Limitless Expanded Edition – by Jim Kwik
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.
This is a little flashier in presentation than we usually go for here, but the content is actually very good. Indeed, we’ve featured Jim Kwik before, with different, but also good content—in that case, physical exercises that strengthen the brain.
This time, Kwik (interspersed with motivational speeches that you may or may not benefit from, but they are there) offers a step-by-step course in improving various metrics of cognitive ability. His methods were produced by trial and error, and now have been refined and enjoyed by man. If it sounds like a sales gimmick, it is a bit, but the good news is that everything you need to benefit is in the book; it’s not about upselling to a course or “advanced” books or whatnot.
The style is enthusiastically conversational, and instructions when given (which is often) are direct and clear.
Bottom line: one of the most critical abilities a brain can have is the ability to improve itself, so whatever level your various cognitive abilities are at right now, if you apply this book, you will almost certainly improve in one or more areas, which will make it worth the price of the book.
Click here to check out Limitless, and find out what you can do!
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:
-
Change Your Brain, Change Your Life – by Dr. Daniel G. Amen
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.
To what extent can we change our brains, and to what extent are we stuck with what we have?
Dr. Amen tells us that being mindful of both ends of this is critical:
- Neuroplasticity means we can, indeed, change our brains
- We do, however, have fundamental “brain types” based on our neurochemistry and physical brain structure
He argues for the use of brain imaging technology to learn more about the latter… In order to better go about doing what we can with the former.
The book looks at how these different brain types can lead to situations where what works as a treatment for one person can often not work for another. It’s also prescriptive, about what sorts of treatments (and lifestyle adjustments) are more likely to do better for each.
Where the book excels is in giving ideas and pointers for exploration… Things to take to one’s doctor, and—for example—request certain tests, and then what to do with those.
Where the book is a little light is on including hard science in the explanations. The hard science is referred to, but is considered beyond the scope of the book, or perhaps beyond the interest of the reader. That’s unfortunate, as we’d have liked to have seen more of it, rather than taking claims at face value without evidence.
Bottom line: this is distinctly “pop science” in presentation, but can give a lot of great ideas for learning more about our own brains and brain health… And then optimizing such.
Click here to check out “Change Your Brain; Change Your Life” on Amazon today!
Share This Post
-
What Happens To Your Body When You Do Squats Every Day-Not Just For Legs!
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.
Squat Every Day? Yes, Please!
It’s back to basics with this video (below). Passion for Health’s video, “What Happens To Your Body When You Do Squats Every Day-Not Just For Legs!” really brings home how squats aren’t just a one-trick pony for your legs.
The humble bodyweight squat is shown to contribute to everything from bolstering all-around lower body strength to bettering bone density and increasing metabolism.
Indeed, squats are so powerful that we reviewed a whole book that focuses just on the topic of squatting. Other, broader books on exercise also focus on the positive impacts that squatting can make.
A proper squat goes beyond your legs, engaging your core, enhancing joint health, and, some argue, can lead to improved balance and circulation.
(Plus, they’re easy to execute, given they can be done anywhere, without any equipment).
This is probably why Luigi Fontana and Dr Rangan Chatterjee have spoken about the benefits of squatting.
How Should We Start?
The video goes beyond the ‘why’ and delves into the ‘how’, offering step-by-step squatting techniques.
It answers the burning question: should you really be doing squats every day?
(Hint: the answer is most likely “yes”).
Of course, some of us may not be able to squat, and for those, we’ll feature alternatives in a future article.
For beginners, the advice is to start slow, aiming for 10 repetitions. You can gradually increase that count as you feel your muscles strengthen. Experienced gym-goers might push for 20 or more reps, adding variations like jump squats for an extra challenge.
The key takeaway is to listen to your body and ensure rest days for muscle recovery.
At the end of the day, Passion for Health’s video is a treasure trove for squat lovers, from novices to the seasoned, and insists on the importance of form, frequency, and listening to one’s body.
How did you find that video? If you’ve discovered any great videos yourself that you’d like to share with fellow 10almonds readers, then please do email them to us!
Share This Post
-
Is Cutting Calories The Key To Healthy Long Life?
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.
Caloric Restriction with Optimal Nutrition
Yesterday, we asked you “What is your opinion of caloric restriction as a health practice?” and got the above-depicted, below-described spread of responses:
- 48% said “It is a robust, scientifically proven way to live longer and healthier”
- 23% said “It may help us to live longer, but at the cost of enjoying it fully”
- 17% said “It’s a dangerous fad that makes people weak, tired, sick, and unhealthy”
- 12% said “Counting calories is irrelevant to good health; the body compensates”
So… What does the science say?
A note on terms, first
“Caloric restriction” (henceforth: CR), as a term, sees scientific use to mean anything from a 25% reduction to a 50% reduction, compared to metabolic base rate.
This can also be expressed the other way around, “dropping to 60% of the metabolic base rate” (i.e., a 40% reduction).
Here we don’t have the space to go into much depth, so our policy will be: if research papers consider it CR, then so will we.
A quick spoiler, first
The above statements about CR are all to at least some degree True in one way or another.
However, there are very important distinctions, so let’s press on…
CR is a robust, scientifically proven way to live longer and healthier: True or False?
True! This has been well-studied and well-documented. There’s more science for this than we could possibly list here, but here’s a good starting point:
❝Calorie restriction (CR), a nutritional intervention of reduced energy intake but with adequate nutrition, has been shown to extend healthspan and lifespan in rodent and primate models.
Accumulating data from observational and randomized clinical trials indicate that CR in humans results in some of the same metabolic and molecular adaptations that have been shown to improve health and retard the accumulation of molecular damage in animal models of longevity.
In particular, moderate CR in humans ameliorates multiple metabolic and hormonal factors that are implicated in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer, the leading causes of morbidity, disability and mortality❞
Source: Ageing Research Reviews | Calorie restriction in humans: an update
See also: Caloric restriction in humans reveals immunometabolic regulators of health span
We could devote a whole article (or a whole book, really) to this, but the super-short version is that it lowers the metabolic “tax” on the body and allows the body to function better for longer.
CR may help us to live longer, but at the cost of enjoying it fully: True or False?
True or False, contingently, depending on what’s important to you. And that depends on psychology as much as physiology, but it’s worth noting that there is often a selection bias in the research papers; people ill-suited to CR drop out of the studies and are not counted in the final data.
Also, relevant for a lot of our readers, most (human-based) studies recruit people over 18 and under 60. So while it is reasonable to assume the same benefits will be carried over that age, there is not nearly as much data for it.
Studies into CR and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) have been promising, and/but have caveats:
❝In non-obese adults, CR had some positive effects and no negative effects on HRQoL.❞
❝We do not know what degree of CR is needed to achieve improvements in HRQoL, but we do know it requires an extraordinary amount of support.
Therefore, the incentive to offer this intervention to a low-risk, normal or overweight individual is lacking and likely not sustainable in practice.❞
CR a dangerous fad that makes people weak, tired, sick, and unhealthy: True or False?
True if it is undertaken improperly, and/or without sufficient support. Many people will try CR and forget that the idea is to reduce metabolic load while still getting good nutrition, and focus solely on the calorie-counting.
So for example, if a person “saves” their calories for the day to have a night out in a bar where they drink their calories as alcohol, then this is going to be abysmal for their health.
That’s an extreme example, but lesser versions are seen a lot. If you save your calories for a pizza instead of a night of alcoholic drinks, then it’s not quite so woeful, but for example the nutrition-to-calorie ratio of pizza is typically not great. Multiply that by doing it as often as not, and yes, someone’s health is going to be in ruins quite soon.
Counting calories is irrelevant to good health; the body compensates: True or False?
True if by “good health” you mean weight loss—which is rarely, if ever, what we mean by “good health” here at 10almonds (unless we clarify such), but it’s a very common association and indeed, for some people it’s a health goal. You cannot sustainably and healthily lose weight by CR alone, especially if you’re not getting optimal nutrition.
Your body will notice that you are starving, and try to save you by storing as much fat as it can, amongst other measures that will similarly backfire (cortisol running high, energy running low, etc).
For short term weight loss though, yes, it’ll work. At a cost. That we don’t recommend.
❝By itself, decreasing calorie intake will have a limited short-term influence.❞
Source: Reducing Calorie Intake May Not Help You Lose Body Weight
See also…
❝Caloric restriction is a commonly recommended weight-loss method, yet it may result in short-term weight loss and subsequent weight regain, known as “weight cycling”, which has recently been shown to be associated with both poor sleep and worse cardiovascular health❞
Source: Dieting Behavior Characterized by Caloric Restriction
In summary…
Caloric restriction is a well-studied area of health science. We know:
- Practised well, it can extend not only lifespan, but also healthspan
- Practised well, it can improve mood, energy, sexual function, and the other things people fear losing
- Practised badly, it can be ruinous to the health—it is critical to practise caloric restriction with optimal nutrition.
- Practised badly, it can lead to unhealthy weight loss and weight regain
One final note…
If you’ve tried CR and hated it, and you practised it well (e.g., with optimal nutrition), then we recommend just not doing it.
You could also try intermittent fasting instead, for similar potential benefits. If that doesn’t work out either, then don’t do that either!
Sometimes, we’re just weird. It can often be because of a genetic or epigenetic quirk. There are usually workarounds, and/but not everything that’s right for most people will be right for all of us.
Take care!
Share This Post
-
What Your Eyes Say About Your Health (If You Have A Mirror, You Can Do This Now!)
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 an age when doctors are increasingly pressed to get you out of their office quickly and not take the time to do thorough tests, having a good basic knowledge of signs and symptoms of disease has become more important than ever for all of us:
The eyes have it:
Dr. Siobhan Deshauer is back, this time working with Dr. Maria Howard, a Canadian optometrist, who advised behind-the-scenes to ensure the best information about these signs and symptoms and what they tell us:
- Color blindness test: Ishihara color test identifies color blindness; in the version in the video, seeing “74” is normal, “12” indicates red-green color blindness, and no numbers suggest complete color blindness due to genetics or retinal/optic nerve issues.
- Yellow sclera (scleral icterus): yellow sclera indicates high bilirubin from excessive red blood cell breakdown, liver damage, bile duct blockage, or Gilbert syndrome.
- Blue sclera: indicates thin collagen in the sclera, which can be linked to osteogenesis imperfecta, Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and Marfan syndrome.
- Pink eye: caused by infections, autoimmune diseases, or trauma; persistent symptoms or associated pain/vision changes need medical evaluation.
- Physiologic diplopia (double vision): normal test where fingers appear doubled when focusing on different planes; absence may indicate amblyopia.
- Pinhole test (visual acuity): looking through a small pinhole can determine if glasses are needed for clearer vision.
- Nearsighted vs farsighted: nearsightedness risks retinal tears and night vision issues, while farsightedness increases the risk of glaucoma.
- Eye color and health: brown eyes lower cancer risk but higher cataract risk; light eyes higher cancer risk but lower cataract risk; sudden changes may indicate a condition.
- Kayser-Fleischer rings: golden-brown rings around the iris suggest copper buildup from Wilson disease, treatable with chelation therapy.
- Corneal arcus: gray/white ring around the iris indicates cholesterol buildup, normal with aging but concerning in younger individuals, signaling hypercholesterolemia or artery narrowing.
- Limbal rings: dark rings around the iris are generally aesthetic and not health-related.
- Red desaturation test: a difference in red color perception between eyes may indicate optic nerve or retinal issues.
- Eye twitching: often linked to stress, sleep deprivation, or caffeine; persistent twitching or muscle involvement requires medical attention.
- Pupillary reflex: pupil constriction in light; abnormal responses suggest trauma, overdose, or poisoning.
- Cataracts: lens cloudiness due to age, UV exposure, smoking, diabetes, or prednisone; also occurs sometimes in youth due to conditions like diabetes.
- Yellow spots (pinguecula and pterygium): sun damage, wind, and dust exposure cause yellow spots; protect with sunglasses to prevent progression impacting vision.
- Dark spots in the eye: includes freckles, moles (nevi), and melanoma; changes require medical evaluation.
- Hypnotic induction profile: eye roll test assesses susceptibility to hypnosis.
- Floaters: normal clumps in the eye; sudden increases, flashes, or curtain-like effects may signal retinal detachment.
- Retinal detachment: caused by aging-related vitreous shrinkage; treated with lasers, gas bubbles, or retinal buckles.
- Macular degeneration (Amsler grid test): wavy, fuzzy lines or missing vision spots may indicate this condition.
- Giant cell arteritis: no, that’s not a typo: rather it is about blood vessel inflammation that can cause blindness; treated with prednisone, symptoms include headaches and vision changes.
- Near point of convergence: focus test to detect convergence issues common with excessive screen time.
- Blepharitis: eyelid inflammation causing itchiness, burning, or flaky skin; treated with hygiene, antibiotics, or tea tree oil.
- Proptosis (Graves’ disease): bulging eyes due to hyperthyroidism; treatable with medications, radiation, or surgery.
- Ptosis (droopy eyelids): indicates myasthenia gravis, temporarily improved with the ice pack test.
- Night vision issues: caused by retinal problems or high myopia, not typically vitamin A deficiency in developed countries.
- Dry eyes: caused by screen time, smoking, medications, or autoimmune diseases; managed with lubricating drops, reduced screen time, and adjustments.
- Watery eyes: caused by irritation or blocked tear ducts; treated with lubricating drops or surgery.
- Retinoblastoma: rare childhood cancer detectable through flash photography showing one white pupil; early detection enables treatment.
For more on all of these plus visual demonstrations, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like:
What Your Hands Can Tell You About Your Health
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:
-
HRT: Bioidentical vs Animal
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.
HRT: A Tale Of Two Approaches
In yesterday’s newsletter, we asked you for your assessment of menopausal hormone replacement therapy (HRT).
- A little over a third said “It can be medically beneficial, but has some minor drawbacks”
- A little under a third said “It helps, but at the cost of increased cancer risk; not worth it”
- Almost as many said “It’s a wondrous cure-all that makes you happier, healthier, and smell nice too”
- Four said “It is a dangerous scam and a sham; “au naturel” is the way to go”
So what does the science say?
Which HRT?
One subscriber who voted for “It’s a wondrous cure-all that makes you healthier, happier, and smell nice too” wrote to add:
❝My answer is based on biodentical hormone replacement therapy. Your survey did not specify.❞
And that’s an important distinction! We did indeed mean bioidentical HRT, because, being completely honest here, this European writer had no idea that Premarin etc were still in such wide circulation in the US.
So to quickly clear up any confusion:
- Bioidentical hormones: these are (as the name suggests) identical on a molecular level to the kind produced by humans.
- Conjugated Equine Estrogens: such as Premarin, come from animals. Indeed, the name “Premarin” comes from “pregnant mare urine”, the substance used to make it.
There are also hormone analogs, such as medroxyprogesterone acetate, which is a progestin and not the same thing as progesterone. Hormone analogs such as the aforementioned MPA are again, a predominantly-American thing—though they did test it first in third-world countries, after testing it on animals and finding it gave them various kinds of cancer (breast, cervical, ovarian, uterine).
A quick jumping-off point if you’re interested in that:
Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate and the risk of breast and gynecologic cancer
this is about its use as a contraceptive (so, much lower doses needed), but it is the same thing sometimes given in the US as part of menopausal HRT. You will note that the date on that research is 1996; DMPA is not exactly cutting-edge and was first widely used in the 1950s.
Similarly, CEEs (like Premarin) have been used since the 1930s, while estradiol (bioidentical estrogen) has been in use since the 1970s.
In short: we recommend being wary of those older kinds and mostly won’t be talking about them here.
Bioidentical hormones are safer: True or False?
True! This is an open-and-shut case:
❝Physiological data and clinical outcomes demonstrate that bioidentical hormones are associated with lower risks, including the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease, and are more efficacious than their synthetic and animal-derived counterparts.
Until evidence is found to the contrary, bioidentical hormones remain the preferred method of HRT. ❞
Further research since that review has further backed up its findings.
Source: Are Bioidentical Hormones Safer or More Efficacious than Other Commonly Used Versions in HRT?
So simply, if you’re going on HRT (estrogen and/or progesterone), you might want to check it’s the bioidentical kind.
HRT can increase the risk of breast cancer: True or False?
Contingently True, but for most people, there is no significant increase in risk.
First: again, we’re talking bioidentical hormones, and in this case, estradiol. Older animal-derived attempts had much higher risks with much lesser efficaciousness.
There have been so many studies on this (alas, none that have been publicised enough to undo the bad PR in the wake of old-fashioned HRT from before the 70s), but here’s a systematic review that highlights some very important things:
❝Estradiol-only therapy carries no risk for breast cancer, while the breast cancer risk varies according to the type of progestogen.
Estradiol therapy combined with medroxyprogesterone, norethisterone and levonorgestrel related to an increased risk of breast cancer, estradiol therapy combined with dydrogesterone and progesterone carries no risk❞
In fewer words:
- Estradiol by itself: no increased risk of breast cancer
- Estradiol with MDPA or other progestogens that aren’t really progesterone: increased risk of breast cancer
- Estradiol with actual progesterone: back to no increased risk of breast cancer
So again, you might want to make sure you are getting actual bioidentical hormones, and not something else!
However! If you are aware that you already have an increased risk of breast cancer (e.g. family history, you’ve had it before, you know you have certain genes for it, etc), then you should certainly discuss that with your doctor, because your personal circumstances may be different:
❝Tailored HRT may be used without strong evidence of a deleterious effect after ovarian cancer, endometrial cancer, most other gynecological cancers, bowel cancer, melanoma, a family history of breast cancer, benign breast disease, in carriers of BRACA mutations, after breast cancer if adjuvant therapy is not being used, past thromboembolism, varicose veins, fibroids and past endometriosis.
Relative contraindications are existing cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease and breast cancer being treated with adjuvant therapies❞
Source: HRT in difficult circumstances: are there any absolute contraindications?
HRT makes you happier, healthier, and smell nice too: True or False?
Contingently True, assuming you do want its effects, which generally means the restoration of much of the youthful vitality you enjoyed pre-menopause.
The “and smell nice too” was partly rhetorical, but also partly literal: our scent is largely informed by our hormones, and higher estrogen results in a sweeter scent; lower estrogen results in a more bitter scent. Not generally considered an important health matter, but it’s a thing, so hey.
More often, people take menopausal HRT for more energy, stronger bones (reduced osteoporosis risk), healthier heart (reduced CVD risk), improved sexual health, better mood, healthier skin and hair, and general avoidance of menopause symptoms:
Read more: Skin, hair and beyond: the impact of menopause
We’d need another whole main feature to discuss all the benefits properly; today we’re just mythbusting.
HRT does have some drawbacks: True or False?
True, and/but how serious they are (beyond the aforementioned consideration in the case of an already-increased risk of breast cancer) is a matter of opinion.
For example, it is common to get a reprise of monthly cramps and/or mood swings, depending on how one is taking the HRT and other factors (e.g. your own personal physiology and genetic predispositions). For most people, these will even out over time.
It’s also even common to get a reprise of (much slighter than before) monthly bleeding, unless you have for example had a hysterectomy (no uterus = no bleeding). Again, this will usually settle down in a matter of months.
If you experience anything more alarming than that, then indeed check with your doctor.
HRT is a dangerous scam and sham: True or False?
False, simply. As described above, for most people they’re quite safe. Again, talking bioidentical hormones.
The other kind are in the most neutral sense a sham (i.e. they are literally sham hormones), though they’re not without their merits and for many people they may be better than nothing.
As for being a scam, biodentical hormones are widely prescribed in the many countries that have universal healthcare and/or a single-payer healthcare system, where there would be no profit motive (and considerable cost) in doing so.
They’re prescribed because they are effective and thus reduce healthcare spending in other areas (such as treating osteoporosis or CVD after the fact) and improve Health Related Quality of Life, and by extension, health-adjusted life-years, which is one of the top-used metrics for such systems.
See for example:
Our apologies, gentlemen
We wanted to also talk about testosterone therapy for the andropause, but we’ve run out of room today (because of covering the important distinction of bioidentical vs old-fashioned HRT)!
To make it up to you, we’ll do a full main feature on it (it’s an interesting topic) in the near future, so watch this space
Ladies, we’ll also at some point cover the pros and cons of different means of administration, e.g. pills, transdermal gel, injections, patches, pessaries, etc—which often have big differences.
That’ll be in a while though, because we try to vary our topics, so we can’t talk about menopausal HRT all the time, fascinating and important a topic it is.
Meanwhile… take care, all!
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 New Menopause – by Dr. Mary Claire Haver
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 author is most famous for “The Galveston Diet”, which book is astonishingly similar in its content, chapters, format, etc to Nikki Williams’ “It’s Not You, It’s Your Hormones” which came out a few years previously but didn’t get the same marketing.
Nonetheless, this time Dr. Haver has something new to add, and we think it’s worth a read.
The general theme of this book is a comprehensive overview of the menopause, experientially (subjective to the person going through it) and empirically (by science), from start to finish and beyond. This book’s more about human physiology, and less about diet than the previous.
Dr. Haver also discusses in-depth how estrogen is thought of as a sex hormone (and it is), to the point that people consider it perhaps expendable, and forget (or are simply unaware) that we have estrogen receptors throughout our bodies and estrogen is vital for maintaining many other bodily functions, including your heart, cognitive function, bone integrity, blood sugar balance, and more.
(in case you’re wondering “why don’t men fall to bits, then?”, don’t worry, their testosterone does these things for them. Testosterone is orders of magnitude less potent than estrogen, mg for mg, so they need a lot more of it, but under good conditions they produce plenty so it’s fine)
But, the amount of testosterone available to peri/postmenopausal women is simply not enough to do that job (and it’d also result in a transition of secondary sex characteristics, which for most people would be very unwanted), so, something else needs to be done.
Dr. Haver also discusses in detail the benefits and risks of HRT and how to get/manage them, respectively, with the latest up-to-date research (at time of going to print; the book was published in April 2024).
Bottom line: if you want to know what’s going on with your peri- or post-menopausal body and how it could be better (or if you want to know what’s going on with someone else approaching/experiencing menopause), then this is a top-tier book.
Click here to check out The New Menopause, and know what’s going on and what to do about it!
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:
