The Many Faces Of Cosmetic Surgery

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.

Cosmetic Surgery: What’s The Truth?

In Tuesday’s newsletter, we asked you your opinion on elective cosmetic surgeries, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

  • About 48% said “Everyone should be able to get what they want, assuming informed consent”
  • About 28% said “It can ease discomfort to bring features more in line with normalcy”
  • 15% said “They should be available in the case of extreme disfigurement only”
  • 10% said “No elective cosmetic surgery should ever be performed; needless danger”

Well, there was a clear gradient of responses there! Not so polarizing as we might have expected, but still enough dissent for discussion

So what does the science say?

The risks of cosmetic surgery outweigh the benefits: True or False?

False, subjectively (but this is important).

You may be wondering: how is science subjective?

And the answer is: the science is not subjective, but people’s cost:worth calculations are. What’s worth it to one person absolutely may not be worth it to another. Which means: for those for whom it wouldn’t be worth it, they are usually the people who will not choose the elective surgery.

Let’s look at some numbers (specifically, regret rates for various surgeries, elective/cosmetic or otherwise):

  • Regret rate for elective cosmetic surgery in general: 20%
  • Regret rate for knee replacement (i.e., not cosmetic): 17.1%
  • Regret rate for hip replacement (i.e., not cosmetic): 4.8%
  • Regret rate for gender-affirming surgeries (for transgender patients): 1%

So we can see, elective surgeries have an 80–99% satisfaction rate, depending on what they are. In comparison, the two joint replacements we mentioned have a 82.9–95.2% satisfaction rate. Not too dissimilar, taken in aggregate!

In other words: if a person has studied the risks and benefits of a surgery and decides to go ahead, they’re probably going to be happy with the results, and for them, the benefits will have outweighed the risks.

Sources for the above numbers, by the way:

But it’s just a vanity; therapy is what’s needed instead: True or False?

False, generally. True, sometimes. Whatever the reasons for why someone feels the way they do about their appearance—whether their face got burned in a fire or they just have triple-J cups that they’d like reduced, it’s generally something they’ve already done a lot of thinking about. Nevertheless, it does also sometimes happen that it’s a case of someone hoping it’ll be the magical solution, when in reality something else is also needed.

How to know the difference? One factor is whether the surgery is “type change” or “restorative”, and both have their pros and cons.

  • In “type change” (e.g. rhinoplasty), more psychological adjustment is needed, but when it’s all over, the person has a new nose and, statistically speaking, is usually happy with it.
  • In “restorative” (e.g. facelift), less psychological adjustment is needed (as it’s just a return to a previous state), so a person will usually be happy quickly, but ultimately it is merely “kicking the can down the road” if the underlying problem is “fear of aging”, for example. In such a case, likely talking therapy would be beneficial—whether in place of, or alongside, cosmetic surgery.

Here’s an interesting paper on that; the sample sizes are small, but the discussion about the ideas at hand is a worthwhile read:

Does cosmetic surgery improve psychosocial wellbeing?

Some people will never be happy no matter how many surgeries they get: True or False?

True! We’re going to refer to the above paper again for this one. In particular, here’s what it said about one group for whom surgeries will not usually be helpful:

❝There is a particular subgroup of people who appear to respond poorly to cosmetic procedures. These are people with the psychiatric disorder known as “body dysmorphic disorder” (BDD). BDD is characterised by a preoccupation with an objectively absent or minimal deformity that causes clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other areas of functioning.

For several reasons, it is important to recognise BDD in cosmetic surgery settings:

Firstly, it appears that cosmetic procedures are rarely beneficial for these people. Most patients with BDD who have had a cosmetic procedure report that it was unsatisfactory and did not diminish concerns about their appearance.

Secondly, BDD is a treatable disorder. Serotonin-reuptake inhibitors and cognitive behaviour therapy have been shown to be effective in about two-thirds of patients with BDD❞

~ Dr. David Castle et al. (lightly edited for brevity)

Which is a big difference compared to, for example, someone having triple-J breasts that need reducing, or the wrong genitals for their gender, or a face whose features are distinct outliers.

Whether that’s a reason people with BDD shouldn’t be able to get it is an ethical question rather than a scientific one, so we’ll not try to address that with science.

After all, many people (in general) will try to fix their woes with a haircut, a tattoo, or even a new sportscar, and those might sometimes be bad decisions, but they are still the person’s decision to make.

And even so, there can be protectionist laws/regulations that may provide a speed-bump, for example:

Thinking about cosmetic surgery? New standards will force providers to tell you the risks and consider if you’re actually suitable

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Qigong: A Breath Of Fresh Air?
  • Buckwheat vs Oats – Which is Healthier?
    Buckwheat vs Oats: Our verdict’s in – oats win with more protein, fiber, vitamins, and minerals, making them the unbeatable choice for your diet.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • No, sugar doesn’t make your kids hyperactive

    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 a Saturday afternoon at a kids’ birthday party. Hordes of children are swarming between the spread of birthday treats and party games. Half-eaten cupcakes, biscuits and lollies litter the floor, and the kids seem to have gained superhuman speed and bounce-off-the-wall energy. But is sugar to blame?

    The belief that eating sugary foods and drinks leads to hyperactivity has steadfastly persisted for decades. And parents have curtailed their children’s intake accordingly.

    Balanced nutrition is critical during childhood. As a neuroscientist who has studied the negative effects of high sugar “junk food” diets on brain function, I can confidently say excessive sugar consumption does not have benefits to the young mind. In fact, neuroimaging studies show the brains of children who eat more processed snack foods are smaller in volume, particularly in the frontal cortices, than those of children who eat a more healthful diet.

    But today’s scientific evidence does not support the claim sugar makes kids hyperactive.

    Sharomka/Shutterstock

    The hyperactivity myth

    Sugar is a rapid source of fuel for the body. The myth of sugar-induced hyperactivity can be traced to a handful of studies conducted in the 1970s and early 1980s. These were focused on the Feingold Diet as a treatment for what we now call Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), a neurodivergent profile where problems with inattention and/or hyperactivity and impulsivity can negatively affect school, work or relationships.

    Devised by American paediatric allergist Benjamin Feingold, the diet is extremely restrictive. Artificial colours, sweeteners (including sugar) and flavourings, salicylates including aspirin, and three preservatives (butylated hydroxyanisole, butylated hydroxytoluene, and tert-Butrylhdryquinone) are eliminated.

    Salicylates occur naturally in many healthy foods, including apples, berries, tomatoes, broccoli, cucumbers, capsicums, nuts, seeds, spices and some grains. So, as well as eliminating processed foods containing artificial colours, flavours, preservatives and sweeteners, the Feingold diet eliminates many nutritious foods helpful for healthy development.

    However, Feingold believed avoiding these ingredients improved focus and behaviour. He conducted some small studies, which he claimed showed a large proportion of hyperactive children responded favourably to his diet.

    bowls of lollies on table
    Even it doesn’t make kids hyperactive, they shouldn’t have too much sugar. DenisMArt/Shutterstock

    Flawed by design

    The methods used in the studies were flawed, particularly with respect to adequate control groups (who did not restrict foods) and failed to establish a causal link between sugar consumption and hyperactive behaviour.

    Subsequent studies suggested less than 2% responded to restrictions rather than Feingold’s claimed 75%. But the idea still took hold in the public consciousness and was perpetuated by anecdotal experiences.

    Fast forward to the present day. The scientific landscape looks vastly different. Rigorous research conducted by experts has consistently failed to find a connection between sugar and hyperactivity. Numerous placebo-controlled studies have demonstrated sugar does not significantly impact children’s behaviour or attention span.

    One landmark meta-analysis study, published almost 20 years ago, compared the effects of sugar versus a placebo on children’s behaviour across multiple studies. The results were clear: in the vast majority of studies, sugar consumption did not lead to increased hyperactivity or disruptive behaviour.

    Subsequent research has reinforced these findings, providing further evidence sugar does not cause hyperactivity in children, even in those diagnosed with ADHD.

    While Feingold’s original claims were overstated, a small proportion of children do experience allergies to artificial food flavourings and dyes.

    Pre-school aged children may be more sensitive to food additives than older children. This is potentially due to their smaller body size, or their still-developing brain and body.

    Hooked on dopamine?

    Although the link between sugar and hyperactivity is murky at best, there is a proven link between the neurotransmitter dopamine and increased activity.

    The brain releases dopamine when a reward is encountered – such as an unexpected sweet treat. A surge of dopamine also invigorates movement – we see this increased activity after taking psychostimulant drugs like amphetamine. The excited behaviour of children towards sugary foods may be attributed to a burst of dopamine released in expectation of a reward, although the level of dopamine release is much less than that of a psychostimulant drug.

    Dopamine function is also critically linked to ADHD, which is thought to be due to diminished dopamine receptor function in the brain. Some ADHD treatments such as methylphenidate (labelled Ritalin or Concerta) and lisdexamfetamine (sold as Vyvanse) are also psychostimulants. But in the ADHD brain the increased dopamine from these drugs recalibrates brain function to aid focus and behavioural control.

    girl in yellow top licks large lollipop while holding a pink icecream
    Maybe it’s less of a sugar rush and more of a dopamine rush? Anastasiya Tsiasemnikava/Shutterstock

    Why does the myth persist?

    The complex interplay between diet, behaviour and societal beliefs endures. Expecting sugar to change your child’s behaviour can influence how you interpret what you see. In a study where parents were told their child had either received a sugary drink, or a placebo drink (with a non-sugar sweetener), those parents who expected their child to be hyperactive after having sugar perceived this effect, even when they’d only had the sugar-free placebo.

    The allure of a simple explanation – blaming sugar for hyperactivity – can also be appealing in a world filled with many choices and conflicting voices.

    Healthy foods, healthy brains

    Sugar itself may not make your child hyperactive, but it can affect your child’s mental and physical health. Rather than demonising sugar, we should encourage moderation and balanced nutrition, teaching children healthy eating habits and fostering a positive relationship with food.

    In both children and adults, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends limiting free sugar consumption to less than 10% of energy intake, and a reduction to 5% for further health benefits. Free sugars include sugars added to foods during manufacturing, and naturally present sugars in honey, syrups, fruit juices and fruit juice concentrates.

    Treating sugary foods as rewards can result in them becoming highly valued by children. Non-sugar rewards also have this effect, so it’s a good idea to use stickers, toys or a fun activity as incentives for positive behaviour instead.

    While sugar may provide a temporary energy boost, it does not turn children into hyperactive whirlwinds.

    Amy Reichelt, Senior Lecturer (Adjunct), Nutritional neuroscientist, University of Adelaide

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

    Share This Post

  • Protein Immune Support Salad

    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.

    How to get enough protein from a salad, without adding meat? Cashews and chickpeas have you more than covered! Along with the leafy greens and an impressive array of minor ingredients full of healthy phytochemicals, this one’s good for your muscles, bones, skin, immune health, and more.

    You will need

    • 1½ cups raw cashews (if allergic, omit; the chickpeas and coconut will still carry the dish for protein and healthy fats)
    • 2 cans (2x 14oz) chickpeas, drained
    • 1½ lbs baby spinach leaves
    • 2 large onions, finely chopped
    • 3 oz goji berries
    • ½ bulb garlic, finely chopped
    • 2 tbsp dessicated coconut
    • 1 tbsp dried cumin
    • 1 tbsp nutritional yeast
    • 2 tsp chili flakes
    • 1 tsp black pepper, coarse ground
    • ½ tsp MSG, or 1 tsp low-sodium salt
    • Extra virgin olive oil, for cooking

    Method

    (we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

    1) Heat a little oil in a pan; add the onions and cook for about 3 minutes.

    2) Add the garlic and cook for a further 2 minutes.

    3) Add the spinach, and cook until it wilts.

    4) Add the remaining ingredients except the coconut, and cook for another three minutes.

    5) Heat another pan (dry); add the coconut and toast for 1–2 minutes, until lightly golden. Add it to the main pan.

    6) Serve hot as a main, or an attention-grabbing side:

    Enjoy!

    Want to learn more?

    For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Spinach vs Kale – 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 spinach to kale, we picked the spinach.

    Why?

    In terms of macros, spinach and kale are very similar. They are mostly water wrapped in fiber, with very small amounts of carbohydrates and protein and trace amounts of fat.

    Spinach has a lot more vitamins and minerals—a wider variety, and in most cases, more of them.

    Kale is notably higher in vitamin C, though. Everything else, spinach is higher or close to equal.

    Spinach is especially notably a lot higher in B vitamins, as well as iron, calcium, magnesium, and zinc.

    One downside to spinach, though, which is that it’s high in oxalates, which can increase the risk of kidney stones. If your kidneys are in good health and you eat spinach in moderation, this is not a problem for most people—but if your kidneys aren’t in good health (or you are, for whatever reason, consuming Popeye levels of spinach), you might consider switching to kale.

    While spinach swept the board in most categories, kale remains a very good option too, and a diet diverse in many kinds of plants is usually best.

    Want to learn more?

    Spinach and kale are very both good sources of carotenoids; check out:

    Brain food? The Eyes Have It!

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Qigong: A Breath Of Fresh Air?
  • Get Better Sleep: Beyond “Sleep Hygiene”

    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.

    Better Sleep, Better Life!

    This is Arianna Huffington. Yes, that Huffington, of the Huffington Post. But! She’s also the CEO of Thrive Global, a behavior change tech company with the mission of changing the way we work and live—in particular, by challenging the idea that burnout is the required price of success.

    The power of better sleep

    Sleep is a very important, but most often neglected, part of good health. Here are some of Huffington’s top insights from her tech company Thrive, and as per her “Sleep Revolution” initiative.

    Follow your circadian rhythm

    Are you a night owl or a morning lark? Whichever it is, roll with it, and plan around that if your lifestyle allows for such. While it is possible to change from one to the other, we do have a predisposition towards one or the other, and will generally function best when not fighting it.

    This came about, by the way, because we evolved to have half of us awake in the mornings and half in the evenings, to keep us all safe. Socially we’ve marched onwards from that point in evolutionary history, but our bodies are about a hundred generations behind the times, and that’s just what we have to work with!

    Don’t be afraid (or ashamed!) to take naps

    Naps, done right, can be very good for the health—especially if we had a bad night’s sleep the previous night.

    Thrive found that workers are more productive when they have nap rooms, and (following on a little from the previous point) are allowed to sleep in or work from home.

    See also: How To Nap Like A Pro (No More “Sleep Hangovers”!)

    Make sure you have personal space available in bed

    The correlation between relationship satisfaction and sleeping close to one’s partner has been found to be so high that it’s even proportional: the further away a couple sleeps from each other, the less happy they are. But…

    Partners who got good sleep the previous night, will be more likely to want intimacy on any given night—at a rate of an extra 14% per extra hour of sleep the previous night. So, there’s a trade-off, as having more room in bed tends to result in better sleep. Time to get a bigger bed?

    What gets measured, gets done

    This goes for sleep, too! Not only does dream-journaling in the morning cue your subconscious to prepare to dream well the following night, but also, sleep trackers and sleep monitoring apps go a very long way to improving sleep quality, even if no extra steps are consciously taken to “score better”.

    We’ve previously reviewed some of the most popular sleep apps; you can check out for yourself how they measured up:

    Time For Some Pillow Talk: The Head-To-Head Of Google and Apple’s Top Apps For Getting Your Head Down

    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:

  • Mango vs Guava – 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 mango to guava, we picked the guava.

    Why?

    Looking at macros first, these two fruits are about equal on carbs (nominally mango has more, but it’s by a truly tiny margin), while guava has more than 3x the protein and more than 3x the fiber. A clear win for guava.

    In terms of vitamins, mango has more of vitamins A, E, and K, while guava has more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B7, B9, and C. Another win for guava.

    In the category of minerals, mango is not higher in any minerals, while guava is higher in calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc.

    In short, enjoy both; both are healthy. But if you’re choosing one, there’s a clear winner here, and it’s guava.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?

    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:

  • Some women’s breasts can’t make enough milk, and the effects can be devastating

    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 new mothers worry about their milk supply. For some, support from a breastfeeding counsellor or lactation consultant helps.

    Others cannot make enough milk no matter how hard they try. These are women whose breasts are not physically capable of producing enough milk.

    Our recently published research gives us clues about breast features that might make it difficult for some women to produce enough milk. Another of our studies shows the devastating consequences for women who dream of breastfeeding but find they cannot.

    Some breasts just don’t develop

    Unlike other organs, breasts are not fully developed at birth. There are key developmental stages as an embryo, then again during puberty and pregnancy.

    At birth, the breast consists of a simple network of ducts. Usually during puberty, the glandular (milk-making) tissue part of the breast begins to develop and the ductal network expands. Then typically, further growth of the ductal network and glandular tissue during pregnancy prepares the breast for lactation.

    But our online survey of women who report low milk supply gives us clues to anomalies in how some women’s breasts develop.

    We’re not talking about women with small breasts, but women whose glandular tissue (shown in this diagram as “lobules”) is underdeveloped and have a condition called breast hypoplasia.

    Anatomical diagram of the breast
    Sometimes not enough glandular tissue, shown here as lobules, develop.
    Tsuyna/Shutterstock

    We don’t know how common this is. But it has been linked with lower rates of exclusive breastfeeding.

    We also don’t know what causes it, with much of the research conducted in animals and not humans.

    However, certain health conditions have been associated with it, including polycystic ovary syndrome and other endocrine (hormonal) conditions. A high body-mass index around the time of puberty may be another indicator.

    Could I have breast hypoplasia?

    Our survey and other research give clues about who may have breast hypoplasia.

    But it’s important to note these characteristics are indicators and do not mean women exhibiting them will definitely be unable to exclusively breastfeed.

    Indicators include:

    • a wider than usual gap between the breasts
    • tubular-shaped (rather than round) breasts
    • asymmetric breasts (where the breasts are different sizes or shapes)
    • lack of breast growth in pregnancy
    • a delay in or absence of breast fullness in the days after giving birth

    In our survey, 72% of women with low milk supply had breasts that did not change appearance during pregnancy, and about 70% reported at least one irregular-shaped breast.

    The effects

    Mothers with low milk supply – whether or not they have breast hyoplasia or some other condition that limits their ability to produce enough milk – report a range of emotions.

    Research, including our own, shows this ranges from frustration, confusion and surprise to intense or profound feelings of failure, guilt, grief and despair.

    Some mothers describe “breastfeeding grief” – a prolonged sense of loss or failure, due to being unable to connect with and nourish their baby through breastfeeding in the way they had hoped.

    These feelings of failure, guilt, grief and despair can trigger symptoms of anxiety and depression for some women.

    Tired, stress woman with hand over face
    Feelings of failure, guilt, grief and despair were common.
    Bricolage/Shutterstock

    One woman told us:

    [I became] so angry and upset with my body for not being able to produce enough milk.

    Many women’s emotions intensified when they discovered that despite all their hard work, they were still unable to breastfeed their babies as planned. A few women described reaching their “breaking point”, and their experience felt “like death”, “the worst day of [my] life” or “hell”.

    One participant told us:

    I finally learned that ‘all women make enough milk’ was a lie. No amount of education or determination would make my breasts work. I felt deceived and let down by all my medical providers. How dare they have no answers for me when I desperately just wanted to feed my child naturally.

    Others told us how they learned to accept their situation. Some women said they were relieved their infant was “finally satisfied” when they began supplementing with formula. One resolved to:

    prioritise time with [my] baby over pumping for such little amounts.

    Where to go for help

    If you are struggling with low milk supply, it can help to see a lactation consultant for support and to determine the possible cause.

    This will involve helping you try different strategies, such as optimising positioning and attachment during breastfeeding, or breastfeeding/expressing more frequently. You may need to consider taking a medication, such as domperidone, to see if your supply increases.

    If these strategies do not help, there may be an underlying reason why you can’t make enough milk, such as insufficient glandular tissue (a confirmed inability to make a full supply due to breast hypoplasia).

    Even if you have breast hypoplasia, you can still breastfeed by giving your baby extra milk (donor milk or formula) via a bottle or using a supplementer (which involves delivering milk at the breast via a tube linked to a bottle).

    More resources

    The following websites offer further information and support:

    Shannon Bennetts, a research fellow at La Trobe University, contributed to this article.The Conversation

    Renee Kam, PhD candidate and research officer, La Trobe University and Lisa Amir, Professor in Breastfeeding Research, La Trobe 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: