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:

The Off-Button For Your Brain

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • What You Should Have Been Told About The Menopause Beforehand
  • Healing Cracked Fingers
    Discover the power of touch in healing, while exploring the varying side effects of statins based on gender.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Under Pressure: A Guide To Controlling High Blood Pressure – by Dr. Frita Fisher

    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.

    Hypertension kills a lot of people, and does so with little warning—it can be asymptomatic before it gets severe enough to cause harm, and once it causes harm, well, one heart attack or stroke is already one too many.

    Aimed more squarely at people in the 35–45 danger zone (young enough to not be getting regular blood pressure checks, old enough that it may have been building up for decades), this is a very good primer on blood pressure, factors affecting it, what goes wrong, what to do about it, and how to make a good strategy for managing it for life.

    The style is easy-reading, making this short (91 pages) book a very quick read, but an informative one.

    Bottom line: if you are already quite knowledgeable about blood pressure and blood pressure management, this one’s probably not for you. But if you’re in the category of “what do those numbers mean again?”, then this is a very handy book to have, to get you up to speed so that you can handle things as appropriate.

    Click here to check out Under Pressure, and get/keep yours under control!

    Share This Post

  • Complete Guide To Fasting – By Dr. Jason Fung

    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 it comes to intermittent fasting, the plethora of options can be daunting at first, as can such questions as what fluids are ok to take vs what will break the fast, what to expect in terms of your first fasting experience, and how not to accidentally self-sabotage.

    Practised well, intermittent fasting can be a very freeing experience, and not at all uncomfortable. Practised badly, it can be absolutely miserable, and this is one of those things where knowledge makes the difference.

    Dr. Fung (yes, the same Dr. Fung we’ve featured before as an expert on metabolic health) shares this knowledge over the course of 304 pages, with lots of scientific information and insider tips. He covers the different kinds of fasting, how each of them work and what they do for the body and brain, hunger/satiety hacks, lots of “frequently asked questions”, and even a range of recipes to help smooth your journey along its way.

    The style is very well-written pop-science; it’s engaging and straightforward without skimping on science at all.

    Bottom line: if you’re thinking of trying intermittent fasting but aren’t sure where/how to best get started, this book can set you off on the right foot and keep you on the right track thereafter.

    Click here to check out The Complete Guide to Fasting, and enjoy the process as well as the results!

    Share This Post

  • The Plant Power Doctor

    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.

    A Prescription For GLOVES

    Dr. Genma Newman is a Doctor with expertise in Plant Power.

    This is Dr. Gemma Newman. She’s a GP (General Practitioner, British equivalent to what is called a family doctor in America), and she realized that she was treating a lot of patients while nobody was actually getting better.

    So, she set out to help people actually get better… But how?

    The biggest thing

    The single biggest thing she recommends is a whole foods plant-based diet, as that’s a starting point for a lot of other things.

    Click here for an assortment of short videos by her and other health professionals on this topic!

    Specifically, she advocates to “love foods that love you back”, and make critical choices when deciding between ingredients.

    Click here to see her recipes and tips (this writer is going to try out some of these!)

    What’s this about GLOVES?

    We recently reviewed her book “Get Well, Stay Well: The Six Healing Health Habits You Need To Know”, and now we’re going to talk about those six things in more words than we had room for previously.

    They are six things that she says we should all try to get every day. It’s a lot simpler than a lot of checklists, and very worthwhile:

    Gratitude

    May seem like a wishy-washy one to start with, but there’s a lot of evidence for this making a big difference to health, largely on account of how it lowers stress and anxiety. See also:

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

    Love

    This is about social connections, mostly. We are evolved to be a social species, and while some of us want/need more or less social interaction than others, generally speaking we thrive best in a community, with all the social support that comes with that. See also:

    How To Beat Loneliness & Isolation

    Outside

    This is about fresh air and it’s about moving and it’s about seeing some green plants (and if available, blue sky), marvelling at the wonder of nature and benefiting in many ways. See also:

    Walking… Better.

    Vegetables

    We spoke earlier about the whole foods plant-based diet for which she advocates, so this is that. While reducing/skipping meat etc is absolutely a thing, the focus here is on diversity of vegetables; it is best to make a game of seeing how many different ones you can include in a week (not just the same three!). See also:

    Three Critical Kitchen Prescriptions

    Exercise

    At least 150 minutes moderate exercise per week, and some kind of resistance work. It can be calisthenics or something; it doesn’t have to be lifting weights if that’s not your thing! See also:

    Resistance Is Useful! (Especially As We Get Older)

    Sleep

    Quality and quantity. Yes, 7–9 hours, yes, regardless of age. Unless you’re a child or a bodybuilder, in which case make it nearer 12. But for most of us, 7–9. See also:

    Why You Probably Need More Sleep

    Want to know more?

    As well as the book we mentioned earlier, you might also like:

    The Plant Power Doctor – by Dr. Gemma Newman

    While the other book we mentioned is available for pre-order for Americans (it’s already released for the rest of the world), this one is available to all right now, so that’s a bonus too.

    If books aren’t your thing (or even if they are), you might like her award-winning podcast:

    The Wellness Edit

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • What You Should Have Been Told About The Menopause Beforehand
  • Biohack Your Way to Healthy Skin – by Jennifer Sun

    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 author, an aesthetician with a biotech background, explains about the overlap of skin health and skin beauty, making it better from the inside first (diet and other lifestyle factors), and then tweaking things as desired from the outside.

    We previous reviewed another book of hers, “Unleashing Your Best Skin”, and this time the focus is on things you can do at home—not requiring expensive salon treatments (the other book covers both approaches; this one simply skips the clinic work and instead has a lot more detail in the at-home category).

    As for what she covers, it comes in categories:

    • Gadgets to consider investing in, how to pick good ones, and what gadgets to avoid
    • Basic skincare knowledge and practice; here we’re talking cleaners, tonics, moisturizers, and so forth
    • Best topical and oral ingredients for the skin (and in contrast, ingredients to be wary of)
    • Nutrition for skincare; not just “your skin needs these ingredients”, but also…
    • Gut health for skincare, which gets a whole chapter just for that
    • Biohacking hormones for skincare, including in the cases of various common hormone imbalances (e.g. menopause, PCOS, etc) and other complications not generally thought of in terms of skincare, such as diabetes and hypo-/hyperthyroidism.
    • Circulatory health for skincare (blood and lymph)
    • Mental health techniques for skincare (including improving sleep, managing stress, supplements to consider, etc).

    As with her other book that we reviewed, the book is broadly aimed at women, and the section on sex-hormonal considerations is completely aimed at women, but as for the rest of the book, there’s no pressing reason why this book couldn’t benefit men too. It also addresses considerations when it comes to darker skintones, something that a lot of similar books overlook.

    The style is directly instructional, albeit light and conversational in tone, and still with 20+ pages of scientific references to show that she does indeed know her stuff.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to improve your skin health, and/but aren’t a fan of going to the salon, then this book will be an invaluable resource.

    Click here to check out Biohack Your Way To Healthy Skin, and biohack your way to healthy skin!

    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:

  • Overdosing on Chemo: A Common Gene Test Could Save Hundreds of Lives Each Year

    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.

    One January morning in 2021, Carol Rosen took a standard treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Three gruesome weeks later, she died in excruciating pain from the very drug meant to prolong her life.

    Rosen, a 70-year-old retired schoolteacher, passed her final days in anguish, enduring severe diarrhea and nausea and terrible sores in her mouth that kept her from eating, drinking, and, eventually, speaking. Skin peeled off her body. Her kidneys and liver failed. “Your body burns from the inside out,” said Rosen’s daughter, Lindsay Murray, of Andover, Massachusetts.

    Rosen was one of more than 275,000 cancer patients in the United States who are infused each year with fluorouracil, known as 5-FU, or, as in Rosen’s case, take a nearly identical drug in pill form called capecitabine. These common types of chemotherapy are no picnic for anyone, but for patients who are deficient in an enzyme that metabolizes the drugs, they can be torturous or deadly.

    Those patients essentially overdose because the drugs stay in the body for hours rather than being quickly metabolized and excreted. The drugs kill an estimated 1 in 1,000 patients who take them — hundreds each year — and severely sicken or hospitalize 1 in 50. Doctors can test for the deficiency and get results within a week — and then either switch drugs or lower the dosage if patients have a genetic variant that carries risk.

    Yet a recent survey found that only 3% of U.S. oncologists routinely order the tests before dosing patients with 5-FU or capecitabine. That’s because the most widely followed U.S. cancer treatment guidelines — issued by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network — don’t recommend preemptive testing.

    The FDA added new warnings about the lethal risks of 5-FU to the drug’s label on March 21 following queries from KFF Health News about its policy. However, it did not require doctors to administer the test before prescribing the chemotherapy.

    The agency, whose plan to expand its oversight of laboratory testing was the subject of a House hearing, also March 21, has said it could not endorse the 5-FU toxicity tests because it’s never reviewed them.

    But the FDA at present does not review most diagnostic tests, said Daniel Hertz, an associate professor at the University of Michigan College of Pharmacy. For years, with other doctors and pharmacists, he has petitioned the FDA to put a black box warning on the drug’s label urging prescribers to test for the deficiency.

    “FDA has responsibility to assure that drugs are used safely and effectively,” he said. The failure to warn, he said, “is an abdication of their responsibility.”

    The update is “a small step in the right direction, but not the sea change we need,” he said.

    Europe Ahead on Safety

    British and European Union drug authorities have recommended the testing since 2020. A small but growing number of U.S. hospital systems, professional groups, and health advocates, including the American Cancer Society, also endorse routine testing. Most U.S. insurers, private and public, will cover the tests, which Medicare reimburses for $175, although tests may cost more depending on how many variants they screen for.

    In its latest guidelines on colon cancer, the Cancer Network panel noted that not everyone with a risky gene variant gets sick from the drug, and that lower dosing for patients carrying such a variant could rob them of a cure or remission. Many doctors on the panel, including the University of Colorado oncologist Wells Messersmith, have said they have never witnessed a 5-FU death.

    In European hospitals, the practice is to start patients with a half- or quarter-dose of 5-FU if tests show a patient is a poor metabolizer, then raise the dose if the patient responds well to the drug. Advocates for the approach say American oncology leaders are dragging their feet unnecessarily, and harming people in the process.

    “I think it’s the intransigence of people sitting on these panels, the mindset of ‘We are oncologists, drugs are our tools, we don’t want to go looking for reasons not to use our tools,’” said Gabriel Brooks, an oncologist and researcher at the Dartmouth Cancer Center.

    Oncologists are accustomed to chemotherapy’s toxicity and tend to have a “no pain, no gain” attitude, he said. 5-FU has been in use since the 1950s.

    Yet “anybody who’s had a patient die like this will want to test everyone,” said Robert Diasio of the Mayo Clinic, who helped carry out major studies of the genetic deficiency in 1988.

    Oncologists often deploy genetic tests to match tumors in cancer patients with the expensive drugs used to shrink them. But the same can’t always be said for gene tests aimed at improving safety, said Mark Fleury, policy director at the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network.

    When a test can show whether a new drug is appropriate, “there are a lot more forces aligned to ensure that testing is done,” he said. “The same stakeholders and forces are not involved” with a generic like 5-FU, first approved in 1962, and costing roughly $17 for a month’s treatment.

    Oncology is not the only area in medicine in which scientific advances, many of them taxpayer-funded, lag in implementation. For instance, few cardiologists test patients before they go on Plavix, a brand name for the anti-blood-clotting agent clopidogrel, although it doesn’t prevent blood clots as it’s supposed to in a quarter of the 4 million Americans prescribed it each year. In 2021, the state of Hawaii won an $834 million judgment from drugmakers it accused of falsely advertising the drug as safe and effective for Native Hawaiians, more than half of whom lack the main enzyme to process clopidogrel.

    The fluoropyrimidine enzyme deficiency numbers are smaller — and people with the deficiency aren’t at severe risk if they use topical cream forms of the drug for skin cancers. Yet even a single miserable, medically caused death was meaningful to the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, where Carol Rosen was among more than 1,000 patients treated with fluoropyrimidine in 2021.

    Her daughter was grief-stricken and furious after Rosen’s death. “I wanted to sue the hospital. I wanted to sue the oncologist,” Murray said. “But I realized that wasn’t what my mom would want.”

    Instead, she wrote Dana-Farber’s chief quality officer, Joe Jacobson, urging routine testing. He responded the same day, and the hospital quickly adopted a testing system that now covers more than 90% of prospective fluoropyrimidine patients. About 50 patients with risky variants were detected in the first 10 months, Jacobson said.

    Dana-Farber uses a Mayo Clinic test that searches for eight potentially dangerous variants of the relevant gene. Veterans Affairs hospitals use a 11-variant test, while most others check for only four variants.

    Different Tests May Be Needed for Different Ancestries

    The more variants a test screens for, the better the chance of finding rarer gene forms in ethnically diverse populations. For example, different variants are responsible for the worst deficiencies in people of African and European ancestry, respectively. There are tests that scan for hundreds of variants that might slow metabolism of the drug, but they take longer and cost more.

    These are bitter facts for Scott Kapoor, a Toronto-area emergency room physician whose brother, Anil Kapoor, died in February 2023 of 5-FU poisoning.

    Anil Kapoor was a well-known urologist and surgeon, an outgoing speaker, researcher, clinician, and irreverent friend whose funeral drew hundreds. His death at age 58, only weeks after he was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer, stunned and infuriated his family.

    In Ontario, where Kapoor was treated, the health system had just begun testing for four gene variants discovered in studies of mostly European populations. Anil Kapoor and his siblings, the Canadian-born children of Indian immigrants, carry a gene form that’s apparently associated with South Asian ancestry.

    Scott Kapoor supports broader testing for the defect — only about half of Toronto’s inhabitants are of European descent — and argues that an antidote to fluoropyrimidine poisoning, approved by the FDA in 2015, should be on hand. However, it works only for a few days after ingestion of the drug and definitive symptoms often take longer to emerge.

    Most importantly, he said, patients must be aware of the risk. “You tell them, ‘I am going to give you a drug with a 1 in 1,000 chance of killing you. You can take this test. Most patients would be, ‘I want to get that test and I’ll pay for it,’ or they’d just say, ‘Cut the dose in half.’”

    Alan Venook, the University of California-San Francisco oncologist who co-chairs the panel that sets guidelines for colorectal cancers at the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, has led resistance to mandatory testing because the answers provided by the test, in his view, are often murky and could lead to undertreatment.

    “If one patient is not cured, then you giveth and you taketh away,” he said. “Maybe you took it away by not giving adequate treatment.”

    Instead of testing and potentially cutting a first dose of curative therapy, “I err on the latter, acknowledging they will get sick,” he said. About 25 years ago, one of his patients died of 5-FU toxicity and “I regret that dearly,” he said. “But unhelpful information may lead us in the wrong direction.”

    In September, seven months after his brother’s death, Kapoor was boarding a cruise ship on the Tyrrhenian Sea near Rome when he happened to meet a woman whose husband, Atlanta municipal judge Gary Markwell, had died the year before after taking a single 5-FU dose at age 77.

    “I was like … that’s exactly what happened to my brother.”

    Murray senses momentum toward mandatory testing. In 2022, the Oregon Health & Science University paid $1 million to settle a suit after an overdose death.

    “What’s going to break that barrier is the lawsuits, and the big institutions like Dana-Farber who are implementing programs and seeing them succeed,” she said. “I think providers are going to feel kind of bullied into a corner. They’re going to continue to hear from families and they are going to have to do something about it.”

    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:

  • Homeopathy: Evidence So Tiny That It’s Not there?

    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.

    Homeopathy: Evidence So Tiny That It’s Not There?

    Yesterday, we asked you your opinions on homeopathy. The sample size of responses was a little lower than we usually get, but of those who did reply, there was a clear trend:

    • A lot of enthusiasm for “Homeopathy works on valid principles and is effective”
    • Near equal support for “It may help some people as a complementary therapy”
    • Very few people voted for “Science doesn’t know how it works, but it works”; this is probably because people who considered voting for this, voted for the more flexible “It may help some people as a complementary therapy” instead.
    • Very few people considered it a dangerous scam and a pseudoscience.

    So, what does the science say?

    Well, let us start our investigation by checking out the position of the UK’s National Health Service, an organization with a strong focus on providing the least expensive treatments that are effective.

    Since homeopathy is very inexpensive to arrange, they will surely want to put it atop their list of treatments, right?

    ❝Homeopathy is a “treatment” based on the use of highly diluted substances, which practitioners claim can cause the body to heal itself.

    There’s been extensive investigation of the effectiveness of homeopathy. There’s no good-quality evidence that homeopathy is effective as a treatment for any health condition.❞

    The NHS actually has a lot more to say about that, and you can read their full statement here.

    But that’s just one institution. Here’s what Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council had to say:

    ❝There was no reliable evidence from research in humans that homeopathy was effective for treating the range of health conditions considered: no good-quality, well-designed studies with enough participants for a meaningful result reported either that homeopathy caused greater health improvements than placebo, or caused health improvements equal to those of another treatment❞

    You can read their full statement here.

    The American FDA, meanwhile, have a stronger statement:

    ❝Homeopathic drug products are made from a wide range of substances, including ingredients derived from plants, healthy or diseased animal or human sources, minerals and chemicals, including known poisons. These products have the potential to cause significant and even permanent harm if they are poorly manufactured, since that could lead to contaminated products or products that have potentially toxic ingredients at higher levels than are labeled and/or safe, or if they are marketed as substitute treatments for serious or life-threatening diseases and conditions, or to vulnerable populations.❞

    You can read their full statement here.

    Homeopathy is a dangerous scam and a pseudoscience: True or False?

    False and True, respectively, mostly.

    That may be a confusing answer, so let’s elaborate:

    • Is it dangerous? Mostly not; it’s mostly just water. However, two possibilities for harm exist:
      • Careless preparation could result in a harmful ingredient still being present in the water—and because of the “like cures like” principle, many of the ingredients used in homeopathy are harmful, ranging from heavy metals to plant-based neurotoxins. However, the process of “ultra-dilution” usually removes these so thoroughly that they are absent or otherwise scientifically undetectable.
      • Placebo treatment has its place, but could result in “real” treatment going undelivered. This can cause harm if the “real” treatment was critically needed, especially if it was needed on a short timescale.
    • Is it a scam? Probably mostly not; to be a scam requires malintent. Most practitioners probably believe in what they are practising.
    • Is it a pseudoscience? With the exception that placebo effect has been highly studied and is a very valid complementary therapy… Yes, aside from that it is a pseudoscience. There is no scientific evidence to support homeopathy’s “like cures like” principle, and there is no scientific evidence to support homeopathy’s “water memory” idea. On the contrary, they go against the commonly understood physics of our world.

    It may help some people as a complementary therapy: True or False?

    True! Not only is placebo effect very well-studied, but best of all, it can still work as a placebo even if you know that you’re taking a placebo… Provided you also believe that!

    Science doesn’t know how it works, but it works: True or False?

    False, simply. At best, it performs as a placebo.

    Placebo is most effective when it’s a remedy against subjective symptoms, like pain.

    However, psychosomatic effect (the effect that our brain has on the rest of our body, to which it is very well-connected) can mean that placebo can also help against objective symptoms, like inflammation.

    After all, our body, directed primarily by the brain, can “decide” what immunological defenses to deploy or hold back, for example. This is why placebo can help with conditions as diverse as arthritis (an inflammatory condition) or diabetes (an autoimmune condition, and/or a metabolic condition, depending on type).

    Here’s how homeopathy measures up, for those conditions:

    (the short answer is “no better than placebo”)

    Homeopathy works on valid principles and is effective: True or False?

    False, except insofar as placebo is a valid principle and can be effective.

    The stated principles of homeopathy—”like cures like” and “water memory”—have no scientific basis.

    We’d love to show the science for this, but we cannot prove a negative.

    However, the ideas were conceived in 1796, and are tantamount to alchemy. A good scientific attitude means being open-minded to new ideas and testing them. In homeopathy’s case, this has been done, extensively, and more than 200 years of testing later, homeopathy has consistently performed equal to placebo.

    In summary…

    • If you’re enjoying homeopathic treatment and that’s working for you, great, keep at it.
    • If you’re open-minded to enjoying a placebo treatment that may benefit you, be careful, but don’t let us stop you.
    • If your condition is serious, please do not delay seeking evidence-based medical treatment.

    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: