Take This Two-Minute Executive Dysfunction Test
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.
Roll For Initiative
Some of us struggle with executive dysfunction a lot; others, a little.
What Is Executive Dysfunction?
• Executive function is a broad group of mental skills that enable people to complete tasks and interact with others.
• Executive dysfunction can impair a person’s ability to organize and manage behavior
• Executive dysfunction is not a specific stand-alone diagnosis or condition.
• Instead, conditions such as depression and ADHD (amongst others) can affect a person’s executive function.
Take This Two-Minute Executive Dysfunction Test
How did you score? (8/16 here!)
Did you do it? (it honestly is really two minutes and is quite informative)
If not, here’s your cue to go back up and do it
For almost all of us, we sometimes find ourselves torn between several competing tasks, and end up doing… none of them.
For such times, compile yourself a “productivity buffet”, print it, and pin it above your desk or similar space.
What’s a productivity buffet?
It’s a numbered list of 6, 8, 10, 12 or 20 common tasks that pretty much always need doing (to at least some extent!). Doesn’t matter how important they are, just that they are frequently recurring tasks. For example:
- Tidy desk (including that drawer!)
- Reply to emails/messages
- Drink water
- Collect stray one-off to-dos into a list
- Stretch (or at least correct your posture!)
- Extend that Duolingo streak
- Read one chapter of a book
- Etc
Why 6, 8, 10, 12, or 20?
Because those are common denominations of polyhedral dice that are very cheap to buy!
Keep the relevant die to hand (perhaps in your pocket or on your desk), and when you know you should be doing something but can’t decide what exactly, roll the die and do the item corresponding to the number you roll.
And if you find yourself thinking “damn, I got 12, I wanted 7!” then go ahead and do item 7—the dice aren’t the boss of you, they’re just there to break the ice between you and your to-do list!
The Housekeeper In Your Pocket?
If you found the tidying tips (up top) helpful, but don’t like cleaning schedules because you just can’t stick to them, this one’s for you.
It’s easy to slip into just doing the same few easy tasks while neglecting others for far too long.
The answer? Outsource!
Not “get a cleaner” (though if you want to and can, great, go for it, this one won’t be for you after all), but rather, try this nifty little app that helps you keep on top of daily cleaning—which we all know is better than binge-cleaning every few months.
Sweepy keeps track of:
- What jobs there are that might need doing in each room (or type of room) in the house
- How often those jobs generally need doing
- How much of your energy (a finite resource, which it also takes into account!) those jobs will take
- How much energy you are prepared to spend per day (you can “lighter/heavier” days, or even “off-days”, too)
…and then it populates a small daily task list according to what needs cleaning and how much energy it’ll take.
For example, today Sweepy gives me (your trusty writer, hi! ) the tasks:
- Bathroom: clean sink (every 3 days, 1pt of energy)
- Dining room: clean and tidy table (every day, 1pt of energy)
- Bedroom: vacuum floor (every 7 days, 2pts of energy)
- Kitchen: clean coffee machine (every 30 days, 2pts of energy)
And that’s my 6pts of energy I’ve told Sweepy I’m happy to spend per day cleaning. There are “3 pts” tasks too—cleaning the oven, for example—but none came up today.
Importantly: it does not bother me about any other tasks today (even if something’s overdue), and I don’t have to worry my pretty head about it.
I don’t have to feel guilty for not doing other cleaning tasks; if they need doing, Sweepy will tell me tomorrow, and it will make sure I don’t get behind or leave anything neglected for too long.
Check it out (available for both iOS and Android)
PS: to premium or not to premium? We think the premium is worth it (unlocks some extra customization features) but the free version is sufficient to get your house in order, so don’t be afraid to give it a try first.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
When supplies resume, should governments subsidise drugs like Ozempic for weight loss? We asked 5 experts
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.
Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide are taking drugs like Ozempic to lose weight. But what do we actually know about them? This month, The Conversation’s experts explore their rise, impact and potential consequences.
You’ve no doubt heard of Ozempic but have you heard of Wegovy? They’re both brand names of the drug semaglutide, which is currently in short supply worldwide.
Ozempic is a lower dose of semaglutide, and is approved and used to treat diabetes in Australia. Wegovovy is approved to treat obesity but is not yet available in Australia. Shortages of both drugs are expected to last throughout 2024.
Both drugs are expensive. But Ozempic is listed on Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule (PBS), so people with diabetes can get a three-week supply for A$31.60 ($7.70 for concession card holders) rather than the full price ($133.80).
Wegovy isn’t listed on the PBS to treat obesity, meaning when it becomes available, users will need to pay the full price. But should the government subsidise it?
Wegovy’s manufacturer will need to make the case for it to be added to the PBS to an independent advisory committee. The company will need to show Wegovy is a safe, clinically effective and cost-effective treatment for obesity compared to existing alternatives.
In the meantime, we asked five experts: when supplies resume, should governments subsidise drugs like Ozempic for weight loss?
Four out of five said yes
This is the last article in The Conversation’s Ozempic series. Read the other articles here.
Disclosure statements: Clare Collins is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Australian Research Council (ARC), the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF), the Hunter Medical Research Institute, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, the Western Australian Department of Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk (for weight management resources and an obesity advisory group), Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update, the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns and current co-chair of the Guidelines Development Advisory Committee for Clinical Practice Guidelines for Treatment of Obesity; Emma Beckett has received funding for research or consulting from Mars Foods, Nutrition Research Australia, NHMRC, ARC, AMP Foundation, Kellogg and the University of Newcastle. She works for FOODiQ Global and is a fat woman. She is/has been a member of committees/working groups related to nutrition or food, including for the Australian Academy of Science, the NHMRC and the Nutrition Society of Australia; Jonathan Karnon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment; Nial Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, a member of the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association and a member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd (a medical device company) and a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design and testing; Priya Sumithran has received grant funding from external organisations, including the NHMRC and MRFF. She is in the leadership group of the Obesity Collective and co-authored manuscripts with a medical writer provided by Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly.
Fron Jackson-Webb, Deputy Editor and Senior Health Editor, The Conversation
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
Galveston Diet Cookbook for Beginners – by Martha McGrew
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
We recently reviewed “The Galveston Diet”, and here’s a cookbook (by a nutritionist) to support that.
For the most part, it’s essentially keto-leaning, with an emphasis on protein and fats, but without quite the carb-cut that keto tends to have. It’s also quite plant-centric, but it’s not by default vegan or even vegetarian; you will find meat and fish in here. As you might expect from an anti-inflammatory cookbook, it’s light on the dairy too, though fermented dairy products such as yogurt do feature as well.
The recipes are quite simple and easy to follow, with suggestions of alternative ingredients along the way, making for extra variety as well as convenience.
If you are going to buy this book, you might want to take a look at the buying options, to ensure you get a full-color version, as recent reprints have photos in black and white, whereas older runs have color throughout.
Bottom line: if you’d like to cook the Galveston Diet way, this is as good a way to start as any.
Click here to check out the Galveston Diet Cookbook for Beginners, and get cooking!
Share This Post
-
Aging with Grace – by Dr. David Snowdon
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 is not: a book about Christianity. Don’t worry, we didn’t suddenly change the theme of 10almonds.
Rather, what this book is: a book about a famous large (n=678) study into the biology of aging, that took a population sample of women who had many factors already controlled-for, e.g. they ate the same food, had the same schedule, did the same activities, etc—for many years on end. In other words, a convent of nuns.
This allowed for a lot more to be learned about other factors that influence aging, such as:
- Heredity / genetics in general
- Speaking more than one language
- Supplementing with vitamins or not
- Key adverse events (e.g. stroke)
- Key chronic conditions (e.g. depression)
The book does also cover (as one might expect) the role that community and faith can play in healthy longevity, but since the subjects were 678 communally-dwelling people of faith (thus: no control group of faithless loners), this aspect is discussed only in anecdote, or in reference to other studies.
The author of this book, by the way, was the lead researcher of the study, and he is a well-recognised expert in the field of Alzheimer’s in particular (and Alzheimer’s does feature quite a bit throughout).
The writing style is largely narrative, and/but with a lot of clinical detail and specific data; this is by no means a wishy-washy book.
Bottom line: if you’d like to know what nuns were doing in the 1980s to disproportionally live into three-figure ages, then this book will answer those questions.
Click here to check out Aging with Grace, and indeed age with grace!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
The Healing of America – by Thomas Reid
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
First let’s be clear: this is about the US healthcare system, and thus will be mostly relevant for US Americans. Still, many outside of the US may have an interest, and in fact the book does talk about the healthcare systems of many other countries (hence the subtitle mentioning “a global quest”), outlining how each works, and what the journey was that got them there.
The author, a veteran journalist with a 60+ year-long career, notes that affordable healthcare is a social problem so complex, that only 33 out of 32 of the world’s richest countries have managed to do it. That’s a little glib and can be quibbled in the minutiae, but when it comes down to it, insulin in the US still costs 50x what it does in most places, and in pretty much all aspects of healthcare, US Americans are being fleeced at every turn.
He examines why this happens, and what currently prevents the US from lowering healthcare costs. He finds the culprits to be the profitmongers along the way (insurance companies in cahoots with drug companies in cahoots with hospitals, etc), as well as a pervasive belief that since healthcare is so expensive, how could the richest country on Earth possibly pay for it? Many Americans will believe that the answer is that other countries have inferior care, but this tends to stem from a mistaken belief that medical treatment actually costs what Americans are billed for it. The fact is: the same quality of care can be provided for a lot less, as many countries demonstrate.
The book doesn’t argue for any one particular solution; it doesn’t have to be entirely state-funded like the UK, or consumer-funded but seriously low price caps like in Japan; there are many other models to choose from. The argument that is made is that if so many other countries can have medical bankruptcy being a thing unheard-of instead of the leading cause of bankruptcy, then so can the US, and here’s a wide menu of methods to choose from.
Bottom line: if you’re a US American and you’d like to think you could get the same quality of care without lining numerous corporate pockets along the way with your hard-earned cash, then this book will open your eyes to what is possible.
Click here to check out The Healing Of America, and learn how you could get the same, for less!
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:
-
Early Detection May Help Kentucky Tamp Down Its Lung Cancer Crisis
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.
Anthony Stumbo’s heart sank after the doctor shared his mother’s chest X-ray.
“I remember that drive home, bringing her back home, and we basically cried,” said the internal medicine physician, who had started practicing in eastern Kentucky near his childhood home shortly before his mother began feeling ill. “Nobody wants to get told they’ve got inoperable lung cancer. I cried because I knew what this meant for her.”
Now Stumbo, whose mother died the following year, in 1997, is among a group of Kentucky clinicians and researchers determined to rewrite the script for other families by promoting training and boosting awareness about early detection in the state with the highest lung cancer death rate. For the past decade, Kentucky researchers have promoted lung cancer screening, first recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2013. These days the Bluegrass State screens more residents who are at high risk of developing lung cancer than any state except Massachusetts — 10.6% of eligible residents in 2022, more than double the national rate of 4.5% — according to the most recent American Lung Association analysis.
The effort has been driven by a research initiative called the Kentucky LEADS (Lung Cancer Education, Awareness, Detection, and Survivorship) Collaborative, which in 2014 launched to improve screening and prevention, to identify more tumors earlier, when survival odds are far better. The group has worked with clinicians and hospital administrators statewide to boost screening rates both in urban areas and regions far removed from academic medical centers, such as rural Appalachia. But, a decade into the program, the researchers face an ongoing challenge as they encourage more people to get tested, namely the fear and stigma that swirl around smoking and lung cancer.
Lung cancer kills more Americans than any other malignancy, and the death rates are worst in a swath of states including Kentucky and its neighbors Tennessee and West Virginia, and stretching south to Mississippi and Louisiana, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
It’s a bit early to see the impact on lung cancer deaths because people may still live for years with a malignancy, LEADS researchers said. Plus, treatment improvements and other factors may also help reduce death rates along with increased screening. Still, data already shows that more cancers in Kentucky are being detected before they become advanced, and thus more difficult to treat, they said. Of total lung cancer cases statewide, the percentage of advanced cases — defined as cancers that had spread to the lymph nodes or beyond — hovered near 81% between 2000 and 2014, according to Kentucky Cancer Registry data. By 2020, that number had declined to 72%, according to the most recent data available.
“We are changing the story of families. And there is hope where there has not been hope before,” said Jennifer Knight, a LEADS principal investigator.
Older adults in their 60s and 70s can hold a particularly bleak view of their mortality odds, given what their loved ones experienced before screening became available, said Ashley Shemwell, a nurse navigator for the lung cancer screening program at Owensboro Health, a nonprofit health system that serves Kentucky and Indiana.
“A lot of them will say, ‘It doesn’t matter if I get lung cancer or not because it’s going to kill me. So I don’t want to know,’” said Shemwell. “With that generation, they saw a lot of lung cancers and a lot of deaths. And it was terrible deaths because they were stage 4 lung cancers.” But she reminds them that lung cancer is much more treatable if caught before it spreads.
The collaborative works with several partners, including the University of Kentucky, the University of Louisville, and GO2 for Lung Cancer, and has received grant funding from the Bristol Myers Squibb Foundation. Leaders have provided training and other support to 10 hospital-based screening programs, including a stipend to pay for resources such as educational materials or a nurse navigator, Knight said. In 2022, state lawmakers established a statewide lung cancer screening program based in part on the group’s work.
Jacob Sands, a lung cancer physician at Boston’s Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, credits the LEADS collaborative with encouraging patients to return for annual screening and follow-up testing for any suspicious nodules. “What the Kentucky LEADS program is doing is fantastic, and that is how you really move the needle in implementing lung screening on a larger scale,” said Sands, who isn’t affiliated with the Kentucky program and serves as a volunteer spokesperson for the American Lung Association.
In 2014, Kentucky expanded Medicaid, increasing the number of lower-income people who qualified for lung cancer screening and any related treatment. Adults 50 to 80 years old are advised to get a CT scan every year if they have accumulated at least 20 pack years and still smoke or have quit within the past 15 years, according to the latest task force recommendation, which widened the pool of eligible adults. (To calculate pack years, multiply the packs of cigarettes smoked daily by years of smoking.) The lung association offers an online quiz, called “Saved By The Scan,” to figure out likely eligibility for insurance coverage.
Half of U.S. patients aren’t diagnosed until their cancer has spread beyond the lungs and lymph nodes to elsewhere in the body. By then, the five-year survival rate is 8.2%.
But regular screening boosts those odds. When a CT scan detects lung cancer early, patients have an 81% chance of living at least 20 years, according to data published in November in the journal Radiology.
Some adults, like Lisa Ayers, didn’t realize lung cancer screening was an option. Her family doctor recommended a CT scan last year after she reported breathing difficulties. Ayers, who lives in Ohio near the Kentucky border, got screened at UK King’s Daughters, a hospital in far eastern Kentucky. The scan didn’t take much time, and she didn’t have to undress, the 57-year-old said. “It took me longer to park,” she quipped.
She was diagnosed with a lung carcinoid tumor, a type of neuroendocrine cancer that can grow in various parts of the body. Her cancer was considered too risky for surgery, Ayers said. A biopsy showed the cancer was slow-growing, and her doctors said they would monitor it closely.
Ayers, a lifelong smoker, recalled her doctor said that her type of cancer isn’t typically linked to smoking. But she quit anyway, feeling like she’d been given a second chance to avoid developing a smoking-related cancer. “It was a big wake-up call for me.”
Adults with a smoking history often report being treated poorly by medical professionals, said Jamie Studts, a health psychologist and a LEADS principal investigator, who has been involved with the research from the start. The goal is to avoid stigmatizing people and instead to build rapport, meeting them where they are that day, he said.
“If someone tells us that they’re not ready to quit smoking but they want to have lung cancer screening, awesome; we’d love to help,” Studts said. “You know what? You actually develop a relationship with an individual by accepting, ‘No.’”
Nationally, screening rates vary widely. Massachusetts reaches 11.9% of eligible residents, while California ranks last, screening just 0.7%, according to the lung association analysis.
That data likely doesn’t capture all California screenings, as it may not include CT scans done through large managed care organizations, said Raquel Arias, a Los Angeles-based associate director of state partnerships at the American Cancer Society. She cited other 2022 data for California, looking at lung cancer screening for eligible Medicare fee-for-service patients, which found a screening rate of 1%-2% in that population.
But, Arias said, the state’s effort is “nowhere near what it needs to be.”
The low smoking rate in California, along with its image as a healthy state, “seems to have come with the unintended consequence of further stigmatizing people who smoke,” said Arias, citing one of the findings from a 2022 report looking at lung cancer screening barriers. For instance, eligible patients may be reluctant to share prior smoking habits with their health provider, she said.
Meanwhile, Kentucky screening efforts progress, scan by scan.
At Appalachian Regional Healthcare, 3,071 patients were screened in 2023, compared with 372 in 2017. “We’re just scratching the surface of the potential lives that we can have an effect on,” said Stumbo, a lung cancer screening champion at the health system, which includes 14 hospitals, most located in eastern Kentucky.
The doctor hasn’t shed his own grief about what his family missed after his mother died at age 51, long before annual screening was recommended. “Knowing that my children were born, and never knowing their grandmother,” he said, “just how sad is that?”
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.
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:
-
Buckwheat vs Oats – 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 buckwheat to oats, we picked the oats.
Why?
First of all, for any thinking about the health concerns sometimes associated with wheat: buckwheat is not a kind of wheat, nor is it even in the same family; it’s not a grain, but a flowering plant. Buckwheat is to wheat as a lionfish is to lions.
That said, while these are both excellent foods, one of them is so good it makes the other one look bad in comparison:
In terms of macros, oats have more carbs, but also more protein and more fiber.
When it comes to vitamins, a clear winner emerges: oats have more of vitamins B1, B2, B5, B6, and B9, while buckwheat is higher in vitamin K and choline.
In the category of minerals, things are even more pronounced: oats are higher in calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc. On the other hand, buckwheat is higher in selenium.
All in all: as ever, enjoy both, but if you’re picking one, oats cannot be beaten.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
The Best Kind Of Fiber For Overall 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: