
Just one man survived the Air India crash. What’s it like to survive a mass disaster?
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.
Viswashkumar Ramesh, a British citizen returning from a trip to India, has been confirmed as the only survivor of Thursday’s deadly Air India crash.
“I don’t know how I am alive,” Ramesh told family, according to his brother Nayan, in a video call moments after emerging from the wreckage. Another brother Ajay, seated elswhere on the plane, was killed.
The Boeing 787-7 Dreamliner crashed into a medical college less than a minute after taking off in the city of Ahmedabad, killing the other 229 passengers and 12 crew. At least five people were killed on the ground.
Surviving a mass disaster of this kind may be hailed as a kind of “miracle”. But what is it like to survive – especially as the only one?
Surviving a disaster
Past research has shown disaster survivors may experience an intense range of emotions, from grief and anxiety to feelings of loss and uncertainty.
These are common reactions to an extraordinary situation.
Some people may develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and have difficulty adjusting to a new reality after bearing witness to immense loss. They may also be dealing with physical recovery from injuries sustained in the disaster.
Most people recover after disasters by drawing on their own strengths and the support of others. Recovery rates are high: generally less than one in ten of those affected by disasters develop chronic, long-term problems.
However, being a sole survivor of a mass casualty may have its own complex psychological challenges.
Survivor’s guilt
Survivors can experience guilt they lived when others died.
My friend, Gill Hicks, spoke to me for this article about the ongoing guilt she still feels, years after surviving the 2005 bombings of the London underground.
Lying trapped in a smoke-filled train carriage, she was the last living person to be rescued after the attack. Gill lost both her legs.
Yet she still wonders, “Why me? Why did I get to go home, when so many others didn’t?”
In the case of a sole survivor, this guilt may be particularly acute. However, research addressing the impact of sole survivorship is limited. Most research that looks at the psychological impact of disaster focuses on the impact of disasters more broadly.
Those interviewed for a 2013 documentary about surviving large plane crashes, Sole Survivor, express complex feelings – wanting to share their stories, but fearing being judged by others.
Being the lone survivor can be a heavy burden.
“I didn’t think I was worthy of the gift of being alive,” George Lamson Jr. told the documentary, after surviving a 1985 plane crash in Nevada that killed all others on board.
Looking for meaning
People who survive a disaster may also be under pressure to explain what happened and relive the trauma for the benefit of others.
Vishwashkumar Ramesh was filmed and interviewed by media in the minutes and hours following the Air India crash. But as he told his brother: “I have no idea how I exited the plane”.
It can be common for survivors themselves to be plagued by unanswerable questions. Did they live for a reason? Why did they live, when so many others died?
These kinds of unaswerable questions reflect our natural inclination to look for meaning in experiences, and to have our life stories make sense.
For some people, sharing a traumatic experience with others who’ve been through it or something similar can be a beneficial part of the recovery process, helping to process emotions and regain some agency and control.
However, this may not always be possible for sole survivors, potentially compounding feelings of guilt and isolation.
Coping with survivor guilt
Survivor guilt can be an expression of grief and loss.
Studies indicate guilt is notably widespread among individuals who have experienced traumatic events, and it is associated with heightened psychopathological symptoms (such as severe anxiety, insomnia or flashbacks) and thoughts of suicide.
Taking time to process the traumatic event can help survivors cope, and seeking support from friends, family and community or faith leaders can help an individual work through difficult feelings.
My friend Gill says the anxiety rises as the anniversary of the disaster approaches each year. Trauma reminders such as anniversaries are different to unexpected trauma triggers, but can still cause distress.
Media attention around collectively experienced dates can also amplify trauma-related distress, contributing to a cycle of media consumption and increased worry about future events.
On the 7th of July each year, Gill holds a private remembrance ritual. This allows her to express her grief and sense of loss, and to honour those who did not survive. These types of rituals can be a valuable tool in processing feelings of grief and guilt, offering a sense of control and meaning and facilitating the expression and acceptance of loss.
But lingering guilt and anxiety – especially when it interferes with day-to-day life – should not be ignored. Ongoing survivor guilt is associated with significantly higher levels of post-traumatic symptoms.
Survivors may need support from psychologists or mental health professionals in the short and long term.
Erin Smith, Associate Professor and Discipline Lead (Paramedicine), La Trobe 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!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Is TikTok right? Can adding a teaspoon of cinnamon to your coffee help you burn fat?
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.
Cinnamon has been long used around the world in both sweet and savoury dishes and drinks.
But a new TikTok trend claims adding a teaspoon of cinnamon to your daily coffee (and some cocoa to make it more palatable) for one week can help you burn fat. Is there any truth to this?
Evannovostro/Shutterstock Not all cinnamon is the same
There are two types of cinnamon, both of which come from grinding the bark of the cinnamomum tree and may include several naturally occurring active ingredients.
Cassia cinnamon is the most common type available in grocery stores. It has a bitter taste and contains higher levels of one of the active ingredient cinnamaldehyde, a compound that gives cinnamon its flavour and odour. About 95% of cassia cinnamon is cinnamaldehyde.
The other is Ceylon cinnamon, which tastes sweeter. It contains about 50-60% cinnamaldehyde.
Does cinnamon burn fat? What does the research say?
A review of 35 studies examined whether consuming cinnamon could affect waist circumference, which is linked to increased body fat levels. It found cinnamon doses below 1.5 grams per day (around half a teaspoon) decreased waist circumference by 1.68cm. However, consuming more than 1.5g/day did not have a significant effect.
A meta-analysis of 21 clinical trials with 1,480 total participants found cinnamon also reduced body mass index (BMI) by 0.40kg/m² and body weight by 0.92kg. But it did not change the participants’ composition of fat or lean mass.
Another umbrella review, which included all the meta-analyses, found a small effect of cinnamon on weight loss. Participants lost an average of 0.67kg and reduced their BMI by 0.45kg/m².
The effect appears small. Radu Sebastian/Shutterstock So overall, the weight loss we see from these high-quality studies is very small, ranging anywhere from two to six months and mostly with no change in body composition.
The studies included people with different diseases, and most were from the Middle East and/or the Indian subcontinent. So we can’t be certain we would see this effect in people with other health profiles and in other countries. They were also conducted over different lengths of time from two to six months.
The supplements were different, depending on the study. Some had the active ingredient extracted from cinnamon, others used cinnamon powder. Doses varied from 0.36g to 10g per day.
They also used the two different types of cinnamon – but none of the studies used cinnamon from the grocery store.
How could cinnamon result in small amounts of weight loss?
There are several possible mechanisms.
It appears to allow blood glucose (sugar) to enter the body’s cells more quickly. This lowers blood glucose levels and can make insulin work more effectively.
It also seems to improve the way we break down fat when we need it for energy.
Finally, it may make us feel fuller for longer by slowing down how quickly the food is released from our stomach into the small intestine.
What are the risks?
Cinnamon is generally regarded as safe when used as a spice in cooking and food.
However, in recent months the United States and Australia have issued health alerts about the level of lead and other heavy metals in some cinnamon preparations.
Lead enters as a contaminant during growth (from the environment) and in harvesting. In some cases, it has been suggested there may have been intentional contamination.
Some people can have side effects from cinnamon, including gastrointestinal pain and allergic reactions.
One of the active ingredients, coumarin, can be toxic for some people’s livers. This has prompted the European Food Authority to set a limit of 0.1mg/kg of body weight.
Cassia cinnamon contains up to 1% of coumarin, and the Ceylon variety contains much less, 0.004%. So for people weighing above 60kg, 2 teaspoons (6g) of cassia cinnamon would bring them over the safe limit.
What about the coffee and cocoa?
Many people may think coffee can also help us lose weight. However there isn’t good evidence to support this yet.
An observational study found drinking one cup of regular coffee was linked to a reduction in weight that is gained over four years, but by a very small amount: an average of 0.12kg.
Good-quality cocoa and dark chocolate have also been shown to reduce weight. But again, the weight loss was small (between 0.2 and 0.4kg) and only after consuming it for four to eight weeks.
So what does this all mean?
Using cinnamon may have a very small effect on weight, but it’s unlikely to deliver meaningful weight loss without other lifestyle adjustments.
We also need to remember these trials used products that differ from the cinnamon we buy in the shops. How we store and how long we keep cinnamon might also impact or degrade the active ingredients.
And consuming more isn’t going to provide additional benefit. In fact, it could increase your risk of side effects.
So if you enjoy the taste of cinnamon in your coffee, continue to add it, but given its strong taste, you’re likely to only want to add a little.
And no matter how much we’d like this to be true, we certainly won’t gain any fat-loss benefits by consuming cinnamon on doughnuts or in buns, due to their high kilojoule count.
If you want to lose weight, there are evidence-backed approaches that won’t spoil your morning coffee.
Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
‘Active recovery’ after exercise is supposed to improve performance – but does it really work?
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.
Imagine you have just finished a workout. Your legs are like jelly, your lungs are burning and you just want to collapse on the couch.
But instead, you pick yourself up and go for a brisk walk.
While this might seem counterintuitive, doing some light activity after an intense workout – known as “active recovery” – has been suggested to reduce soreness and speed up recovery after exercise.
But does it work or is it just another fitness myth?
gpointstudio/Shutterstock What is active recovery?
Active recovery simply describes doing some low-intensity physical activity after a strenuous bout of exercise.
This is commonly achieved through low-intensity cardio, such as walking or cycling, but can also consist of low-intensity stretching, or even bodyweight exercises such as squats and lunges.
The key thing is making sure the intensity is light or moderate, without moving into the “vigorous” range.
As a general rule, if you can maintain a conversation while you’re exercising, you are working at a light-to-moderate intensity.
Some people consider doing an easy training session on their “rest days” as a form of active recovery. However, this has not really been researched. So we will be focusing on the more traditional form of active recovery in this article, where it is performed straight after exercise.
What does active recovery do?
Active recovery helps speed up the removal of waste products, such as lactate and hydrogen, after exercise. These waste products are moved from the muscles into the blood, before being broken down and used for energy, or simply excreted.
This is thought to be one of the ways it promotes recovery.
In some instances active recovery has been shown to reduce muscle soreness in the days following exercise. This may lead to a faster return to peak performance in some physical capabilities such as jump height.
Active recovery can involve stretching. fatir29/Shutterstock But, active recovery does not appear to reduce post-exercise inflammation. While this may sound like a bad thing, it’s not.
Post-exercise inflammation can promote increases in strength and fitness after exercise. And so when it’s reduced (say, by using ice baths after exercise) this can lead to smaller training improvements than would be seen otherwise.
This means active recovery can be used regularly after exercise without the risk of affecting the benefits of the main exercise session.
There’s evidence to the contrary too
Not all research on active recovery is positive.
Several studies indicate it’s no better than simply lying on the couch when it comes to reducing muscle soreness and improving performance after exercise.
In fact, there’s more research suggesting active recovery doesn’t have an effect than research showing it does have an effect.
While there could be several reasons for this, two stand out.
First, the way in which active recovery is applied in the research varies as lot. It’s likely there is a sweet spot in terms of how long active recovery should last to maximise its benefits (more on this later).
Second, it’s likely the benefits of active recovery are trivial to small. As such, they won’t always be considered “significant” in the scientific literature, despite offering potentially meaningful benefits at an individual level. In sport science, studies often have small sample sizes, which can make it hard to see small effects.
But there doesn’t seem to be any research suggesting active recovery is less effective than doing nothing, so at worst it certainly won’t cause any harm.
When is active recovery useful?
Active recovery appears useful if you need to perform multiple bouts of exercise within a short time frame. For example, if you were in a tournament and had 10–20 minutes between games, then a quick active recovery would be better than doing nothing.
Active recovery might also be a useful strategy if you have to perform exercise again within 24 hours after intense activity.
For example, if you are someone who plays sport and you need to play games on back-to-back days, doing some low-intensity active recovery after each game might help reduce soreness and improve performance on subsequent days.
Similarly, if you are training for an event like a marathon and you have a training session the day after a particularly long or intense run, then active recovery might get you better prepared for your next training session.
Conversely, if you have just completed a low-to-moderate intensity bout of exercise, it’s unlikely active recovery will offer the same benefits. And if you will get more than 24 hours of rest between exercise sessions, active recovery is unlikely to do much because this will probably be long enough for your body to recover naturally anyway.
Active recovery may be useful for people with back-to-back sporting commitments. Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock How to get the most out of active recovery
The good news is you don’t have to do a lot of active recovery to see a benefit.
A systematic review looking at the effectiveness of active recovery across 26 studies found 6–10 minutes of exercise was the sweet spot when it came to enhancing recovery.
Interestingly, the intensity of exercise didn’t seem to matter. If it was within this time frame, it had a positive effect.
So it makes sense to make your active recovery easy (because why would you make it hard if you don’t have to?) by keeping it in the light-to-moderate intensity range.
However, don’t expect active recovery to be a complete game changer. The research would suggest the benefits are likely to be small at best.
Hunter Bennett, Lecturer in Exercise Science, University of South Australia and Lewis Ingram, Lecturer in Physiotherapy, University of South Australia
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
How To Increase Your Dementia Risk By 17%
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.
First, let us be completely honest: the headline is a little misleading, because actually you can use this hack to increase your dementia risk much more than 17% 🙂
But the 17% figure did come from somewhere, and we will explain:
Every breath you take?
Researchers (Dr. Clare Rogowski et al.) investigated the effect of air pollution on dementia incidence, and found:
In few words: chronic exposure to air pollution significantly increases the risk of dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease and especially vascular dementia.
In more detail:
- For every 10 μg/m³ increase of PM2.5 (tiny particles from traffic, industry, wood burning, and construction), dementia risk rises by 17%.
- For every 10 μg/m³ increase of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) (mainly from fossil fuel combustion and vehicle exhausts) dementia risk rises by 3%.
So, the 17% figure is tied to a 10 μg/m³ increase in PM2.5, whereas in fact, there is (for practical purposes) no cap on how high the PM2.5 levels can go. If, for example, you get a 100 μg/m³ increase, that’s a 175% dementia risk increase.
Why this happens: it’s not known for 100% sure, but it is currently believed that the pollutants trigger brain inflammation and oxidative stress directly or via circulation, damaging cells, proteins, and DNA.
You can read the paper here: Long-term air pollution exposure and incident dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis ← this is a very good study; it’s a systematic review and meta-analysis of 51 studies covering nearly 30 million people (34 studies in the meta-analysis) from North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia
What this means for you, in practical terms
Statistically, you (dear reader) probably do not spend your days directing traffic on a busy intersection, you are probably not a chimney sweep, and nor do you probably work in heavy industry. So… Does this matter to you, really?
And yes, yes it does.
For example, approximately half of 10almonds readers are currently breathing air with dangerously high pollution levels. We can say that with reasonable confidence, as most of our readers live in the US, and about half of the population of the US live in places with pollution levels higher than those deemed safe by the government, and let’s face it, governments usually look to set those levels higher than would be ideal, because they don’t want to look like they’re failing, so badly and on such a huge scale, to meet their own targets.
The worst places, per a recent report, were:
- Bakersfield-Delano, Calif.
- Visalia, Calif.
- Fresno-Hanford-Corcoran, Calif.
- Eugene-Springfield, Ore.
- Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif.
- Detroit-Warren-Ann Arbor, Mich.
- San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, Calif.
- Houston-Pasadena, Texas
- Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Ohio
- Fairbanks-College, Ark.
…but as we say, nearly half the US population lives in somewhere with “unsafe” levels.
You can read more about that, here: Why Your Air Is Probably Worse Quality Than You Think
And, about those “safe” levels? Air considered “safe” per existing environmental standards, isn’t
So, the safest readers will be those who live in rural places, but rural places that also have no major industry (agriculture is a major industry).
Well, that sucks, but what can we do about it?
Aside from the “concerned citizen” angle (i.e. whatever may be done to encourage a reduction of pollution), on an individual level the options are few, but meaningful.
One option, a good one, is wearing a mask in places where you know there will be highest levels of pollution (city centers, for example, or other places with more fumes), whether or not you can detect it (i.e. seeing/smelling it in the air), you know it is there.
You might be wondering whether N95 masks (the most-recommend kind vs COVID) will help here, when it comes to the sizes of the particles in question.
The answer is that PM2.5 particles are (by definition) around 2.5 microns, and N95 masks do, by definition, filter 95% of air pollutants of that size (including PM2.5 particles, against which they are specifically tested) or larger.
If you want more protection you can get N99, N100, or P100, but many find breathing in those less comfortable, so there’s a trade-off in that regard.
The other option, and better for when you are at home, is getting an air purifier.
This is important, because: You May Have More Air Pollution In Your Home Than In The Street
You can also learn more about that, here: What’s Lurking In Your Household Air?
At time of writing, here’s an example product on Amazon that currently has 80% off and 4.9 stars average review 😎
…but of course, feel free to shop around; you might find a device you prefer.
Take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Is black mould really as bad for us as we think? A toxicologist explains
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.
Mould in houses is unsightly and may cause unpleasant odours. More important though, mould has been linked to a range of health effects – especially triggering asthma.
However, is mould exposure linked to a serious lung disease in children, unrelated to asthma? As we’ll see, this link may not be real, or if it is, it’s so rare to not be a meaningful risk. Yet we still hear mould in damp homes described as “toxic”.
Indeed, mouldy homes can harm people’s health, but not necessarily how you might think.
Peeradontax/Shutterstock What is mould?
Mould is the general term for a variety of fungi. The mould that people have focused on in damp homes is “black mould”. This forms unsightly black patches on walls and other parts of damp-affected buildings.
Black mould is not a single fungus. But when people talk about black mould, they generally mean the fungus Stachybotrys chartarum or S. chartarum for short. It’s one of experts’ top ten feared fungi.
The focus on this species comes from a report in the 1990s on cases of haemorrhagic lung disease in a number of infants. This is a rare disease where blood leaks into the lungs, and can be fatal. The report suggested chemicals known as mycotoxins associated with this species of fungus were responsible for the outbreak.
What are mycotoxins?
A variety of fungi produce mycotoxins to defend themselves, among other reasons.
Hundreds of different chemicals are listed as myocytoxins. These include ones in poisonous mushrooms, and ones associated with the soil fungi Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus.
The fungus typically associated with black mould S. chartarum can produce several mycotoxins. These include roridin, which inhibits protein synthesis in humans and animals, and satratoxins, which have numerous toxic effects including bleeding in the lungs.
While the satratoxins, in particular, were mentioned in the report from the 90s in children, there are some problems when we look at the evidence.
The amount of mycotoxins S. chartarum makes can vary considerably. Even if significant amounts of mycotoxin are present, getting them into the body in the required amount to cause damage is another thing.
Inhaling spores in contaminated (mouldy) homes is the most probable way mycotoxins enter the body. For instance, we know mycotoxins can be found in S. chartarum spores. We also know direct injection of high concentrations of mycotoxin-bearing spores directly in the noses of mice can cause some lung bleeding.
Stachybotrys chartarum mycotoxins have been blamed for lung issues after exposure to black mould. Kateryna Kon/Shutterstock But just because inhaling spores is the probable route of contamination doesn’t mean this is very likely.
That’s because S. chartarum doesn’t release a lot of spores. Its spores are typically embedded in a slimy mass and it rarely produces the spore densities needed to replicate the animal studies.
The original reports suggesting the US infants who were diagnosed with haemorrhagic lung disease were exposed to toxic levels of mycotoxins were also flawed.
Among other issues, the concentrations of mould spores was calculated incorrectly. Subsequent correction for these issues resulted in the association between S. chartarum and this disease cluster basically disappearing.
The American Academy of Asthma Allergy and Immunology states while there is a clear, well-established relationship between damp indoor spaces and detrimental health effects, there is no good evidence black mould mycotoxins are involved.
But mould can cause allergies
Moulds can affect human health in ways unrelated to mycotoxins, typically through allergic reactions. Moulds including black moulds can trigger or worsen asthma attacks in people with mould allergies.
Some rarer but severe reactions can include allergic fungal sinusitis, allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis and rarer still, hypersensitivity pneumonitis.
These can typically be controlled by removing the mould (or removing the person from the source of mould).
People with impaired immune systems (such as people taking immune-suppressant medications) may also be prone to mould infections.
In a nutshell
There is sufficient evidence that household mould is associated with respiratory issues attributable to their allergic effects.
However, there is no strong evidence mycotoxins from household mould – and in particular black mould – are associated with substantial health issues.
Ian Musgrave, Senior lecturer in Pharmacology, University of Adelaide
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:
-
Metabolic Health Roadmap – by Brenda Wollenberg
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 term “roadmap” is often used in informative books, but in this case, Wollenberg (a nutritionist with decades of experience) really does deliver what can very reasonably be described as a roadmap:
She provides chapters in the form of legs of a journey [to better metabolic health], and those legs are broadly divided into an “information center” to deliver new information, a “rest stop” for reflection, “roadwork” to guide the reader through implementing the information we just learned, in a practical fashion, and finally “traveller assistance” to give additional support / resources, as well as any potential troubleshooting, etc.
The information and guidance within are all based on very good science; a lot is what you will have read already about blood sugar management (generally the lynchpin of metabolic health in general), but there’s also a lot about leveraging epigenetics for our benefit, rather than being sabotaged by such.
There’s a little guidance that falls outside of nutrition (sleep, exercise, etc), but for the most part, Wollenberg stays within her own field of expertise, nutrition.
The style is idiosyncratic; it’s very clear that her goal is providing the promised roadmap, and not living up to any editor’s wish or publisher’s hope of living up to industry standard norms of book formatting. However, this pays off, because her delivery is clear and helpful while remaining personable and yet still bringing just as much actual science, and this makes for a very pleasant and informative read.
Bottom line: if you’d like to improve your metabolic health, as well as get held-by-the-hand through your health-improvement journey by a charming guide, this is very much the book for you!
Click here to check out the Metabolic Health Roadmap, and start taking steps!
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 Art and Science of Connection – by Kasley Killam, MPH
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
We can eat well, exercise well, and even sleep well, and we’ll still have a +53% increased all-cause mortality if we lack social connection—even if we technically have support and access to social resources, just not the real human connection itself. And as we get older, it gets increasingly easy to find ourselves isolated.
The author is a social scientist by profession, and it shows. None of what she shares in the book is wishy-washy; it has abundant scientific references coming thick and fast, and a great deal of clarity with regard to terms, something often not found in books of this genre that lean more towards the art than the science.
On which note, for the reader who may be thinking “I am indeed quite alone”, she also offers proven techniques for remedying that; not in the way that many books use the word “proven” to mean “we got some testimonials”, but rather, proven in the sense of “we did science to it and based on these 17 large population-based retrospective cohort studies, we can say with 99% confidence that this is an effective tool to mediate improved social bonds and social health outcomes”.
To this end, it’s a very practical book also, and should bestow upon any isolated reader a sense of confidence that in fact, things can be better. A particular strength is that it also looks at many different scenarios, so for the “what if I…” people with clear reasons why social connection is not abundantly available, yes, she has such cases covered too.
Bottom line: if you’d like to live more healthily for longer, social health is an underrated and oft-forgotten way of greatly increasing those things, by science.
Click here to check out The Art And Science Of Social Connection, and get connected!
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:














