Category: NATURAL-BEAUTY

From the tenuous bonds that connect us with one another to the ever-present vulnerability we share as humans in a chaotic world, our lives are forever saturated in the possibility of catastrophe. Bad things — often really tragic things like accidents, illness, and untimely death — happen to people every single day. We know this, yet we are tasked with finding ways of moving forward in a world where nothing is guaranteed.

But how? Mainly, we find ways to oppose the dread of life’s dangers with hope: an aspirational feeling that circumstances can improve, that we can persist, that there is at least as much good in the world as bad.

What hope does for us

The topic of hope is low-hanging fruit for pop culture and even politics: Not all that long ago, one US president hailed from a town called Hope, and another campaigned on it. But hope is also beginning to reveal its value in scientific studies. Among young adults with chronic illnesses, greater degrees of hope are associated with improved coping, well-being, and engagement in healthy behaviors. It also protects against depression and suicide. Among teens, hope is linked with health, quality of life, self-esteem, and a sense of purpose. It is an essential factor for developing both maturity and resilience.

Fortunately, such benefits also extend into later life, as the opportunities for calamity start to increase. Our bodies fail us. We may experience life’s setbacks like losing jobs, relationships, or family members. If our early challenges are so often related to growing and developing into healthy adults, later life can be thought of as a period of consolidation and acceptance of one’s self, even as the physical body declines and circumstances shift for the worse.

Hope is a shield and a path

Hope can be a particularly powerful protector against the dread of a chronic or life-threatening illness. It needn’t center on a cure to be useful, though those aspirations are enticing. Rather, a person’s hope — even when facing an illness that will likely end their life — can be aimed at finding joy or comfort. It can be cultivated and focused on achieving life milestones, such as meeting grandchildren or attending a child’s wedding. It can be found in moments of serenity: what is contentedness if not an acknowledgment that there can be good in our lives, even under challenging circumstances?

Lastly, hope can be an opportunity for us to process events that seem insurmountable. A massive setback in life, a crushing accident, a vigil held during a relative’s last days in the intensive care unit, or even our own final months living with a fatal disease can be times when hope for comfort or reprieve serves as a pathway from one stage to the next.

The pitfalls of false hope

When grounded in realism, hope serves many positive functions. Yet hope beyond the possible is a recipe for eventual disappointment and disillusionment. Unrealistic expectations can keep people from embracing moments of comfort and joy in the here and now, as they continue to look in the distance toward a mirage. Focusing on unrealistic expectations can also prevent people from making realistic choices about important topics like medical decision-making. Weighing the quality of your life and possible paths toward a good death can sometimes take a back seat to doing as much as possible to stave off death.

Hoping for hope

Hope is an essential component of our well-being. What can we do when it seems to be in short supply? First, we can start by practicing gratitude. Spending a few minutes each day recounting the positives in one’s life — even small ones like noticing a moment of serenity in the sunshine, or the endorphins of a brisk walk around your neighborhood — can have enormous impact. Next, we can begin to actively envision realistic ways that our circumstances may improve. Pain and discomfort often subside. Even deep sorrows can pass with time. In all these cases, the action to embrace is to choose to be mindful and deliberate about fostering positivity, even in the face of its absence.

Men who are newly diagnosed with prostate cancer have difficult choices to make about medical therapy, and the last thing any of them want is to regret their treatment decisions later. But unfortunately, treatment-related regrets are quite common, according to a new study.

After looking into the experiences of 2,072 men diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2011 and 2012, the investigators found that more than one in 10 were unhappy with their chosen treatment.

The men were all younger than 80, with an average age of 64. Nearly half of them had slow-growing cancers with a low risk of recurrence or spread after treatment. The rest were in intermediate- or higher-risk categories.

All the men were treated in one of three different ways: surgery to remove the prostate (a procedure called radical prostatectomy); radiation therapy; or active surveillance, which entails monitoring prostate tumors with routine PSA checks and imaging, and treating only when, or if, the cancer progresses. More than half the men chose surgery regardless of their cancer risk at the time of diagnosis. Most of the others chose radiation, and about 13% of the men — the majority of them in low- or intermediate-risk categories — chose active surveillance. Then, at periodic intervals afterwards, the men filled out questionnaires asking if they felt they might have been better off with a different approach, or if the treatment they had chosen was the wrong one.

What the results showed

Results showed that after five years, 279 of the men (13% of the entire group) had regrets about what they had chosen. The surgically-treated men were most likely to voice unhappiness with their decision; 183 of them (13%) felt they would have been better off with a different approach. By contrast, regrets were expressed by 76 (11%) of the radiation-treated men and 20 (7%) of men who chose active surveillance. Men in the low-to intermediate-risk categories were more likely to regret having chosen immediate treatment with surgery or radiation instead of active surveillance. The men with high-risk cancer, however, did not regret being treated immediately.

The study was led by Dr. Christopher Wallis, a urologic oncologist at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto, Canada. Wallis and his team didn’t explore which specific disease outcomes or complications led to the regrets associated with particular treatments. However, the study did find that sexual dysfunction was significantly associated with treatment regrets in general. “And patients on active surveillance may develop regret if their disease progresses and they then come to believe that they may have been better suited by getting treatment earlier,” Wallis wrote in an email.

The study’s key finding, according to the investigators, is that regrets arise from discrepancies between what men expect from a particular approach and their actual experiences over time. “That’s the important take-away,” Wallis said.

In an accompanying editorial, Randy Jones, PhD., RN, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Nursing, emphasized that improved treatment counseling at the time of diagnosis can help to minimize the likelihood of regret later. This communication, he wrote, should consider the patient’s personal values, stress shared decision-making between patients and doctors, and aim for an “understanding of realistic expectations and adverse effects that are possible during treatment.”

“This study underscores the importance of not rushing into a decision, and fully understanding the time course of side effects and what can be expected from them,” said Dr. Marc Garnick, the Gorman Brothers Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, editor of the Harvard Health Publishing Annual Report on Prostate Diseases, and editor in chief of HarvardProstateKnowledge.org. “Only when these consequences of treatment(s) or surveillance are fully understood is the patient able to make a truly informed decision.” All too often, newly diagnosed patients respond by “wanting to take care of this as soon as emergently possible.” But with prostate cancer, patients have the time to fully understand what is at stake. “I urge my patients to speak with members of prostate support groups and other prostate cancer patients about the issues they are likely to face, not necessarily in the immediate future, but years later. The fact that this study evaluated individuals 10+ years following their decision is an important feature in helping us better understand the time course during which regrets may be experienced.”

Various versions of low-carbohydrate diets have been popular for many years. The details of what is allowed and what is not vary quite a bit, and the amount of carbohydrates also differs. Too often these diets contain plates piled high with bacon, meat, eggs, and cheese. Due to the high saturated fat content in these diets, doctors and nutritionists worry about their potential adverse effect on cardiovascular disease.

The American Heart Association recommends aiming for about 13 grams of saturated fat, which is about 6% of 2,000 calorie diet. Recently, a new study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition suggests that at least in the short term a low carb diet with a higher amount of saturated fat might still be heart-healthy. But is it that simple? Let’s take a look at what this randomized diet trial did and what the results really mean.

What did the study actually involve?

The 164 participants in this study were all considered overweight or obese, and had just finished a weight loss trial to lose 12% of their body weight. They were randomly assigned to one of three diets containing different proportions of carbohydrates and fat. Protein content was kept the same (at 20% calories) for everyone. They were not planning to lose any more weight.

The three diets were:

• Low carbohydrates (20%), high fat (60%), saturated fat comprising 21% of calories: this resembles a typical low-carbohydrate diet and has much higher saturated fat than recommended.
• Moderate carbohydrate (40%), moderate fat (40%), saturated fat comprising 14% of calories: this is not far from the typical American diet of 50% carbohydrates and 33% fat, and it is quite similar to a typical Mediterranean diet, which is slightly lower in carbohydrates and higher in fat than an American diet.
• High carbohydrate (60%), low fat (20%), saturated fat comprising 7% of calories: this meets the recommendation of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and is a typical high-carbohydrate diet, including a lot of grains, starchy vegetables, and fruits or juices.

The study participants received food prepared for them for 20 weeks. They had their blood measured for a number of risk factors of cardiovascular disease, and a lipoprotein insulin resistance (LPIR) score was calculated using a number of blood markers to reflect the risk for cardiovascular disease. (LPIR is a score that measures both insulin resistance and abnormal blood cholesterol all in one number, and it is used for research purposes.)

The researchers found that at the end of eating these diets for five months, the participants in each of the three groups had similar values of cardiovascular disease markers, such as the LIPR score an and cholesterol blood levels.

What were the participants actually eating?

Alas, those who were eating the low-carbohydrate diet were not piling up their plate with steak and bacon, and those eating the high-carbohydrate diets were not drinking unlimited soda. All three diets were high in plant foods and low in highly processed foods (it is easier to stick to a diet when all the food is prepared for you). Even the low-carbohydrate group was eating lentils, a good amount of vegetables, and quite a bit of nuts.

Even the two diets with higher than recommended amounts of saturated fats also were high in the healthy poly- and monounsaturated fats as well. For example, the diets contained a combination of higher amounts of healthy (salmon) and a small amount of unhealthy (sausage) choices. In addition, fiber intake (at about 22 grams/day) was slightly higher than the average American intake (18 grams/day). Overall, except for saturated fat being higher than recommended, the diet as a whole was quite healthy.

What is the take-home message?

Striving for a plant-based diet with saturated fat being limited to 7% of total calories remains an ideal goal. But for people who choose a low carb, high fat diet to jump start weight loss, keeping saturated fat this low even for a few months is challenging. This study at least provides some evidence that higher amounts of saturated fat in the context of a healthy diet do not seem to adversely affect certain cardiovascular risk markers in the short term. How it would affect actual disease — such as heart attack, stroke, and diabetes — in the long run is unknown. However, there is ample evidence showing that a diet that consists of healthy foods and has moderate amounts of carbohydrate and fat can lower the risk of these diseases.

Preventing diseases is a long-term process; a healthy diet must not only be effective, but it should also be flexible enough for people to stick to in the long run. Could a diet with lower amounts of healthy carbohydrates and ample healthy fats with a bit more saturated fat be healthy enough? As the researchers state, we need long-term testing to help answer the question.

When faced with buying shoes, some people will be done in five minutes and be totally satisfied. For others, it’ll be a multiday process of reading reviews, comparing prices, consideration, and more consideration before making a decision.

Or not.

People can want to make a choice, but fear of making a bad one or of missing a better deal that might come gets in the way. The upcoming holiday gift-buying only ups the pressure.

“Making decisions is a taxing task,” says Dr. Soo Jeong Youn, clinical psychologist at Massachusetts General Hospital and assistant professor in the department of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School.

We’re doing it constantly, with what to wear and eat. It can also feel agonizing, even paralyzing, because sometimes we don’t know all the information, and so the brain fills in the gaps with worst-case scenarios, which does nothing to lower the stress.

Can we get better at making decisions? The short answer is yes. It takes some organization, but also a mindset shift in which we accept that there is no ideal choice. But before that, it helps to look a little more at why decision-making can be so difficult.

Knowing what to expect

Not all decisions cause the same stress. Big ones, like changing jobs or buying a house, take consideration, which we expect. Everyday choices, like our morning coffee order or groceries, are often automatic. And usually, the prefrontal cortex is in control. That’s the part of the brain behind the forehead, handling executive functioning skills — a term, Youn says, which tries to capture the complexity behind thinking. The prefrontal cortex processes information from the entire brain and puts it together to make a choice.

It’s the midlevel decisions — the new bike, winter jacket, toaster, or shoes — that become troublesome. They’re not huge purchases, but since we don’t make them regularly, we can spend more time weighing cost versus benefit. “We haven’t engaged in the thinking process,” Youn says.

Instead of the prefrontal cortex, the limbic system takes over. It’s the fight-or-flight response part of the brain, and there’s no careful weighing of factors. The goal is simple: survival, and it can cause us to make a less-than-optimal choice just to end the decision-making process — or to avoid the situation altogether by doing nothing, she says.

That’s not necessarily our goal. We want to make a good choice, but often there’s more in play, namely expectations. It’s tied into how we get viewed and what our worth is. If it’s a present, we worry about whether it expresses our feelings appropriately. As Youn says, “That decision is not just about that decision.”

And underlying it all is the fear and regret that you picked the wrong thing.

But to that, Youn poses a question: Wrong for what?

Get your focus

Often, people go into a purchase without being clear on what they need. Is the item for warmth, durability, exercise, style? Does it have to have special features? Do you need it quickly? Establishing a scope gives us something to refer back to and ask, “Does this fit with my purpose?” Conversely, with no parameters, we spend more time and angst making decisions, and sometimes keep looking under the belief that the “perfect” thing exists.

“We want this to check off all the boxes, even though we haven’t defined what all the boxes are,” she says.

For some people, the difficulty is in making the decision, but once done, the stress is over. But for others, the worry continues: the limbic system is still activated, and that’s when regret or buyer’s remorse comes in. Youn says to treat it like that song in your head that won’t go away, and give it some attention.

Examine the worry and name it. If you’re wondering about missing out on something, ask, “Why is that important?” And then with every assumption ask, “And then what would happen?” The process might reduce the magnitude of how much something actually matters. If that doesn’t work and you’re worried that you missed out on a better deal, then do some research. Whatever the result, even if it wasn’t in your favor, take it as a lesson that you can use for the next decision.

Lean on routines

New decisions take energy. That’s why routines are helpful — they remove the uncertainty of what to do in the morning or how to get to work. When possible, Youn says, use previous knowledge instead of constantly reinventing the wheel. If you like a pair of sneakers, there’s no problem with rebuying them if your needs haven’t changed.

If they have, just re-examine the new components, not the stuff you already know. And if you feel like you’re getting stuck in the evaluation process, ask yourself, “Is this worth my time?” The question creates a pause, brings you back into the moment, and allows you to decide how you want to proceed.

More research won’t help with decision-making or decision regret

It helps to realize that when we do our research, there comes a point where we’ve seen everything. In fact, more information becomes overload. What helps is to shrink down options as soon as possible. Maybe start with 10, but quickly get to five, then three, and finally two to compare before picking the winner. What can also help is setting the timer on your phone and giving yourself a certain number of minutes to make a choice. Sometimes that self-imposed deadline can keep us on track, and we can move on to the next decision.

But there can always be a nagging feeling that there’s more to know. In reality there isn’t, and actually we can’t know everything and don’t have to know everything — and that’s all right. As Youn says, “It’s an illusion.”