Loss, Trauma, and Resilience – by Dr. Pauline Boss

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.

Most books about bereavement are focused on grieving healthily and then moving on healthily. And, while it may be said “everyone’s grief is on their own timescale”… society’s expectation is often quite fixed:

“Time will heal”, they say.

But what if it doesn’t? What happens when that’s not possible?

Ambiguous loss occurs when someone is on the one hand “gone”, but on the other hand, not necessarily.

This can be:

  • Someone was lost in a way that didn’t leave a body to 100% confirm it
    • (e.g. disaster, terrorism, war, murder, missing persons)
  • Someone remains physically present but in some ways already “gone”
    • (e.g. Alzheimer’s disease or other dementia, brain injury, coma)

These things stop us continuing as normal, and/but also stop us from moving on as normal.

When either kind of moving forward is made impossible, everything gets frozen in place. How does one deal with that?

Dr. Boss wrote this book for therapists, but its content is equally useful for anyone struggling with ambiguous loss—or who has a loved one who is, in turn, struggling with that.

The book looks at the impact of ambiguous loss on continuing life, and how to navigate that:

  • How to be resilient, in the sense of when life tries to break you, to have ways to bend instead.
  • How to live with the cognitive dissonance of a loved one who is a sort of “Schrödinger’s person”.
  • How, and this is sometimes the biggest one, to manage ambiguous loss in a society that often pushes toward: “it’s been x period of time, come on, get over it now, back to normal”

Will this book heal your heart and resolve your grief? No, it won’t. But what it can do is give a roadmap for nonetheless thriving in life, while gently holding onto whatever we need to along the way.

Click here to check out “Ambiguous loss, Trauma, and Resilience” on Amazon—it can really help

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:

  • Macadamias vs Hazelnuts – 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 macadamias to hazelnuts, we picked the hazelnuts.

    Why?

    In terms of macros first, hazelnuts have 2x the protein, and slightly more carbs and fiber. We call this a win for hazelnuts.

    When it comes to vitamins, macadamias have more of vitamins B1, B2, and B3, while hazelnuts have more of vitamins A, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, and E. Notably, 28x more vitamin E, so that’s not inconsiderable. Also 10x the vitamin B9, and 5x the vitamin C, and the rest, more modest wins. In any case, clearly a strong win for hazelnuts here.

    In the category of minerals, macadamias have more selenium, while hazelnuts have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc. Another clear win for hazelnuts.

    In short, hazelnuts win in all categories. However, by all means enjoy either or both (unless you have a nut allergy, in which case, obviously don’t).

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • The Brain’s Way of Healing – by Dr. Norman Doidge

    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, what this book isn’t: any sort of wishy-washy “think yourself better” fluff, and nor is it a “tapping into your Universal Divine Essence” thing.

    In contrast, Dr. Norman Doidge sticks with science, and the only “vibrational frequencies” involved are the sort that come from an MRI machine or similar.

    The author makes bold claims of the potential for leveraging neuroplasticity to heal many chronic diseases. All of them are neurological in whole or in part, ranging from chronic pain to Parkinson’s.

    How well are these claims backed up, you ask?

    The book makes heavy use of case studies. In science, case studies rarely prove anything, so much as indicate a potential proof of principle. Clinical trials are what’s needed to become more certain, and for Dr. Doidge’s claims, these are so far sadly lacking, or as yet inconclusive.

    Where the book’s strengths lie is in describing exactly what is done, and how, to effect each recovery. Specific exercises to do, and explanations of the mechanism of action. To that end, it makes them very repeatable for any would-be “citizen scientist” who wishes to try (in the cases that they don’t require special equipment).

    Bottom line: this book would be more reassuring if its putative techniques had enjoyed more clinical studies… But in the meantime, it’s a fair collection of promising therapeutic approaches for a number of neurological disorders.

    Click here to check out The Brain’s Way of Healing, and learn more!

    Share This Post

  • It Didn’t Start with You – by Mark Wolynn

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

    There is a trend in psychology to “blame the parents” for “childhood trauma” that can result in problems later in life. Sometimes fairly, sometimes not. This book’s mostly not about that.

    It does touch on our own childhood trauma, if applicable. But mostly, it’s about epigenetic trauma inheritance. In other words, not just trauma that’s passed on in terms of “the cycle of abuse”, but trauma that’s passed on in terms of “this generation experienced trauma x, developed trauma response y, encoded it epigenetically, and passed it on to their offspring”.

    So, how does one heal from a trauma one never directly experienced, and just inherited the response to it? That’s what most of this book is about, after establishing how epigenetic trauma inheritance works.

    The author, a therapist, provides practical advice for how to do the things that can be done to rewrite the epigenetic code we inherited. Better late than never!

    Bottom line: it is well-established that trauma is inheritable. But unlike one’s eye color or the ability to smell asparagus metabolites in urine, we can rewrite epigenetic things, to a degree. This book explains how.

    Click here to check out It Didn’t Start With You, and put things to rest!

    Share This Post

  • I’ve been sick. When can I start exercising again?

    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.

    You’ve had a cold or the flu and your symptoms have begun to subside. Your nose has stopped dripping, your cough is clearing and your head and muscles no longer ache.

    You’re ready to get off the couch. But is it too early to go for a run? Here’s what to consider when getting back to exercising after illness.

    Ketut Subiyanto/Pexels

    Exercise can boost your immune system – but not always

    Exercise reduces the chance of getting respiratory infections by increasing your immune function and the ability to fight off viruses.

    However, an acute bout of endurance exercise may temporarily increase your susceptibility to upper respiratory infections, such as colds and the flu, via the short-term suppression of your immune system. This is known as the “open window” theory.

    A study from 2010 examined changes in trained cyclists’ immune systems up to eight hours after two-hour high-intensity cycling. It found important immune functions were suppressed, resulting in an increased rate of upper respiratory infections after the intense endurance exercise.

    So, we have to be more careful after performing harder exercises than normal.

    Can you exercise when you’re sick?

    This depends on the severity of your symptoms and the intensity of exercise.

    Mild to moderate exercise (reducing the intensity and length of workout) may be OK if your symptoms are a runny nose, nasal congestion, sneezing and minor sore throat, without a fever.

    Exercise may help you feel better by opening your nasal passages and temporarily relieving nasal congestion.

    Man walks on a beach
    If you have a runny or blocked nose and no fever, low-intensity movement such as a walk might help. Laker/Pexels

    However, if you try to exercise at your normal intensity when you are sick, you risk injury or more serious illness. So it’s important to listen to your body.

    If your symptoms include chest congestion, a cough, upset stomach, fever, fatigue or widespread muscle aches, avoid exercising. Exercising when you have these symptoms may worsen the symptoms and prolong the recovery time.

    If you’ve had the flu or another respiratory illness that caused a high fever, make sure your temperature is back to normal before getting back to exercise. Exercising raises your body temperature, so if you already have a fever, your temperature will become high quicker, which makes you sicker.

    If you have COVID or other contagious illnesses, stay at home, rest and isolate yourself from others.

    When you’re sick and feel weak, don’t force yourself to exercise. Focus instead on getting plenty of rest. This may actually shorten the time it takes to recover and resume your normal workout routine.

    I’ve been sick for a few weeks. What has happened to my strength and fitness?

    You may think taking two weeks off from training is disastrous, and worry you’ll lose the gains you’ve made in your previous workouts. But it could be just what the body needs.

    It’s true that almost all training benefits are reversible to some degree. This means the physical fitness that you have built up over time can be lost without regular exercise.

    To study the effects of de-training on our body functions, researchers have undertaken “bed rest” studies, where healthy volunteers spend up to 70 days in bed. They found that V̇O₂max (the maximum amount of oxygen a person can use during maximal exercise, which is a measure of aerobic fitness) declines 0.3–0.4% a day. And the higher pre-bed-rest V̇O₂max levels, the larger the declines.

    In terms of skeletal muscles, upper thigh muscles become smaller by 2% after five days of bed rest, 5% at 14 days, and 12% at 35 days of bed rest.

    Muscle strength declines more than muscle mass: knee extensor muscle strength gets weaker by 8% at five days, 12% at 14 days and more than 20% after around 35 days of bed rest.

    This is why it feels harder to do the same exercises after resting for even five days.

    Man sits on the side of his bed
    In bed rest studies, participants don’t get up. But they do in real life. Olly/Pexels

    But in bed rest studies, physical activities are strictly limited, and even standing up from a bed is prohibited during the whole length of a study. When we’re sick in bed, we have some physical activities such as sitting on a bed, standing up and walking to the toilet. These activities could reduce the rate of decreases in our physical functions compared with study participants.

    How to ease back into exercise

    Start with a lower-intensity workout initially, such as going for a walk instead of a run. Your first workout back should be light so you don’t get out of breath. Go low (intensity) and go slow.

    Gradually increase the volume and intensity to the previous level. It may take the same number of days or weeks you rested to get back to where you were. If you were absent from an exercise routine for two weeks, for example, it may require two weeks for your fitness to return to the same level.

    If you feel exhausted after exercising, take an extra day off before working out again. A day or two off from exercising shouldn’t affect your performance very much.

    Ken Nosaka, Professor of Exercise and Sports Science, Edith Cowan 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:

  • Reflexology: What The Science Says

    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.

    How Does Reflexology Work, Really?

    In Wednesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your opinion of reflexology, and got the above-depicted, below-described set of responses:

    • About 63% said “It works by specific nerves connecting the feet and hands to various specific organs, triggering healing remotely”
    • About 26% said “It works by realigning the body’s energies (e.g. qi, ki, prana, etc), removing blockages and improving health“
    • About 11% said “It works by placebo, at best, and has no evidence for any efficacy beyond that”

    So, what does the science say?

    It works by realigning the body’s energies (e.g. qi, ki, prana, etc), removing blockages and improving health: True or False?

    False, or since we can’t prove a negative: there is no reliable scientific evidence for this.

    Further, there is no reliable scientific evidence for the existence of qi, ki, prana, soma, mana, or whatever we want to call it.

    To save doubling up, we did discuss this in some more detail, exploring the notion of qi as bioelectrical energy, including a look at some unreliable clinical evidence for it (a study that used shoddy methodology, but it’s important to understand what they did wrong, to watch out for such), when we looked at [the legitimately very healthful practice of] qigong, a couple of weeks ago:

    Qigong: A Breath Of Fresh Air?

    As for reflexology specifically: in terms of blockages of qi causing disease (and thus being a putative therapeutic mechanism of action for attenuating disease), it’s an interesting hypothesis but in terms of scientific merit, it was pre-emptively supplanted by germ theory and other similarly observable-and-measurable phenomena.

    We say “pre-emptively”, because despite orientalist marketing, unless we want to count some ancient pictures of people getting a foot massage and say it is reflexology, there is no record of reflexology being a thing before 1913 (and that was in the US, by a laryngologist working with a spiritualist to produce a book that they published in 1917).

    It works by specific nerves connecting the feet and hands to various specific organs, triggering healing remotely: True or False?

    False, or since we can’t prove a negative: there is no reliable scientific evidence for this.

    A very large independent review of available scientific literature found the current medical consensus on reflexology is that:

    • Reflexology is effective for: anxiety (but short lasting), edema, mild insomnia, quality of sleep, and relieving pain (short term: 2–3 hours)
    • Reflexology is not effective for: inflammatory bowel disease, fertility treatment, neuropathy and polyneuropathy, acute low back pain, sub acute low back pain, chronic low back pain, radicular pain syndromes (including sciatica), post-operative low back pain, spinal stenosis, spinal fractures, sacroiliitis, spondylolisthesis, complex regional pain syndrome, trigger points / myofascial pain, chronic persistent pain, chronic low back pain, depression, work related injuries of the hip and pelvis

    Source: Reflexology – a scientific literary review compilation

    (the above is a fascinating read, by the way, and its 50 pages go into a lot more detail than we have room to here)

    Now, those items that they found it effective for, looks suspiciously like a short list of things that placebo is often good for, and/or any relaxing activity.

    Another review was not so generous:

    ❝The best evidence available to date does not demonstrate convincingly that reflexology is an effective treatment for any medical condition❞

    ~ Dr. Edzard Ernst (MD, PhD, FMedSci)

    Source: Is reflexology an effective intervention? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials

    In short, from the available scientific literature, we can surmise:

    • Some researchers have found it to have some usefulness against chiefly psychosomatic conditions
    • Other researchers have found the evidence for even that much to be uncompelling

    It works by placebo, at best, and has no evidence for any efficacy beyond that: True or False?

    Mostly True; of course reflexology runs into similar problems as acupuncture when it comes to testing against placebo:

    How Does One Test Acupuncture Against Placebo Anyway?

    …but not quite as bad, since it is easier to give a random foot massage while pretending it is a clinical treatment, than to fake putting needles into key locations.

    However, as the paper we cited just above (in answer to the previous True/False question) shows, reflexology does not appear to meaningfully outperform placebo—which points to the possibility that it does work by placebo, and is just a placebo treatment on the high end of placebo (because the placebo effect is real, does work, isn’t “nothing”, and some placebos work better than others).

    For more on the fascinating science and useful (applicable in daily life!) practicalities of how placebo does work, check out:

    How To Leverage Placebo Effect For Yourself

    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 Mediterranean Diet Cookbook for Beginners – by Jessica Aledo

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

    There are a lot of Mediterranean Diet books on the market, and not all of them actually stick to the Mediterranean Diet. There’s a common mistake of thinking “Well, this dish is from the Mediterranean region, so…”, but that doesn’t make, for example, bacon-laden carbonara part of the Mediterranean Diet!

    Jessica Aledo does better, and sticks unwaveringly to the Mediterranean Diet principles.

    First, she gives a broad introduction, covering:

    • The Mediterranean Diet pyramid
    • Foods to eat on the Mediterranean Diet
    • Foods to avoid on the Mediterranean Diet
    • Benefits of the Mediterranean Diet

    Then, it’s straight into the recipes, of which there are 201 (as with many recipe books, the title is a little misleading about this).

    They’re divided into sections, thus:

    • Breakfasts
    • Lunches
    • Snacks
    • Dinners
    • Desserts

    The recipes are clear and simple, one per double-page, with high quality color illustrations. They give ingredients/directions/nutrients. There’s no padding!

    Helpfully, she does include a shopping list as an appendix, which is really useful!

    Bottom line: if you’re looking to build your Mediterranean Diet repertoire, this book is an excellent choice.

    Get your copy of The Mediterranean Diet Cookbook for Beginners from Amazon today!

    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: