Beat Food Addictions!

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.

When It’s More Than “Just” Cravings

This is Dr. Nicole Avena. She’s a research neuroscientist who also teaches at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, as well as at Princeton. She’s done a lot of groundbreaking research in the field of nutrition, diet, and addition, with a special focus on women’s health and sugar intake specifically.

What does she want us to know?

Firstly, that food addictions are real addictions.

We know it can sound silly, like the famous line from Mad Max:

❝Do not, my friends, become addicted to water. It will take hold of you and you will resent its absence!❞

~ “Immortan Joe”

As an aside, it is actually possible to become addicted to water; if one drinks it excessively (we are talking gallons every day) it does change the structure of the brain (no surprise; the brain is not supposed to have that much water!) causing structural damage that then results in dependency, and headaches upon withdrawal. It’s called psychogenic polydipsia:

Primary polydipsia: Update

But back onto today’s more specific topic, and by a different mechanism of addiction…

Food addictions are dopaminergic addictions (as is cocaine)

If you are addicted to a certain food (often sugar, but other refined carbs such as potato products, and also especially refined flour products, are also potential addictive substances), then when you think about the food in question, your brain lights up with more dopamine than it should, and you are strongly motivated to seek and consume the substance in question.

Remember, dopamine functions by expectation, not by result. So until your brain’s dopamine-gremlin is sated, it will keep flooding you with motivational dopamine; that’s why the first bite tastes best, then you wolf down the rest before your brain can change its mind, and afterwards you may be left thinking/feeling “was that worth it?”.

Much like with other addictions (especially alcohol), shame and regret often feature strongly afterwards, even accompanied by notions of “never again”.

But, binge-eating is as difficult to escape as binge-drinking.

You can break free, but you will probably have to take it seriously

Dr. Avena recommends treating a food addiction like any other addiction, which means:

  1. Know why you want to quit (make a list of the reasons, and this will help you stay on track later!)
  2. Make a conscious decision to genuinely quit
  3. Learn about the nature of the specific addiction (know thy enemy!)
  4. Choose a strategy (e.g. wean off vs cold turkey, and decide what replacements, if any, you will use)
  5. Get support (especially from those around you, and/but the support of others facing, or who have successfully faced, the same challenge is very helpful too)
  6. Keep track of your success (build and maintain a streak!)
  7. Lean into how you will better enjoy life without addiction to the substance (it never really made you happy anyway, so enjoy your newfound freedom and good health!)

Want more from Dr. Avena?

You can check out her column at Psychology Today here:

Psychology Today | Food Junkie ← it has a lot of posts about sugar addiction in particular, and gives a lot of information and practical advice

You can also read her book, which could be a great help if you are thinking of quitting a sugar addiction:

Sugarless: A 7-Step Plan to Uncover Hidden Sugars, Curb Your Cravings, and Conquer Your Addiction

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:

  • Broccoli vs Cabbage – 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 broccoli to cabbage, we picked the broccoli.

    Why?

    Here we go once again pitting two different cultivars of the same species (Brassica oleracea) against each other, and/but once again, there is one that comes out as nutritionally best.

    In terms of macros, broccoli has more protein, carbs, and fiber, while they are both low glycemic index foods. The differences are small though, so it’s fairest to call this category a tie.

    When it comes to vitamins, broccoli has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, E, K, and choline, while cabbage is not higher in any vitamins. It should be noted that cabbage is still good for these, especially vitamins C and K, but broccoli is simply better.

    In the category of minerals, broccoli has more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while cabbage is not higher in any minerals. Again though, cabbage is still good, especially in calcium, iron, and manganese, but again, broccoli is simply better.

    Of course, enjoy either or both! But if you want the nutritionally densest option, it’s broccoli.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Gooseberries vs Orange – 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 gooseberries to oranges, we picked the gooseberries.

    Why?

    Both are great! But…

    In terms of macros, gooseberries have about 2x the fiber for about the same carbs and (in both cases, negligible) protein, winning in this category.

    In the category of vitamins, gooseberries have more of vitamins A, B3, B5, B6, and E, while oranges have more of vitamins B1, B2, B9, and C, yielding a marginal 5:4 win to gooseberries.

    Looking at minerals, gooseberries have more copper, iron, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while oranges have more calcium, thus a compelling 7:1 win for gooseberries here.

    Adding up the sections makes for a clear overall win for gooseberries, but by all means do enjoy either or both, as diversity is best!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like:

    What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Ouch. That ‘Free’ Annual Checkup Might Cost You. Here’s Why.

    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.

    When Kristy Uddin, 49, went in for her annual mammogram in Washington state last year, she assumed she would not incur a bill because the test is one of the many preventive measures guaranteed to be free to patients under the 2010 Affordable Care Act. The ACA’s provision made medical and economic sense, encouraging Americans to use screening tools that could nip medical problems in the bud and keep patients healthy.

    So when a bill for $236 arrived, Uddin — an occupational therapist familiar with the health care industry’s workings — complained to her insurer and the hospital. She even requested an independent review.

    “I’m like, ‘Tell me why am I getting this bill?’” Uddin recalled in an interview. The unsatisfying explanation: The mammogram itself was covered, per the ACA’s rules, but the fee for the equipment and the facility was not.

    That answer was particularly galling, she said, because, a year earlier, her “free” mammogram at the same health system had generated a bill of about $1,000 for the radiologist’s reading. Though she fought that charge (and won), this time she threw in the towel and wrote the $236 check. But then she dashed off a submission to the KFF Health News-NPR “Bill of the Month” project:

    “I was really mad — it’s ridiculous,” she later recalled. “This is not how the law is supposed to work.”

    The ACA’s designers might have assumed that they had spelled out with sufficient clarity that millions of Americans would no longer have to pay for certain types of preventive care, including mammograms, colonoscopies, and recommended vaccines, in addition to doctor visits to screen for disease. But the law’s authors didn’t reckon with America’s ever-creative medical billing juggernaut.

    Over the past several years, the medical industry has eroded the ACA’s guarantees, finding ways to bill patients in gray zones of the law. Patients going in for preventive care, expecting that it will be fully covered by insurance, are being blindsided by bills, big and small.

    The problem comes down to deciding exactly what components of a medical encounter are covered by the ACA guarantee. For example, when do conversations between doctor and patient during an annual visit for preventive services veer into the treatment sphere? What screenings are needed for a patient’s annual visit?

    A healthy 30-year-old visiting a primary care provider might get a few basic blood tests, while a 50-year-old who is overweight would merit additional screening for Type 2 diabetes.

    Making matters more confusing, the annual checkup itself is guaranteed to be “no cost” for women and people age 65 and older, but the guarantee doesn’t apply for men in the 18-64 age range — though many preventive services that require a medical visit (such as checks of blood pressure or cholesterol and screens for substance abuse) are covered.

    No wonder what’s covered under the umbrella of prevention can look very different to medical providers (trying to be thorough) and billers (intent on squeezing more dollars out of every medical encounter) than it does to insurers (who profit from narrower definitions).

    For patients, the gray zone has become a billing minefield. Here are a few more examples, gleaned from the Bill of the Month project in just the past six months:

    Peter Opaskar, 46, of Texas, went to his primary care doctor last year for his preventive care visit — as he’d done before, at no cost. This time, his insurer paid $130.81 for the visit, but he also received a perplexing bill for $111.81. Opaskar learned that he had incurred the additional charge because when his doctor asked if he had any health concerns, he mentioned that he was having digestive problems but had already made an appointment with his gastroenterologist. So, the office explained, his visit was billed as both a preventive physical and a consultation. “Next year,” Opasker said in an interview, if he’s asked about health concerns, “I’ll say ‘no,’ even if I have a gunshot wound.”

    Kevin Lin, a technology specialist in Virginia in his 30s, went to a new primary care provider to take advantage of the preventive care benefit when he got insurance; he had no physical complaints. He said he was assured at check-in that he wouldn’t be charged. His insurer paid $174 for the checkup, but he was billed an additional $132.29 for a “new patient visit.” He said he has made many calls to fight the bill, so far with no luck.

    Finally, there’s Yoori Lee, 46, of Minnesota, herself a colorectal surgeon, who was shocked when her first screening colonoscopy yielded a bill for $450 for a biopsy of a polyp — a bill she knew was illegal. Federal regulations issued in 2022 to clarify the matter are very clear that biopsies during screening colonoscopies are included in the no-cost promise. “I mean, the whole point of screening is to find things,” she said, stating, perhaps, the obvious.

    Though these patient bills defy common sense, room for creative exploitation has been provided by the complex regulatory language surrounding the ACA. Consider this from Ellen Montz, deputy administrator and director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, in an emailed response to queries and an interview request on this subject: “If a preventive service is not billed separately or is not tracked as individual encounter data separately from an office visit and the primary purpose of the office visit is not the delivery of the preventive item or service, then the plan issuer may impose cost sharing for the office visit.”

    So, if the doctor decides that a patient’s mention of stomach pain does not fall under the umbrella of preventive care, then that aspect of the visit can be billed separately, and the patient must pay?

    And then there’s this, also from Montz: “Whether a facility fee is permitted to be charged to a consumer would depend on whether the facility usage is an integral part of performing the mammogram or an integral part of any other preventive service that is required to be covered without cost sharing under federal law.”

    But wait, how can you do a mammogram or colonoscopy without a facility?

    Unfortunately, there is no federal enforcement mechanism to catch individual billing abuses. And agencies’ remedies are weak — simply directing insurers to reprocess claims or notifying patients they can resubmit them.

    In the absence of stronger enforcement or remedies, CMS could likely curtail these practices and give patients the tools to fight back by offering the sort of clarity the agency provided a few years ago regarding polyp biopsies — spelling out more clearly what comes under the rubric of preventive care, what can be billed, and what cannot.

    The stories KFF Health News and NPR receive are likely just the tip of an iceberg. And while each bill might be relatively small compared with the stunning $10,000 hospital bills that have become all too familiar in the United States, the sorry consequences are manifold. Patients pay bills they do not owe, depriving them of cash they could use elsewhere. If they can’t pay, those bills might end up with debt-collection agencies and, ultimately, harm their credit score.

    Perhaps most disturbing: These unexpected bills might discourage people from seeking preventive screenings that could be lifesaving, which is why the ACA deemed them “essential health benefits” that should be free.

    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.

    Share This Post

  • The Sugar That Blocks COVID

    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.

    Vaccines are considered the “gold standard” against COVID and similar pathogens, for their very high rate of efficacy, clear science, and at least moderately lasting effects (i.e., it’s not something like handwashing*, which must be redone very frequently). Since vaccines are not without their popular misunderstanders, we have written a little about that, here: Vaccine Mythbusting

    *See also: The Truth About Handwashing ← for another mythbusting edition, covering what actually works against what, and what doesn’t—as well as the disparity between people’s self-reports of handwashing, and how often/well they actually wash their hands!

    These are not the only things we can do; consider for example: Beyond Supplements: The Real Immune-Boosters! ← most people don’t know these things and the huge difference they make

    And for that matter: Why Some People Get Sick More (And How To Not Be One Of Them) ← for a very prophylactic approach

    So… What’s this about a sugar that blocks COVID?

    A sweet distraction

    What if, rather than triggering immune responses as vaccines do, we could provide a physical shield?

    Of course, masks do that, but are more important on an epidemiological level than personal (i.e. they protect society more than they protect the wearer), and they are impractical in many circumstances, and use of them is very low in most countries. So in other words: they’re good! But may be a lost cause at least for the time being.

    See also: Mythbusting The Mask Debate

    And, for that matter: Do We Simply Not Care About Old People?

    So… How about a nanotech version, that you can squirt up your nose and then it’s done, you’re protected?

    Researchers (Dr. Daniela Niemeyer et al.) have developed a synthetic sugar-coated polymer nanoparticle that blocks Covid-19 from infecting human cells!

    How it works: it’s two things in one:

    1. a decoy
    2. a trap

    The particle mimics the virus’s natural target (sialic acid chains) acting as a decoy. It then binds to the virus’s spike protein 500 times more strongly, preventing it from binding with cells (something the virus needs to do in order to replicate itself).

    How well it works: at low doses, reduced infection in human lung cells by 98.6%, working against both the original SARS-CoV-2 strain and the D614G variant.

    Now, there are two things to bear in mind here.

    Firstly, you may be wondering: what about the other 1.4%? And well, nothing is perfect, but 98.6% is good, and assuming you do have a functioning immune system, your immune system will be much more likely to throw off a pathogen that is able to affect only a few cells at a time, than one that is infecting almost every cell it touches, and multiplying exponentially as it does so.

    Secondly, about those human lung cells: they were in a petri dish, so we can’t say for sure yet that this will be safe and effective in vivo (i.e. in actual humans). However, the researchers are cautiously optimistic and are looking forward to the next testing stage.

    You can read the paper itself, here: Polysialosides Outperform Sulfated Analogs for Binding with SARS-CoV-2 ← not the most exciting title

    Lastly, you may be wondering: doesn’t this mean I will be left with live COVID viruses in my respiratory tract, stuck in these molecular traps? And the answer is: sort of, at least for a while. The virus will still be theoretically active insofar as it remains viable, not destroyed, but as it’s already bound to something it can’t infect, it can’t do any harm. Further, a virus that has been trapped in this fashion is much easier for our own immune system to locate and destroy, or even just locate and remove. Think of it like a fly trapped on a flypaper. It’s technically still viable, but it’s not going anywhere, and is easy to get rid of.

    On the flipside, that does raise an extra question of how long the protection will last—it’s currently being posited as a medium-term solution, but the timescales have not yet been worked out, as that’ll need to be studied in vivo.

    Want to learn more?

    Check out:

    The Minerals That Neutralize Viruses (While Being Harmless To Humans) ← for a similar approach with a very common food additive

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • How’s Your TFL Muscle (Common Hidden Cause Of Low Back, Hip, Knee & Ankle Pain)?

    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.

    Cori Lefkowitz, of “Strong at Every Age”, shows us what to do about it:

    The problem is often not what it seems

    The tensor fasciae latae (TFL) is a small muscle on the outside-front of your hip that helps flex your hip, internally rotate your thigh, and lift your leg sideways, but when it becomes overactive it often compensates for weak or poorly recruited glute medius muscles.

    This can become a bigger problem than it needs to, because many people focus only on where pain appears, without realizing the TFL is behind it (often literally). For this reason, stretching, strengthening, resting, foam rolling downstream areas, or even doing glute exercises like band walks, clamshells, or lateral raises can backfire if your TFL is still doing the work.

    In particular: if you feel a given exercise more in the front or side of your hip than the side of your butt, you’re likely reinforcing compensation rather than fixing it.

    Because changing recruitment patterns is easier when tight muscles are first relaxed, use a three-step process of:

    1. foam rolling overactive muscles
    2. stretching and mobilizing them
    3. activating the weaker muscles

    …in that order!

    For more on all of this plus visual demonstrations of how, enjoy:

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

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like:

    How Tight Are Your Hips? Test (And Fix!) With This

    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:

  • Understanding Type 1 Diabetes

    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!

    No question/request too big or small 😎

    ❝I enjoy10almonds reading. What you need more articles about is type 1 diabetes❞

    Glad you enjoy it!

    You’re right that we haven’t written a lot about type 1 diabetes (henceforth: T1D), and the reason is that most people tend to be interested in:

    • Things that pertain to them directly (e.g. health conditions they have)
    • Things that might pertain to them (e.g. health conditions they fear getting)

    So, we have a lot of articles about health conditions that are very common and/or become increasingly common as we get older, and therefore that everyone would do well to avoid.

    In contrast, since T1D is usually diagnosed at a rather young age, our readers will tend to fall into one of the following two categories:

    • People who do not have T1D and, being mostly older adults, less likely to get it now
    • People who do have T1D and, as such, already know far more about it than we’re likely to include in a one-page article
      • Honorable mention: people who do not have T1D but do live with or otherwise spend a lot of time with someone who does, and thus learn a lot due by proximity and (hopefully) care for the other’s wellbeing

    However! Perhaps we are overemphasizing a focus on direct usefulness, and underestimating general interest.

    So, while we won’t have room to go into great depth, let’s address some important things:

    It’s really quite different from type 2 diabetes

    While type 2 diabetes is largely a matter of insulin resistance resulting in blood sugar imbalances (and thus can largely be controlled by dietary adjustments, for most people), T1D is an autoimmune disorder in which the pancreas (which normally produces insulin) goes to war with itself and produces no meaningful amount of insulin.

    As a result, those with T1D rely on exogenous (“comes from outside”) insulin, and that’s not negotiable (until such time as a cure is found, but alas, that’s not yet).

    Without exogenous insulin, blood sugar levels will rocket upwards (even if sugar consumption was minimal, the problem is that it has no way of getting out of the blood and into where it’s needed, so it just builds up), and this hyperglycemia will cause all the same problems it would in type 2 diabetes (including diabetic ketoacidosis and, if untreated, death), except that unlike in type 2 diabetes (where this can often be waited out if it’s not too severe), hyperglycemia won’t self-resolve without exogenous insulin.

    It makes a lot of other health considerations more difficult to manage

    For starters, it increases the risk of… honestly, most other adverse health conditions. This is for three main reasons:

    • Being an autoimmune condition, it does mean the immune system is chronically compromised, which reduces its ability to do its actual job, i.e. defending the body from pathogens and similar
    • Hypo- and hyperglycemia (low and high blood sugar levels, which are both frequently-suffered conditions within T1D) both have adverse effects on the body which increase the risk of many health problems
    • Trying to manage the hypos and hypers makes it very difficult to do a lot of other things that most people take for granted when it comes to improving one’s health. It affects one’s ability to exercise (see our “learn more” below for how to best manage that, by the way), and has a huge impact on adherence to any sort of dietary strategy, let alone things like intermittent fasting. Simply put, one cannot be especially purist about diet when the options are “have a sugary snack at 4am to correct this hypo, or go into a coma”

    Want to learn more?

    You might like this very good book that we reviewed:

    Exercise with Type 1 Diabetes: How to exercise without scary lows or frustrating highs – by Ginger Vieira ← most of this book is very practical information, e.g: using fasted exercise (4 hours from last meal+bolus) to prevent hypos, counterintuitive as that may seemthe key is that timing a workout for when you have the least amount of fast-acting insulin in your body means your body can’t easily use your blood sugars for energy, and draws from your fat reserves instead… Win/Win!

    That’s just one quick tip; do check out the book for much more 😎

    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: