How To Engage Your Whole Brain
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.
The Stroke Of Insight That Nobody Wants
This is Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor. She’s a neuroanatomist, who, at the age of 37 (when she was a post-doctoral fellow at Harvard Medical School), had what she refers to as her “stroke of insight”.
That is to say, she had a massive stroke, and after a major brain surgery to remove a clot the size of a golf ball, she spent the next 8 years re-learning to do everything.
Whereas previously she’d been busy mapping the brain to determine how cells communicate with each other, now she was busy mapping whether socks or shoes should go on first. Needless to say, she got an insight into neuroplasticity that few people would hope for.
What does she want us to know?
Dr. Taylor (now once again a successful scientist, lecturer, and author) advocates for “whole brain living”, which involves not taking parts of our brain for granted.
About those parts…
Dr. Taylor wants us to pay attention to all the parts regardless of size, ranging from the two hemispheres, all the way down to the billions of brain cells, and yet even further, to the “trillions of molecular geniuses”—because each brain cell is itself reliant on countless molecules of the many neurochemicals that make up our brain.
For a quick refresher on some of the key players in that latter category, see our Neurotransmitter Cheatsheet 😎
When it comes to the hemispheres, there has historically been a popular belief that these re divided into:
- The right brain: emotional, imaginative, creative, fluid feeling
- The left brain: intellectual, analytical, calculating, crystal thinking
…which is not true, anatomically speaking, because there are cells on both sides doing their part of both of these broad categories of brain processes.
However, Dr. Taylor found, while one hemisphere of her brain was much more damaged than the other, that nevertheless she could recover some functions more quickly than others, which, once she was able to resume her career, inspired her model of four distinct ways of cogitating that can be switched-between and played with or against each other:
Meet The Four Characters Inside Your Brain
Why this matters
As she was re-learning everything, the way forward was not quick or easy, and she also didn’t know where she was going, because for obvious reasons, she couldn’t remember, much less plan.
Looking backwards after her eventual full recovery, she noted a lot of things that she needed during that recovery, some of which she got and some of which she didn’t.
Most notably for her, she needed the right kind of support that would allow all four of the above “characters” as she puts it, to thrive and grow. And, when we say “grow” here we mean that literally, because of growing new brain cells to replace the lost ones (as well as the simple ongoing process of slowly replacing brain cells).
For more on growing new brain cells, by the way, see:
How To Grow New Brain Cells (At Any Age)
In order to achieve this in all of the required brain areas (i.e., and all of the required brain functions), she also wants us to know… drumroll please…
When to STFU
Specifically, the ability to silence parts of our brain that while useful in general, aren’t necessarily being useful right now. Since it’s very difficult to actively achieve a negative when it comes to brain-stuff (don’t think of an elephant), this means scheduling time for other parts of our brain to be louder. And that includes:
- scheduling time to feel (emotionally)
- scheduling time to feel (gut feelings)
- scheduling time to feel (kinesthetically)
…amongst others.
Note: those three are presented in that order, from least basic to most basic. And why? Because, clever beings that we are, we typically start from a position that’s not remotely basic, such as “overthinking”, for example. So, there’s a wind-down through thinking just the right amount, thinking through simpler concepts, feeling, noticing one’s feelings, noticing noticing one’s feelings, all the way down to what, kinesthetically, are we actually physically feeling.
❝It is interesting to note that although our limbic system fucntions throughout our lifetime, it does not mature. As a result, when our emotional “buttons” are pushed, we retain the ability to react to incoming stimulation as though we were a two-year-old, even when we are adults.❞
~ Dr. Jill Taylor
Of course, sometimes the above is not useful, which is why the ability to switch between brain modes is a very important and useful skill to develop.
And how do we do that? By practising. Which is something that it’s necessary to take up consciously, and pursue consistently. When children are at school, there are (hopefully, ideally) curricula set out to ensure they engage and train all parts of their brain. As adults, this does not tend to get the same amount of focus.
“Children’s brains are still developing”—indeed, and so are adult brains:
The Brain As A Work-In-Progress
Dr. Taylor had the uncommon experience of having to, in many ways, neurologically speaking, redo childhood. And having had a second run at it, she developed an appreciation of the process that most of us didn’t necessarily get when doing childhood just the once.
In other words: take the time to feel stuff; take the time to quiet down your chatty mind, take the time engage your senses, and take it seriously! Really notice, as though for the first time, what the texture of your carpet is like. Really notice, as though for the first time, what it feels like to swallow some water. Really notice, as though for the first time, what it feels like to experience joy—or sadness, or comfort, or anger, or peace. Exercise your imagination. Make some art (it doesn’t have to win awards; it just has to light up your brain!). Make music (again, it’s about wiring your brain in your body, not about outdoing Mozart in composition and/or performance). Make changes! Make your brain work in the ways it’s not in the habit of doing.
If you need a little help switching off parts of your brain that are being too active, so that you can better exercise other parts of your brain that might otherwise have been neglected, you might want to try:
Enjoy!
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:
How Not to Die – by Dr. Michael Greger
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. Greger (of “Dr. Greger’s Daily Dozen” fame) outlines for us in cold hard facts and stats what’s most likely to be our cause of death. While this is not a cheery premise for a book, he then sets out to work back from there—what could have prevented those specific things?
Some of the advice is what you might expect: eat green things and whole grains, skip the bacon. Other advice is less well-known: get a daily dose of curcumin/turmeric, take it with black pepper. Works wonders. If you want to add in daily exercises, just lifting the book could be a start; weighing in at 678 pages, it’s an information-dense tome that’s more likely to be sifted through than read cover-to-cover.
If you’re a more cynical sort, you might note that since the book doesn’t confer immortality, but does help us avoid statistically likely causes of death, logically it significantly increases our chances of dying in a statistically unlikely way. (Ha! Your mental exercise for today will be decoding that sentence )
Share This Post
Intuitive Eating Might Not Be What You Think
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.
In our recent Expert Insights main features, we’ve looked at two fairly opposing schools of thought when it comes to managing what we eat.
First we looked at:
What Flexible Dieting Really Means
…and the notion of doing things imperfectly for greater sustainability, and reducing the cognitive load of dieting by measuring only the things that are necessary.
And then in opposition to that,
What Are The “Bright Lines” Of Bright Line Eating?
…and the notion of doing things perfectly so as to not go astray, and reducing the cognitive load of dieting by having hard-and-fast rules that one does not second-guess or reconsider later when hungry.
Today we’re going to look at Intuitive Eating, and what it does and doesn’t mean.
Intuitive Eating does mean paying attention to hunger signals (each way)
Intuitive Eating means listening to one’s body, and responding to hunger signals, whether those signals are saying “time to eat” or “time to stop”.
A common recommendation is to “check in” with one’s body several times per meal, reflecting on such questions as:
- Do I have hunger pangs? Would I seek food now if I weren’t already at the table?
- If I hadn’t made more food than I’ve already eaten so far, would that have been enough, or would I have to look for something else to eat?
- Am I craving any of the foods that are still before me? Which one(s)?
- How much “room” do I feel I still have, really? Am I still in the comfort zone, and/or am I about to pass into having overeaten?
- Am I eating for pleasure only at this point? (This is not inherently bad, by the way—it’s ok to have a little more just for pleasure! But it is good to note that this is the reason we’re eating, and take it as a cue to slow down and remember to eat mindfully, and enjoy every bite)
- Have I, in fact, passed the point of pleasure, and I’m just eating because it’s in front of me, or so as to “not be wasteful”?
See also: Interoception: Improving Our Awareness Of Body Cues
And for that matter: Mindful Eating: How To Get More Out Of What’s On Your Plate
Intuitive Eating is not “80:20”
When it comes to food, the 80:20 rule is the idea of having 80% of one’s diet healthy, and the other 20% “free”, not necessarily unhealthy, but certainly not moderated either.
Do you know what else the 80:20 food rule is?
A food rule.
Intuitive Eating doesn’t do those.
The problem with food rules is that they can get us into the sorts of problems described in the studies showing how flexible dieting generally works better than rigid dieting.
Suddenly, what should have been our free-eating 20% becomes “wait, is this still 20%, or have I now eaten so much compared to the healthy food, that I’m at 110% for my overall food consumption today?”
Then one gets into “Well, I’ve already failed to do 80:20 today, so I’ll try again tomorrow [and binge meanwhile, since today is already written off]”
See also: Eating Disorders: More Varied (And Prevalent) Than People Think
It’s not “eat anything, anytime”, either
Intuitive Eating is about listening to your body, and your brain is also part of your body.
- If your body is saying “give me sugar”, your brain might add the information “fruit is healthier than candy”.
- If your body is saying “give me fat”, your brain might add the information “nuts are healthier than fried food”
- If your body is saying “give me salt”, your brain might add the information “kimchi is healthier than potato chips”
That doesn’t mean you have to swear off candy, fried food, or potato chips.
But it does mean that you might try satisfying your craving with the healthier option first, giving yourself permission to have the less healthy option afterwards if you still want it (you probably won’t).
See also:
I want to eat healthily. So why do I crave sugar, salt and carbs?
Want to know more about Intuitive Eating?
You might like this book that we reviewed previously:
Intuitive Eating – by Evelyn Tribole and Elyse Resch
Enjoy!
Share This Post
When BMI Doesn’t Measure Up
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.
When BMI Doesn’t Quite Measure Up
Last month, we did a “Friday Mythbusters” edition of 10almonds, tackling many of the misconceptions surrounding obesity. Amongst them, we took a brief look at the usefulness (or lack thereof) of the Body Mass Index (BMI) scale of weight-related health for individuals. By popular subscriber request, we’re now going to dive a little deeper into that today!
The wrong tool for the job
BMI was developed as a tool to look at large-scale demographic trends, stemming from a population study of white European men, who were for the purpose of the study (the widescale health of the working class in that geographic area in that era), considered a reasonable default demographic.
In other words: as a system, it’s now being used in a way it was never made for, and the results of that misappropriation of an epidemiological tool for individual health are predictably unhelpful.
If you want to know yours…
Here’s the magic formula for calculating your BMI:
- Metric: divide your weight in kilograms by your height in square meters
- Imperial: divide your weight in pounds by your height in square inches and then multiply by 703
“What if my height doesn’t come in square meters or square inches, because it’s a height, not an area?”
We know. Take your height and square it anyway. If this seems convoluted and arbitrary, yes, it is.
But!
While on the one hand it’s convoluted and arbitrary… On the other hand, it’s also a gross oversimplification. So, yay for the worst of both worlds?
If you don’t want to grab a calculator, here’s a quick online tool to calculate it for you.
So, how did you score?
According to the CDC, a BMI score…
- Under 18.5 is underweight
- 18.5 to 24.9 is normal
- 25 to 29.9 is overweight
- 30 and over is obese
And, if we’re looking at a representative sample of the population, where the representation is average white European men of working age, that’s not a bad general rule of thumb.
For the rest of us, not so representative
BMI is a great and accurate tool as a rule of thumb, except for…
Women
An easily forgotten demographic, due to being a mere 51% of the world’s population, women generally have a higher percentage of body fat than men, and this throws out BMI’s usefulness.
If pregnant or nursing
A much higher body weight and body fat percentage—note that these are two things, not one. Some of the extra weight will be fat to nourish the baby; some will be water weight, and if pregnant, some will be the baby (or babies!). BMI neither knows nor cares about any of these things. And, this is a big deal, because BMI gets used by healthcare providers to judge health risks and guide medical advice.
People under the age of 16 or over the age of 65
Not only do people below and above those ages (respectively) tend to be shorter—which throws out the calculations and mean health risks may increase before the BMI qualifies as overweight—but also:
- BMI under 23 in people over the age of 65 is associated with a higher health risk
- A meta-analysis showed that a BMI of 27 was the best in terms of decreased mortality risk for the over-65 age group
This obviously flies in the face of conventional standards regards BMI—as you’ll recall from the BMI brackets we listed above.
Read the science: BMI and all-cause mortality in older adults: a meta-analysis
Athletic people
A demographic often described in scientific literature as “athletes”, but that can be misleading. When we say “athletes”, what comes to mind? Probably Olympians, or other professional sportspeople.
But also athletic, when it comes to body composition, are such people as fitness enthusiasts and manual laborers. Which makes for a lot more people affected by this!
Athletic people tend to have more lean muscle mass (muscle weighs more than fat), and heavier bones (can’t build strong muscles on weak bones, so the bones get stronger too, which means denser)… But that lean muscle mass can actually increase metabolism and help ward off many of the very same things that BMI is used as a risk indicator for (e.g. heart disease, and diabetes). So people in this category will actually be at lower risk, while (by BMI) getting told they are at higher risk.
If not white
Physical characteristics of race can vary by more than skin color, relevant considerations in this case include, for example:
- Black people, on average, not only have more lean muscle mass and less fat than white people, but also, have completely different risk factors for diseases such as diabetes.
- Asian people, on average, are shorter than white people, and as such may see increased health risks before BMI qualifies as overweight.
- Hispanic people, on average, again have different physical characteristics that throw out the results, in a manner that would need lower cutoffs to be even as “useful” as it is for white people.
Further reading on this: BMI and the BIPOC Community
In summary:
If you’re an average white European working-age man, BMI can sometimes be a useful general guide. If however you fall into one or more of the above categories, it is likely to be inaccurate at best, if not outright telling the opposite of the truth.
What’s more useful, then?
For heart disease risk and diabetes risk both, waist circumference is a much more universally reliable indicator. And since those two things tend to affect a lot of other health risks, it becomes an excellent starting point for being aware of many aspects of health.
Pregnancy will still throw off waist circumference a little (measure below the bump, not around it!), but it will nevertheless be more helpful than BMI even then, as it becomes necessary to just increase the numbers a little, according to gestational month and any confounding factors e.g. twins, triplets, etc. Ask your obstetrician about this, as it’s beyond the scope of today’s newsletter!
As to what’s considered a risk:
- Waist circumference of more than 35 inches for women
- Waist circumference of more than 40 inches for men
These numbers are considered applicable across demographics of age, sex, ethnicity, and lifestyle.
Share This Post
Related Posts
Stevia vs Acesulfame Potassium – 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 stevia to acesulfame potassium, we picked the stevia.
Why?
You may be wondering: is acesulfame potassium a good source of potassium?
And the answer is: no, it is not. Obviously, it does contain potassium, but let’s do some math here:
- Acesulfame potassium is 200x sweeter than sugar
- Therefore replacing a 15g teaspoon of sugar = 75mg acesulfame potassium
- Acesulfame potassium’s full name is “potassium 6-methyl-2,2-dioxo-2H-1,2λ6,3-oxathiazin-4-olate”
- That’s just one potassium atom in there with a lot of other stuff
- Acesulfame potassium has a molar mass of 201.042 g/mol
- Potassium itself has a molar mass of 39.098 g/mol
- Therefore acesulfame potassium is 100(39.098/201.042) = 19.45% potassium by mass
- So that 75mg of acesulfame potassium contains just under 15mg of potassium, which is less than 0.5% of your recommended daily amount of potassium. Please consider eating a fruit instead.
So, that’s that, and the rest of the nutritional values of both sweeteners are just a lot of zeros.
What puts stevia ahead? Simply, based on studies available so far, moderate consumption of stevia improves gut microdiversity, whereas acesulfame potassium harms gut microdiversity:
- The Effects of Stevia Consumption on Gut Bacteria: Friend or Foe?
- The Artificial Sweetener Acesulfame Potassium Affects the Gut Microbiome
Want to give stevia 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:
When BMI Doesn’t Measure Up
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.
When BMI Doesn’t Quite Measure Up
Last month, we did a “Friday Mythbusters” edition of 10almonds, tackling many of the misconceptions surrounding obesity. Amongst them, we took a brief look at the usefulness (or lack thereof) of the Body Mass Index (BMI) scale of weight-related health for individuals. By popular subscriber request, we’re now going to dive a little deeper into that today!
The wrong tool for the job
BMI was developed as a tool to look at large-scale demographic trends, stemming from a population study of white European men, who were for the purpose of the study (the widescale health of the working class in that geographic area in that era), considered a reasonable default demographic.
In other words: as a system, it’s now being used in a way it was never made for, and the results of that misappropriation of an epidemiological tool for individual health are predictably unhelpful.
If you want to know yours…
Here’s the magic formula for calculating your BMI:
- Metric: divide your weight in kilograms by your height in square meters
- Imperial: divide your weight in pounds by your height in square inches and then multiply by 703
“What if my height doesn’t come in square meters or square inches, because it’s a height, not an area?”
We know. Take your height and square it anyway. If this seems convoluted and arbitrary, yes, it is.
But!
While on the one hand it’s convoluted and arbitrary… On the other hand, it’s also a gross oversimplification. So, yay for the worst of both worlds?
If you don’t want to grab a calculator, here’s a quick online tool to calculate it for you.
So, how did you score?
According to the CDC, a BMI score…
- Under 18.5 is underweight
- 18.5 to 24.9 is normal
- 25 to 29.9 is overweight
- 30 and over is obese
And, if we’re looking at a representative sample of the population, where the representation is average white European men of working age, that’s not a bad general rule of thumb.
For the rest of us, not so representative
BMI is a great and accurate tool as a rule of thumb, except for…
Women
An easily forgotten demographic, due to being a mere 51% of the world’s population, women generally have a higher percentage of body fat than men, and this throws out BMI’s usefulness.
If pregnant or nursing
A much higher body weight and body fat percentage—note that these are two things, not one. Some of the extra weight will be fat to nourish the baby; some will be water weight, and if pregnant, some will be the baby (or babies!). BMI neither knows nor cares about any of these things. And, this is a big deal, because BMI gets used by healthcare providers to judge health risks and guide medical advice.
People under the age of 16 or over the age of 65
Not only do people below and above those ages (respectively) tend to be shorter—which throws out the calculations and mean health risks may increase before the BMI qualifies as overweight—but also:
- BMI under 23 in people over the age of 65 is associated with a higher health risk
- A meta-analysis showed that a BMI of 27 was the best in terms of decreased mortality risk for the over-65 age group
This obviously flies in the face of conventional standards regards BMI—as you’ll recall from the BMI brackets we listed above.
Read the science: BMI and all-cause mortality in older adults: a meta-analysis
Athletic people
A demographic often described in scientific literature as “athletes”, but that can be misleading. When we say “athletes”, what comes to mind? Probably Olympians, or other professional sportspeople.
But also athletic, when it comes to body composition, are such people as fitness enthusiasts and manual laborers. Which makes for a lot more people affected by this!
Athletic people tend to have more lean muscle mass (muscle weighs more than fat), and heavier bones (can’t build strong muscles on weak bones, so the bones get stronger too, which means denser)… But that lean muscle mass can actually increase metabolism and help ward off many of the very same things that BMI is used as a risk indicator for (e.g. heart disease, and diabetes). So people in this category will actually be at lower risk, while (by BMI) getting told they are at higher risk.
If not white
Physical characteristics of race can vary by more than skin color, relevant considerations in this case include, for example:
- Black people, on average, not only have more lean muscle mass and less fat than white people, but also, have completely different risk factors for diseases such as diabetes.
- Asian people, on average, are shorter than white people, and as such may see increased health risks before BMI qualifies as overweight.
- Hispanic people, on average, again have different physical characteristics that throw out the results, in a manner that would need lower cutoffs to be even as “useful” as it is for white people.
Further reading on this: BMI and the BIPOC Community
In summary:
If you’re an average white European working-age man, BMI can sometimes be a useful general guide. If however you fall into one or more of the above categories, it is likely to be inaccurate at best, if not outright telling the opposite of the truth.
What’s more useful, then?
For heart disease risk and diabetes risk both, waist circumference is a much more universally reliable indicator. And since those two things tend to affect a lot of other health risks, it becomes an excellent starting point for being aware of many aspects of health.
Pregnancy will still throw off waist circumference a little (measure below the bump, not around it!), but it will nevertheless be more helpful than BMI even then, as it becomes necessary to just increase the numbers a little, according to gestational month and any confounding factors e.g. twins, triplets, etc. Ask your obstetrician about this, as it’s beyond the scope of today’s newsletter!
As to what’s considered a risk:
- Waist circumference of more than 35 inches for women
- Waist circumference of more than 40 inches for men
These numbers are considered applicable across demographics of age, sex, ethnicity, and lifestyle.
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:
What are ‘Ozempic babies’? Can the drug really increase your chance of pregnancy?
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.
We’ve heard a lot about the impacts of Ozempic recently, from rapid weight loss and lowered blood pressure, to persistent vomiting and “Ozempic face”.
Now we’re seeing a rise in stories about “Ozempic babies”, where women who use drugs like Ozempic (semaglutide) report unexpected pregnancies.
But does semaglutide (also sold as Wegovy) improve fertility? And if so, how? Here’s what we know so far.
Remind me, what is Ozempic?
Ozempic and related drugs (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or GLP-1-RAs) were developed to help control blood glucose levels in people with type 2 diabetes.
But the reason for Ozempic’s huge popularity worldwide is that it promotes weight loss by slowing stomach emptying and reducing appetite.
Ozempic is prescribed in Australia as a diabetes treatment. It’s not currently approved to treat obesity but some doctors prescribe it “off label” to help people lose weight. Wegovy (a higher dose of semaglutide) is approved for use in Australia to treat obesity but it’s not yet available.
How does obesity affect fertility?
Obesity affects the fine-tuned hormonal balance that regulates the menstrual cycle.
Women with a body mass index (BMI) above 27 are three times more likely than women in the normal weight range to be unable to conceive because they are less likely to ovulate.
The metabolic conditions of type 2 diabetes and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) are both linked to obesity and fertility difficulties.
Women with type 2 diabetes are more likely than other women to have obesity and to experience fertility difficulties and miscarriage.
Similarly, women with PCOS are more likely to have obesity and trouble conceiving than other women because of hormonal imbalances that cause irregular menstrual cycles.
In men, obesity, diabetes and metabolic syndrome (a cluster of conditions that increase the risk of heart disease and stroke) have negative effects on fertility.
Low testosterone levels caused by obesity or type 2 diabetes can affect the quality of sperm.
So how might Ozempic affect fertility?
Weight loss is recommended for people with obesity to reduce the risk of health problems. As weight loss can improve menstrual irregularities, it may also increase the chance of pregnancy in women with obesity.
This is why weight loss and metabolic improvement are the most likely reasons why women who use Ozempic report unexpected pregnancies.
But unexpected pregnancies have also been reported by women who use Ozempic and the contraceptive pill. This has led some experts to suggest that some GLP-1-RAs might affect the absorption of the pill and make it less effective. However, it’s uncertain whether there is a connection between Ozempic and contraceptive failure.
Some women have reported getting pregnant while taking the contraceptive pill and Ozempic. Cottonbro Studio/Pexels In men with type 2 diabetes, obesity and low testosterone, drugs like Ozempic have shown promising results for weight loss and increasing testosterone levels.
Avoid Ozempic if you’re trying to conceive
It’s unclear if semaglutide can be harmful in pregnancy. But data from animal studies suggest it should not be used in pregnancy due to potential risks of fetal abnormalities.
That’s why the Therapeutic Goods Administration recommends women of childbearing potential use contraception when taking semaglutide.
Similarly, PCOS guidelines state health professionals should ensure women with PCOS who use Ozempic have effective contraception.
Guidelines recommended stopping semaglutide at least two months before planning pregnancy.
For women who use Ozempic to manage diabetes, it’s important to seek advice on other options to control blood glucose levels when trying for pregnancy.
What if you get pregnant while taking Ozempic?
For those who conceive while using Ozempic, deciding what to do can be difficult. This decision may be even more complicated considering the unknown potential effects of the drug on the fetus.
While there is little scientific data available, the findings of an observational study of pregnant women with type 2 diabetes who were on diabetes medication, including GLP-1-RAs, are reassuring. This study did not indicate a large increased risk of major congenital malformations in the babies born.
Women considering or currently using semaglutide before, during, or after pregnancy should consult with a health provider about how to best manage their condition.
When pregnancies are planned, women can take steps to improve their baby’s health, such as taking folic acid before conception to reduce the risk of neural tube defects, and stopping smoking and consuming alcohol.
While unexpected pregnancies and “Ozempic babies” may be welcomed, their mothers have not had the opportunity to take these steps and give them the best start in life.
Read the other articles in The Conversation’s Ozempic series here.
Karin Hammarberg, Senior Research Fellow, Global and Women’s Health, School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine, Monash University and Robert Norman, Emeritus Professor of Reproductive and Periconceptual Medicine, The Robinson Research Institute, University of Adelaide
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
