The 4 Bad Habits That Cause The Most Falls While Walking

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 risk of falling becomes greater (both in probability and in severity of consequences) as we get older. But, many people who do fall do so for the same reasons, some of which are avoidable. Dr. Doug Weiss has advice based on extensive second-hand experience:

Best foot forward!

If any of these prompt a “surely nobody does that” response, then, good for you to not have that habit, but Dr. Weiss has seen many patients who thusly erred. And if any of these do describe how you walk, then well, you’re not alone—time to fix it, though!

  • Walking with Stiff Legs: walking with a hyperextended (straight) knee instead of a slight bend (5-15°) makes it harder to adjust balance, increasing the risk of falls. This can also put extra pressure on the joints, potentially leading to osteoarthritis.
  • Crossing Legs While Turning: turning by crossing one leg over the other is a common cause of falls, particularly in the elderly. To avoid this, when turning step first with the foot that is on the side you are going to go. If you have the bad habit, this may feel strange at first, but you will soon adapt.
  • Looking Down While Walking: focusing only on the ground directly in front of you can cause you to miss obstacles ahead, leading to falls. Instead, practice “scanning”, alternating between looking down at the ground and looking up to maintain awareness of your surroundings.
  • Shuffling Instead of Tandem Walking: shuffling with feet far apart, rather than walking with one foot in front of the other, reduces balance and increases the risk of tripping. Tandem walking, where one foot is placed directly in front of the other, is the safer and more balanced way to walk. It also helps disguise your numbers.

For more details on all of these, plus visual demonstrations, enjoy:

Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

Want to learn more?

You might also like to read:

Fall Special (How To Not Fall, And How To Minimize Injury If You Do) ← this never seems like an urgent thing to learn, but trust us, it’s more fun to read it now, than from your hospital bed later

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Dr. Kim Foster’s Method For Balancing Hormones Naturally
  • Can you die from long COVID? The answer is not so simple
    COVID lingers; long COVID’s role in ongoing deaths and grave symptoms is debated while care models are urged for this chronic affliction’s management.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Chromium Picolinate For Blood Sugar Control & 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.

    First, a quick disambiguation:

    • chromium found in food, trivalent chromium of various kinds, is safe (in the quantities usually consumed) and is sometimes considered an essential mineral, sometimes considered unnecessary but beneficial. It’s hard to know for sure, since it’s in a lot of foods (naturally, like many trace elements)
    • chromium found in pollution, hexavalent chromium (so: twice as many cationic bonds, if this writer’s chemistry serves her correctly) is poisonous.

    We’re going to be writing about the food kind, which is also possible to take as a supplement.

    In this case, supplementing vs getting from food is quite a big difference, by the way, since (unlike for a lot of things, which are often the other way around) the bioavailability of chromium from food is very low (around 2.5%), whereas chromium picolinate, one of the most commonly-used supplement forms, boasts higher bioavailability.

    Does it work for blood sugars?

    Yes, it does! At least, it does in the case of people with type 2 diabetes. Rather than bombard you with many individual studies, here’s a systematic review and meta-analysis of 22 criteria-meeting randomized clinical trials that found:

    ❝The available evidence suggests favourable effects of chromium supplementation on glycaemic control in patients with diabetes.

    Chromium monosupplement may additionally improve triglycerides and HDL-C levels.❞

    Source: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of chromium supplementation in diabetes

    Type 1 diabetes does not have anything like the same weight of evidence, and indeed, we couldn’t find a single human study. It was beneficial for mice with artificially-induced T1D, though wait no, we have an update! We found literally a single human study:

    Chromium picolinate supplementation for diabetes mellitus

    Literally, as in: it’s a case study of one person, and the results were a modest reduction in Hb A1c levels after 3 months of 600μg daily; the researchers concluded that ❝chromium picolinate continues to fall squarely within the scope of “alternative medicine,” with both unproven benefits and unknown risks❞.

    As for people without diabetes, it may reduce the risk of diabetes:

    Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Is Lower in US Adults Taking Chromium-Containing Supplements

    However! This was an observational study, and correlation ≠ causation.

    Furthermore, they said:

    ❝Over one-half the adult US population consumes nutritional supplements, and over one-quarter consumes supplemental chromium. The odds of having T2D were lower in those who, in the previous 30 d, had consumed supplements containing chromium❞

    That “over one-quarter consumes supplemental chromium” brought our attention to the fact that this is not talking about specifically chromium “monosupplements” (definitely not quarter of the adult population take those), but rather, “multivitamin and mineral” supplements that also contain a tiny amount (often under 50μg) of chromium.

    In other words, this ruins the data and honestly the benefit could have been from anything in the “multivitamin and mineral” supplement, or indeed, could just be “the kind of person who takes supplements is the kind of person who lives a lifestyle that is less conducive to becoming diabetic”.

    Does it work for weight loss?

    We’re running out of space here, so we’ll be brief:

    No.

    There are many papers that have concluded this, but here are two:

    Chromium picolinate supplementation for overweight or obese adults

    and

    The potential value and toxicity of chromium picolinate as a nutritional supplement, weight loss agent and muscle development agent

    Is it safe?

    Science’s current best answer is “we don’t know; it hasn’t been tested enough; we haven’t even established the tolerable upper limit, which is usually step 1 of establishing safety”.

    Nor is there an estimated average requirement (if indeed there even is a requirement, which question is also not as yet answered conclusively by science), and science falls back to “here’s an average of what people consume in their diet, so that’s probably safe, we guess”.

    (that average was reckoned as 25μg/day for young women and 25μg/day for young men, by the way; older ages not as yet reckoned)

    You can read about this sorry state of affairs here.

    Want to try some?

    Notwithstanding the above lack of data for safety, it does have benefits for blood sugars, so if that’s a gamble you’re willing to make, then here’s an example product on Amazon.

    Note: the dosage per capsule there (800μg) is half of the low end of the dose that was implicated in the serious kidney condition caused in this case study (1200–2400μg), so if you are going to try it, we strongly recommend not taking more than one per day.

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • How Processed Is The Food You Buy, Really?

    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.

    Ultraprocessed foods are a) ubiquitous in industrialized nations b) generally not fabulous for the health. See for example:

    Abstaining from ultraprocessed food can also be difficult psychologically, because they are generally engineered specifically to trigger certain physiological responses, often with their combination of sweet and/or salty flavors with simple carbohydrates that will zip straight into one’s veins and feel immediately rewarding, even if there is a health price to pay later.

    And worse, being habituated to ultraprocessed food can make unprocessed or minimally-processed food seem less appealing:

    What causes food cravings? And what can we do about them?

    Fortunately, we can reverse this, and once we get habituated to unprocessed or minimally-processed food, the ultraprocessed will start to seem like not-food to us. You will wonder: how did I ever eat that crap?

    Now, one other thing to bear in mind:

    There is a scale of “badness”

    You might recall this article:

    Not all ultra-processed foods are bad for your health, whatever you might have heard

    For example, Reese’s confectionary and Huel nutrition powder are both ultra-processed, but one is definitely better than the other.

    See also: Are plant-based burgers really bad for your heart? Here’s what’s behind the scary headlines

    Some comparisons are obvious; others, not so much. So, how to tell the difference?

    The “True Food” Scale

    A large study analyzed ingredient lists, nutrition facts, and prices of over 50,000 food items from Target, Whole Foods, and Walmart. Using a rigorous statistical method, they assigned processing scores and compiled data into a giant database, with results published publicly.

    You can find the study here:

    Prevalence of processed foods in major US grocery stores

    That in and of itself doesn’t tell a lot that’s useful to the consumer, because the paper itself does not have all of the data from all 50,000 food items, just the aggregate results, trends, implications for public health, and suggestions for public health policy.

    However, what does tell a lot, is the public face of the database itself, which you can browse for free, and look up your regular shopping items, if you are wondering “are these textured soy pieces basically a step away from soy beans, or a frankenfood that will murder me in my sleep?”

    How it works: it examines each food, its listed ingredients, and what is known about the processedness of such ingredients. It also draws a distinction between ingredients and additives, rendering the entire process of the production of the food into an “ingredient tree”, showing what was added to what along the way. Minimally-processed foods will have barely an ingredient sapling, while ultraprocessed foods will have an ingredient tree whose branches can barely be counted, they are so numerous. It’s not just about the number of ingredients though; it’s about the processes that each underwent.

    How it represents this data: you can look at the food in the database, and it’ll tell you the ingredients and nutritional facts (which you probably knew already; it’s written on the packaging), and then show you how processed it is, and then ranking that against all other foods in the database of the same kind.

    So for example, if you are looking at a pizza (have you ever noticed how some are marketed with bright flashy colors, and others in natural tones to suggest minimal processing? This is marketing, not reliable information! Sometimes the product that looks healthier, isn’t!), then it’ll give it a score reflecting how it ranks compared to all other pizze in the database. This number is out of a hundred, and it reflects the percentile into which it falls.

    So for example, if the score your pizza gets is 47, then that means that if you looked at it next to 99 others, on average your pizza would would rank better than 46 of them and worse than 53 of them.

    In other words, the lower the score, the less processed it is on the whole.

    Here’s a side-by-side example of two cakes, one of which got a score of 3, and the other got a score of 61:

    Mini No Sugar Added Cheesecake vs EDWARDS Desserts Original Whipped Cheesecake

    And here is the main menu of the database, in which you can use the search function to look up the food you want to check, or else browse by category:

    The TrueFood Database: Search or Browse (it’s free!)

    Enjoy!

    Want to know more?

    You might like this book that we reviewed a little while back:

    Ultra-Processed People: The Science Behind Food That Isn’t Food – by Dr. Chris van Tulleken

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Coconut vs Avocado – 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 coconut to avocado, we picked the avocado.

    Why?

    In terms of macros, avocado is lower in carbs and also in net carbscoconut’s a little higher in fiber, but not enough to make up for the difference in carbs nor, when it comes to glycemic index and insulin index, the impact of coconut’s much higher fat content on insulin responses too. On which note, while coconut’s fats are broadly considered healthy (its impressive saturated fat content is formed of medium-chain triglycerides which, in moderation, are heart-healthy), avocado’s fats are even healthier, being mostly monounsaturated fat with some polyunsaturated (and about 15x less saturated fat). All in all, a fair win for avocado on the macros front, but coconut isn’t bad in moderation.

    When it comes to vitamins, avocados are higher in vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, C, E, K, and choline. Most of those differences are by very large margins. Coconuts are not higher in any vitamins. A huge, easy, “perfect score” win for avocados.

    In the category of minerals, however, it’s coconut’s turn to sweep with more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, zinc, and selenium—though the margins are mostly not nearly as impressive as avocado’s vitamin margins. Speaking of avocados, they do have more potassium than coconuts do, but the margin isn’t very large. A compelling win for coconut’s mineral content.

    Adding up the sections, we get to a very credible win for avocados, but coconuts are also very respectable. So, as ever, enjoy both (although we do recommend exercising moderation in the case of coconuts, mainly because of the saturated fat content), and if you’re choosing between them for some purpose, then avocado will generally be the best option.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Dr. Kim Foster’s Method For Balancing Hormones Naturally
  • Hearing loss is twice as common in Australia’s lowest income groups, our research shows

    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.

    Around one in six Australians has some form of hearing loss, ranging from mild to complete hearing loss. That figure is expected to grow to one in four by 2050, due in a large part to the country’s ageing population.

    Hearing loss affects communication and social engagement and limits educational and employment opportunities. Effective treatment for hearing loss is available in the form of communication training (for example, lipreading and auditory training), hearing aids and other devices.

    But the uptake of treatment is low. In Australia, publicly subsidised hearing care is available predominantly only to children, young people and retirement-age people on a pension. Adults of working age are mostly not eligible for hearing health care under the government’s Hearing Services Program.

    Our recent study published in the journal Ear and Hearing showed, for the first time, that working-age Australians from lower socioeconomic backgrounds are at much greater risk of hearing loss than those from higher socioeconomic backgrounds.

    We believe the lack of socially subsidised hearing care for adults of working age results in poor detection and care for hearing loss among people from disadvantaged backgrounds. This in turn exacerbates social inequalities.

    Population data shows hearing inequality

    We analysed a large data set called the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey that collects information on various aspects of people’s lives, including health and hearing loss.

    Using a HILDA sub-sample of 10,719 working-age Australians, we evaluated whether self-reported hearing loss was more common among people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds than for those from higher socioeconomic backgrounds between 2008 and 2018.

    Relying on self-reported hearing data instead of information from hearing tests is one limitation of our paper. However, self-reported hearing tends to underestimate actual rates of hearing impairment, so the hearing loss rates we reported are likely an underestimate.

    We also wanted to find out whether people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds were more likely to develop hearing loss in the long run.

    A boy wearing a hearing aid is playing.
    Hearing care is publicly subsidised for children.
    mady70/Shutterstock

    We found people in the lowest income groups were more than twice as likely to have hearing loss than those in the highest income groups. Further, hearing loss was 1.5 times as common among people living in the most deprived neighbourhoods than in the most affluent areas.

    For people reporting no hearing loss at the beginning of the study, after 11 years of follow up, those from a more deprived socioeconomic background were much more likely to develop hearing loss. For example, a lack of post secondary education was associated with a more than 1.5 times increased risk of developing hearing loss compared to those who achieved a bachelor’s degree or above.

    Overall, men were more likely to have hearing loss than women. As seen in the figure below, this gap is largest for people of low socioeconomic status.

    Why are disadvantaged groups more likely to experience hearing loss?

    There are several possible reasons hearing loss is more common among people from low socioeconomic backgrounds. Noise exposure is one of the biggest risks for hearing loss and people from low socioeconomic backgrounds may be more likely to be exposed to damaging levels of noise in jobs in mining, construction, manufacturing, and agriculture.

    Lifestyle factors which may be more prevalent in lower socioeconomic communities such as smoking, unhealthy diet, and a lack of regular exercise are also related to the risk of hearing loss.

    Finally, people with lower incomes may face challenges in accessing timely hearing care, alongside competing health needs, which could lead to missed identification of treatable ear disease.

    Why does this disparity in hearing loss matter?

    We like to think of Australia as an egalitarian society – the land of the fair go. But nearly half of people in Australia with hearing loss are of working age and mostly ineligible for publicly funded hearing services.

    Hearing aids with a private hearing care provider cost from around A$1,000 up to more than $4,000 for higher-end devices. Most people need two hearing aids.

    A builder using a grinder machine at a construction site.
    Hearing loss might be more common in low income groups because they’re exposed to more noise at work.
    Dmitry Kalinovsky/Shutterstock

    Lack of access to affordable hearing care for working-age adults on low incomes comes with an economic as well as a social cost.

    Previous economic analysis estimated hearing loss was responsible for financial costs of around $20 billion in 2019–20 in Australia. The largest component of these costs was productivity losses (unemployment, under-employment and Jobseeker social security payment costs) among working-age adults.

    Providing affordable hearing care for all Australians

    Lack of affordable hearing care for working-age adults from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may significantly exacerbate the impact of hearing loss among deprived communities and worsen social inequalities.

    Recently, the federal government has been considering extending publicly subsidised hearing services to lower income working age Australians. We believe reforming the current government Hearing Services Program and expanding eligibility to this group could not only promote a more inclusive, fairer and healthier society but may also yield overall cost savings by reducing lost productivity.

    All Australians should have access to affordable hearing care to have sufficient functional hearing to achieve their potential in life. That’s the land of the fair go.The Conversation

    Mohammad Nure Alam, PhD Candidate in Economics, Macquarie University; Kompal Sinha, Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Macquarie University, and Piers Dawes, Professor, School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland

    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:

  • Superfood Energy Balls

    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.

    They are healthy, they are tasty, they are convenient! Make some of these and when you need an energizing treat at silly o’clock when you don’t have time to prepare something, here they are, full of antioxidants, vitamins and minerals, good for blood sugars too, and ready to go:

    You will need

    • 1 cup pitted dates
    • 1 cup raw mixed nuts
    • ¼ cup goji berries
    • 1 tbsp cocoa powder
    • 1 tsp chili flakes

    Naturally, you can adjust the spice level if you like! But this is a good starter recipe.

    Method

    (we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

    1) Blend all the ingredients in a good processor to make a dough

    2) Roll the dough into 1″ balls; you should have enough dough for about 16 balls. If you want them to be pretty, you can roll them in some spare dry ingredients (e.g. chopped nuts, goji berries, chili flakes, seeds of some kind, whatever you have in your kitchen that fits the bill).

    3) Refrigerate for at least 1–2 hours, and serve! They can also be kept in the fridge for at least a good while—couldn’t tell you how long for sure though, because honestly, they’ve never stayed that long in the fridge without being eaten.

    Enjoy!

    Want to learn more?

    For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

    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:

  • What happens to your vagina as you age?

    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 vagina is an internal organ with a complex ecosystem, influenced by circulating hormone levels which change during the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, breastfeeding and menopause.

    Around and after menopause, there are normal changes in the growth and function of vaginal cells, as well as the vagina’s microbiome (groups of bacteria living in the vagina). Many women won’t notice these changes. They don’t usually cause symptoms or concern, but if they do, symptoms can usually be managed.

    Here’s what happens to your vagina as you age, whether you notice or not.

    Let’s clear up the terminology

    We’re focusing on the vagina, the muscular tube that goes from the external genitalia (the vulva), past the cervix, to the womb (uterus). Sometimes the word “vagina” is used to include the external genitalia. However, these are different organs and play different roles in women’s health.

    What happens to the vagina as you age?

    Like many other organs in the body, the vagina is sensitive to female sex steroid hormones (hormones) that change around puberty, pregnancy and menopause.

    Menopause is associated with a drop in circulating oestrogen concentrations and the hormone progesterone is no longer produced. The changes in hormones affect the vagina and its ecosystem. Effects may include:

    • less vaginal secretions, potentially leading to dryness
    • less growth of vagina surface cells resulting in a thinned lining
    • alteration to the support structure (connective tissue) around the vagina leading to less elasticity and more narrowing
    • fewer blood vessels around the vagina, which may explain less blood flow after menopause
    • a shift in the type and balance of bacteria, which can change vaginal acidity, from more acidic to more alkaline.

    What symptoms can I expect?

    Many women do not notice any bothersome vaginal changes as they age. There’s also little evidence many of these changes cause vaginal symptoms. For example, there is no direct evidence these changes cause vaginal infection or bleeding in menopausal women.

    Some women notice vaginal dryness after menopause, which may be linked to less vaginal secretions. This may lead to pain and discomfort during sex. But it’s not clear how much of this dryness is due to menopause, as younger women also commonly report it. In one study, 47% of sexually active postmenopausal women reported vaginal dryness, as did around 20% of premenopausal women.

    Other organs close to the vagina, such as the bladder and urethra, are also affected by the change in hormone levels after menopause. Some women experience recurrent urinary tract infections, which may cause pain (including pain to the side of the body) and irritation. So their symptoms are in fact not coming from the vagina itself but relate to changes in the urinary tract.

    Not everyone has the same experience

    Women vary in whether they notice vaginal changes and whether they are bothered by these to the same extent. For example, women with vaginal dryness who are not sexually active may not notice the change in vaginal secretions after menopause. However, some women notice severe dryness that affects their daily function and activities.

    In fact, researchers globally are taking more notice of women’s experiences of menopause to inform future research. This includes prioritising symptoms that matter to women the most, such as vaginal dryness, discomfort, irritation and pain during sex.

    If symptoms bother you

    Symptoms such as dryness, irritation, or pain during sex can usually be effectively managed. Lubricants may reduce pain during sex. Vaginal moisturisers may reduce dryness. Both are available over-the-counter at your local pharmacy.

    While there are many small clinical trials of individual products, these studies lack the power to demonstrate if they are really effective in improving vaginal symptoms.

    In contrast, there is robust evidence that vaginal oestrogen is effective in treating vaginal dryness and reducing pain during sex. It also reduces your chance of recurrent urinary tract infections. You can talk to your doctor about a prescription.

    Vaginal oestrogen is usually inserted using an applicator, two to three times a week. Very little is absorbed into the blood stream, it is generally safe but longer-term trials are required to confirm safety in long-term use beyond a year.

    Women with a history of breast cancer should see their oncologist to discuss using oestrogen as it may not be suitable for them.

    Are there other treatments?

    New treatments for vaginal dryness are under investigation. One avenue relates to our growing understanding of how the vaginal microbiome adapts and modifies around changes in circulating and local concentrations of hormones.

    For example, a small number of reports show that combining vaginal probiotics with low-dose vaginal oestrogen can improve vaginal symptoms. But more evidence is needed before this is recommended.

    Where to from here?

    The normal ageing process, as well as menopause, both affect the vagina as we age.

    Most women do not have troublesome vaginal symptoms during and after menopause, but for some, these may cause discomfort or distress.

    While hormonal treatments such as vaginal oestrogen are available, there is a pressing need for more non-hormonal treatments.

    Dr Sianan Healy, from Women’s Health Victoria, contributed to this article.

    Louie Ye, Clinical Fellow, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Melbourne and Martha Hickey, Professor of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, The University of Melbourne

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    The Conversation

    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: