
How To Make Downhill Walking Easier On The Knees
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.
Dr. Alyssa Kuhn, arthritis specialist, gives the low-down:
Easier now, easier later
Many people struggle with downhill walking due to lack of control or knee pain. This happens because muscles also act as brakes, and weak muscles shift the stress to joints. So, the fix will be strengthening those muscles. But first:
Quick tip for the “easier now”: use a zigzag walking pattern when descending; not only does this make the incline (or relatively speaking: decline) functionally less steep, but also, the stress is now at a different angle to your joint, which takes pressure off it too.
Now for some exercises, for the “easier later”:
- Seated leg extensions with resistance band: sit at the edge of a chair and use a loop or long resistance band around your shins; kick one leg out straight, then slowly return it—variations include using thicker cotton bands to avoid rolling, anchoring the band under a chair leg, or crossing a long band for added resistance—aim for 10–15 slow, controlled repetitions per leg, adjusting reps per ability.
- Slow chair squats: with your feet shoulder-width apart and without touching the back of the chair, slowly sit down over a count of 3 and then stand back up—keep knees aligned with ankles to avoid inner knee pain and improper muscle use—this builds essential downhill control strength; begin with 5–10 reps and increase as it becomes easier.
- Step-down lunges: place one foot on a step stool or low stair, extend your rear leg behind you with both knees bent, and lower your body slowly (counting to 3) before pushing back up—this mimics the single-leg control needed for descending; using a raised surface helps keep the knee behind the toes to avoid pain—aim for 10–12 controlled reps per side before progressing to floor lunges.
Limitation: if you have a connective tissue disorder such as some kind of Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (there are many kinds; it’s an umbrella term), there’s a good chance that no matter how much you strengthen your legs, your associated nerves aren’t going to believe it, so every now and again your legs will still fold like laundry no matter how strong they are, in an effort to save you from what they mistake for a breaking-point level of physical stress. We’ll drop a link in the “learn more” section below, for a way of addressing this.
For more on all of this plus visual demonstrations, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like:
The Best Exercise to Stop Your Legs From Giving Out ← this one’s a little different; if your legs are plenty strong but you have a connective tissue disorder that causes your joints to occasionally just collapse for no obvious reason
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
What Can Moderate Drinking Mean For Healthy Longevity?
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.
Alcohol is, of course, unhealthy. Not even the famous “small glass of red” is recommended:
Can We Drink To Good Health? ← this was mostly about the purported heart health benefits, and the answer to the question is: no, we cannot, and as WHO has declared, “the only safe amount of alcohol is zero”)
See also: How Much Alcohol Does It Take To Increase Cancer Risk? ← the answer is “any” (although, the risk is dose-dependent, so if not abstaining completely, less is still better than more)
A lot of why people think that moderate drinking is healthy, that widespread popular belief stems from flawed associative studies that compared the following two categories of people:
- non-drinkers, including many former heavy drinkers who stopped because they realized the harm they were doing to themselves
- light drinkers, who have been able to continue drinking because of their otherwise good health
In other words, they looked at now-teetotal former alcoholics whose health was ruined by drinking and concluded “aha, non-drinkers have bad health; clearly some drinking is best”.
You can read more about this and how that flawed research was later disproven once the confounding variables were removed, here: Are You Making This Alcohol Mistake?
But that’s background history. Now here’s for…
The latest evidence that makes things clearer
Researchers (Dr. Sinead George et al.) wanted to know the lifetime risk of alcohol-attributable death and illness in the US based on average weekly alcohol consumption, using evidence from more than 7,200 pre-existing research papers as well as national survey, census, mortality, and morbidity data.
So, can there be any benefit from moderate drinking?
In few words: no overall protective health effect was found at low levels of alcohol consumption, and even what is commonly considered moderate drinking was associated with increased risks of premature death and chronic disease.
In numbers: estimated lifetime alcohol-attributable mortality risk exceeded 1 in 1,000 at more than 6.5 drinks per week for men and more than 7.0 drinks per week for women, rose above 1 in 100 at more than 8.5 drinks per week for everyone and reached 1 in 25 (4%) at 14 drinks per week for men.
As for disease risk:
- Chronic disease in general: alcohol consumption increased the risk of multiple conditions, including cancers of the esophagus, mouth, and breast, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, and alcohol-related injuries.
- Heart disease in particular: although low alcohol intake was associated with a lower risk of ischemic heart disease and stroke, these potential benefits were outweighed by increased risks of cancer and other alcohol-related diseases when all health outcomes were considered together.
If you’d like to read the paper in full, here it is: Moderate alcohol consumption linked to premature death and chronic illness
If you’d like to rethink drinking for yourself, then feel free to check out: Rethinking Drinking: How To Reduce Or Quit Alcohol
Worried you’ve already done too much harm?
It’s never too early to quit drinking, but it’s also never too late:
What Happens To Your Body When You Stop Drinking Alcohol ← for a detailed timeline which parts of your body recover when
Take care!
Share This Post
-
A Urologist Explains Edging: What, Why, & Is It Safe?
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.
“Edging” is the practice of intentionally delaying orgasm, which can be enjoyed by anyone, with a partner or alone.
On the edge
Question: why?
Answer: the more tension is built up, the stronger the orgasm can be at the end of it. And, even before then, pleasure along the way is pleasure along the way, which is generally considered a good thing—especially for any (usually but not always women, for hormonal and social reasons) who find it difficult to orgasm. It’s also a great way to experiment and learn more about one’s own body and/or that of one’s partner(s), personal responses, and so forth. Also, for any (usually but not always men, for hormonal reasons) who find they usually orgasm sooner than they’d like, it’s a great way to change that, if changing that is what’s wanted.
Bonus answer: for some (usually but not always men, for hormonal reasons) who find they have an uncomfortable slump in mood after orgasm, that can simply be skipped entirely, postponed for another time, etc, with pleasure being derived from the sexual activity rather than orgasm. That way, there’s a lasting dopamine high, with no prolactin crash afterwards ← this is very much tied to male hormones, by the way. If you have female hormones, there’s usually no prolactin crash either way, and instead, the post-orgasm spike in oxytocin is stronger, and a wave of serotonin makes the later decline of dopamine much more gentle.
Question: can it cause any problems?
Answer: yep! Or rather, subjectively, it may be considered so—this is obviously a personal matter and your mileage may vary. The main problem it may cause is that if practised habitually, it may result in greater difficulty achieving orgasm, simply because the body has got used to “ok, when we do this (sex/masturbation), we are in no particular rush to do that (orgasm)”. So whether not this would be a worry for you is down to any given individual. Lastly, if your intent was a long edging session with an orgasm at the end and then something happened to interrupt that, then your orgasm may be unintentionally postponed to another time, which again, may be more or less of an issue depending on your feelings about that.
For more on these things including advice on how to try it, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like to read:
- Mythbusting The Big O ← 10almonds main feature on orgasms, health, and associated myths
- Come Together: The Science (and Art) of Creating Lasting Sexual Connections – by Dr. Emily Nagoski
- Better Sex Through Mindfulness: How Women Can Cultivate Desire – by Dr. Lori Brotto
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Margarine vs Butter – 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 margarine to butter, we picked the butter.
Why?
Once upon a time, when margarines were filled with now-banned trans fats, this would have been an easy win for butter.
Nowadays, the macronutrient/lipid profiles are generally more similar (although margarine often has a little less saturated fat), except one thing that butter has in its favor:
More micronutrients. What exactly they are (and how much) depends on the diet and general health of the cows from whom the milk to make the butter came, but they’re not something found in plant-based butter alternatives at this time.
Nevertheless, because of the saturated fat content, it’s not advisable to use more than a very small amount of either (two tablespoons of butter would put one at the daily limit already, without eating any other saturated fat that day).
Read more: Butter vs Margarine
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Early Detection May Help Kentucky Tamp Down Its Lung Cancer Crisis
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.
Anthony Stumbo’s heart sank after the doctor shared his mother’s chest X-ray.
“I remember that drive home, bringing her back home, and we basically cried,” said the internal medicine physician, who had started practicing in eastern Kentucky near his childhood home shortly before his mother began feeling ill. “Nobody wants to get told they’ve got inoperable lung cancer. I cried because I knew what this meant for her.”
Now Stumbo, whose mother died the following year, in 1997, is among a group of Kentucky clinicians and researchers determined to rewrite the script for other families by promoting training and boosting awareness about early detection in the state with the highest lung cancer death rate. For the past decade, Kentucky researchers have promoted lung cancer screening, first recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2013. These days the Bluegrass State screens more residents who are at high risk of developing lung cancer than any state except Massachusetts — 10.6% of eligible residents in 2022, more than double the national rate of 4.5% — according to the most recent American Lung Association analysis.
The effort has been driven by a research initiative called the Kentucky LEADS (Lung Cancer Education, Awareness, Detection, and Survivorship) Collaborative, which in 2014 launched to improve screening and prevention, to identify more tumors earlier, when survival odds are far better. The group has worked with clinicians and hospital administrators statewide to boost screening rates both in urban areas and regions far removed from academic medical centers, such as rural Appalachia. But, a decade into the program, the researchers face an ongoing challenge as they encourage more people to get tested, namely the fear and stigma that swirl around smoking and lung cancer.
Lung cancer kills more Americans than any other malignancy, and the death rates are worst in a swath of states including Kentucky and its neighbors Tennessee and West Virginia, and stretching south to Mississippi and Louisiana, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
It’s a bit early to see the impact on lung cancer deaths because people may still live for years with a malignancy, LEADS researchers said. Plus, treatment improvements and other factors may also help reduce death rates along with increased screening. Still, data already shows that more cancers in Kentucky are being detected before they become advanced, and thus more difficult to treat, they said. Of total lung cancer cases statewide, the percentage of advanced cases — defined as cancers that had spread to the lymph nodes or beyond — hovered near 81% between 2000 and 2014, according to Kentucky Cancer Registry data. By 2020, that number had declined to 72%, according to the most recent data available.
“We are changing the story of families. And there is hope where there has not been hope before,” said Jennifer Knight, a LEADS principal investigator.
Older adults in their 60s and 70s can hold a particularly bleak view of their mortality odds, given what their loved ones experienced before screening became available, said Ashley Shemwell, a nurse navigator for the lung cancer screening program at Owensboro Health, a nonprofit health system that serves Kentucky and Indiana.
“A lot of them will say, ‘It doesn’t matter if I get lung cancer or not because it’s going to kill me. So I don’t want to know,’” said Shemwell. “With that generation, they saw a lot of lung cancers and a lot of deaths. And it was terrible deaths because they were stage 4 lung cancers.” But she reminds them that lung cancer is much more treatable if caught before it spreads.
The collaborative works with several partners, including the University of Kentucky, the University of Louisville, and GO2 for Lung Cancer, and has received grant funding from the Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation. Leaders have provided training and other support to 10 hospital-based screening programs, including a stipend to pay for resources such as educational materials or a nurse navigator, Knight said. In 2022, state lawmakers established a statewide lung cancer screening program based in part on the group’s work.
Jacob Sands, a lung cancer physician at Boston’s Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, credits the LEADS collaborative with encouraging patients to return for annual screening and follow-up testing for any suspicious nodules. “What the Kentucky LEADS program is doing is fantastic, and that is how you really move the needle in implementing lung screening on a larger scale,” said Sands, who isn’t affiliated with the Kentucky program and serves as a volunteer spokesperson for the American Lung Association.
In 2014, Kentucky expanded Medicaid, increasing the number of lower-income people who qualified for lung cancer screening and any related treatment. Adults 50 to 80 years old are advised to get a CT scan every year if they have accumulated at least 20 pack years and still smoke or have quit within the past 15 years, according to the latest task force recommendation, which widened the pool of eligible adults. (To calculate pack years, multiply the packs of cigarettes smoked daily by years of smoking.) The lung association offers an online quiz, called “Saved By The Scan,” to figure out likely eligibility for insurance coverage.
Half of U.S. patients aren’t diagnosed until their cancer has spread beyond the lungs and lymph nodes to elsewhere in the body. By then, the five-year survival rate is 8.2%.
But regular screening boosts those odds. When a CT scan detects lung cancer early, patients have an 81% chance of living at least 20 years, according to data published in November in the journal Radiology.
Some adults, like Lisa Ayers, didn’t realize lung cancer screening was an option. Her family doctor recommended a CT scan last year after she reported breathing difficulties. Ayers, who lives in Ohio near the Kentucky border, got screened at UK King’s Daughters, a hospital in far eastern Kentucky. The scan didn’t take much time, and she didn’t have to undress, the 57-year-old said. “It took me longer to park,” she quipped.
She was diagnosed with a lung carcinoid tumor, a type of neuroendocrine cancer that can grow in various parts of the body. Her cancer was considered too risky for surgery, Ayers said. A biopsy showed the cancer was slow-growing, and her doctors said they would monitor it closely.
Ayers, a lifelong smoker, recalled her doctor said that her type of cancer isn’t typically linked to smoking. But she quit anyway, feeling like she’d been given a second chance to avoid developing a smoking-related cancer. “It was a big wake-up call for me.”
Adults with a smoking history often report being treated poorly by medical professionals, said Jamie Studts, a health psychologist and a LEADS principal investigator, who has been involved with the research from the start. The goal is to avoid stigmatizing people and instead to build rapport, meeting them where they are that day, he said.
“If someone tells us that they’re not ready to quit smoking but they want to have lung cancer screening, awesome; we’d love to help,” Studts said. “You know what? You actually develop a relationship with an individual by accepting, ‘No.’”
Nationally, screening rates vary widely. Massachusetts reaches 11.9% of eligible residents, while California ranks last, screening just 0.7%, according to the lung association analysis.
That data likely doesn’t capture all California screenings, as it may not include CT scans done through large managed care organizations, said Raquel Arias, a Los Angeles-based associate director of state partnerships at the American Cancer Society. She cited other 2022 data for California, looking at lung cancer screening for eligible Medicare fee-for-service patients, which found a screening rate of 1%-2% in that population.
But, Arias said, the state’s effort is “nowhere near what it needs to be.”
The low smoking rate in California, along with its image as a healthy state, “seems to have come with the unintended consequence of further stigmatizing people who smoke,” said Arias, citing one of the findings from a 2022 report looking at lung cancer screening barriers. For instance, eligible patients may be reluctant to share prior smoking habits with their health provider, she said.
Meanwhile, Kentucky screening efforts progress, scan by scan.
At Appalachian Regional Healthcare, 3,071 patients were screened in 2023, compared with 372 in 2017. “We’re just scratching the surface of the potential lives that we can have an effect on,” said Stumbo, a lung cancer screening champion at the health system, which includes 14 hospitals, most located in eastern Kentucky.
The doctor hasn’t shed his own grief about what his family missed after his mother died at age 51, long before annual screening was recommended. “Knowing that my children were born, and never knowing their grandmother,” he said, “just how sad is that?”
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Are You Making This Warm-Up Mistake?
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 most common warm-up mistake that people make is, of course, not warming up.
The second most common warm-up mistake people make, however, is this:
It’s about joints, and…
Why the stationary bike is a poor warm-up after 50: cycling raises your heart rate but does not prepare your joints, muscles, or movement patterns for resistance training unless you are about to cycle.
That’s the example in the video, but it also goes for other forms of cardio-centric warm-up that don’t address joints, muscles, and movement patterns as appropriate.
In short: your warm-up should closely match the movements and loads you will use in your workout.
So, how best to do that, without it amounting to going straight into the exercise without warming up because the warm-up is already the exercise?
- First, practice the movement pattern: start with the exact exercise you plan to do using no resistance, then gradually increase the load in small steps to prepare your brain and your muscles.
- Next, mobilize stiff or vulnerable joints: identify your personal “sticky” areas and mobilize them before training to reduce injury risk.
Some examples he gives:
- Goblet squat workup: do bodyweight squats, then lighter sets, then a few reps near your working weight before resting briefly and starting your first full set.
- Ankle mobility for squatting: chair-supported ankle dorsiflexion helps improve knee-over-toe movement and squat depth.
- Hip and knee mobility drill: a simple supine sequence of straightening, bending, and hugging your leg to your chest improves full-range hip and knee motion.
- Lower-back preparation: gentle side-to-side leg rotations while lying on your back expose your pelvis and lumbar spine to safe movement before lifting.
To be clear, he recommends to focus only on the drills that match your problem areas and do them briefly before your workout or before troublesome exercises.
For more on this, plus visual demonstrations of some examples, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like:
Overdone It? How To Speed Up Recovery After Exercise
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
How Nature Provides Us With A Surprisingly Powerful Painkiller
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.
It’s well-known (at least to regular 10almonds-readers) that seeing nature, ideally green leaves and blue sky, improves our mood by stimulating production of serotonin.
See also: Neurotransmitter Cheatsheet
But it does a lot more.
Reducing the actual signals of pain
Researchers at the University of Vienna have discovered that viewing nature scenes (even if just on video) alleviates physical pain—not just in self-reported subjective assessments, but also by a reduction of the neural activity that signals pain:
❝Pain is like a puzzle, made up of different pieces that are processed differently in the brain. Some pieces of the puzzle relate to our emotional response to pain, such as how unpleasant we find it. Other pieces correspond to the physical signals underlying the painful experience, such as its location in the body and its intensity.
Unlike placebos, which usually change our emotional response to pain, viewing nature changed how the brain processed early, raw sensory signals of pain.
Thus, the effect appears to be less influenced by participants’ expectations, and more by changes in the underlying pain signals❞
This was tested against, varyingly, viewing an urban environment or viewing an indoor environment, neither of which gave the same benefits.
The setup of the experiment is relevant, so…
Matching soundscape accompanied each visual stimulus. The three pain runs had a total duration of 9 min each, during which one environment was accompanied by 16 painful and 16 non-painful shocks. Neuroimaging was used for all parts, and participants were exposed to all environments:
- First, a cue indicating the intensity of the next shock (red = painful, yellow = not painful) was presented for 2000 milliseconds (ms).
- Second, a variable interval of 3500 ± 1500 ms was shown.
- Third, a cue indicating the intensity of the shock was presented for 1000 ms, accompanied by an electrical shock with a duration of 500 ms.
- Fourth, a variable interval of 3500 ± 1500 ms followed.
- Fifth, after each third trial, participants rated the shock’s intensity and unpleasantness at 6000 ms each.
- Sixth, each trial ended with an intertrial interval (ITI) presented for 2000 ms.
They found that as well as the self-assessment reports being as expected (nature scenes reduced subjective experience of pain),
❝In summary, the multivoxel and region of interest analyses converged in showing that pain responses when exposed to nature as compared to urban or indoor stimuli were associated with a decrease in neural processes related to lower-level nociception-related features (NPS, thalamus), as well as in regions of descending modulatory circuitry associated with attentional alterations of pain that also encode sensory-discriminative aspects (S2, pINS).❞
In other words—to the extent that pain can be quantified objectively by neural imaging—the pain was also objectively reduced, much like with a chemical painkiller.
You can read the paper in full, here:
Nature exposure induces analgesic effects by acting on nociception-related neural processing
How to benefit from this
Well, first there is the obvious, “view nature“.
However, note the timescales involved in the testing periods: 2000 milliseconds is two seconds, and that was the intertrial interval used—the equivalent of a washout phase in an interventional trial (but a drug/supplement/diet washout is usually a number of weeks).
The fact that the test periods were a matter of seconds, and the intertrial period was also literally two seconds, this means:
It works quickly, and the effect disappears quickly, too.
In other words: if you want pain relief from nature, the good news is you can get it immediately while viewing nature, and the bad news is that you have to keep viewing nature to continue enjoying the painkilling effect.
So that’s a limitation, but it’s still clearly a very worthy option for a little respite from chronic pain now and again, for example.
Want to learn more?
We’ve written quite a bit about pain management, including:
- Before You Reach For That Tylenol…
- How To Stop Pain Spreading
- How To Dial Down Your Pain
- Managing Chronic Pain (Realistically!)
- Get The Right Help For Your Pain
- The 7 Approaches To Pain Management
- Science-Based Alternative Pain Relief (When Painkillers Aren’t Helping, These Things Might)
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:







