
What Nobody Teaches You About Strengthening Your Knees
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.
Strengthening unhappy knees can seem difficult, because many obvious exercises like squats may hurt, and can feel like they are doing harm (and if your knees are bad enough, maybe they are; it depends on many factors). Here’s a way to improve things:
The muscle nobody talks about
Well, not nobody. But, it’s a muscle that’s rarely talked about; namely, the tibialis anterior.
It plays a key role in decelerating knee motion—in other words, the movement that hurts if you have bad knees. It’s essential for absorbing shock during activities like walking, climbing stairs, and stepping off curbs
So, of course, strengthening this muscle supports knee health.
The exercise this video recommends for strengthening it involves leaning against a wall with feet about a foot away (closer feet make it easier, further makes it harder). Note, this is a lean, not a “Roman chair”.
The exercise involves squeezing the quadriceps, lifting toes toward the nose, and engaging the tibialis anterior muscle. If you’re wondering what to do with your hands, they can be held out with palms open to work on posture, or hanging by the sides. Do this for about 1½–2 minutes.
For more on all this, plus a visual demonstration, enjoy:
Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!
Want to learn more?
You might also like to read:
When Bad Joints Stop You From Exercising (5 Things To Change)
Take care!
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:
-
Growing Young – by Marta Zaraska
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 one will be a slightly mixed review, but we think the book has more than enough of value to make it a very worthwhile read.
The premise of the book is that, as the subtitle suggests, positive social qualities increase personal longevity.
Author (and science journalist) Marta Zaraska looks at a lot of research to back this up, and also did a lot of travelling and digging into stories. This is of great value, because she notes where a lot of misconceptions have arisen.
To give one example, it’s commonly noted that marriage (or as-though-marriage life partnerships) is generally* associated with longer life.
*Statistics suggest that marriage-related longevity is enjoyed by men married to women, and people in same-sex marriages regardless of gender, but is not so much the case for women married to men.
However! Zaraska notes a factor she learned from Gottman’s research (yes, that Gottman), that what matters is not the official status of a relationship, so much as the sense of secure lifelong commitment to it.
These kinds of observations (throughout the book) add an extra layer beyond “common wisdom”, and allow us to better understand what’s really going on. The book’s main weaknesses, meanwhile, include such things as how the author is (in this reviewer’s opinion) unduly dismissive of physical health lifestyle factors such as diet and exercise, because they “only” account for a similar bonus to healthy longevity
Bottom line: the book has its flaws, but we think that only serves to make it more engaging. After all, reading should not be a purely passive activity! Zaraska’s well-studied insights give plenty of pointers for tweaking the social side of anyone’s quest for healthy longevity.
Click here to check out Growing Young, increase your healthspan, and take joy in doing it!
Share This Post
-
The Hormone That Makes You Burn Fat (Just Add Water)
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 is Dr. Helena Cristina de Lima Barbosa, and she’s a professor of functional biology, and her PhD is in pancreatic endocrinology and metabolism. She’s a Diabetes UK Fellow, and she’s an internationally-respected expert in glycemic homeostasis, molecular mechanisms involved in insulin secretion, and cell signaling.
So, what does she want us to know?
“The next Ozempic”, but we produce it in our bodies
The hormone that she’s been researching (known to its friends as FGF19) has been hailed by some as “the next Ozempic”, though it’s not a claim she makes personally at this stage (scientists being often more cautious in this regard than the popular press).
In her own words:
❝FGF19 had already been linked to a reduction in food intake. Our work broke new ground by showing that it also plays an important role by acting on the hypothalamus and stimulating an increase in energy expenditure in white and brown adipose tissue.
In other words, in addition to controlling appetite, it stimulates thermogenesis. So, in terms of therapy associated with obesity, it’d make a lot of sense❞
As to where it comes from, the hormone is produced in the small intestine and regulates bile acids, glucose production, and fat synthesis. Its brain effects are only recently being explored.
But there’s more:
❝The brain plays an extremely important role in controlling the body’s adiposity. At the same time as it receives information from peripheral tissues, it triggers commands.
These commands, apparently using the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), seem to be an interesting way of thinking about energy expenditure❞
Scientists such as Dr. Barbosa are the sort of people to follow the call of curiosity wherever it takes them (research grants permitting), and in this case, she and her team wondered whether the brain could be nudged into signalling more of this hormone to be produced, by triggering the sympathetic nervous system.
Now, there are various ways the sympathetic nervous system can be triggered, but a fairly accessible one that doesn’t rely on undue psychological stress, is cold water immersion.
Which offers a bonus, because of the hormone’s other role of stimulating thermogenesis (heat production), and, specifically, stimulating thermogenic adipocytes in order to do that.
Which, translating from sciencese, means: burning fat to keep you warm
Dr. Barbosa and her team found that FGF19 acts directly on the hypothalamus to drive thermogenesis, and that cold exposure increases FGF19 receptor expression in the hypothalamus. She suspects it has/had an evolutionary role in temperature control, but the upshot for us here and now today in the moment (and not on an evolutionary timescale) is that FGF19 increases energy expenditure, stimulates heat-producing adipocytes, and reduces inflammation, but only when the sympathetic nervous system is active.
How did they learn that? They (with the aid of computers and a small army of undergrads and doctoral students) analyzed the transcription of more than 50,000 single cells to identify hypothalamic cell types that express FGF19 receptors.
There was also a mouse study component, whereupon they confirmed that mice receiving FGF19 directly in the brain showed improved metabolic balance through increased sympathetic nervous system activity and thermogenesis.
You can read the paper itself in full, here: Central FGF19 signaling enhances energy homeostasis and adipose tissue thermogenesis through sympathetic activation
Do I have to take ice baths?
Not unless you want to, and as ever, do check with your doctor for safety reasons, especially if you have any heart condition.
See: Ice Baths: To Dip Or Not To Dip? ← our mythbusting main feature on this
A cold shower can offer the same SNS-activating (and thus, per Dr. Barbosa’s work, FGF19-activating) benefits with less discomfort and risk (of course nothing is risk-free; you could slip in the shower or something; please be careful).
You can read more about that, here: A Cold Shower A Day Keeps The Doctor Away?
But even that is not the only way. The important part is to create a short burst of controlled, safe, but stressful stimulation.
For more on that, see: The Stress Prescription (Against Aging!) ← our main feature leaning on the work of the incredible Dr. Elissa Epel, who for the past 20 years has specialized in the effect of stress* on aging. She’s led groundbreaking research on cortisol, telomeres, and telomerase, all in the context of aging, especially in women, as well as the relationship between stress and weight gain. She was elected member of the National Academy of Medicine for her work on stress pathways, and has been recognized as a key “Influencer in Aging” by the Alliance for Aging Research.
Indeed, she’s also been named in the top 0.1% of researchers globally, in terms of publication impact.
*Spoiler: chronic stress is very bad, whereas acute stress is very good in moderation
But that’s another (albeit closely related and overlapping) topic.
For now, we’re out of room for more today, so… Take care!
Share This Post
-
How Much Does A Vegan Diet Affect Biological Aging?
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.
Slow Your Aging, One Meal At A Time
This one’s a straightforward one today, and the ““life hack” can be summed up:
Enjoy a vegan diet to enjoy younger biological age.
First, what is biological age?
Biological age is not one number, but a collection of numbers, as per different biomarkers of aging, including:
- Visual markers of aging (e.g. wrinkles, graying hair)
- Performative markers of aging (e.g. mobility tests)
- Internal functional markers of aging (e.g. tests for cognitive decline, eyesight, hearing, etc)
- Cellular markers of aging (e.g. telomere length)
We wrote more about this here:
Age & Aging: What Can (And Can’t) We Do About It?
A vegan diet may well impact multiple of those categories of aging, but today we’re highlighting a study (hot off the press; published only a few days ago!) that looks at its effect on that last category: cellular markers of aging.
There’s an interesting paradox here, because this category is:
- the most easily ignorable; because we all feel it if our knees are giving out or our skin is losing elasticity, but who notices if telomeres’ T/S ratio changed by 0.0407? ← the researchers, that’s who, as this difference is very significant
- the most far-reaching in its impact, because cellular aging in turn has an effect on all the other markers of aging
Second, how much difference does it make, and how do we know?
The study was an eight-week interventional identical twin study. This means several things, to start with:
- Eight weeks is a rather short period of time to accumulate cellular aging, let alone for an intervention to accumulate a significant difference in cellular aging—but it did. So, just imagine what difference it might make in a year or ten!
- Doing an interventional study with identical twin pairs already controlled for a lot of factors, that are usually confounding variables in population / cohort / longitudinal / observational studies.
Factors that weren’t controlled for by default by using identical twins, were controlled for in the experiment design. For example, twin pairs were rejected if one or more twin in a given pair already had medical conditions that could affect the outcome:
❝Inclusion criteria involved participants aged ≥18, part of a willing twin pair, with BMI <40, and LDL-C <190 mg/dL. Exclusions included uncontrolled hypertension, metabolic disease, diabetes, cancer, heart/renal/liver disease, pregnancy, lactation, and medication use affecting body weight or energy.
Eligibility was determined via online screening, followed by an orientation meeting and in-person clinic visit. Randomization occurred only after completing baseline visits, dietary recalls, and questionnaires for both twins❞
~ Dr. Varun Dwaraka et al. ← there’s a lot of “et al.” to this one; the paper had 16 collaborating authors!
As to the difference it made over the course of the 8 weeks…
❝Various measures of epigenetic age acceleration (PC GrimAge, PC PhenoAge, DunedinPACE) were assessed, along with system-specific effects (Inflammation, Heart, Hormone, Liver, and Metabolic).
Distinct responses were observed, with the vegan cohort exhibiting significant decreases in overall epigenetic age acceleration, aligning with anti-aging effects of plant-based diets. Diet-specific shifts were noted in the analysis of methylation surrogates, demonstrating the influence of diet on complex trait prediction through DNA methylation markers.❞
~ Ibid.
You can read the whole paper here (it goes into a lot more detail than we have room to here, and also gives infographics, charts, numbers, the works):
Were they just eating more healthily, though?
Well, arguably yes, as the results show, but to be clear:
The omnivorous diet compared to the vegan diet in this study was also controlled; both groups were given a healthy meal plan for their respective diet. So this wasn’t a case of “any omnivorous diet vs healthy vegan diet”, but rather “healthy omnivorous diet vs healthy vegan diet”.
Again, the paper itself has the full details—a short version is that it involved a healthy meal kit delivery service, followed by ongoing dietician involvement in an equal and carefully-controlled fashion.
So, aside from that one group had an omnivorous meal plan and the other vegan, both groups received the same level of “healthy eating” support, guidance, and oversight.
But isn’t [insert your preferred animal product here] healthy?
Quite possibly! For general health, general scientific consensus is that eating at least mostly plants is best, red meat is bad, poultry is neutral in moderation, fish is good in moderation, dairy is good in moderation if fermented, eggs are good in moderation if not fried.
This study looked at the various biomarkers of aging that we listed, and not every possible aspect of health—there’s more science yet to be done, and the researchers themselves are calling for it.
It also bears mentioning that for some (relatively few, but not insignificantly few) people, extant health conditions may make a vegan diet unhealthy or otherwise untenable. Do speak with your own doctor and/or dietician if unsure.
See also: Do We Need Animal Products To Be Healthy?
We would hypothesize, by the way, that the anti-aging benefits of a vegan diet are probably proportional to abstention from animal products—meaning that even if you simply have some “vegan days”, while still consuming animal products other days, you’ll still get benefit for the days you abstained. That’s just our hypothesis though.
Take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Beyond Burger vs Beef Burger – 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 the Beyond Burger to a grass-fed beef burger, we picked the Beyond Burger—but it was very close.
Why?
The macronutrient profiles of the two are almost identical, including the amount of protein, the amount of fat, and the amount of that fat that’s saturated.
Where they stand apart is in two ways:
1) Red meat is classed as a group 2A carcinogen
2) The Beyond Burger contains more sodium (about 1/5 of the daily allowance according to the AHA, or 1/4 of the daily allowance according to the WHO)Neither of those things are great, so how to decide which is worse?
• Cancer and heart disease are both killers, with heart disease claiming more victims.
• However, we do need some sodium to live, whereas we don’t need carcinogens to live.Tie-breaker: the sodium content in the Beyond Burger is likely to be offset by the fact that it’s a fully seasoned burger and will be eaten as-is, whereas the beef burger will doubtlessly have seasonings added before it’s eaten—which may cause it to equal or even exceed the salt content of the Beyond Burger.
The cancer risk for the beef burger, meanwhile, stays one-sided.
One thing’s for sure though: neither of them are exactly a cornerstone of a healthy diet, and either are best enjoyed as an occasional indulgence.
Some further reading:
• Lesser-Known Salt Risks
• Food Choices And Cancer Risk
• Hypertension: Factors Far More Relevant Than SaltDon’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:
-
Wheelchair? Hearing Aids? Yes. ‘Disabled’? No Way.
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.
In her house in Ypsilanti, Michigan, Barbara Meade said, “there are walkers and wheelchairs and oxygen and cannulas all over the place.”
Barbara, 82, has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, so a portable oxygen tank accompanies her everywhere. Spinal stenosis limits her mobility, necessitating the walkers and wheelchairs and considerable help from her husband, Dennis, who serves as her primary caregiver.
“I know I need hearing aids,” Barbara added. “My hearing is horrible.” She acquired a pair a few years ago but rarely uses them.
Dennis Meade, 86, is more mobile, despite arthritis pain in one knee, but contends with his own hearing problems. Similarly dissatisfied with the hearing aids he once bought, he said, “I just got to the point where I say, ‘Talk louder.’”
But if you ask either of them a question included on a recent University of Michigan survey — “Do you identify as having a disability?” — the Meades answer promptly: No, they don’t.
Disability “means you can’t do things,” Dennis said. “As long as you can work with it and it’s not affecting your life that much, you don’t consider yourself disabled.”
(E+/Getty Images) Their daughter Michelle Meade, a rehabilitation psychologist and the director of the Center for Disability Health and Wellness at the university, accompanies her parents to medical appointments and tends to roll her eyes at their reluctance to acknowledge needing support.
Working with other researchers on the recent national poll has shown her how often older adults feel that they are not disabled despite ample evidence to the contrary.
The survey looked at nearly 3,000 Americans aged 50 and older and found that only a minority — fewer than 18% of participants over 65 — saw themselves as having a disability.
Yet their responses to the six questions that the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey uses to track disability rates told a different story.
The survey asks whether respondents have difficulty seeing or hearing, limitations in walking or climbing stairs, difficulty concentrating or remembering, trouble dressing or bathing, difficulty working, or problems leaving the home.
In the university’s survey, about a third of those aged 65 to 74 reported difficulty with one or more of those functions. Among those over 75, the figure was more than 44%.
Moreover, when respondents were asked about several additional health conditions that would require accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act, including respiratory problems or speech disorders, the proportion climbed even higher. Half the 65-to-74 group reported disabilities, as did about two-thirds of those over 75.
Yet only a sliver — fewer than 1 in 5 — of older adults had ever received an accommodation from their health care providers to which they are legally entitled under the ADA.
Even among the small minority who identified as disabled, only a quarter had asked for an accommodation (though a third received one, whether they asked or not).
“It’s a familiar story,” said Megan Morris, a rehabilitation researcher at NYU Langone Health and director of the Disability Equity Collaborative. When it comes to the way people describe themselves, “many people still feel like ‘disability’ is a dirty word,” she said.
It’s almost an American value to decline to seek help, even when the law requires that it be available, Michelle Meade added. Faced with a disability, she said, “we’re supposed to toughen up and battle through it.”
That may be particularly true among older Americans whose attitudes formed before the landmark ADA became law in 1990, or even before the 50-year-old Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, which guaranteed access to public education.
“It’s going to be hard for that older generation,” Morris said. “Disability was something that was locked away. Younger folks are more open to seeing disability as being part of a community.”
In the University of Michigan survey, for instance, among people over 65 who had two or more disabilities, about half identified as a person with a disability. In the younger cohort, aged 50 to 64, it was 68%.
Why does that matter? “It greatly assists in health care settings if you disclose a disability and know to request an accommodation and support,” said Anjali Forber-Pratt, the research director at the American Association of Health and Disability.
Such accommodations “can make a stressful situation easier,” she added. They include mammography and X-ray machines that allow patients to remain seated, scales that wheelchair users can roll onto, examination tables that rise and lower so that patients don’t have to step onto a footstool and swivel around.
Health care providers may also offer amplification devices for people with hearing loss, as well as magnifiers and large print materials for the visually impaired. Buildings themselves must be accessible. Practices can send a staff member with a wheelchair to help patients traverse long distances.
Even with a disability parking placard, “you hike in, you wait for the elevator, you hike to the office,” said Emmie Poling, 75, a retired teacher in Menlo Park, California.
Because of arthritis and spinal stenosis, “I can’t walk with an upright posture for more than a few minutes” without pain, she said. “I basically live on Tylenol.” Yet when she makes an appointment and the scheduler asks if she will need assistance, Poling replies that she won’t.
“My personal voice says, ‘Come on, you can do it,’” she said.
Identifying as a person with a disability provides other benefits, advocates say. It can mean avoiding isolation and “being part of a community of people who are good problem-solvers, who figure things out and work in partnership to do things better,” Meade said.
Government programs and private organizations like the National Disability Rights Network, the Americans with Disabilities Act National Network, and the National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities help connect people with services and supports in their communities.
Several studies have found, too, that patients who identify as disabled have less depression and anxiety, higher self-esteem, and a greater sense of “self-efficacy” than disabled people who don’t.
For years, despite a lifetime of surgeries for congenitally dislocated hips, as well as joint replacements and cancer treatment, Glenna Mills, an artist in Oakland, California, told herself that she was not disabled.
“I suffered a lot by denying that I couldn’t walk very far,” she recalled. Although walking caused pain in her knees, hips, and shoulders, “I didn’t want people to see me as someone who couldn’t keep up,” she added.
But about 10 years ago, “I stopped worrying about that,” said Mills, 82. “I was more willing to say, ‘I can’t do that activity. I can’t walk that far.’” She bought a scooter that allowed her to take walks with her husband and dog, and to spend time in museums. “I’m happier now,” she said.
More often, older Americans resist a label that could help improve their care. Even those who do request accommodations may find that enforcement of the ADA remains spotty, in part because patients don’t always report violations.
The Meades, after years of pleading from their children, have made appointments to see an audiologist about new hearing aids.
But Poling intends to struggle on without seeking or accepting assistance. “I know that point will come,” she said. “I’ll attempt to surrender as gracefully as possible, given my personality.”
Until then, she said, “the mental picture that’s acceptable to me is not wanting to look like I’m disabled.”
The New Old Age is produced through a partnership with The New York Times.
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.
This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
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:
-
Peas vs Green Beans – 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 peas to green beans, we picked the peas.
Why?
Looking at macros first, peas have nearly 6x the protein, nearly 2x the fiber, and nearly 2x the carbs, making them the “more food per food” choice.
In terms of vitamins, peas have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, and choline, while green beans have more of vitamins E and K. An easy win for peas.
In the category of minerals, peas have more copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while green beans have more calcium. Another overwhelming win for peas.
In short, enjoy both (diversity is good), but there’s a clear winner here and it’s peas.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Peas vs Broad Beans – Which is Healthier?
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:









