End the Insomnia Struggle – by Dr. Colleen Ehrnstrom and Dr. Alisha Brosse
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’ve reviewed sleep books before, and we always try to recommend books that have something a little different than the rest, so what makes this one stand out?
While there is the usual quick overview of the basics that we’re sure you already know (sleep hygiene etc), most of the attention here is given to cold, hard clinical psychology… in a highly personalized way.
How, you may ask, can they personalize a book, that is the same for everyone?
The answer is, by guiding the reader through examining our own situation. With template logbooks, worksheets, and the like—for this reason we recommend getting a paper copy of the book, rather than the Kindle version, in case you’d like to use/photocopy those.
Essentially, reading this book is much like having your own psychologist (or two) to guide you through finding a path to better sleep.
The therapeutic approach, by the way, is a combination of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Acceptance-Commitment Therapy (ACT), which work very well together here.
Bottom line: if you’ve changed your bedsheets and turned off your electronic devices and need something a little more, this book is the psychological “big guns” for removing the barriers between you and good sleep.
Click here to check out End the Insomnia Struggle, and end yours once and for all!
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:
-
12 Questions For Better Brain Health
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
We usually preface our “Expert Insights” pieces with a nice banner that has a stylish tall cutout that allows us to put a photo of the expert in. Today we’re not doing that, because for today’s camera-shy expert, we could only find one photo, and it’s a small, grainy, square headshot that looks like it was taken some decades ago, and would not fit our template at all. You can see it here, though!
In any case, Dr. Linda Selwa is a neurologist and neurophysiologist with nearly 40 years of professional experience.
The right questions to ask
As a neurologist, she found that one of the problems that results in delayed interventions (and thus, lower efficacy of those interventions) is that people don’t know there’s anything to worry about until a degenerative brain condition has degenerated past a certain point. With that in mind, she bids us ask ourselves the following questions, and discuss them with our primary healthcare providers as appropriate:
- Sleep: Are you able to get sufficient sleep to feel rested?
- Affect, mood and mental health: Do you have concerns about your mood, anxiety, or stress?
- Food, diet and supplements: Do you have concerns about getting enough or healthy enough food, or have any questions about supplements or vitamins?
- Exercise: Do you find ways to fit physical exercise into your life?
- Supportive social interactions: Do you have regular contact with close friends or family, and do you have enough support from people?
- Trauma avoidance: Do you wear seatbelts and helmets, and use car seats for children?
- Blood pressure: Have you had problems with high blood pressure at home or at doctor visits, or do you have any concerns about blood pressure treatment or getting a blood pressure cuff at home?
- Risks, genetic and metabolic factors: Do you have trouble controlling blood sugar or cholesterol? Is there a neurological disease that runs in your family?
- Affordability and adherence: Do you have any trouble with the cost of your medicines?
- Infection: Are you up to date on vaccines, and do you have enough information about those vaccines?
- Negative exposures: Do you smoke, drink more than one to two drinks per day, or use non-prescription drugs? Do you drink well water, or live in an area with known air or water pollution?
- Social and structural determinants of health: Do you have concerns about keeping housing, having transportation, having access to care and medical insurance, or being physically or emotionally safe from harm?
You will note that some of these are well-known (to 10almonds readers, at least!) risk factors for cognitive decline, but others are more about systemic and/or environmental considerations, things that don’t directly pertain to brain health, but can have a big impact on it anyway.
About “concerns”: in the case of those questions that ask “do you have concerns about…?”, and you’re not sure, then yes, you do indeed have concerns.
About “trouble”: as for these kinds of health-related questionnaires in general, if a question asks you “do you have trouble with…?” and your answer is something like “no, because I have a special way of dealing with that problem” then the answer for the purposes of the questionnaire is yes, you do indeed have trouble.
Note that you can “have trouble with” something that you simultaneously “have under control”—just as a person can have no trouble at all with something that they leave very much out of control.
Further explanation on each of the questions
If you’re wondering what is meant by any of these, or what counts, or why the question is even being asked, then we recommend you check out Dr. Selwa et al’s recently-published paper, then all is explained in there, in surprisingly easy-to-read fashion:
Emerging Issues In Neurology: The Neurologist’s Role in Promoting Brain Health
If you scroll past the abstract, introduction, and disclaimers, then you’ll be straight into the tables of information about the above 12 factors.
Want to be even more proactive?
Check out:
How To Reduce Your Alzheimer’s Risk
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Blueberries vs Cranberries – 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 blueberries to cranberries, we picked the blueberries.
Why?
It’s close!
In terms of macros, blueberries have slightly more protein and carbs, while cranberries have slightly more fiber. We say the extra fiber’s more important than the (even more minimally) extra protein, so this is the slightest of marginal wins for cranberries in this category.
In the category of vitamins, blueberries have much more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B9, K, and choline, while cranberries have slightly more of vitamins A, B5, B6, C, and E. That’s a 6:5 win for blueberries, and also, the margins of difference were much greater for blueberries’ vitamins, making this a clearer win for blueberries.
When it comes to minerals, blueberries have slightly more iron, manganese, phosphorus, and zinc, while cranberries have slightly more calcium. The margins of difference are small in both cases, but this is a 4:1 win for blueberries.
Both of these berries are famously full of antioxidants; blueberries have more antioxidant power overall, though cranberries have some specific benefits such as being better than antibiotics against UTIs—though there are some contraindications too; check out the link below for more on that!
All in all, meanwhile, we say that adding up the sections here makes for a win for blueberries, but by all means, enjoy either or both (unless one of the contraindications below applies to you).
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Health Benefits Of Cranberries (But: You’d Better Watch Out)
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Could ADHD drugs reduce the risk of early death? Unpacking the findings from a new Swedish study
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.
Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can have a considerable impact on the day-to-day functioning and overall wellbeing of people affected. It causes a variety of symptoms including difficulty focusing, impulsivity and hyperactivity.
For many, a diagnosis of ADHD, whether in childhood or adulthood, is life changing. It means finally having an explanation for these challenges, and opens up the opportunity for treatment, including medication.
Although ADHD medications can cause side effects, they generally improve symptoms for people with the disorder, and thereby can significantly boost quality of life.
Now a new study has found being treated for ADHD with medication reduces the risk of early death for people with the disorder. But what can we make of these findings?
A large study from Sweden
The study, published this week in JAMA (the prestigious journal of the American Medical Association), was a large cohort study of 148,578 people diagnosed with ADHD in Sweden. It included both adults and children.
In a cohort study, a group of people who share a common characteristic (in this case a diagnosis of ADHD) are followed over time to see how many develop a particular health outcome of interest (in this case the outcome was death).
For this study the researchers calculated the mortality rate over a two-year follow up period for those whose ADHD was treated with medication (a group of around 84,000 people) alongside those whose ADHD was not treated with medication (around 64,000 people). The team then determined if there were any differences between the two groups.
What did the results show?
The study found people who were diagnosed and treated for ADHD had a 19% reduced risk of death from any cause over the two years they were tracked, compared with those who were diagnosed but not treated.
In understanding this result, it’s important – and interesting – to look at the causes of death. The authors separately analysed deaths due to natural causes (physical medical conditions) and deaths due to unnatural causes (for example, unintentional injuries, suicide, or accidental poisonings).
The key result is that while no significant difference was seen between the two groups when examining natural causes of death, the authors found a significant difference for deaths due to unnatural causes.
So what’s going on?
Previous studies have suggested ADHD is associated with an increased risk of premature death from unnatural causes, such as injury and poisoning.
On a related note, earlier studies have also suggested taking ADHD medicines may reduce premature deaths. So while this is not the first study to suggest this association, the authors note previous studies addressing this link have generated mixed results and have had significant limitations.
In this new study, the authors suggest the reduction in deaths from unnatural causes could be because taking medication alleviates some of the ADHD symptoms responsible for poor outcomes – for example, improving impulse control and decision-making. They note this could reduce fatal accidents.
The authors cite a number of studies that support this hypothesis, including research showing ADHD medications may prevent the onset of mood, anxiety and substance use disorders, and lower the risk of accidents and criminality. All this could reasonably be expected to lower the rate of unnatural deaths.
Strengths and limitations
Scandinavian countries have well-maintained national registries that collect information on various aspects of citizens’ lives, including their health. This allows researchers to conduct excellent population-based studies.
Along with its robust study design and high-quality data, another strength of this study is its size. The large number of participants – almost 150,000 – gives us confidence the findings were not due to chance.
The fact this study examined both children and adults is another strength. Previous research relating to ADHD has often focused primarily on children.
One of the important limitations of this study acknowledged by the authors is that it was observational. Observational studies are where the researchers observe and analyse naturally occurring phenomena without intervening in the lives of the study participants (unlike randomised controlled trials).
The limitation in all observational research is the issue of confounding. This means we cannot be completely sure the differences between the two groups observed were not either partially or entirely due to some other factor apart from taking medication.
Specifically, it’s possible lifestyle factors or other ADHD treatments such as psychological counselling or social support may have influenced the mortality rates in the groups studied.
Another possible limitation is the relatively short follow-up period. What the results would show if participants were followed up for longer is an interesting question, and could be addressed in future research.
What are the implications?
Despite some limitations, this study adds to the evidence that diagnosis and treatment for ADHD can make a profound difference to people’s lives. As well as alleviating symptoms of the disorder, this study supports the idea ADHD medication reduces the risk of premature death.
Ultimately, this highlights the importance of diagnosing ADHD early so the appropriate treatment can be given. It also contributes to the body of evidence indicating the need to improve access to mental health care and support more broadly.
Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Should We Skip Shampoo?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!
Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!
In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!
As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!
So, no question/request too big or small 😎
❝What’s the science on “no poo”? Is it really better for hair? There are so many mixed reports out there.❞
First, for any unfamiliar: this is not about constipation; rather, it is about skipping shampoo, and either:
- Using an alternative cleaning agent, such as vinegar and/or sodium bicarbonate
- Using nothing at all, just conditioner when wet and brushing when dry
Let’s examine why the trend became a thing: the thinking went “shampoo does not exist in nature, and most of our body is more or less self-cleaning; shampoos remove oils from hair, and the body has to produce more sebum to compensate, resulting in a rapid cycle of dry and greasy hair”.
Now let’s fact-check each of those:
- shampoo does not exist in nature: true (except in the sense that everything that exists can be argued to exist in nature, since nature encompasses everything—but the point is that shampoo is a purely artificial human invention)
- most of our body is more or less self-cleaning: true, but our hair is not, for the same reason our nails are not: they’re not really a living part of the overall organism that is our body, so much as a keratinous protrusion of neatly stacked and hardened dead cells from our body. Dead things are not self-cleaning.
- shampoos remove oils from hair: true; that is what they were invented for and they do it well
- the body has to produce more sebum to compensate, resulting in a rapid cycle of dry and greasy hair: false; or at least, there is no evidence for this.
Our hair’s natural oils are great at protecting it, and also great at getting dirt stuck in it. For the former reason we want the oil there; for the latter reason, we don’t.
So the trick becomes: how to remove the oil (and thus the dirt stuck in it) and then put clean oil back (but not too much, because we don’t want it greasy, just, shiny and not dry)?
The popular answer is: shampoo to clean the hair, conditioner to put an appropriate amount of oil* back.
*these days, mostly not actually oil, but rather silicon-based substitutes, that do the same job of protecting hair and keeping it shiny and not brittle, without attracting so much dirt. Remember also that silicon is inert and very body safe; its molecules are simply too large to be absorbed, which is why it gets used in hair products, some skin products, and lube.
See also: Water-based Lubricant vs Silicon-based Lubricant – Which is Healthier?
If you go “no poo”, then what will happen is either you dry your hair out much worse by using vinegar or (even worse) bicarbonate of soda, or you just have oil (and any dirt stuck in it) in your hair for the life of the hair. As in, each individual strand of hair has a lifespan, and when it falls out, the dirt will go with it. But until that day, it’s staying with you, oil and dirt and all.
If you use a conditioner after using those “more natural” harsh cleaners* that aren’t shampoo, then you’ll undo a lot of the damage done, and you’ll probably be fine.
*in fact, if you’re going to skip shampoo, then instead of vinegar or bicarbonate of soda, dish soap from your kitchen may actually do less damage, because at least it’s pH-balanced. However, please don’t use that either.
If you’re going to err one way or the other with regard to pH though, erring on the side of slightly acidic is much better than slightly alkaline.
More on pH: Journal of Trichology | The Shampoo pH can Affect the Hair: Myth or Reality?
If you use nothing, then brushing a lot will mitigate some of the accumulation of dirt, but honestly, it’s never going to be clean until you clean it.
Our recommendation
When your hair seems dirty, and not before, wash it with a simple shampoo (most have far too many unnecessary ingredients; it just needs a simple detergent, and the rest is basically for marketing; to make it foam completely unnecessarily but people like foam, to make it thicker so it feels more substantial, to make it smell nice, to make it a color that gives us confidence it has ingredients in it, etc).
Then, after rinsing, enjoy a nice conditioner. Again there are usually a lot of unnecessary ingredients, but an argument can be made this time for some being more relevant as unlike with the shampoo, many ingredients are going to remain on your hair after rinsing.
Between washes, if you have long hair, consider putting some hair-friendly oil (such as argan oil or coconut oil) on the tips daily, to avoid split ends.
And if you have tight curly hair, then this advice goes double for you, because it takes a lot longer for natural oils to get from your scalp to the ends of your hair. For those of us with straight hair, it pretty much zips straight on down there within a day or two; not so if you have beautiful 4C curls to take care of!
For more on taking care of hair gently, check out:
Gentler Hair Care Options, According To Science
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:
-
Barley Malt Flour vs chickpea flour – 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 barley malt flour to chickpea flour, we picked the chickpea.
Why?
First, some notes:
About chickpea flour: this is also called besan flour, gram flour, and garbanzo bean flour; they are all literally the same thing by different names, and are all flour made from ground chickpeas.
About barley malt flour: barley is a true grain, and does contain gluten. We’re not going to factor that into today’s decision, but if you are avoiding gluten, avoid barley. As for “malt”; malting grains means putting them in an environment (with appropriate temperature and humidity) that they can begin germination, and then drying them with hot air to stop the germination process from continuing, so that we still have grains to make flour out of, and not little green sprouting plants. It improves the nutritional qualities and, subjectively, the flavor.
To avoid repetition, we’re just going to write “barley” instead of “barley malt” now, but it’s still malted.
Now, let’s begin:
Looking at the macros first, chickpea flour has 2x the protein and also more fiber, while barley flour has more carbs. An easy win for chickpea flour.
In the category of vitamins, chickpea flour has more of vitamins A, B1, B5, B9, E, and K, while barley flour has more of vitamins B2, B3, B6, and C. A modest 6:4 victory for chickpea flour.
When it comes to minerals, things are much more one-sided; chickpea flour has more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc, while barley flour has more selenium. An overwhelming win for chickpea flour.
Adding up these three wins for chickpea flour makes for a convincing story in favor of using that where reasonably possible as a flour! It has a slight nutty taste, so you might not want to use it in everything, but it is good for a lot of things.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
- Grains: Bread Of Life, Or Cereal Killer?
- Gluten: What’s The Truth?
- Sprout Your Seeds, Grains, Beans, Etc
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:
-
What is childhood dementia? And how could new research help?
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.
“Childhood” and “dementia” are two words we wish we didn’t have to use together. But sadly, around 1,400 Australian children and young people live with currently untreatable childhood dementia.
Broadly speaking, childhood dementia is caused by any one of more than 100 rare genetic disorders. Although the causes differ from dementia acquired later in life, the progressive nature of the illness is the same.
Half of infants and children diagnosed with childhood dementia will not reach their tenth birthday, and most will die before turning 18.
Yet this devastating condition has lacked awareness, and importantly, the research attention needed to work towards treatments and a cure.
More about the causes
Most types of childhood dementia are caused by mutations (or mistakes) in our DNA. These mistakes lead to a range of rare genetic disorders, which in turn cause childhood dementia.
Two-thirds of childhood dementia disorders are caused by “inborn errors of metabolism”. This means the metabolic pathways involved in the breakdown of carbohydrates, lipids, fatty acids and proteins in the body fail.
As a result, nerve pathways fail to function, neurons (nerve cells that send messages around the body) die, and progressive cognitive decline occurs.
Childhood dementia is linked to rare genetic disorders. maxim ibragimov/Shutterstock What happens to children with childhood dementia?
Most children initially appear unaffected. But after a period of apparently normal development, children with childhood dementia progressively lose all previously acquired skills and abilities, such as talking, walking, learning, remembering and reasoning.
Childhood dementia also leads to significant changes in behaviour, such as aggression and hyperactivity. Severe sleep disturbance is common and vision and hearing can also be affected. Many children have seizures.
The age when symptoms start can vary, depending partly on the particular genetic disorder causing the dementia, but the average is around two years old. The symptoms are caused by significant, progressive brain damage.
Are there any treatments available?
Childhood dementia treatments currently under evaluation or approved are for a very limited number of disorders, and are only available in some parts of the world. These include gene replacement, gene-modified cell therapy and protein or enzyme replacement therapy. Enzyme replacement therapy is available in Australia for one form of childhood dementia. These therapies attempt to “fix” the problems causing the disease, and have shown promising results.
Other experimental therapies include ones that target faulty protein production or reduce inflammation in the brain.
Research attention is lacking
Death rates for Australian children with cancer nearly halved between 1997 and 2017 thanks to research that has enabled the development of multiple treatments. But over recent decades, nothing has changed for children with dementia.
In 2017–2023, research for childhood cancer received over four times more funding per patient compared to funding for childhood dementia. This is despite childhood dementia causing a similar number of deaths each year as childhood cancer.
The success for childhood cancer sufferers in recent decades demonstrates how adequately funding medical research can lead to improvements in patient outcomes.
Dementia is not just a disease of older people. Miljan Zivkovic/Shutterstock Another bottleneck for childhood dementia patients in Australia is the lack of access to clinical trials. An analysis published in March this year showed that in December 2023, only two clinical trials were recruiting patients with childhood dementia in Australia.
Worldwide however, 54 trials were recruiting, meaning Australian patients and their families are left watching patients in other parts of the world receive potentially lifesaving treatments, with no recourse themselves.
That said, we’ve seen a slowing in the establishment of clinical trials for childhood dementia across the world in recent years.
In addition, we know from consultation with families that current care and support systems are not meeting the needs of children with dementia and their families.
New research
Recently, we were awarded new funding for our research on childhood dementia. This will help us continue and expand studies that seek to develop lifesaving treatments.
More broadly, we need to see increased funding in Australia and around the world for research to develop and translate treatments for the broad spectrum of childhood dementia conditions.
Dr Kristina Elvidge, head of research at the Childhood Dementia Initiative, and Megan Maack, director and CEO, contributed to this article.
Kim Hemsley, Head, Childhood Dementia Research Group, Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University; Nicholas Smith, Head, Paediatric Neurodegenerative Diseases Research Group, University of Adelaide, and Siti Mubarokah, Research Associate, Childhood Dementia Research Group, Flinders Health and Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine and Public Health, 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:
