular sleep)
- Make small changes and shift your sleep schedule gradually to where you want it to be, then consciously maintain it there, by using light/dark cues and other “time anchors” that you can usually control, such as mealtimes and exercise times.
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:
Early Bird Or Night Owl? Genes vs Environment
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Starfruit vs Soursop – 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 starfruit to soursop, we picked the soursop.
Why?
First, by starfruit, we also mean carambola, which is a different name for the same fruit, and by soursop we also mean graviola/guyabano/guanábana, which are different namers for the same fruit. Now, as for their health qualities:
In terms of macros, the soursop has more carbs and fiber, the ratio of which also give it the lower glycemic index. So, a win for soursop here.
When it comes to vitamins, starfruit has more of vitamins A, B5, C, and E, while soursop has more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B6, B7, B9, and K. Another win for soursop.
In the category of minerals, starfruit has slightly more copper, manganese, and zinc, while soursop has much more calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, and potassium. One more win for soursop!
Adding up the sections makes for a clear and overwhelming win for soursop, but let’s address to quick safety considerations while we’re here:
- Soursop extract has been claimed to be an effective cancer treatment. It isn’t. There is no evidence for this at all; just one unscrupulous company that spread the claims.
- Soursop contains annonacin, a neurotoxin. That sounds scary, but much like with apple seeds and cyanide, the quantities you’d have to consume to suffer ill effects are absurd. Remember how capsaicin (as found in hot peppers) is also a neurotoxin, too and has many health benefits. Humans have a long and happy tradition of enjoying things that are toxic at high doses, but in small doses are neutral or even beneficial. Pretty much all things we can consume (including oxygen, and water) are toxic at sufficient doses.
In short, both of these fruits are fine and good, neither will treat cancer, but both will help to keep you in good health. As for nutritional density, the soursop wins in every category.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Top 8 Fruits That Prevent & Kill Cancer ← soursop has no special cancer treatment properties, but actual evidence shows these fruits are beneficial (being good as a preventative, and also definitely a worthy adjunct to—but not a replacement for—mainstream anticancer therapies if you have cancer).
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Heart Rate Zones, Oxalates, & More
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!
Have a question or a request? You can always hit “reply” to any of our emails, or use the feedback widget at the bottom!
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
❝I think the heart may be an issue for lots of us. I know it is for me due to AFib. When I’m in my training zone like on a treadmill, I’m usually around 110 to 120. But there are occasionally times when I’m at 140 or 150. How dangerous is that? If I use that formula of 180 minus age, thats 103. I get nothing from that. My resting heart rate is in the 50 to 60 range.❞
First, for safety, let us draw attention to our medical disclaimer at the bottom of each email, and also specifically note that we are not cardiologists here, let alone your cardiologist. There’s a lot we can’t know or advise about. However, as general rules of thumb:
For people without serious health conditions, it is considered good and healthful for one’s heart rate to double (from its resting rate) during exercise, with even more than 2.5x resting rate being nothing more than a good cardio workout.
As for “180 minus age” (presuming you mean: to calculate the safe maximum heart rate), more common (and used by the American Heart Association) is 220 minus age. In your case, that’d give 143.
Having atrial fibrillation may change this however, and we can’t offer medical advice.
We can point to this AHA “AFib Resources For Patients and Professionals”, including this handy FAQ sheet which says:
“Am I able to exercise?” / “Yes, as long as you’re cleared by your doctor, you can perform normal activities of daily living that you can tolerate” (accompanied by a little graphic of a person using an exercise bike)
You personally probably know this already, of course, but it’s quite an extensive collection of resources, so we thought we’d include it.
It’s certainly a good idea for everyone to be aware of their healthy heart rate ranges, regardless of having a known heart condition or not, though!
American Heart Association: Target Heart Rates Chart
❝I would like to see some articles on osteoporosis❞
You might enjoy this mythbusting main feature we did a few weeks ago!
The Bare-Bones Truth About Osteoporosis
❝Interesting, but… Did you know spinach is high in oxylates? Some people are sensitive and can cause increased inflammation, joint pain or even kidney stones. Moderation is key. My sister and I like to eat healthy but found out by experience that too much spinach salad caused us joint and other aches.❞
It’s certainly good to be mindful of such things! For most people, a daily serving of spinach shouldn’t cause ill effects, and certainly there are other greens to eat.
We wondered whether there was a way to reduce the oxalate content, and we found:
How to Reduce Oxalic Acid in Spinach: Neutralizing Oxalates
…which led us this product on Amazon:
Nephure Oxalate Reducing Enzyme, Low Oxalate Diet Support
We wondered what “nephure” was, and whether it could be trusted, and came across this “Supplement Police” article about it:
Nephure Review – Oxalate Reducing Enzyme Powder Health Benefits?
…which honestly, seems to have been written as a paid advertisement. But! It did reference a study, which we were able to look up, and find:
In vitro and in vivo safety evaluation of Nephure™
…which seems to indicate that it was safe (for rats) in all the ways that they checked. They did not, however, check whether it actually reduced oxalate content in spinach or any other food.
The authors did declare a conflict of interest, in that they had a financial relationship with the sponsor of the study, Captozyme Inc.
All in all, it may be better to just have kale instead of spinach:
- 20 Foods High in Oxalates to Limit if You Have Kidney Stones
- The Kidney Dietician: The Best Low Oxalate Greens
We turn the tables and ask you a question!
We’ll then talk about this tomorrow:
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Needle Pain Is a Big Problem for Kids. One California Doctor Has a Plan.
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.
Almost all new parents go through it: the distress of hearing their child scream at the doctor’s office. They endure the emotional torture of having to hold their child down as the clinician sticks them with one vaccine after another.
“The first shots he got, I probably cried more than he did,” said Remy Anthes, who was pushing her 6-month-old son, Dorian, back and forth in his stroller in Oakland, California.
“The look in her eyes, it’s hard to take,” said Jill Lovitt, recalling how her infant daughter Jenna reacted to some recent vaccines. “Like, ‘What are you letting them do to me? Why?’”
Some children remember the needle pain and quickly start to internalize the fear. That’s the fear Julia Cramer witnessed when her 3-year-old daughter, Maya, had to get blood drawn for an allergy test at age 2.
“After that, she had a fear of blue gloves,” Cramer said. “I went to the grocery store and she saw someone wearing blue gloves, stocking the vegetables, and she started freaking out and crying.”
Pain management research suggests that needle pokes may be children’s biggest source of pain in the health care system. The problem isn’t confined to childhood vaccinations either. Studies looking at sources of pediatric pain have included children who are being treated for serious illness, have undergone heart surgeries or bone marrow transplants, or have landed in the emergency room.
“This is so bad that many children and many parents decide not to continue the treatment,” said Stefan Friedrichsdorf, a specialist at the University of California-San Francisco’s Stad Center for Pediatric Pain, speaking at the End Well conference in Los Angeles in November.
The distress of needle pain can follow children as they grow and interfere with important preventive care. It is estimated that a quarter of all adults have a fear of needles that began in childhood. Sixteen percent of adults refuse flu vaccinations because of a fear of needles.
Friedrichsdorf said it doesn’t have to be this bad. “This is not rocket science,” he said.
He outlined simple steps that clinicians and parents can follow:
- Apply an over-the-counter lidocaine, which is a numbing cream, 30 minutes before a shot.
- Breastfeed babies, or give them a pacifier dipped in sugar water, to comfort them while they’re getting a shot.
- Use distractions like teddy bears, pinwheels, or bubbles to divert attention away from the needle.
- Don’t pin kids down on an exam table. Parents should hold children in their laps instead.
At Children’s Minnesota, Friedrichsdorf practiced the “Children’s Comfort Promise.” Now he and other health care providers are rolling out these new protocols for children at UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospitals in San Francisco and Oakland. He’s calling it the “Ouchless Jab Challenge.”
If a child at UCSF needs to get poked for a blood draw, a vaccine, or an IV treatment, Friedrichsdorf promises, the clinicians will do everything possible to follow these pain management steps.
“Every child, every time,” he said.
It seems unlikely that the ouchless effort will make a dent in vaccine hesitancy and refusal driven by the anti-vaccine movement, since the beliefs that drive it are often rooted in conspiracies and deeply held. But that isn’t necessarily Friedrichsdorf’s goal. He hopes that making routine health care less painful can help sway parents who may be hesitant to get their children vaccinated because of how hard it is to see them in pain. In turn, children who grow into adults without a fear of needles might be more likely to get preventive care, including their yearly flu shot.
In general, the onus will likely be on parents to take a leading role in demanding these measures at medical centers, Friedrichsdorf said, because the tolerance and acceptance of children’s pain is so entrenched among clinicians.
Diane Meier, a palliative care specialist at Mount Sinai, agrees. She said this tolerance is a major problem, stemming from how doctors are usually trained.
“We are taught to see pain as an unfortunate, but inevitable side effect of good treatment,” Meier said. “We learn to repress that feeling of distress at the pain we are causing because otherwise we can’t do our jobs.”
During her medical training, Meier had to hold children down for procedures, which she described as torture for them and for her. It drove her out of pediatrics. She went into geriatrics instead and later helped lead the modern movement to promote palliative care in medicine, which became an accredited specialty in the United States only in 2006.
Meier said she thinks the campaign to reduce needle pain and anxiety should be applied to everyone, not just to children.
“People with dementia have no idea why human beings are approaching them to stick needles in them,” she said. And the experience can be painful and distressing.
Friedrichsdorf’s techniques would likely work with dementia patients, too, she said. Numbing cream, distraction, something sweet in the mouth, and perhaps music from the patient’s youth that they remember and can sing along to.
“It’s worthy of study and it’s worthy of serious attention,” Meier said.
This article is from a partnership that includes KQED, NPR, and KFF Health News.
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.
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.
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:
-
Frozen/Thawed/Refrozen Meat: How Much Is Safety, And How Much Is Taste?
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 You Can (And Can’t) Safely Do With Frozen Meat
Yesterday, we asked you:
❝You have meat in the freezer. How long is it really safe to keep it?❞
…and got a range of answers, mostly indicating to a) follow the instructions (a very safe general policy) and b) do not refreeze if thawed because that would be unsafe. Fewer respondents indicated that meat could be kept for much longer than guidelines say, or conversely, that it should only be kept for weeks or less.
So, what does the science say?
Meat can be kept indefinitely (for all intents and purposes) in a freezer; it just might get tougher: True or False?
False, assuming we are talking about a normal household electrical freezer that bottoms out at about -18℃ / 0℉.
Fun fact: cryobiologists cryopreserve tissue samples (so basically, meat) at -196℃ / -320℉, and down at those temperatures, the tissues will last a lot longer than you will (and, for all practical purposes: indefinitely). There are other complications with doing so (such as getting the sample through the glass transition point without cracking it during the vitrification process) but those are beyond the scope of this article.
If you remember back to your physics or perhaps chemistry classes at school, you’ll know that molecules move more quickly at higher temperatures, and more slowly at lower ones, only approaching true stillness as they near absolute zero (-273℃ / -459℉ / 0K ← we’re not saying it’s ok, although it is; rather, that is zero kelvin; no degree sign is used with kelvins)
That means that when food is frozen, the internal processes aren’t truly paused; it’s just slowed to a point of near imperceptibility.
So, all the way up at the relatively warm temperatures of a household freezer, a lot of processes are still going on.
What this means in practical terms: those guidelines saying “keep in the freezer for up to 4 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 9 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 12 months” etc are being honest with you.
More or less, anyway! They’ll usually underestimate a little to be on the safe side—but so should you.
Bad things start happening within weeks at most: True or False?
False, for all practical purposes. Again, assuming a normal and properly-working household freezer as described above.
(True, technically but misleadingly: the bad things never stopped; they just slowed down to a near imperceptible pace—again, as described above)
By “bad” here we should clarify we mean “dangerous”. One subscriber wrote:
❝Meat starts losing color and flavor after being in the freezer for too long. I keep meat in the freezer for about 2 months at the most❞
…and as a matter of taste, that’s fair enough!
It is unsafe to refreeze meat that has been thawed: True or False?
False! Assuming it has otherwise been kept chilled, just the same as for fresh meat.
Food poisoning comes from bacteria, and there is nothing about the meat previously having been frozen that will make it now have more bacteria.
That means, for example…
- if it was thawed (but chilled) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been chilled for that period of time (so probably: use it or freeze it, unless it’s been more than a few days)
- if it was thawed (and at room temperature) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been at room temperature for that period of time (so probably: throw it out, unless the period of time is very small indeed)
The USDA gives for 2 hours max at room temperature before considering it unsalvageable, by the way.
However! Whenever you freeze meat (or almost anything with cells, really), ice crystals will form in and between cells. How much ice crystallization occurs depends on several variables, with how much water there is present in the food is usually the biggest factor (remember that animal cells are—just like us—mostly water).
Those ice crystals will damage the cell walls, causing the food to lose structural integrity. When you thaw it out, the ice crystals will disappear but the damage will be left behind (this is what “freezer burn” is).
So if your food seems a little “squishy” after having been frozen and thawed, that’s why. It’s not rotten; it’s just been stabbed countless times on a microscopic level.
The more times you freeze and thaw and refreeze food, the more this will happen. Your food will degrade in structural integrity each time, but the safety of it won’t have changed meaningfully.
Want to know more?
Further reading:
You can thaw and refreeze meat: five food safety myths busted
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:
-
Strong Women Stay Young – by Dr. Miriam Nelson with Dr. Sarah Wernick
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. Nelson makes heavy reference to her own peer-reviewed study; this involved 40 postmenopausal women, for a year, the intervention group enjoyed a 15–20 year rejuvenation (by various physical markers, ranging from strength to bone density to mobility to metabolic benefits and more) while the control group simply got a year older.
So, what was the intervention? The program itself involves two at-home 30-minute exercise sessions per week, with only easy-to-get, inexpensive equipment (mainly: dumbbells), though in the book there are also suggestions for those who prefer to use a fully-furnished gym.
There is, by the way, also a short chapter near the end entitled “Men need strength training too!”; given the target audience of the book, this chapter is brief and to the point. The final chapter, on the other hand, is longer again and is a “questions and answers” section, for troubleshooting any common problems not covered in the main part of the book.
The style is light and accessible pop-science, a little salesy in feel but all it’s “selling” is the idea that you should indeed do this exercise program, so it can be considered motivational rather than unduly commercial. Aside from that, the rest of what we find here is direct practical advice.
Bottom line: if you’d like to be stronger and healthier, this is a strongly evidence-based way to do so!
Click here to check out Strong Women Stay Young, and stay strong and young!
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:








