Call us toll free: +1 4062079616
How To Be Spiritual In A Material World
Call us toll free: +1 4062079616

Full Width Blog

06 Aug 2024
Comments: 0

Too much sleep results in cognitive decline, researchers find

We’ve been hearing about the dangers of too little sleep for years. With 70 million Americans suffering from sleeping disorders, risks of depression, obesity, anxiety, and psychological disorders increase when we get less than seven hours a night. Even memory problems form when we don’t dream enough, which relies on achieving enough cycles of REM sleep—also dealing with duration.

There’s always two sides to every story. You can die of thirst or drink too much water. Same goes for sleep. The world’s largest sleep study has just wrapped up, offering balance to how we usually treat sleep: Too much is no good either.

Published in the journal Sleep (where else?), the researchers gathered data from over 10,000 people from across the planet. Western University Brain and Mind Institute researchers launched this study in June 2017; over 40,000 volunteers initially signed up. They filled out questionnaires and performed a series of tests to monitor their cognitive abilities. As Western researcher Adrian Owen (located in London, Ontario) says:

 

People who logged in gave us a lot of information about themselves. We had a fairly extensive questionnaire and they told us things like which medications they were on, how old they were, where they were in the world and what kind of education they’d received because these are all factors that might have contributed to some of the results.

 

The study cites a survey of over a quarter-million people, in which 29.2 percent of respondents claimed to sleep less than six hours per night; even partial sleeping disorders cost the Canadian economy $21.4 billion each year. Since basic cognitive functioning requires collaboration from numerous systems, reasoning and verbal skills suffer when you sleep too little—or too much, they note. Sure, less than seven hours per night is problematic, but so is more than eight hours, they found.

The Cambridge Brain Sciences 12-point online test covers a wide application of cognitive abilities, including spatial working memory, reasoning, planning, cognitive flexibility, and visuospatial working memory. A total of 10,886 participants, including 6,796 women and 4,013 men (average age of 41.7 years), were assessed. The optimal amount of sleep for reasoning, verbal, and overall abilities, turned out to be 7.16 hours.

Interestingly, despite a popular myth, age does not have an impact on required sleep. We don’t actually need less sleep as we grow older; in fact, the authors write, sleeping less as you age could aid in diseases of dementia and age-related cognitive decline. As researcher associate and lead author Conor Wild says, it’s all about how long you spend unconscious.

 

We found that the optimum amount of sleep to keep your brain performing its best is 7 to 8 hours every night and that corresponds to what the doctors will tell you need to keep your body in tip-top shape, as well. We also found that people that slept more than that amount were equally impaired as those who slept too little.

 

One bright spot for those who like to sleep in: A single night of “oversleeping” results in better-than-usual performance on these tests. And the bad news for those suffering from lack of sleep continues: Sleeping less than four hours per night is the equivalent of aging almost eight years.

These results matter, not just for one’s general health, but for the functioning of society. As the authors conclude:

 

These findings have significant real-world implications, because many people, including those in positions of responsibility, operate on very little sleep and hence may suffer from impaired reasoning, problem-solving, and communications skills on a daily basis.

 

Original article here

 

 


03 Aug 2024
Comments: 0

Can Humanity Address Climate Change Without Believing It? Medical History Suggests It Is Possible

 

Strange as it may seem, early germ theorists could tell us a lot about today’s attitudes toward climate change.

While researching for a new book about the history of emerging infections, I found many similarities between early debates over the existence of microbes and current debates over the existence of global warming.

Both controversies reveal the struggles of perceiving an unseen threat. Both reveal the influence of economic interests that benefit from the status quo. But most importantly, both reveal how people with different beliefs and interests can still agree on key policies and practices for tackling a global problem.

What You Can’t See Might Hurt You

Seeing is believing, and until the mid-19th century, it was very difficult to see the tiny organisms responsible for our so-called “fever” diseases.

Although the indirect evidence was compelling, many people remained skeptical of “animalcules” – as microorganisms were once called – until the microscope was sufficiently developed. Even then, acceptance was gradual. The once-dominant ideas about disease-causing gases, called miasmsas, persisted for several decades before most people acknowledged that the fevers had a living cause.

Climate change presents similar challenges of visibility. Although everyone can see and feel the weather, it is often difficult to observe its larger patterns and longer trends without the aid of technical charts.

 

 

Even when people acknowledge the bigger picture, the case for human responsibility is complicated by the fact that the carbon emissions from our engines, like the germ infections within our bodies, are unseen by the naked eye. It is hard to achieve human solutions when the evidence of human cause is invisible.

Economics Can Outweigh Evidence 

Adding to these challenges, economic interests often confound scientific recommendations.

In the case of germ theory, early recommendations to prevent the spread of infection included reinstating quarantines at shipping ports and border crossings, thus impeding the international flow of trade.

In the case of climate theory, recommendations to slow global warming include reducing the consumption of carbon-based fuels, thus reducing the flow of oil. These strategies can threaten livelihoods as well as profits, so it is not surprising to find labor unions divided over green initiatives and energy executives spreading misinformation about climate science.

Beliefs And Interests Need Not Coincide

But people’s beliefs and interests need not align if everyone finds some benefit in the recommendations.

This was the case in the latter decades of the 19th century, when germ-denying surgeons nevertheless adopted the antiseptic techniques of Joseph Lister.

They did so mainly for the practical reason that their patients fared better under the new methods. But if an explanation was needed, many of these die-hard skeptics claimed Lister’s methods prevented the transmission of miasmas rather than living organisms.

 

Responding to these claims, Lister stated:

 

If anyone chooses to assume that the septic material is not of the nature of the living organisms, but a so-called chemical ferment destitute of vitality … such a notion, unwarranted though I believe it to be by any scientific evidence, will in a practical point of view be equivalent to a germ theory, since it will inculcate precisely the same methods of antiseptic management.”

 

Lister was more concerned with saving lives than winning arguments. As long as the surgeons adopted his methods, Lister cared little about their justifications. When it came to preventing infection, it was the behaviors rather than the beliefs that counted.

 

 

Changing Behaviors Through Complementary Interests

The same could be said for global warming: Changing behaviors is more important than changing beliefs.

Case in point, there is a large and growing environmentalist movement among evangelical Christians. Organizations such as Green Faith and the Creation Care Task Force cite Biblical scripture to promote environmental stewardship as a sacred duty.

While many of these groups acknowledge human-based climate change, some of their core beliefs contradict the evolutionary theories that my colleagues and I employ as scientists. But we need not agree about fossils to wean the world off fossil fuels.

The same goes for priorities and economic interests.

A recent national Pew survey found that a large majority of Americans support the development and use of renewable energy. This includes a slight majority of Republicans, though their motives tend to differ from those of Democrats.

 

 

Republicans are more likely to prioritize the economic benefits of renewable energy than Democrats, who tend to list global warming as their driving concern.

The economic benefits could explain why red states produce the largest share of America’s wind energy and why three of these states are among the nation’s top five producers of solar energy. Their adoption correlates with the geography of the wind and sun belts, where farmers see favorable returns for producing power and a stable source of income to buffer the price fluctuations of weather-sensitive crops. Livelihood is a powerful motivator.

 

 

Finding Common Ground Could Change The World

None of these examples address climate change on all its fronts. And among Democrats as well as Republicans, there are different opinions about how fast and how far the transition to renewable energy should go.

But we can take another hopeful lesson from the 19th century: Although people did not agree on all disease-preventing actions, they nevertheless found enough common ground to achieve the greatest mortality decline in recorded history.

 

Original article here

 


31 Jul 2024
Comments: 0

The science behind why some of us are shy

Does the idea of mingling at a party send cold fingers of dread creeping up your spine? Or the thought of giving a presentation in front of a room full of people make you feel physically sick?

If so, then you are not alone.

Akindele Michael was a shy kid. Growing up in Nigeria he spent a lot of time indoors at his parents’ house. His parents, incidentally, are not shy. He believes that his sheltered upbringing is linked to his shyness – but is he right?

Partly, says Thalia Eley, professor of developmental behavioural genetics at Kings College London.

“We think of shyness as a temperamental trait and temperament is like a precursor to personality,” she says. “When very young children are starting to engage with other people you see variation in how comfortable [they] are in speaking to an adult that they don’t know.”

She says that only about 30% of shyness as a trait is down to genetics and the rest comes about as a response to the environment.

Most of what we know about the genetics of shyness comes from studies that compare shyness in identical twins – who are perfect genetic copies of each other – with non-identical twins, who only share about half of the same genes.

In the last decade or so, scientists like Eley have started to look at DNA itself to try and find genetic variants that might have an effect on personality and mental health.

Each individual genetic variant only has a tiny effect, but when you look at thousands in combination, the impact starts to be more noticeable. Even then, the influence of genes on shyness can’t be taken in isolation.

“There won’t be one, ten or even a hundred genes involved, there’ll be thousands of genes,” Eley says. “So if you think of the entire genome for both parents [of a child] there are hundreds of thousands of relevant genetic variants.”

 

A shy child may be more likely to isolate themselves in a playground and watch everybody else rather than engaging

  

So the environment is almost more important for developing these sorts of traits, she says. And one of the interesting things about genetics is that it drives us to extract aspects of the environment that match our actual predispositions.

For example, a shy child may be more likely to isolate themselves in a playground and watch everybody else rather than engaging. That then makes them feel more comfortable being on their own because that becomes their common experience.

“It’s not that it’s one or the other; it’s both [genes and environment] and they work together,” says Eley. “It’s a dynamic system. And because of that, you can always change it through psychological therapies that can teach you techniques to cope.”

Is shyness necessarily a bad thing?

Chloe Foster, a clinical psychologist at the Centre for Anxiety Disorders and Trauma in London, says shyness in itself is quite common and normal and doesn’t cause problems unless it develops into more of a social anxiety.

Foster says the people she treats seek help because “they are starting to avoid a lot of things that they need to be doing”. It might be not being able to talk to people at work, difficulties socialising or being in a situation where they feel they’re going to be judged or evaluated by other people.

 

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the most effective psychological therapy for people who have shyness and social anxiety

 

Eley says that there may be evolutionary reasons for people to develop shy personality traits.

 

 

“It was useful to have people in your group who were off out there exploring and engaging in new groups but it was also useful for people who were more risk averse, [were] more aware of threat and would do a better job protecting young offspring, for example.”

She says that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the most effective psychological therapy for people who have shyness and social anxiety. This evidence-based therapy works by trying to change your thought and behaviour patterns.

CBT helps you to identify these sorts of negative thoughts as well as realising that certain behaviours we think help us, such as rehearsing what you’re going to say in advance or avoiding eye contact, might actually be making us feel more socially anxious.

“It’s often that little critical bully that will pop into your mind before, during and even after a social event,” Foster says.

Sometimes the problem is that people who struggle with something like public speaking due to shyness often set themselves very high standards for how they should perform in such a situation, she explains.

“They may think they shouldn’t stumble their words… or they should be very, very interesting and that everybody should be totally rivetted in what they’re saying the whole time.”

 

The more you can involve yourself with social situations, the more confident you’re going to become — Chloe Foster

 

If they are able to relieve some of the pressure on themselves, allowing themselves short pauses to take a breath might help alleviate some of that anxiety.

Another thing that could help is to try to focus externally on what’s happening around you, rather than internally on how anxiety makes you feel physically. Focusing on the audience rather than yourself can help you be less caught up in whether you stumble over your words.

She also suggests challenging yourself by being more open to new situations. “The more you can involve yourself with social situations, the more confident you’re going to become,” she says. “But remember to approach the social situations in a new way.”

This means changing your script. Ask yourself what you fear most about social situations. Are you worried about appearing boring? Or running out of things to say? The more you know about your anxiety, the more you can start to challenge it.

 

 

Jessie Sun, a PhD student at the University of California Davis who researches the psychology of personality, stresses that shyness and introversion are not the same thing.

She explains that people often think that introversion is about being introspective or having an interest in exploring thoughts, but to psychologists that’s part of a different dimension of personality referred to as openness to experience.

Shy people are often introverted, but they might also be extroverts whose anxiety gets in the way of being sociable. And non-shy introverts might be socially adept but just prefer their own company.

Sun says “personality is consistently one of the strongest predictors of happiness and extroversion has especially strong relationships with wellbeing”.

“People who are extroverted tend to experience more feelings of excitement, enthusiasm and joy, whereas people who are introverted tend to experience those feelings less often,” she says.

 

They found that for people who were pretty extroverted anyway, acting consistently extroverted over a week meant they experienced more positive emotions

 

But could introverts get in on some of that joy and enthusiasm – by just acting extroverted?

Sun and her colleagues did an experiment. They asked people to act extroverted for an entire week – which is a long time for someone who is shy. “We asked them to act bold, talkative, outgoing, active and assertive as much as possible,” she says.

They found that for people who were pretty extroverted anyway, acting consistently extroverted over a week meant they experienced more positive emotions and they felt more “authentic” – more like themselves.

But the people who were more introverted didn’t experience as much of that boost in positive emotion. And the people who were extreme introverts actually felt more tired and experienced more negative emotion.

“I think the main lesson,” says Sun, “is that it’s probably too much to ask introverted or very shy people to act extroverted as much as they can for an entire week [but they] might consider acting extroverted on fewer occasions.”

We’ve seen how our environment plays a big part in whether we are shy or not – but could culture also affect how happy you are if you are a natural introvert?

The United States is said to value confident, extroverted behaviour over introversion, whereas studies have found that in parts of Asia, including Japan and China, being quiet and reserved is more desirable.

Attitudes towards eye contact also varies hugely from country to country. Kris Rugsaken, a retired professor of Asian studies at Ball State University, says “while good eye contact is praised and expected in the West, it is seen as a sign of disrespect and challenge in other cultures, including Asian and African.

 

Extroverts tend to be happier even in the countries where introversion is more respected

 

“The less eye contact these groups have with an individual, the more respect they show.”

Despite these cultural differences, Sun says the research seems to show that extroverts tend to be happier even in the countries where introversion is more respected but the degree of happiness is less marked in those countries.

So while research suggests that extroverts end up being happier wherever they may be in the world, being introverted isn’t necessarily negative – any more than being outgoing is always positive.

“Don’t think of introversion as something to be cured”, Susan Cain writes in her book Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop Talking. “There’s zero correlation between being the best talker and having the best ideas.”

 

 

 

Original article here


27 Jul 2024
Comments: 0

7 common household items that are polluting your air

 

Never before has it been more important to focus on learning how to improve air quality indoors. Aside from the usual tips and tricks people use, there may be some household items that are polluting the air you are breathing

While an air purifier works to clean the air in your home, it’s worth looking at what is polluting it.

Many everyday items around the house can pollute the air without us even realizing it. When identifying these emitters, it’s crucial to identify those most pervasive and address practical steps for mitigation.

Here are seven everyday household items and what you can do to reduce their impact:

1.   Cleaning products

‘Many household cleaners contain volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that can evaporate into the air at room temperature,’ says Joshua Bartlett, home improvement expert at I’ll Just Fix It Myself. ‘These compounds contribute to indoor air pollution and can exacerbate respiratory problems, headaches, and eye irritation.’

Thankfully there are a few ways that you can mitigate these pollutants. The first is by using natural products such as an antibacterial all-purpose cleaner spray, or making your own with ingredients like vinegar and baking soda.

Additionally, you should always ensure good ventilation by opening windows or using exhaust fans when cleaning and avoid aerosol cleaners, choosing liquid or solid cleaning products over aerosols to reduce those VOC emissions.

2. Paints and Varnishes

Another household item you wouldn’t think produces pollutants is most paints and varnishes. Paints and varnishes release VOCs and other harmful chemicals into the air during application and drying.

Instead, you should opt for low-VOC paint and varnish options such as Glidden Fundamentals Interior Paint. Similar to cleaning products, good ventilation helps a lot to remove pollutants from your vicinity. Paint in well-ventilated areas and allow plenty of time for the paint to dry.

3. Air fresheners

We all want our homes to smell nice, however, the devices we often use to do so, such as air freshers and scent boosters are actually causing further pollution. Air fresheners often contain phthalates and other chemicals that emit VOCs, contributing to indoor air pollution.

If you enjoy your home smelling fragrant, cleaning specialist Janille Mangat suggests that you use natural air fresheners like essential oils or potpourri instead, and if you are just trying to mask over bad smells and odors, open your windows to Improve ventilation and reduce the need for air fresheners to begin with.

There are also several houseplants like spider plants or peace lilies, which help purify the air and achieve the same result.

4. Candles

When burned, traditional paraffin candles release soot, benzene, and toluene, which can contribute to indoor air pollution. Instead, use more natural candles such as beeswax or soy candles with natural wicks that do not contain those chemicals.

If you want to take it one step further, you can also opt for unscented candles to reduce synthetic fragrance emissions.

5. Carpets and rugs

Surprisingly, new carpets and rugs can also contribute pollutants to your air as they emit VOCs from adhesives, dyes, and backing materials. Over time carpets and rugs also trap dust, dirt, and allergens.

Similarly to paint and varnishes, luckily there are low-VOC and eco-friendly carpets you can buy which are kinder to your lungs. Ensure any new carpets are installed with low-VOC adhesives, allowing them to be off-gas before use.

Aside from changing all of your rugs and carpets, you can help reduce the release of pollutants by regularly cleaning and vacuuming.

6. Furniture

Furniture made from pressed wood or particleboard can also emit formaldehyde and other VOCs. Instead, opt for solid wood furniture rather than pressed wood or particleboard.

You can also look to update your furniture with an eco-friendly finish, such as one that has been finished off with a low-VOC varnish.

7. Pesticides

Pesticides are a big contributor to the buildup of pollutants in your home. They release harmful chemicals into the air that can linger and cause respiratory problems and skin irritation.

If you are looking for ways to eliminate pests,  you can still use natural pest control methods like diatomaceous earth, essential oils such as organic neem oil, or traps. Use a combination of these natural pest control methods to maximize their effectiveness.

 

Tips for improving indoor air quality

In addition to mitigating current household items that are polluting your air, you can also incorporate some of these general tips to improve your overall indoor air quality.

Ventilation: Improve natural ventilation by opening windows and doors when possible.

Air Purifiers: Use air purifiers with HEPA and activated carbon filters such as the Winix 5300-2 Air Purifier.

Houseplants: Incorporate air-purifying houseplants into your home decor.

Regular Cleaning: Maintain a regular cleaning schedule to reduce dust, mold, and other pollutants.

Humidity Control: Keep indoor humidity levels between 30-50% to prevent mold growth and dust mites.

 

FAQs

How to test air quality in your home?

One way that you can test the quality of air in your home is by using air quality monitors. By using multiple monitors across several rooms you will be able to gather a better understanding of the air quality throughout your home and identify any problem areas.

By understanding what contributes to indoor air pollution and taking proactive steps, you can significantly improve the air quality in your home and breathe much cleaner air.

 

 

Original article here

 


Leave a Comment!

You must be logged in to post a comment.