Lucid Dreaming – by Stephen LaBerge Ph.D.

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.

For any unfamiliar: lucid dreaming means being aware that one is dreaming, while dreaming, and exercising a degree of control over the dream. Superficially, this is fun. But if one really wants to go deeper into it, it can be a lot more:

Dr. Stephen LaBerge takes a science-based approach to lucid dreaming, and in this work provides not only step-by-step instructions of several ways of inducing lucid dreaming, but also, opens the reader’s mind to things that can be done there beyond the merely recreational:

In lucid dreams, he argues and illustrates, it’s possible to talk to parts of one’s own subconscious (Inception, anyone? Yes, this book came first) and get quite an amount of self-therapy done. And that hobby you wish you had more time to practice? The possibilities just became limitless. And who wouldn’t want that?

Grab Your Bedtime Reading From Amazon Now!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • The Polyvagal Theory – by Dr. Stephen Porges
  • Anti-Inflammatory Pineapple Fried Rice
    Revamp your perception of healthy eating with our nutrient-rich, anti-inflammatory pineapple fried rice recipe – a delicious blend of whole grains and spice!

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Pomegranate vs Cranberries – 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 pomegranate to cranberries, we picked the pomegranate.

    Why?

    Starting with the macros: pomegranate has nearly 4x the protein (actually quite a lot for a fruit, but this is not too surprising—it’s because we are eating the seeds!), and slightly more carbs and fiber. Their glycemic indices are comparable, both being low GI foods. While both of these fruits have excellent macro profiles, we say the pomegranate is slightly better, because of the protein, and when it comes to the carbs and fiber, since they balance each other out, we’ll go with the option that’s more nutritionally dense. We like foods that add more nutrients!

    In the category of vitamins, pomegranate is higher in vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, K, and choline, while cranberry is higher in vitamins A, C, and E. Both are very respectable profiles, but pomegranate wins on strength of numbers (and also some higher margins of difference).

    When it comes to minerals, it is not close; pomegranate is higher in calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while cranberry is higher in manganese. An easy win for pomegranate here.

    Both of these fruits have additional “special” properties, though it’s worth noting that:

    • pomegranate’s bonus properties, which are too many to list here, but we link to an article below, are mostly in its peel (so dry it, and grind it into a powder supplement, that can be worked into foods, or used like an instant fruit tea, just without the sugar)
    • cranberries’ bonus properties (including: famously very good at reducing UTI risk) come with some warnings, including that they may increase the risk of kidney stones if you are prone to such, and also that cranberries have anti-clotting effects, which are great for heart health but can be a risk of you’re on blood thinners or have a bleeding disorder.

    You can read about both of these fruits’ special properties in more detail below:

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Rutin For Your Circulation & More

    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.

    Rutin is a bioflavonoid so potent it’s also been called “vitamin P”, and it’s found most abundantly in buckwheat, as well appearing in citrus and some stone fruits (apricots, plums, etc) as well as figs and apples—it’s also found in asparagus, and green and black tea.

    So, what does it do?

    Quite a lot: The Pharmacological Potential of Rutin

    There’s much more there than we have room to cover here, but we’ll pick out a few salient properties to focus on.

    First, a word of warning

    A lot of the extant science for rutin is in non-human animals. Sometimes, what works for non-human animals doesn’t work for humans; we saw a clear example of this here:

    Conjugated Linoleic Acid For Weight Loss?

    …in which CLA worked for weight loss in mice, hamsters, chickens, and pigs, but stubbornly not humans.

    The state of affairs with the science for rutin isn’t nearly that bad and there are human studies showing efficacy, and indeed, rutin is given to (human) patients with capillary fragility, varicose veins, bruising, or hemorrhoids, for example:

    Rutin: An Overview

    So, we’ll try to give you humans-only sources so far as we can today!

    Improving blood flow

    Rutin does improve various blood metrics, including various kinds of blood pressure (diastolic, systolic, mean arterial, pulse) and heart rate. At least, it did in humans with type 2 diabetes, and we may reasonably assume these results may be extrapolated to humans without type 2 (or any other) diabetes:

    The effects of rutin supplement on blood pressure markers, some serum antioxidant enzymes, and quality of life in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus compared with placebo

    As you may gather from the title, it did also significantly improve serum antioxidant levels, and quality of life (which latter was categorized as: emotional limitations, energy and freshness, mental health, social performance, and general health).

    We couldn’t find studies for cardioprotective effects in humans (and of course those couldn’t be RCTs, they’d have to be observational studies, because no ethics board allows inducing heart attacks in humans for the sake of science), but here’s a study using rats (with and without diabetes), showing proof of principle at least:

    Cardioprotective actions of two bioflavonoids, quercetin and rutin, in experimental myocardial infarction

    Anti-Alzheimer’s potential

    As ever, a good general rule of thumb is “what’s good for the blood is good for the brain”, and that’s true in this case too.

    The title says it all, here:

    Rutin inhibits β-amyloid aggregation and cytotoxicity, attenuates oxidative stress, and decreases the production of nitric oxide and proinflammatory cytokines

    In case that is not clear: everything in that title after the word “inhibits” is bad for the brain and is implicated in Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis and progression; in other words, rutin is good against all those bad, Alzheimer’s-favoring things.

    Other neuroprotective activity

    You may remember from the above-linked research that it helps protect against damage caused by Advanced Glycation End-products (AGEs) (the golden-brown stuff that appears as a result of dry-cooking proteins and fats); it also helps against damage caused by acrylamide (the golden-brown stuff that appears as a result of dry-cooking starches).

    Note: in both cases “dry-cooking” includes cooking with oil; it simply means “without water”.

    See: Protective effect of rutin against brain injury induced by acrylamide or gamma radiation: role of PI3K/AKT/GSK-3β/NRF-2 signalling pathway

    Again, this was a rat study, because no ethics board would have let the researchers fry human brains for science.

    Want to try some?

    As well as simply enjoying the fruits and vegetables that contain it, it is possible to take a rutin supplement.

    We don’t sell it, but here for your convenience is an example product on Amazon 😎

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Staying Strong: Tips To Prevent Muscle Loss With Age

    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. Andrea Furlan, specialist in physical medicine and rehabilitation with 30 years of experience, has advice:

    Fighting sarcopenia

    Sarcopenia is so common as to be considered “natural”, but “natural” does not mean “obligatory” and it certainly doesn’t mean “healthy”. As for how to fight it?

    You may be thinking “let us guess, is it eat protein and do resistance exercises? And yes it is, but that’s only part of it…

    Firstly, she recommends remembering why you are doing this, or because understanding is key to compliance (i.e. your perfect diet and exercise program will mean nothing if you don’t actually do it, and you won’t do it enough to make it a habit, let alone keep it up, if the reasons aren’t clear in your mind).

    Sarcopenia comes with an increased risk of falls, reduced physical capacity in general, resultant disability, social isolation, and depression. Of course, this is not a one-to-one equation; you will not necessarily become depressed the moment your muscle mass is below a certain percentage, but statistically speaking, the road to ruin is laid out clearly.

    Secondly, she recommends being on the lookout for it. If you check your body composition regularly with a gadget, that’s great and laudable; if you don’t, then a) consider getting one (here’s an example product on Amazon), and b) watch out for decreased muscle strength, fatigue, reduced stamina, noticeable body shape changes with muscle loss and (likely) fat gain.

    Thirdly, she recommends more than just regular resistance training and good protein intake. Yes, she recommends those things too, but also getting enough water (can’t rebuild the body without it), avoiding a sedentary lifestyle (sitting leads to atrophy of many supporting and stabilizing muscles, you know, the kind of muscles that don’t look flashy but stop you falling down), and getting good sleep—vital for all kinds of body maintenance, and muscle maintenance is no exception (there’s a reason bodybuilders sleep 9–12 hours daily when in a gaining phase; you don’t need to do that, but don’t skimp on your 7–9 hours, yes, really, even you, yes, at any age).

    Lastly, she recommends continuing to learn about the topic, as otherwise it’s easy to go off-track.

    For more information on all of the above and more, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • The Polyvagal Theory – by Dr. Stephen Porges
  • Can Medical Schools Funnel More Doctors Into the Primary Care Pipeline?

    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.

    Throughout her childhood, Julia Lo Cascio dreamed of becoming a pediatrician. So, when applying to medical school, she was thrilled to discover a new, small school founded specifically to train primary care doctors: NYU Grossman Long Island School of Medicine.

    Now in her final year at the Mineola, New York, school, Lo Cascio remains committed to primary care pediatrics. But many young doctors choose otherwise as they leave medical school for their residencies. In 2024, 252 of the nation’s 3,139 pediatric residency slots went unfilled and family medicine programs faced 636 vacant residencies out of 5,231 as students chased higher-paying specialties.

    Lo Cascio, 24, said her three-year accelerated program nurtured her goal of becoming a pediatrician. Could other medical schools do more to promote primary care? The question could not be more urgent. The Association of American Medical Colleges projects a shortage of 20,200 to 40,400 primary care doctors by 2036. This means many Americans will lose out on the benefits of primary care, which research shows improves health, leading to fewer hospital visits and less chronic illness.

    Many medical students start out expressing interest in primary care. Then they end up at schools based in academic medical centers, where students become enthralled by complex cases in hospitals, while witnessing little primary care.

    The driving force is often money, said Andrew Bazemore, a physician and a senior vice president at the American Board of Family Medicine. “Subspecialties tend to generate a lot of wealth, not only for the individual specialists, but for the whole system in the hospital,” he said.

    A department’s cache of federal and pharmaceutical-company grants often determines its size and prestige, he said. And at least 12 medical schools, including Harvard, Yale, and Johns Hopkins, don’t even have full-fledged family medicine departments. Students at these schools can study internal medicine, but many of those graduates end up choosing subspecialties like gastroenterology or cardiology.

    One potential solution: eliminate tuition, in the hope that debt-free students will base their career choice on passion rather than paycheck. In 2024, two elite medical schools — the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine — announced that charitable donations are enabling them to waive tuition, joining a handful of other tuition-free schools.

    But the contrast between the school Lo Cascio attends and the institution that founded it starkly illustrates the limitations of this approach. Neither charges tuition.

    In 2024, two-thirds of students graduating from her Long Island school chose residencies in primary care. Lo Cascio said the tuition waiver wasn’t a deciding factor in choosing pediatrics, among the lowest-paid specialties, with an average annual income of $260,000, according to Medscape.

    At the sister school, the Manhattan-based NYU Grossman School of Medicine, the majority of its 2024 graduates chose specialties like orthopedics (averaging $558,000 a year) or dermatology ($479,000).

    Primary care typically gets little respect. Professors and peers alike admonish students: If you’re so smart, why would you choose primary care? Anand Chukka, 27, said he has heard that refrain regularly throughout his years as a student at Harvard Medical School. Even his parents, both PhD scientists, wondered if he was wasting his education by pursuing primary care.

    Seemingly minor issues can influence students’ decisions, Chukka said. He recalls envying the students on hospital rotations who routinely were served lunch, while those in primary care settings had to fetch their own.

    Despite such headwinds, Chukka, now in his final year, remains enthusiastic about primary care. He has long wanted to care for poor and other underserved people, and a one-year clerkship at a community practice serving low-income patients reinforced that plan.

    When students look to the future, especially if they haven’t had such exposure, primary care can seem grim, burdened with time-consuming administrative tasks, such as seeking prior authorizations from insurers and grappling with electronic medical records.

    While specialists may also face bureaucracy, primary care practices have it much worse: They have more patients and less money to hire help amid burgeoning paperwork requirements, said Caroline Richardson, chair of family medicine at Brown University’s Warren Alpert Medical School.

    “It’s not the medical schools that are the problem; it’s the job,” Richardson said. “The job is too toxic.”

    Kevin Grumbach, a professor of family and community medicine at the University of California-San Francisco, spent decades trying to boost the share of students choosing primary care, only to conclude: “There’s really very little that we can do in medical school to change people’s career trajectories.”

    Instead, he said, the U.S. health care system must address the low pay and lack of support.

    And yet, some schools find a way to produce significant proportions of primary care doctors — through recruitment and programs that provide positive experiences and mentors.

    U.S. News & World Report recently ranked 168 medical schools by the percentage of graduates who were practicing primary care six to eight years after graduation.

    The top 10 schools are all osteopathic medical schools, with 41% to 47% of their students still practicing primary care. Unlike allopathic medical schools, which award MD degrees, osteopathic schools, which award DO degrees, have a history of focusing on primary care and are graduating a growing share of the nation’s primary care physicians.

    At the bottom of the U.S. News list is Yale, with 10.7% of its graduates finding lasting careers in primary care. Other elite schools have similar rates: Johns Hopkins, 13.1%; Harvard, 13.7%.

    In contrast, public universities that have made it a mission to promote primary care have much higher numbers.

    The University of Washington — No. 18 in the ranking, with 36.9% of graduates working in primary care — has a decades-old program placing students in remote parts of Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho. UW recruits students from those areas, and many go back to practice there, with more than 20% of graduates settling in rural communities, according to Joshua Jauregui, assistant dean for clinical curriculum.

    Likewise, the University of California-Davis (No. 22, with 36.3% of graduates in primary care) increased the percentage of students choosing family medicine from 12% in 2009 to 18% in 2023, even as it ranks high in specialty training. Programs such as an accelerated three-year primary care “pathway,” which enrolls primarily first-generation college students, help sustain interest in non-specialty medical fields.

    The effort starts with recruitment, looking beyond test scores to the life experiences that forge the compassionate, humanistic doctors most needed in primary care, said Mark Henderson, associate dean for admissions and outreach. Most of the students have families who struggle to get primary care, he said. “So they care a lot about it, and it’s not just an intellectual, abstract sense.”

    Establishing schools dedicated to primary care, like the one on Long Island, is not a solution in the eyes of some advocates, who consider primary care the backbone of medicine and not a separate discipline. Toyese Oyeyemi Jr., executive director of the Social Mission Alliance at the Fitzhugh Mullan Institute of Health Workforce Equity, worries that establishing such schools might let others “off the hook.”

    Still, attending a medical school created to produce primary care doctors worked out well for Lo Cascio. Although she underwent the usual specialty rotations, her passion for pediatrics never flagged — owing to her 23 classmates, two mentors, and her first-year clerkship shadowing a community pediatrician. Now, she’s applying for pediatric residencies.

    Lo Cascio also has deep personal reasons: Throughout her experience with a congenital heart condition, her pediatrician was a “guiding light.”

    “No matter what else has happened in school, in life, in the world, and medically, your pediatrician is the person that you can come back to,” she said. “What a beautiful opportunity it would be to be that for someone else.”

    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.

    This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    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:

  • New research suggests intermittent fasting increases the risk of dying from heart disease. But the evidence is mixed

    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.

    Kaitlin Day, RMIT University and Sharayah Carter, RMIT University

    Intermittent fasting has gained popularity in recent years as a dietary approach with potential health benefits. So you might have been surprised to see headlines last week suggesting the practice could increase a person’s risk of death from heart disease.

    The news stories were based on recent research which found a link between time-restricted eating, a form of intermittent fasting, and an increased risk of death from cardiovascular disease, or heart disease.

    So what can we make of these findings? And how do they measure up with what else we know about intermittent fasting and heart disease?

    The study in question

    The research was presented as a scientific poster at an American Heart Association conference last week. The full study hasn’t yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

    The researchers used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), a long-running survey that collects information from a large number of people in the United States.

    This type of research, known as observational research, involves analysing large groups of people to identify relationships between lifestyle factors and disease. The study covered a 15-year period.

    It showed people who ate their meals within an eight-hour window faced a 91% increased risk of dying from heart disease compared to those spreading their meals over 12 to 16 hours. When we look more closely at the data, it suggests 7.5% of those who ate within eight hours died from heart disease during the study, compared to 3.6% of those who ate across 12 to 16 hours.

    We don’t know if the authors controlled for other factors that can influence health, such as body weight, medication use or diet quality. It’s likely some of these questions will be answered once the full details of the study are published.

    It’s also worth noting that participants may have eaten during a shorter window for a range of reasons – not necessarily because they were intentionally following a time-restricted diet. For example, they may have had a poor appetite due to illness, which could have also influenced the results.

    Other research

    Although this research may have a number of limitations, its findings aren’t entirely unique. They align with several other published studies using the NHANES data set.

    For example, one study showed eating over a longer period of time reduced the risk of death from heart disease by 64% in people with heart failure.

    Another study in people with diabetes showed those who ate more frequently had a lower risk of death from heart disease.

    A recent study found an overnight fast shorter than ten hours and longer than 14 hours increased the risk dying from of heart disease. This suggests too short a fast could also be a problem.

    But I thought intermittent fasting was healthy?

    There are conflicting results about intermittent fasting in the scientific literature, partly due to the different types of intermittent fasting.

    There’s time restricted eating, which limits eating to a period of time each day, and which the current study looks at. There are also different patterns of fast and feed days, such as the well-known 5:2 diet, where on fast days people generally consume about 25% of their energy needs, while on feed days there is no restriction on food intake.

    Despite these different fasting patterns, systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) consistently demonstrate benefits for intermittent fasting in terms of weight loss and heart disease risk factors (for example, blood pressure and cholesterol levels).

    RCTs indicate intermittent fasting yields comparable improvements in these areas to other dietary interventions, such as daily moderate energy restriction.

    A group of people eating around a table.
    There are a variety of intermittent fasting diets. Fauxels/Pexels

    So why do we see such different results?

    RCTs directly compare two conditions, such as intermittent fasting versus daily energy restriction, and control for a range of factors that could affect outcomes. So they offer insights into causal relationships we can’t get through observational studies alone.

    However, they often focus on specific groups and short-term outcomes. On average, these studies follow participants for around 12 months, leaving long-term effects unknown.

    While observational research provides valuable insights into population-level trends over longer periods, it relies on self-reporting and cannot demonstrate cause and effect.

    Relying on people to accurately report their own eating habits is tricky, as they may have difficulty remembering what and when they ate. This is a long-standing issue in observational studies and makes relying only on these types of studies to help us understand the relationship between diet and disease challenging.

    It’s likely the relationship between eating timing and health is more complex than simply eating more or less regularly. Our bodies are controlled by a group of internal clocks (our circadian rhythm), and when our behaviour doesn’t align with these clocks, such as when we eat at unusual times, our bodies can have trouble managing this.

    So, is intermittent fasting safe?

    There’s no simple answer to this question. RCTs have shown it appears a safe option for weight loss in the short term.

    However, people in the NHANES dataset who eat within a limited period of the day appear to be at higher risk of dying from heart disease. Of course, many other factors could be causing them to eat in this way, and influence the results.

    When faced with conflicting data, it’s generally agreed among scientists that RCTs provide a higher level of evidence. There are too many unknowns to accept the conclusions of an epidemiological study like this one without asking questions. Unsurprisingly, it has been subject to criticism.

    That said, to gain a better understanding of the long-term safety of intermittent fasting, we need to be able follow up individuals in these RCTs over five or ten years.

    In the meantime, if you’re interested in trying intermittent fasting, you should speak to a health professional first.

    Kaitlin Day, Lecturer in Human Nutrition, RMIT University and Sharayah Carter, Lecturer Nutrition and Dietetics, RMIT University

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    The Conversation

    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:

  • 6 Worst Foods That Cause Dementia

    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 many do you consume?

    The hit list

    Dr. Li bids us avoid:

    High carb, low fiber foods: consuming a diet high in carbohydrates, particularly refined carbs like cakes, white bread, pizza, and sugary syrups, can significantly harm brain health. Over time, imbalanced (i.e. not balanced with fiber) carbohydrate consumption leads to the growth of visceral fat (not the same as subcutaneous fat, which is the squishy bits just under your skin; visceral fat is further underneath, around your viscera), , which triggers systemic inflammation and oxidative stress. These processes disrupt communication between brain cells, impair memory, and increase the risk of diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. High carb diets can also contribute to metabolic syndrome—a cluster of conditions, including diabetes, obesity and high blood pressure—that damage blood vessels, leading to strokes and vascular dementia.

    Trans fats: these are region-bound, as they’re banned in some places and not others—check your local regulations. Found in processed foods such as fried items, baked goods, packaged snacks, and margarine, trans fats are created through hydrogenation, which makes fats more stable at room temperature. These artificial fats raise bad cholesterol, lower good cholesterol, and promote atherosclerosis. This damages the brain by reducing oxygen supply, triggering chronic inflammation, and increasing the risk of Alzheimer’s and dementia. 

    Sodas: regular consumption of sodas, whether sugary or artificially sweetened, is harmful to brain health. A single can of soda contains around 9 teaspoons of sugar, which overwhelms metabolism, contributes to insulin resistance, and leads to inflammation. These effects damage blood vessels and brain tissue, disrupt neuron function, and increase the risk of type 2 diabetes and dementia. Furthermore, insulin resistance caused by excessive sugar intake can impair neuronal survival, activate immune responses, and exacerbate cognitive decline. As for the artificial sweeteners, the mechanism of harm depends on the sweetener (and some can also mess up insulin response, for reasons that are not entirely clear yet, but they measurably do), but even picking the healthiest artificial sweetener, training your palate to enjoy hyper-sweetened things will tend to lead to more sugar-laden food choices in other parts of one’s diet.

    Processed foods: arguably a broad category that encompasses some of the above, but it’s important to consider it separately for catch-all purposes: these convenience foods, laden with artificial preservatives, colors, and sweeteners, harm brain health through chronic inflammation and usually a lack of essential nutrients. Processed foods are also a significant source of microplastics, which have been found to accumulate in the arteries, contributing to plaque build-up, atherosclerosis, and reduced blood flow to the brain. This combination of inflammation and oxidative stress from microplastics damages brain cells, paving the way for cognitive decline and dementia.

    Seafood with high mercury levels: large fish such as tuna, swordfish, sharks, and tilefish accumulate high amounts of mercury, a potent neurotoxin. Fish that are larger, older, and/or higher up the food chain will have the most mercury (and other cumulative contaminants, for that matter, but we’re considering mercury here). Mercury disrupts essential brain chemicals like dopamine and serotonin, triggering oxidative stress and damaging brain cells. Chronic exposure to mercury leads to inflammation and neuroinflammation, both of which increase the risk of Alzheimer’s and dementia. 

    Alcohol: contrary to popular belief, any amount of alcohol is detrimental to brain health. While red wine is often promoted for its health benefits, the purported positive effects come from polyphenols, not the alcohol itself, and (for example) resveratrol from red wine cannot be delivered in meaningful doses without drinking an impossibly large quantity. Alcohol is a neurotoxin that can damage or kill brain cells, impair neuronal communication, and lead to cognitive decline. Excessive drinking results in hangover symptoms like headaches and brain fog, which are indicators of its harmful impact on the brain. Chronic alcohol consumption exacerbates neuron death, increases inflammation, and raises the risk of dementia.

    As for what to eat instead?

    Dr. Li recommends including foods such as:

    • foods rich in omega-3s that aren’t mercury-laden fish, e.g. flaxseeds, chia seeds, walnuts, and hemp seeds, as they reduce inflammation, protect blood vessel linings, and prevent vascular dementia.
    • berries, and in particular he recommends organic strawberries, which are rich in ellagic acid and anthocyanins, which improve memory, reduce depressive symptoms, and enhance cognitive function.

    For more on all of these, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Reduce Your Alzheimer’s Risk!

    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: