To Medicate or Not? That is the Question! – by Dr. Asha Bohannon
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.
Medications are, of course, a necessity of life (literally!) for many, especially as we get older. Nevertheless, overmedication is also a big problem that can cause a lot of harm too, and guess what, it comes with the exact same “especially as we get older” tag too.
So, what does Dr. Bohannon (a doctor of pharmacy, diabetes educator, and personal trainer too) recommend?
Simply put: she recommends starting with a comprehensive health history assessment and analysing one’s medication/supplement profile, before getting lab work done, tweaking all the things that can be tweaked along the way, and—of course—not neglecting lifestyle medicine either.
The book is prefaced and ended with pep talks that probably a person who has already bought the book does not need, but they don’t detract from the practical content either. Nevertheless, it feels a little odd that it takes until chapter 4 to reach “step 1” of her 7-step method!
The style throughout is conversational and energetic, but not overly padded with hype; it’s just a very casual style. Nevertheless, she brings to bear her professional knowledge and understanding as a doctor of pharmacy, to include her insights into the industry that one might not observe from outside of it.
Bottom line: if you’d like to do your own personal meds review and want to “know enough to ask the right questions” before bringing it up with your doctor, this book is a fine choice for that.
Click here to check out To Medicate Or Not, and make informed choices!
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:
Almond Butter vs Cashew Butter – 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 almond butter to cashew butter, we picked the almond.
Why?
It’s not just our pro-almonds bias! And of course exact nutritional values may vary depending on the recipe, but we’re using the USDA’s standardized figures which should represent a reasonable average. Specifically, we’re looking at the USDA entries for “[Nut] butter, plain, without salt added”.
In terms of macros, almond butter takes the lead immediately with nearly 2x the protein and over 3x the fiber. In contrast, cashew butter has 1.5x the carbs, and the two nut butters are approximately equal on fat. An easy win for almond butter so far.
When it comes to vitamins, almond butter has more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, E, and choline, while cashew butter has more of vitamins B1, B6, and K. Thus, a 6:3 win for almond butter.
In the category of minerals, things are closer, but almond butter has more calcium, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and potassium, while cashew butter has more copper, iron, zinc, and selenium. So, a 5:4 win for almond butter.
In short, these three wins for almond butter add up to one total win for almond butter, unless you have a pressing reason to have different priorities in what you’re looking for in terms of nutrition.
Enjoy both, of course! Unless you are allergic, in which case, please don’t.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts
Take care!
Share This Post
4 Tips To Stand Without Using Hands
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 “sit-stand” test, getting up off the floor without using one’s hands, is well-recognized as a good indicator of healthy aging, and predictor of longevity. But what if you can’t do it? Rather than struggling, there are exercises to strengthen the body to be able to do this vital movement.
Step by step
Teresa Shupe has been teaching Pilates professionally full-time for over 25 years, and here’s what she has to offer in the category of safe and effective ways of improving balance and posture while doing the sitting-to-standing movement:
- Squat! Doing squats (especially deep ones) regularly strengthens all the parts necessary to effectively complete this movement. If your knees aren’t up to it at first, do the squats with your back against a wall to start with.
- Roll! On your back, cross your feet as though preparing to stand, and rock-and-roll your body forwards. To start with you can “cheat” and use your fingertips to give a slight extra lift. This exercise builds mobility in the various necessary parts of the body, and also strengthens the core—as well as getting you accustomed to using your bodyweight to move your body forwards.
- Lift! This one’s focusing on that last part, and taking it further. Because it may be difficult to get enough momentum initially, you can practice by holding small weights in your hands, to shift your centre of gravity forwards a bit. Unlike many weights exercises, in this case you’re going to transition to holding less weight rather than more, though.
- Complete! Continue from the above, without weights now; use the blades of your feet to stand. If you need to, use your fingertips to give you a touch more lift and stability, and reduce the fingers that you use until you are using none.
For more on each of these as well as a visual demonstration, enjoy this short video:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Further reading
For more exercises with a similar approach, check out:
Mobility As A Sporting Pursuit
Take care!
Share This Post
We looked at over 166,000 psychiatric records. Over half showed people were admitted against their will
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.
Picture two people, both suffering from a serious mental illness requiring hospital admission. One was born in Australia, the other in Asia.
Hopefully, both could be treated on a voluntary basis, taking into account their individual needs, preferences and capacity to consent. If not, you might imagine they should be equally likely to receive treatment against their will (known colloquially as being “sectioned” or “scheduled”).
However, our research published in British Journal of Psychiatry Open suggests this is not the case.
In the largest study globally of its kind, we found Australians are more likely to be treated in hospital for their acute mental illness against their will if they are born overseas, speak a language other than English or are unemployed.
What we did and what we found
We examined more than 166,000 episodes of voluntary and involuntary psychiatric care in New South Wales public hospitals between 2016 and 2021. Most admissions (54%) included at least one day of involuntary care.
Being brought to hospital via legal means, such as by police or via a court order, was strongly linked to involuntary treatment.
While our study does not show why this is the case, it may be due to mental health laws. In NSW, which has similar laws to most jurisdictions in Australia, doctors may treat a person on an involuntary basis if they present with certain symptoms indicating serious mental illness (such as hallucinations and delusions) which cause them to require protection from serious harm, and there is no other less-restrictive care available. Someone who has been brought to hospital by police or the courts may be more likely to meet the legal requirement of requiring protection from serious harm.
The likelihood of involuntary care was also linked to someone’s diagnosis. A person with psychosis or organic brain diseases, such as dementia and delirium, were about four times as likely to be admitted involuntarily compared to someone with anxiety or adjustment disorders (conditions involving a severe reaction to stressors).
However, our data suggest non-clinical factors contribute to the decision to impose involuntary care.
Compared with people born in Australia, we found people born in Asia were 42% more likely to be treated involuntarily.
People born in Africa or the Middle East were 32% more likely to be treated this way.
Overall, people who spoke a language other than English were 11% more likely to receive involuntary treatment compared to those who spoke English as their first language.
Some international researchers have suggested higher rates of involuntary treatment seen in people born overseas might be due to higher rates of psychotic illness. But our research found a link between higher rates of involuntary care in people born overseas or who don’t speak English regardless of their diagnosis.
We don’t know why this is happening. It is likely to reflect a complex interplay of factors about both the people receiving treatment and the way services are provided to them.
People less likely to be treated involuntarily included those who hold private health insurance, and those referred through a community health centre or outpatients unit.
Our findings are in line with international studies. These show higher rates of involuntary treatment among people from Black and ethnic minority groups, and people living in areas of higher socioeconomic disadvantage.
A last resort? Or should we ban it?
Both the NSW and Australian mental health commissions have called involuntary psychiatric care an avoidable harm that should only be used as a last resort.
Despite this, one study found Australia’s rate of involuntary admissions has increased by 3.4% per year and it has one of the highest rates of involuntary admissions in the world.
Involuntary psychiatric treatment is also under increasing scrutiny globally.
When Australia signed up to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, it added a declaration noting it would allow for involuntary treatment of people with mental illness where such treatments are “necessary, as a last resort and subject to safeguards”.
However, the UN has rejected this, saying it is a fundamental human right “to be free from involuntary detention in a mental health facility and not to be forced to undergo mental health treatment”.
Others question if involuntary treatment could ever be removed entirely.
Where to from here?
Our research not only highlights concerns regarding how involuntary psychiatric treatment is implemented, it’s a first step towards decreasing its use. Without understanding how and when it is used it will be difficult to create effective interventions to reduce it.
But Australia is still a long way from significantly reducing involuntary treatment.
We need to provide more care options outside hospital, ones accessible to all Australians, including those born overseas, who don’t speak English, or who come from disadvantaged communities. This includes intervening early enough that people are supported to not become so unwell they end up being referred for treatment via police or the criminal justice system.
More broadly, we need to do more to reduce stigma surrounding mental illness and to ensure poverty and discrimination are tackled to help prevent more people becoming unwell in the first place.
Our study also shows we need to do more to respect the autonomy of someone with serious mental illness to choose if they are treated. That’s whether they are in NSW or other jurisdictions.
And legal reform is required to ensure more states and territories more fully reflect the principal that people who have the capacity to make such decisions should have the right to decline mental health treatment in the same way they would any other health care.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Amy Corderoy, Medical doctor and PhD candidate studying involuntary psychiatric treatment, School of Psychiatry, UNSW Sydney
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
Related Posts
Saffron For The Brain (& More)
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.
Saffron For The Brain (& More)
In yesterday’s edition of 10almonds, one of the items in the “health news from around the world” section was:
Clinical trial finds herbal medicine Sailuotong effective for brain health in older people
But, what is it?
❝SaiLuoTong (SLT) is a modern compound Chinese herbal medicine preparation in capsule form containing standardized extracts of Panax ginseng, Ginkgo biloba, and Crocus sativus L❞
We’ve written previously about ginseng and ginkgo biloba:
So, what’s this about Crocus sativus L.?
That is the plant better known as saffron. And, for all its wide availability (your local supermarket probably has at least a tiny amount in the spice section), there’s a reason we don’t see much of it:
❝Saffron blooms only once a year and should be collected within a very short duration. It is picked during 3–4 weeks in October-November. The method for the cultivation of saffron contributes greatly to its high price. According to some reports, this species is a sterile triploid and so does not produce fertile seeds. Germination can take 1–6 months at 18°C. It takes 3 years for plants to flower from seed.❞
Source: Crocus sativus L.: A comprehensive review
That’s fascinating, but what does it do for us?
Well, in the words of El Midaoui et al. (2022):
❝In the frame of a double-blind-placebo-controlled study, 30 mg per day supplementation with saffron for 16 weeks resulted in improved cognitive function in patients suffering from mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease.
Moreover, the follow-up of this study in which the authors evaluated the effects of saffron (30 mg/day) for 22 weeks showed that saffron was as effective as donepezil in the treatment of mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease❞
Read the full review: Saffron (Crocus sativus L.): A Source of Nutrients for Health and for the Treatment of Neuropsychiatric and Age-Related Diseases
Not just that, but it also has powerful antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties beyond the brain (though the brain is where research has been most focused, due to its neuroprotective effects).
(this, too, is a full research review in its own right; we’re getting a lot of “bang for buck” on papers today)
And more?
Yes, and more. Lots more. To bullet-pointify even just the abstract from another research review:
- Saffron has been suggested to be effective in the treatment of a wide range of disorders including coronary artery diseases, hypertension, stomach disorders, dysmenorrhea and learning and memory impairments.
- In addition, different studies have indicated that saffron has anti-inflammatory, anti-atherosclerotic, antigenotoxic and cytotoxic activities. (This is all good; the cytotoxic activities are about killing cancer cells)
- Antitussive effects of stigmas and petals of C. sativus and its components, safranal and crocin have also been demonstrated.
- The anticonvulsant and anti-Alzheimer properties of saffron extract were shown in human and animal studies.
- The efficacy of C. sativus in the treatment of mild to moderate depression was also reported in clinical trial.
- Administration of C. sativus and its constituents increased glutamate and dopamine levels in the brain in a dose-dependent manner.
- It also interacts with the opioid system to reduce withdrawal syndrome.
- C. sativus and its components can be considered as promising agents in the treatment of nervous system disorders.
For more details on any of those items, see:
The effects of Crocus sativus (saffron) and its constituents on nervous system: a review
Is it safe?
The effective dose is 30mg/kg and the LD50 is more than 20g/kg, so yes, it’s very safe. Given the price of it, this also means that if you’re the size of this writer (a little over 70kg, or a little over 150lbs) to poison yourself effectively you’d need to consume about 1.4kg of saffron at a time, which would cost well over $6,000.
Where can I get it?
Your local supermarket probably has a tiny amount in the spice section, or you can get better prices buying it in “bulk” online. Here’s an example product on Amazon, for your convenience
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:
The Squat Bible – by Dr. Aaron Horschig
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.
You probably know the following three things about squats:
- Squatting is great for the health in many ways
- There are many different ways to squat
- Not all of them are correct, and some may even do harm
Dr. Aaron Horschig makes the case for squats being a movement first, and an exercise second. To this end, he takes us on a joint-by-joint tour of the anatomy of squatting, so that we get it right from top to toe.
Or rather: from toe to top, since he starts with the best foundation.
What this means is that if you’ve struggled to squat because you find some discomfort in your ankles, or a weakness in the knees, or you can’t get your back quite right, Dr. Horschig will have a fix for you. He also takes a realistic look about how people’s anatomy varies from person to person, and what differences this makes to how we each should best squat.
The explanations are clear and so are the pictures—we recommend getting the color print edition (linked), as the image quality is better than the black and white and/or Kindle edition.
Bottom-line: squats are one of the single best exercises we can do for our health—but we can miss out on benefits (or even do ourselves harm) if we don’t do them well. This book is a comprehensive reference resource for making sure we get the most out of our squatting ability.
Click here to check out The Squat Bible, and master this all-important movement!
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:
Toxic Gas That Sterilizes Medical Devices Prompts Safety Rule Update
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.
Over the past two years, Madeline Beal has heard frustration and even bewilderment during public meetings about ethylene oxide, a cancer-causing gas that is used to sterilize half of the medical devices in the U.S.
Beal, senior risk communication adviser for the Environmental Protection Agency, has fielded questions about why the agency took so long to alert people who live near facilities that emit the chemical about unusually high amounts of the carcinogenic gas in their neighborhoods. Residents asked why the EPA couldn’t close those facilities, and they wanted to know how many people had developed cancer from their exposure.
“If you’re upset by the information you’re hearing tonight, if you’re angry, if it scares you to think about risk to your family, those are totally reasonable responses,” Beal told an audience in Laredo, Texas, in September 2022. “We think the risk levels near this facility are too high.”
There are about 90 sterilizing plants in the U.S. that use ethylene oxide, and for decades companies used the chemical to sterilize medical products without drawing much attention. Many medical device-makers send their products to the plants to be sterilized before they are shipped, typically to medical distribution companies.
But people living around these facilities have been jolted in recent years by a succession of warnings about cancer risk from the federal government and media reports, an awareness that has also spawned protests and lawsuits alleging medical harm.
The EPA is expected to meet a March 1 court-ordered deadline to finalize tighter safety rules around how the toxic gas is used. The proposed changes come in the wake of a 2016 agency report that found that long-term exposure to ethylene oxide is more dangerous than was previously thought.
But the anticipated final rules — the agency’s first regulatory update on ethylene oxide emissions in more than a decade — are expected to face pushback. Medical device-makers worry stricter regulation will increase costs and may put patients at higher risk of infection from devices, ranging from surgical kits to catheters, due to deficient sterilization. The new rules are also not likely to satisfy the concerns of environmentalists or members of the public, who already have expressed frustration about how long it took the federal government to sound the alarm.
“We have been breathing this air for 40 years,” said Connie Waller, 70, who lives with her husband, David, 75, within two miles of such a sterilizing plant in Covington, Georgia, east of Atlanta. “The only way to stop these chemicals is to hit them in their pocketbook, to get their attention.”
The EPA says data shows that long-term exposure to ethylene oxide can increase the risk of breast cancer and cancers of the white blood cells, such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma, myeloma, and lymphocytic leukemia. It can irritate the eyes, nose, throat, and lungs, and has been linked to damage to the brain and nervous and reproductive systems. Children are potentially more vulnerable, as are workers routinely exposed to the chemical, EPA officials say. The agency calculates the risk based on how much of the gas is in the air or near the sterilizing facility, the distance a person is from the plant, and how long the person is exposed.
Waller said she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2004 and that her husband was found to have non-Hodgkin lymphoma eight years later.
A 2022 study of communities living near a sterilization facility in Laredo found the rates of acute lymphocytic leukemia and breast cancer were greater than expected based on statewide rates, a difference that was statistically significant.
Beal, the EPA risk adviser, who regularly meets with community members, acknowledges the public’s concerns. “We don’t think it’s OK for you to be at increased risk from something that you have no control over, that’s near your house,” she said. “We are working as fast as we can to get that risk reduced with the powers that we have available to us.”
In the meantime, local and state governments and industry groups have scrambled to defuse public outcry.
Hundreds of personal injury cases have been filed in communities near sterilizing plants. In 2020, New Mexico’s then-attorney general filed a lawsuit against a plant in Santa Teresa, and that case is ongoing. In a case that settled last year in suburban Atlanta, a company agreed to pay $35 million to 79 people who alleged ethylene oxide used at the plant caused cancer and other injuries.
In Cook County, Illinois, a jury in 2022 awarded $363 million to a woman who alleged exposure to ethylene oxide gas led to her breast cancer diagnosis. But, in another Illinois case, a jury ruled that the sterilizing company was not liable for a woman’s blood cancer claim.
Greg Crist, chief advocacy officer for the Advanced Medical Technology Association, a medical device trade group that says ethylene oxide is an effective and reliable sterilant, attributes the spate of lawsuits to the litigious nature of trial attorneys.
“If they smell blood in the water, they’ll go after it,” Crist said.
Most states have at least one sterilizing plant. According to the EPA, a handful, like California and North Carolina, have gone further than the agency and the federal Clean Air Act to regulate ethylene oxide emissions. After a media and political firestorm raised awareness about the metro Atlanta facilities, Georgia started requiring sterilizing plants that use the gas to report all leaks.
The proposed rules the EPA is set to finalize would set lower emissions limits for chemical plants and commercial sterilizers and increase some safety requirements for workers within these facilities. The agency is expected to set an 18-month deadline for commercial sterilizers to come into compliance with the emissions rules.
That would help at facilities that “cut corners,” with lax pollution controls that allow emissions of the gas into nearby communities, said Richard Peltier, a professor of environmental health sciences at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. Stronger regulation also prevents the plants from remaining under the radar. “One of the dirty secrets is that a lot of it is self-regulated or self-policed,” Peltier added.
But the proposed rules did not include protections for workers at off-site warehouses that store sterilized products, which can continue to emit ethylene oxide. They also did not require air testing around the facilities, prompting debate about how effective they would be in protecting the health of nearby residents.
Industry officials also don’t expect an alternative that is as broadly effective as ethylene oxide to be developed anytime soon, though they support researching other methods. Current alternatives include steam, radiation, and hydrogen peroxide vapor.
Increasing the use of alternatives can reduce industry dependence on “the crutch of ethylene oxide,” said Darya Minovi, senior analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group.
But meeting the new guidelines will be disruptive to the industry, Crist said. He estimates companies will spend upward of $500 million to comply with the new EPA rules and could struggle to meet the agency’s 18-month timetable. Sterilization companies will also have difficulty adjusting to new rules on how workers handle the gas without a dip in efficiency, Crist said.
The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates drugs and medical devices, is also watching the regulatory moves closely and worries the updated emissions rule could “present some unique challenges” if implemented as proposed, said Audra Harrison, an FDA spokesperson. “The FDA is concerned about the rule’s effects on the availability of medical devices,” she added.
Other groups, like the American Chemistry Council and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state’s environmental agency, assert that ethylene oxide use isn’t as dangerous as the EPA says. The EPA’s toxicity assessment has “severe flaws” and is “overly conservative,” the council said in an emailed statement. Texas, which has several sterilizing plants, has said ethylene oxide isn’t as high a cancer risk as the agency claims, an assessment that the EPA has rejected.
Tracey Woodruff, a researcher at the University of California-San Francisco who previously worked at the EPA, said it can be hard for the agency to keep up with regulating chemicals like ethylene oxide because of constrained resources, the technical complications of rulemaking, and industry lobbying.
But she’s hopeful the EPA can strike a balance between its desire to reduce exposure and the desire of the FDA not to disrupt medical device sterilization. And scrutiny can also help the device sterilization industry think outside the box.
“We continue to discover these chemicals that we’ve already been exposed to were toxic, and we have high exposures,” she said. “Regulation is an innovation forcer.”
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: