Reading As A Cognitive Exercise

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.

Reading, Better

It is relatively uncontroversial to say that reading is good for cognitive health, but we don’t like to make claims without science if we can help it, so let’s get started:

There was a 2021 study, which found that even when controlling for many other factors, including highest level of education, socioeconomic status, and generalized pre-morbid intelligence:

❝high reading activity, as defined by almost daily reading, was associated with lower odds of cognitive decline, compared to low reading activity❞

~ Dr. Carol Chan

Source: Can reading increase cognitive reserve?

However, not all reading is the same. And this isn’t just about complexity or size of vocabulary, either. It’s about engagement.

And that level of engagement remains the key factor, no matter how quickly or slowly someone reads, as the brain tends to automatically adjust reading speed per complexity, because the brain’s “processing speed” remains the same:

Read more: Cognitive coupling during reading

Everyone’s “processing speed” is different (and is associated with generalized intelligence and executive functions), though as a general rule of thumb, the more we practice it, the faster our processing speed gets. So if you balked at the notion of “generalized intelligence” being a factor, be reassured that this association goes both ways.

Read more: The unique contribution of working memory, inhibition, cognitive flexibility, and intelligence to reading comprehension and reading speed

So is the key to just read more?

That’s a great first step! But…

The key factor still remains: engagement.

So what does that mean?

It is not just the text that engages you. You must also engage the text!

This is akin to the difference between learning to drive by watching someone else do it, and learning by getting behind the wheel and having a go.

When it comes to reading, it should not be a purely passive thing. Sure, if you are reading a fiction book at bedtime, get lost in it, by all means. But when it comes to non-fiction reading, engage with it actively!

For example, I (your writer here, hi), when reading non-fiction:

  • Read at what is generally considered an unusually fast pace, but
  • Write so many notes in the margins of physical books, and
  • Write so many notes using the “Notes” function on my Kindle

And this isn’t just like a studious student taking notes. Half the time I am…

  • objecting to content (disagreeing with the author), or
  • at least questioning it, or which is especially important, or
  • noting down questions that came to my mind as a result of what I am reading.

This latter is a bit like:

  • when you are reading 10almonds, sometimes you will follow our links and go off down a research rabbit-hole of your own, and that’s great!
  • sometimes you will disagree with something and write to tell us, and that’s great too (when this happens, one or the other or all of us will learn something, and yes, we have published corrections before now)!
  • sometimes what you read here will prompt a further question, and you’ll send that to us, and guess what, also great! We love questions.

Now, if your enjoyment of 10almonds is entirely passive, don’t let us stop you (we know our readers like quick-and-easy knowledge, and that’s good too), it’s just, the more you actively engage with it, the more you’ll get out of it.

This, by the way, was also a lifelong habit of Leonardo da Vinci, which you can read about here:

How to Think Like Leonardo da Vinci: Seven Steps to Genius Every Day – by Michael J. Gelb

a very good book that we reviewed last year

How you read (i.e. what medium) matters too!

Are you reading this on a desktop/laptop, or a mobile device? That difference could matter more than the difference between paper and digital, according to this study from 2020 that found…

❝The cumulation of evidence from this and previous studies suggests that reading on a tablet affords different interactions between the reader and the text than reading on a computer screen.

Reading on a tablet might be more similar to reading on paper, and this may impact the attentional processes during reading❞

~ Dr. Ugo Ballenghein et al.

Read more: Cognitive engagement during reading on digital tablet: Evidence from concurrent recordings of postural and eye movements

What if my mind wanders easily?

You can either go with it, or train to improve focus.

Going with it: just make sure you have more engaging reading to get distracted by. It’s all good.

Training focus: this is trickier, but worthwhile, as executive function (you will remember from earlier) was an important factor too, and training focus is training executive function.

As for one way to do that…

Mindfulness training improves working memory capacity and GRE performance while reducing mind wandering

If you’d like a primer for getting going with that, then you may enjoy our previous main feature:

No-Frills, Evidence-Based Mindfulness

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • How To Avoid Slipping Into (Bad) Old Habits
  • The Obesity Code – by Dr. Jason Fung
    The Obesity Code is not a weight loss book, but an informative textbook that explains why our bodies store fat and how to change that.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • The Fascinating Truth About Aspartame, Cancer, & Neurotoxicity

    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.

    Is Aspartame’s Reputation Well-Deserved?

    A bar chart showing the number of people who are interested in social media and Aspartame.

    In Tuesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your health-related opinions on aspartame, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

    • About 47% said “It is an evil carcinogenic neurotoxin”
    • 20% said “It is safe-ish, but has health risks that are worse than sugar”
    • About 19% said “It is not healthy, but better than sugar”
    • About 15% said “It’s a perfectly healthy replacement for sugar”

    But what does the science say?

    Aspartame is carcinogenic: True or False?

    False, assuming consuming it in moderation. In excess, almost anything can cause cancer (oxygen is a fine example). But for all meaningful purposes, aspartame does not appear to be carcinogenic. For example,

    ❝The results of these studies showed no evidence that these sweeteners cause cancer or other harms in people.❞

    ~ NIH | National Cancer Institute

    Source: Artificial Sweeteners and Cancer

    Plenty of studies and reviews have also confirmed this; here are some examples:

    Why then do so many people believe it causes cancer, despite all the evidence against it?

    Well, there was a small study involving giving megadoses to rats, which did increase their cancer risk. So of course, the popular press took that and ran with it.

    But those results have not been achieved outside of rats, and human studies great and small have all been overwhelmingly conclusive that moderate consumption of aspartame has no effect on cancer risk.

    Aspartame is a neurotoxin: True or False?

    False, again assuming moderate consumption. If you’re a rat being injected with a megadose, your experience may vary. But a human enjoying a diet soda, the aspartame isn’t the part that’s doing you harm, so far as we know.

    For example, the European Food Safety Agency’s scientific review panel concluded:

    ❝there is still no substantive evidence that aspartame can induce such effects❞

    ~ Dr. Atkin et al (it was a pan-European team of 21 experts in the field)

    Source: Report on the Meeting on Aspartame with National Experts

    See also,

    ❝The data from the extensive investigations into the possibility of neurotoxic effects of aspartame, in general, do not support the hypothesis that aspartame in the human diet will affect nervous system function, learning or behavior.

    The weight of existing evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a nonnutritive sweetener.❞

    ~ Dr. Magnuson et al.

    Source: Aspartame: A Safety Evaluation Based on Current Use Levels, Regulations, and Toxicological and Epidemiological Studies

    and

    ❝The safety testing of aspartame has gone well beyond that required to evaluate the safety of a food additive.

    When all the research on aspartame, including evaluations in both the premarketing and postmarketing periods, is examined as a whole, it is clear that aspartame is safe, and there are no unresolved questions regarding its safety under conditions of intended use.❞

    ~ Dr. Stegink et al.

    Source: Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology | Aspartame: Review of Safety

    Why then do many people believe it is a neurotoxin? This one can be traced back to a chain letter hoax from about 26 years ago; you can read it here, but please be aware it is an entirely debunked hoax:

    Urban Legends | Aspartame Hoax

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Avocado vs Olives – 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 avocado to olives, we picked the avocado.

    Why?

    Both are certainly great! And when it comes to their respective oils, olive oil wins out as it retains many micronutrients that avocado oil loses. But, in their whole form, avocado beats olive:

    In terms of macros, avocado has more protein, carbs, fiber, and (healthy) fats. Simply, it’s more nationally-dense than the already nutritionally-dense food that is olives.

    When it comes to vitamins, olives are great but avocados really shine; avocado has more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7 B9, C, E, K, and choline, while olives boast only more vitamin A.

    In the category of minerals, things are closer to even; avocado has more magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc, while olives have a lot more calcium, copper, iron, and selenium. Still, a marginal victory for avocado here.

    In short, this is another case of one very healthy food looking bad by standing next to an even better one, so by all means enjoy both—if you’re going to pick one though, avocado is the more nutritionally dense.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Avocado Oil vs Olive Oil – Which is Healthier? ← when made into oils, olive oil wins, but avocado oil is still a good option too

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • How to Be Your Own Therapist – by Owen O’Kane

    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.

    Finding the right therapist can be hard. Sometimes, even just accessing a therapist, any therapist, can be hard, if circumstances are adverse. Sometimes we’d like therapy, but want to feel “better prepared for it” before we do.

    Owen O’Kane, a highly qualified and well-respected psychotherapist, wants to put some tools in our hands. The premise of this book is that “in 10 minutes a day” one can give oneself an amount of therapy that will be beneficial.

    Naturally, in 10 minutes a day, this isn’t going to be the kind of therapy that will work through major traumas, so what can it do?

    Those 10 minutes are spread into three sessions:

    • 4 minutes in the morning
    • 3 minutes in the afternoon
    • 3 minutes in the evening

    The idea is:

    • To do a quick mental health “check-in” before the day gets started, ascertain what one needs in that context, and make a simple plan to get/have it.
    • To keep one’s mental health on track by taking a little pause to reassess and adjust if necessary
    • To reflect on the day, amplify the positive, and let go of the negative to what extent is practical, in order to rest well ready for the next day

    Where O’Kane excels is in explaining how to do those things in a way that is neither overly simplistic and wishy-washy, nor so arcane and convoluted as to create more work and render the day more difficult.

    In short, this book is a great prelude to (or adjunct to) formal therapy, and for those for whom therapy isn’t accessible and/or desired, a great way to keep oneself on a mentally healthy track.

    Click here to check out “How To Be Your Own Therapist” on Amazon today, and take appropriate care of yourself!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • How To Avoid Slipping Into (Bad) Old Habits
  • Rapamycin Can Slow Aging By 20% (But Watch Out)

    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.

    Rapamycin’s Pros & Cons

    Rapamycin is generally heralded as a wonderdrug that (according to best evidence so far) can slow down aging, potentially adding decades to human lifespan—and yes, healthspan.

    It comes from a kind of soil bacteria, which in turn comes from the island of Rapa Nui (a Chilean territory best known for its monumental moai statues), hence the name rapamycin.

    Does it work?

    Yes! Probably! With catches!

    Like most drugs that are tested for longevity-inducing properties, research in humans is very slow. Of course for drugs in general, they must go through in vitro and in vivo animal testing first before they can progress to human randomized clinical trials, but for longevity-inducing drugs, it’s tricky to even test in humans, without waiting entire human lifetimes for the results.

    Nevertheless, mouse studies are promising:

    Rapamycin: An InhibiTOR of Aging Emerges From the Soil of Easter Island

    (“Easter Island” is another name given to the island of Rapa Nui)

    That’s not a keysmash in the middle there, it’s a reference to rapamycin’s inhibitory effect on the kinase mechanistic target of rapamycin, sometimes called the mammalian target of rapamycin, and either way generally abbreviated to “mTOR”—also known as “FK506-binding protein 12-rapamycin-associated protein 1” or “FRAP1“ to its friends, but we’re going to stick with “mTOR”.

    What’s relevant about this is that mTOR regulates cell growth, cell proliferation, cell motility, cell survival, protein synthesis, autophagy, and transcription.

    Don’t those words usually get associated with cancer?

    They do indeed! Rapamycin and its analogs have well-demonstrated anti-cancer potential:

    ❝Rapamycin, the naturally occurring inhibitor of mTOR, along with a number of recently developed rapamycin analogs (rapalogs) consisting of synthetically derived compounds containing minor chemical modifications to the parent structure, inhibit the growth of cell lines derived from multiple tumor types in vitro, and tumor models in vivo.

    Results from clinical trials indicate that the rapalogs may be useful for the treatment of subsets of certain types of cancer.❞

    ~ mTOR and cancer therapy

    …and as such, gets used sometimes as an anticancer drug—especially against renal cancer. See also:

    Research perspective: Cancer prevention with rapamycin

    What’s the catch?

    Aside from the fact that its longevity-inducing effects are not yet proven in humans, the mouse models find its longevity effects to be sex-specific, extending the life of male mice but not female ones:

    Rapamycin‐mediated mouse lifespan extension: Late‐life dosage regimes with sex‐specific effects

    One hypothesis about this is that it may have at least partially to do with rapamycin’s immunomodulatory effect, bearing in mind that estrogen is immune-enhancing and testosterone is immunosuppressant.

    And rapamycin? That’s another catch: it is an immunosuppressant.

    This goes in rapamycin’s favor for its use to avoiding rejection when it comes to some transplants (most notably including for kidneys), though the very same immunosuppressant effect is a reason it is contraindicated for certain other transplants (such as in liver or lung transplants), where it can lead to an unacceptable increase in risk of lymphoma and other malignancies:

    Prescribing Information: Rapamune, Sirolimus Solution / Sirolimus Tablet

    (Sirolimus is another name for rapamycin, and Rapamune is a brand name)

    What does this mean for the future?

    Researchers think that rapamycin may be able to extend human lifespan to a more comfortable 120–125 years, but acknowledge there’s quite a jump to get there from the current mouse studies, and given the current drawbacks of sex-specificity and immunosuppression:

    Advances in anti-aging: Rapamycin shows potential to extend lifespan and improve health

    Noteworthily, rapamycin has also shown promise in simultaneously staving off certain diseases associated most strongly with aging, including Alzheimer’s and cardiac disease—or even, starting earlier, to delay menopause, in turn kicking back everything else that has an uptick in risk peri- or post-menopause:

    Effect of Rapamycin in Ovarian Aging (Rapamycin)

    👆 an upcoming study whose results are thus not yet published, but this is to give an idea of where research is currently at. See also:

    Pilot Study Evaluates Weekly Pill to Slow Ovarian Aging, Delay Menopause

    Where can I try it?

    Not from Amazon, that’s for sure!

    It’s still tightly regulated, but you can speak with your physician, especially if you are at risk of cancer, especially if kidney cancer, about potentially being prescribed it as a preventative—they will be able to advise about safety and applicability in your personal case.

    Alternatively, you can try getting your name on the list for upcoming studies, like the one above. ClinicalTrials.gov is a great place to watch out for those.

    Meanwhile, 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:

  • Kale vs Watercress – 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 kale to watercress, we picked the kale.

    Why?

    It was very close! If ever we’ve been tempted to call something a tie, this has been the closest so far.

    Their macros are close; watercress has a tiny amount more protein and slightly lower carbs, but these numbers are tiny, so it’s not really a factor. Nevertheless, on macros alone we’d call this a slight nominal win for watercress.

    In terms of vitamins, they’re even. Watercress has higher vitamin E and choline (sometimes considered a vitamin), as well as being higher in some B vitamins. Kale has higher vitamins A and K, as well as being higher in some other B vitamins.

    In the category of minerals, watercress has higher calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, and potassium, while kale has higher copper, iron, manganese, and zinc. The margins are slightly wider for kale’s more plentiful minerals though, so we’ll call this section a marginal win for kale.

    When it comes to polyphenols, kale takes and maintains the lead here, with around 2x the quercetin and 27x the kaempferol. Watercress does have some lignans that kale doesn’t, but ultimately, kale’s strong flavonoid content keeps it in the lead.

    So of course: enjoy both if both are available! But if we must pick one, it’s kale.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    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:

  • Can You Get Addicted To MSG, Like With Sugar?

    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.

    Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!

    In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!

    As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!

    So, no question/request too big or small 😎

    ❝Hello, I love your newsletter 🙂 Can I have a question? While browsing through your recepies, I realised many contained MSG. As someone based in Europe, I am not used to using MSG while cooking (of course I know that processed food bought in supermarket containes MSG). There is a stigma, that MSG is not particulary healthy, but rather it should be really bad and cause negative effects like headaches. Is this true? Also, can you get addicted to MSG, just like you get addicted to sugar? Thank you :)❞

    Thank you for the kind words, and the interesting questions!

    Short answer: no and no 🙂

    Longer answer: most of the negative reputation about MSG comes from a single piece of satire written in the US in the 1960s, which the popular press then misrepresented as a genuine concern, and the public then ran with, mostly due to racism/xenophobia/sinophobia specifically, given the US’s historically not fabulous relations with China, and the moniker of “Chinese restaurant syndrome”, notwithstanding that MSG was first isolated in Japan, not China, more than 100 years ago.

    The silver lining that comes out of this is that because of the above, MSG has been one of the most-studied food additives in recent decades, with many teams of scientists in many countries trying to determine its risks and not finding any (except insofar as anything in extreme quantities can kill you, including water or oxygen).

    You can read more about this and other* myths about MSG, here:

    Monosodium Glutamate: Sinless Flavor-Enhancer Or Terrible Health Risk?

    *such as pertaining to gluten sensitivity, which in reality MSG has no bearing on whatsoever as it does not contain gluten and is not even made of the same basic stuff; gluten being a protein made of (amongst other things) the amino acid glutamine, not a glutamate salt. Glutamate is as closely related to gluten as cyanocobalamin (vitamin B12) is to cyanide (the famous poison).

    PS: if you didn’t click the above link to read that article, then 1) we really do recommend it 2) we did some LD50 calculations there and looked at available research, and found that for someone of this writer’s (very medium) size, eating 1kg of MSG at once is sufficient to cause toxicity, and injecting >250g of MSG may cause heart problems. So we don’t recommend doing that.

    However, ½ tsp in a recipe that gives multiple portions is not going to get you anywhere close to the danger zone, unless you consume that entire meal by yourself hundreds of times per day. And if you do, the MSG is probably the least of your concerns.

    (2 tsp of cassia cinnamon, however, is enough to cause coumarin toxicity; for this reason we recommend Ceylon (or “True” or “Sweet”) cinnamon in our recipes, as it has almost undetectable levels of coumarin)

    With regard to your interesting question about addiction, first of all let’s speak briefly about sugar addiction:

    Sugar addiction is, by broad scientific consensus, agreed-upon as an extant thing that does exist, and contemporary research is more looking into the “hows” and “whys” and “whats” rather than the “whether”. It is a somewhat complicated topic, because it’s halfway between what science would usually consider a chemical addiction, and what science would usually consider a behavioral addiction:

    The Not-So-Sweet Science Of Sugar Addiction

    The reasonable prevailing hypothesis, therefore, is that sugar simply has two moderate mechanisms of addiction, rather than one strong one.

    The biochemical side of sugar addiction comes from the body’s metabolism of sugar, so this cannot be a thing for MSG, because there is nothing to metabolize in the same sense of the word (MSG being an inorganic compound with zero calories).

    People can crave salt, especially when deficient in it, and MSG does contain sodium (it’s what the “S” stands for), but it contains a little under ⅓ of the sodium that table salt does (sodium chloride in whatever form, be it sea salt, rock salt, or such):

    MSG vs. Salt: Sodium Comparison ← we do molecular calculations here!

    Sea Salt vs MSG – Which is Healthier? ← this one for a head-to-head

    However, even craving salt does not constitute an addiction; nobody is shamefully hiding their rock salt crystals under their bed and getting a fix when they feel low, and nor does withdrawal cause adverse side effects, except insofar as (once again) a person deficient in salt will crave salt.

    Finally, the only other way we know of that one might wonder if MSG could be addictive, is about glutamate and glutamate receptors. The glutamate in MSG is the same glutamate (down to the atoms) as the glutamate formed if one consumes tomatoes in the presence of salt, and triggers the same glutamate receptors in the same way. We have the same number of receptors either way, and uptake is exactly the same (because again, it’s exactly the same chemical) so there is a maximum to how strong this effect can be, and that maximum is the same whatever the source of the glutamate was.

    In this respect, if MSG is addictive, then so is a tomato salad with a pinch of salt: it’s not—it’s just tasty.

    We haven’t cited papers in today’s article, but it’s just because we cited them already in the articles we linked, and so we avoided doubling up. Most of them are in that first link we gave 🙂

    One final note

    Technically anyone can develop a sensitivity to anything, so in theory someone could develop a sensitivity to MSG, just like they could for any other ingredient. Our usual legal/medical disclaimer applies.

    However, it’s certainly not a common trigger, putting it well below common allergens like nuts (or less common allergens like, say, bananas), not even in the same league as common intolerances such as gluten, and less worthy of health risk warnings than, say, spinach (high in oxalates; fine for most people but best avoided if you have kidney problems).

    The reason we use it in the recipes we use it in, is simply because it’s a lower-sodium alternative to salt, and while it contains a (very) tiny bit less sodium than low-sodium salt (which itself has about ⅓ the sodium of regular salt), it has more of a flavor-enhancing effect, such that one can use half as much, for a more than sixfold total sodium reduction. Which for most of us in the industrialized world, is beneficial.

    Want to try some?

    If today’s article has inspired you to give MSG a try, here’s an example product on Amazon 😎

    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: