The Telomere Effect – by Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn and Dr. Elissa Epel
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.
Telomeres can be pretty mystifying to the person with a lay interest in longevity. Beyond “they’re the little caps that sit on the end of your DNA, and longer is better, and when they get short, damage occurs, and aging”, how do they fit into the big picture?
Dr. Elizabeth Blackburn and Dr. Elissa Epel excel at explaining the marvelous world of telomeres…
- how they work
- what affects them
- and how and why
…and the extent to which changes are or aren’t reversible.
For some of us, the ship has sailed on avoiding a lot of early-life damage to our telomeres, and now we have a damage-mitigation task ahead. That’s where the authors get practical.
Indeed, the whole third part of the book is titled “Help Your Body Protect Its Cells“, and indeed covers not just “from now on” protection, but undoing some of the damage already done (yes, telomeres can be lengthened—it gets harder as we get older, but absolutely can be done).
In short: if you’d like to avoid further damage to your telomeres where possible, and reverse some of the damage done already, this book will set you on the right track.
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:
-
‘I keep away from people’ – combined vision and hearing loss is isolating more and more older Australians
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 ageing population brings a growing crisis: people over 65 are at greater risk of dual sensory impairment (also known as “deafblindness” or combined vision and hearing loss).
Some 66% of people over 60 have hearing loss and 33% of older Australians have low vision. Estimates suggest more than a quarter of Australians over 80 are living with dual sensory impairment.
Combined vision and hearing loss describes any degree of sight and hearing loss, so neither sense can compensate for the other. Dual sensory impairment can occur at any point in life but is increasingly common as people get older.
The experience can make older people feel isolated and unable to participate in important conversations, including about their health.
bricolage/Shutterstock Causes and conditions
Conditions related to hearing and vision impairment often increase as we age – but many of these changes are subtle.
Hearing loss can start as early as our 50s and often accompany other age-related visual changes, such as age-related macular degeneration.
Other age-related conditions are frequently prioritised by patients, doctors or carers, such as diabetes or heart disease. Vision and hearing changes can be easy to overlook or accept as a normal aspect of ageing. As an older person we interviewed for our research told us
I don’t see too good or hear too well. It’s just part of old age.
An invisible disability
Dual sensory impairment has a significant and negative impact in all aspects of a person’s life. It reduces access to information, mobility and orientation, impacts social activities and communication, making it difficult for older adults to manage.
It is underdiagnosed, underrecognised and sometimes misattributed (for example, to cognitive impairment or decline). However, there is also growing evidence of links between dementia and dual sensory loss. If left untreated or without appropriate support, dual sensory impairment diminishes the capacity of older people to live independently, feel happy and be safe.
A dearth of specific resources to educate and support older Australians with their dual sensory impairment means when older people do raise the issue, their GP or health professional may not understand its significance or where to refer them. One older person told us:
There’s another thing too about the GP, the sort of mentality ‘well what do you expect? You’re 95.’ Hearing and vision loss in old age is not seen as a disability, it’s seen as something else.
Isolated yet more dependent on others
Global trends show a worrying conundrum. Older people with dual sensory impairment become more socially isolated, which impacts their mental health and wellbeing. At the same time they can become increasingly dependent on other people to help them navigate and manage day-to-day activities with limited sight and hearing.
One aspect of this is how effectively they can comprehend and communicate in a health-care setting. Recent research shows doctors and nurses in hospitals aren’t making themselves understood to most of their patients with dual sensory impairment. Good communication in the health context is about more than just “knowing what is going on”, researchers note. It facilitates:
- shorter hospital stays
- fewer re-admissions
- reduced emergency room visits
- better treatment adherence and medical follow up
- less unnecessary diagnostic testing
- improved health-care outcomes.
‘Too hard’
Globally, there is a better understanding of how important it is to maintain active social lives as people age. But this is difficult for older adults with dual sensory loss. One person told us
I don’t particularly want to mix with people. Too hard, because they can’t understand. I can no longer now walk into that room, see nothing, find my seat and not recognise [or hear] people.
Again, these experiences increase reliance on family. But caring in this context is tough and largely hidden. Family members describe being the “eyes and ears” for their loved one. It’s a 24/7 role which can bring frustration, social isolation and depression for carers too. One spouse told us:
He doesn’t talk anymore much, because he doesn’t know whether [people are] talking to him, unless they use his name, he’s unaware they’re speaking to him, so he might ignore people and so on. And in the end, I noticed people weren’t even bothering him to talk, so now I refuse to go. Because I don’t think it’s fair.
Dual sensory loss can be isolating for older people and carers. Synthex/Shutterstock So, what can we do?
Dual sensory impairment is a growing problem with potentially devastating impacts.
It should be considered a unique and distinct disability in all relevant protections and policies. This includes the right to dedicated diagnosis and support, accessibility provisions and specialised skill development for health and social professionals and carers.
We need to develop resources to help people with dual sensory impairment and their families and carers understand the condition, what it means and how everyone can be supported. This could include communication adaptation, such as social haptics (communicating using touch) and specialised support for older adults to navigate health care.
Increasing awareness and understanding of dual sensory impairment will also help those impacted with everyday engagement with the world around them – rather than the isolation many feel now.
Moira Dunsmore, Senior Lecturer, Sydney Nursing School, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, University of Sydney; Annmaree Watharow, Lived Experience Research Fellow, Centre for Disability Research and Policy, University of Sydney, and Emily Kecman, Postdoctoral research fellow, Department of Linguistics, University of Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
‘Disease X’: What it is (and isn’t)
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
- In January 2024, the World Economic Forum hosted an event called Preparing for Disease X to discuss strategies to improve international pandemic response.
- Disease X is a term used in epidemiology to refer to potential disease threats. It is not a real disease or a global conspiracy.
- Preparation to prevent and respond to future pandemics is a necessary part of global health to keep us all safer.
During the World Economic Forum’s 54th annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, global health experts discussed ways to strengthen health care systems in preparation for future pandemics. Conspiracy theories quickly began circulating posts about the event and the fictional disease at its center, so-called Disease X.
What is Disease X?
In 2018, the World Health Organization added Disease X to its list of Blueprint Priority Diseases that are public health risks. But, unlike the other diseases on the list, Disease X doesn’t exist. The term represents a hypothetical human disease capable of causing a pandemic. Although experts don’t know what the next Disease X will be, they can make educated guesses about where and how it may emerge—and how we can prepare for it.
Why are we hearing about Disease X now?
COVID-19 has been the deadliest infectious disease outbreak of the 21st century. It’s also an example of a Disease X: a previously unknown pathogen that spreads rapidly around the world, claiming millions of lives.
When the WEF hosted a panel of experts to discuss Disease X, it was the first exposure that many people had to a concept that global health experts have been discussing since 2018.
Even before the routine pandemic preparedness event took place, online conspiracy theorists began circulating false claims that those discussing and preparing for Disease X had sinister motives, underscoring how widespread distrust of global health entities has become in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Why does Disease X matter?
Epidemiologists use concepts like Disease X to plan for future outbreaks and avoid the mistakes of past outbreaks. The COVID-19 pandemic and the recent non-endemic outbreak of mpox highlight the importance of global coordination to efficiently prevent and respond to disease outbreaks.
Pandemics are inevitable, but the scale of their destruction doesn’t have to be. Major disease outbreaks are likely to become more frequent due to the impacts of climate change. Preparing for a pandemic now helps ensure that the world is better equipped to handle the next one.
This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
-
Yoga Teacher: “If I wanted to get flexible in 2025, here’s what I’d do”
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.
Progress in flexibility isn’t about doing more but doing it smarter:
Step by step
First, we need a good foundation. Create three routines focusing on different areas of the body, namely:
- Hips & hamstrings
- Shoulders & spine
- Wrists, ankles, & neck
Alternate these on a daily basis (e.g. Mon = 1, Tue = 2, Wed = 3, Thu = 1, Fri = 2, Sat = 3, Sun = 1, Mon = 2, Tue = 3, and so on), doing just 10 minutes per day and focusing on consistency.
Next, we will want to identify problem areas (likely they will identify themselves, i.e. a particular stretch will be harder than others). Use “focus sessions” twice a week (20–30 minutes) to address these spots. While you’re at it, incorporate techniques like active stretches, weighted stretches, and resistance bands to improve strength and range of motion.
Because commitment is important, schedule flexibility sessions like important meetings and set calendar alerts. Focus on consistency rather than perfection.
To help keep you going, remember that flexibility improvements are less obvious than other fitness goals. Take photos every couple of weeks (e.g. forward fold, low lunge, shoulder stretch). Visual proof of progress can motivate you to keep going.
For more on all of this, plus suggested specific stretches for those routines, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like:
Getting Flexible, Starting As An Adult: How Long Does It Really Take?
Take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
When And Why Do We Pick Up Our Phones?
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 School of Life’s Alain de Botton makes the argument that—if we pay attention, if we keep track—there’s an understory to why we pick up our phones:
It’s not about information
Yes, our phones (or rather, the apps therein) are designed to addict us, to draw us back, to keep us scrolling and never let us go. We indeed seek out information like our ancestors once sought out berries; searching, encouraged by a small discovery, looking for more. The neurochemistry is similar.
But when we look at the “when” of picking up our phones, de Botton says, it tells a different story:
We pick them up not to find out what’s going on with the world, but rather specifically to not find out what’s going with ourselves. We pick them up to white out some anxiety we don’t want to examine, a line of thought we don’t want to go down, memories we don’t want to consider, futures we do not want to have to worry about.
And of course, phones do have a great educational potential, are an immensely powerful tool for accessing knowledge of many kinds—if only we can remain truly conscious while using them, and not take them as the new “opiate of the masses”.
De Botton bids us, when next we pick up our phone. ask a brave question:
“If I weren’t allowed to consult my phone right now, what might I need to think about?”
As for where from there? There’s more in the video:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Further reading
Making Social Media Work For Your Mental Health
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:
-
Could ADHD drugs reduce the risk of early death? Unpacking the findings from a new Swedish study
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.
Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can have a considerable impact on the day-to-day functioning and overall wellbeing of people affected. It causes a variety of symptoms including difficulty focusing, impulsivity and hyperactivity.
For many, a diagnosis of ADHD, whether in childhood or adulthood, is life changing. It means finally having an explanation for these challenges, and opens up the opportunity for treatment, including medication.
Although ADHD medications can cause side effects, they generally improve symptoms for people with the disorder, and thereby can significantly boost quality of life.
Now a new study has found being treated for ADHD with medication reduces the risk of early death for people with the disorder. But what can we make of these findings?
A large study from Sweden
The study, published this week in JAMA (the prestigious journal of the American Medical Association), was a large cohort study of 148,578 people diagnosed with ADHD in Sweden. It included both adults and children.
In a cohort study, a group of people who share a common characteristic (in this case a diagnosis of ADHD) are followed over time to see how many develop a particular health outcome of interest (in this case the outcome was death).
For this study the researchers calculated the mortality rate over a two-year follow up period for those whose ADHD was treated with medication (a group of around 84,000 people) alongside those whose ADHD was not treated with medication (around 64,000 people). The team then determined if there were any differences between the two groups.
What did the results show?
The study found people who were diagnosed and treated for ADHD had a 19% reduced risk of death from any cause over the two years they were tracked, compared with those who were diagnosed but not treated.
In understanding this result, it’s important – and interesting – to look at the causes of death. The authors separately analysed deaths due to natural causes (physical medical conditions) and deaths due to unnatural causes (for example, unintentional injuries, suicide, or accidental poisonings).
The key result is that while no significant difference was seen between the two groups when examining natural causes of death, the authors found a significant difference for deaths due to unnatural causes.
So what’s going on?
Previous studies have suggested ADHD is associated with an increased risk of premature death from unnatural causes, such as injury and poisoning.
On a related note, earlier studies have also suggested taking ADHD medicines may reduce premature deaths. So while this is not the first study to suggest this association, the authors note previous studies addressing this link have generated mixed results and have had significant limitations.
In this new study, the authors suggest the reduction in deaths from unnatural causes could be because taking medication alleviates some of the ADHD symptoms responsible for poor outcomes – for example, improving impulse control and decision-making. They note this could reduce fatal accidents.
The authors cite a number of studies that support this hypothesis, including research showing ADHD medications may prevent the onset of mood, anxiety and substance use disorders, and lower the risk of accidents and criminality. All this could reasonably be expected to lower the rate of unnatural deaths.
Strengths and limitations
Scandinavian countries have well-maintained national registries that collect information on various aspects of citizens’ lives, including their health. This allows researchers to conduct excellent population-based studies.
Along with its robust study design and high-quality data, another strength of this study is its size. The large number of participants – almost 150,000 – gives us confidence the findings were not due to chance.
The fact this study examined both children and adults is another strength. Previous research relating to ADHD has often focused primarily on children.
One of the important limitations of this study acknowledged by the authors is that it was observational. Observational studies are where the researchers observe and analyse naturally occurring phenomena without intervening in the lives of the study participants (unlike randomised controlled trials).
The limitation in all observational research is the issue of confounding. This means we cannot be completely sure the differences between the two groups observed were not either partially or entirely due to some other factor apart from taking medication.
Specifically, it’s possible lifestyle factors or other ADHD treatments such as psychological counselling or social support may have influenced the mortality rates in the groups studied.
Another possible limitation is the relatively short follow-up period. What the results would show if participants were followed up for longer is an interesting question, and could be addressed in future research.
What are the implications?
Despite some limitations, this study adds to the evidence that diagnosis and treatment for ADHD can make a profound difference to people’s lives. As well as alleviating symptoms of the disorder, this study supports the idea ADHD medication reduces the risk of premature death.
Ultimately, this highlights the importance of diagnosing ADHD early so the appropriate treatment can be given. It also contributes to the body of evidence indicating the need to improve access to mental health care and support more broadly.
Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University
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:
-
Spelt vs Bulgur – 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 spelt to bulgur, we picked the spelt.
Why?
An argument could be made for bulgur, but we say spelt comes out on top. Speaking of “sorting the wheat from the chaff”, be aware: spelt is a hulled wheat product and bulgur is a cracked wheat product.
Looking at macros first, it’s not surprising therefore that spelt has proportionally more carbs and bulgur has proportionally more fiber, resulting in a slightly lower glycemic index. That said, for the exact same reason, spelt is proportionally higher in protein. Still, fiber is usually the most health-relevant aspect in the macros category, so we’re going to call this a moderate win for bulgur.
When it comes to micronutrients, however, spelt is doing a lot better:
In the category of vitamins, spelt is higher in vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, and E (with the difference in E being 26x more!), while bulgur is higher only in vitamin B9 (and that, only slightly). A clear win for spelt here.
Nor are the mineral contents less polarized; spelt has more copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while bulgur is not higher in any minerals. Another easy win for spelt.
Adding these up makes a win for spelt, but again we’d urge to not underestimate the importance of fiber. Enjoy both in moderation, unless you are avoiding wheat/gluten in which case don’t, and for almost everyone, mixed whole grains are always going to be best.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
- Grains: Bread Of Life, Or Cereal Killer?
- Gluten: What’s The Truth?
- Why You’re Probably Not Getting Enough Fiber (And How To Fix 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:
