How to Find Happiness In Yourself – by Michelle Mann
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 books about happiness tell you what to pursue, generally. What things to focus on, and that’s good, but incomplete. This book does cover those things too (complete with academic sources to back up what really works), but also goes further:
Michelle Mann gives 25 key habits that will cumulatively build happiness, which is what it’s really about. After all:
- If you watch your favourite movie, you’ll be happy for 90 minutes (or 9 hours if it’s The Lord of the Rings).
- If you build daily habits that add happiness to you, your surroundings, and those around you, you’ll be happy for life.
They do also cover happiness while going through difficult times, such as divorce, job loss, illness, or bereavement.
Sometimes, knowing what we “should” do in theory is the easy part. Where Mann excels here is in providing explanations of each habit. This means that rather than it being some platitude, the principles underlying it are truly understood… and thus motivate us to actually apply the advice and build the habits into our life.
While the explanations are therefore the greatest value of the book, we do recommend copying out the 25 habits (which are effectively subchapter headings) and putting them somewhere to read often.
Bottom line: we recommend getting yourself (and/or your loved ones!) a copy of this book. You (and/or they) will be happy you did!
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:
-
Driving under the influence of marijuana: An explainer and research roundup
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.
Update 1: On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a proposed rule to the Federal Register to downgrade marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug. This is the first step in a lengthy approval process that starts with a 60-day comment period.
Update 2: Two recent research studies were added to the “Studies on marijuana and driving” section of this piece on July 18, 2024.
As marijuana use continues to rise and state-level marijuana legalization sweeps the U.S., researchers and policymakers are grappling with a growing public safety concern: marijuana-impaired driving.
As of April 2023, 38 U.S. states had legalized medical marijuana and 23 had legalized its recreational use, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Recreational or medical marijuana measures are on the ballot in seven states this year.
The issue of marijuana-impaired driving has not been an easy one to tackle because, unlike alcohol, which has well-established thresholds of impairment, the metrics for marijuana’s effects on driving remain rather elusive.
“We don’t have that kind of deep knowledge right now and it’s not because of lack of trying,” says Dr. Guohua Li, professor of epidemiology and the founding director of the Center for Injury Science and Prevention at Columbia University.
“Marijuana is very different from alcohol in important ways,” says Li, who has published several studies on marijuana and driving. “And one of them is that the effect of marijuana on cognitive functions and behaviors is much more unpredictable than alcohol. In general, alcohol is a depressant drug. But marijuana could act on the central nervous system as a depressant, a stimulant, and a hallucinogenic substance.”
Efforts to create a breathalyzer to measure the level of THC, the main psychoactive compound found in the marijuana plant, have largely failed, because “the THC molecule is much bigger than ethanol and its behavior after ingestion is very different from alcohol,” Li says.
Currently, the two most common methods used to measure THC concentration to identify impaired drivers are blood and saliva tests, although there’s ongoing debate about their reliability.
Marijuana, a term interchangeably used with cannabis, is the most commonly used federally illegal drug in the U.S.: 48.2 million people, or about 18% of Americans reported using it at least once in 2019, according to the latest available data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Worldwide, 2.5% of the population consumes marijuana, according to the World Health Organization.
Marijuana is legal in several countries, including Canada, where it was legalized in 2018. Despite state laws legalizing cannabis, it remains illegal at the federal level in the U.S.
As states grapple with the contentious issue of marijuana legalization, the debate is not just about public health, potential tax revenues and economic interests. At the heart of the discussion is also the U.S. criminal justice system.
Marijuana is shown to have medicinal qualities and, compared with substances like alcohol, tobacco, and opioids, it has relatively milder health risks. However, it’s not risk-free, a large body of research has shown.
Marijuana consumption can lead to immediate effects such as impaired muscle coordination and paranoia, as well as longer-term effects on mental health and cognitive functions — and addiction. As its use becomes more widespread, researchers are trying to better understand the potential hazards of marijuana, particularly for younger users whose brains are in critical stages of development.
Marijuana and driving
The use of marijuana among drivers, passengers and pedestrians has increased steadily over the past two decades, Li says.
Compared with the year 2000, the proportion of U.S. drivers on the road who are under the influence of marijuana has increased by several folds, between five to 10 times, based on toxicology testing of people who died in car crashes, Li says.
A 2022 report from the National Transportation Safety Board finds alcohol and cannabis are the two most commonly detected drugs among drivers arrested for impaired driving and fatally injured drivers. Most drivers who tested positive for cannabis also tested positive for another potentially impairing drug.
“Although cannabis and many other drugs have been shown to impair driving performance and are associated with increased crash risk, there is evidence that, relative to alcohol, awareness about the potential dangers of driving after using other drugs is lower,” according to the report.
Indeed, many U.S. adults perceive daily marijuana use or exposure to its smoke safer than tobacco, even though research finds otherwise.
Several studies have demonstrated marijuana’s impact on driving.
Marijuana use can reduce the drivers’ ability to pay attention, particularly when they are performing multiple tasks, research finds. It also slows reaction time and can impair coordination.
“The combination is that you potentially have people who are noticing hazards later, braking slower and potentially not even noticing hazards because of their inability to focus on competing things on the road,” says Dr. Daniel Myran, an assistant professor at the Department of Family Medicine and health services researcher at the University of Ottawa.
In a study published in September in JAMA Network Open, Myran and colleagues find that from 2010 to 2021 the rate of cannabis-involved traffic injuries that led to emergency department visits in Ontario, Canada, increased by 475%, from 0.18 per 1,000 traffic injury emergency department visits in 2010 to 1.01 visits in 2021.
To be sure, cannabis-involved traffic injuries made up a small fraction of all traffic injury-related visits to hospital emergency departments. Out of 947,604 traffic injury emergency department visits, 426 had documented cannabis involvement.
Myran cautions the increase shouldn’t be solely attributed to marijuana legalization. It captures changing societal attitudes toward marijuana and acceptance of cannabis use over time in the lead-up to legalization. In addition, it may reflect an increasing awareness among health care providers about cannabis-impaired driving, and they may be more likely to ask about cannabis use and document it in medical charts, he says.
“When you look at the 475% increase in cannabis involvement in traffic injuries, rather than saying legalizing cannabis has caused the roads to be unsafe and is a public health disaster, it’s that cannabis use appears to be growing as a risk for road traffic injuries and that there seem to be more cannabis impaired drivers on the road,” Myran says. “Legalization may have accelerated this trend. Faced with this increase, we need to think about what are public health measures and different policy interventions to reduce harms from cannabis-impaired driving.”
Setting a legal limit for marijuana-impaired driving
Setting a legal limit for marijuana-impaired driving has not been easy. Countries like Canada and some U.S. states have agreed upon a certain level of THC in blood, usually between 1 to 5 nanograms per milliliter. Still, some studies have found those limits to be weak indicators of cannabis-impaired driving.
When Canada legalized recreational marijuana in 2018, it also passed a law that made it illegal to drive with blood THC levels of more than 2 nanograms. The penalties are more severe for blood THC levels above 5 nanograms. The blood test is done at the police station for people who are pulled over and are deemed to be drug impaired.
In the U.S., five states — Ohio, Illinois, Montana, Washington and Nevada — have “per se laws,” which set a specific amount of THC in the driver’s blood as evidence of impaired driving, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. That limit ranges between 2 and 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood.
Colorado, meanwhile, has a “permissible inference law,” which states that it’s permissible to assume the driver was under the influence if their blood THC level is 5 nanograms per milliliter or higher, according to NCSL.
Twelve states, most which have legalized some form of marijuana of use, have zero tolerance laws for any amount of certain drugs, including THC, in the body.
The remaining states have “driving under the influence of drugs” laws. Among those states, Alabama and Michigan, have oral fluid roadside testing program to screen drivers for marijuana and other drugs, according to NCSL.
In May this year, the U.S. Department of Transportation published a final rule that allows employers to use saliva testing for commercially licensed drivers, including truck drivers. The rule, which went into effect in June, sets the THC limit in saliva at 4 nanograms.
Saliva tests can detect THC for 8 to 24 hours after use, but the tests are not perfect and can results in false positives, leading some scientists to argue against using them in randomly-selected drivers.
In a 2021 report, the U.S. National Institute of Justice, the research and development arm of the Department of Justice, concluded that THC levels in bodily fluids, including blood and saliva “were not reliable indicators of marijuana intoxication.”
Studies on marijuana and driving
Over the past two decades, many studies have shown marijuana use can impair driving. However, discussions about what’s the best way to measure the level of THC in blood or saliva are ongoing. Below, we highlight and summarize several recent studies that address the issue. The studies are listed in order of publication date. We also include a list of related studies and resources to inform your audiences.
State Driving Under the Influence of Drugs Laws
Alexandra N. Origenes, Sarah A. White, Emma E. McGinty and Jon S. Vernick. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, July 2024.Summary: As of January 2023, 33 states and D.C. had a driving under the influence of drugs law for at least one drug other than cannabis. Of those, 29 states and D.C. had a law specifically for driving under the influence of cannabis, in addition to a law for driving under the influence of other drugs. Four states had a driving under the influence of drug laws, excluding cannabis. Meanwhile, 17 states had no law for driving under the influence of drugs, including cannabis. “The 17 states lacking a DUID law that names specific drugs should consider enacting such a law. These states already have expressed their concern — through legislation — with drug-impaired driving. However, failure to name specific drugs is likely to make the laws more difficult to enforce. These laws may force courts and/or law enforcement to rely on potentially subjective indicators of impairment,” the authors write.
Associations between Adolescent Marijuana Use, Driving After Marijuana Use and Recreational Retail Sale in Colorado, USA
Lucas M. Neuroth, et al. Substance Use & Misuse, October 2023.Summary: Researchers use data from four waves (2013, 2015, 2017 and 2019) of the Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, including 47,518 students 15 and older who indicated that they drove. They find 20.3% of students said that they had used marijuana in the past month and 10.5% said they had driven under the influence of marijuana. They find that the availability of recreational marijuana in stores was associated with an increased prevalence of using marijuana one to two times in the past month and driving under the influence of marijuana at least once. “Over the study period, one in ten high school age drivers engaged in [driving after marijuana use], which is concerning given the high risk of motor vehicle-related injury and death arising from impaired driving among adolescents,” the authors write.
Are Blood and Oral Fluid Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and Metabolite Concentrations Related to Impairment? A Meta-Regression Analysis
Danielle McCartney, et al. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, March 2022.Summary: Commonly used THC measurements may not be strong indicators of driving impairment. While there is a relationship between certain biomarkers like blood THC concentrations and impaired driving, this correlation is often weak. The study underscores the need for more nuanced and comprehensive research on this topic, especially as cannabis usage becomes more widespread and legally accepted.
The Effects of Cannabis and Alcohol on Driving Performance and Driver Behaviour: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Sarah M. Simmons, Jeff K. Caird, Frances Sterzer and Mark Asbridge. Addiction, January 2022.Summary: This meta-analysis of experimental driving studies, including driving simulations, confirms that cannabis impairs driving performance, contrary to some beliefs that it might enhance driving abilities. Cannabis affects lateral control and speed — typically increasing lane excursions while reducing speed. The combination of alcohol and marijuana appears worse than either alone, challenging the idea that they cancel each other out.
Cannabis Legalization and Detection of Tetrahydrocannabinol in Injured Drivers
Jeffrey R. Brubacher, et al. The New England Journal of Medicine, January 2022.Summary: Following the legalization of recreational marijuana in Canada, there was a notable increase in injured drivers testing positive for THC, especially among those 50 years of age or older. This rise in cannabis-related driving incidents occurred even with new traffic laws aiming to deter cannabis-impaired driving. This uptick began before legalization became official, possibly due to perceptions that cannabis use was soon-to-be legal or illegal but not enforced. The data suggests that while legalization has broad societal impacts, more comprehensive strategies are needed to deter driving under the influence of cannabis and raise public awareness about its risks.
Cannabis and Driving
Godfrey D. Pearlson, Michael C. Stevens and Deepak Cyril D’Souza. Frontiers in Psychiatry, September 2021.Summary: Cannabis-impaired driving is a growing public health concern, and studies show that such drivers are more likely to be involved in car crashes, according to this review paper. Drivers are less affected by cannabis than they are by alcohol or cocaine, but the problem is expected to escalate with increasing cannabis legalization and use. Unlike alcohol, THC’s properties make it challenging to determine direct impairment levels from testing results. Current roadside tests lack precision in detecting genuine cannabis-impaired drivers, leading to potential wrongful convictions. Moreover, there is a pressing need for research on the combined effects of alcohol and cannabis on driving, as well as the impact of emerging popular forms of cannabis, like concentrates and edibles. The authors recommend public awareness campaigns about the dangers of driving under the influence of cannabis, similar to those against drunk driving, to address misconceptions. Policymakers should prioritize science-based decisions and encourage further research in this domain.
Demographic And Policy-Based Differences in Behaviors And Attitudes Towards Driving After Marijuana Use: An Analysis of the 2013–2017 Traffic Safety Culture Index
Marco H. Benedetti, et al. BMC Research Notes, June 2021.Summary: The study, based on a U.S. survey, finds younger, low-income, low-education and male participants were more tolerant of driving after marijuana consumption. Notably, those in states that legalized medical marijuana reported driving after use more frequently, aligning with studies indicating a higher prevalence of THC detection in drivers from these states. Overall, while the majority perceive driving after marijuana use as dangerous, not all research agrees on its impairment effects. Existing studies highlight that marijuana impacts motor skills and executive functions, yet its direct correlation with crash risk remains debated, given the variations in individual tolerance and how long THC remains in the system.
Driving Under the Influence of Cannabis: A Framework for Future Policy
Robert M. Chow, et al.Anesthesia & Analgesia, June 2019.Summary: The study presents a conceptual framework focusing on four main domains: legalization, driving under the influence of cannabis, driver impairment, and motor vehicle accidents. With the growing legalization of cannabis, there’s an anticipated rise in cannabis-impaired driving cases. The authors group marijuana users into infrequent users who show significant impairment with increased THC blood levels, chronic users with minimal impairment despite high THC levels, and those with consistent psychomotor deficits. Current challenges lie in the lack of standardized regulation for drivers influenced by cannabis, primarily because of state-to-state variability and the absence of a federal statutory limit for blood THC levels. European nations, however, have established thresholds for blood THC levels, ranging from 0.5 to 50.0 micrograms per liter depending on whether blood or blood serum are tested. The authors suggest the combined use of alcohol and THC blood tests with a psychomotor evaluation by a trained professional to determine impairment levels. The paper stresses the importance of creating a structured policy framework, given the rising acceptance and use of marijuana in society.
Additional research
Cannabis-Involved Traffic Injury Emergency Department Visits After Cannabis Legalization and Commercialization
Daniel T. Myran, et al. JAMA Network Open, September 2023.Driving Performance and Cannabis Users’ Perception of Safety: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Thomas D. Marcotte, et al. JAMA Psychiatry, January 2022.Medicinal Cannabis and Driving: The Intersection of Health and Road Safety Policy
Daniel Perkins, et al. International Journal of Drug Policy, November 2021.Prevalence of Marijuana Use Among Trauma Patients Before and After Legalization of Medical Marijuana: The Arizona Experience
Michael Levine, et al. Substance Abuse, July 2021.Self-Reported Driving After Marijuana Use in Association With Medical And Recreational Marijuana Policies
Marco H. Benedetti, et al. International Journal of Drug Policy, June 2021.Cannabis and Driving Ability
Eric L. Sevigny. Current Opinion in Psychology, April 2021.The Failings of per se Limits to Detect Cannabis-Induced Driving Impairment: Results from a Simulated Driving Study
Thomas R. Arkell, et al. Traffic Injury Prevention, February 2021.Risky Driving Behaviors of Drivers Who Use Alcohol and Cannabis
Tara Kelley-Baker, et al. Transportation Research Record, January 2021.Direct and Indirect Effects of Marijuana Use on the Risk of Fatal 2-Vehicle Crash Initiation
Stanford Chihuri and Guohua Li. Injury Epidemiology, September 2020Cannabis-Impaired Driving: Evidence and the Role of Toxicology Testing
Edward C. Wood and Robert L. Dupont. Cannabis in Medicine, July 2020.Association of Recreational Cannabis Laws in Colorado and Washington State With Changes in Traffic Fatalities, 2005-2017
Julian Santaella-Tenorio, et al. JAMA Internal Medicine, June 2020.Marijuana Decriminalization, Medical Marijuana Laws, and Fatal Traffic Crashes in US Cities, 2010–2017
Amanda Cook, Gregory Leung and Rhet A. Smith. American Journal of Public Health, February 2020.Cannabis Use in Older Drivers in Colorado: The LongROAD Study
Carolyn G. DiGuiseppi, et al. Accident Analysis & Prevention, November 2019.Crash Fatality Rates After Recreational Marijuana Legalization in Washington and Colorado
Jayson D. Aydelotte, et al. American Journal of Public Health, August 2017.Marijuana-Impaired Driving: A Report to Congress
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, July 2017Interaction of Marijuana And Alcohol on Fatal Motor Vehicle Crash Risk: A Case–Control Study
Stanford Chihuri, Guohua Li and Qixuan Chen. Injury Epidemiology, March 2017.US Traffic Fatalities, 1985–2014, and Their Relationship to Medical Marijuana Laws
Julian Santaella-Tenorio, et al. American Journal of Public Health, February 2017.Delays in DUI Blood Testing: Impact on Cannabis DUI Assessments
Ed Wood, Ashley Brooks-Russell and Phillip Drum. Traffic Injury Prevention, June 2015.Establishing Legal Limits for Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana
Kristin Wong, Joanne E. Brady and Guohua Li. Injury Epidemiology, October 2014.Cannabis Effects on Driving Skills
Rebecca L. Hartman and Marilyn A. Huestis. Clinical Chemistry, March 2014.Acute Cannabis Consumption And Motor Vehicle Collision Risk: Systematic Review of Observational Studies and Meta-Analysis
Mark Asbridge, Jill A. Hayden and Jennifer L. Cartwright. The BMJ, February 2012.Resources for your audiences
The following resources include explainers from federal agencies and national organizations. You’re free to use images and graphics from federal agencies.
- CDC’s main marijuana page.
- CDC’s marijuana data and statistics.
- Marijuana Drug Facts from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
- Health Effects of Marijuana from the CDC.
- Learn About Marijuana Risks from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
- Marijuana and Lung Health from the American Lung Association.
- Substance Use Disorder 101 from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.
- What You Need To Know About Marijuana Use and Driving from the CDC.
- Does marijuana use affect driving? from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
- Drug-Impaired Driving from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
This article first appeared on The Journalist’s Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
-
Nicotine pouches are being marketed to young people on social media. But are they safe, or even legal?
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.
Flavoured nicotine pouches are being promoted to young people on social media platforms such as TikTok and Instagram.
Although some viral videos have been taken down following a series of reports in The Guardian, clips featuring Australian influencers have claimed nicotine pouches are a safe and effective way to quit vaping. A number of the videos have included links to websites selling these products.
With the rapid rise in youth vaping and the subsequent implementation of several reforms to restrict access to vaping products, it’s not entirely surprising the tobacco industry is introducing more products to maintain its future revenue stream.
The major trans-national tobacco companies, including Philip Morris International and British American Tobacco, all manufacture nicotine pouches. British American Tobacco’s brand of nicotine pouches, Velo, is a leading sponsor of the McLaren Formula 1 team.
But what are nicotine pouches, and are they even legal in Australia?
Like snus, but different
Nicotine pouches are available in many countries around the world, and their sales are increasing rapidly, especially among young people.
Nicotine pouches look a bit like small tea bags and are placed between the lip and gum. They’re typically sold in small, colourful tins of about 15 to 20 pouches. While the pouches don’t contain tobacco, they do contain nicotine that is either extracted from tobacco plants or made synthetically. The pouches come in a wide range of strengths.
As well as nicotine, the pouches commonly contain plant fibres (in place of tobacco, plant fibres serve as a filler and give the pouches shape), sweeteners and flavours. Just like for vaping products, there’s a vast array of pouch flavours available including different varieties of fruit, confectionery, spices and drinks.
The range of appealing flavours, as well as the fact they can be used discreetly, may make nicotine pouches particularity attractive to young people.
Vaping has recently been subject to tighter regulation in Australia.
Aleksandr Yu/ShutterstockUsers absorb the nicotine in their mouths and simply replace the pouch when all the nicotine has been absorbed. Tobacco-free nicotine pouches are a relatively recent product, but similar style products that do contain tobacco, known as snus, have been popular in Scandinavian countries, particularly Sweden, for decades.
Snus and nicotine pouches are however different products. And given snus contains tobacco and nicotine pouches don’t, the products are subject to quite different regulations in Australia.
What does the law say?
Pouches that contain tobacco, like snus, have been banned in Australia since 1991, as part of a consumer product ban on all forms of smokeless tobacco products. This means other smokeless tobacco products such as chewing tobacco, snuff, and dissolvable tobacco sticks or tablets, are also banned from sale in Australia.
Tobacco-free nicotine pouches cannot legally be sold by general retailers, like tobacconists and convenience stores, in Australia either. But the reasons for this are more complex.
In Australia, under the Poisons Standard, nicotine is a prescription-only medicine, with two exceptions. Nicotine can be used in tobacco prepared and packed for smoking, such as cigarettes, roll-your-own tobacco, and cigars, as well as in preparations for therapeutic use as a smoking cessation aid, such as nicotine patches, gum, mouth spray and lozenges.
If a nicotine-containing product does not meet either of these two exceptions, it cannot be legally sold by general retailers. No nicotine pouches have currently been approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration as a therapeutic aid in smoking cessation, so in short they’re not legal to sell in Australia.
However, nicotine pouches can be legally imported for personal use only if users have a prescription from a medical professional who can assess if the product is appropriate for individual use.
We only have anecdotal reports of nicotine pouch use, not hard data, as these products are very new in Australia. But we do know authorities are increasingly seizing these products from retailers. It’s highly unlikely any young people using nicotine pouches are accessing them through legal channels.
Health concerns
Nicotine exposure may induce effects including dizziness, headache, nausea and abdominal cramps, especially among people who don’t normally smoke or vape.
Although we don’t yet have much evidence on the long term health effects of nicotine pouches, we know nicotine is addictive and harmful to health. For example, it can cause problems in the cardiovascular system (such as heart arrhythmia), particularly at high doses. It may also have negative effects on adolescent brain development.
The nicotine contents of some of the nicotine pouches on the market is alarmingly high. Certain brands offer pouches containing more than 10mg of nicotine, which is similar to a cigarette. According to a World Health Organization (WHO) report, pouches deliver enough nicotine to induce and sustain nicotine addiction.
Pouches are also being marketed as a product to use when it’s not possible to vape or smoke, such as on a plane. So instead of helping a person quit they may be used in addition to smoking and vaping. And importantly, there’s no clear evidence pouches are an effective smoking or vaping cessation aid.
A Velo product display at Dubai airport in October 2022. Nicotine pouches are marketed as safe to use on planes.
Becky FreemanFurther, some nicotine pouches, despite being tobacco-free, still contain tobacco-specific nitrosamines. These compounds can damage DNA, and with long term exposure, can cause cancer.
Overall, there’s limited data on the harms of nicotine pouches because they’ve been on the market for only a short time. But the WHO recommends a cautious approach given their similarities to smokeless tobacco products.
For anyone wanting advice and support to quit smoking or vaping, it’s best to talk to your doctor or pharmacist, or access trusted sources such as Quitline or the iCanQuit website.
Becky Freeman, Associate Professor, School of Public Health, University of Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
Self-Care for Tough Times – by Suzy Reading
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 note on the author: while not “Dr. Reading”, she is a “CPsychol, B Psych (Hons), M Psych”; a Chartered Psychologist specializing in wellbeing, stress management and facilitation of healthy lifestyle change. So this is coming from a place of research and evidence!
The kinds of “tough times” she has in mind are so numerous that listing them takes two pages in the book, so we won’t try here. But suffice it to say, there are a lot of things that can go wrong for us as humans, and this book addresses how to take care of ourselves mindfully in light of them.
The author takes a “self-care is health care” approach, and goes about things with a clinical mindset and/but a light tone, offering both background information, and hands-on practical advice.
Bottom line: there may be troubles ahead (and maybe you’re in the middle of troubles right now), but there’s always room for a little sunshine too.
Click here to check out Self-Care For Tough Times, and care for yourself in tough times!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
We talk a lot about being ‘resilient’. But what does it actually mean?
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 a world with political polarisation, war, extreme weather events and increasing costs of living, we need to be able to cope as individuals and communities.
Our capacity to cope with very real stressors in our lives – our resilience – can determine whether we thrive, just survive, or are deprived of a reasonable quality of life.
Kinga Howard/Unsplash Stress vs resilience
Resilience means having the ability to cope with, and rebound from, life’s challenges and still achieve our goals.
Stress isn’t something to be avoided. We need to feel some stress to achieve our best. Exposure to manageable levels of stress and adversity develops our coping skills and resilience.
But if we feel too much stress, we can flounder or become overwhelmed.
The ability to re-activate ourselves when we feel down, fatigued or disengaged helps to optimise our focus and motivation. Sportspeople, for example, might listen to high intensity music just before a competition to increase their energy levels.
Conversely, the ability to dampen down emotional intensity can make use feel less stressed or anxious. Exercising, listening to relaxing music, or patting a much-loved pet can prevent high arousal from interfering with completing a task.
Effective emotion regulation is crucial for adapting to life’s ups and downs, and keeping us on a relatively even keel.
How does resilience develop?
Resilience emerges from interactions between personal and environmental factors.
In addition to emotion regulation skills, personal factors that can bolster resilience include academic achievement, developing a range of skills and abilities (such as sport and music) and problem-solving skills. Many of these skills can be fostered in childhood. And if one area of life isn’t going well, we can still experience confidence, joy and meaning in others.
Sometimes we need to increase our energy levels, other times we need to lower anxiety. Ilias Chebbi/Unsplash People who reflect on traumatic experience and develop new positive meanings about themselves (getting through it means I’m strong!) and life (a greater appreciation) can also have higher levels of resilience.
Genetic factors and temperament also play an important role. Some of us are born with nervous systems that respond with more anxiety than others in novel, uncertain, or potentially threatening situations. And some of us are more likely to avoid rather than approach these situations. These traits tend to be associated with lower levels of resilience. But we can all learn skills to build our resilience.
Environmental factors that promote resilience include:
- a nurturing home environment
- supportive family and peer relationships
- cultural identity, belonging and rituals
- modelling from others overcoming hardship
- community cohesion
- government policies that provide social safety nets, strong education, anti-discrimination and inclusion
- investment in facilities, spaces, services and networks that support the quality of life and wellbeing of communities.
Can resilience be taught?
Many factors associated with resilience are modifiable, so it stands to reason that interventions that aim to bolster them should be helpful.
There is evidence that interventions that promote optimism, flexibility, active coping and social support-seeking can have small yet meaningful positive effects on resilience and emotional wellbeing in children and adults.
However, school-based programs give us reason to be cautious.
A trial across 84 schools in the United Kingdom evaluated the effectiveness of school-based mindfulness programs. More than 3,500 students aged between 11 and 13 years received ten lessons of mindfulness and a similar number did not.
There was no evidence that mindfulness had any benefit on risk for depression, social, emotional and behavioural functioning, or wellbeing after one year. Teaching school children mindfulness at scale did not appear to bolster resilience.
In fact, there was some evidence it did harm – and it was most harmful for students at the highest risk of depression. The intervention was not deemed to be effective or cost-effective and was not recommended by the authors.
In another recent trial, researchers found an emotion regulation intervention with Year 8 and 9 school children was unhelpful and even harmful, although children who engaged in more home practice tended to do better.
The evidence doesn’t support school-based resilience programs. Mitchell Luo/Unsplash These interventions may have failed for a number of reasons. The content may not have been delivered in a way that was sufficiently engaging, comprehensive, age-appropriate, frequent, individually tailored, or relevant to the school context. Teachers may also not be sufficiently trained in delivering these interventions for them to be effective. And students didn’t co-design the interventions.
Regardless of the reasons, these findings suggest we need to be cautious when delivering universal interventions to all children. It may be more helpful to wait until there are early signs of excessive stress and intervening in an individualised way.
What does this mean for resilience-building?
Parents and schools have a role in providing children with the sense of security that gives them confidence to explore their environments and make mistakes in age-appropriate ways, and providing support when needed.
Parents and teachers can encourage children to try to solve problems themselves before getting involved. Problem-solving attempts should be celebrated even more than success.
Schools need to allocate their scarce resources to children most in need of practical and emotional support in non-stigmatising ways, rather than universal approaches. Most children will develop resilience without intervention programs.
To promote resilience, schools can foster positive peer relationships, cultural identity and involvement in creative, sporting and academic pursuits. They can also highlight others’ recovery and resilience stories to demonstrate how growth can occur from adversity.
More broadly in the community, people can work on developing their own emotion regulation skills to bolster their confidence in their ability to manage adversity.
Think about how you can:
- approach challenges in constructive ways
- actively problem-solve rather than avoid challenges
- genuinely accept failure as part of being human
- establish healthy boundaries
- align your behaviour with your values
- receive social and professional support when needed.
This will help you navigate the ebbs and flows of life in ways that support recovery and growth.
Peter McEvoy, Professor of Clinical Psychology, Curtin University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
How Tight Are Your Hips? Test (And Fix!) With This
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.
Upon surveying over half a million people; hips were the most common area for stiffness and lack of mobility. So, what to do about it?
This test don’t lie
With 17 muscles contributing to hip function (“hip flexors” being the name for this group of 17 muscles, not specific muscle), it’s important to figure out which ones are tight, and if indeed it really is the hip flexors at all, or if it could be, as it often is, actually the tensor fasciae latae (TFL) muscle of the thigh. If it turns out to be both, well, that’s unfortunate but the good news is, now you’ll know and can start fixing from all the necessary angles.
Diagnostic test for tight hip flexors (Thomas Test):
- Use a sturdy, elevated surface (e.g. table or counter—not a bed or couch, unless there is perchance room to swing your legs without them touching the floor).
- Sit at the edge, lie back, and pull both knees to your chest.
- Return one leg back down until the thigh is perpendicular to the table.
- Let the other leg dangle off the edge to assess flexibility.
Observations from the test:
- Thigh contact: is the back of your thigh touching the table?
- Knee angle: is your knee bent at roughly 80° or straighter?
- Thigh rotation: does the thigh roll outward?
Interpreting results:
- If your thigh contacts the surface and the knee is bent at around 80°, hip mobility is good.
- If your thigh doesn’t touch or knee is too straight, hip flexor tightness is present.
- If your thigh rolls outwards from your midline, that indicates tightness in the TFL muscle of the thigh.
Three best hip flexor stretches:
- Kneeling lunge stretch:
- Hips above the knee, tuck tailbone, engage glutes, press hips forward, reach arm up with a slight side bend.
- Seated hip lift stretch:
- Sit with feet hip-width apart, hands behind shoulders, lift hips, step one foot back, tuck tailbone, point knee away.
- Sofa stretch:
- Kneel with one shin against a couch/wall, other foot forward in lunge, tuck tailbone, press hips forward, lift torso.
It’s recommended to how each stretch for 30 seconds on each side.
For more on all of the above, and visual demonstrations, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like to read:
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:
-
The Fast-Mimicking Diet
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.
Live, Fast, Live Long
This is Dr. Valter Longo. He’s a biogerontologist and cell biologist, whose work has focused on fasting and nutrient response genes, and how we can leverage them against diseases and aging in general.
We reviewed his book recently:
What does he want us to know?
What to eat
Dr. Longo recommends a mostly plant-based diet (especially vegetables, whole grains, and legumes), but also having some fish. The bulk of our dietary fats, however, he says are best coming from olive oil and nuts.
He also advises aiming for nutritional density of vitamins and minerals in our diet, and/but supplementing with a multivitamin once every few days to cover any gaps.
If in doubt choosing between plant-based whole foods, he recommends that we choose those our ancestors will have eaten.
Read more: Longevity Diet For Adults
When to eat
Dr. Longo recommends time-restricted eating within a 12-hour window per day.
See also: Intermittent Fasting: We Sort The Science From The Hype
However, he also recommends (additionally or separately; it’s up to us; additionally is better but the point is it still has excellent benefits separately too) his “fast-mimicking diet” (FMD), which involves eating according to what we said in “What to eat”, but restricting it to 750 kcal per day, 5 days in a row, but not necessarily 5 days per week.
For example, the following was a 3-month study that involved doing this for only one 5-day cycle per month:
❝Three FMD cycles reduced body weight, trunk, and total body fat; lowered blood pressure; and decreased insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1). No serious adverse effects were reported.
A post hoc analysis of subjects from both FMD arms showed that body mass index, blood pressure, fasting glucose, IGF-1, triglycerides, total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and C-reactive protein were more beneficially affected in participants at risk for disease than in subjects who were not at risk.
Thus, cycles of a 5-day FMD are safe, feasible, and effective in reducing markers/risk factors for aging and age-related diseases.❞
~ Dr. Min Wei et al. ← Dr. Longo was
Note: the introduction mentions FMD in mice, but this is just referencing previous studies. This study is about FMD in humans!
Read in full: Fasting-mimicking diet and markers/risk factors for aging, diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease
Want to know more?
You might like this (text-based) interview with Dr. Longo, with the Health Sciences Academy:
Eat, fast and live longer? Interview with Professor Valter Longo
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:
