How gender-affirming care improves trans mental health

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

In recent years, a growing number of states have passed laws restricting or banning gender-affirming care for transgender people, particularly minors. As conversations about gender-affirming care increase, so do false narratives about it, with some opponents falsely suggesting that it’s harmful to mental health.

Despite widespread attacks against gender-affirming care, research clearly shows that it improves mental health outcomes for transgender people.

Read on to learn more about what gender-affirming care is, how it benefits mental well-being, and how you can access it.

What is gender-affirming care?

Gender-affirming care describes a range of medical interventions that help align people’s bodies with their gender identities. While anyone can seek gender-affirming care in the form of laser hair removal, breast augmentation, erectile dysfunction medication, or hormone therapy, among other treatments, most conversations about gender-affirming care center around transgender people, whose gender identity or gender expression does not conform to their sex assigned at birth.

Gender-affirming care for trans people varies based on age. For example, some trans adults seek hormone replacement therapy (HRT) or gender-affirming surgeries that help their bodies match their internal sense of gender.

Trans kids entering adolescence might be prescribed puberty blockers, which temporarily delay the production of hormones that initiate puberty, to give them more time to figure out their gender identities before deciding on next steps. This is the same medication given to cisgender kids—whose gender identities match the sex they were assigned at birth—experiencing early puberty.

What is gender dysphoria?

Gender dysphoria describes a feeling of unease that some trans people experience when their perceived gender doesn’t match their gender identity. This can lead to a range of mental health conditions that affect their quality of life

Some trans people may manage gender dysphoria by wearing gender-affirming clothing, opting for a gender-affirming hairstyle, or asking others to refer to them by a name and pronouns that authentically represent them. Others may need gender-affirming care to feel at home in their bodies.

Trans people who desire gender-affirming care and have not been able to access it experience psychological distress, including depression, anxiety, self-harm, and suicidal ideation. The Trevor Project’s 2023 U.S. National Survey on the Mental Health of LGBTQ Young People found that roughly half of trans youth “seriously considered attempting suicide in the past year.”

A grid shows 10 drawings of people in black and white. Seven of the people are highlighted in purple squares. Text on the image reads,

How does gender-affirming care improve mental health?

For trans adults, gender-affirming care can alleviate gender dysphoria, which has been shown to improve both short-term and long-term mental health. A 2018 study found that trans adults who do not undergo HRT are four times more likely to experience depression than those who do, although not all trans people desire HRT.

Extensive research has shown that gender-affirming care also alleviates gender dysphoria and improves mental health outcomes in trans kids, teens, and young adults. A 2022 study found that access to HRT and puberty blockers lowered the odds of depression in trans people between the ages of 13 and 20 by 60 percent and reduced the risk of self-harm and suicidal thoughts by 73 percent.

Both the Endocrine Society—which aims to advance hormone research—and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend that trans kids and teens have access to developmentally appropriate gender-affirming care.

How can I access gender-affirming care?

If you’re a trans adult seeking gender-affirming care or a guardian of a trans kid or teen who’s seeking gender-affirming care, talk to your health care provider about your options. You can find a trans-affirming provider by searching the World Professional Association for Transgender Health directory or visiting your local LGBTQ+ health center or Planned Parenthood.

Some gender-affirming care may not be covered by insurance. Learn how to make the most of your coverage from the National Center for Transgender Equality. Find insurance plans available through the Marketplace that cover gender-affirming care in some states through Out2Enroll.

Some states restrict or ban gender-affirming care. Learn about the laws in your state by visiting the Trans Legislation Tracker.

Where can trans people and their families find mental health support?

In addition to working with a trans-affirming therapist, trans people and their families can find mental health support through these free services:

  • PFLAG offers resources for families and friends of LGBTQ+ people. Find a PFLAG chapter near you.
  • The Trevor Project’s hotline has trained counselors who help LGBTQ+ youth in crisis. Call the TrevorLifeline 1-866-488-7386 or text START to 678-678.
  • The Trans Lifeline was created by and for the trans community to support trans people in crisis. You can reach the Trans Lifeline hotline at 1-877-565-8860.

For more information, talk to your health care provider.

If you or anyone you know is considering suicide or self-harm or is anxious, depressed, upset, or needs to talk, call the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline at 988 or text the Crisis Text Line at 741-741. For international resources, here is a good place to begin.

This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • With all this bird flu around, how safe are eggs, chicken or milk?
  • How To Keep On Keeping On?
    How To Stay Motivated for Long-Term Health Goals. Instead of depriving yourself, focus on adding healthy habits. Start small and build up. Commit to yourself and prioritize what you won’t do yet.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Reporting on psychedelics research or legislation? Proceed with caution

    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.

    More cities and states are introducing bills to decriminalize and regulate access to psychedelic drugs, which could potentially become another option to treat mental health conditions and substance use disorders. But the substances remain illegal under U.S. federal law and scientific evidence about their effectiveness is still far from conclusive.

    This month alone, California lawmakers introduced a bill to allow people 21 and older to consume psychedelic mushrooms under medical supervision. In Massachusetts, lawmakers are working on a bill that would legalize psilocybin, the active ingredient of psychedelic mushrooms. And Arizona legislators have also introduced a bill that would make psychedelic mushrooms available as a mental health treatment option.

    Last December, Congress passed legislation that included funding for psychedelic clinical trials for active-duty service members. And in January this year, the Department of Veterans Affairs announced that it will begin funding research on MDMA, also known as ecstasy, and psilocybin, to treat veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder and depression. This is the first time since the 1960s that the VA is funding research on such compounds, according to the department.

    The rise of proposed and passed legislation in recent years necessitates more journalistic coverage. But it’s important for journalists to go beyond what the bills and lawmakers say and include research studies about psychedelics and note the limitations of those studies.

    Major medical organizations, including the American Psychiatric Association, have not yet endorsed psychedelics to treat psychiatric disorders, except in clinical trials, due to inadequate scientific evidence.

    The authors of a 2023 study published in the journal Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology, also advise “strong caution” regarding the hype around the potential medical use of psychedelics. “There is not enough robust evidence to draw any firm conclusions about the safety and efficacy of psychedelic therapy,” they write.

    Scientists are still trying to better understand how psychedelics work, what’s the best dose for treating different mental health conditions and how to reduce the risk of potential side effects such as intense emotional experiences or increased heart rate and blood pressure, the authors of a February 2024 study published in the journal Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry write.

    In a 2022 study published in JAMA Psychiatry, Dr. Joshua Siegel and his colleagues at Washington University in St. Louis write that while legislative reform for psychedelic drugs is moving forward rapidly, several issues have not been addressed, including:

    • A mechanism for verifying the chemical content of drugs that are obtained from outside the medical establishment.
    • Licensure and training criteria for practitioners who wish to provide psychedelic treatment.
    • Clinical and billing infrastructure.
    • Assessing potential interactions with other drugs.
    • How the drugs should be used in populations such as youths, older adults and pregnant people.

    “Despite the relative rapidity with which some have embraced psychedelics as legitimate medical treatments, critical questions about the mechanism of action, dose and dose frequency, durability of response to repeated treatments, drug-drug interactions, and the role that psychotherapy plays in therapeutic efficacy remain unanswered,” Siegel and colleagues write.

    What are psychedelics?

    Psychedelics are among the oldest class of mind-altering substances, used by humans for thousands of years in traditional or religious rituals.

    In 2021, 74 million people 12 years and older reported using hallucinogens, according to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health.

    The terms “psychedelics” and “hallucinogens” are used interchangeably in public discourse, but scientifically, hallucinogens fall into three groups based on chemical structure and mechanism of action, according to NIH’s National Institute on Drug Abuse:

    • Psychedelic drugs, also called “classic psychedelics” or simply “psychedelics,” mainly affect the way the brain processes serotonin, a chemical that carries messages between nerve cells in the brain and the body. These drugs can bring on vivid visions and affect a person’s sense of self, according to NIDA. Drugs in this category include:
      • Psilocybin is the active ingredient in psychedelic mushrooms, also known as “magic” mushrooms or shrooms. It’s a Schedule 1 drug in the U.S. under the Controlled Substances Act, which means it has a high potential for abuse and has no accepted medical use. However, some states have decriminalized it, according to NIDA. The drug has also been given the Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA, a process to speed up the development and review of drugs, for the treatment of major depressive disorder.
      • LSD, or lysergic acid diethylamide, is a synthetic chemical made from a fungus that infects rye. It’s a Schedule 1 drug.
      • DMT, or dimethyltryptamine, found in certain plants native to the Amazon rainforest, has been used in religious practices and rituals. The plants are sometimes used to make a tea called ayahuasca. DMT can also be made in the lab as a white powder. DMT is generally smoked or consumed in brews like ayahuasca. It’s a Schedule 1 drug.
      • Mescaline, a chemical compound found in a small cactus called peyote, has been used by Indigenous people in northern Mexico and the southwestern U.S. in religious rituals. Mescaline can also be produced in the lab. Mescaline and peyote are Schedule 1 drugs.
    • Dissociative drugs affect how the brain processes glutamate, an abundant chemical released by nerve cells in the brain that plays an important role in learning and memory. These drugs can make people feel disconnected from their bodies and surroundings. Drugs in this category include:
      • PCP, or phencyclidine, was developed in the 1950s as an injectable anesthetic but was discontinued because patients became agitated and delusional. Today it is an illegal street drug. It’s a Schedule 2 drug, which means it has a high potential for abuse, but lower compared to Schedule 1 drugs.
      • Ketamine, a drug developed in the 1960s and used as an anesthetic in the Vietnam War, is approved by the FDA as an anesthetic. It has been shown to play a role in pain management and treatment of depression. It is also illegally used for its hallucinogenic effects. It is a Schedule 3 drug, which means it has a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence. A chemically-similar drug called esketamine is approved by the FDA for the treatment of depression that doesn’t respond to standard treatment.
    • Other hallucinogens, which affect different brain functions and can cause psychedelic and potentially dissociative effects, include:
      • MDMA, or ecstasy, is a synthetic drug that’s a stimulant and hallucinogen. It is a Schedule 1 drug. It has been given the Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for the treatment of PTSD.
      • Salvia is an herb in the mint family that has hallucinogenic effects. It is not a federally controlled drug, but it is controlled in some states, according to the DEA.
      • Ibogaine is derived from the root bark of a West African shrub and is a stimulant and hallucinogen. It is a Schedule 1 drug.

    Research on psychedelics

    There was a wave of studies on psychedelics, particularly LSD, in the 1950s and 1960s, but they came to a halt when the U.S. declared a “War on Drugs” in 1971 and tightened pharmaceutical regulations. There was little research activity until the early 1990s when studies on drugs such as MDMA and DMT began to emerge.

    In 2006, researchers at Johns Hopkins University published a seminal double-blind study in which two-thirds of participants — who had never taken psychedelics previously — said their psychedelic sessions were among the most meaningful experiences of their lives.

    “These studies, among others, renewed scientific interest in psychedelics and, accordingly, research into their effects has continued to grow since,” Jacob S. Aday and colleagues write in a 2019 study published in Drug Science, Policy and Law.

    In their paper, Aday and colleagues argue that 2018 may be remembered as the true turning point in psychedelic research due to “advances within science, increased public interest, and regulatory changes,” such as psilocybin receiving the “breakthrough therapy” status from the FDA.

    Today, there are numerous ongoing clinical trials on the therapeutic potential of psychedelics for different conditions, including substance use disorders and mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder.

    Given the growing number of studies on psychedelics, the Food and Drug Administration issued a draft guidance in June 2023 for clinical trials with psychedelic drugs, aiming to help researchers design studies that will yield more reliable results for drug development.

    The systematic reviews highlighted below show that there’s a lack of robust study designs in many psychedelic clinical trials. Some have small sample sizes. Some include participants who have used psychedelics before, so when they participate in a randomized controlled clinical trial, they know whether they are receiving psychedelic treatment or a placebo. Or, some include participants who may have certain expectations due to positive coverage in the lay media, hence creating bias in the results.

    If you’re covering a study about psychedelics…

    It’s important for journalists to pay close attention to study design and speak with an expert who is not involved in the study.

    In a February 2024 blog post from Harvard Law School’s Petrie-Flom Center, Leiden University professors Eiko I. Fried and Michiel van Elk share several challenges in psychedelic research:

    • “Conclusions are dramatically overstated in many studies. This ranges from conclusions in the results sections, abstracts, and even titles of papers not consistent with the reported results.”
    • “There is emerging evidence that adverse events resulting from psychedelic substances are both common and underreported.”
    • Some studies don’t have control groups, which can create problems for interpreting results, “because treatments like psychedelics need to be compared against a placebo or other treatment to conclude that they work beyond the placebo effect or already existing, readily available treatments.”
    • “Participants in psychedelic studies usually know if they are in the treatment or control group, which artificially increases the apparent efficacies of psychedelics in clinical studies.”
    • Small sample sizes can affect the statistical power and generalizability of the findings. “Small samples also mean that results are not representative. For example, participants with severe or comorbid mental health problems are commonly excluded from psychedelic studies, and therefore results may look better in these studies than in real-world psychiatric settings.”
    • Many studies do not include long-term follow-ups of participants. “Studying how these people are feeling a few days or weeks after they receive treatment is not sufficient to establish that they are indeed cured from depression.”

    Fried and van Elk also have a useful checklist for assessing the quality and scientific rigor of psychedelic research in their 2023 study “History Repeating: Guidelines to Address Common Problems in Psychedelic Science,” published in the journal Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology.

    Journalists should also remind their audiences that the drugs are still illegal under federal law and can pose a danger to health.

    In California, the number of emergency room visits involving the use of hallucinogens increased by 54% between 2016 and 2022, according to a January 2024 study published in Addiction. Meanwhile, the law enforcement seizure of psychedelic mushrooms has risen dramatically, increasing nearly four-fold between 2017 and 2022, according to a February 2024 study published in the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence.

    Below, we have curated and summarized five recent studies, mostly systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which examine various aspects of psychedelic drugs, including legislative reform; long-term effects; efficacy and safety for the treatment of anxiety, depression and PTSD; and participation of older adults in clinical trials. The research summaries are followed by recommended reading.

    Research roundup

    Psychedelic Drug Legislative Reform and Legalization in the US
    Joshua S. Siegel, James E. Daily, Demetrius A. Perry and Ginger E. Nicol. JAMA Psychiatry, December 2022.

    The study: Most psychedelics are Schedule I drugs federally, but state legislative reforms are changing the prospects of the drugs’ availability for treatment and their illegal status. For a better understanding of the legislative reform landscape around Schedule I psychedelic drugs, researchers collected all bills and ballot initiatives related to psychedelic drugs that were introduced into state legislatures between 2019 and September 2022. They used publicly available sources, including BillTrack50, Ballotpedia and LexisNexis.

    The findings: In total, 25 states considered 74 bills, although the bills varied widely in their framework. A majority proposed decriminalization but only a few would require medical oversight and some would not even require training or licensure, the authors write. Ten of those bills became law in seven states — Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, Oregon, Texas and Washington. As of August 1, 2022, 32 bills were dead and 32 remained active.

    The majority of the bills — 67 of them — referred to psilocybin; 27 included both psilocybin and MDMA; 43 proposed decriminalization of psychedelic drugs.

    To predict the future legalization of psychedelics, the authors also created two models based on existing medical and recreational marijuana reform. Using 2020 as the year of the first psychedelic decriminalization in Oregon, their models predict that 26 states will legalize psychedelics between 2033 and 2037.

    In the authors’ words: “Despite the relative rapidity with which some have embraced psychedelics as legitimate medical treatments, critical questions about the mechanism of action, dosing and dose frequency, durability of response to repeated treatments, drug-drug interactions, and the role psychotherapy plays in therapeutic efficacy remain unanswered. This last point is critical, as a significant safety concern associated with drugs like psilocybin, MDMA, or LSD is the suggestibility and vulnerability of the patient while under the influence of the drug. Thus, training and clinical oversight is necessary to ensure safety and also therapeutic efficacy for this divergent class of treatments.”

    Who Are You After Psychedelics? A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis of the Magnitude of Long-Term Effects of Serotonergic Psychedelics on Cognition/Creativity, Emotional Processing and Personality
    Ivana Solaja, et al. Neuroscience & Behavioral Reviews, March 2024.

    The study: Many anecdotal reports and observational studies have reported that psychedelics, even at microdoses, which are roughly one-tenth of a typical recreational dose, may enhance certain aspects of cognition and/or creativity, including coming up with new, useful ideas. Cognition is a “range of intellectual functions and processes involved in our ability to perceive, process, comprehend, store and react to information,” the authors explain. There are established relationships between impaired cognitive functioning and mental health disorders.

    Due to limitations such as a lack of rigorous study designs, various populations in the studies and lack of documented dosage, it’s difficult to draw any conclusions about changes that last at least one week as a result of consuming psychedelics.

    The authors screened 821 studies and based on the criteria they had set, found 10 to be eligible for the review and meta-analysis. The drugs in the studies include psilocybin, ayahuasca and LSD.

    The findings: Overall, there was little evidence that these psychedelics have lasting effects on creativity. Also, there was not sufficient evidence to determine if this group of psychedelics enhances cognition and creativity in healthy populations or improves cognitive deficits in the study populations.

    Pooled data from three studies showed lasting improvement in emotional processing — perceiving, expressing and managing emotions.

    The studies offered little evidence suggesting lasting effects of psychedelics on personality traits.

    In the authors’ words: “Results from this study showed very limited evidence for any lasting beneficial effects across these three psychological constructs. However, preliminary meta-analytic evidence suggested that these drugs may have the potential to cause lasting improvement in emotional recognition time. Future studies investigating these constructs should employ larger sample sizes, better control conditions, standardized and validated measures and longer-term follow-ups.”

    The Impact of Psychedelics on Patients with Alcohol Use Disorder: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis
    Dakota Sicignano, et al. Current Medical Research and Opinion, December 2023.

    The study: Researchers are exploring the psychedelics’ potential for the treatment of alcohol use disorder, which affected nearly 30 million Americans in 2022. The authors of this study searched PubMed from 1960 to September 2023 for studies on the use of psychedelics to treat alcohol use disorder. Out of 174 English-language studies, they selected six studies that met the criteria for their analysis.

    The findings: LSD and psilocybin are promising therapies for alcohol use disorder, the authors report. However, five of the six trials were conducted in the 1960s and 1970s and may not reflect the current treatment views. Also, four of the six studies included patients who had used psychedelics before participating in the study, increasing the risk of bias.

    In the authors’ words: “Despite the existence of several clinical trials showing relatively consistent benefits of psychedelic therapy in treating alcohol use disorder, there are important limitations in the dataset that must be appreciated and that preclude a conclusive determination of its value for patient care at this time.”

    Older Adults in Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy Trials: A Systematic Review
    Lisa Bouchet, et al. Journal of Psychopharmacology, January 2024.

    The study: People 65 years and older have been underrepresented in clinical trials involving psychedelics, including the use of psilocybin for the treatment of depression and anxiety. About 15% of adults older than 60 suffer from mental health issues, the authors note. They wanted to quantify the prevalence of older adults enrolled in psychedelic clinical trials and explore safety data in this population. They searched for English-language studies in peer-reviewed journals from January 1950 to September 2023. Of 4,376 studies, the authors selected 36. The studies involved psilocybin, MDMA, LSD, ayahuasca, and DPT (dipropyltryptamine), which is a less-studied synthetic hallucinogen.

    The findings: Of the 1,400 patients participating in the selected studies, only 19 were 65 and older. Eighteen received psychedelics for distress related to cancer or other life-threatening illnesses. In a trial of MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD, only one older adult was included. Adverse reactions to the drugs among older patients, including heart and gastrointestinal issues were resolved within two days and didn’t have a long-lasting impact.

    In the authors’ words: “Although existing data in older adults is limited, it does provide preliminary evidence for the safety and tolerability of [psychedelic-assisted therapy] in older patients, and as such, should be more rigorously studied in future clinical trials.”

    Efficacy and Safety of Four Psychedelic-Assisted Therapies for Adults with Symptoms of Depression, Anxiety, and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Anees Bahji, Isis Lunsky, Gilmar Gutierrez and Gustavo Vazquez. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, November 2023.

    The study: LSD, psilocybin, ayahuasca and MDMA have been approved for clinical trials on psychedelic-assisted therapy of mental health conditions in Canada and the U.S. However, major medical associations, including the American Psychiatric Association, have argued that there is insufficient scientific evidence to endorse these drugs for treating mental health disorders. To better understand the current evidence, researchers reviewed 18 blinded, randomized controlled trials, spanning 2008 through 2023. Most studies were conducted in the U.S. or Switzerland.

    The findings: The studies overall suggest preliminary evidence that psychedelic drugs are mostly well-tolerated. Psilocybin and MDMA therapies may offer relief from depression and PTSD symptoms for at least a year. Most studies also used therapy and psychological support along with psychedelics.

    In the authors’ words: “Despite the promising evidence presented by our study and previous reviews in the field, the evidence base remains limited and underpowered. Long-term efficacy and safety data are lacking,” the authors write. “Future steps should encourage and highlight the need for more robust larger scale randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up periods, and efforts to address regulatory and legal barriers through the collaborations between researchers, healthcare professionals, regulatory bodies, and policymakers.”

    This article first appeared on The Journalist’s Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    Share This Post

  • You Are the One You’ve Been Waiting For – by Dr. Richard Schwartz

    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.

    As self-therapy approaches go, the title here could be read two ways: as pop-psychology fluff, or a suggestion of something deeper. And, while written in a way to make it accessible to all, we’re happy to report the content consists of serious therapeutic ideas, presented clearly.

    Internal Family Systems (IFS) is a large, internationally recognized, and popular therapeutic approach. It’s also an approach that lends itself quite well to self-therapy, as this book illustrates.

    Dr. Schwartz kicks off by explaining not IFS, but the problem that it solves… We (most of us, anyway) have over the course of our lives tried to plug the gaps in our own unmet psychological needs. And, that can cause resentment, strain, and can even be taken out on others if we’re not careful.

    The real meat of the book, however, is in its illustrative explanations of how IFS works, and can be applied by an individual. The goal is to recognize all the parts that make us who we are, understand what they need in order to be at peace, and give them that. Spoiler: most what they will need is just being adequately heard, rather than locked in a box untended.

    One of the benefits of using this book for self-therapy, of course, is that it requires a lot less vulnerability with a third party.

    But, speaking of which, what of these intimate relationships the subtitle of the book referenced? Mostly the benefits to such come from a “put your own oxygen mask on first” angle… but the book does also cover discussions between intimate partners, and approaches to love, including what the author calls “courageous love”.

    Bottom line: this is a great book if you want to do some “spring-cleaning of the soul” and live a little more lightly as a result.

    Click here to check out “You Are The One You’ve Been Waiting For” on Amazon today, and try out IFS for yourself!

    Share This Post

  • The Compass of Pleasure – by Dr. David Linden

    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 are a lot of books about addiction, so what sets this one apart?

    Mostly, it’s that this one maintains that addiction is neither good nor bad per se—just, some behaviors and circumstances are. Behaviors and circumstances caused, directly or indirectly, by addiction.

    But, Dr. Linden argues, not every addiction has to be so. Especially behavioral addictions; the rush of dopamine one gets from a good session at the gym or learning a new language, that’s not a bad thing, even if they can fundamentally be addictions too.

    Similarly, we wouldn’t be here as a species without some things that rely on some of the same biochemistry as addictions; orgasms and eating food, for example. Yet, those very same urges can also inconvenience us, and in the case of foods and other substances, can harm our health.

    In this book, the case is made for shifting our addictive tendencies to healthier addictions, and enough information is given to help us do so.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to understand what is going on when you get waylaid by some temptation, and how to be tempted to better things, this book can give the understanding to do just that.

    Click here to check out The Compass of Pleasure, and make yours work in your favor!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • With all this bird flu around, how safe are eggs, chicken or milk?
  • ADHD 2.0 – by Dr. Edward Hallowell & Dr. John Ratey

    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.

    A lot of ADHD literature is based on the assumption that the reader is a 30-something parent of a child with ADHD. This book, on the other hand, addresses all ages, and includes just as readily the likelihood that the person with ADHD is the reader, and/or the reader’s partner.

    The authors cover such topics as:

    • ADHD mythbusting, before moving on to…
    • The problems of ADHD, and the benefits that those exact same traits can bring too
    • How to leverage those traits to get fewer of the problems and more of the benefits
    • The role of diet beyond the obvious, including supplementation
    • The role of specific exercises (especially HIIT, and balance exercises) in benefiting the ADHD brain
    • The role of medications—and arguments for and gainst such

    The writing style is… Thematic, let’s say. The authors have ADHD and it shows. So, expect comprehensive deep-dives from whenever their hyperfocus mode kicked in, and expect no stones left unturned. That said, it is very readable, and well-indexed too, for ease of finding specific sub-topics.

    Bottom line: if you are already very familiar with ADHD, you may not learn much, and might reasonably skip this one. However, if you’re new to the topic, this book is a great—and practical—primer.

    Click here to check out ADHD 2.0, and make things better!

    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:

  • Ozempic’s cousin drug liraglutide is about to get cheaper. But how does it stack up?

    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.

    Fourteen years ago, the older drug cousin of semaglutide (Ozempic and Wegovy) came onto the market. The drug, liraglutide, is sold under the brand names Victoza and Saxenda.

    Patents for Victoza and Saxenda have now expried. So other drug companies are working to develop “generic” versions. These are likely be a fraction of current cost, which is around A$400 a month.

    So how does liraglutide compare with semaglutide?

    Halfpoint/Shutterstock

    How do these drugs work?

    Liraglutide was not originally developed as a weight-loss treatment. Like semaglutide (Ozempic), it originally treated type 2 diabetes.

    The class of drugs liraglutide and semaglutide belong to are known as GLP-1 mimetics, meaning they mimic the natural hormone GLP-1. This hormone is released from your small intestines in response to food and acts in several ways to improve the way your body handles glucose (sugar).

    How do they stop hunger?

    Liraglutide acts in several regions of the unconscious part of your brain, specifically the hypothalamus, which controls metabolism, and parts of the brain stem responsible for communicating your body’s nutrient status to the hypothalamus.

    Its actions here appear to reduce hunger in two different ways. First, it helps you to feel full earlier, making smaller meals more satisfying. Second, it alters your “motivational salience” towards food, meaning it reduces the amount of food you seek out.

    Liraglutide’s original formulation, designed to treat type 2 diabetes, was marketed as Victoza. Its ability to cause weight loss was evident soon after it entered the market.

    Shortly after, a stronger formulation, called Saxenda, was released, which was intended for weight loss in people with obesity.

    How much weight can you lose with liraglutide?

    People respond differently and will lose different amounts of weight. But here, we’ll note the average weight loss users can expect. Some will lose more (sometimes much more), others will lose less, and a small proportion won’t respond.

    The first GLP-1 mimicking drug was exenatide (Bayetta). It’s still available for treating type 2 diabetes, but there are currently no generics. Exenatide does provide some weight loss, but this is quite modest, typically around 3-5% of body weight.

    For liraglutide, those using the drug to treat obesity will use the stronger one (Saxenda), which typically gives about 10% weight loss.

    Semaglutide, with the stronger formulation called Wegovy, typically results in 15% weight loss.

    The newest GLP-1 mimicking drug on the market, tirzepatide (Mounjaro for type 2 diabetes and Zepbound for weight loss), results in weight loss of around 25% of body weight.

    What happens when you stop taking them?

    Despite the effectiveness of these medications in helping with weight loss, they do not appear to change people’s weight set-point.

    So in many cases, when people stop taking them, they experience a rebound toward their original weight.

    Person holds Saxenda pen
    People often regain weight when when they stop taking the drug. Mohammed_Al_Ali/Shutterstock

    What is the dose and how often do you need to take it?

    Liraglutide (Victoza) for type 2 diabetes is exactly the same drug as Saxenda for weight loss, but Saxenda is a higher dose.

    Although the target for each formulation is the same (the GLP-1 receptor), for glucose control in type 2 diabetes, liraglutide has to (mainly) reach the pancreas.

    But to achieve weight loss, it has to reach parts of the brain. This means crossing the blood-brain barrier – and not all of it makes it, meaning more has to be taken.

    All the current formulations of GLP-1 mimicking drug are injectables. This won’t change when liraglutide generics hit the market.

    However, they differ in how frequently they need to be injected. Liraglutide is a once-daily injection, whereas semaglutide and tirzepatide are once-weekly. (That makes semaglutide and tirzepatide much more attractive, but we won’t see semaglutide as a generic until 2033.)

    What are the side effects?

    Because all these medicines have the same target in the body, they mostly have the same side effects.

    The most common are a range of gastrointestinal upsets including nausea, vomiting, bloating, constipation and diarrhoea. These occur, in part, because these medications slow the movement of food out of the stomach, but are generally managed by increasing the dose slowly.

    Recent clinical data suggests the slowing in emptying of the stomach can be problematic for some people, and may increase the risk of of food entering the lungs during operations, so it is important to let your doctor know if you are taking any of these drugs.

    Because these are injectables, they can also lead to injection-site reactions.

    Doctor consults with patient
    Gastrointestinal side effects are most common. Halfpoint/Shutterstock

    During clinical trials, there were some reports of thyroid disease and pancreatitis (inflammation of the pancreas). However, it is not clear that these can be attributed to GLP-1 mimicking drugs.

    In animals, GLP-1 mimicking drugs drugs have been found to negatively alter the growth of the embryo. There is currently no controlled clinical trial data on their use during pregnancy, but based on animal data, these medicines should not be used during pregnancy.

    Who can use them?

    The GLP-1 mimicking drugs for weight loss (Wegovy, Saxenda, Zepbound/Mounjaro) are approved for use by people with obesity and are meant to only be used in conjunction with diet and exercise.

    These drugs must be prescribed by a doctor and for obesity are not covered by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, which is one of the reasons why they are expensive. But in time, generic versions of liraglutide are likely to be more affordable.

    Sebastian Furness, ARC Future Fellow, School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Queensland

    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:

  • The Fascinating Truth About Aspartame, Cancer, & Neurotoxicity

    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.

    Is Aspartame’s Reputation Well-Deserved?

    A bar chart showing the number of people who are interested in social media and Aspartame.

    In Tuesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your health-related opinions on aspartame, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

    • About 47% said “It is an evil carcinogenic neurotoxin”
    • 20% said “It is safe-ish, but has health risks that are worse than sugar”
    • About 19% said “It is not healthy, but better than sugar”
    • About 15% said “It’s a perfectly healthy replacement for sugar”

    But what does the science say?

    Aspartame is carcinogenic: True or False?

    False, assuming consuming it in moderation. In excess, almost anything can cause cancer (oxygen is a fine example). But for all meaningful purposes, aspartame does not appear to be carcinogenic. For example,

    ❝The results of these studies showed no evidence that these sweeteners cause cancer or other harms in people.❞

    ~ NIH | National Cancer Institute

    Source: Artificial Sweeteners and Cancer

    Plenty of studies and reviews have also confirmed this; here are some examples:

    Why then do so many people believe it causes cancer, despite all the evidence against it?

    Well, there was a small study involving giving megadoses to rats, which did increase their cancer risk. So of course, the popular press took that and ran with it.

    But those results have not been achieved outside of rats, and human studies great and small have all been overwhelmingly conclusive that moderate consumption of aspartame has no effect on cancer risk.

    Aspartame is a neurotoxin: True or False?

    False, again assuming moderate consumption. If you’re a rat being injected with a megadose, your experience may vary. But a human enjoying a diet soda, the aspartame isn’t the part that’s doing you harm, so far as we know.

    For example, the European Food Safety Agency’s scientific review panel concluded:

    ❝there is still no substantive evidence that aspartame can induce such effects❞

    ~ Dr. Atkin et al (it was a pan-European team of 21 experts in the field)

    Source: Report on the Meeting on Aspartame with National Experts

    See also,

    ❝The data from the extensive investigations into the possibility of neurotoxic effects of aspartame, in general, do not support the hypothesis that aspartame in the human diet will affect nervous system function, learning or behavior.

    The weight of existing evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a nonnutritive sweetener.❞

    ~ Dr. Magnuson et al.

    Source: Aspartame: A Safety Evaluation Based on Current Use Levels, Regulations, and Toxicological and Epidemiological Studies

    and

    ❝The safety testing of aspartame has gone well beyond that required to evaluate the safety of a food additive.

    When all the research on aspartame, including evaluations in both the premarketing and postmarketing periods, is examined as a whole, it is clear that aspartame is safe, and there are no unresolved questions regarding its safety under conditions of intended use.❞

    ~ Dr. Stegink et al.

    Source: Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology | Aspartame: Review of Safety

    Why then do many people believe it is a neurotoxin? This one can be traced back to a chain letter hoax from about 26 years ago; you can read it here, but please be aware it is an entirely debunked hoax:

    Urban Legends | Aspartame Hoax

    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: