Endure – by Alex Hutchinson
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.
Life is a marathon, not a sprint. For most of us, at least. But how do we pace ourselves to go the distance, without falling into complacency along the way?
According to our author Alex Hutchinson, there’s a lot more to it than goal-setting and strategy.
Hutchinson set out to write a running manual, and ended up writing a manual for life. To be clear, this is still mostly centered around the science of athletic endurance, but covers the psychological factors as much as the physical… and notes how the capacity to endure is the key trait that underlies great performance in every field.
The writing style is both personal and personable, and parts read like a memoir (Hutchinson himself being a runner and sports journalist), while others are scientific in nature.
As for the science, the kind of science examined runs the gamut from case studies to clinical studies. We examine not just the science of physical endurance, but the science of psychological endurance too. We learn about such things as:
- How perception of ease/difficulty plays its part
- What factors make a difference to pain tolerance
- How mental exhaustion affects physical performance
- What environmental factors increase or lessen our endurance
- …and many other elements that most people don’t consider
Bottom line: whether you want to run a marathon in under two hours, or just not quit after one minute forty seconds on the exercise bike, or to get through a full day’s activities while managing chronic pain, this book can help.
Click here to check out Endure, and find out what you are capable of when you move your limits!
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 Beneficial Is MCT Oil, Really?
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.
Often derived from coconuts (though it doesn’t have to be), medium-chain triglycerides (MCTs) are trendy… But does the science back the hype?
First, the principle
MCTs are commonly enjoyed because unlike short- or long-chain fatty acids, they can be quickly broken down and either immediately converted quickly and easily into energy, or turned into ketones in the case of a surplus (in the case of true excess, however, it’ll simply be stored as fat).
Most of that involves the liver, so for anyone who wants a refresher on liver health:
How To Unfatty A Fatty Liver ← notwithstanding the title, this is also important knowledge even if your liver is healthy now—if you’d like it to stay healthy, anyway!
You can also read about the ins and outs of glycogen metabolism and the body’s energy-based metabolic processes in general (including the body’s energy processes that go on in the liver), here:
From Apples to Bees, and High-Fructose Cs: Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?
If the liver turns the MCTs into ketones, those ketones will then be used for energy if there is insufficient glucose available (as the body will always use glucose from the blood first, if available, before moving to alternative energy sources such as ketones and/or fat reserves.)
Thus, many people look to ketones as a solution for having enough energy to function while on a very low-carb diet such as the ketogenic diet:
Ketogenic Diet: Burning Fat Or Burning Out?
…which as you’ll recall, does work for short-term weight loss, but brings long-term health risks, so should not be undertaken for long periods of time.
So, does MCT Oil help?
With regard to weight loss, the research is weak and mixed:
- Weak, because often the methodology was shoddy, often there are many factors not controlled-for, and often the sample sizes were small (and also, RCTs by their very nature tend to be quite short-term (often 6, 8, or 12 weeks), whereas heavy reliance on ketones from MCTs may fall into the same long-term problems as the ketogenic diet in general).
- Mixed, because the results varied widely (probably because of the aforementioned problems).
Rather than pick at individual studies, let’s look at this review and meta-analysis of 13 studies, with a combined sample size of 749 people (so you can imagine how small the individual RCTs were):
❝Compared with LCTs, MCTs decreased body weight (-0.51 kg [95% CI-0.80 to -0.23 kg]; P<0.001; I(2)=35%); waist circumference (-1.46 cm [95% CI -2.04 to -0.87 cm]; P<0.001; I(2)=0%), hip circumference (-0.79 cm [95% CI -1.27 to -0.30 cm]; P=0.002; I(2)=0%), total body fat (standard mean difference -0.39 [95% CI -0.57 to -0.22]; P<0.001; I(2)=0%), total subcutaneous fat (standard mean difference -0.46 [95% CI -0.64 to -0.27]; P<0.001; I(2)=20%), and visceral fat (standard mean difference -0.55 [95% CI -0.75 to -0.34]; P<0.001; I(2)=0%).
No differences were seen in blood lipid levels.
Many trials lacked sufficient information for a complete quality assessment, and commercial bias was detected.❞
So, if we’re going to take those numbers at face value, that means a net weight loss, over the course of the trial period, was…
*drumroll*
0.51kg (that’s about 1 lb).
To put that into perspective, if you did nothing else but pee 1 cup of urine before getting weighed, you’d register as having lost 0.25kg (or about ½ lb) by virtue of the bathroom trip alone.
Here’s the paper:
What about cholesterol and heart health?
With regard to cholesterol, MCT oil is touted as improving blood lipids, which means lowering LDL and increasing HDL (within a safe range, anyway).
You’ll remember that the above review concluded “No differences were seen in blood lipid levels”.
It may again be a case of individual studies cancelling each other out. For example…
This study found that it improved lipids in 40 young women as part of a calorie-controlled interventional diet:
This study found that it worsened lipids in 17 young men, worse even than taking an equivalent amount of sunflower oil:
In short, it’s a gamble.
It may be good for insulin sensitivity, though
This one seems to be specific to people with type 2 diabetes. The paper heading says it all, but we include the link in case you want to know the details (the short version is, it improved insulin sensitivity in diabetic subjects only (not others), and didn’t affect anything else that was measured:
The sample size was small (20 people total, of whom 10 had diabetes), and the next study was with 40 people, this time moderately overweight and all with type 2 diabetes:
Want to try some?
We don’t sell it, but here for your convenience is an example product on Amazon 😎
Enjoy!
Share This Post
-
Food and exercise can treat depression as well as a psychologist, our study found. And it’s cheaper
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.
Around 3.2 million Australians live with depression.
At the same time, few Australians meet recommended dietary or physical activity guidelines. What has one got to do with the other?
Our world-first trial, published this week, shows improving diet and doing more physical activity can be as effective as therapy with a psychologist for treating low-grade depression.
Previous studies (including our own) have found “lifestyle” therapies are effective for depression. But they have never been directly compared with psychological therapies – until now.
Amid a nation-wide shortage of mental health professionals, our research points to a potential solution. As we found lifestyle counselling was as effective as psychological therapy, our findings suggest dietitians and exercise physiologists may one day play a role in managing depression.
Alexander Raths/shutterstock What did our study measure?
During the prolonged COVID lockdowns, Victorians’ distress levels were high and widespread. Face-to-face mental health services were limited.
Our trial targeted people living in Victoria with elevated distress, meaning at least mild depression but not necessarily a diagnosed mental disorder. Typical symptoms included feeling down, hopeless, irritable or tearful.
We partnered with our local mental health service to recruit 182 adults and provided group-based sessions on Zoom. All participants took part in up to six sessions over eight weeks, facilitated by health professionals.
Half were randomly assigned to participate in a program co-facilitated by an accredited practising dietitian and an exercise physiologist. That group – called the lifestyle program – developed nutrition and movement goals:
Lifestyle therapy aims to improve diet. Jonathan Borba/Pexels - eating a wide variety of foods
- choosing high-fibre plant foods
- including high quality fats
- limiting discretionary foods, such as those high in saturated fats and added sugars
- doing enjoyable physical activity.
The second group took part in psychotherapy sessions convened by two psychologists. The psychotherapy program used cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), the gold standard for treating depression in groups and when delivered remotely.
In both groups, participants could continue existing treatments (such as taking antidepressant medication). We gave both groups workbooks and hampers. The lifestyle group received a food hamper, while the psychotherapy group received items such as a colouring book, stress ball and head massager.
Lifestyle therapies just as effective
We found similar results in each program.
At the trial’s beginning we gave each participant a score based on their self-reported mental health. We measured them again at the end of the program.
Over eight weeks, those scores showed symptoms of depression reduced for participants in the lifestyle program (42%) and the psychotherapy program (37%). That difference was not statistically or clinically meaningful so we could conclude both treatments were as good as each other.
There were some differences between groups. People in the lifestyle program improved their diet, while those in the psychotherapy program felt they had increased their social support – meaning how connected they felt to other people – compared to at the start of the treatment.
Participants in both programs increased their physical activity. While this was expected for those in the lifestyle program, it was less expected for those in the psychotherapy program. It may be because they knew they were enrolled in a research study about lifestyle and subconsciously changed their activity patterns, or it could be a positive by-product of doing psychotherapy.
People in both groups reported doing more physical activity. fongbeerredhot/Shutterstock There was also not much difference in cost. The lifestyle program was slightly cheaper to deliver: A$482 per participant, versus $503 for psychotherapy. That’s because hourly rates differ between dietitians and exercise physiologists, and psychologists.
What does this mean for mental health workforce shortages?
Demand for mental health services is increasing in Australia, while at the same time the workforce faces worsening nation-wide shortages.
Psychologists, who provide about half of all mental health services, can have long wait times. Our results suggest that, with the appropriate training and guidelines, allied health professionals who specialise in diet and exercise could help address this gap.
Lifestyle therapies can be combined with psychology sessions for multi-disciplinary care. But diet and exercise therapies could prove particularly effective for those on waitlists to see a psychologists, who may be receiving no other professional support while they wait.
Many dietitians and exercise physiologists already have advanced skills and expertise in motivating behaviour change. Most accredited practising dietitians are trained in managing eating disorders or gastrointestinal conditions, which commonly overlap with depression.
There is also a cost argument. It is overall cheaper to train a dietitian ($153,039) than a psychologist ($189,063) – and it takes less time.
Potential barriers
Australians with chronic conditions (such as diabetes) can access subsidised dietitian and exercise physiologist appointments under various Medicare treatment plans. Those with eating disorders can also access subsidised dietitian appointments. But mental health care plans for people with depression do not support subsidised sessions with dietitians or exercise physiologists, despite peak bodies urging them to do so.
Increased training, upskilling and Medicare subsidies would be needed to support dietitians and exercise physiologists to be involved in treating mental health issues.
Our training and clinical guidelines are intended to help clinicians practising lifestyle-based mental health care within their scope of practice (activities a health care provider can undertake).
Future directions
Our trial took place during COVID lockdowns and examined people with at least mild symptoms of depression who did not necessarily have a mental disorder. We are seeking to replicate these findings and are now running a study open to Australians with mental health conditions such as major depression or bipolar disorder.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Adrienne O’Neil, Professor, Food & Mood Centre, Deakin University and Sophie Mahoney, Associate Research Fellow, Food and Mood Centre, Deakin University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
What’s the difference between ‘strep throat’ and a sore throat? We’re developing a vaccine for one of them
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
What’s the difference? is a new editorial product that explains the similarities and differences between commonly confused health and medical terms, and why they matter.
It’s the time of the year for coughs, colds and sore throats. So you might have heard people talk about having a “strep throat”.
But what is that? Is it just a bad sore throat that goes away by itself in a day or two? Should you be worried?
Here’s what we know about the similarities and differences between strep throat and a sore throat, and why they matter.
Prostock-studio/Shutterstock How are they similar?
It’s difficult to tell the difference between a sore throat and strep throat as they look and feel similar.
People usually have a fever, a bright red throat and sometimes painful lumps in the neck (swollen lymph nodes). A throat swab can help diagnose strep throat, but the results can take a few days.
Thankfully, both types of sore throat usually get better by themselves.
How are they different?
Most sore throats are caused by viruses such as common cold viruses, the flu (influenza virus), or the virus that causes glandular fever (Epstein-Barr virus).
These viral sore throats can occur at any age. Antibiotics don’t work against viruses so if you have a viral sore throat, you won’t get better faster if you take antibiotics. You might even have some unwanted antibiotic side-effects.
But strep throat is caused by Streptococcus pyogenes bacteria, also known as strep A. Strep throat is most common in school-aged children, but can affect other age groups. In some cases, you may need antibiotics to avoid some rare but serious complications.
In fact, the potential for complications is one key difference between a viral sore throat and strep throat.
Generally, a viral sore throat is very unlikely to cause complications (one exception is those caused by Epstein-Barr virus which has been associated with illnesses such as chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple sclerosis and certain cancers).
But strep A can cause invasive disease, a rare but serious complication. This is when bacteria living somewhere on the body (usually the skin or throat) get into another part of the body where there shouldn’t be bacteria, such as the bloodstream. This can make people extremely sick.
Invasive strep A infections and deaths have been rising in recent years around the world, especially in young children and older adults. This may be due to a number of factors such as increased social mixing at this stage of the COVID pandemic and an increase in circulating common cold viruses. But overall the reasons behind the increase in invasive strep A infections are not clear.
Another rare but serious side effect of strep A is autoimmune disease. This is when the body’s immune system makes antibodies that react against its own cells.
The most common example is rheumatic heart disease. This is when the body’s immune system damages the heart valves a few weeks or months after a strep throat or skin infection.
Around the world more than 40 million people live with rheumatic heart disease and more than 300,000 die from its complications every year, mostly in developing countries.
However, parts of Australia have some of the highest rates of rheumatic heart disease in the world. More than 5,300 Indigenous Australians live with it.
Strep throat is caused by Streptococcus bacteria and can be treated with antibiotics if needed. Kateryna Kon/Shutterstock Why do some people get sicker than others?
We know strep A infections and rheumatic heart disease are more common in low socioeconomic communities where poverty and overcrowding lead to increased strep A transmission and disease.
However, we don’t fully understand why some people only get a mild infection with strep throat while others get very sick with invasive disease.
We also don’t understand why some people get rheumatic heart disease after strep A infections when most others don’t. Our research team is trying to find out.
How about a vaccine for strep A?
There is no strep A vaccine but many groups in Australia, New Zealand and worldwide are working towards one.
For instance, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute and Telethon Kids Institute have formed the Australian Strep A Vaccine Initiative to develop strep A vaccines. There’s also a global consortium working towards the same goal.
Companies such as Vaxcyte and GlaxoSmithKline have also been developing strep A vaccines.
What if I have a sore throat?
Most sore throats will get better by themselves. But if yours doesn’t get better in a few days or you have ongoing fever, see your GP.
Your GP can examine you, consider running some tests and help you decide if you need antibiotics.
Kim Davis, General paediatrician and paediatric infectious diseases specialist, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute; Alma Fulurija, Immunologist and the Australian Strep A Vaccine Initiative project lead, Telethon Kids Institute, and Myra Hardy, Postdoctoral Researcher, Infection, Immunity and Global Health, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
Can I take antihistamines everyday? More than the recommended dose? What if I’m pregnant? Here’s what the research says
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.
Allergies happen when your immune system overreacts to a normally harmless substance like dust or pollen. Hay fever, hives and anaphylaxis are all types of allergic reactions.
Many of those affected reach quickly for antihistamines to treat mild to moderate allergies (though adrenaline, not antihistamines, should always be used to treat anaphylaxis).
If you’re using oral antihistamines very often, you might have wondered if it’s OK to keep relying on antihistamines to control symptoms of allergies. The good news is there’s no research evidence to suggest regular, long-term use of modern antihistamines is a problem.
But while they’re good at targeting the early symptoms of a mild to moderate allergic reaction (sneezing, for example), oral antihistamines aren’t as effective as steroid nose sprays for managing hay fever. This is because nasal steroid sprays target the underlying inflammation of hay fever, not just the symptoms.
Here are the top six antihistamines myths – busted.
Andrea Piacquadio/Pexels Myth 1. Oral antihistamines are the best way to control hay fever symptoms
Wrong. In fact, the recommended first line medical treatment for most patients with moderate to severe hay fever is intranasal steroids. This might include steroid nose sprays (ask your doctor or pharmacist if you’d like to know more).
Studies have shown intranasal steroids relieve hay fever symptoms better than antihistamine tablets or syrups.
To be effective, nasal steroids need to be used regularly, and importantly, with the correct technique.
In Australia, you can buy intranasal steroids without a doctor’s script at your pharmacy. They work well to relieve a blocked nose and itchy, watery eyes, as well as improve chronic nasal blockage (however, antihistamine tablets or syrups do not improve chronic nasal blockage).
Some newer nose sprays contain both steroids and antihistamines. These can provide more rapid and comprehensive relief from hay fever symptoms than just oral antihistamines or intranasal steroids alone. But patients need to keep using them regularly for between two and four weeks to yield the maximum effect.
For people with seasonal allergic rhinitis (hayfever), it may be best to start using intranasal steroids a few weeks before the pollen season in your regions hits. Taking an antihistamine tablet as well can help.
Antihistamine eye drops work better than oral antihistamines to relieve acutely itchy eyes (allergic conjunctivitis).
Myth 2. My body will ‘get used to’ antihistamines
Some believe this myth so strongly they may switch antihistamines. But there’s no scientific reason to swap antihistamines if the one you’re using is working for you. Studies show antihistamines continue to work even after six months of sustained use.
Myth 3. Long-term antihistamine use is dangerous
There are two main types of antihistamines – first-generation and second-generation.
First-generation antihistamines, such as chlorphenamine or promethazine, are short-acting. Side effects include drowsiness, dry mouth and blurred vision. You shouldn’t drive or operate machinery if you are taking them, or mix them with alcohol or other medications.
Most doctors no longer recommend first-generation antihistamines. The risks outweigh the benefits.
The newer second-generation antihistamines, such as cetirizine, fexofenadine, or loratadine, have been extensively studied in clinical trials. They are generally non-sedating and have very few side effects. Interactions with other medications appear to be uncommon and they don’t interact badly with alcohol. They are longer acting, so can be taken once a day.
Although rare, some side effects (such as photosensitivity or stomach upset) can happen. At higher doses, cetirizine can make some people feel drowsy. However, research conducted over a period of six months showed taking second-generation antihistamines is safe and effective. Talk to your doctor or pharmacist if you’re concerned.
Allergies can make it hard to focus. Pexels/Edward Jenner Myth 4. Antihistamines aren’t safe for children or pregnant people
As long as it’s the second-generation antihistamine, it’s fine. You can buy child versions of second-generation antihistamines as syrups for kids under 12.
Though still used, some studies have shown certain first-generation antihistamines can impair childrens’ ability to learn and retain information.
Studies on second-generation antihistamines for children have found them to be safer and better than the first-generation drugs. They may even improve academic performance (perhaps by allowing kids who would otherwise be distracted by their allergy symptoms to focus). There’s no good evidence they stop working in children, even after long-term use.
For all these reasons, doctors say it’s better for children to use second-generation than first-generation antihistimines.
What about using antihistimines while you’re pregnant? One meta analysis of combined study data including over 200,000 women found no increase in fetal abnormalities.
Many doctors recommend the second-generation antihistamines loratadine or cetirizine for pregnant people. They have not been associated with any adverse pregnancy outcomes. Both can be used during breastfeeding, too.
Myth 5. It is unsafe to use higher than the recommended dose of antihistamines
Higher than standard doses of antihistamines can be safely used over extended periods of time for adults, if required.
But speak to your doctor first. These higher doses are generally recommended for a skin condition called chronic urticaria (a kind of chronic hives).
Myth 6. You can use antihistamines instead of adrenaline for anaphylaxis
No. Adrenaline (delivered via an epipen, for example) is always the first choice. Antihistamines don’t work fast enough, nor address all the problems caused by anaphylaxis.
Antihistamines may be used later on to calm any hives and itching, once the very serious and acute phase of anaphylaxis has been resolved.
In general, oral antihistamines are not the best treatment to control hay fever – you’re better off with steroid nose sprays. That said, second-generation oral antihistamines can be used to treat mild to moderate allergy symptoms safely on a regular basis over the long term.
Janet Davies, Respiratory Allergy Stream Co-chair, National Allergy Centre of Excellence; Professor and Head, Allergy Research Group, Queensland University of Technology; Connie Katelaris, Professor of Immunology and Allergy, Western Sydney University, and Joy Lee, Respiratory Allergy Stream member, National Allergy Centre of Excellence; Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash 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:
-
Elon Musk says ‘disc replacement’ worked for him. But evidence this surgery helps chronic pain is lacking
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.
Last week in a post on X, owner of the platform Elon Musk recommended people look into disc replacement if they’re experiencing severe neck or back pain.
According to a biography of the billionaire, he’s had chronic back and neck pain since he tried to “judo throw” a 350-pound sumo wrestler in 2013 at a Japanese-themed party for his 42nd birthday, and blew out a disc at the base of his neck.
In comments following the post, Musk said the surgery was a “gamechanger” and reduced his pain significantly.
Musk’s original post has so far had more than 50 million views and generated controversy. So what is disc replacement surgery and what does the evidence tells us about its benefits and harms?
What’s involved in a disc replacement?
Disc replacement is a type of surgery in which one or more spinal discs (a cushion between the spine bones, also known as vertebrae) are removed and replaced with an artificial disc to retain movement between the vertebrae. Artificial discs are made of metal or a combination of metal and plastic.
Disc replacement may be performed for a number of reasons, including slipped discs in the neck, as appears to be the case for Musk.
Disc replacement is major surgery. It requires general anaesthesia and the operation usually takes 2–4 hours. Most people stay in hospital for 2–7 days. After surgery patients can walk but need to avoid things like strenuous exercise and driving for 3–6 weeks. People may be required to wear a neck collar (following neck surgery) or a back brace (following back surgery) for about 6 weeks.
Costs vary depending on whether you have surgery in the public or private health system, if you have private health insurance, and your level of coverage if you do. In Australia, even if you have health insurance, a disc replacement surgery may leave you more than A$12,000 out of pocket.
Disc replacement surgery is not performed as much as other spinal surgeries (for example, spinal fusion) but its use is increasing.
In New South Wales for example, rates of privately-funded disc replacement increased six-fold from 6.2 per million people in 2010–11 to 38.4 per million in 2019–20.
What are the benefits and harms?
People considering surgery will typically weigh that option against not having surgery. But there has been very little research comparing disc replacement surgery with non-surgical treatments.
Clinical trials are the best way to determine if a treatment is effective. You first want to show that a new treatment is better than doing nothing before you start comparisons with other treatments. For surgical procedures, the next step might be to compare the procedure to non-surgical alternatives.
Unfortunately, these crucial first research steps have largely been skipped for disc replacement surgery for both neck and back pain. As a result, there’s a great deal of uncertainty about the treatment.
There are no clinical trials we know of investigating whether disc replacement is effective for neck pain compared to nothing or compared to non-surgical treatments.
For low back pain, the only clinical trial that has been conducted to our knowledge comparing disc replacement to a non-surgical alternative found disc replacement surgery was slightly more effective than an intensive rehabilitation program after two years and eight years.
Many people experience chronic pain. Yan Krukau/Pexels Complications are not uncommon, and can include disclocation of the artificial disc, fracture (break) of the artificial disc, and infection.
In the clinical trial mentioned above, 26 of the 77 surgical patients had a complication within two years of follow up, including one person who underwent revision surgery that damaged an artery leading to a leg needing to be amputated. Revision surgery means a re-do to the primary surgery if something needs fixing.
Are there effective alternatives?
The first thing to consider is whether you need surgery. Seeking a second opinion may help you feel more informed about your options.
Many surgeons see disc replacement as an alternative to spinal fusion, and this choice is often presented to patients. Indeed, the research evidence used to support disc replacement mainly comes from studies that compare disc replacement to spinal fusion. These studies show people with neck pain may recover and return to work faster after disc replacement compared to spinal fusion and that people with back pain may get slightly better pain relief with disc replacement than with spinal fusion.
However, spinal fusion is similarly not well supported by evidence comparing it to non-surgical alternatives and, like disc replacement, it’s also expensive and associated with considerable risks of harm.
Fortunately for patients, there are new, non-surgical treatments for neck and back pain that evidence is showing are effective – and are far cheaper than surgery. These include treatments that address both physical and psychological factors that contribute to a person’s pain, such as cognitive functional therapy.
While Musk reported a good immediate outcome with disc replacement surgery, given the evidence – or lack thereof – we advise caution when considering this surgery. And if you’re presented with the choice between disc replacement and spinal fusion, you might want to consider a third alternative: not having surgery at all.
Giovanni E Ferreira, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, Institute of Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney; Christine Lin, Professor, Institute for Musculoskeletal Health, University of Sydney; Christopher Maher, Professor, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney; Ian Harris, Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery, UNSW Sydney, and Joshua Zadro, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, University of Sydney
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:
-
How To Gain Weight (Healthily!)
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
What Do You Have To Gain?
We have previously promised a three-part series about changing one’s weight:
- Losing weight (specifically, losing fat)
- Gaining weight (specifically, gaining muscle)
- Gaining weight (specifically, gaining fat)
There will be, however, no need for a “losing muscle” article, because (even though sometimes a person might have some reason to want to do this), it’s really just a case of “those things we said for gaining muscle? Don’t do those and the muscle will atrophy naturally”.
Here’s our first article: How To Lose Weight (Healthily!)
While some people will want to lose fat, please do be aware that the association between weight loss and good health is not nearly so strong as the weight loss industry would have you believe:
And, while BMI is not a useful measure of health in general, it’s worth noting that over the age of 65, a BMI of 27 (which is in the high end of “overweight”, without being obese) is associated with the lowest all-cause mortality:
BMI and all-cause mortality in older adults: a meta-analysis
Here was our second article: How To Build Muscle (Healthily!)
And now, it’s time for the last part, which yes, is also something that some people want/need to do (healthily!), and want/need help with that.
How to gain fat, healthily
Fat gets a bad press, but when it comes to health, we would die without it.
Even in the case of having excess fat, the fat itself is not generally the problem, so much as comorbid metabolic issues that are often caused by the same things as the excess fat.
So, how to gain fat healthily?
- Obvious but potentially dangerously misleading answer: “in moderation”
- More useful answer: “carefully”
Because, you can “in moderation” put on less than one pound per week for a few years and be in very bad health by the end of it. So how does this “carefully” work any differently to “in moderation”?
The key is in how we store the fat
Not merely where we store it (though that’ll follow from the “how”), but specifically: how we store it.
- When we consume energy from food in excess of our immediate survival needs, our body stores what it can. This is good!
- When our body is receiving energy from food faster than it can physically process it to store it healthily, it will start shoving it wherever it can instead. This is bad!
This is the physiological equivalent of the difference between tidying a room carefully, and cramming everything into one cupboard in 30 seconds just to get it out of sight.
So, you do need to consume calories yes, but you need to consume them in a way your body can take its time about storing them.
We’ve written before about the science of this, so we’ll share some links, but first, here are the practical tips:
- Do not drink your calories. Drinking calories tends to be the equivalent of injecting sugars directly into your veins, in terms of how quickly it gets received.
- See also: How To Unfatty A Fatty Liver ← this is highly relevant, because the same process that results in unhealthy weight gain, results in liver disease, by the same mechanism (the liver gets overwhelmed).
- Eat your greens. No, they won’t provide many calories, but they are critical to your body not being overwhelmed by the arrival of sugars.
- See also: 10 Ways To Balance Blood Sugars ← the other 9 things are also helpful for not putting on fat unhealthily, so using these alongside a calorie-dense diet can result in healthy fat gain as needed
- Get more of your calories from fats than carbs. Fats will not overwhelm your body’s glycemic response in the same way that carbs will.
- Again this is about getting calories while not getting metabolic disease. See also: How To Prevent And Reverse Type Two Diabetes as the advice is the same for that, for the same reason!
- Consider going low-carb, but even if you choose not to, go for carbs with a low glycemic index instead of a high glycemic index.
- For reference, see: Glycemic Index Chart: Glycemic index and glycemic load ratings for 500+ foods
- Need healthy fats in a snack? Enjoy nuts (unless you have an allergy); they will be your best friend in this regard. As an example, a mere 1oz portion of cashew nuts has 157 calories.
- See also: Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts
- Need healthy fats for cooking? Enjoy olive oil, as it has one of the healthiest lipids profiles available, and is a great way to increase the calorific content of many meals.
Lastly…
Be patient, enjoy your food, and stick as best you can to the above considerations. All strength to you.
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:
