What causes food cravings? And what can we do about them?
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.
Many of us try to eat more fruits and vegetables and less ultra-processed food. But why is sticking to your goals so hard?
High-fat, sugar-rich and salty foods are simply so enjoyable to eat. And it’s not just you – we’ve evolved that way. These foods activate the brain’s reward system because in the past they were rare.
Now, they’re all around us. In wealthy modern societies we are bombarded by advertising which intentionally reminds us about the sight, smell and taste of calorie-dense foods. And in response to these powerful cues, our brains respond just as they’re designed to, triggering an intense urge to eat them.
Here’s how food cravings work and what you can do if you find yourself hunting for sweet or salty foods.
What causes cravings?
A food craving is an intense desire or urge to eat something, often focused on a particular food.
We are programmed to learn how good a food tastes and smells and where we can find it again, especially if it’s high in fat, sugar or salt.
Something that reminds us of enjoying a certain food, such as an eye-catching ad or delicious smell, can cause us to crave it.
The cue triggers a physical response, increasing saliva production and gastric activity. These responses are relatively automatic and difficult to control.
What else influences our choices?
While the effect of cues on our physical response is relatively automatic, what we do next is influenced by complex factors.
Whether or not you eat the food might depend on things like cost, whether it’s easily available, and if eating it would align with your health goals.
But it’s usually hard to keep healthy eating in mind. This is because we tend to prioritise a more immediate reward, like the pleasure of eating, over one that’s delayed or abstract – including health goals that will make us feel good in the long term.
Stress can also make us eat more. When hungry, we choose larger portions, underestimate calories and find eating more rewarding.
Looking for something salty or sweet
So what if a cue prompts us to look for a certain food, but it’s not available?
Previous research suggested you would then look for anything that makes you feel good. So if you saw someone eating a doughnut but there were none around, you might eat chips or even drink alcohol.
But our new research has confirmed something you probably knew: it’s more specific than that.
If an ad for chips makes you look for food, it’s likely a slice of cake won’t cut it – you’ll be looking for something salty. Cues in our environment don’t just make us crave food generally, they prompt us to look for certain food “categories”, such as salty, sweet or creamy.
Food cues and mindless eating
Your eating history and genetics can also make it harder to suppress food cravings. But don’t beat yourself up – relying on willpower alone is hard for almost everyone.
Food cues are so powerful they can prompt us to seek out a certain food, even if we’re not overcome by a particularly strong urge to eat it. The effect is more intense if the food is easily available.
This helps explain why we can eat an entire large bag of chips that’s in front of us, even though our pleasure decreases as we eat. Sometimes we use finishing the packet as the signal to stop eating rather than hunger or desire.
Is there anything I can do to resist cravings?
We largely don’t have control over cues in our environment and the cravings they trigger. But there are some ways you can try and control the situations you make food choices in.
- Acknowledge your craving and think about a healthier way to satisfy it. For example, if you’re craving chips, could you have lightly-salted nuts instead? If you want something sweet, you could try fruit.
- Avoid shopping when you’re hungry, and make a list beforehand. Making the most of supermarket “click and collect” or delivery options can also help avoid ads and impulse buys in the aisle.
- At home, have fruit and vegetables easily available – and easy to see. Also have other nutrient dense, fibre-rich and unprocessed foods on hand such as nuts or plain yoghurt. If you can, remove high-fat, sugar-rich and salty foods from your environment.
- Make sure your goals for eating are SMART. This means they are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound.
- Be kind to yourself. Don’t beat yourself up if you eat something that doesn’t meet your health goals. Just keep on trying.
Gabrielle Weidemann, Associate Professor in Psychological Science, Western Sydney University and Justin Mahlberg, Research Fellow, Pyschology, Monash 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!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Palliative care as a true art form
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.
How do you ease the pain from an ailment amidst lost words? How can you serve the afflicted when lines start to blur? When the foundation of communication begins to crumble, what will be the pillar health-care professionals can lean on to support patients afflicted with dementia during their final days?
The practice of medicine is both highly analytical and evidence based in nature. However, it is considered a “practice” because at the highest level, it resembles a musician navigating an instrument. It resembles art. Between lab values, imaging techniques and treatment options, the nuances for individualized patient care so often become threatened.
Dementia, a non-malignant terminal illness, involves the progressive cognitive and social decline in those afflicted. Though there is no cure, dementia is commonly met in the setting of end-of-life care. During this final stage of life, the importance of comfort via symptomatic management and communication usually is a priority in patient care. But what about the care of a patient suffering from dementia? While communication serves as the vehicle to deliver care at a high level, medical professionals are suddenly met with a roadblock. And there … behind the pieces of shattered communication and a dampened map of ethical guidelines, health-care providers are at a standstill.
It’s 4:37 a.m. You receive a text message from the overnight nurse at a care facility regarding a current seizure. After lorazepam is ordered and administered, Mr. H, a quick-witted 76-year-old, stabilizes. Phenobarbital 15mg SC qhs was also added to prevent future similar events. You exhale a sigh of relief.
Mr. H. has been admitted to the floor 36 hours earlier after having a seizure while playing poker with colleagues. Since he became your patient, he’s shared many stories from professional and family life with you, along with as many jokes as he could fit in between. However, over the course of the next seven days, Mr. H. would develop aspiration pneumonia, progressing to ventilator dependency and, ultimately, multi-organ failure with rapid cognitive decline.
What strategies and tools would you use to maximize the well-being of your patient during his decline? How would you bridge the gap of understanding between the patient’s family and health-care team to provide the standard of care that all patients are owed?
To give Mr. H. the type of care he would have wanted, upon his hospital admission, he should have been questioned about his understanding of illness along with the goals of care of the medical team. The patient should have been informed that it is imperative to adhere to the medical regimen implemented by his team along with the risks of not doing so. In the event disease-related complications arose, advanced directives should have been documented to avoid any unnecessary measures.
It is important to note, that with each change in status of the patient’s health status, the goal of treatment must be reassessed. The patient or surrogate decision-maker’s understanding of these goals is paramount in maintaining the patient’s autonomy. It is often said that effective communication is the bedrock of a healthy relationship. This is true regardless of type of relationship.
This is why I and Megan Vierhout wrote Integrated End of Life Care in Dementia: A Comprehensive Guide, a book targeted at providing a much-needed road map to navigate the many challenges involved in end-of-life care for individuals with dementia. Ultimately, our aim is to provide a compass for both health-care professionals and the families of those affected by the progressive effects of dementia. We provide practical advice on optimizing communication with individuals with dementia while taking their cognitive limitations, preferences and needs into account.
I invite you to explore the unpredictable terrain of end-of-life care for patients with dementia. Together, we can pave a smoother, sturdier path toward the practice of medicine as a true art form.
This article is republished from healthydebate under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
Ageless – by Dr. Andrew Steele
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.
So, yet another book with “The new science of…” in the title; does this one deliver new science?
Actually, yes, this time! The author was originally a physicist before deciding that aging was the number one problem that needed solving, and switched tracks to computational biology, and pioneered a lot of research, some of the fruits of which can be found in this book, in amongst a more general history of the (very young!) field of biogerontology.
Downside: most of this is not very practical for the lay reader; most of it is explanations of how things happen on a cellular and/or genetic level, and how we learned that. A lot also pertains to what we can learn from animals that either age very slowly, or are biologically immortal (in other words, they can still be killed, but they don’t age and won’t die of anything age-related), or are immune to cancer—and how we might borrow those genes for gene therapy.
However, there are also chapters on such things as “running repairs”, “reprogramming aging”, and “how to live long enough to live even longer”.
The style is conversational pop science; in the prose, he simply states things without reference, but at the back, there are 40 pages of bibliography, indexed in the order in which they occurred and prefaced with the statement that he’s referencing in each case. It’s an odd way to do citations, but it works comfortably enough.
Bottom line: if you’d like to understand aging on the cellular level, and how we know what we know and what the likely future possibilities are, then this is a great book; it’s also simply very enjoyable to read, assuming you have an interest in the topic (as this reviewer does).
Click here to check out Ageless, and understand the science of getting older without getting old!
Share This Post
-
Beating Toxic Positivity
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.
How To Get Your Brain On A More Positive Track (Without Toxic Positivity)
There have been many studies done regards optimism and health, and they generally come to the same conclusion: optimism is simply good for the health.
Here’s an example we’ve mentioned before, but it’s a good introduction to today’s main feature. It’s a longitudinal study, and it followed 121,700 women (what a sample size!) for eight years. It controlled for all kinds of other lifestyle factors (especially smoking, drinking, diet, and exercise habits, as well as pre-existing medical conditions), so this wasn’t a case of “people who are healthy are more optimistic as results. And, in the researchers’ own words…
❝We found strong and statistically significant associations of increasing levels of optimism with decreasing risks of mortality, including mortality due each major cause of death, such as cancer, heart disease, stroke, respiratory disease, and infection. Importantly, findings were maintained after close control for potential confounding factors, including sociodemographic characteristics and depression❞
Read: Optimism and Cause-Specific Mortality: A Prospective Cohort Study
And yet, toxic positivity can cause as many problems as it tries to fix.
What is toxic positivity?
- Toxic positivity is the well-meaning friend who says “I’m sure it’ll be ok” when you know full well it definitely will not.
- Toxic positivity is the allegorical frog-in-a-pan saying that the temperature rises due to climate change are gradual, so they’re nothing to worry about
- Toxic positivity is thinking that “good vibes” will outperform chemotherapy
Sometimes, a dose of realism is needed. So, can we do that and maintain a positive attitude?
The answer is: somewhat, yes! But first, a quick check-in:
❝I’m not a pessimist; I’m a realist!❞
~ every pessimist ever
To believe self-reports, the world is divided between optimists and realists. But how does your outlook measure up, really?
While like most free online tests, this is offered “as-is” with the usual caveats about not being a clinical diagnostic tool, this one actually has a fair amount of scientific weight behind it:
❝Empirical testing has indicated the validity of the Optimism Pessimism Instrument as published in the scientific journal Current Psychology: Research and Reviews.
The IDRlabs Optimism/Pessimism Test (IDR-OPT) was developed by IDRlabs. The IDR-OPT is based on the Optimism/Pessimism Instrument (OPI) developed by Dr. William Dember, Dr. Stephanie Martin, Dr. Mary Hummer, Dr. Steven Howe, and Dr. Richard Melton, at the University of Cincinnati.❞
Take This Short (1–2 mins) Test
How did you score? And what could you do to improve on that score?
First, it’s said that with a big enough “why”, one can overcome any “how”. So…
An attitude of gratitude
We know, we know, it’s very Oprah Winfrey. But also, it works. Take the time, ideally daily, to quickly list 3–5 things for which you feel grateful. Great or small, it can be anything from your spouse to your cup of coffee, provided you feel fortunate to have it.
How this works: our brains easily get stuck in loops, so it can help to nudge them into a more positive loop.
What about when we are treated unfairly? Are we supposed to be grateful?
Sometimes, our less positive emotions are necessary, to protect us and/or those around us, and to provide a motivational force. We can still maintain a positive attitude by noting the bad thing and some good, but watch out! Notice the difference:
- “How dare they take our healthcare away, but at least I’m not sick right now” (lasting impression: no action required)
- “At least I’m not sick right now, but how dare they take our healthcare away!” (lasting impression: action required)
It’s a well-known idea in neurolinguistic programming, that “but” negates whatever goes before it (think of “I’m sorry but”, or “I’m not racist but”, etc), so use it consciously and wisely, or else simply use “and” instead.
Cognitive reframing: problem, or opportunity?
Most problems can be opportunities, even if the problems themselves genuinely suck and are not intrinsically positive. A way of leveraging this can be replacing “I have to…” with “I get to…”.
This not only can reframe problems as opportunities, but also calls back to the gratitude idea.
- Instead of “I have to get my mammogram / prostate exam” (not generally considered fun activities), “I get to have the peace of mind of being free from cancer / I get to have the forewarning that will keep me safe”.
- Instead of “I have to go to work”, “I get to go to work” (many wish they were in your shoes!)
- Instead of “I have to rest”, “I get to rest”
When things are truly not great
Whether due to internal or external factors, whether you can control something or not, sometimes things are truly not great. The trick here is that in most contexts, one can replace negative talk, with verbally positive talk, no matter how dripping with scathing irony. You’ll still get to express the idea you wanted, but your brain will feel more positive and you’ll be in a positive loop rather than a negative one.
This, by the way, is the inverse of talking to a dog with a tone of voice that is completely the opposite of the meaning of the words. Whereas the dog will interpret the tone only, your brain will interpret the words only.
- You just spilled your drink over yourself at a social function? “Aren’t I the very model of grace and charm?”
- You made a costly mistake in your business dealings? “I am such a genius”
- You just got a diagnosis of a terrible disease? “Well, this is fabulous”
None of these things involve burying your head in the sand, in the manner of toxic positivity. You’ll still learn from your business mistake and correct it as best you can, or take appropriate action regards the disease, for example.
You’ll just feel better while you do it, and not get caught into a negative spiral that ruins your day, or even your next few months.
Sympathetic/Somatic Therapy:
Lastly, an easy one, leveraging the body’s tendency to get in sync with things around us:
For when you do just need a mood change, have an uplifting playlist available at the touch of a button. It’s hard to be consumed with counterproductive feelings to the tune of “Walking on Sunshine”!
Bonus tip: consider having the playlist start with something that is lyrically negative while musically upbeat. That way, your brain won’t resist it as antithetical to your mood, and by the second track, you’ll already be on your way to a better mood.
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
What’s the difference between autism and Asperger’s disorder?
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.
Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg describes herself as having Asperger’s while others on the autism spectrum, such as Australian comedian Hannah Gatsby, describe themselves as “autistic”. But what’s the difference?
Today, the previous diagnoses of “Asperger’s disorder” and “autistic disorder” both fall within the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, or ASD.
Autism describes a “neurotype” – a person’s thinking and information-processing style. Autism is one of the forms of diversity in human thinking, which comes with strengths and challenges.
When these challenges become overwhelming and impact how a person learns, plays, works or socialises, a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder is made.
Where do the definitions come from?
The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) outlines the criteria clinicians use to diagnose mental illnesses and behavioural disorders.
Between 1994 and 2013, autistic disorder and Asperger’s disorder were the two primary diagnoses related to autism in the fourth edition of the manual, the DSM-4.
In 2013, the DSM-5 collapsed both diagnoses into one autism spectrum disorder.
How did we used to think about autism?
The two thinkers behind the DSM-4 diagnostic categories were Baltimore psychiatrist Leo Kanner and Viennese paediatrician Hans Asperger. They described the challenges faced by people who were later diagnosed with autistic disorder and Asperger’s disorder.
Kanner and Asperger observed patterns of behaviour that differed to typical thinkers in the domains of communication, social interaction and flexibility of behaviour and thinking. The variance was associated with challenges in adaptation and distress.
Between the 1940s and 1994, the majority of those diagnosed with autism also had an intellectual disability. Clinicians became focused on the accompanying intellectual disability as a necessary part of autism.
The introduction of Asperger’s disorder shifted this focus and acknowledged the diversity in autism. In the DSM-4 it superficially looked like autistic disorder and Asperger’s disorder were different things, with the Asperger’s criteria stating there could be no intellectual disability or delay in the development of speech.
Today, as a legacy of the recognition of the autism itself, the majority of people diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder – the new term from the DSM-5 – don’t a have an accompanying intellectual disability.
What changed with ‘autism spectrum disorder’?
The move to autism spectrum disorder brought the previously diagnosed autistic disorder and Asperger’s disorder under the one new diagnostic umbrella term.
It made clear that other diagnostic groups – such as intellectual disability – can co-exist with autism, but are separate things.
The other major change was acknowledging communication and social skills are intimately linked and not separable. Rather than separating “impaired communication” and “impaired social skills”, the diagnostic criteria changed to “impaired social communication”.
The introduction of the spectrum in the diagnostic term further clarified that people have varied capabilities in the flexibility of their thinking, behaviour and social communication – and this can change in response to the context the person is in.
Why do some people prefer the old terminology?
Some people feel the clinical label of Asperger’s allowed a much more refined understanding of autism. This included recognising the achievements and great societal contributions of people with known or presumed autism.
The contraction “Aspie” played an enormous part in the shift to positive identity formation. In the time up to the release of the DSM-5, Tony Attwood and Carol Gray, two well known thinkers in the area of autism, highlighted the strengths associated with “being Aspie” as something to be proud of. But they also raised awareness of the challenges.
What about identity-based language?
A more recent shift in language has been the reclamation of what was once viewed as a slur – “autistic”. This was a shift from person-first language to identity-based language, from “person with autism spectrum disorder” to “autistic”.
The neurodiversity rights movement describes its aim to push back against a breach of human rights resulting from the wish to cure, or fundamentally change, people with autism.
The movement uses a “social model of disability”. This views disability as arising from societies’ response to individuals and the failure to adjust to enable full participation. The inherent challenges in autism are seen as only a problem if not accommodated through reasonable adjustments.
However the social model contrasts itself against a very outdated medical or clinical model.
Current clinical thinking and practice focuses on targeted supports to reduce distress, promote thriving and enable optimum individual participation in school, work, community and social activities. It doesn’t aim to cure or fundamentally change people with autism.
A diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder signals there are challenges beyond what will be solved by adjustments alone; individual supports are also needed. So it’s important to combine the best of the social model and contemporary clinical model.
Andrew Cashin, Professor of Nursing, School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross 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:
-
You can thaw and refreeze meat: five food safety myths busted
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 time of year, most fridges are stocked up with food and drinks to share with family and friends. Let’s not make ourselves and our guests sick by getting things wrong when preparing and serving food.
As the weather warms up, so does the environment for micro-organisms in foods, potentially allowing them to multiply faster to hazardous levels. So put the drinks on ice and keep the fridge for the food.
But what are some of those food safety myths we’ve long come to believe that aren’t actually true?
Myth 1: if you’ve defrosted frozen meat or chicken you can’t refreeze it
From a safety point of view, it is fine to refreeze defrosted meat or chicken or any frozen food as long as it was defrosted in a fridge running at 5°C or below. Some quality may be lost by defrosting then refreezing foods as the cells break down a little and the food can become slightly watery.
Another option is to cook the defrosted food and then divide into small portions and refreeze once it has stopped steaming. Steam in a closed container leads to condensation, which can result in pools of water forming. This, combined with the nutrients in the food, creates the perfect environment for microbial growth. So it’s always best to wait about 30 minutes before refrigerating or freezing hot food.
Plan ahead so food can be defrosted in the fridge, especially with large items such as a frozen turkey or roll of meat. If left on the bench, the external surface could be at room temperature and micro-organisms could be growing rapidly while the centre of the piece is still frozen!
Myth 2: Wash meat before you prepare and/or cook it
It is not a good idea to wash meats and poultry when preparing for cooking. Splashing water that might contain potentially hazardous bacteria around the kitchen can create more of a hazard if those bacteria are splashed onto ready-to-eat foods or food preparation surfaces.
It is, however, a good idea to wash fruits and vegetables before preparing and serving, especially if they’re grown near or in the ground as they may carry some dirt and therefore micro-organisms.
This applies particularly to foods that will be prepared and eaten without further cooking. Consuming foods raw that traditionally have been eaten cooked or otherwise processed to kill pathogenic micro-organisms (potentially deadly to humans) might increase the risk of food poisoning.
Fruit, salad, vegetables and other ready-to-eat foods should be prepared separately, away from raw meat, chicken, seafood and other foods that need cooking.
Myth 3: Hot food should be left out to cool completely before putting it in the fridge
It’s not OK to leave perishable food out for an extended time or overnight before putting it in the fridge.
Micro-organisms can grow rapidly in food at temperatures between 5° and 60°C. Temperature control is the simplest and most effective way of controlling the growth of bacteria. Perishable food should spend as little time as possible in the 5-60°C danger zone. If food is left in the danger zone, be aware it is potentially unsafe to eat.
Hot leftovers, and any other leftovers for that matter, should go into the fridge once they have stopped steaming to reduce condensation, within about 30 minutes.
Large portions of hot food will cool faster if broken down into smaller amounts in shallow containers. It is possible that hot food such as stews or soup left in a bulky container, say a two-litre mixing bowl (versus a shallow tray), in the fridge can take nearly 24 hours to cool to the safe zone of less than 5°C.
Myth 4: If it smells OK, then it’s OK to eat
This is definitely not always true. Spoilage bacteria, yeasts and moulds are the usual culprits for making food smell off or go slimy and these may not make you sick, although it is always advisable not to consume spoiled food.
Pathogenic bacteria can grow in food and not cause any obvious changes to the food, so the best option is to inhibit pathogen growth by refrigerating foods.
Myth 5: Oil preserves food so it can be left at room temperature
Adding oil to foods will not necessarily kill bugs lurking in your food. The opposite is true for many products in oil if anaerobic micro-organisms, such as Clostridium botulinum (botulism), are present in the food. A lack of oxygen provides perfect conditions for their growth.
Outbreaks of botulism arising from consumption of vegetables in oil – including garlic, olives, mushrooms, beans and hot peppers – have mostly been attributed to the products not being properly prepared.
Vegetables in oil can be made safely. In 1991, Australian regulations stipulated that this class of product (vegetables in oil) can be safely made if the pH (a measure of acid) is less than 4.6. Foods with a pH below 4.6 do not in general support the growth of food-poisoning bacteria including botulism.
So keep food out of the danger zone to reduce your guests’ risk of getting food poisoning this summer. Check out other food safety tips and resources from CSIRO and the Food Safety Information Council, including testing your food safety knowledge.
Cathy Moir, Team leader, Microbial and chemical sciences, Food microbiologist and food safety specialist, CSIRO
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:
-
Rice vs Buckwheat – 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 rice to buckwheat, we picked the buckwheat.
Why?
It’s a simple one today:
- The vitamin and mineral profiles are very similar, so neither of these are a swaying factor
- In terms of macros, rice is higher in carbohydrates while buckwheat is higher in fiber
- Buckwheat also has more protein, but not by much
- Buckwheat has the lower glycemic index, and a lower insulin index, too
While buckwheat cannot always be reasonably used as a substitute for rice (often because the texture would not work the same), in many cases it can be.
And if you love rice, well, so do we, but variety is also the spice of life indeed, not to mention important for good health. You know that whole “eat 30 different plants per week” thing? Grains count in that tally! So substituting buckwheat in place of rice sometimes seems like a very good bet.
Not sure where to buy it?
Here for your convenience is an example product on Amazon
Want to know more about today’s topic?
Check out: Carb-Strong or Carb-Wrong?
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: