Make Your Negativity Work For You

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.

What’s The Right Balance?

We’ve written before about positivity the pitfalls and perils of toxic positivity:

How To Get Your Brain On A More Positive Track (Without Toxic Positivity)

…as well as the benefits that can be found from selectively opting out of complaining:

A Bone To Pick… Up And Then Put Back Where We Found It

So… What place, if any, does negativity usefully have in our lives?

Carrot and Stick

We tend to think of “carrot and stick” motivation being extrinsic, i.e. there is some authority figure offering is reward and/or punishment, in response to our reactions.

In those cases when it really is extrinsic, the “stick” can still work for most people, by the way! At least in the short term.

Because in the long term, people are more likely to rebel against a “stick” that they consider unjust, and/or enter a state of learned helplessness, per “I’ll never be good enough to satisfy this person” and give up trying to please them.

But what about when you have your own carrot and stick? What about when it comes to, for example, your own management of your own healthy practices?

Here it becomes a little different—and more effective. We’ll get to that, but first, bear with us for a touch more about extrinsic motivation, because here be science:

We will generally be swayed more easily by negative feelings than positive ones.

For example, a study was conducted as part of a blood donation drive, and:

  • Group A was told that their donation could save a life
  • Group B was told that their donation could prevent a death

The negative wording given to group B boosted donations severalfold:

Read the paper: Life or Death Decisions: Framing the Call for Help

We have, by the way, noticed a similar trend—when it comes to subject lines in our newsletters. We continually change things up to see if trends change (and also to avoid becoming boring), but as a rule, the response we get from subscribers is typically greater when a subject line is phrased negatively, e.g. “how to avoid this bad thing” rather than “how to have this good thing”.

How we can all apply this as individuals?

When we want to make a health change (or keep up a healthy practice we already have)…

  • it’s good to note the benefits of that change/practice!
  • it’s even better to note the negative consequences of not doing it

For example, if you want to overcome an addiction, you will do better for your self-reminders to be about the bad consequences of using, more than the good consequences of abstinence.

See also: How To Reduce Or Quit Alcohol

This goes even just for things like diet and exercise! Things like diet and exercise can seem much more low-stakes than substance abuse, but at the end of the day, they can add healthy years onto our lives, or take them off.

Because of this, it’s good to take time to remember, when you don’t feel like exercising or do feel like ordering that triple cheeseburger with fries, the bad outcomes that you are planning to avoid with good diet and exercise.

Imagine yourself going in for that quadruple bypass surgery, asking yourself whether the unhealthy lifestyle was worth it. Double down on the emotions; imagine your loved ones grieving your premature death.

Oof, that was hard-hitting

It was, but it’s effective—if you choose to do it. We’re not the boss of you! Either way, we’ll continue to send the same good health advice and tips and research and whatnot every day, with the same (usually!) cheery tone.

One last thing…

While it’s good to note the negative, in order to avoid the things that lead to it, it’s not so good to dwell on the negative.

So if you get caught in negative thought spirals or the like, it’s still good to get yourself out of those.

If you need a little help with that sometimes, check out these:

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • How To Set Anxiety Aside
  • The Smart Woman’s Guide to Breast Cancer – by Dr. Jenn Simmons
    Breast cancer care decoded: Dr. Simmons, an oncologist and survivor, offers a step-by-step guide and mythbusting insights in the Smart Woman’s Guide to Breast Cancer.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • A Hospital Kept a Brain-Damaged Patient on Life Support to Boost Statistics. His Sister Is Now Suing for Malpractice.

    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.

    ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.

    In 2018, Darryl Young was hoping for a new lease on life when he received a heart transplant at a New Jersey hospital after years of congestive heart failure. But he suffered brain damage during the procedure and never woke up.

    The following year, a ProPublica investigation revealed that Young’s case was part of a pattern of heart transplants that had gone awry at Newark Beth Israel Medical Center in 2018. The spate of bad outcomes had pushed the center’s percentage of patients still alive one year after surgery — a key benchmark — below the national average. Medical staff were under pressure to boost that metric. ProPublica published audio recordings from meetings in which staff discussed the need to keep Young alive for a year, because they feared another hit to the program’s survival rate would attract scrutiny from regulators. On the recordings, the transplant program’s director, Dr. Mark Zucker, cautioned his team against offering Young’s family the option of switching from aggressive care to comfort care, in which no lifesaving efforts would be made. He acknowledged these actions were “very unethical.”

    ProPublica’s revelations horrified Young’s sister Andrea Young, who said she was never given the full picture of her brother’s condition, as did the findings of a subsequent federal regulator’s probe that determined that the hospital was putting patients in “immediate jeopardy.” Last month, she filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the hospital and members of her brother’s medical team.

    The lawsuit alleges that Newark Beth Israel staff were “negligent and deviated from accepted standards of practice,” leading to Young’s tragic medical outcome.

    Defendants in the lawsuit haven’t yet filed responses to the complaint in court documents. But spokesperson Linda Kamateh said in an email that “Newark Beth Israel Medical Center is one of the top heart transplant programs in the nation and we are committed to serving our patients with the highest quality of care. As this case is in active litigation, we are unable to provide further detail.” Zucker, who is no longer on staff at Newark Beth Israel, didn’t respond to requests for comment. His attorney also didn’t respond to calls and emails requesting comment.

    Zucker also didn’t respond to requests for comment from ProPublica in 2018; Newark Beth Israel at the time said in a statement, made on behalf of Zucker and other staff, that “disclosures of select portions of lengthy and highly complex medical discussions, when taken out of context, may distort the intent of conversations.”

    The lawsuit alleges that Young suffered brain damage as a result of severely low blood pressure during the transplant surgery. In 2019, when the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services scrutinized the heart transplant program following ProPublica’s investigation, the regulators found that the hospital had failed to implement corrective measures even after patients suffered, leading to further harm. For example, one patient’s kidneys failed after a transplant procedure in August 2018, and medical staff made recommendations internally to increase the frequency of blood pressure measurement during the procedure, according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges that the hospital didn’t implement its own recommendations and that one month later, “these failures were repeated” in Young’s surgery, leading to brain damage.

    The lawsuit also alleges that Young wasn’t asked whether he had an advance directive, such as a preference for a do-not-resuscitate order, despite a hospital policy stating that patients should be asked at the time of admission. The lawsuit also noted that CMS’ investigation found that Andrea Young was not informed of her brother’s condition.

    Andrea Young said she understands that mistakes can happen during medical procedures, “however, it’s their duty and their responsibility to be honest and let the family know exactly what went wrong.” Young said she had to fight to find out what was going on with her brother, at one point going to the library and trying to study medical books so she could ask the right questions. “I remember as clear as if it were yesterday, being so desperate for answers,” she said.

    Andrea Young said that she was motivated to file the lawsuit because she wants accountability. “Especially with the doctors never, from the outset, being forthcoming and truthful about the circumstances of my brother’s condition, not only is that wrong and unethical, but it took a lot away from our entire family,” she said. “The most important thing to me is that those responsible be held accountable.”

    ProPublica’s revelation of “a facility putting its existence over that of a patient is a scary concept,” said attorney Jonathan Lomurro, who’s representing Andrea Young in this case with co-counsel Christian LoPiano. Besides seeking damages for Darryl Young’s children, “we want to call attention to this so it doesn’t happen again,” Lomurro said.

    The lawsuit further alleges that medical staff at Newark Beth Israel invaded Young’s privacy and violated the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, more commonly known as HIPAA, by sharing details of his case with the media without his permission. “We want people to be whistleblowers and want information out,” but that information should be told to patients and their family members directly, Lomurro said.

    The 2019 CMS investigation determined that Newark Beth Israel’s program placed patients in “immediate jeopardy,” the most serious level of violation, and required the hospital to implement corrective plans. Newark Beth Israel did not agree with all of the regulator’s findings and in a statement at the time said that the CMS team lacked the “evidence, expertise and experience” to assess and diagnose patient outcomes.

    The hospital did carry out the corrective plans and continues to operate a heart transplant program today. The most recent federal data, based on procedures from January 2021 through June 2023, shows that the one year probability of survival for a patient at Newark Beth is lower than the national average. It also shows that the number of graft failures, including deaths, in that time period was higher than the expected number of deaths for the program.

    Andrea Young said she’s struggled with a feeling of emptiness in the years after her brother’s surgery. They were close and called each other daily. “There’s nothing in the world that can bring my brother back, so the only solace I will have is for the ones responsible to be held accountable,” she said. Darryl Young died on Sept 12, 2022, having never woken up after the transplant surgery.

    A separate medical malpractice lawsuit filed in 2020 by the wife of another Newark Beth Israel heart transplant patient who died after receiving an organ infected with a parasitic disease is ongoing. The hospital has denied the allegations in court filing. The state of New Jersey, employer of the pathologists named in the case, settled for $1.7 million this month, according to the plaintiff’s attorney Christian LoPiano. The rest of the case is ongoing.

    Share This Post

  • Older people’s risk of abuse is rising. Can an ad campaign protect them?

    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.

    Elder abuse is an emerging public health and safety issue for communities of high-income countries.

    The most recent data from Australia’s National Elder Abuse Prevalence Study, which surveyed 7,000 older people living in the community, found one in six self-reported being a victim of some form of abuse. But this did not include older people living in residential aged care or those with cognitive impairment, such as dementia – so is likely an underestimate.

    This week the Australian government announced a multi-million dollar advertising campaign it hopes will address this serious and abhorrent abuse.

    But is investing in community awareness of elder abuse the best use of scarce resources?

    Nuttapong punna/Shutterstock

    What is elder abuse?

    The World Health Organization (WHO) defines elder abuse as

    […] a single, or repeated act, or lack of appropriate action, occurring within any relationship where there is an expectation of trust which causes harm or distress to an older person.

    Australia usually defines older people as those over 65. The exact age varies between countries depending on the overall health status of a nation and its vulnerable population groups. The WHO definitions of an older adult for sub-Saharan Africa, for example, is over 50. And there are communities with poorer health status and shorter lifespans within country borders, including our First Nations people.

    Elder abuse can take on many different forms including physical, sexual, psychological, emotional, or financial abuse and neglect.

    Living longer and wealthier

    The number of older people in our society is greater than it has ever been. Around 17% Australians are aged 65 and over. By 2071, older Australians will make up between 25% and 27% of the total population.

    People are living longer, accumulating substantial wealth and are vulnerable to abuse due to cognitive, physical or functional limitations.

    Longer lifespans increase the time of possible exposure to abuse. Australian men aged 65 can expect to live another 20.2 years, while women aged 65 are likely to live another 22.8 years. (Life expectancy for First Nations men and women remains significantly shorter.)

    Australian men are now 143 times more likely to reach the age of 100 than they were in 1901. Women are 82 times more likely.

    Older people hold a large proportion of our nation’s wealth, making them vulnerable to financial abuse. Recent research by the Australian Council of Social Service and UNSW Sydney reveals older households (with people over 65) are 25% wealthier than the average middle-aged household and almost four times as wealthy as the average under-35 household.

    Finally, older people have higher levels of impairment in their thinking, reasoning and physical function. Cognitive impairment, especially dementia, increases from one in 67 Australians under 60 to almost one in two people aged over 90.

    Over half of Australians aged 65 years and over have disability. A particularly vulnerable group are the 258,374 older Australians who receive government-funded home care.

    Who perpetrates elder abuse?

    Sadly, most of the perpetrators of elder abuse are known to their victims. They are usually a member of the family, such as a life partner, child or grandchild.

    Elder abuse causes significant illness and even early death. Financial abuse (across all ages) costs the community billions of dollars. Specific data for financial elder abuse is limited but indicates massive costs to individual survivors and the community.

    Despite this, the level of awareness of elder abuse is likely to be much lower than for family violence or child abuse. This is partly due to the comparatively recent concept of elder abuse, with global awareness campaigns only developed over the past two decades.

    Is an advertising campaign the answer?

    The federal government has allocated A$4.8 million to an advertising campaign on television, online and in health-care clinics to reach the broader community. For context, last year the government spent $131.4 million on all media campaigns, including $32.6 million on the COVID vaccination program, $2 million on Japanese encephalitis and $3.2 million on hearing health awareness.

    The campaign will likely benefit a small number of people who may be victims and have the capacity to report their perpetrators to authorities. It will generate some heartbreaking anecdotes. But it is unlikely to achieve broad community or systemic change.

    There is little research evidence to show media campaigns alter the behaviour of perpetrators of elder abuse. And suggesting the campaign raises awareness of the issue for older people who are survivors of abuse sounds more like blaming victims than empowering them.

    We don’t know how the government will judge the success of the campaign, so taxpayers won’t know whether a reasonable return on this investment was achieved. There may also be opportunity costs associated with the initiative – that is, lost opportunities for other actions and strategies. It could be more effective and efficient to target high-risk subgroups or to allocate funding to policy, practice reform or research that has direct tangible benefits for survivors. https://www.youtube.com/embed/DeK2kaqplTI?wmode=transparent&start=0 The Australian Human Rights Commission’s campaign from last year.

    But the campaign can’t hurt, right?

    Actually, the dangers that could come with an advertising campaign are two-fold.

    First it may well oversimplify a highly complex issue. Identifying and managing elder abuse requires an understanding of the person’s vulnerabilities, their decision-making capacity and ability to consent, the will and preferences of victim and the role of perpetrator in the older person’s life. Abuse happens in the context of family and social networks. And reporting abuse can have consequences for the victim’s quality of life and care.

    Consider the complexities of a case where an older person declines to have her grandson reported to police for stealing her money and medication because of her fear of becoming socially isolated. She might even feel responsible for the behaviour having raised the grandson and not want him to have a criminal record.

    Secondly, a public campaign can create the illusion government and our institutions have the matter “in hand”. This might slow the opportunity for real change.

    Ideally, the campaign will strengthen the argument for better policies, reporting procedures, policing, prosecution and judgements that are aligned. But these ends will also need investment in more research to build better communities that take good care of older people.

    Joseph Ibrahim, Professor, Aged Care Medical Research Australian Centre for Evidence Based Aged Care, La Trobe University

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

    Share This Post

  • Serotonin vs Dopamine (Know The Differences)

    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.

    Of the various neurotransmitters that people confuse with each other, serotonin and dopamine are the two highest on the list (with oxytocin coming third as people often attribute its effects to serotonin). But, for all they are both “happiness molecules”, serotonin and dopamine are quite different, and are even opposites in some ways:

    More than just happiness

    Let’s break it down:

    Similarities:

    • Both are neurotransmitters, neuromodulators, and monoamines.
    • Both impact cognition, mood, energy, behavior, memory, and learning.
    • Both influence social behavior, though in different ways.

    Differences (settle in; there are many):

    • Chemical structure:
      • Dopamine: catecholamine (derived from phenylalanine and tyrosine)
      • Serotonin: indoleamine (derived from tryptophan)
    • Derivatives:
      • Dopamine → noradrenaline and adrenaline (stress and alertness)
      • Serotonin → melatonin (sleep and circadian rhythm)
    • Effects on mental state:
      • Dopamine: drives action, motivation, and impulsivity.
      • Serotonin: promotes calmness, behavioral inhibition, and cooperation.
    • Role in memory and learning:
      • Dopamine: key in attention and working memory
      • Serotonin: crucial for hippocampus activation and long-term memory

    Symptoms of imbalance:

    • Low dopamine:
      • Loss of motivation, focus, emotion, and activity
      • Linked to Parkinson’s disease and ADHD
    • Low serotonin:
      • Sadness, irritability, poor sleep, and digestive issues
      • Linked to PTSD, anxiety, and OCD
    • High dopamine:
      • Excessive drive, impulsivity, addictions, psychosis
    • High serotonin:
      • Nervousness, nausea, and in extreme cases, serotonin syndrome (which can be fatal)

    Brain networks:

    • Dopamine: four pathways controlling movement, attention, executive function, and hormones.
    • Serotonin: widely distributed across the cortex, partially overlapping with dopamine systems.

    Speed of production:

    • Dopamine: can spike and deplete quickly; fatigues faster with overuse.
    • Serotonin: more stable, releasing steadily over longer periods.

    Illustrative examples:

    • Coffee boosts dopamine but loses its effect with repeated use.
    • Sunlight helps maintain serotonin levels over time.

    If you remember nothing else, remember this:

    • Dopamine: action, motivation, and alertness.
    • Serotonin: contentment, happiness, and calmness.

    For more on all of the above, enjoy:

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

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Neurotransmitter Cheatsheet

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • How To Set Anxiety Aside
  • No, COVID-19 vaccines don’t cause ‘turbo cancer’

    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.

    What you need to know

    • COVID-19 vaccines do not cause “turbo cancer” or contain SV40, a virus that has been suspected of causing cancer.
    • There is no link between rising cancer rates and COVID-19 vaccines.
    • Staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is a safe, free way to support long-term health.

    Myths that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer have been circulating since the vaccines were first developed. These false claims resurfaced last month after Princess Kate Middleton announced that she is undergoing cancer treatment, with some vaccine opponents falsely claiming Middleton has a “turbo cancer” caused by COVID-19 vaccines.

    Here’s what we know: “Turbo cancer” is a made-up term for a fake phenomenon, and there is strong evidence that COVID-19 vaccines do not cause cancer or increase cancer risk.

    Read on to learn how to recognize false claims about COVID-19 vaccines and cancer.


    Do COVID-19 vaccines contain cancer-causing ingredients?

    No. Some vaccine opponents claim that COVID-19 vaccines contain SV40, a virus that has been suspected of causing cancer. This claim is false.

    A piece of SV40’s DNA sequence—called a “promoter”—was used as starting material to develop COVID-19 vaccines, but the virus itself is not present in the vaccines. The promoter does not contain the part of the virus that enters the cell nucleus, so it poses no risk.

    COVID-19 vaccines and their ingredients have been rigorously studied in millions of people worldwide and have been determined to be safe. The National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society agree that COVID-19 vaccines do not increase cancer risk or accelerate cancer growth.

    Why are cancer rates rising in the U.S.?

    Since the 1990s, cancer rates have been on the rise globally and in the U.S., most notably in people under 50. Increased cancer screening may partially explain the rising number of cancer diagnoses. Exposure to air pollution and lifestyle factors like tobacco use, alcohol use, and diet may also be contributing factors.

    What are the benefits of staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines?

    Staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is a safe way to protect our long-term health. COVID-19 vaccines prevent severe illness, hospitalization, death, and long COVID.

    The CDC says staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is a safer and more reliable way to build protection against COVID-19 than getting sick from COVID-19.

    For more information, talk to your health care provider.

    This article first appeared on Public Good 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:

  • Flax Seeds vs Pumpkin Seeds – 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 flax seeds to pumpkin seeds, we picked the flax.

    Why?

    Looking at the macros first, they are equal on protein, and flax seeds have a lot more fiber while pumpkin seeds have a lot more carbs. We’re going to prioritise fiber over carbs and call this a win for flax.

    In terms of vitamins, flax seeds have a lot more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, E, K, and choline, while pumpkin seeds have a tiny bit more vitamin A. An easy win for flax here.

    When it comes to minerals, flax has multiples more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and selenium, while pumpkin seeds have more zinc. Another win for flax.

    Adding up the sections makes for a clear overall win for flax, but by all means enjoy either or both; diversity is good!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    What’s Your Plant Diversity Score? ← seeds count as plants!

    Enjoy!

    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 Oxygen Advantage – by Patrick McKeown

    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 probably know to breathe through your nose, and use your diaphragm. What else does this book have to offer?

    A lot of the book is aimed at fixing specific problems, and optimizing what can be optimized—including with tips and tricks you may not have encountered before. Yet, the offerings are not bizarre either; we don’t need to learn to breathe through our ears while drinking a glass of water upside down or anything.

    Rather, such simple things as improving one’s VO₂Max by occasionally holding one’s breath while walking briskly. But, he advises specifically, this should be done by pausing the breath halfway through the exhalation (a discussion of the ensuing physiological response is forthcoming).

    Little things like that are woven throughout the book, whose style is mostly anecdotal rather than hard science, yet is consistent with broad scientific consensus in any case.

    Bottom line: if you’ve any reason to think your breathing might be anything less than the best it could possibly be, this book is likely to help you to tweak it to be a little better.

    Click here to check out The Oxygen Advantage, and get yours!

    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: