How Does Alcohol Cause Blackouts?

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.

Sometimes people who have never experienced an alcoholic blackout wonder “is it real, or is it just a convenient excuse to avoid responsibility/embarrassment with regard to things done while drunk?”

In 1969 (so, still in the era of incredibly unethical psychological experiments that ranged from the 50s into the 70s), Dr. Donald Goodwin conducted a study in which intoxicated participants were asked to recall an object they had just seen. Most succeeded initially, but half were unable to remember the object just 30 minutes later, demonstrating alcohol-induced memory blackouts.

But, is it any different from regular forgetting? And the answer is: yes, it is indeed different.

The memories that never got stored

Ethanol, the active compound in alcohol, is lipophilic, enabling it to cross the blood-brain barrier and disrupt brain function. It impairs all kinds of things, including decision-making, impulse control, motor skills, and, notably, memory networks—which is what we’re looking at today.

Memory formation (beyond “working memory”, which is the kind that enables you to have an idea of what you were just doing, and carry out simple plans like “pick up this cup, raise it to my mouth, and take a sip”, without forgetting partway through) relies on a process called long-term potentiation (LTP), which strengthens neural connections to store information. Ethanol disrupts this process, preventing memory storage and causing blackouts.

In effect, this means you didn’t just forget a memory; you never stored it in the first place. For this reason, experiences from during an alcoholic blackout cannot be retrieved in the same ways we might retrieve other memories (e.g. in regular forgetting, it’s possible that a context clue jogs our memory and then we remember the experience—because in regular forgetting, the memory was in there; we just didn’t recall it until we were reminded).

Blackouts (in which the memory is never stored in the first place) typically occur when blood alcohol concentration (BAC) exceeds 0.16, while lower levels can result in partial memory loss (brownouts) in which some things may be recalled, but not others. Factors such as dehydration, genetics, medications, food consumption, and age influence the likelihood of complete blackouts.

While alcohol’s residual effects typically subside within a day, repeated over-drinking can cause permanent neuron damage, as well as of course plenty of damage to other organs in the body (especially the liver and gut).

For more on all of this, enjoy:

Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

Want to learn more?

You might also like to read:

What Happens To Your Body When You Stop Drinking Alcohol

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Signs Of Low Estrogen In Women: What Your Skin, Hair, & Nails Are Trying To Tell You
  • Quercetin Quinoa Probiotic Salad
    Revitalize your gut health with this quercetin-rich twist on tabbouleh, packed with flavorful fermented foods and no added salt needed!

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • “The Longevity Vitamin” (That’s Not A Vitamin)

    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.

    The Magic of Mushrooms

    “The Longevity Vitamin that’s not a vitamin” is a great tagline for what’s actually an antioxidant amino acid nutraceutical, but in this case, we’re not the ones spearheading its PR, but rather, the Journal of Nutritional Science:

    Is ergothioneine a “longevity vitamin” limited in the American diet?

    It can be found in all foods, to some extent, but usually in much tinier amounts than would be useful. The reason for this is that it’s synthesized by a variety of microbes (mostly fungi and actinobacteria), and enters the food chain via vegetables that are grown in soil that contain such (which is basically all soil, unless you were to go out of your way to sterilize it, or something really unusually happened).

    About those fungi? That includes common popular edible fungi, where it is found quite generously. An 85g (3oz) portion of (most) mushrooms contains about 5mg of ergothioneine, the consumption of which is associated with a 16% reduced all-cause mortality:

    Association of mushroom consumption with all-cause and cause-specific mortality among American adults: prospective cohort study findings from NHANES III

    However… Most Americans don’t eat that many mushrooms, and those polled averaged 1.1mg/day ergothioneine (in contrast with, for example, Italians’ 4.6mg/day average).

    Antioxidant properties

    While its antioxidant properties aren’t the most exciting quality, they are worth a mention, on account of their potency:

    The biology of ergothioneine, an antioxidant nutraceutical

    This is also part of its potential bid to get classified as a vitamin, because…

    ❝Decreased blood and/or plasma levels of ergothioneine have been observed in some diseases, suggesting that a deficiency could be relevant to the disease onset or progression❞

    ~ Dr. Barry Halliwell et al.

    Source: Ergothioneine: a diet-derived antioxidant with therapeutic potential

    Healthy aging

    Building on from the above, ergothioneine has been specifically identified as being associated with healthy aging and the prevention of cardiometabolic diseases:

    ❝An increasing body of evidence suggests ergothioneine may be an important dietary nutrient for the prevention of a variety of inflammatory and cardiometabolic diseases and ergothioneine has alternately been suggested as a vitamin, “longevity vitamin”, and nutraceutical❞

    ~ Dr. Bernadette Moore et al., citing more references every few words there

    Source: Ergothioneine: an underrecognised dietary micronutrient required for healthy ageing?

    Good for the heart = good for the brain

    As a general rule of thumb, “what’s good for the heart is good for the brain” is almost always true, and it appears to be so in this case, too:

    ❝Ergothioneine crosses the blood–brain barrier and has been reported to have beneficial effects in the brain. In this study, we discuss the cytoprotective and neuroprotective properties of ergotheioneine, which may be harnessed for combating neurodegeneration and decline during aging.❞

    ~ Dr. Bindu Paul

    Source: Ergothioneine: A Stress Vitamin with Antiaging, Vascular, and Neuroprotective Roles?

    Want to get some?

    You can just eat a portion of mushrooms per day! But if you don’t fancy that, it is available as a supplement in convenient 1/day capsule form too.

    We don’t sell it, but for your convenience, here is an example product on Amazon

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Caramelized Caraway Cabbage

    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.

    Cabbage is an underrated vegetable for its many nutrients and its culinary potential—here’s a great way to make it a delectable starter or respectable side.

    You will need

    • 1 medium white cabbage, sliced into 1″ thick slabs
    • 1 tbsp extra-virgin olive oil
    • 1 tbsp caraway seeds
    • 1 tsp black pepper
    • ½ tsp turmeric
    • ¼ tsp MSG or ½ tsp low-sodium salt

    Method

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

    1) Preheat the oven to 400℉ / 200℃.

    2) Combine the non-cabbage ingredients in a small bowl, whisking to mix thoroughly—with a tiny whisk if you have one, but a fork will work if necessary.

    3) Arrange the cabbage slices on a lined baking tray and brush the seasoning-and-oil mixture over both sides of each slice.

    4) Roast for 20–25 minutes until the cabbage is tender and beginning to caramelize.

    5) Serve warm.

    Enjoy!

    Want to learn more?

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

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • The Sweet Truth About Diabetes

    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.

    There’s A Lot Of Confusion About Diabetes!

    For those readers who are not diabetic, nor have a loved one who is diabetic, nor any other pressing reason to know these things, first a quick 101 rundown of some things to understand the rest of today’s main feature:

    • Blood sugar levels: how much sugar is in the blood, measured in mg/dL or mmol/L
    • Hyperglycemia or “hyper” for short: too much sugar in the blood
    • Hypoglycemia or “hypo” for short: too little sugar in the blood
    • Insulin: a hormone that acts as a gatekeeper to allow sugar to pass, or not pass, into various parts of the body
    • Type 1 diabetes (sometimes capitalized, and/or abbreviated to “T1D”) is an autoimmune disorder that prevents the pancreas from being able to supply the body with insulin. This means that taking insulin consistently is necessary for life.
    • Type 2 diabetes is a matter of insulin resistance. The pancreas produces plenty of insulin, but the body has become desensitized to it, so it doesn’t work properly. Taking extra insulin may sometimes be necessary, but for many people, it can be controlled by means of a careful diet and other lifestyle factors.

    With that in mind, on to some very popular myths…

    Diabetes is caused by having too much sugar

    While sugar is not exactly a health food, it’s not the villain of this story either.

    • Type 1 diabetes has a genetic basis, triggered by epigenetic factors unrelated to sugar.
    • Type 2 diabetes comes from a cluster of risk factors which, together, can cause a person to go through pre-diabetes and acquire type 2 diabetes.
      • Those risk factors include:
        • A genetic predisposition
        • A large waist circumference
          • (this is more relevant than BMI or body fat percentage)
        • High blood pressure
        • A sedentary lifestyle
        • Age (the risk starts rising at 35, rises sharply at 45, and continues upwards with increasing age)

    Read more: Risk Factors for Type 2 Diabetes

    Diabetics can’t have sugar

    While it’s true that diabetics must be careful about sugar (and carbs in general), it’s not to say that they can’t have them… just: be mindful and intentional about it.

    • Type 1 diabetics will need to carb-count in order to take the appropriate insulin bolus. Otherwise, too little insulin will result in hyperglycemia, or too much insulin will result in hypoglycemia.
    • Type 2 diabetics will often be able to manage their blood sugar levels with diet alone, and slow-release carbs will make this easier.

    In either case, having quick release sugars will increase blood sugar levels (what a surprise), and sometimes (such as when experiencing a hypo), that’s what’s needed.

    Also, when it comes to sugar, a word on fruit:

    Not all fruits are equal, and some fruits can help maintain stable blood sugar levels! Read all about it:

    Fruit Intake to Prevent and Control Hypertension and Diabetes

    Artificial sweeteners are must-haves for diabetics

    Whereas sugar is a known quantity to the careful diabetic, some artificial sweeteners can impact insulin sensitivity, causing blood sugars to behave in unexpected ways. See for example:

    The Impact of Artificial Sweeteners on Body Weight Control and Glucose Homeostasis

    If a diabetic person is hyper, they should exercise to bring their blood sugar levels down

    Be careful with this!

    • In the case of type 2 diabetes, it may (or may not) help, as the extra sugar may be used up.
    • Type 1 diabetes, however, has a crucial difference. Because the pancreas isn’t making insulin, a hyper (above a certain level, anyway) means more insulin is needed. Exercising could do more harm than good, as unlike in type 2 diabetes, the body has no way to use that extra sugar, without the insulin to facilitate it. Exercising will just pump the syrupy hyperglycemic blood around the body, potentially causing damage as it goes (all without actually being able to use it).

    There are other ways this can be managed that are outside of the scope of this newsletter, but “be careful” is rarely a bad approach.

    Read more, from the American Diabetes Association:

    Exercise & Type 1 Diabetes

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Signs Of Low Estrogen In Women: What Your Skin, Hair, & Nails Are Trying To Tell You
  • The Rise Of The Machines

    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.

    In this week’s health science news, several pieces of technology caught our eye. Let’s hope these things roll out widely!

    When it comes to UTIs, antimicrobial resistance is taking the p—

    This has implications far beyond UTIs—though UTIs can be a bit of a “canary in the coal mine” for antimicrobial resistance. The more people are using antibiotics (intentionally, or because they are in the food chain), the more killer bugs are proliferating instead of dying when we give them something to kill them. And yes: they do proliferate sometimes when given antibiotics, not because the antibiotics did anything directly good for them, but because they killed their (often friendly bacteria) competition. Thus making for a double-whammy of woe.

    This development tackles that, by using AI modelling to crunch the numbers of a real-time data-driven personalized approach to give much more accurate treatment options, in a way that a human couldn’t (or at least, couldn’t at anything like the same speed, and most family physicians don’t have a mathematician locked in the back room to spend the night working on a patient’s data).

    Read in full: AI can help tackle urinary tract infections and antimicrobial resistance

    Related: AI: The Doctor That Never Tires?

    When it comes to CPR and women, people are feint of heart

    When CPR is needed, time is very much of the essence. And yet, bystanders are much less likely to give CPR to a woman than to a man. Not only that, but CPR-training is part of what leads to this reluctance when it comes to women: the mannequins used are very homogenous, being male (94%) and lean (99%). They’re also usually white (88%) even in countries where the populations are not, but that is less critical. After all, a racist person is less likely to give CPR to a person of color regardless of what color the training mannequin was.

    However, the mannequins being male and lean is an issue, because it means people suddenly lack confidence when faced with breasts and/or abundant body fat. Both can prompt the bystander to wonder if some different technique is needed (it isn’t), and breasts can also prompt the bystander to fear doing something potentially “improper” (the proper course of action is: save a person’s life; do not get distracted by breasts).

    Read in full: Women are less likely to receive CPR than men. Training on manikins with breasts could help ← there are also CPR instructions (and a video demonstration) there, for anyone who wants a refresher, if perhaps your last first-aid course was a while ago!

    Related: Heart Attack: His & Hers (Be Prepared!)

    When technology is a breath of fresh air

    A woman with COPD and COVID has had her very damaged lungs replaced using a da Vinci X robot to perform a minimally-invasive surgery (which is quite a statement, when it comes to replacing someone’s lungs).

    Not without human oversight though—surgeon Dr. Stephanie Chang was directing the transplant. Surgery is rarely fun for the person being operated on, but advances like this make things go a lot more smoothly, so this kind of progress is good to see.

    Read in full: Woman receives world’s first robotic double-lung transplant

    Related: Why Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Is More Likely Than You Think

    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:

  • Starfruit vs Soursop – 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 starfruit to soursop, we picked the soursop.

    Why?

    First, by starfruit, we also mean carambola, which is a different name for the same fruit, and by soursop we also mean graviola/guyabano/guanábana, which are different namers for the same fruit. Now, as for their health qualities:

    In terms of macros, the soursop has more carbs and fiber, the ratio of which also give it the lower glycemic index. So, a win for soursop here.

    When it comes to vitamins, starfruit has more of vitamins A, B5, C, and E, while soursop has more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B6, B7, B9, and K. Another win for soursop.

    In the category of minerals, starfruit has slightly more copper, manganese, and zinc, while soursop has much more calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, and potassium. One more win for soursop!

    Adding up the sections makes for a clear and overwhelming win for soursop, but let’s address to quick safety considerations while we’re here:

    1. Soursop extract has been claimed to be an effective cancer treatment. It isn’t. There is no evidence for this at all; just one unscrupulous company that spread the claims.
    2. Soursop contains annonacin, a neurotoxin. That sounds scary, but much like with apple seeds and cyanide, the quantities you’d have to consume to suffer ill effects are absurd. Remember how capsaicin (as found in hot peppers) is also a neurotoxin, too and has many health benefits. Humans have a long and happy tradition of enjoying things that are toxic at high doses, but in small doses are neutral or even beneficial. Pretty much all things we can consume (including oxygen, and water) are toxic at sufficient doses.

    In short, both of these fruits are fine and good, neither will treat cancer, but both will help to keep you in good health. As for nutritional density, the soursop wins in every category.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Top 8 Fruits That Prevent & Kill Cancer ← soursop has no special cancer treatment properties, but actual evidence shows these fruits are beneficial (being good as a preventative, and also definitely a worthy adjunct to—but not a replacement for—mainstream anticancer therapies if you have cancer).

    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:

  • Feminist narratives are being hijacked to market medical tests not backed by evidence

    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.

    Corporations have used feminist language to promote their products for decades. In the 1980s, companies co-opted messaging about female autonomy to encourage women’s consumption of unhealthy commodities, such as tobacco and alcohol.

    Today, feminist narratives around empowerment and women’s rights are being co-opted to market interventions that are not backed by evidence across many areas of women’s health. This includes by commercial companies, industry, mass media and well-intentioned advocacy groups.

    Some of these health technologies, tests and treatments are useful in certain situations and can be very beneficial to some women.

    However, promoting them to a large group of asymptomatic healthy women that are unlikely to benefit, or without being transparent about the limitations, runs the risk of causing more harm than good. This includes inappropriate medicalisation, overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

    In our analysis published today in the BMJ, we examine this phenomenon in two current examples: the anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) test and breast density notification.

    The AMH test

    The AMH test is a blood test associated with the number of eggs in a woman’s ovaries and is sometimes referred to as the “egg timer” test.

    Although often used in fertility treatment, the AMH test cannot reliably predict the likelihood of pregnancy, timing to pregnancy or specific age of menopause. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists therefore strongly discourages testing for women not seeking fertility treatment.

    Woman sits in a medical waiting room
    The AMH test can’t predict your chance of getting pregnant.
    Anastasia Vityukova/Unsplash

    Despite this, several fertility clinics and online companies market the AMH test to women not even trying to get pregnant. Some use feminist rhetoric promising empowerment, selling the test as a way to gain personalised insights into your fertility. For example, “you deserve to know your reproductive potential”, “be proactive about your fertility” and “knowing your numbers will empower you to make the best decisions when family planning”.

    The use of feminist marketing makes these companies appear socially progressive and champions of female health. But they are selling a test that has no proven benefit outside of IVF and cannot inform women about their current or future fertility.

    Our recent study found around 30% of women having an AMH test in Australia may be having it for these reasons.

    Misleading women to believe that the test can reliably predict fertility can create a false sense of security about delaying pregnancy. It can also create unnecessary anxiety, pressure to freeze eggs, conceive earlier than desired, or start fertility treatment when it may not be needed.

    While some companies mention the test’s limitations if you read on, they are glossed over and contradicted by the calls to be proactive and messages of empowerment.

    Breast density notification

    Breast density is one of several independent risk factors for breast cancer. It’s also harder to see cancer on a mammogram image of breasts with high amounts of dense tissue than breasts with a greater proportion of fatty tissue.

    While estimates vary, approximately 25–50% of women in the breast screening population have dense breasts.

    Young woman has mammogram
    Dense breasts can make it harder to detect cancer.
    Tyler Olsen/Shutterstock

    Stemming from valid concerns about the increased risk of cancer, advocacy efforts have used feminist language around women’s right to know such as “women need to know the truth” and “women can handle the truth” to argue for widespread breast density notification.

    However, this simplistic messaging overlooks that this is a complex issue and that more data is still needed on whether the benefits of notifying and providing additional screening or tests to women with dense breasts outweigh the harms.

    Additional tests (ultrasound or MRI) are now being recommended for women with dense breasts as they have the ability to detect more cancer. Yet, there is no or little mention of the lack of robust evidence showing that it prevents breast cancer deaths. These extra tests also have out-of-pocket costs and high rates of false-positive results.

    Large international advocacy groups are also sponsored by companies that will financially benefit from women being notified.

    While stronger patient autonomy is vital, campaigning for breast density notification without stating the limitations or unclear evidence of benefit may go against the empowerment being sought.

    Ensuring feminism isn’t hijacked

    Increased awareness and advocacy in women’s health are key to overcoming sex inequalities in health care.

    But we need to ensure the goals of feminist health advocacy aren’t undermined through commercially driven use of feminist language pushing care that isn’t based on evidence. This includes more transparency about the risks and uncertainties of health technologies, tests and treatments and greater scrutiny of conflicts of interests.

    Health professionals and governments must also ensure that easily understood, balanced information based on high quality scientific evidence is available. This will enable women to make more informed decisions about their health.The Conversation

    Brooke Nickel, NHMRC Emerging Leader Research Fellow, University of Sydney and Tessa Copp, 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: