Aging Is Inevitable… Or is it?
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.
Aging is inevitable… Or is it?
We’ve talked before about how and why aging happens. We’ve also talked about the work to tackle aging as basically an engineering problem, with the premise that our bodies are biological machines, and machines can be repaired. We also recommended a great book about this, by the way. But that’s about interfering with the biological process of aging. What about if the damage is already done?
“When the damage is done, it’s done”
We can do a lot to try to protect ourselves from aging, and we might be able to slow down the clock, but we can’t stop it, and we certainly can’t reverse it… right?
Wrong! Or at least, so we currently understand, in some respects. Supplementation with phosphatidylserine, for example, has shown promise for not just preventing, but treating, neurodegeneration (such as that caused by Alzheimer’s disease). It’s not a magic bullet and so far the science is at “probably” and “this shows great promise for…” and “this appears to…”
Phosphatidylserene does help slow neurodegeneration
…because of its role in allowing your cells to know whether they have permission to die.
This may seem a flippant way of putting it, but it’s basically how cell death works. Cells do need to die (if they don’t, that’s called cancer) and be replaced with new copies, and those copies need to be made before too much damage is accumulated (otherwise the damage is compounded with each new iteration). So an early cell death-and-replacement is generally better for your overall health than a later one.
However, neurons are tricky to replace, so phosphatidylserine effectively says “not you, hold on” to keep the rate of neuronal cell death nearer to the (slow) rate at which they can be replaced.
One more myth to bust…
For the longest time we thought that adults, especially older adults, couldn’t make new brain cells at all, that we grew a certain number, then had to hang onto them until we died… suffering diminished cognitive ability with age, on account of losing brain cells along the way.
It’s partly true: it’s definitely easier to kill brain cells than to grow them… Mind you, that’s technically true of people, too, yet the population continues to boom!
Anyway, new research showing that adults do, in fact, grow new braincells was briefly challenged by a 2018 study that declared: Human hippocampal neurogenesis drops sharply in children to undetectable levels in adults after all, never mind, go back to your business.
So was adult neurogenesis just a myth to be busted after all? Nope.
It turned out, the 2018 study had a methodological flaw!
To put it in lay terms: they had accidentally melted the evidence.
A 2019 study overcame this flaw by using a shorter fixation time for the cell samples they wanted to look at, and found that there were tens of thousands of “baby neurons” (again with the lay terms), newly-made brain cells, in samples from adults ranging from 43 to 87.
Now, there was still a difference: the samples from the youngest adult had 30% more newly-made braincells than the 87-year-old, but given that previous science thought brain cell generation stopped in childhood, the fact that an 87-year-old was generating new brain cells 30% less quickly than a 43-year-old is hardly much of a criticism!
As an aside: samples from patients with Alzheimer’s also had a 30% reduction in new braincell generation, compared to samples from patients of the same age without Alzheimer’s. But again… Even patients with Alzheimer’s were still growing some new brain cells.
Read it for yourself: Adult hippocampal neurogenesis is abundant in neurologically healthy subjects and drops sharply in patients with Alzheimer’s disease
In a nutshell…
- We can’t fully hit pause on aging just yet, but we can definitely genuinely slow it
- We can also, in some very specific ways, reverse it
- We can slow the loss of brain cells
- We can grow new brain cells
- We can reduce our risk of Alzheimer’s, and at least somewhat mitigate it if it appears
- We know that phosphatidylserine supplementation may help with most (if not all) of the above
- We don’t sell that (or anything else) but for your convenience, here it is on Amazon if you’re interested
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:
The Purple Parsnip’s Bioactive Brain Benefits (& 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.
This Root Might Be A Guardian Angel
Sometimes we go searching for supplements to research; sometimes supplements present themselves for examination! In this case, our attention was grabbed by a headline:
Angelica gigas extract emerges as a potential treatment for vascular disease
Angelica who?
Angelica gigas, also called the purple parsnip (amongst other names), is a flowering plant native to Korea. It has assorted medicinal properties, and in this case, it was its heart-healthy benefits that were making news:
❝Ultimately, this study presents clearly evidence that Angelica gigas extract is a promising natural product-based functional food/herbal medicine candidate for preventing or regulating hyperlipidemic cardiovascular complications❞
But it has a lot more to offer…
The root has various bioactive metabolites, but the compounds that most studies are most interested in are decursin and decursinol, for their neuroprotective and cognitive enhancement effects:
❝[C]rude extracts and isolated components from the root of A. gigas exhibited neuroprotective and cognitive enhancement effects.
Neuronal damage or death is the most important factor for many neurodegenerative diseases.
In addition, recent studies have clearly demonstrated the possible mechanisms behind the neuroprotective action of extracts/compounds from the root of A. gigas.❞
That middle paragraph there? That’s one of the main pathogenic processes of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, Huntington’s, and Multiple Sclerosis.
Angelica gigas attenuates (reduces the force of) that process:
❝The published reports revealed that the extracts and isolated components from the root of A. gigas showed neuroprotective and cognitive enhancement properties through various mechanisms such as anti-apoptosis, antioxidative actions, inhibiting mRNA and protein expressions of inflammatory mediators and regulating a number of signaling pathways.
In conclusion, the A. gigas root can serve as an effective neuroprotective agent by modulating various pathophysiological processes❞
Read more: Neuroprotective and Cognitive Enhancement Potentials of Angelica gigas Nakai Root: A Review
Beyond neuroprotection & cognitive enhancement
…and also beyond its protection against vascular disease, which is what got our attention…
Angelica gigas also has antioxidant properties, anti-cancer properties, and general immune-boosting properties.
We’ve only so much room, so: those links above will take you to example studies for those things, but there are plenty more where they came from, so we’re quite confident in this one.
Of course, what has antioxidant properties is usually anti-inflammatory, anti-cancer, and anti-aging, because these things are reliant on many of the same processes as each other, with a lot of overlap.
Where can we get it?
We don’t sell it, but here’s an example product on Amazon, for your convenience
Enjoy!
Share This Post
Surviving with Beans And Rice – by Eliza Whool
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.
If you’d like to be well-set the next time a crisis shuts down supply lines, this is one of those books you’ll want to have read.
Superficially, “have in a large quantity of dried beans and rice” is good advice, but obvious. Why a book?
Whool gives a lot of advice on keeping your nutrition balanced while subsisting on the same quite few ingredients, which is handy.
More than that, she offers 100 recipes using the ingredients that will be in your long-term pantry. That’s over three months without repeating a meal! And if you don’t think rice and beans can be tasty and exciting and varied, then most of the chefs of the Global South might want to have a word about that.
Anyway, we’re not here to sell you rice and beans (we’re just enthusiastic and correct). What we are here to do is to give you a fair overview of this book.
The recipes are just-the-recipes, very simple clear instructions, one two-page spread per recipe. Most of the book is devoted to these. As a quick note, it does cover making things gluten-free if necessary, and other similar adjustments for medical reasons.
The planning-and-storage section of the book is helpful too though, especially as it covers common mistakes to avoid.
Bottom line: this is a great book, and remember what we said about doing the things now that future you will thank you for!
Get yourself a copy of Surviving with Beans And Rice from Amazon today!
Share This Post
Paulina Porizkova (Former Supermodel) Talks Menopause, Aging, & Appearances
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.
Are supermodels destined to all eventually become “Grizabella the Glamor Cat”, a washed-up shell of their former glory? Is it true that “men grow cold as girls grow old, and we all lose our charms in the end”? And what—if anything—can we do about it?
Insights from a retired professional
Paulina Porizkova is 56, and she looks like she’s… 56, maybe? Perhaps a little younger or a bit older depending on the camera and lighting and such.
It’s usually the case, on glossy magazine covers and YouTube thumbnails, that there’s a 20-year difference between appearance and reality, but not here. Why’s that?
Porizkova noted that many celebrities of a similar age look younger, and felt bad. But then she noted that they’d all had various cosmetic work done, and looked for images of “real” women in their mid-50s, and didn’t find them.
Note: we at 10almonds do disagree with one thing here: we say that someone who has had cosmetic work done is no less real for it; it’s a simple matter of personal choice and bodily autonomy. She is, in our opinion, making the same mistake as people make when they say such things as “real people, rather than models”, as though models are not also real people.
Porizkova found modelling highly lucrative but dehumanizing, and did not enjoy the objectification involved—and she enjoyed even less, when she reached a certain age, negative comments about aging, and people being visibly wrong-footed when meeting her, as they had misconceptions based on past images.
As a child and younger adult through her modelling career, she felt very much “seen and not heard”, and these days, she realizes she’s more interesting now but feels less seen. Menopause coincided with her marriage ending, and she felt unattractive and ignored by her husband; she questioned her self-worth, and felt very bad about it. Then her husband (they had separated, but had not divorced) died, and she felt even more isolated—but it heightened her sensitivity to life.
In her pain and longing for recognition, she reached out through her Instagram, crying, and received positive feedback—but still she struggles with expressing needs and feeling worthy.
And yet, when it comes to looks, she embraces her wrinkles as a form of expression, and values her natural appearance over cosmetic alterations.
She describes herself as a work in progress—still broken, still needing cleansing and healing, but proud of how far she’s come so far, and optimistic with regard to the future.
For all this and more in her own words, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like to read:
The Many Faces Of Cosmetic Surgery
Take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
Tuna vs Catfish – 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 tuna to catfish, we picked the tuna.
Why?
Today in “that which is more expensive and/or harder to get is not necessarily healthier”…
Looking at their macros, tuna has more protein and less fat (and overall, less saturated fat, and also less cholesterol).
In the category of vitamins, both are good but tuna distinguishes itself: tuna has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B6, and D, while catfish has more of vitamins B5, B9, B12, E, and K. They are both approximately equal in choline, and as an extra note in tuna’s favor (already winning 6:5), tuna is a very good source of vitamin D, while catfish barely contains any. All in all: a moderate, but convincing, win for tuna.
When it comes to minerals, things are clearer still: tuna has more copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, and selenium, while catfish has more calcium, manganese, and zinc. Oh, and catfish is also higher in one other mineral: sodium, which most people in industrialized countries need less of, on average. So, a 6:3 win for tuna, before we even take into account the sodium content (which makes the win for tuna even stronger).
In short: tuna wins the day in every category!
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Farmed Fish vs Wild Caught (It Makes Quite A Difference)
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:
Can You Get Addicted To MSG, Like With Sugar?
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.
Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!
In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!
As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!
So, no question/request too big or small 😎
❝Hello, I love your newsletter 🙂 Can I have a question? While browsing through your recepies, I realised many contained MSG. As someone based in Europe, I am not used to using MSG while cooking (of course I know that processed food bought in supermarket containes MSG). There is a stigma, that MSG is not particulary healthy, but rather it should be really bad and cause negative effects like headaches. Is this true? Also, can you get addicted to MSG, just like you get addicted to sugar? Thank you :)❞
Thank you for the kind words, and the interesting questions!
Short answer: no and no 🙂
Longer answer: most of the negative reputation about MSG comes from a single piece of satire written in the US in the 1960s, which the popular press then misrepresented as a genuine concern, and the public then ran with, mostly due to racism/xenophobia/sinophobia specifically, given the US’s historically not fabulous relations with China, and the moniker of “Chinese restaurant syndrome”, notwithstanding that MSG was first isolated in Japan, not China, more than 100 years ago.
The silver lining that comes out of this is that because of the above, MSG has been one of the most-studied food additives in recent decades, with many teams of scientists in many countries trying to determine its risks and not finding any (except insofar as anything in extreme quantities can kill you, including water or oxygen).
You can read more about this and other* myths about MSG, here:
Monosodium Glutamate: Sinless Flavor-Enhancer Or Terrible Health Risk?
*such as pertaining to gluten sensitivity, which in reality MSG has no bearing on whatsoever as it does not contain gluten and is not even made of the same basic stuff; gluten being a protein made of (amongst other things) the amino acid glutamine, not a glutamate salt. Glutamate is as closely related to gluten as cyanocobalamin (vitamin B12) is to cyanide (the famous poison).
PS: if you didn’t click the above link to read that article, then 1) we really do recommend it 2) we did some LD50 calculations there and looked at available research, and found that for someone of this writer’s (very medium) size, eating 1kg of MSG at once is sufficient to cause toxicity, and injecting >250g of MSG may cause heart problems. So we don’t recommend doing that.
However, ½ tsp in a recipe that gives multiple portions is not going to get you anywhere close to the danger zone, unless you consume that entire meal by yourself hundreds of times per day. And if you do, the MSG is probably the least of your concerns.
(2 tsp of cassia cinnamon, however, is enough to cause coumarin toxicity; for this reason we recommend Ceylon (or “True” or “Sweet”) cinnamon in our recipes, as it has almost undetectable levels of coumarin)
With regard to your interesting question about addiction, first of all let’s speak briefly about sugar addiction:
Sugar addiction is, by broad scientific consensus, agreed-upon as an extant thing that does exist, and contemporary research is more looking into the “hows” and “whys” and “whats” rather than the “whether”. It is a somewhat complicated topic, because it’s halfway between what science would usually consider a chemical addiction, and what science would usually consider a behavioral addiction:
The Not-So-Sweet Science Of Sugar Addiction
The reasonable prevailing hypothesis, therefore, is that sugar simply has two moderate mechanisms of addiction, rather than one strong one.
The biochemical side of sugar addiction comes from the body’s metabolism of sugar, so this cannot be a thing for MSG, because there is nothing to metabolize in the same sense of the word (MSG being an inorganic compound with zero calories).
People can crave salt, especially when deficient in it, and MSG does contain sodium (it’s what the “S” stands for), but it contains a little under ⅓ of the sodium that table salt does (sodium chloride in whatever form, be it sea salt, rock salt, or such):
MSG vs. Salt: Sodium Comparison ← we do molecular calculations here!
Sea Salt vs MSG – Which is Healthier? ← this one for a head-to-head
However, even craving salt does not constitute an addiction; nobody is shamefully hiding their rock salt crystals under their bed and getting a fix when they feel low, and nor does withdrawal cause adverse side effects, except insofar as (once again) a person deficient in salt will crave salt.
Finally, the only other way we know of that one might wonder if MSG could be addictive, is about glutamate and glutamate receptors. The glutamate in MSG is the same glutamate (down to the atoms) as the glutamate formed if one consumes tomatoes in the presence of salt, and triggers the same glutamate receptors in the same way. We have the same number of receptors either way, and uptake is exactly the same (because again, it’s exactly the same chemical) so there is a maximum to how strong this effect can be, and that maximum is the same whatever the source of the glutamate was.
In this respect, if MSG is addictive, then so is a tomato salad with a pinch of salt: it’s not—it’s just tasty.
We haven’t cited papers in today’s article, but it’s just because we cited them already in the articles we linked, and so we avoided doubling up. Most of them are in that first link we gave 🙂
One final note
Technically anyone can develop a sensitivity to anything, so in theory someone could develop a sensitivity to MSG, just like they could for any other ingredient. Our usual legal/medical disclaimer applies.
However, it’s certainly not a common trigger, putting it well below common allergens like nuts (or less common allergens like, say, bananas), not even in the same league as common intolerances such as gluten, and less worthy of health risk warnings than, say, spinach (high in oxalates; fine for most people but best avoided if you have kidney problems).
The reason we use it in the recipes we use it in, is simply because it’s a lower-sodium alternative to salt, and while it contains a (very) tiny bit less sodium than low-sodium salt (which itself has about ⅓ the sodium of regular salt), it has more of a flavor-enhancing effect, such that one can use half as much, for a more than sixfold total sodium reduction. Which for most of us in the industrialized world, is beneficial.
Want to try some?
If today’s article has inspired you to give MSG a try, here’s an example product on Amazon 😎
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:
Is Dairy Scary?
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.
Is Dairy Scary?
Milk and milk products are popularly enjoyed as a good source of calcium and vitamin D.
In contrast, critics of dairy products (for medical reasons, rather than ethical, which is another matter entirely and beyond the scope of this article) point to risks of cancer, heart disease, and—counterintuitively—osteoporosis. We’ll focus more on the former, but touch on the latter two before closing.
Dairy & Cancer
Evidence is highly conflicting. There are so many studies with so many different results. This is partially explicable by noting that not only is cancer a many-headed beast that comes in more than a hundred different forms and all or any of them may be affected one way or another by a given dietary element, but also… Not all milk is created equal, either!
Joanna Lampe, of the Public Health Sciences division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, writes:
❝Dairy products are a complex group of foods and composition varies by region, which makes evaluation of their association with disease risk difficult. For most cancers, associations between cancer risk and intake of milk and dairy products have been examined only in a small number of cohort studies, and data are inconsistent or lacking❞
In her systematic review of studies, she noted, for example, that:
- Milk and dairy products contain micronutrients and several bioactive constituents that may influence cancer risk and progression
- There’s probable association between milk intake and lower risk of colorectal cancer
- There’s a probable association between diets high in calcium and increased risk of prostate cancer
- Some studies show an inverse association between intake of cultured dairy products and bladder cancer (i.e., if you eat yogurt you’re less likely to get bladder cancer)
Since that systemic review was undertaken, more research has been conducted, and the results are… Not conclusive, but converging towards a conclusion:
- Dairy products can increase or decrease cancer risk
- The increase in cancer risk seems strongest when milk is consumed in quantities that result in too much calcium. When it comes to calcium, you can absolutely have too much of a good thing—just ask your arteries!
- The decrease in cancer seems to be mostly, if not exclusively, from fermented dairy products. This usually means yogurts. The benefit here is not from the milk itself, but rather from the gut-friendly bacteria.
You may be wondering: “Hardened arteries, gut microbiome health? I thought we were talking about cancer?” and yes we are. No part of your health is an island unrelated to other parts of your health. One thing can lead to another. Sometimes we know how and why, sometimes we don’t, but it’s best to not ignore the data.
The bottom line on dairy products and cancer is:
- Consuming dairy products in general is probably fine
- Yogurt, specifically, is probably beneficial
Dairy and Heart Disease
The reason for the concern is clear enough: it’s largely assumed to be a matter of saturated fat intake.
The best combination of “large” and “recent” that we found was a three-cohort longitudinal study in 2019, which pretty much confirms what was found in smaller or less recent studies:
- There is some evidence to suggest that consumption of dairy can increase all-cause mortality in general, and death from (cancer and) cardiovascular disease in particular
- The evidence is not, however, overwhelming. It is marginal.
Dairy and Osteoporosis
Does dairy cause osteoporosis? Research here tends to fall into one of two categories when it comes to conclusions, so we’ll give an example of each:
- “Results are conflicting, saying yes/no/maybe, and basically we just don’t know”
- “Results are conflicting, but look: cross-sectional and case-control studies say yes; cohort studies say maybe or no; we prefer the cohort studies”
See them for yourself:
- Osteoporosis: Is milk a kindness or a curse?
- Consumption of milk and dairy products and risk of osteoporosis and hip fracture
Conclusion: really, the jury is very much still out on this one
Summary:
- Moderate consumption of dairy products is almost certainly fine
- More specifically: it probably has some (small) pros and some (small) cons
- Yogurt is almost certainly healthier than other dairy products, and is almost universally considered a healthy food (assuming not being full of added sugar etc, of course)
- If you’re going to have non-dairy alternatives to milk, choose wisely!
That’s all we have time for today, but perhaps in a future edition we’ll do a run-down of the pros and cons of various dairy alternatives!
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: