Heal Your Stressed Brain
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.
Rochelle Walsh, therapist, explains the problem and how to fix it:
Not all brain damage is from the outside
Long-term stress and burnout cause brain damage; it’s not just a mindset issue—it impacts the brain physiologically. To compound matters, it also increases the risk of neurodegenerative diseases. While the brain can indeed grow new neurons and regenerate itself, chronic stress damages specific regions, and inhibits that.
There are some effects of chronic stress that can seem positive—the amygdalae and hypothalamus are seen to grow larger and stronger, for instance—but this is, unfortunately, “all the better to stress you with”. In compensation for this, chronic stress deprioritizes the pre-frontal cortex and hippocampi, so there goes your reasoning and memory.
This often results in people not managing chronic stress well. Just like a weak heart and lungs might impede the exercise that could make them stronger, the stressed brain is not good at permitting you to do the things that would heal it—preferring to keep you on edge all day, worrying and twitchy, mind racing and body tense. It also tends to lead to autoimmune diseases, due to the increased inflammation (because the body’s threat-detection system as at “jumping at own shadow” levels so it’s deploying every defense it has, including completely inappropriate ones).
Notwithstanding the “Heal Your Stressed Brain” thumbnail, she doesn’t actually go into this in detail and bids us sign up for her masterclass. We at 10almonds however like to deliver, so you can find useful advice and free resources in our links-drop at the bottom of this article.
Meanwhile, if you’d like to hear more about the neurological woes described above, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like to read:
- Meditation That You’ll Actually Enjoy
- How To Manage/Reduce Chronic Stress
- Lower Your Cortisol! (Here’s Why & How)
- How Healthy People Regulate Their Emotions
- Sleep: Yes, You Really Do Still Need It!
- Give Your Adrenal Glands A Chance
- The Stress Prescription (Against Aging!)
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Winter Wellness & The Pills That Increase Your Alzheimer’s Risk
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.
This week in health news…
Do not go gentle into that good night
As wildfires rage in California, snow is falling from Texas to Georgia, meaning that a lot of people are facing weather they’re not accustomed to, in houses that were not built for it. And that’s the lucky ones; there are many thousands of people who are homeless, of whom many will die.
Hopefully all our readers are safe, but it pays to watch out for the signs of hypothermia as it is a condition that really sneaks up on people and, in the process, takes away their ability to notice the hypothermia. You and your loved ones are not immune to this, so it’s good to keep an eye on each other, looking out for:
- Shivering, first ← when this stops, assuming it’s not because the temperature has risen, it is often a sign of hypothermia entering a later stage, in which the body is no longer responding appropriately to the cold
- Slurred speech or mumbling
- Slow, shallow breathing
- A weak pulse
- Clumsiness or lack of coordination
- Drowsiness or very low energy
- Confusion or memory loss
- Loss of consciousness
- In infants, bright red, cold skin
How cold is too cold? It doesn’t even have to be sub-zero. According to the CDC, temperatures of 4℃ (40℉) can be low enough to cause hypothermia.
Read in full: The warning signs to notice if someone has hypothermia
Related: Cold Weather Health Risks
Lethal lottery of pathogens
In Minnesota, hospital emergency room waiting times have skyrocketed since yesterday (at time of writing), with 40% of Minnesota’s 1,763 flu-related hospitalizations this fall and winter occurring in the same week, according to yesterday’s report. To put it further into perspective, 17 out of 20 of this season’s flu outbreaks have occurred in the past two weeks.
And that’s just the flu, without considering COVID, RSV, and Norovirus, which are also all running rampant in MN right now.
The advice presently is:
❝Go to the ER if you are super-sick. If you are not super-sick, go to urgent care, go to your clinic, schedule a virtual appointment.❞
And if you’re not in Minneapolis? These stats won’t apply, but definitely consider, before going to the hospital, whether you might leave sicker than you arrived, and plan accordingly, making use of telehealth where reasonably possible.
Read in full: Minnesota ERs stressed by “quad-demic” of COVID, flu, RSV, norovirus
Related: Move over, COVID and Flu! We Have “Hybrid Viruses” To Contend With Now
Sleep, but at what cost?
This was a study looking at the effects of sleeping pills on the brain, specifically zolpidem (most well-known by its brand name of Ambien).
What they found is that while it does indeed effectively induce sleep, part of how it does that is suppressing norepinephrine oscillations (which might otherwise potentially wake you up, though in healthy people these oscillations and the micro-arousals that they cause shouldn’t disrupt sleep at all, and are just considered part of our normal sleep cycles), which oscillations are necessary to generate the pumping action required to move cerebrospinal fluid through the glymphatic system while asleep.
This is a big problem, because the glymphatic system is almost entirely responsible for keeping the brain free from waste products such as beta-amyloids (whose build-up is associated with Alzheimer’s disease and is considered to be a significant part of Alzheimer’s pathogensesis) and alpha-synuclein (same but for Parkinson’s disease), amongst others:
Read in full: Common sleeping pill may pave way for disorders like Alzheimer’s
Related: How To Clean Your Brain (Glymphatic Health Primer)
Take care!
Share This Post
-
When Age Is A Flexible Number
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.
Aging, Counterclockwise!
In the late 1970s, Dr. Ellen Langer hypothesized that physical markers of aging could be affected by psychosomatic means.
Note: psychosomatic does not mean “it’s all in your head”.
Psychosomatic means “your body does what your brain tells it to do, for better or for worse”
She set about testing that, in what has been referred to since as…
The Counterclockwise Study
A small (n=16) sample of men in their late 70s and early 80s were recruited in what they were told was a study about reminiscing.
Back in the 1970s, it was still standard practice in the field of psychology to outright lie to participants (who in those days were called “subjects”), so this slight obfuscation was a much smaller ethical aberration than in some famous studies of the same era and earlier (cough cough Zimbardo cough Milgram cough).
Anyway, the participants were treated to a week in a 1950s-themed retreat, specifically 1959, a date twenty years prior to the experiment’s date in 1979. The environment was decorated and furnished authentically to the date, down to the food and the available magazines and TV/radio shows; period-typical clothing was also provided, and so forth.
- The control group were told to spend the time reminiscing about 1959
- The experimental group were told to pretend (and maintain the pretense, for the duration) that it really was 1959
The results? On many measures of aging, the experimental group participants became quantifiably younger:
❝The experimental group showed greater improvement in joint flexibility, finger length (their arthritis diminished and they were able to straighten their fingers more), and manual dexterity.
On intelligence tests, 63 percent of the experimental group improved their scores, compared with only 44 percent of the control group. There were also improvements in height, weight, gait, and posture.
Finally, we asked people unaware of the study’s purpose to compare photos taken of the participants at the end of the week with those submitted at the beginning of the study. These objective observers judged that all of the experimental participants looked noticeably younger at the end of the study.❞
Remember, this was after one week.
Her famous study was completed in 1979, and/but not published until eleven years later in 1990, with the innocuous title:
Higher stages of human development: Perspectives on adult growth
You can read about it much more accessibly, and in much more detail, in her book:
Counterclockwise: A Proven Way to Think Yourself Younger and Healthier – by Dr. Ellen Langer
We haven’t reviewed that particular book yet, so here’s Linda Graham’s review, that noted:
❝Langer cites other research that has made similar findings.
In one study, for instance, 650 people were surveyed about their attitudes on aging. Twenty years later, those with a positive attitude with regard to aging had lived seven years longer on average than those with a negative attitude to aging.
(By comparison, researchers estimate that we extend our lives by four years if we lower our blood pressure and reduce our cholesterol.)
In another study, participants read a list of negative words about aging; within 15 minutes, they were walking more slowly than they had before.❞
Read the review in full:
Aging in Reverse: A Review of Counterclockwise
The Counterclockwise study has been repeated since, and/but we are still waiting for the latest (exciting, much larger sample, 90 participants this time) study to be published. The research proposal describes the method in great detail, and you can read that with one click over on PubMed:
It was approved, and has now been completed (as of 2020), but the results have not been published yet; you can see the timeline of how that’s progressing over on ClinicalTrials.gov:
Clinical Trials | Ageing as a Mindset: A Counterclockwise Experiment to Rejuvenate Older Adults
Hopefully it’ll take less time than the eleven years it took for the original study, but in the meantime, there seems to be nothing to lose in doing a little “Citizen Science” for ourselves.
Maybe a week in a 20 years-ago themed resort (writer’s note: wow, that would only be 2004; that doesn’t feel right; it should surely be at least the 90s!) isn’t a viable option for you, but we’re willing to bet it’s possible to “microdose” on this method. Given that the original study lasted only a week, even just a themed date-night on a regular recurring basis seems like a great option to explore (if you’re not partnered then well, indulge yourself how best you see fit, in accord with the same premise; a date-night can be with yourself too!).
Just remember the most important take-away though:
Don’t accidentally put yourself in your own control group!
In other words, it’s critically important that for the duration of the exercise, you act and even think as though it is the appropriate date.
If you instead spend your time thinking “wow, I miss the [decade that does it for you]”, you will dodge the benefits, and potentially even make yourself feel (and thus, potentially, if the inverse hypothesis holds true, become) older.
This latter is not just our hypothesis by the way, there is an established potential for nocebo effect.
For example, the following study looked at how instructions given in clinical tests can be worded in a way that make people feel differently about their age, and impact the results of the mental and/or physical tests then administered:
❝Our results seem to suggest how manipulations by instructions appeared to be more largely used and capable of producing more clear performance variations on cognitive, memory, and physical tasks.
Age-related stereotypes showed potentially stronger effects when they are negative, implicit, and temporally closer to the test of performance. ❞
(and yes, that’s the same Dr. Francesco Pagnini whose name you saw atop the other study we cited above, with the 90 participants recreating the Counterclockwise study)
Want to know more about [the hard science of] psychosomatic health?
Check out Dr. Langer’s other book, which we reviewed recently:
The Mindful Body: Thinking Our Way to Chronic Health – by Dr. Ellen Langer
Enjoy!
Share This Post
-
Ovarian cancer is hard to detect. Focusing on these 4 symptoms can help with diagnosis
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.
Ovarian cancers are often found when they are already advanced and hard to treat.
Researchers have long believed this was because women first experienced symptoms when ovarian cancer was already well-established. Symptoms can also be hard to identify as they’re vague and similar to other conditions.
But a new study shows promising signs ovarian cancer can be detected in its early stages. The study targeted women with four specific symptoms – bloating, abdominal pain, needing to pee frequently, and feeling full quickly – and put them on a fast track to see a specialist.
As a result, even the most aggressive forms of ovarian cancer could be detected in their early stages.
So what did the study find? And what could it mean for detecting – and treating – ovarian cancer more quickly?
Ground Picture/Shutterstock Why is ovarian cancer hard to detect early?
Ovarian cancer cannot be detected via cervical cancer screening (which used to be called a pap smear) and pelvic exams aren’t useful as a screening test.
Current Australian guidelines recommend women get tested for ovarian cancer if they have symptoms for more than a month. But many of the symptoms – such as tiredness, constipation and changes in menstruation – are vague and overlap with other common illnesses.
This makes early detection a challenge. But it is crucial – a woman’s chances of surviving ovarian cancer are associated with how advanced the cancer is when she is diagnosed.
If the cancer is still confined to the original site with no spread, the five-year survival rate is 92%. But over half of women diagnosed with ovarian cancer first present when the cancer has already metastatised, meaning it has spread to other parts of the body.
If the cancer has spread to nearby lymph nodes, the survival rate is reduced to 72%. If the cancer has already metastasised and spread to distant sites at the time of diagnosis, the rate is only 31%.
There are mixed findings on whether detecting ovarian cancer earlier leads to better survival rates. For example, a trial in the UK that screened more than 200,000 women failed to reduce deaths.
That study screened the general public, rather than relying on self-reported symptoms. The new study suggests asking women to look for specific symptoms can lead to earlier diagnosis, meaning treatment can start more quickly.
What did the new study look at?
Between June 2015 and July 2022, the researchers recruited 2,596 women aged between 16 and 90 from 24 hospitals across the UK.
They were asked to monitor for these four symptoms:
- persistent abdominal distension (women often refer to this as bloating)
- feeling full shortly after starting to eat and/or loss of appetite
- pelvic or abdominal pain (which can feel like indigestion)
- needing to urinate urgently or more often.
Women who reported at least one of four symptoms persistently or frequently were put on a fast-track pathway. That means they were sent to see a gynaecologist within two weeks. The fast track pathway has been used in the UK since 2011, but is not specifically part of Australia’s guidelines.
Some 1,741 participants were put on this fast track. First, they did a blood test that measured the cancer antigen 125 (CA125). If a woman’s CA125 level was abnormal, she was sent to do a internal vaginal ultrasound.
What did they find?
The study indicates this process is better at detecting ovarian cancer than general screening of people who don’t have symptoms. Some 12% of women on the fast-track pathway were diagnosed with some kind of ovarian cancer.
A total of 6.8% of fast-tracked patients were diagnosed with high-grade serous ovarian cancer. It is the most aggressive form of cancer and responsible for 90% of ovarian cancer deaths.
Out of those women with the most aggressive form, one in four were diagnosed when the cancer was still in its early stages. That is important because it allowed treatment of the most lethal cancer before it had spread significantly through the body.
There were some promising signs in treating those with this aggressive form. The majority (95%) had surgery and three quarters (77%) had chemotherapy. Complete cytoreduction – meaning all of the cancer appears to have been removed – was achieved in six women out of ten (61%).
It’s a promising sign that there may be ways to “catch” and target ovarian cancer before it is well-established in the body.
What does this mean for detection?
The study’s findings suggest this method of early testing and referral for the symptoms leads to earlier detection of ovarian cancer. This may also improve outcomes, although the study did not track survival rates.
It also points to the importance of public awareness about symptoms.
Clinicians should be able to recognise all of the ways ovarian cancer can present, including vague symptoms like general fatigue.
But empowering members of the general public to recognise a narrower set of four symptoms can help trigger testing, detection and treatment of ovarian cancer earlier than we thought.
This could also save GPs advising every woman who has general tiredness or constipation to undergo an ovarian cancer test, making testing and treatment more targeted and efficient.
Many women remain unaware of the symptoms of ovarian cancer. This study shows recognising them may help early detection and treatment.
Jenny Doust, Clinical Professorial Research Fellow, Australian Women and Girls’ Health Research Centre, The University of Queensland
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Walnuts vs Pecans – Which is Healthier?
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
Our Verdict
When comparing walnuts to pecans, we picked the walnuts.
Why?
It was very close, though, and an argument could be made for pecans! Walnuts are nevertheless always a very good bet, and so far in our This-or-That comparisons, the only nut to beat them so far as been almonds, and that was very close too.
In terms of macros, walnuts have a lot more protein, while pecans have a little more fiber (for approximately the same carbs). Both are equally fatty (near enough; technically pecans have a little more) but where the walnuts stand out in the fat category is that while pecans have mostly healthy monounsaturated fats, walnuts have mostly healthy polyunsaturated fats, including including a good balance of omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids. So, while we do love the extra fiber from pecans, we’re calling it for walnuts in the macros category, on account of the extra protein and the best lipids profile (not that pecans’ lipids profile is bad by any stretch; just, walnuts have it better).
In the vitamins category, walnuts have more of vitamins B2, B6, B9, and C, while pecans offer more of vitamins A, B1, B3, B5, E, K, and choline. The margins aren’t huge and walnuts are also excellent for all the vitamins that pecans narrowly beat them on, but still, the vitamins category is a win for pecans.
When it comes to minerals, walnuts take back the crown; walnuts offer more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, and selenium, while pecans have a little more manganese and zinc. Once again, the margins aren’t huge and pecans are also excellent for all the minerals that walnuts narrowly beat them on, but still, the minerals category is a win for walnuts.
In short: enjoy both of these nuts for their healthy fats, vitamins, minerals, protein, and fiber, but if you’re going to pick one, walnuts come out on top.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts!
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
How to Eat to Change How You Drink – by Dr. Brooke Scheller
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.
Whether you want to stop drinking or just cut down, this book can help. But what makes it different from the other reduce/stop drinking books we’ve reviewed?
Mostly, it’s about nutrition. This book focuses on the way that alcohol changes our relationship to food, our gut, our blood sugars, and more. The author also explains how reducing/stopping drinking, without bearing these things in mind, can be unnecessarily extra hard.
The remedy? To bear them in mind, of course, but that requires knowing them. So what she does is explain the physiology of what’s going on in terms of each of the above things (and more), and how to adjust your diet to make up for what alcohol has been doing to you, so that you can reduce/quit without feeling constantly terrible.
The style is very pop-science, light in tone, readable. She makes reference to a lot of hard science, but doesn’t discuss it in more depth than is necessary to convey the useful information. So, this is a practical book, aimed at all people who want to reduce/quit drinking.
Bottom line: if you feel like it’s hard to drink less because it feels like something is missing, it’s probably because indeed something is missing, and this book can help you bridge that gap!
Click here to check out How To Eat To Change How You Drink, and do just that!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
The Lifestyle Factors That Matter >8 Times More Than Genes
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
We’ve said before that “genes predispose; they don’t predetermine”. It can be good to know one’s genes, of course, and we’ve written about this here:
Genetic Testing: Health Benefits & Methods
…which can include some quite contemporary risks, such as:
Genetic Risk Factors For Long COVID
And yet…
Nurture Over Nature
A very large (n=492,567) study looked into the impact of 25 lifestyle/environmental factors, of which 23 are considered modifiable, and found that lifestyle/environmental factors accounted for 17% of the variation in mortality risk, while genetic predisposition accounted for less than 2%.
Which is good news, because it means we can improve our lot.
But how?
The strongest negative factors (that increased mortality the most) were:
- Smoking
- Not owning your home (interestingly, “live in accommodation rent-free vs own” performed just as badly as various kinds of “renting home vs own”, while “own house with mortgage, vs own outright” had only a marginal negative effect)
- Sleeping more than 9 hours per day (performed even worse than sleeping under 7 hours per day, which also increased mortality risk, but not by as much as oversleeping)
- Financial difficulties in the past two years
- Homosexuality
- Unemployment
- Being an evening person
- Lonely lifestyle
- Frequent napping
We may hypothesize that homosexuality probably makes the list because of how it makes one more likely to have other items on the list, especially unemployment, and the various poverty-related indicators that come from unemployment.
Being an evening person, whatever its pathology, is a well-established risk factor that we’ve talked about before:
Early Bird Or Night Owl? Genes vs Environment ← this is also, by the way, an excellent example of how “genes predispose; they don’t predetermine”, because there is a genetic factor involved, and/but we absolutely can switch it up, if we go about it correctly, and become a morning person without trying to force it.
The strongest positive factors (that decreased mortality the most) were:
- The inverse of all of the various above things, e.g. never having smoked, owning your own home, etc
- Household income, specifically
- Living with a partner
- Having oil central heating
- Gym use
- Sun protection use
- Physical activity, especially if in leisure time rather than as part of one’s work
- Glucosamine supplements
- Family visit frequency
- Cereal fiber intake (i.e. whole grains)
We may hypothesize that having oil central heating is simply a more expensive option to install than many, and therefore likely one enjoyed by homeowners more often than renters.
We may hypothesize that glucosamine supplementation is an indication of the type of person who takes care of a specific condition (inflammation of the joints) without an existential threat; notably, multivitamin supplements don’t get the same benefit, probably because of their ubiquity.
We may hypothesize that “family visit frequency” is highly correlated to having a support network, being social (and thus not lonely), and likely is associated with household income too.
You can see the full list of factors and their impacts, here:
Environmental architecture of mortality in the UKB ← that’s the UK Biobank
You can read the paper in full, here:
Integrating the environmental and genetic architectures of aging and mortality
Practical takeaways
The priorities seem to be as follows:
Don’t smoke. Ideally you will never have smoked, but short of a time machine, you can’t change that now, so: what you can do is quit now if you haven’t already.
See also: Which Addiction-Quitting Methods Work Best?
Note that other factors often lumped in with such, for example daily alcohol consumption, red meat intake, processed meat intake, and salt intake, all significantly increased mortality risk, but none of them in the same league of badness as smoking.
See also: Is Sugar The New Smoking? ← simply put: no, it is not. Don’t get us wrong; added sugar is woeful for the health, but smoking is pretty much the worst thing you can do for your health, short of intentionally (and successfully) committing suicide.
Be financially secure, ideally owning your own home. For many (indeed, for most people in the world) this may be an “easier said than done” thing, but if you can make decisions that will improve your financial security, the mortality numbers are very clear on this matter.
Be social, as loneliness indeed kills, in numerous ways. Loneliness means a lack of a support network, and it means a lack of social contact (thus increased risk of cognitive decline), and likely decreased ikigai, unless your life’s purpose is something inherently linked to solitude (e.g. the “meditating on top of a mountain” archetype).
See also: What Loneliness Does To Your Brain And Body
And to fix it: How To Beat Loneliness & Isolation
Be active: especially in your leisure time; being active because you have to does convey benefits, but on the same level as physical activity because you want to.
See also: No-Exercise Exercises (That Won’t Feel Like “Having To Do” Exercise)
Use sunscreen: we’re surprised this one made the list; it’s important to avoid skin cancer of course, but we didn’t think it’d be quite such a driver of mortality risk mitigation as the numbers show it is, and we can’t think of a clear alternative explanation, as we could with some of the other “why did this make the list?” items. At worst, it could be a similar case to that of glucosamine use, and thus is a marker of a conscientious person making a regular sustained effort for their health. Either way, it seems like a good idea based on the numbers.
See also: Do We Need Sunscreen In Winter, Really?
Enjoy whole grains: fiber is super-important, and that mustn’t be underestimated!
See also: What Matters Most For Your Heart? ← hint: it isn’t about salt intake or fat
And, for that matter: The Best Kind Of Fiber For Overall Health?
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:
