Building Your Brain At Every Age

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

There is a famous myth that the brain doesn’t finish developing until the age of 25.

Or rather, there is a famous incorrect belief, since the fact it’s a myth is, sadly, not so well-known as it could be.

The reality is that the 2006 study the “brain doesn’t finish developing until 25” people are referring to examined the development of the brain up to the age of 25, and that was where the study ended, because the study was about the adolescent brain, and in any case all studies have to stop somewhere or else nothing would get published.

This is the equivalent of saying “it didn’t stop raining until four o’clock” when the reality is that four o’clock is simply when you gave up on checking.

The study didn’t misrepresent this, by the way, but the popular press did!

Another 2012 study looked at various metrics of brain development, and found:

  • Synapse overproduction into the teens
  • Cortex pruning into the late 20s
  • Prefrontal pruning into middle age at least (that’s where they stopped looking)
  • Myelination beyond middle age (that’s where they stopped looking)

Source: Experience and the developing prefrontal cortexcheck out figure 1, and make sure you’re looking at the human data not the rat data

You can read much more about the original study, here: The Brain As A Work-In-Progress

There’s more (there’s always more)

Those latter bulletpoints listed there are about pruning and myelination (that is, encasing neurons in protective sheathes of myelin), so what about actual brain growth?

It was long believed that brain growth could not occur later in life, due to expending our innate stock of pluripotent stem cells. However, this was mostly based on rodent studies.

Rodent studies are often used for brain research, because it’s difficult to find human volunteers willing to have their brains sliced thinly (so that the cells can be viewed under a microscope) at the end of the study.

However, in 2018 and 2019, there was a flurry of studies that (using brain tissue samples from the autopsies of formerly healthy humans) proved, disproved*, and then re-proved, that neurogenesis (creation of new brain cells) occurs in adult humans:

*This middle one was a mistake; in an effort to disprove the prior work of Dr. Maura Boldrini et al., the next research team (Dr. Shawn Sorrels et al.) accidentally destroyed the evidence they were looking for, and then proclaimed “look, it’s not there”. It then took a follow-up study by Dr. Elena Moreno-Jiménez et al. to fix the error. If you’ll pardon the pun, because actually the accident in the middle study was due to the fixing process they used (in the sense of chemical tissue fixation to preserve them for study).

You can read those studies in order, here:

That third study corrected the mistake made in the second study, by using a shorter fixation time for the cell samples they wanted to look at, and found that there were tens of thousands of newly-made brain cells in samples from adults ranging from 43 to 87.

There was still room for doubt

Since those studies, it’s been generally considered no longer contentious that humans do, indeed, do neurogenesis throughout life—at least in the hippocampi, which is where the tissue that was tested came from, and the hippocampus is a focal point for a lot of such research as it’s almost entirely responsible for memory.

Thus, to get philosophical for a moment, it could be argued that that’s the part of the brain that’s the most uniquely “us” (since it contains more or less our entire conscious life experience), and other parts of the brain serve as processing apparatus of various kinds. So, it’s an important bit of gray matter.

However, scientists (Dr. Marta Paterlini et al.) wanted to check that those newly-formed neurons really were newly-formed. The reason this was in question was that it wasn’t known whether the predecessors of these new neurons, neural progenitor cells, were still able to proliferate.

The alternative explanation (if it turned out they weren’t) would be that those “new” neurons found in aged brains were, in fact, old neurons in a state of arrested development (because they had been considered “new” on account of their cellular features that mark them as in an early stage of neural development).

Good news: the study confirmed the existence and division of those precursor cells that generate new neurons in adults.

Specifically, they examined brain tissue from human brains aged 0 to 78 using a lot of very hi-tech methods including:

  • Flow cytometry ← this is a lot fancier than it sounds like, and essentially involves rapidly laser-scanning tens of thousands of cells one at a time. And you thought photocopying a workbook was arduous!
  • Single nucleus RNA sequencing ← this one is what it sounds like
  • RNAscope ← think of this as a “noise-cancelling” microscope for looking at RNA in the context of in situ hybridization
  • Xenium ← when sci-fi shows have a fuzzy image and someone says “enhance” and now it has details, that’s what this software does, but for looking at RNA
  • Carbon-dating ← yes, really! It may seem funny to use carbon-dating to tell the age of a brain cell (with an undertone of “are we really that old now?”, but measuring C14 decay was a reliable way to know definitively when a given cell was formed (because, being carbon-based life as we are, our cells can be carbon-dated just like any carbon-containing sample from an archeological site).

Using these technologies, they were able to detect not just various stages of neuron development, but also many actively dividing cells, and the progenitor cells of which we spoke above.

Notably, some adults had many neural progenitor cells while others had very few, suggesting differences in brain regenerative potential. Almost certainly this is linked to overall brain health, but identifying the cause(s) of the difference was not part of this study, so we can’t say for sure.

You can find the paper here: Identification of proliferating neural progenitors in the adult human hippocampus

What to do with this information

The practical take-away here is that our brain, at any age, is a developing thing and will continue to rejuvenate itself given the chance. So, we have to give it that chance.

This means looking after our brains with such things as:

And of course: don’t smoke, and don’t drink alcohol. They are terrible for everything, and brain health is near the top of the list for each of them.

See also: What Happens To Your Body When You Stop Drinking Alcohol ← for a timeline of physical recovery, including repairing the damage done to the brain by alcohol

Want to learn more?

You might like this book we reviewed a little while ago:

The Brain’s Way of Healing: Remarkable Discoveries and Recoveries from the Frontiers of Neuroplasticity – by Dr. Norman Doidge

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:

  • Practical Programming for Strength Training – by Mark Rippetoe & Andy Baker

    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.

    Strength training is an important part of overall health maintenance, but it can be hard to find a good guide to progressive strength improvement that isn’t a bodybuilding book.

    This one gives a ground-upwards approach, explaining small details to even quite basic things, before taking the reader through to more advanced progressions, and how to get the most strength-building out of each exercise over time.

    As such, this is a good book for anyone of any level from beginner to quite experienced, and you can hop in at any point since there are always catch-up summaries and/or reiterations of the previous concepts that we’re now building on from.

    The authors do also talk nutrition, hormones, and so forth, but most of it is about the exercises and the progressions thereof.

    There is a slightly patronizing chapter towards the end, about “special populations”, for example offering “novice and intermediate training for women”, but it doesn’t take away from the majority of the book, as the exercises don’t care about your gender. Muscles are muscles, and we all start from wherever we are. Yes, testosterone boosts muscle mass, but let’s face it, there are a lot of women in the world who are stronger than a lot of men.

    One thing to bear in mind is that a lot of this is barbell training, so you will need a barbell (or access to one at a gym). If purely bodyweight training is your preference, or perhaps some other form of weightlifting (e.g. kettlebells or such) then this isn’t the book for that.

    Bottom line: if strength training is your focus and you like barbells, then this is a great book to take you quite a way along that road.

    Click here to check out Practical Programming For Strength Training, and get stronger!

    Share This Post

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

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

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

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

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

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

    Doing more things, but less effectively

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Adults are better at multi-tasking than kids

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

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

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

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

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

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

    What about as we approach older age?

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

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

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

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

    Older people can practise and improve

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

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

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

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

    There are times when we do think better when moving

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Peter Wilson, Professor of Developmental Psychology, Australian Catholic University

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

    Share This Post

  • Scrolling on the toilet increases your risk of haemorrhoids, new study shows

    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.

    Many of us are guilty of scrolling our smartphones on the toilet. But a new study from the United States, published today, has found this habit may increase your risk of developing haemorrhoids by up to 46%.

    So, what’s the link? How can time on your phone lead to these painful lumps in and around your anus? Here’s what we know.

    Arisara_Tongdonnoi/Getty

    What are haemorrhoids?

    Every healthy person has haemorrhoids, sometimes called piles. They are columns of cushioned tissue and blood vessels found close to the opening of the anus.

    Diagram showing haemorrhoid types: normal, internal and external.
    We don’t notice haemorrhoids until they’re symptomatic. Aleksandr Kharitonov/Getty

    Haemorrhoids have a really important role in maintaining bowel continence or, to put it simply, keeping your poo in.

    When all is well, we don’t notice them. But haemorrhoids can get swollen and this can lead to symptoms such as pain, bleeding or feeling a lump just inside your anus (internal haemorrhoids) or protruding outside (external haemorrhoids).

    So when someone “has haemorrhoids”, it means they have become inflamed or symptomatic.

    This is extremely common: more than one in two of us will experience symptomatic haemorrhoids at some point in our lives.

    You are more likely to get haemorrhoids if you:

    • are older (over 45)
    • are pregnant
    • are overweight
    • have persistent constipation or diarrhoea
    • regularly lift heavy objects
    • spend a lot of time on the toilet.

    The link between toilet time and haemorrhoids

    Prolonged sitting in general has not been linked to developing haemorrhoids.

    However, a standard toilet seat – unlike a chair or couch – has a large internal opening that provides no support for the pelvic floor (the group of muscles and ligaments that support the bladder, bowel and uterus).

    Prolonged sitting on a toilet seat is believed to increase pressure inside the pelvic floor and lead to blood pooling in the vascular cushions of the anus. This makes haemorrhoids more likely to develop.

    What the new study looked at

    The new US study recruited 125 adults, aged 45 and older, who were undergoing a colonoscopy at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical centre.

    Researchers surveyed them about their smartphone habits while using the toilet, including how often they checked their phone and for how long. Participants also reported on other behaviours such as straining, their fibre intake, and how much physical activity they did.

    The researchers recorded whether they had haemorrhoids. Since the participants were all having a colonoscopy, the presence of internal haemorrhoids could be directly confirmed visually.

    What did the study show?

    Two-thirds (66%) of all participants used smartphones while on the toilet. The most common activity was reading news (54.3%), followed by social media (44.4%).

    Those who used their smartphones spent longer on the toilet than those who didn’t. More than one in three (37.3%) toilet smartphone users spent over five minutes on the toilet, compared to just over one in 20 (7%) of those who didn’t use their smartphones.

    The smartphone users had a 46% higher risk of haemorrhoids, compared to those who didn’t use their smartphone. To calculate this, researchers took into account other known risk factors for haemorrhoids such as gender, age, body mass index, exercise activity, straining and fibre intake.

    However, unlike some other research, this study did not find a link between straining and haemorrhoids.

    As a result, the researchers concluded that time spent on the toilet poses a more significant risk for haemorrhoids than straining. However, we can’t rule out straining as a risk factor, based on one study.

    Some other limitations to consider

    The study relied on participants remembering whether or not they strained, and how long they spent on the toilet.

    This kind of recall is subjective, and may also be influenced by taking part in the study. For example, if the participants thought they had haemorrhoids, they may be more likely to report straining.

    The study’s small sample size and the participants’ age (all over 45) also mean it is unlikely to be representative of the broader population.

    Toilet sitting time

    The new study is not the first to study the link between time spent on the toilet and developing haemorrhoids. In 2020, a Turkish study found spending more than five minutes on the toilet was associated with haemorrhoids.

    Another 2020 study from Italy of 52 people with diagnosed internal or external haemorrhoids noted the longer they spent on the toilet, the more severe their haemorrhoids.

    So, what are we doing on the toilet?

    Defaecation itself usually doesn’t take long. One study found it took healthy adults an average two minutes when sitting, but only 51 seconds when squatting.

    The majority of “toilet sitting time” usually means just that – sitting on the toilet, doing other activities aside from pooing (or weeing).

    One 2008 study from Israel surveyed 500 adults and found more than half (52.7%) read books or newspapers while on the toilet. It also found toilet readers spent significantly more time on the toilet.

    How to avoid haemorrhoids

    The usual advice is to increase the amount of fibre in your diet (eating more fruit, vegetables and wholegrains) and ensure you drink enough water. This makes it easier to pass a stool and reduces straining – which you should also try to avoid.

    However, the new research confirms previous evidence that cutting down toilet sitting time may also help. So, avoiding distractions by leaving your smartphone outside the bathroom is a good idea (and as a bonus, will expose your device to fewer germs).

    If you have any concerning symptoms, such as blood in your stool, a new lump in the anal region, or pain when passing a bowel motion then you should see your local doctor for further investigations and treatment.

    Vincent Ho, Associate Professor and Clinical Academic Gastroenterologist, Western Sydney University

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

    Share This Post

  • Sweet Potato vs Cassava – 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 sweet potato to cassava, we picked the sweet potato.

    Why?

    For any unfamiliar with cassava, it’s also called manioc or yuca/yucca, and it’s a tuber that can be used a lot like sweet potato. It’s popular in S. America, often in recipes that aren’t the healthiest (deep-fried chunky “cassava chips” are popular in Brazil, for example, and farofa, a flour made from cassava, is less healthy even than refined white flour from wheat), but today we’re going to judge it on its own merit—since after all, almost anything can be deep-fried and many things can be turned into flour, but it doesn’t mean we have to do that.

    Let’s talk macros first: sweet potato has nearly 2x the protein, while cassava has nearly 2x the carbs. As for fiber to soften those carbs’ impact on our blood sugars, well, sweet potato has about 2x the fiber. All in all for macros, a clear and easy win for sweet potato.

    Important note: as for the impact that has on glycemic index: the exact glycemic index will depend on what you do with it (different cooking methods change the GI), but broadly speaking, sweet potatoes are considered a medium GI food, while cassava is a very high GI food, to the point that it’s higher than sucrose, and nearly equal to pure glucose. Which is impressive, for a tuber.

    In terms of vitamins, sweet potato’s famously high vitamin A content raises the bar, but it’s not all it has to offer: sweet potato has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, E, and K, while cassava has more of vitamins B9 and choline. Just for amusement’s sake, let’s note that the sweet potato has over 1,478x the vitamin A content. In any case, the vitamins category is another clear win for sweet potato.

    When it comes to minerals, it’s again quite one-sided: sweet potato has more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and potassium, while cassava has more selenium. So, sweet potato wins yet again.

    In short: definitely a case of “the less widely-available option is not necessarily the healthier”!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Glycemic Index vs Glycemic Load vs Insulin Index

    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:

  • The Most Underrated Plank Exercise For Best Benefits

    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 very simple, but makes a big difference:

    More muscles, more complete exercise

    First, a note on nomenclature: she calls this a “plange plank”, but searching the Internet suggests that only she calls it that. Our best guess is that she heard it called a “planche” and miss-guessed the spelling, but “planche” is simply the French word for “plank”. So there’s that.

    Now, how to do it: start in a forearm plank, push the ground away with your forearms so your shoulder blades protract (move forwards and around your rib cage), round your mid-back towards the ceiling, slightly tuck your chin, draw your ribs down towards your hips, and tuck your pelvis upwards to create a posterior pelvic tilt.

    Why doing it this way works: rounding your back during a plank increases activation of your serratus anterior (around your rib cage), your abs (especially your lower abs) and even your glutes, making the exercise more effective than simply holding a standard plank longer.

    It is important to be mindful while you do it, and this is because consciously feeling and maintaining the rib tuck, pelvic tuck, and strong push into the floor creates better stability, which means more stabilizing muscle use, and more efficient muscle recruitment. In particular the shoulder blade protraction targets your serratus anterior, while pulling your ribs and pelvis towards your belly button strongly engages your lower abs and supports your spine.

    The conscious mind-body connection is what allows this to happen. That may sound wishy-washy, but it’s about the two-way conversation between your brain and your muscles, via the nerves that run between them. Without it, your body will just recruit the largest muscles available and forget the rest.

    Some progressions:

    • Dolphin plank progression: move from the rounded plank down into a flatter front plank as your hips lower, then round back up—your abs work both to create flexion and to resist spinal extension as you move.
    • Extended plank progression: walk your feet back so your elbows are in front of your shoulders, increasing the lever length; your lower abs resist spinal extension while your serratus anterior works harder through both protraction and elevation of your shoulder blades—avoid shrugging or overloading your shoulders.

    In both cases, you can also do them on an incline or a decline, to adjust the difficulty.

    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:

    What Happens To Your Body When You Plank 1 Minute Every Day

    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 much does your phone’s blue light really delay your sleep? Relax, it’s just 2.7 minutes

    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 one of the most pervasive messages about technology and sleep. We’re told bright, blue light from screens prevents us falling asleep easily. We’re told to avoid scrolling on our phones before bedtime or while in bed. We’re sold glasses to help filter out blue light. We put our phones on “night mode” to minimise exposure to blue light.

    But what does the science actually tell us about the impact of bright, blue light and sleep? When our group of sleep experts from Sweden, Australia and Israel compared scientific studies that directly tested this, we found the overall impact was close to meaningless. Sleep was disrupted, on average, by less than three minutes.

    We showed the message that blue light from screens stops you from falling asleep is essentially a myth, albeit a very convincing one.

    Instead, we found a more nuanced picture about technology and sleep.

    Mangostar/Shutterstock

    What we did

    We gathered evidence from 73 independent studies with a total of 113,370 participants of all ages examining various factors that connect technology use and sleep.

    We did indeed find a link between technology use and sleep, but not necessarily what you’d think.

    We found that sometimes technology use can lead to poor sleep and sometimes poor sleep can lead to more technology use. In other words, the relationship between technology and sleep is complex and can go both ways.

    How is technology supposed to harm sleep?

    Technology is proposed to harm our sleep in a number of ways. But here’s what we found when we looked at the evidence:

    • bright screen light – across 11 experimental studies, people who used a bright screen emitting blue light before bedtime fell asleep an average of only 2.7 minutes later. In some studies, people slept better after using a bright screen. When we were invited to write about this evidence further, we showed there is still no meaningful impact of bright screen light on other sleep characteristics including the total amount or quality of sleep
    • arousal is a measure of whether people become more alert depending on what they’re doing on their device. Across seven studies, people who engaged in more alerting or “exciting” content (for example, video games) lost an average of only about 3.5 minutes of sleep compared to those who engaged in something less exciting (for example, TV). This tells us the content of technology alone doesn’t affect sleep as much as we think
    • we found sleep disruption at night (for example, being awoken by text messages) and sleep displacement (using technology past the time that we could be sleeping) can lead to sleep loss. So while technology use was linked to less sleep in these instances, this was unrelated to being exposed to bright, blue light from screens before bedtime.

    Which factors encourage more technology use?

    Research we reviewed suggests people tend to use more technology at bedtime for two main reasons:

    There are also a few things that might make people more vulnerable to using technology late into the night and losing sleep.

    We found people who are risk-takers or who lose track of time easily may turn off devices later and sacrifice sleep. Fear of missing out and social pressures can also encourage young people in particular to stay up later on technology.

    What helps us use technology sensibly?

    Last of all, we looked at protective factors, ones that can help people use technology more sensibly before bed.

    The two main things we found that helped were self-control, which helps resist the short-term rewards of clicking and scrolling, and having a parent or loved one to help set bedtimes.

    Mother looking over shoulder of teen daughter sitting on sofa using smartphone
    We found having a parent or loved one to help set bedtimes encourages sensible use of technology. fast-stock/Shutterstock

    Why do we blame blue light?

    The blue light theory involves melatonin, a hormone that regulates sleep. During the day, we are exposed to bright, natural light that contains a high amount of blue light. This bright, blue light activates certain cells at the back of our eyes, which send signals to our brain that it’s time to be alert. But as light decreases at night, our brain starts to produce melatonin, making us feel sleepy.

    It’s logical to think that artificial light from devices could interfere with the production of melatonin and so affect our sleep. But studies show it would require light levels of about 1,000-2,000 lux (a measure of the intensity of light) to have a significant impact.

    Device screens emit only about 80-100 lux. At the other end of the scale, natural sunlight on a sunny day provides about 100,000 lux.

    What’s the take-home message?

    We know that bright light does affect sleep and alertness. However our research indicates the light from devices such as smartphones and laptops is nowhere near bright or blue enough to disrupt sleep.

    There are many factors that can affect sleep, and bright, blue screen light likely isn’t one of them.

    The take-home message is to understand your own sleep needs and how technology affects you. Maybe reading an e-book or scrolling on socials is fine for you, or maybe you’re too often putting the phone down way too late. Listen to your body and when you feel sleepy, turn off your device.

    Chelsea Reynolds, Casual Academic/Clinical Educator and Clinical Psychologist, College of Education, Psychology and Social Work, Flinders University

    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: