Using the”Task Zero” approach
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.
“Jonathan Frakes Asks You Things” Voice:
- Do you ever find yourself in a room and wonder what you’re doing there?
- Or set about a to-do list, but get quickly distracted by side-quests?
- Finally get through to a person in a call center, they ask how they can help, and your mind goes blank?
- Go to the supermarket and come out with six things, none of which were the one you came for?
This is a “working memory” thing and you’re not alone. There’s a trick that can help keep you on track more often than not:
Don’t try to overburden your working memory. It is very limited (this goes for everyone to a greater or lesser degree). Instead, hold only two tasks at once:
- Task zero (what you are doing right now)
- Task one (your next task)
When you’ve completed task zero, task one becomes the new task zero, and you can populate a new task one from your to-do list.
This way, you will always know what you’re doing right now, and what you’re doing next, and your focus will be so intent on task zero, that you will not get sidetracked by task seventeen!
Happy focusing
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:
-
White Potato vs Sweet Potato – 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 white potatoes to sweet potatoes, we picked the sweet potatoes.
Why?
In terms of macros, sweet potatoes are a little lighter on carbs and calories, though in the case of sugar and fiber, sweet potato has a few grams more of each, per potato. However, when an average sweet potato’s 7g of sugar are held against its 4g of fiber, this (much like with fruit!) not a sugar you need to avoid.
See also: Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?
The glycemic index of a sweet potato is also lower than that of a white potato, so the sugars it does have are slower-release.
Sweet potatoes famously are good sources of vitamin A and beta-carotene, which important nutrients white potatoes cannot boast.
Both plants are equally good sources of potassium and vitamin C.
Summary
Both are good sources of many nutrients, and any nutritional health-hazards associated with them come with the preparation (for example, frying introduces unhealthy fats, and mashing makes the glycemic index skyrocket, and cooking with salt increases the salt content).
Baking either is great (consider stuffing them with delicious well-seasoned beans and/or tomatoes; if you make it yourself, pesto can be a great option too, as can cheese if you’re so-inclined and judicious with choice and quantity) and preserves almost all of their nutrients. Remember that nearly 100% of the fiber is in the skin, so you do want to eat that.
The deciding factor is: sweet potatoes are good sources of a couple more valuable nutrients that white potatoes aren’t, and come out as the overall healthiest for that reason.
Enjoy!
Share This Post
-
How anti-vaccine figures abuse data to trick you
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
The anti-vaccine movement is nearly as old as vaccines themselves. For as long as humans have sought to harness our immune system’s incredible ability to recognize and fight infectious invaders, critics and conspiracy theorists have opposed these efforts.
Anti-vaccine tactics have advanced since the early days of protesting “unnatural” smallpox inoculation, and the rampant abuse of scientific data may be the most effective strategy yet.
Here’s how vaccine opponents misuse data to deceive people, plus how you can avoid being manipulated.
Misappropriating raw and unverified safety data
Perhaps the oldest and most well-established anti-vaccine tactic is the abuse of data from the federal Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration maintain VAERS as a tool for researchers to detect early warning signs of potential vaccine side effects.
Anyone can submit a VAERS report about any symptom experienced at any point after vaccination. That does not mean that these symptoms are vaccine side effects.
VAERS was not designed to determine if a specific vaccine caused a specific adverse event. But for decades, vaccine opponents have misinterpreted, misrepresented, and manipulated VAERS data to convince people that vaccines are dangerous.
Anyone relying on VAERS to draw conclusions about vaccine safety is probably trying to trick you. It isn’t possible to determine from VAERS data alone if a vaccine caused a specific health condition.
VAERS isn’t the only federal data that vaccine opponents abuse. Originally created for COVID-19 vaccines, V-safe is a vaccine safety monitoring system that allows users to report—via text message surveys—how they feel and any health issues they experience up to a year after vaccination. Anti-vaccine groups have misrepresented data in the system, which tracks all health experiences, whether or not they are vaccine-related.
The U.S. Department of Defense’s Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) has also become a target of anti-vaccine misinformation. Vaccine opponents have falsely claimed that DMED data reveals massive spikes in strokes, heart attacks, HIV, cancer, and blood clots among military service members since the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. The spike was due to an updated policy that corrected underreporting in the previous years
Misrepresenting legitimate studies
A common tactic vaccine opponents use is misrepresenting data from legitimate sources such as national health databases and peer-reviewed studies. For example, COVID-19 vaccines have repeatedly been blamed for rising cancer and heart attack rates, based on data that predates the pandemic by decades.
A prime example of this strategy is a preliminary FDA study that detected a slight increase in stroke risk in older adults after a high-dose flu vaccine alone or in combination with the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine. The study found no “increased risk of stroke following administration of the COVID-19 bivalent vaccines.”
Yet vaccine opponents used the study to falsely claim that COVID-19 vaccines were uniquely harmful, despite the data indicating that the increased risk was almost certainly driven by the high-dose flu vaccine. The final peer-reviewed study confirmed that there was no elevated stroke risk following COVID-19 vaccination. But the false narrative that COVID-19 vaccines cause strokes persists.
Similarly, the largest COVID-19 vaccine safety study to date confirmed the extreme rarity of a few previously identified risks. For weeks, vaccine opponents overstated these rare risks and falsely claimed that the study proves that COVID-19 vaccines are unsafe.
Citing preprint and retracted studies
When a study has been retracted, it is no longer considered a credible source. A study’s retraction doesn’t deter vaccine opponents from promoting it—it may even be an incentive because retracted papers can be held up as examples of the medical establishment censoring so-called “truthtellers.” For example, anti-vaccine groups still herald Andrew Wakefield nearly 15 years after his study falsely linking the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine to autism was retracted for data fraud.
The COVID-19 pandemic brought the lasting impact of retracted studies into sharp focus. The rush to understand a novel disease that was infecting millions brought a wave of scientific publications, some more legitimate than others.
Over time, the weaker studies were reassessed and retracted, but their damage lingers. A 2023 study found that retracted and withdrawn COVID-19 studies were cited significantly more frequently than valid published COVID-19 studies in the same journals.
In one example, a widely cited abstract that found that ivermectin—an antiparasitic drug proven to not treat COVID-19—dramatically reduced mortality in COVID-19 patients exemplifies this phenomenon. The abstract, which was never peer reviewed, was retracted at the request of its authors, who felt the study’s evidence was weak and was being misrepresented.
Despite this, the study—along with the many other retracted ivermectin studies—remains a touchstone for proponents of the drug that has shown no effectiveness against COVID-19.
In a more recent example, a group of COVID-19 vaccine opponents uploaded a paper to The Lancet’s preprint server, a repository for papers that have not yet been peer reviewed or published by the prestigious journal. The paper claimed to have analyzed 325 deaths after COVID-19 vaccination, finding COVID-19 vaccines were linked to 74 percent of the deaths.
The paper was promptly removed because its conclusions were unsupported, leading vaccine opponents to cry censorship.
Applying animal research to humans
Animals are vital to medical research, allowing scientists to better understand diseases that affect humans and develop and screen potential treatments before they are tested in humans. Animal research is a starting point that should never be generalized to humans, but vaccine opponents do just that.
Several animal studies are frequently cited to support the claim that mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous during pregnancy. These studies found that pregnant rats had adverse reactions to the COVID-19 vaccines. The results are unsurprising given that they were injected with doses equal to or many times larger than the dose given to humans rather than a dose that is proportional to the animal’s size.
Similarly, a German study on rat heart cells found abnormalities after exposure to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Vaccine opponents falsely insinuated that this study proves COVID-19 vaccines cause heart damage in humans and was so universally misrepresented that the study’s author felt compelled to dispute the claims.
The author noted that the study used vaccine doses significantly higher than those administered to humans and was conducted in cultured rat cells, a dramatically different environment than a functioning human heart.
How to avoid being misled
The internet has empowered vaccine opponents to spread false information with an efficiency and expediency that was previously impossible. Anti-vaccine narratives have advanced rapidly due to the rampant exploitation of valid sources and the promotion of unvetted, non-credible sources.
You can avoid being tricked by using multiple trusted sources to verify claims that you encounter online. Some examples of credible sources are reputable public health entities like the CDC and World Health Organization, personal health care providers, and peer-reviewed research from experts in fields relevant to COVID-19 and the pandemic.
Read more about anti-vaccine tactics:
- How vaccine opponents spread misinformation
- How misinformation tricks our brains
- How vaccine opponents use kids to spread misinformation
This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
-
What you need to know about FLiRT, an emerging group of COVID-19 variants
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
What you need to know
- COVID-19 wastewater levels are currently low, but a recent group of variants called FLiRT is making headlines.
- KP.2 is one of several FLiRT variants, and early lab tests suggest that it’s more infectious than JN.1.
- Getting infected with any COVID-19 variant can cause severe illness, heart problems, and death.
KP.2, a new COVID-19 variant, is now dominant in the United States. Lab tests suggest that it may be more infectious than JN.1, the variant that was dominant earlier this year.
Fortunately, there’s good news: Current wastewater data shows that COVID-19 infection rates are low. Still, experts are closely watching KP.2 to see if it will lead to an uptick in infections.
Read on to learn more about KP.2 and how to stay informed about COVID-19 cases in your area.
Where can I find data on COVID-19 cases in my area?
Hospitals are no longer required to report COVID-19 hospital admissions or hospital capacity to the Department of Health and Human Services. However, wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) estimates the number of COVID-19 infections in a community based on the amount of COVID-19 viral particles detected in local wastewater.
View this map of wastewater data from the CDC to visualize COVID-19 infection rates throughout the U.S., or look up COVID-19 wastewater trends in your state.
What do we know so far about the new variant?
Early lab tests suggest that KP.2—one of a group of emerging variants called FLiRT—is similar to the previously dominant variant, JN.1, but it may be more infectious. If you had JN.1, you may still get reinfected with KP.2, especially if it’s been several months or longer since your last COVID-19 infection.
A CDC spokesperson said they have no reason to believe that KP.2 causes more severe illness than other variants. Experts are closely watching KP.2 to see if it will lead to an uptick in COVID-19 cases.
How can I protect myself from COVID-19 variants?
Staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines reduces your risk of severe illness, long COVID, heart problems, and death. The CDC recommends that people 65 and older and immunocompromised people receive an additional dose of the updated COVID-19 vaccine this spring.
Wearing a high-quality, well-fitting mask reduces your risk of contracting COVID-19 and spreading it to others. At indoor gatherings, improving ventilation by opening doors and windows, using high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters, and building your own Corsi-Rosenthal box can also reduce the spread of COVID-19.
This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Driving under the influence of marijuana: An explainer and research roundup
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.
Update 1: On May 16, 2024, the U.S. Department of Justice sent a proposed rule to the Federal Register to downgrade marijuana from a Schedule I to a Schedule III drug. This is the first step in a lengthy approval process that starts with a 60-day comment period.
Update 2: Two recent research studies were added to the “Studies on marijuana and driving” section of this piece on July 18, 2024.
As marijuana use continues to rise and state-level marijuana legalization sweeps the U.S., researchers and policymakers are grappling with a growing public safety concern: marijuana-impaired driving.
As of April 2023, 38 U.S. states had legalized medical marijuana and 23 had legalized its recreational use, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Recreational or medical marijuana measures are on the ballot in seven states this year.
The issue of marijuana-impaired driving has not been an easy one to tackle because, unlike alcohol, which has well-established thresholds of impairment, the metrics for marijuana’s effects on driving remain rather elusive.
“We don’t have that kind of deep knowledge right now and it’s not because of lack of trying,” says Dr. Guohua Li, professor of epidemiology and the founding director of the Center for Injury Science and Prevention at Columbia University.
“Marijuana is very different from alcohol in important ways,” says Li, who has published several studies on marijuana and driving. “And one of them is that the effect of marijuana on cognitive functions and behaviors is much more unpredictable than alcohol. In general, alcohol is a depressant drug. But marijuana could act on the central nervous system as a depressant, a stimulant, and a hallucinogenic substance.”
Efforts to create a breathalyzer to measure the level of THC, the main psychoactive compound found in the marijuana plant, have largely failed, because “the THC molecule is much bigger than ethanol and its behavior after ingestion is very different from alcohol,” Li says.
Currently, the two most common methods used to measure THC concentration to identify impaired drivers are blood and saliva tests, although there’s ongoing debate about their reliability.
Marijuana, a term interchangeably used with cannabis, is the most commonly used federally illegal drug in the U.S.: 48.2 million people, or about 18% of Americans reported using it at least once in 2019, according to the latest available data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Worldwide, 2.5% of the population consumes marijuana, according to the World Health Organization.
Marijuana is legal in several countries, including Canada, where it was legalized in 2018. Despite state laws legalizing cannabis, it remains illegal at the federal level in the U.S.
As states grapple with the contentious issue of marijuana legalization, the debate is not just about public health, potential tax revenues and economic interests. At the heart of the discussion is also the U.S. criminal justice system.
Marijuana is shown to have medicinal qualities and, compared with substances like alcohol, tobacco, and opioids, it has relatively milder health risks. However, it’s not risk-free, a large body of research has shown.
Marijuana consumption can lead to immediate effects such as impaired muscle coordination and paranoia, as well as longer-term effects on mental health and cognitive functions — and addiction. As its use becomes more widespread, researchers are trying to better understand the potential hazards of marijuana, particularly for younger users whose brains are in critical stages of development.
Marijuana and driving
The use of marijuana among drivers, passengers and pedestrians has increased steadily over the past two decades, Li says.
Compared with the year 2000, the proportion of U.S. drivers on the road who are under the influence of marijuana has increased by several folds, between five to 10 times, based on toxicology testing of people who died in car crashes, Li says.
A 2022 report from the National Transportation Safety Board finds alcohol and cannabis are the two most commonly detected drugs among drivers arrested for impaired driving and fatally injured drivers. Most drivers who tested positive for cannabis also tested positive for another potentially impairing drug.
“Although cannabis and many other drugs have been shown to impair driving performance and are associated with increased crash risk, there is evidence that, relative to alcohol, awareness about the potential dangers of driving after using other drugs is lower,” according to the report.
Indeed, many U.S. adults perceive daily marijuana use or exposure to its smoke safer than tobacco, even though research finds otherwise.
Several studies have demonstrated marijuana’s impact on driving.
Marijuana use can reduce the drivers’ ability to pay attention, particularly when they are performing multiple tasks, research finds. It also slows reaction time and can impair coordination.
“The combination is that you potentially have people who are noticing hazards later, braking slower and potentially not even noticing hazards because of their inability to focus on competing things on the road,” says Dr. Daniel Myran, an assistant professor at the Department of Family Medicine and health services researcher at the University of Ottawa.
In a study published in September in JAMA Network Open, Myran and colleagues find that from 2010 to 2021 the rate of cannabis-involved traffic injuries that led to emergency department visits in Ontario, Canada, increased by 475%, from 0.18 per 1,000 traffic injury emergency department visits in 2010 to 1.01 visits in 2021.
To be sure, cannabis-involved traffic injuries made up a small fraction of all traffic injury-related visits to hospital emergency departments. Out of 947,604 traffic injury emergency department visits, 426 had documented cannabis involvement.
Myran cautions the increase shouldn’t be solely attributed to marijuana legalization. It captures changing societal attitudes toward marijuana and acceptance of cannabis use over time in the lead-up to legalization. In addition, it may reflect an increasing awareness among health care providers about cannabis-impaired driving, and they may be more likely to ask about cannabis use and document it in medical charts, he says.
“When you look at the 475% increase in cannabis involvement in traffic injuries, rather than saying legalizing cannabis has caused the roads to be unsafe and is a public health disaster, it’s that cannabis use appears to be growing as a risk for road traffic injuries and that there seem to be more cannabis impaired drivers on the road,” Myran says. “Legalization may have accelerated this trend. Faced with this increase, we need to think about what are public health measures and different policy interventions to reduce harms from cannabis-impaired driving.”
Setting a legal limit for marijuana-impaired driving
Setting a legal limit for marijuana-impaired driving has not been easy. Countries like Canada and some U.S. states have agreed upon a certain level of THC in blood, usually between 1 to 5 nanograms per milliliter. Still, some studies have found those limits to be weak indicators of cannabis-impaired driving.
When Canada legalized recreational marijuana in 2018, it also passed a law that made it illegal to drive with blood THC levels of more than 2 nanograms. The penalties are more severe for blood THC levels above 5 nanograms. The blood test is done at the police station for people who are pulled over and are deemed to be drug impaired.
In the U.S., five states — Ohio, Illinois, Montana, Washington and Nevada — have “per se laws,” which set a specific amount of THC in the driver’s blood as evidence of impaired driving, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. That limit ranges between 2 and 5 nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood.
Colorado, meanwhile, has a “permissible inference law,” which states that it’s permissible to assume the driver was under the influence if their blood THC level is 5 nanograms per milliliter or higher, according to NCSL.
Twelve states, most which have legalized some form of marijuana of use, have zero tolerance laws for any amount of certain drugs, including THC, in the body.
The remaining states have “driving under the influence of drugs” laws. Among those states, Alabama and Michigan, have oral fluid roadside testing program to screen drivers for marijuana and other drugs, according to NCSL.
In May this year, the U.S. Department of Transportation published a final rule that allows employers to use saliva testing for commercially licensed drivers, including truck drivers. The rule, which went into effect in June, sets the THC limit in saliva at 4 nanograms.
Saliva tests can detect THC for 8 to 24 hours after use, but the tests are not perfect and can results in false positives, leading some scientists to argue against using them in randomly-selected drivers.
In a 2021 report, the U.S. National Institute of Justice, the research and development arm of the Department of Justice, concluded that THC levels in bodily fluids, including blood and saliva “were not reliable indicators of marijuana intoxication.”
Studies on marijuana and driving
Over the past two decades, many studies have shown marijuana use can impair driving. However, discussions about what’s the best way to measure the level of THC in blood or saliva are ongoing. Below, we highlight and summarize several recent studies that address the issue. The studies are listed in order of publication date. We also include a list of related studies and resources to inform your audiences.
State Driving Under the Influence of Drugs Laws
Alexandra N. Origenes, Sarah A. White, Emma E. McGinty and Jon S. Vernick. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, July 2024.Summary: As of January 2023, 33 states and D.C. had a driving under the influence of drugs law for at least one drug other than cannabis. Of those, 29 states and D.C. had a law specifically for driving under the influence of cannabis, in addition to a law for driving under the influence of other drugs. Four states had a driving under the influence of drug laws, excluding cannabis. Meanwhile, 17 states had no law for driving under the influence of drugs, including cannabis. “The 17 states lacking a DUID law that names specific drugs should consider enacting such a law. These states already have expressed their concern — through legislation — with drug-impaired driving. However, failure to name specific drugs is likely to make the laws more difficult to enforce. These laws may force courts and/or law enforcement to rely on potentially subjective indicators of impairment,” the authors write.
Associations between Adolescent Marijuana Use, Driving After Marijuana Use and Recreational Retail Sale in Colorado, USA
Lucas M. Neuroth, et al. Substance Use & Misuse, October 2023.Summary: Researchers use data from four waves (2013, 2015, 2017 and 2019) of the Healthy Kids Colorado Survey, including 47,518 students 15 and older who indicated that they drove. They find 20.3% of students said that they had used marijuana in the past month and 10.5% said they had driven under the influence of marijuana. They find that the availability of recreational marijuana in stores was associated with an increased prevalence of using marijuana one to two times in the past month and driving under the influence of marijuana at least once. “Over the study period, one in ten high school age drivers engaged in [driving after marijuana use], which is concerning given the high risk of motor vehicle-related injury and death arising from impaired driving among adolescents,” the authors write.
Are Blood and Oral Fluid Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and Metabolite Concentrations Related to Impairment? A Meta-Regression Analysis
Danielle McCartney, et al. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, March 2022.Summary: Commonly used THC measurements may not be strong indicators of driving impairment. While there is a relationship between certain biomarkers like blood THC concentrations and impaired driving, this correlation is often weak. The study underscores the need for more nuanced and comprehensive research on this topic, especially as cannabis usage becomes more widespread and legally accepted.
The Effects of Cannabis and Alcohol on Driving Performance and Driver Behaviour: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Sarah M. Simmons, Jeff K. Caird, Frances Sterzer and Mark Asbridge. Addiction, January 2022.Summary: This meta-analysis of experimental driving studies, including driving simulations, confirms that cannabis impairs driving performance, contrary to some beliefs that it might enhance driving abilities. Cannabis affects lateral control and speed — typically increasing lane excursions while reducing speed. The combination of alcohol and marijuana appears worse than either alone, challenging the idea that they cancel each other out.
Cannabis Legalization and Detection of Tetrahydrocannabinol in Injured Drivers
Jeffrey R. Brubacher, et al. The New England Journal of Medicine, January 2022.Summary: Following the legalization of recreational marijuana in Canada, there was a notable increase in injured drivers testing positive for THC, especially among those 50 years of age or older. This rise in cannabis-related driving incidents occurred even with new traffic laws aiming to deter cannabis-impaired driving. This uptick began before legalization became official, possibly due to perceptions that cannabis use was soon-to-be legal or illegal but not enforced. The data suggests that while legalization has broad societal impacts, more comprehensive strategies are needed to deter driving under the influence of cannabis and raise public awareness about its risks.
Cannabis and Driving
Godfrey D. Pearlson, Michael C. Stevens and Deepak Cyril D’Souza. Frontiers in Psychiatry, September 2021.Summary: Cannabis-impaired driving is a growing public health concern, and studies show that such drivers are more likely to be involved in car crashes, according to this review paper. Drivers are less affected by cannabis than they are by alcohol or cocaine, but the problem is expected to escalate with increasing cannabis legalization and use. Unlike alcohol, THC’s properties make it challenging to determine direct impairment levels from testing results. Current roadside tests lack precision in detecting genuine cannabis-impaired drivers, leading to potential wrongful convictions. Moreover, there is a pressing need for research on the combined effects of alcohol and cannabis on driving, as well as the impact of emerging popular forms of cannabis, like concentrates and edibles. The authors recommend public awareness campaigns about the dangers of driving under the influence of cannabis, similar to those against drunk driving, to address misconceptions. Policymakers should prioritize science-based decisions and encourage further research in this domain.
Demographic And Policy-Based Differences in Behaviors And Attitudes Towards Driving After Marijuana Use: An Analysis of the 2013–2017 Traffic Safety Culture Index
Marco H. Benedetti, et al. BMC Research Notes, June 2021.Summary: The study, based on a U.S. survey, finds younger, low-income, low-education and male participants were more tolerant of driving after marijuana consumption. Notably, those in states that legalized medical marijuana reported driving after use more frequently, aligning with studies indicating a higher prevalence of THC detection in drivers from these states. Overall, while the majority perceive driving after marijuana use as dangerous, not all research agrees on its impairment effects. Existing studies highlight that marijuana impacts motor skills and executive functions, yet its direct correlation with crash risk remains debated, given the variations in individual tolerance and how long THC remains in the system.
Driving Under the Influence of Cannabis: A Framework for Future Policy
Robert M. Chow, et al.Anesthesia & Analgesia, June 2019.Summary: The study presents a conceptual framework focusing on four main domains: legalization, driving under the influence of cannabis, driver impairment, and motor vehicle accidents. With the growing legalization of cannabis, there’s an anticipated rise in cannabis-impaired driving cases. The authors group marijuana users into infrequent users who show significant impairment with increased THC blood levels, chronic users with minimal impairment despite high THC levels, and those with consistent psychomotor deficits. Current challenges lie in the lack of standardized regulation for drivers influenced by cannabis, primarily because of state-to-state variability and the absence of a federal statutory limit for blood THC levels. European nations, however, have established thresholds for blood THC levels, ranging from 0.5 to 50.0 micrograms per liter depending on whether blood or blood serum are tested. The authors suggest the combined use of alcohol and THC blood tests with a psychomotor evaluation by a trained professional to determine impairment levels. The paper stresses the importance of creating a structured policy framework, given the rising acceptance and use of marijuana in society.
Additional research
Cannabis-Involved Traffic Injury Emergency Department Visits After Cannabis Legalization and Commercialization
Daniel T. Myran, et al. JAMA Network Open, September 2023.Driving Performance and Cannabis Users’ Perception of Safety: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Thomas D. Marcotte, et al. JAMA Psychiatry, January 2022.Medicinal Cannabis and Driving: The Intersection of Health and Road Safety Policy
Daniel Perkins, et al. International Journal of Drug Policy, November 2021.Prevalence of Marijuana Use Among Trauma Patients Before and After Legalization of Medical Marijuana: The Arizona Experience
Michael Levine, et al. Substance Abuse, July 2021.Self-Reported Driving After Marijuana Use in Association With Medical And Recreational Marijuana Policies
Marco H. Benedetti, et al. International Journal of Drug Policy, June 2021.Cannabis and Driving Ability
Eric L. Sevigny. Current Opinion in Psychology, April 2021.The Failings of per se Limits to Detect Cannabis-Induced Driving Impairment: Results from a Simulated Driving Study
Thomas R. Arkell, et al. Traffic Injury Prevention, February 2021.Risky Driving Behaviors of Drivers Who Use Alcohol and Cannabis
Tara Kelley-Baker, et al. Transportation Research Record, January 2021.Direct and Indirect Effects of Marijuana Use on the Risk of Fatal 2-Vehicle Crash Initiation
Stanford Chihuri and Guohua Li. Injury Epidemiology, September 2020Cannabis-Impaired Driving: Evidence and the Role of Toxicology Testing
Edward C. Wood and Robert L. Dupont. Cannabis in Medicine, July 2020.Association of Recreational Cannabis Laws in Colorado and Washington State With Changes in Traffic Fatalities, 2005-2017
Julian Santaella-Tenorio, et al. JAMA Internal Medicine, June 2020.Marijuana Decriminalization, Medical Marijuana Laws, and Fatal Traffic Crashes in US Cities, 2010–2017
Amanda Cook, Gregory Leung and Rhet A. Smith. American Journal of Public Health, February 2020.Cannabis Use in Older Drivers in Colorado: The LongROAD Study
Carolyn G. DiGuiseppi, et al. Accident Analysis & Prevention, November 2019.Crash Fatality Rates After Recreational Marijuana Legalization in Washington and Colorado
Jayson D. Aydelotte, et al. American Journal of Public Health, August 2017.Marijuana-Impaired Driving: A Report to Congress
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, July 2017Interaction of Marijuana And Alcohol on Fatal Motor Vehicle Crash Risk: A Case–Control Study
Stanford Chihuri, Guohua Li and Qixuan Chen. Injury Epidemiology, March 2017.US Traffic Fatalities, 1985–2014, and Their Relationship to Medical Marijuana Laws
Julian Santaella-Tenorio, et al. American Journal of Public Health, February 2017.Delays in DUI Blood Testing: Impact on Cannabis DUI Assessments
Ed Wood, Ashley Brooks-Russell and Phillip Drum. Traffic Injury Prevention, June 2015.Establishing Legal Limits for Driving Under the Influence of Marijuana
Kristin Wong, Joanne E. Brady and Guohua Li. Injury Epidemiology, October 2014.Cannabis Effects on Driving Skills
Rebecca L. Hartman and Marilyn A. Huestis. Clinical Chemistry, March 2014.Acute Cannabis Consumption And Motor Vehicle Collision Risk: Systematic Review of Observational Studies and Meta-Analysis
Mark Asbridge, Jill A. Hayden and Jennifer L. Cartwright. The BMJ, February 2012.Resources for your audiences
The following resources include explainers from federal agencies and national organizations. You’re free to use images and graphics from federal agencies.
- CDC’s main marijuana page.
- CDC’s marijuana data and statistics.
- Marijuana Drug Facts from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
- Health Effects of Marijuana from the CDC.
- Learn About Marijuana Risks from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
- Marijuana and Lung Health from the American Lung Association.
- Substance Use Disorder 101 from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.
- What You Need To Know About Marijuana Use and Driving from the CDC.
- Does marijuana use affect driving? from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
- Drug-Impaired Driving from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
This article first appeared on The Journalist’s Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
The Vagus Nerve’s Power for Weight Loss
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. Arun Dhir is a university lecturer, a gastrointestinal surgeon, an author, and a yoga and meditation instructor, and he has this to say:
Gut feelings
The vagus nerve is the 10th cranial nerve, also known as “vagus” (“the wanderer”), because it travels from the brain to many other body parts, including the ears, throat, heart, respiratory system, gut, pancreas, liver, and reproductive system. It’s no surprise then, that it plays a key role in brain-gut communication and metabolism regulation.
The vagus nerve is part of the parasympathetic nervous system, responsible for rest, digestion, and counteracting the stress response. Most signals through the vagus nerve travel from the gut to the brain, though there is communication in both directions.
You may be beginning to see how this works and its implications for weight management: the vagus nerve senses metabolites from the liver, pancreas, and small intestine, and regulates insulin production by stimulating beta cells in the pancreas, which is important for avoiding/managing insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome in general.
Dr. Dhir cites a study in which vagus nerve stimulation (originally used for treating epilepsy and depression) was shown to cause unintentional weight loss (6-11%) in patients, revealing a link to weight management. Of course, that is quite a specific sample, so more research is needed to say for sure, but because the principle is very sound and the mechanism of action is clear, it’s not being viewed as a controversial conclusion.
As for how get these benefits, here are seven ways:
- Cold water on the face: submerge your face in cold water in the morning while holding water in your mouth, or cover your face with a cold wet washcloth (while holding your breath please; no need to waterboard yourself!), which activates the “mammalian dive response” in which your body activates the parasympathetic nervous system in order to remain calm and thus survive for longer underwater
- Alternate hot and cold showers: switch between hot and cold water during showers for 10-second intervals; this creates eustress and activates the process of hormesis, improving your overall stress management and reducing any chronic stress response you may otherwise have going on
- Humming and gargling: the vibrations in the throat stimulate the nearby vagus nerve
- Deep breathing (pranayama): yoga breathing exercises, especially combined with somatic exercises such as the sun salutation, can stimulate the vagus nerve
- Intermittent fasting: helps recalibrate the metabolism and indirectly improves vagus nerve function
- Massage and acupressure: stimulates lymphatic channels and the vagus nerve
- Long walks in nature (“forest bathing”): helps trigger relaxation in general
For more on all of this, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like to read:
The Vagus Nerve (And How You Can Make Use Of It)
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:
-
Gut Health 2.0
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.
Gene Expression & Gut Health
This is Dr. Tim Spector. After training in medicine and becoming a consultant rheumatologist, he’s turned his attention to medical research, and is these days a specialist in twin studies, genetics, epigenetics, microbiome, and diet.
What does he want us to know?
For one thing: epigenetics are for more than just getting your grandparents’ trauma.
More usefully: there are things we can do to improve epigenetic factors in our body
DNA is often seen as the script by which our body does whatever it’s going to do, but it’s only part of the story. Thinking of DNA as some kind of “magical immutable law of reality” overlooks (to labor the metaphor) script revisions, notes made in the margins, directorial choices, and ad-lib improvizations, as well as the quality of the audience’s hearing and comprehension.
Hence the premise of one of Dr. Spector’s older books, “Identically Different: Why We Can Change Our Genes”
(*in fact, it was his first, from all the way back in 2013, when he’d only been a doctor for 34 years)
Gene expression will trump genes every time, and gene expression is something that can often be changed without getting in there with CRISPR / a big pair of scissors and some craft glue.
How this happens on the micro level is beyond the scope of today’s article; part of it has to do with enzymes that get involved in the DNA transcription process, and those enzymes in turn are despatched or not depending on hormonal messaging—in the broadest sense of “hormonal”; all the body’s hormonal chemical messengers, not just the ones people think of as hormones.
However, hormonal messaging (of many kinds) is strongly influenced by something we can control relatively easily with a little good (science-based) knowledge: the gut.
The gut, the SAD, and the easy
In broad strokes: we know what is good for the gut. We’ve written about it before at 10almonds:
Making Friends With Your Gut (You Can Thank Us Later)
This is very much in contrast with what in scientific literature is often abbreviated “SAD”, the Standard American Diet, which is very bad for the gut.
However, Dr. Spector (while fully encouraging everyone to enjoy an evidence-based gut-healthy diet) wanted to do one better than just a sweeping one-size-fits-all advice, so he set up a big study with 15,000 identical twins; you can read about it here: TwinsUK
The information that came out of that was about a lot more than just gene expression and gut health, but it did provide the foundation for Dr. Spector’s next project, ZOE.
ZOE crowdsources huge amounts of data including individual metabolic responses to standardized meals in order to predict personalized food responses based on individual biology and unique microbiome profile.
In other words, it takes the guesswork out of a) knowing what your genes mean for your food responses b) tailoring your food choices with your genetic expression in mind, and c) ultimately creating a positive feedback loop to much better health on all levels.
Now, this is not an ad for ZOE, but if you so wish, you can…
- Get the free ZOE gut health guide (this is good, but generic, gut health information)
- Take the ZOE home gut health test (quiz followed by offers of lab tests)
- Browse the ZOE Health Academy, its education wing
Want to know more?
Dr. Spector has a bunch of books out, including some that we’ve reviewed previously:
- Spoon-Fed: Why Almost Everything We’ve Been Told About Food Is Wrong
- The Diet Myth: The Real Science Behind What We Eat
- Food for Life: The New Science of Eating Well
You can also check out our own previous main feature, which wasn’t about Dr. Spector’s work but was very adjacent:
The Brain-Gut Highway: A Two-Way Street
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:
