What Flexible Dieting Really Means

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

When Flexibility Is The Dish Of The Day

This is Alan Aragon. Notwithstanding not being a “Dr. Alan Aragon”, he’s a research scientist with dozens of peer-reviewed nutrition science papers to his name, as well as being a personal trainer and fitness educator. Most importantly, he’s an ardent champion of making people’s pursuit of health and fitness more evidence-based.

We’ll be sharing some insights from a book of his that we haven’t reviewed yet, but we will link it at the bottom of today’s article in any case.

What does he want us to know?

First, get out of the 80s and into the 90s

In the world of popular dieting, the 80s were all about calorie-counting and low-fat diets. They did not particularly help.

In the 90s, it was discovered that not only was low-fat not the way to go, but also, regardless of the diet in question, rigid dieting leads to “disinhibition”, that is to say, there comes a point (usually not far into a diet) whereby one breaks the diet, at which point, the floodgates open and the dieter binges unhealthily.

Aragon would like to bring our attention to a number of studies that found this in various ways over the course of the 90s measuring various different metrics including rigid vs flexible dieting’s impacts on BMI, weight gain, weight loss, lean muscle mass changes, binge-eating, anxiety, depression, and so forth), but we only have so much room here, so here’s a 1999 study that’s pretty much the culmination of those:

Flexible vs. Rigid Dieting Strategies: Relationship with Adverse Behavioral Outcomes

So in short: trying to be very puritan about any aspect of dieting will not only not work, it will backfire.

Next, get out of the 90s into the 00s

…which is not only fun if you read “00s” out loud as “naughties”, but also actually appropriate in this case, because it is indeed important to be comfortable being a little bit naughty:

In 2000, Dr. Marika Tiggemann found that dichotomous perceptions of food (e.g. good/bad, clean/dirty, etc) were implicated as a dysfunctional cognitive style, and predicted not only eating disorders and mood disorders, but also adverse physical health outcomes:

Dieting and Cognitive Style: The Role of Current and Past Dieting Behaviour and Cognitions

This was rendered clearer, in terms of physical health outcomes, by Dr. Susan Byrne & Dr. Emma Dove, in 2009:

❝Weight loss was negatively associated with pre-treatment depression and frequency of treatment attendance, but not with dichotomous thinking. Females who regard their weight as unacceptably high and who think dichotomously may experience high levels of depression irrespective of their actual weight, while depression may be proportionate to the degree of obesity among those who do not think dichotomously❞

Read more: Effect of dichotomous thinking on the association of depression with BMI and weight change among obese females

Aragon’s advice based on all this: while yes, some foods are better than others, it’s more useful to see foods as being part of a spectrum, rather than being absolutist or “black and white” about it.

Next: hit those perfect 10s… Imperfectly

The next decade expanded on this research, as science is wont to do, and for this one, Aragon shines a spotlight on Dr. Alice Berg’s 2018 study with obese women averaging 69 years of age, in which…

Flexible Eating Behavior Predicts Greater Weight Loss Following a Diet and Exercise Intervention in Older Women

In other words (and in fact, to borrow Dr. Berg’s words from that paper),

❝encouraging a flexible approach to eating behavior and discouraging rigid adherence to a diet may lead to better intentional weight loss for overweight and obese older women❞

You may be wondering: what did this add to the studies from the 90s?

And the key here is: rather than being observational, this was interventional. In other words, rather than simply observing what happened to people who thought one way or another, this study took people who had a rigid, dichotomous approach to food, and gave them a 6-month behavioral intervention (in other words, support encouraging them to be more flexible and open in their approach to food), and found that this indeed improved matters for them.

Which means, it’s not a matter of fate or predisposition, as it could have been back in the 90s, per “some people are just like that; who’s to say which factor causes which”. Instead, now we know that this is an approach that can be adopted, and it can be expected to work.

Beyond weight loss

Now, so far we’ve talked mostly about weight loss, and only touched on other health outcomes. This is because:

  • weight loss a very common goal for many
  • it’s easy to measure so there’s a lot of science for it

Incidentally, if it’s a goal of yours, here’s what 10almonds had to say about that, along with two follow-up articles for other related goals:

Spoiler: we agree with Aragon, and recommend a relaxed and flexible approach to all three of these things

Aragon’s evidence-based approach to nutrition has found that this holds true for other aspects of healthy eating, too. For example…

To count or not to count?

It’s hard to do evidence-based anything without counting, and so Aragon talks a lot about this. Indeed, he does a lot of counting in scientific papers of his own, such as:

How much protein can the body use in a single meal for muscle-building? Implications for daily protein distribution

and

The effect of protein timing on muscle strength and hypertrophy: a meta-analysis

…as well as non-protein-related but diet-related topics such as:

Does Timing Matter? A Narrative Review of Intermittent Fasting Variants and Their Effects on Bodyweight and Body Composition

But! For the at-home health enthusiast, Aragon recommends that the answer to the question “to count or not to count?” is “both”:

  • Start off by indeed counting and tracking everything that is important to you (per whatever your current personal health intervention is, so it might be about calories, or grams of protein, or grams of carbs, or a certain fat balance, or something else entirely)
  • Switch to a more relaxed counting approach once you get used to the above. By now you probably know the macros for a lot of your common meals, snacks, etc, and can tally them in your head without worrying about weighing portions and knowing the exact figures.
  • Alternatively, count moderately standardized portions of relevant foods, such as “three servings of beans or legumes per day” or “no more than one portion of refined carbohydrates per day”
  • Eventually, let habit take the wheel. Assuming you have established good dietary habits, this will now do you just fine.

This latter is the point whereby the advice (that Aragon also champions) of “allow yourself an unhealthy indulgence of 10–20% of your daily food”, as a budget of “discretionary calories”, eventually becomes redundant—because chances are, you’re no longer craving that donut, and at a certain point, eating foods far outside the range of healthiness you usually eat is not even something that you would feel inclined to do if offered.

But until that kicks in, allow yourself that budget of whatever unhealthy thing you enjoy, and (this next part is important…) do enjoy it.

Because it is no good whatsoever eating that cream-filled chocolate croissant and then feeling guilty about it; that’s the dichotomous thinking we had back in the 80s. Decide in advance you’re going to eat and enjoy it, then eat and enjoy it, then look back on it with a sense of “that was enjoyable” and move on.

The flipside of this is that the importance of allowing oneself a “little treat” is that doing so actively helps ensure that the “little treat” remains “little”. Without giving oneself permission, then suddenly, “well, since I broke my diet, I might as well throw the whole thing out the window and try again on Monday”.

On enjoying food fully, by the way:

Mindful Eating: How To Get More Nutrition Out Of The Same Food

Want to know more from Alan Aragon?

Today we’ve been working heavily from this book of his; we haven’t reviewed it yet, but we do recommend checking it out:

Flexible Dieting: A Science-Based, Reality-Tested Method for Achieving and Maintaining Your Optimal Physique, Performance & Health – by Alan Aragon

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • 5 Ways To Beat Cancer (And Other Diseases)
  • Dates vs Raisins – Which is Healthier?
    Dates triumph over raisins with higher fiber, lower glycemic index, and a favorable nutritional profile – our verdict is clear!

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Navigating the health-care system is not easy, but you’re not alone.

    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.

    Hello, dear reader!

    This is my first column for Healthy Debate as a Patient Navigator. This column will be devoted to providing patients with information to help them through their journey with the health-care system and answering your questions.

    Here’s a bit about me: I have been a patient partner at The Ottawa Hospital and Ottawa Hospital Research Institute since 2017, and have joined a variety of governance boards that work on patient and caregiver engagement such as the Patient Advisors Network, the Ontario Health East Region Patient and Family Advisory Council and the Equity in Health Systems Lab.

    My journey as a patient partner started much before 2017 though. When I was a teenager, I was diagnosed with a cholesteatoma, a rare and chronic disease that causes the development of fatty tumors in the middle ear. I have had multiple surgeries to try to fix it but will need regular follow-ups to monitor whether the tumor returns. Because of this, I also live with an invisible disability since I have essentially become functionally deaf in one ear and often rely on a hearing aid when I navigate the world.

    Having undergone three surgeries in my adolescent years, it was my experience undergoing surgery for an acute hand and wrist injury following a jet ski accident as an adult that was the catalyst for my decision to become a patient partner. There was an intriguing contrast between how I was cared for at two different health-care institutions, my age being the deciding factor at which hospital I went to (a children’s hospital or an adult one).

    The most memorable example was how, as a teenager or child, you were never left alone before surgery, and nurses and staff took all the time necessary to comfort me and answer my (and my family’s) questions. I also remember how right before putting me to sleep, the whole staff initiated a surgical pause and introduced themselves and explained to me what their role was during my surgery.

    None of that happened as an adult. I was left in a hallway while the operating theater was prepared, anxious and alone with staff walking by not even batting an eye. My questions felt like an annoyance to the care team; as soon as I was wheeled onto the operating room table, the anesthetist quickly put me to sleep. I didn’t even have the time to see who else was there.

    Now don’t get me wrong: I am incredibly appreciative with the quality of care I received, but it was the everyday interactions with the care teams that I felt could be improved. And so, while I was recovering from that surgery, I looked for a way to help other patients and the hospital improve its care. I discovered the hospital’s patient engagement program, applied, and the rest is history!

    Since then, I have worked on a host of patient-centered policy and research projects and fervently advocate that surgical teams adopt a more compassionate approach with patients before and after surgery.

    I’d be happy to talk a bit more about my journey if you ask, but with that out of the way … Welcome to our first patient navigator column about patient engagement.

    Conceptualizing the continuum of Patient Engagement

    In the context of Canadian health care, patient engagement is a multifaceted concept that involves active collaboration between patients, caregivers, health-care providers and researchers. It involves patients and caregivers as active contributors in decision-making processes, health-care services and medical research. Though the concept is not new, the paradigm shift toward patient engagement in Canada started around 2010.

    I like to conceptualize the different levels of patient engagement as a measure of the strength of the relationship between patients and their interlocutors – whether it’s a healthcare provider, administrator or researcher – charted against the duration of the engagement or the scope of input required from the patient.

    Defining different levels of Patient Engagement

    Following the continuum, let’s begin by defining different levels of patient engagement. Bear in mind that these definitions can vary from one organization to another but are useful in generally labelling the level of patient engagement a project has achieved (or wishes to achieve).

    Patient involvement: If the strength of the relationship between patients and their interlocutors is minimal and not time consuming or too onerous, then perhaps it can be categorized as patient involvement. This applies to many instances of transactional engagement.

    Patient advisory/consulting: Right in the middle of our continuum, patients can find themselves engaging in patient advisory or consulting work, where projects are limited in scope and duration or complexity, and the relationship is not as profound as a partnership.

    Patient partnership: The stronger the relationship is between the patient and their interlocutor, and the longer the engagement activity lasts or how much input the patient is providing, the more this situation can be categorized as patient partnership. It is the inverse of patient involvement.

    Examples of the different levels of Patient Engagement

    Let’s pretend you are accompanying a loved one to an appointment to manage a kidney disease, requiring them to undergo dialysis treatment. We’ll use this scenario to exemplify what label could be used to describe the level of engagement.

    Patient involvement: In our case, if your loved one – or you – fills out a satisfaction or feedback survey about your experience in the waiting room and all that needed to be done was to hand it back to the clerk or care team, then, at a basic level, you could likely label this interaction as a form of patient involvement. It can also involve open consultations around a design of a new look and feel for a hospital, or the understandability of a survey or communications product. Interactions with the care team, administrators or researchers are minimal and often transactional.

    Patient advisory/consulting: If your loved one was asked for more detailed information about survey results over the course of a few meetings, this could represent patient advisory/consulting. This could mean that patients meet with program administrators and care providers and share their insights on how things can be improved. It essentially involves patients providing advice to health-care institutions from the perspective of patients, their family members and caregivers.

    Patient advisors or consultants are often appointed by hospitals or academic institutions to offer insights at multiple stages of health-care delivery and research. They can help pilot an initiative based on that feedback or evaluate whether the new solutions are working. Often patient advisors are engaged in smaller-term individual projects and meet with the project team as regularly as required.

    Patient partnership: Going above and beyond patient advisory, if patients have built a trusting relationship with their care team or administrators, they could feel comfortable enough to partner with them and initiate a project of their own. This could be for a project in which they study a different form of treatment to improve patient-centered outcomes (like the time it takes to feel “normal” following a session); it could be working together to identify and remove barriers for other patients that need to access that type of care. These projects are not fulfilled overnight, but require a collaborative, longstanding and trusting relationship between patients and health-care providers, administrators or researchers. It ensures that patients, regardless of severity or chronicity of their illness, can meaningfully contribute their experiences to aid in improving patient care, or develop or implement policies, pilots or research projects from start to finish.

    It is leveraging that lived and living experience to its full extent and having the patient partner involved as an equal voice in the decision-making process for a project – over many months, usually – that the engagement could be labeled a partnership.

    Last words

    The point of this column will be to answer or explore issues or questions related to patient engagement, health communications or even provide some thoughts on how to handle a particular situation.

    I would be happy to collect your questions and feedback at any time, which will help inform future columns. Just email me at max@le-co.ca or connect with me on social media (Linked In, X / Twitter).

    It’s not easy to navigate our health-care systems, but you are not alone.

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

    Share This Post

  • Feel Great, Lose Weight – by Dr. Rangan Chatterjee

    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 all know that losing weight sustainably tends to be harder than simply losing weight. We know that weight loss needs to come with lifestyle change. But how to get there?

    One of the biggest problems that we might face while trying to lose weight is that our “metabolic thermostat” has got stuck at the wrong place. Trying to move it just makes our bodies think we are starving, and everything gets even worse. We can’t even “mind over matter” our way through it with willpower, because our bodies will do impressive things on a cellular level in an attempt to save us… Things that are as extraordinary as they are extraordinarily unhelpful.

    Dr. Rangan Chatterjee is here to help us cut through that.

    In this book, he covers how our metabolic thermostat got stuck in the wrong place, and how to gently tease it back into a better position.

    Some advices won’t be big surprises—go for a whole foods diet, avoiding processed food, for example. Probably not a shocker.

    Others are counterintuitive, but he explains how they work—exercising less while moving more, for instance. Sounds crazy, but we assure you there’s a metabolic explanation for it that’s beyond the scope of this review. And there’s plenty more where that came from, too.

    Bottom line: if your weight has been either slowly rising, or else very stable but at a higher point than you’d like, Dr. Chatterjee can help you move the bar back to where you want it—and keep it there.

    Click here to check out “Feel Great, Lose Weight” and reset your metabolic thermostat to its healthiest point!

    Share This Post

  • He Thinks His Wife Died in an Understaffed Hospital. Now He’s Trying to Change the Industry.

    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.

    For the past year, police Detective Tim Lillard has spent most of his waking hours unofficially investigating his wife’s death.

    The question has never been exactly how Ann Picha-Lillard died on Nov. 19, 2022: She succumbed to respiratory failure after an infection put too much strain on her weakened lungs. She was 65.

    For Tim Lillard, the question has been why.

    Lillard had been in the hospital with his wife every day for a month. Nurses in the intensive care unit had told him they were short-staffed, and were constantly rushing from one patient to the next.

    Lillard tried to pitch in where he could: brushing Ann’s shoulder-length blonde hair or flagging down help when her tracheostomy tube gurgled — a sign of possible respiratory distress.

    So the day he walked into the ICU and saw staff members huddled in Ann’s room, he knew it was serious. He called the couple’s adult children: “It’s Mom,” he told them. “Come now.”

    All he could do then was sit on Ann’s bed and hold her hand, watching as staff members performed chest compressions, desperately trying to save her life.

    A minute ticked by. Then another. Lillard’s not sure how long the CPR continued — long enough for the couple’s son to arrive and take a seat on the other side of Ann’s bed, holding her other hand.

    Finally, the intensive care doctor called it and the team stopped CPR. Time of death: 12:37 p.m.

    Lillard didn’t know what to do in a world without Ann. They had been married almost 25 years. “We were best friends,” he said.

    Just days before her death, nurses had told Lillard that Ann could be discharged to a rehabilitation center as soon as the end of the week. Then, suddenly, she was gone. Lillard didn’t understand what had happened.

    Lillard said he now believes that overwhelmed, understaffed nurses hadn’t been able to respond in time as Ann’s condition deteriorated. And he has made it his mission to fight for change, joining some nursing unions in a push for mandatory ratios that would limit the number of patients in a nurse’s care. “I without a doubt believe 100% Ann would still be here today if they had staffing levels, mandatory staffing levels, especially in ICU,” Lillard said.

    Last year, Oregon became the second state after California to pass hospital-wide nurse ratios that limit the number of patients in a nurse’s care. Michigan, Maine, and Pennsylvania are now weighing similar legislation.

    But supporters of mandatory ratios are going up against a powerful hospital industry spending millions of dollars to kill those efforts. And hospitals and health systems say any staffing ratio regulations, however well-intentioned, would only put patients in greater danger.

    Putting Patients at Risk

    By next year, the United States could have as many as 450,000 fewer nurses than it needs, according to one estimate. The hospital industry blames covid-19 burnout, an aging workforce, a large patient population, and an insufficient pipeline of new nurses entering the field.

    But nursing unions say that’s not the full story. There are now 4.7 million registered nurses in the country, more than ever before.

    The problem, the unions say, is a hospital industry that’s been intentionally understaffing their units for years in order to cut costs and bolster profits. The unions say there isn’t a shortage of nurses but a shortage of nurses willing to work in those conditions.

    The nurse staffing crisis is now affecting patient care. The number of Michigan nurses who say they know of a patient who has died because of understaffing has nearly doubled in recent years, according to a Michigan Nurses Association survey last year.

    Just months before Ann Picha-Lillard’s death, nurses and doctors at the health system where she died had asked the Michigan attorney general to investigate staffing cuts they believed were leading to dangerous conditions, including patient deaths, according to The Detroit News.

    But Lillard didn’t know any of that when he drove his wife to the hospital in October 2022. She had been feeling short of breath for a few weeks after she and Lillard had mild covid infections. They were both vaccinated, but Ann was immunocompromised. She suffered from rheumatoid arthritis, a condition that had also caused scarring in her lungs.

    To be safe, doctors at DMC Huron Valley-Sinai Hospital wanted to keep Ann for observation. After a few days in the facility, she developed pneumonia. Doctors told the couple that Ann needed to be intubated. Ann was terrified but Lillard begged her to listen to the doctors. Tearfully, she agreed.

    With Ann on a ventilator in the ICU, it seemed clear to Lillard that nurses were understaffed and overwhelmed. One nurse told him they had been especially short-staffed lately, Lillard said.

    “The alarms would go off for the medications, they’d come into the room, shut off the alarm when they get low, run to the medication room, come back, set them down, go to the next room, shut off alarms,” Lillard recalled. “And that was going on all the time.”

    Lillard felt bad for the nurses, he said. “But obviously, also for my wife. That’s why I tried doing as much as I could when I was there. I would comb her hair, clean her, just keep an eye on things. But I had no idea what was really going on.”

    Finally, Ann’s health seemed to be stabilizing. A nurse told Lillard they’d be able to discharge Ann, possibly by the end of that week.

    By Nov. 17, Ann was no longer sedated and she cried when she saw Lillard and her daughter. Still unable to speak, she tried to mouth words to her husband “but we couldn’t understand what she was saying,” Lillard said.

    The next day, Lillard went home feeling hopeful, counting down the days until Ann could leave the hospital.

    Less than 24 hours later, Ann died.

    Lillard couldn’t wrap his head around how things went downhill so fast. Ann’s underlying lung condition, the infection, and her weakened state could have proved fatal in the best of circumstances. But Lillard wanted to understand how Ann had gone from nearly discharged to dying, seemingly overnight.

    He turned his dining room table into a makeshift office and started with what he knew. The day Ann died, he remembered her medical team telling him that her heart rate had spiked and she had developed another infection the night before. Lillard said he interviewed two DMC Huron Valley-Sinai nurse administrators, and had his own doctor look through Ann’s charts and test results from the hospital. “Everybody kept telling me: sepsis, sepsis, sepsis,” he said.

    Sepsis is when an infection triggers an extreme reaction in the body that can cause rapid organ failure. It’s one of the leading causes of death in U.S. hospitals. Some experts say up to 80% of sepsis deaths are preventable, while others say the percentage is far lower.

    Lives can be saved when sepsis is caught and treated fast, which requires careful attention to small changes in vital signs. One study found that for every additional patient a nurse had to care for, the mortality rate from sepsis increased by 12%.

    Lillard became convinced that had there been more nurses working in the ICU, someone could have caught what was happening to Ann.

    “They just didn’t have the time,” he said.

    DMC Huron Valley-Sinai’s director of communications and media relations, Brian Taylor, declined a request for comment about the 2022 staffing complaint to the Michigan attorney general.

    Following the Money

    When Lillard asked the hospital for copies of Ann’s medical records, DMC Huron Valley-Sinai told him he’d have to request them from its parent company in Texas.

    Like so many hospitals in recent years, the Lillards’ local health system had been absorbed by a series of other corporations. In 2011, the Detroit Medical Center health system was bought for $1.5 billion by Vanguard Health Systems, which was backed by the private equity company Blackstone Group.

    Two years after that, in 2013, Vanguard itself was acquired by Tenet Healthcare, a for-profit company based in Dallas that, according to its website, operates 480 ambulatory surgery centers and surgical hospitals, 52 hospitals, and approximately 160 additional outpatient centers.

    As health care executives face increasing pressure from investors, nursing unions say hospitals have been intentionally understaffing nurses to reduce labor costs and increase revenue. Also, insurance reimbursements incentivize keeping nurse staffing levels low. “Hospitals are not directly reimbursed for nursing services in the same way that a physician bills for their services,” said Karen Lasater, an associate professor of nursing in the Center for Health Outcomes and Policy Research at the University of Pennsylvania. “And because hospitals don’t perceive nursing as a service line, but rather a cost center, they think about nursing as: How can we reduce this to the lowest denominator possible?” she said.

    Lasater is a proponent of mandatory nurse ratios. “The nursing shortage is not a pipeline problem, but a leaky bucket problem,” she said. “And the solutions to this crisis need to address the root cause of the issue, which is why nurses are saying they’re leaving employment. And it’s rooted in unsafe staffing. It’s not safe for the patients, but it’s also not safe for nurses.”

    A Battle Between Hospitals and Unions

    In November, almost one year after Ann’s death, Lillard told a room of lawmakers at the Michigan State Capitol that he believes the Safe Patient Care Act could save lives. The health policy committee in the Michigan House was holding a hearing on the proposed act, which would limit the amount of mandatory overtime a nurse can be forced to work, and require hospitals to make their staffing levels available to the public.

    Most significantly, the bills would require hospitals to have mandatory, minimum nurse-to-patient ratios. For example: one nurse for every patient in the ICU; one for every three patients in the emergency room; a nurse for triage; and one nurse for every four postpartum birthing patients and well-baby care.

    Efforts to pass mandatory ratio laws failed in Washington and Minnesota last year after facing opposition from the hospital industry. In Minnesota, the Minnesota Nurses Association accused the Mayo Clinic of using “blackmail tactics”: Mayo had told lawmakers it would pull billions of dollars in investment from the state if mandatory ratio legislation passed. Soon afterward, lawmakers removed nurse ratios from the legislation.

    While Lillard waited for his turn to speak to Michigan lawmakers about the Safe Patient Care Act in November, members of the Michigan Nurses Association, which says it represents some 13,000 nurses, told lawmakers that its units were dangerously understaffed. They said critical care nurses were sometimes caring for up to 11 patients at a time.

    “Last year I coded someone in an ICU for 10 minutes, all alone, because there was no one to help me,” said the nurses association president and registered nurse Jamie Brown, reading from another nurse’s letter.

    “I have been left as the only specially trained nurse to take care of eight babies on the unit: eight fragile newborns,” said Carolyn Clemens, a registered nurse from the Grand Blanc area of Michigan.

    Nikia Parker said she has left full-time emergency room nursing, a job she believes is her calling. After her friend died in the hospital where she worked, she was left wondering whether understaffing may have contributed to his death.

    “If the Safe Patient Care Act passed, and we have ratios, I’m one of those nurses who would return to the bedside full time,” Parker told lawmakers. “And so many of my co-workers who have left would join me.”

    But not all nurses agree that mandatory ratios are a good idea. 

    While the American Nurses Association supports enforceable ratios as an “essential approach,” that organization’s Michigan chapter does not, saying there may not be enough nurses in the state to satisfy the requirements of the Safe Patient Care Act.

    For some lawmakers, the risk of collateral damage seems too high. State Rep. Graham Filler said he worries that mandating ratios could backfire.

    “We’re going to severely hamper health care in the state of Michigan. I’m talking closed wards because you can’t meet the ratio in a bill. The inability for a hospital to treat an emergent patient. So it feels kind of to me like a gamble we’re taking,” said Filler, a Republican.

    Michigan hospitals are already struggling to fill some 8,400 open positions, according to the Michigan Health & Hospital Association. That association says that complying with the Safe Patient Care Act would require hiring 13,000 nurses.

    Every major health system in the state signed a letter opposing mandatory ratios, saying it would force them to close as many as 5,100 beds.

    Lillard watched the debate play out in the hearing. “That’s a scare tactic, in my opinion, where the hospitals say we’re going to have to start closing stuff down,” he said.

    He doesn’t think legislation on mandatory ratios — which are still awaiting a vote in the Michigan House’s health policy committee — are a “magic bullet” for such a complex, national problem. But he believes they could help.

    “The only way these hospitals and the administrations are gonna make any changes, and even start moving towards making it better, is if they’re forced to,” Lillard said.

    Seated in the center of the hearing room in Lansing, next to a framed photo of Ann, Lillard’s hands shook as he recounted those final minutes in the ICU.

    “Please take action so that no other person or other family endures this loss,” he said. “You can make a difference in saving lives.”

    Grief is one thing, Lillard said, but it’s another thing to be haunted by doubts, to worry that your loved one’s care was compromised before they ever walked through the hospital doors. What he wants most, he said, is to prevent any other family from having to wonder, “What if?”

    This article is from a partnership that includes Michigan Public, NPR, and KFF Health News.

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    USE OUR CONTENT

    This story can be republished for free (details).

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • 5 Ways To Beat Cancer (And Other Diseases)
  • Sprout Your Seeds, Grains, Beans, Etc

    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.

    Good Things Come In Small Packages

    “Sprouting” grains and seeds—that is, allowing them to germinate and begin to grow—enhances their nutritional qualities, boosting their available vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and even antioxidants.

    You may be thinking: surely whatever nutrients are in there, are in there already; how can it be increased?

    Well, the grand sweeping miracle of life itself is beyond the scope of what we have room to cover today, but in few words: there are processes that allow plants to transform stuff into other stuff, and that is part of what is happening.

    Additionally, in the cases of some nutrients, they were there already, but the sprouting process allows them to become more available to us. Think about the later example of how it’s easier to eat and digest a ripe fruit than an unripe one, and now scale that back to a seed and a sprouted seed.

    A third way that sprouting benefits us is by reducing“antinutrients”, such as phytic acid.

    Let’s drop a few examples of the “what”, before we press on to the “how”:

    Sounds great! How do we do it?

    First, take the seeds, grains, nuts, beans, etc that you’re going to sprout. Fine examples to try for a first sprouting session include:

    • Grains: buckwheat, brown rice, quinoa
    • Legumes: soy beans, black beans, kidney beans
    • Greens: broccoli, mustard greens, radish
    • Nuts/seeds: almonds, pumpkin seeds, chia seeds

    Note: whatever you use should be as unprocessed as possible to start with:

    • On the one hand, you’d be surprised how often “life finds a way” when it comes to sprouting ridiculous choices
    • On the other hand, it’s usually easier if you’re not trying to sprout blanched almonds, split lentils, rolled oats, or toasted hulled buckwheat.

    Second, you will need clean water, a jar with a lid, muslin cloth or similar, and a rubber band.

    Next, take an amount of the plants you’ll be sprouting. Let’s say beans of some kind. Try it with ¼ cup to start with; you can do bigger batches once you’re more confident of your setup and the process.

    Rinse and soak them for at least 24 hours. Take care to add more water than it looks like you’ll need, because those beans are thirsty, and sprouting is thirsty work.

    Drain, rinse, and put them in a clean glass jar, covering with just the muslin cloth in place of the lid, held in place by the rubber band. No extra water in it this time, and you’re going to be storing the jar upside down (with ventilation underneath, so for example on some sort of wire rack is ideal) in a dark moderately warm place (e.g. 80℉ / 25℃ is often ideal, but it doesn’t have to be exact, you have wiggle-room, and some things will enjoy a few degrees cooler or warmer than that)

    Each day, rinse and replace until you see that they are sprouting. When they’re sprouting, they’re ready to eat!

    Unless you want to grow a whole plant, in which case, go for it (we recommend looking for a gardening guide in that case).

    But watch out!

    That 80℉ / 25℃ temperature at which our sprouting seeds, beans, grains etc thrive? There are other things that thrive at that temperature too! Things like:

    • E. coli
    • Salmonella
    • Listeria

    …amongst others.

    So, some things to keep you safe:

    1. If it looks or smells bad, throw it out
    2. If in doubt, throw it out
    3. Even if it looks perfect, blanch it (by boiling it in water for 30 seconds, before rinsing it in cold water to take it back to a colder temperature) before eating it or refrigerating it for later.
    4. When you come back to get it from the fridge, see once again points 1 and 2 above.
    5. Ideally you should enjoy sprouted things within 5 days.

    Want to know more about sprouting?

    You’ll love this book that we reviewed recently:

    The Sprout Book – by Doug Evans

    Enjoy!

    Don’t Forget…

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

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Stuck in fight-or-flight mode? 5 ways to complete the ‘stress cycle’ and avoid burnout or depression

    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.

    Can you remember a time when you felt stressed leading up to a big life event and then afterwards felt like a weight had been lifted? This process – the ramping up of the stress response and then feeling this settle back down – shows completion of the “stress cycle”.

    Some stress in daily life is unavoidable. But remaining stressed is unhealthy. Chronic stress increases chronic health conditions, including heart disease and stroke and diabetes. It can also lead to burnout or depression.

    Exercise, cognitive, creative, social and self-soothing activities help us process stress in healthier ways and complete the stress cycle.

    What does the stress cycle look like?

    Scientists and researchers refer to the “stress response”, often with a focus on the fight-or-flight reactions. The phrase the “stress cycle” has been made popular by self-help experts but it does have a scientific basis.

    The stress cycle is our body’s response to a stressful event, whether real or perceived, physical or psychological. It could be being chased by a vicious dog, an upcoming exam or a difficult conversation.

    The stress cycle has three stages:

    • stage 1 is perceiving the threat
    • stage 2 is the fight-or-flight response, driven by our stress hormones: adrenaline and cortisol
    • stage 3 is relief, including physiological and psychological relief. This completes the stress cycle.

    Different people will respond to stress differently based on their life experiences and genetics.

    Unfortunately, many people experience multiple and ongoing stressors out of their control, including the cost-of-living crisis, extreme weather events and domestic violence.

    Remaining in stage 2 (the flight-or-flight response), can lead to chronic stress. Chronic stress and high cortisol can increase inflammation, which damages our brain and other organs.

    When you are stuck in chronic fight-or-flight mode, you don’t think clearly and are more easily distracted. Activities that provide temporary pleasure, such as eating junk food or drinking alcohol are unhelpful strategies that do not reduce the stress effects on our brain and body. Scrolling through social media is also not an effective way to complete the stress cycle. In fact, this is associated with an increased stress response.

    Stress and the brain

    In the brain, chronic high cortisol can shrink the hippocampus. This can impair a person’s memory and their capacity to think and concentrate.

    Chronic high cortisol also reduces activity in the prefrontal cortex but increases activity in the amygdala.

    The prefrontal cortex is responsible for higher-order control of our thoughts, behaviours and emotions, and is goal-directed and rational. The amygdala is involved in reflexive and emotional responses. Higher amygdala activity and lower prefrontal cortex activity explains why we are less rational and more emotional and reactive when we are stressed.

    There are five types of activities that can help our brains complete the stress cycle. https://www.youtube.com/embed/eD1wliuHxHI?wmode=transparent&start=0 It can help to understand how the brain encounters stress.

    1. Exercise – its own complete stress cycle

    When we exercise we get a short-term spike in cortisol, followed by a healthy reduction in cortisol and adrenaline.

    Exercise also increases endorphins and serotonin, which improve mood. Endorphins cause an elated feeling often called “runner’s high” and have anti-inflammatory effects.

    When you exercise, there is more blood flow to the brain and higher activity in the prefrontal cortex. This is why you can often think more clearly after a walk or run. Exercise can be a helpful way to relieve feelings of stress.

    Exercise can also increase the volume of the hippocampus. This is linked to better short-term and long-term memory processing, as well as reduced stress, depression and anxiety.

    2. Cognitive activities – reduce negative thinking

    Overly negative thinking can trigger or extend the stress response. In our 2019 research, we found the relationship between stress and cortisol was stronger in people with more negative thinking.

    Higher amygdala activity and less rational thinking when you are stressed can lead to distorted thinking such as focusing on negatives and rigid “black-and-white” thinking.

    Activities to reduce negative thinking and promote a more realistic view can reduce the stress response. In clinical settings this is usually called cognitive behaviour therapy.

    At home, this could be journalling or writing down worries. This engages the logical and rational parts of our brain and helps us think more realistically. Finding evidence to challenge negative thoughts (“I’ve prepared well for the exam, so I can do my best”) can help to complete the stress cycle.

    Young person draws in notebook
    Journalling could help process stressful events and complete the stress cycle. Shutterstock/Fellers Photography

    3. Getting creative – a pathway out of ‘flight or fight’

    Creative activities can be art, craft, gardening, cooking or other activities such as doing a puzzle, juggling, music, theatre, dancing or simply being absorbed in enjoyable work.

    Such pursuits increase prefrontal cortex activity and promote flow and focus.

    Flow is a state of full engagement in an activity you enjoy. It lowers high-stress levels of noradrenaline, the brain’s adrenaline. When you are focussed like this, the brain only processes information relevant to the task and ignores non-relevant information, including stresses.

    4. Getting social and releasing feel-good hormones

    Talking with someone else, physical affection with a person or pet and laughing can all increase oxytocin. This is a chemical messenger in the brain that increases social bonding and makes us feel connected and safe.

    Laughing is also a social activity that activates parts of the limbic system – the part of the brain involved in emotional and behavioural responses. This increases endorphins and serotonin and improves our mood.

    5. Self-soothing

    Breathing exercises and meditation stimulate the parasympathetic nervous system (which calms down our stress responses so we can “reset”) via the vagus nerves, and reduce cortisol.

    A good cry can help too by releasing stress energy and increasing oxytocin and endorphins.

    Emotional tears also remove cortisol and the hormone prolactin from the body. Our prior research showed cortisol and prolactin were associated with depression, anxiety and hostility.

    man jogs outside
    Getting moving can help with stress and its effects on the brain. Shutterstock/Jaromir Chalabala

    Action beats distraction

    Whether it’s watching a funny or sad movie, exercising, journalling, gardening or doing a puzzle, there is science behind why you should complete the stress cycle.

    Doing at least one positive activity every day can also reduce our baseline stress level and is beneficial for good mental health and wellbeing.

    Importantly, chronic stress and burnout can also indicate the need for change, such as in our workplaces. However, not all stressful circumstances can be easily changed. Remember help is always available.

    If you have concerns about your stress or health, please talk to a doctor.

    If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800.

    Theresa Larkin, Associate professor of Medical Sciences, University of Wollongong and Susan J. Thomas, Associate professor in Mental Health and Behavioural Science, University of Wollongong

    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:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    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: