Podcast appearances and mentions of sandra aamodt

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientist and author Sandra Aamodt suggests four healthy habits instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 39533]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientist and author Sandra Aamodt suggests four healthy habits instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 39533]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientist and author Sandra Aamodt suggests four healthy habits instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 39533]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientist and author Sandra Aamodt suggests four healthy habits instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 39533]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientist and author Sandra Aamodt suggests four healthy habits instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 39533]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientist and author Sandra Aamodt suggests four healthy habits instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 39533]

This podcast is a commentary and does not contain any copyrighted material of the reference source. We strongly recommend accessing/buying the reference source at the same time. ■Reference Source https://www.ted.com/talks/sandra_aamodt_why_dieting_doesn_t_usually_work ■Post on this topic (You can get FREE learning materials!) https://englist.me/96-academic-words-reference-from-sandra-aamodt-why-dieting-doesnt-usually-work-ted-talk/ ■Youtube Video https://youtu.be/ecsyCC296fw (All Words) https://youtu.be/z8L7ZkRWSfQ (Advanced Words) https://youtu.be/AFvnvl6kvgE (Quick Look) ■Top Page for Further Materials https://englist.me/ ■SNS (Please follow!)

DEFENDING PARENT'S RIGHTS: GROUP PSYCHOTHERAPY, NOT IN HUDSON WISCONSIN! Let's unpack this…The group psychotherapy model is not appropriate in the public school setting. Psychotherapy (sometimes called "talk therapy") is a term for a variety of treatment techniques that aim to help a person identify and change troubling emotions, thoughts, and behavior. Most psychotherapy takes place with a licensed, trained mental health professional and a patient meeting one-on-one or with other patients in a group setting.Psychoeducational groups are led by a therapist who takes on the role of a teacher and trainer (Brown, 2018). This contrasts with process-oriented groups, where the therapist takes a background role as a facilitator of the group experience.Psychoeducational groups are a form of education-based group therapy. Rather than focusing on individual client relationships, psychoeducational groups focus on providing education, training, and support.Normally thee kinds of groups are led by licensed, trained mental health professionals. The English teachers are not trained sufficiently to facilitate this project. 2.The books listed are sensitive and controversial, introducing students to subjects and risky behaviors, which in many cases students may not have known about until reading one of these books, participating in the group discussion, or reading the research-based, news-style article produced by fellow 9th graders.Is the school ready to take legal responsibility for decisions students make as a result of introducing them to these themes, including “violence, depression, racism, sexuality, substance abuse, rape, and language?” When teaching minors to engage in risky behavior of any kind, the answer to the question is, “age appropriateness depends on the child, and the context of the instruction.3.Students are not capable of dealing with adult level decision making at this age. We believe the lack of cognitive and developmental maturity levels of young people have been grossly overlooked by educators and curriculum authors.Scientific findings regarding mental and emotional maturity are stunning. Conservative estimates indicate maturity at age 25. This is well known, throughout education, psychotherapy, and mental health circles.Sandra Aamodt, neuroscientist and co-author of the book, Welcome to Your Child's Brain.“Neuroscientists have found the brain scans show clearly that the brain is not fully finished developing until about age 25. The changes that happen between 18 and 25 are a continuation of the process that starts around puberty, and 18 year olds are about halfway through that process. Their prefrontal cortex is not yet fully developed. That's the part of the brain that helps you to inhibit impulses and to plan and organize your behavior to reach a goal.”“We see that motor control, meaning the myelination of the motor pathways, occurs around 15 on average. Then the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, responsible for cognitive control and executive function, is pretty much myelinated by 25,” she says. “But then you start talking about emotions—and everyone realizes the impact of emotions on cognitive control. They can change how much control you have. So, when you look at the medial and orbital surfaces of the frontal lobe, which some call the ‘social' brain, the mean age of myelination of those connections between the limbic system and those frontal areas is about 32. That's a far cry from 18."Support the showDONATE, TODAY!www.ParentsRightsInEd.org

Resolutions are easy to make, even easier to break. But what if a story or idea can motivate us in a whole new way? This hour, TED speakers offer different perspectives on our most common resolutions. Guests include neuroscientists Wendy Suzuki and Sandra Aamodt, science journalist Catherine Price, behavioral scientist Wendy De La Rosa, and authors Pico Iyer and A.J. Jacobs.

On this week's Tech Nation, what Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Richard Branson all have in common: They all started spaceflight companies. Moira speaks with New Yorker writer NICHOLAS SCHMIDLE (“schmidd-uhl”) , the author of “Test Gods: Virgin Galactic and the Making of a Modern Astronaut”. Then 40% of Americans report that they have gained weight since the COVID pandemic began. Excerpts from a past interview with DR SANDRA AAMODT (“ehh-mutt”), the former editor-in-chief of Nature Neuroscience. Her TED Talk “Why Dieting Doesn't Usually Work” has received over 4 Million views. She's the author of the 2014 book, “Why Diets Make Us Fat … The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss.”

The holidays can be challenging and triggering for those of us who struggle with our body image and yo-yo dieting. In this episode, I explore the concept of dieting and informed consent for calorie-restricted diets. Not just because I'm a physician and I advise patients and families, but for ourselves, before we embark on a calorie restriction journey.   Disclaimer: The information on this blog, website and podcast is for informational purposes only. It is not meant to replace careful evaluation and treatment. If you have concerns about your or your child's eating, nutrition or growth, consult a doctor.     Mentions: Dreena Burton's Crazy Brownies (https://dreenaburton.com/best-vegan-brownie-recipe/) VDR Episode 167: Is It Good for Weight Loss? (https://apple.co/3nWUvV3) VDR Episode 171: Can Vegans Be Intuitive Eaters? (Part I) (https://apple.co/3p7tPAa)   Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession With Weight Loss by Sandra Aamodt: amzn.to/3nWSsjP   Intuitive Eating Books:  My book - A Parent's Guide to Intuitive Eating: How to Raise Kids Who Love to Eat Healthy:  amzn.to/2ZspXkF Book by Evelyn Tribole and Elyse Resch - Intuitive Eating: A Revolutionary Anti-Diet Approach: amzn.to/3DSkFOh   Health at Every Size: The Surprising Truth About Your Weight by Lindo Bacon: amzn.to/3xqm3W2     Send me an email to yami@doctoryami.com with questions and topics   Sign up for my newsletter doctoryami.com/signup   MORE LISTENING OPTIONS Apple Podcasts: http://bit.ly/vdritunes Spotify: http://bit.ly/vdrspotify   NEWSLETTER SIGN UP https://doctoryami.com/signup     FIND ME AT Doctoryami.com Instagram.com/thedoctoryami Facebook.com/thedoctoryami Veggiefitkids.com   * * * * MORE FROM ME Read - http://veggiefitkids.com/blog Listen: http://bit.ly/vdrpodcast Watch - http://bit.ly/vfkvideos TEDx Talk - http://bit.ly/DOCTORYAMITEDX   * * * *   Questions? Email me: Yami@doctoryami.com

Neste episódio, falamos sobre o livro Bem-vindo ao cérebro do seu filho, e é o terceiro e último episódio sobre este livro, de Sandra Aamodt e Sam Wang, e publicado em português pela editora Cultrix. Neste episódio falaremos sobre as informações que estão nos capítulos 9 a 16. Esperamos que tenham gostado e, quem sabe, se interessado em adquirir o livro para uma boa leitura e aprendizado!

Inspirado en el libro PORQUE LAS DIETAS NOS ENGORDAN ó PORQUÉ LAS DIETAS NOS HACEN ENGORDAR de la Dra. Sandra Aamodt, este episodio lleno de información para vos. Si estás en la transición de dejar de hacer dietas para reconectarte con la intuición con la comida, y si muchas veces tenés el impulso de volver a una dieta, ESCUCHÁ NUEVAMENTE ESTE EPISODIO.

On this week’s Tech Nation, what Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Richard Branson all have in common: They all started spaceflight companies. Moira speaks with New Yorker writer NICHOLAS SCHMIDLE (“schmidd-uhl”) , the author of “Test Gods: Virgin Galactic and the Making of a Modern Astronaut”. Then 40% of Americans report that they have gained weight since the COVID pandemic began. Excerpts from a past interview with DR SANDRA AAMODT (“ehh-mutt”), the former editor-in-chief of Nature Neuroscience. Her TED Talk “Why Dieting Doesn’t Usually Work” has received over 4 Million views. She’s the author of the 2014 book, “Why Diets Make Us Fat … The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss.”

On this week's Tech Nation, what Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Richard Branson all have in common: They all started spaceflight companies. Moira speaks with New Yorker writer NICHOLAS SCHMIDLE (“schmidd-uhl”) , the author of “Test Gods: Virgin Galactic and the Making of a Modern Astronaut”. Then 40% of Americans report that they have gained weight since the COVID pandemic began. Excerpts from a past interview with DR SANDRA AAMODT (“ehh-mutt”), the former editor-in-chief of Nature Neuroscience. Her TED Talk “Why Dieting Doesn't Usually Work” has received over 4 Million views. She's the author of the 2014 book, “Why Diets Make Us Fat … The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss.”

Last November, I recorded an episode about Sandra Aamodt's book Why Diets Make Us Fat. This episode is a sort of next chapter to that. In other words: no more dieting, so now what? If you've done battle with the Quarantine 15, you'll understand why I'm asking this question. ✔️ A lot of us are getting back into the kitchen to cook, but sometimes, that has led to more comfort food and rich desserts.✔️ We live in a society that's pretty conducive to yo-yo dieting. Gain some, go on a diet, lose some, burn out, start the cycle again.  ✔️ If your eating habits are making you feel less than optimal but you don't want to go on a restrictive diet, what next? What are the other options?✔️ Be careful of all-or-nothing thinking. Every workout does not need to culminate in breaking a personal record or feeling like your heart is about to explode out of your chest. Need more? Email me: https://causeyconsultingllc.com/contact-causey/

The holiday season with its cakes, cookies, and pies is upon us. Are you already planning a food binge followed by a January of "paying for your sins" and working out like crazy? If so, I highly recommend Sandra Aamodt's book, Why Diets Make Us Fat. Key topics:✔️ My own experiences with bulking and cutting... and how it gets harder as you get older.✔️ Some people have been on diets or eating plans for their entire adult lives. This cannot be sound for mental or physical health.✔️ The items in the supermarket may have changed over the last few decades, but basic human biology has not.✔️ I go back to the Buddhist idea of the The Middle Path or The Middle Way. No extreme behaviors or wild benders with food. Likewise no starving yourself either.Need more? Email me: https://causeyconsultingllc.com/contact-causey/

In this gripping 2 part episode of All Fired Up, I explore the shadowy world of "Bright Line Eating", a super extreme diet cult which cherry picks neuroscience to convince people that they are 'food addicts', and then sells one of the world's most restrictive (and expensive) diet regimes to keep people hooked on the dream of achieving 'goal weight'. Bright Line Eating is the lucrative brainchild of neuroscientist Susan Peirce Thompson, a charismatic saleswoman who holds nothing back when it comes to the hard sell. Join me as I ask the question, who IS Susan Peirce Thompson - a food addict who has finally found the answer to her addictions, or someone who is still desperately stuck in her eating disorder? We also speak with neuroscientist Dr Sandra Aamodt, who literally attended the SAME UNIVERSITY as Susan Peirce Thompson, and has also experienced eating and body issues, but found peace through mindful and intuitive eating and body acceptance rather than continuing to white knuckle the revolving door of weight cycling. Dr Aamodt has very different ideas regarding this whole idea of food 'addiction'. Spoiler alert: Food addiction models = Binge Eating Disorder rebranded!  DO NOT MISS this story, it's a ripper! But CW - these 2 episodes have a lot of talk about weight, details of diet rules, and eating disorders, so take care if you think you might be triggered.     Shownotes     Hello listeners! Remember me? I’m back! What a year we’ve had. I am back from a break where I was taking care of life for a while. Now I’m back and angrier than ever. Today’s episode is a two-parter, and we’ll be keeping the energy and the rants going on a regular basis again. Remember the Crappy Awards earlier this year? One of the nominations has been gnawing away at me. This is from Dr Martina Zangger, who sent us a rant about Bright Line Eating, a program by Susan Peirce Thompson. Bright Line Eating is a severely restrictive diet, and a very expensive program. Martina shares with us that she experienced Orthorexia and was at risk of Anorexia while engaging with the program - she was obsessed with every bite of food that passed her lips, and says she became a ‘not very nice person’ while so hangry and feeling superior to other people. That feeling of being superior and special was encouraged within the program. After two years, Martina was able to move away from the program and regain the weight she lost, and that process was so disheartening. However, two years after leaving that program, Martina is so much more at peace with her body. She’s able to find enjoyment in food, and in sharing food with friends and family. Bright Line Eating  is making Susan Peirce Thompson rich and is such an unethical program from a practitioner who should know better.  I’m still simmering with rage over this Crappy nomination. The impact of programs like this is devastating on people’s lives. Martina lost two years of her life and experienced an eating disorder, and her story of recovery needs to be heard. How are programs like this still happening, and being sold at such enormous profit? After I heard Martina’s story, I’ve been neck-deep in Susan Peirce Thompson and Bright Line Eating. It’s more than a diet, it’s more like a cult. There’s a variety of techniques being used in it to sell problematic ideas and encourage eating disordered behaviour in an apparent attempt to free yourself from ‘disordered behaviour’ - a mindfuck of the next level.  So, I’ve been reading and researching and I’m ready to dive into a two part series - this episode is about Bright Line Eating and Susan Peirce Thompson. We’re going to talk about her story, her book, and more broadly talk about the topic of neuroscience as it applies to body weight, and also dive into food addiction models. In the next episode, we’ll talk more with Martina and her experience with the program, and we’ll round out the deep dive with a closer look at the incredible amount of money Bright Line Eating has made. I really need to preface this episode with a trigger warning, a content warning, about numbers and weight. If that’s particularly triggering for you, maybe these two episodes are ones to avoid. Usually we avoid numbers, and in this instance we’re using them as examples of the harm that diet culture can cause, and as examples of inaccuracies.  We’ll be talking with neuroscientist Dr Sandra Aamodt about addiction and regulating body weight. So, the book. I’ve read the whole thing. ‘Bright Line Eating: the Science of Living Happy, Thin and Free” by Susan Peirce Thompson, 2017. To begin with, Susan is a really good storyteller and has a compelling personal story of how she came to this way of living. And that’s the thing with so many of these diet gurus, isn’t it? They’re quite compelling, charismatic, often good writers. Susan is from California and her parents were reformed hippies. She grew up in a house which sounded super ‘healthy’. Her mother was thin and always dieting, and Susan recounts how she was doing diets with her mum when she was 10 years old - “neither of us had weight to lose, it was just about being maximally healthy”. Susan paints herself as a kid who was always interested in food, even addicted, compelled to compulsively eat food. What I get from reading this was that this child grew up in a house with little food choice around, no processed food, quite restrictive. We know from lots of research in this area that kids who grow up in households with little food variety and where ‘bad’ food is banned, those kids are quite likely to grow up as binge-eating adults. And kids who diet early have a higher risk of developing eating disorders. There’s also a genetic component with eating disorders, which makes me wonder about Susan’s mother and her own eating issues.  One thing that stuck out was the vivid descriptions of what restricting her food felt like as a child - powerful, a feeling of being in control. For most of us on a diet, we feel pretty crappy. For some of us, perhaps those with quite a restrictive relationship with food, that experience of restriction is quite elating. They describe that feeling of being in power, being in control, and get hooked on that feeling of not eating. There’s a disturbing description of Susan ‘going off sugar’ at age 12, of feeling empowered. She also related how, even with these feelings of being empowered, she would sneak food and hide food - which she reads as evidence of her ‘addiction’, but I read as being evidence of the severity of her restriction.  By the time Susan was 15, she described herself as ‘overweight’, and feeling ‘enormous’ compared to her thin mum. Again, she unquestioningly accepts that there was something wrong with her body at 15. My non-diet lens tells me that our bodies are changing when we’re 15. It’s perfectly normal to gain weight as you grow, maybe it was just growth? She continued dieting and stumbled into drugs, from ages 14-20, including acid, ecstasy, meth, crack. Quite serious. She talks about the impact on her weight - when you’re on drugs like that, you do reduce your weight. It’s a harrowing story, to be hooked on such terrible drugs for your adolescence. Susan found herself at rock bottom and in a 12 Step program at age 20, and found recovery from drug and alcohol addiction through the 12 Step model. That’s an amazing story! It is not easy to turn your life around like that, and she did it. But in the book, that victory didn’t bring her peace, because her weight increased and she felt terrible about it. She was also still thinking of herself as a food addict, and began attending 12 Step programs for overeating. Episode 30 of All Fired Up is about Overeaters Anonymous - check it out. It looks like Susan did stuff like that for years and years and years without reducing her weight.  It’s clear in the book that Susan is not perceiving herself as someone who has issues with her relationship with food, but as someone with weight to lose who is addicted to food. At times she received diagnoses of Binge Eating Disorder and Bulimia, but she did not receive any eating disorder treatment. In 2003, she joined a more extreme unnamed 12 Step, which I believe may be ‘FA’ or ‘Food Addicts Anonymous’. Like all the other 12 Step programs, they are free support groups to help people who perceive themselves as food addicts - and FA has very strict rules. No sugar, no flour. Three meals a day, absolutely no other food. You have to ‘commit’ your meal plan each night to a buddy, mentor, sponsor in the program for the next day. You weigh out each meal according to a strict meal plan. It’s intense, it’s extreme. There’s a lot of mentorship and buddyship to ‘support’ each other - but I would say it’s more like policing each other, to make sure they don’t eat. Susan was happy about finally losing weight in this strict program.  But she grew to be distressed with the amount of time the program was taking up - about 20 hours a week of planning, talking to mentors and more. She mentions that her husband considered leaving her, and she was annoyed with the lack of science around the food rules in the program. By this point, Susan had gone to university and studied cognitive science and was now a neuroscientist. She decided she was going to write a book and start an online program, combining her knowledge of the brain with the strict program. What she calls ‘bright lines’, I call ‘very strict rules’ or ‘diet prison’.  The ‘online boot camps’ she began offering took off very quickly, and eventually she hired a team and  published her book. The diet in the book is basically the same as the FA diet - but FA is free, and Bright Line Eating is for-profit. Her husband is now the CFO. The bootcamps are very expensive, as are all the add-ons in the program. Every level of support requires payment, and Susan justified charging this much money for the program by saying that it’s not just the FA program, it’s a community and it’s combined with neuroscience, and that her team is going ‘cutting edge research in the field’. So, not only has she monetised a popular 12 Step program, but she’s using ‘neuroscience’ and the cache of her PhD to help her ideas gain cred.  Susan talks a lot about the brain, and seems to understand that body weight is tightly controlled by our brain (particularly the hypothalamus) and understands that only a small percentage of dieters keep weight off long term. She understands that the hypothalamus is like a thermostat that controls body weight, and it’s out of our conscious control. So, she pays lip service to that, and then spends the rest of the book talking about how her neuroscience tips will fix that - as if it’s broken.  What’s being missed here? The science that shows us changes in body weight are countered by these established processes in our brain. She never mentions this - the ‘defended weight range’ - which is pretty fundamental science about how our brains defend body weight. In her whole book, she never mentions it. In a minute we’ll talk more with Dr Aamodt about that. Susan does talk a lot about leptin regulating our body weight. Leptin is a  hormone stored in fat cells, and as fat cells get larger they secrete leptin which tells our brain that we’re comfortable, we’re at the right weight, we don’t need to seek out more food. Susan claims that people in larger bodies have too much leptin that isn’t getting to our brains to tell us to stop eating - she says that larger bodied people are ‘leptin resistant’ and our brains think we’re starving and tell us to eat more. She claims that the cause of leptin resistance is insulin resistance, which is caused directly by processed food. Very sweeping generalisations - in essence she is saying that larger people are insatiably eating because leptin is being blocked by our brainstem, which causes us to mindlessly eat processed food all day. So basically, we are all ‘leptin resistant’ humans, mindless processed food eating machines. I’ve got some issues! Not all large people are insulin resistant. Insulin resistance is impacted by an enormous range of factors - genetic, environmental and social. It’s incredibly simplistic to say it’s just due to processed food. For Susan, anyone who is larger is by definition sick or deficient. She continually refers to the ‘right size body’, which is your ‘thin’ body. A complete disregard for body diversity, and lack of data to back up her claims about leptin. She’s also left out the impact of weight loss dieting on leptin. When we try and diet and lose weight, our leptin levels drop. This drop stimulates a huge increase in our appetite and interest in food. So, although she’s concentrating on this idea that larger people are leptin resistant, people may instead have lower leptin levels due to dieting and that’s what is telling our brains that we’re starving. So, leptin drops and interest in food is very well documented in neuroscience - because it’s a very primitive and important danger signal to the brain.  Let’s not forget Susan’s target audience of middle-aged women, who likely have dieted many times before and may have lower leptin levels due to this. She knows this. She even mentions the Biggest Loser study which notes how damaged people’s metabolisms were from strict dieting. She says that during the ‘weight loss’ phase of her bootcamp, your metabolism will slow down something like 80-90%, but in the next breath says that there’s no evidence that this will continue to happen - “we’ve never seen evidence of this in Bright Line Eating, there is no reason for alarm”. This really annoyed me. She has no evidence of it because she’s done no research on it. Simply because you don’t look for harm doesn’t mean there’s no harm.  Another claim from the book is that you can choose your goal weight based on the lowest weight you’ve ever been, and she pretty much guarantees you can reach it. This flies in the face of weight science and our understanding of all the factors outside of our control. There’s no evidence to say that Bright Line Eating is any different from any other weight loss program. Talking about cravings - Susan describes them as a “brain-based bingeing mechanism”, located in the nucleus accumbens which has become ‘overstimulated’ by the plentiful food in our current environment. She uses her own experience as a drug addict to paint this vivid picture, describing her need for higher doses of drugs to get the same high. That is tolerance - it’s well documented in addiction literature, especially for opiate receptors. Sarah says food behaves in the same way - flour and sugar in particular are acting in the same way as heroin in our brain. She doesn't have very much data to support this idea that flour and sugar behave like a drug. She mentions rat studies to back up some of her sugar claims, but even she admits there’s nothing in the research to show flour is addictive. Food addiction was excluded from the category “substance related and addictive disorders” in the DSM-V, due to lack of evidence. We’ll hear more from neuroscientist Dr Aamodt on this. One of the ways Susan is trying to convince us that sugar and flour are toxic poisons is pretty weird. She asks us to google images of flour, sugar and heroin and look at how similar they are. For the record - things that look like drugs are not necessarily drugs. In her view, processing things is what makes them drugs. In Susan’s view, the way sugar is processed makes it a more toxic drug. What about the way we process mint tea? Dried chillies? I think that this Bright Line plan will keep people in a state of deprivation and restriction, which increases those feelings of addiction. The longer we’re deprived, the stronger our desire will become for the forbidden thing. We know that if people are full when they’re doing an experiment where they’re exposed to food stimuli, their reward centres are less activated. When you think about it, you’re never going to be full on Bright Line Eating and you’re going to feel like an addict. And if you then go to a bootcamp or on one of the forums, it’s going to feel more real. Another bugbear - she repeatedly scares people by referring to food in this book as ‘drugs’, ‘toxins’, ‘poisons’. But then later she says it’s fine for children to eat them, because they’re ‘young enough to burn off the calories’. What? This is a woman who is desperately attached to thinness as a measure of self-worth.  If she really believes sugar and flour were toxic poisons, why is she recommending them to children? The rules she’s lifted from FA are full on, and she’s using neuroscience-talk to give them a sense of validation.  “It takes some willpower to set up and then little to none when it becomes automatic”. Susan has science-washed extreme deprivation and disguised it as normal.  Susan likens the automatic level of food behaviours to brushing your teeth - but our bodies and brains aren’t hard-wired to desire tooth-brushing as a survival mechanism, and feel under threat when we haven’t brushed out teeth in a while. Susan knows this. She wouldn’t have to set up such extensive support systems if permanent restriction truly was automatic. Introducing Dr Aamodt, who wrote the book “Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss”. She also has a much-watched Ted Talk about why she stopped dieting and switched to mindful eating, which has been watched by 4.5 million people. Before she was an author, Dr Aamodt was Editor-In--Chief of Nature Neuroscience, a leading scientific journal in the field of brain research. Dr Aamodt was pulled into neuroscience due to personal experience -  as a teenager she remembers her mother commenting that she was “eating like a fat person”. She was not at a higher weight at the time, and looks back at photos of that time and thinks “what was mum doing?”. Dr Aamodt began making complicated food rules for herself, like not being allowed to open the refrigerator herself. It was almost like that comment unlocked disordered eating for her. Sandra then spent about 30 years cycling through diets, and while she never met the definition for an eating disorder she veered very close. Sandra vividly remembers how difficult it was to force herself to move away from dieting. In her early 30’s, Sandra was exposed to some feminist writings about dieting which seemed to unlock some things she’d kind of known for years but hadn’t been paying attention to, such as weight being neurologically controlled. She hadn’t connected the dots that her own body would behave that way. We’re biological animals with physiological regulation, but we’re also social animals living in culture where we’re expected to look and eat a certain way. It’s as if one day someone said to Sandra, “you don’t have to do that”. A blog Sandra credits with some of these early moments of unlearning is ‘Shapely Prose’. The biggest advantage of not dieting for Sandra turned out to be psychological, not physical - the amount of mental space that weight and eating were taking up in her brain turned out to be unbelievable when it stopped. She describes it as like having ringing in your ears for your entire life, then one day someone turns the ringing off. In Susan’s experience, you can’t just tell people ‘don’t diet’ - you have to tell them what to do instead. The message of ‘don’t control your weight’ is too uncomfortable.  Sandra came across mindful eating, which gave some structure to make that transition away from dieting. Sandra initially didn’t know when she was hungry - how could she, after all those years of strictly regulating herself?  There’s a lot of psychological research showing that people who diet frequently are not good at picking up interoception signals from their bodies - such as feeling your heart beating. But even after many years of ignoring your body, you can reconnect and hear those signals again. Sandra is much better at it than she used to be. Unlearning takes time! All those neuroplastic changes can be reversed, if you take the time and energy to do it. For Sandra, moving from dieting to not dieting was a huge upgrade. What is the ‘set point’? Scientists call it the ‘defended range’ which Sandra says is a better term. It’s a small range of weight where your body is comfortable. When you’re within your defended range, weight works the way that random people on the internet think that it works all the time. You can make your lifestyle changes and nudge it a little up or down. It’s the range where your body and your brain are not fighting you. The body is comfortable. Once you get outside that range, in either direction, this is where the brain says ‘this is not right, we’re not regulating properly, we need to fix this’. And this is where calories in, calories out becomes unreliable and the way you process food starts to change in dramatic ways. Metabolism changes to try and get you back into that defended range.  It’s normal to be more hungry when you’re not getting enough food! It does seem as though the responses are asymmetrical - that the body’s compensatory mechanisms become more intense over time if you’re under your defended range, but will become less intense over time if you’re above your defended range. So, your brain is much more relaxed with being at a higher weight than being under your defended range. From an evolutionary perspective, starving is really serious and you should never take it lightly.  How do we know our defended range? It’s genetic to begin with - there are strong genetic influences on it. A number of life experiences can affect it, for instance people who didn’t get enough sleep as children generally have a higher defended range as adults. Also, children who had a lot of stress and/or trauma in their lives have a higher defended range as adults.  If your childhood environment is scary, unpredictable, like something bad will happen at any time - there’s a strong evolutionary argument that it would be okay for your body to store extra energy for future dangerous times. The body makes sense! Your body does its best to survive. There’s a genetic link as well in who is susceptible to constantly being invited to ignore their bodies, and whose bodies have such strong hunger and fullness signals that they seem to be completely immune to those kinds of external messaging.  And then dieting itself - attempting to get under your ‘defended range’. The brain desires that we stay within that defended range and functions 24/7 without a break - and we try to combat this with willpower, which we cannot do 24/7. We can do a lot of these things for a while, but at some point it gets to be like holding your breath.  The food addiction model - the idea that if we remove certain foods from our diet we can permanently change our set point, our weight, and our brains will relax and finally do what diet culture says they should do. What does Sandra think about that? Sandra thinks the food addiction model is basically a rebranding of Binge Eating Disorder. The restriction itself is what produces the sense of being ‘out of control’. The easiest way to see that is in experiments on rodents, who aren’t bombarded with media messages telling them their bodies are unacceptable.  Inducing Binge Eating Disorder in rats is actually done quite reliably - rats are starved to about 70-80% of their starting weight, then given high sugar foods. The rats will eat past fullness - they will ‘stuff’ themselves. If you make this a cycle and repeat several times, you can get rats to the point where they will binge on regular boring rat chow. They don’t even require the food to taste good to overeat it. That sounds familiar, right? We are those rats. We often miss the deprivation with Binge Eating Disorder and focus only on the eating. There are also changes in the brain’s reward system that are associated with that behaviour, but that doesn’t immediately jump out at Sandra as being that the solution is to restrict what we eat. If the restriction causes the disorder, it probably isn’t also the cure. If the rats weren’t starved, would they have this response to high sugar food? No. Rats who aren’t starved and are presented with novel foods will eat until full and then stop. These rats are not trying to diet, they’re not struggling with mixed cultural messages - they’re just having a straightforward biological response to a stimulus that suggests that maybe you should put away some reserves for the future because every so often, somebody comes and takes your food away. It’s quite a simple, elegant, neurobiological response to famine. So, the food addiction model is rebranded deprivation models, or Binge Eating Disorder models. Nobody has come up with evidence that is convincing Sandra that it’s any more than that. The scales that measure food addiction have a lot of overlap with the scales that measure Binge Eating Disorder. A definition of addiction that Sandra likes is ‘when we continue to want things that we do not like” being drawn to repeat behaviours that you don’t actually enjoy. And some people would describe Binge Eating Disorder in that way, but Sandra doesn’t think that implies that the treatment is doing more of what created it in the first place (restriction). Huge thanks to Dr Sandra Aamodt for sharing her experience and  bringing us some logic and more of a whole picture, not just a narrow view. In some ways, Dr Aamodt and Susan Peirce Thompson are quite similar. They both grew up in diet culture, both developed eating issues as a result of trying to control their body weight, and they’re both neuroscientists. However, one has chosen to monetize this in the Bright Line Eating program, and one has chosen to help people find real freedom. The idea of ‘freedom’ in Bright Line Eating is very, very different from the idea of freedom that Dr Aamodt and I (Louise) have. Ours is about laying down our weapons and learning to reconnect.  Next episode we’ll talk with Dr Martina Zangger about her experience with Bright Line Eating, and look at the economic reality of how enormous this machine is. And more dodgy research claims! It’ll be a zinger.  Resources Here's Dr Aamodt's wonderful Ted Talk And her awesome book You can get in touch with Dr Sandra Aamodt at sandra.aamodt@gmail.com and on twitter at @sandra_aamodt

In this gripping 2 part episode of All Fired Up, I explore the shadowy world of "Bright Line Eating", a super extreme diet cult which cherry picks neuroscience to convince people that they are 'food addicts', and then sells one of the world's most restrictive (and expensive) diet regimes to keep people hooked on the dream of achieving 'goal weight'. Bright Line Eating is the lucrative brainchild of neuroscientist Susan Peirce Thompson, a charismatic saleswoman who holds nothing back when it comes to the hard sell. Join me as I ask the question, who IS Susan Peirce Thompson - a food addict who has finally found the answer to her addictions, or someone who is still desperately stuck in her eating disorder? We also speak with neuroscientist Dr Sandra Aamodt, who literally attended the SAME UNIVERSITY as Susan Peirce Thompson, and has also experienced eating and body issues, but found peace through mindful and intuitive eating and body acceptance rather than continuing to white knuckle the revolving door of weight cycling. Dr Aamodt has very different ideas regarding this whole idea of food 'addiction'. Spoiler alert: Food addiction models = Binge Eating Disorder rebranded!  DO NOT MISS this story, it's a ripper! But CW - these 2 episodes have a lot of talk about weight, details of diet rules, and eating disorders, so take care if you think you might be triggered.     Shownotes     Hello listeners! Remember me? I’m back! What a year we’ve had. I am back from a break where I was taking care of life for a while. Now I’m back and angrier than ever. Today’s episode is a two-parter, and we’ll be keeping the energy and the rants going on a regular basis again. Remember the Crappy Awards earlier this year? One of the nominations has been gnawing away at me. This is from Dr Martina Zangger, who sent us a rant about Bright Line Eating, a program by Susan Peirce Thompson. Bright Line Eating is a severely restrictive diet, and a very expensive program. Martina shares with us that she experienced Orthorexia and was at risk of Anorexia while engaging with the program - she was obsessed with every bite of food that passed her lips, and says she became a ‘not very nice person’ while so hangry and feeling superior to other people. That feeling of being superior and special was encouraged within the program. After two years, Martina was able to move away from the program and regain the weight she lost, and that process was so disheartening. However, two years after leaving that program, Martina is so much more at peace with her body. She’s able to find enjoyment in food, and in sharing food with friends and family. Bright Line Eating  is making Susan Peirce Thompson rich and is such an unethical program from a practitioner who should know better.  I’m still simmering with rage over this Crappy nomination. The impact of programs like this is devastating on people’s lives. Martina lost two years of her life and experienced an eating disorder, and her story of recovery needs to be heard. How are programs like this still happening, and being sold at such enormous profit? After I heard Martina’s story, I’ve been neck-deep in Susan Peirce Thompson and Bright Line Eating. It’s more than a diet, it’s more like a cult. There’s a variety of techniques being used in it to sell problematic ideas and encourage eating disordered behaviour in an apparent attempt to free yourself from ‘disordered behaviour’ - a mindfuck of the next level.  So, I’ve been reading and researching and I’m ready to dive into a two part series - this episode is about Bright Line Eating and Susan Peirce Thompson. We’re going to talk about her story, her book, and more broadly talk about the topic of neuroscience as it applies to body weight, and also dive into food addiction models. In the next episode, we’ll talk more with Martina and her experience with the program, and we’ll round out the deep dive with a closer look at the incredible amount of money Bright Line Eating has made. I really need to preface this episode with a trigger warning, a content warning, about numbers and weight. If that’s particularly triggering for you, maybe these two episodes are ones to avoid. Usually we avoid numbers, and in this instance we’re using them as examples of the harm that diet culture can cause, and as examples of inaccuracies.  We’ll be talking with neuroscientist Dr Sandra Aamodt about addiction and regulating body weight. So, the book. I’ve read the whole thing. ‘Bright Line Eating: the Science of Living Happy, Thin and Free” by Susan Peirce Thompson, 2017. To begin with, Susan is a really good storyteller and has a compelling personal story of how she came to this way of living. And that’s the thing with so many of these diet gurus, isn’t it? They’re quite compelling, charismatic, often good writers. Susan is from California and her parents were reformed hippies. She grew up in a house which sounded super ‘healthy’. Her mother was thin and always dieting, and Susan recounts how she was doing diets with her mum when she was 10 years old - “neither of us had weight to lose, it was just about being maximally healthy”. Susan paints herself as a kid who was always interested in food, even addicted, compelled to compulsively eat food. What I get from reading this was that this child grew up in a house with little food choice around, no processed food, quite restrictive. We know from lots of research in this area that kids who grow up in households with little food variety and where ‘bad’ food is banned, those kids are quite likely to grow up as binge-eating adults. And kids who diet early have a higher risk of developing eating disorders. There’s also a genetic component with eating disorders, which makes me wonder about Susan’s mother and her own eating issues.  One thing that stuck out was the vivid descriptions of what restricting her food felt like as a child - powerful, a feeling of being in control. For most of us on a diet, we feel pretty crappy. For some of us, perhaps those with quite a restrictive relationship with food, that experience of restriction is quite elating. They describe that feeling of being in power, being in control, and get hooked on that feeling of not eating. There’s a disturbing description of Susan ‘going off sugar’ at age 12, of feeling empowered. She also related how, even with these feelings of being empowered, she would sneak food and hide food - which she reads as evidence of her ‘addiction’, but I read as being evidence of the severity of her restriction.  By the time Susan was 15, she described herself as ‘overweight’, and feeling ‘enormous’ compared to her thin mum. Again, she unquestioningly accepts that there was something wrong with her body at 15. My non-diet lens tells me that our bodies are changing when we’re 15. It’s perfectly normal to gain weight as you grow, maybe it was just growth? She continued dieting and stumbled into drugs, from ages 14-20, including acid, ecstasy, meth, crack. Quite serious. She talks about the impact on her weight - when you’re on drugs like that, you do reduce your weight. It’s a harrowing story, to be hooked on such terrible drugs for your adolescence. Susan found herself at rock bottom and in a 12 Step program at age 20, and found recovery from drug and alcohol addiction through the 12 Step model. That’s an amazing story! It is not easy to turn your life around like that, and she did it. But in the book, that victory didn’t bring her peace, because her weight increased and she felt terrible about it. She was also still thinking of herself as a food addict, and began attending 12 Step programs for overeating. Episode 30 of All Fired Up is about Overeaters Anonymous - check it out. It looks like Susan did stuff like that for years and years and years without reducing her weight.  It’s clear in the book that Susan is not perceiving herself as someone who has issues with her relationship with food, but as someone with weight to lose who is addicted to food. At times she received diagnoses of Binge Eating Disorder and Bulimia, but she did not receive any eating disorder treatment. In 2003, she joined a more extreme unnamed 12 Step, which I believe may be ‘FA’ or ‘Food Addicts Anonymous’. Like all the other 12 Step programs, they are free support groups to help people who perceive themselves as food addicts - and FA has very strict rules. No sugar, no flour. Three meals a day, absolutely no other food. You have to ‘commit’ your meal plan each night to a buddy, mentor, sponsor in the program for the next day. You weigh out each meal according to a strict meal plan. It’s intense, it’s extreme. There’s a lot of mentorship and buddyship to ‘support’ each other - but I would say it’s more like policing each other, to make sure they don’t eat. Susan was happy about finally losing weight in this strict program.  But she grew to be distressed with the amount of time the program was taking up - about 20 hours a week of planning, talking to mentors and more. She mentions that her husband considered leaving her, and she was annoyed with the lack of science around the food rules in the program. By this point, Susan had gone to university and studied cognitive science and was now a neuroscientist. She decided she was going to write a book and start an online program, combining her knowledge of the brain with the strict program. What she calls ‘bright lines’, I call ‘very strict rules’ or ‘diet prison’.  The ‘online boot camps’ she began offering took off very quickly, and eventually she hired a team and  published her book. The diet in the book is basically the same as the FA diet - but FA is free, and Bright Line Eating is for-profit. Her husband is now the CFO. The bootcamps are very expensive, as are all the add-ons in the program. Every level of support requires payment, and Susan justified charging this much money for the program by saying that it’s not just the FA program, it’s a community and it’s combined with neuroscience, and that her team is going ‘cutting edge research in the field’. So, not only has she monetised a popular 12 Step program, but she’s using ‘neuroscience’ and the cache of her PhD to help her ideas gain cred.  Susan talks a lot about the brain, and seems to understand that body weight is tightly controlled by our brain (particularly the hypothalamus) and understands that only a small percentage of dieters keep weight off long term. She understands that the hypothalamus is like a thermostat that controls body weight, and it’s out of our conscious control. So, she pays lip service to that, and then spends the rest of the book talking about how her neuroscience tips will fix that - as if it’s broken.  What’s being missed here? The science that shows us changes in body weight are countered by these established processes in our brain. She never mentions this - the ‘defended weight range’ - which is pretty fundamental science about how our brains defend body weight. In her whole book, she never mentions it. In a minute we’ll talk more with Dr Aamodt about that. Susan does talk a lot about leptin regulating our body weight. Leptin is a  hormone stored in fat cells, and as fat cells get larger they secrete leptin which tells our brain that we’re comfortable, we’re at the right weight, we don’t need to seek out more food. Susan claims that people in larger bodies have too much leptin that isn’t getting to our brains to tell us to stop eating - she says that larger bodied people are ‘leptin resistant’ and our brains think we’re starving and tell us to eat more. She claims that the cause of leptin resistance is insulin resistance, which is caused directly by processed food. Very sweeping generalisations - in essence she is saying that larger people are insatiably eating because leptin is being blocked by our brainstem, which causes us to mindlessly eat processed food all day. So basically, we are all ‘leptin resistant’ humans, mindless processed food eating machines. I’ve got some issues! Not all large people are insulin resistant. Insulin resistance is impacted by an enormous range of factors - genetic, environmental and social. It’s incredibly simplistic to say it’s just due to processed food. For Susan, anyone who is larger is by definition sick or deficient. She continually refers to the ‘right size body’, which is your ‘thin’ body. A complete disregard for body diversity, and lack of data to back up her claims about leptin. She’s also left out the impact of weight loss dieting on leptin. When we try and diet and lose weight, our leptin levels drop. This drop stimulates a huge increase in our appetite and interest in food. So, although she’s concentrating on this idea that larger people are leptin resistant, people may instead have lower leptin levels due to dieting and that’s what is telling our brains that we’re starving. So, leptin drops and interest in food is very well documented in neuroscience - because it’s a very primitive and important danger signal to the brain.  Let’s not forget Susan’s target audience of middle-aged women, who likely have dieted many times before and may have lower leptin levels due to this. She knows this. She even mentions the Biggest Loser study which notes how damaged people’s metabolisms were from strict dieting. She says that during the ‘weight loss’ phase of her bootcamp, your metabolism will slow down something like 80-90%, but in the next breath says that there’s no evidence that this will continue to happen - “we’ve never seen evidence of this in Bright Line Eating, there is no reason for alarm”. This really annoyed me. She has no evidence of it because she’s done no research on it. Simply because you don’t look for harm doesn’t mean there’s no harm.  Another claim from the book is that you can choose your goal weight based on the lowest weight you’ve ever been, and she pretty much guarantees you can reach it. This flies in the face of weight science and our understanding of all the factors outside of our control. There’s no evidence to say that Bright Line Eating is any different from any other weight loss program. Talking about cravings - Susan describes them as a “brain-based bingeing mechanism”, located in the nucleus accumbens which has become ‘overstimulated’ by the plentiful food in our current environment. She uses her own experience as a drug addict to paint this vivid picture, describing her need for higher doses of drugs to get the same high. That is tolerance - it’s well documented in addiction literature, especially for opiate receptors. Sarah says food behaves in the same way - flour and sugar in particular are acting in the same way as heroin in our brain. She doesn't have very much data to support this idea that flour and sugar behave like a drug. She mentions rat studies to back up some of her sugar claims, but even she admits there’s nothing in the research to show flour is addictive. Food addiction was excluded from the category “substance related and addictive disorders” in the DSM-V, due to lack of evidence. We’ll hear more from neuroscientist Dr Aamodt on this. One of the ways Susan is trying to convince us that sugar and flour are toxic poisons is pretty weird. She asks us to google images of flour, sugar and heroin and look at how similar they are. For the record - things that look like drugs are not necessarily drugs. In her view, processing things is what makes them drugs. In Susan’s view, the way sugar is processed makes it a more toxic drug. What about the way we process mint tea? Dried chillies? I think that this Bright Line plan will keep people in a state of deprivation and restriction, which increases those feelings of addiction. The longer we’re deprived, the stronger our desire will become for the forbidden thing. We know that if people are full when they’re doing an experiment where they’re exposed to food stimuli, their reward centres are less activated. When you think about it, you’re never going to be full on Bright Line Eating and you’re going to feel like an addict. And if you then go to a bootcamp or on one of the forums, it’s going to feel more real. Another bugbear - she repeatedly scares people by referring to food in this book as ‘drugs’, ‘toxins’, ‘poisons’. But then later she says it’s fine for children to eat them, because they’re ‘young enough to burn off the calories’. What? This is a woman who is desperately attached to thinness as a measure of self-worth.  If she really believes sugar and flour were toxic poisons, why is she recommending them to children? The rules she’s lifted from FA are full on, and she’s using neuroscience-talk to give them a sense of validation.  “It takes some willpower to set up and then little to none when it becomes automatic”. Susan has science-washed extreme deprivation and disguised it as normal.  Susan likens the automatic level of food behaviours to brushing your teeth - but our bodies and brains aren’t hard-wired to desire tooth-brushing as a survival mechanism, and feel under threat when we haven’t brushed out teeth in a while. Susan knows this. She wouldn’t have to set up such extensive support systems if permanent restriction truly was automatic. Introducing Dr Aamodt, who wrote the book “Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss”. She also has a much-watched Ted Talk about why she stopped dieting and switched to mindful eating, which has been watched by 4.5 million people. Before she was an author, Dr Aamodt was Editor-In--Chief of Nature Neuroscience, a leading scientific journal in the field of brain research. Dr Aamodt was pulled into neuroscience due to personal experience -  as a teenager she remembers her mother commenting that she was “eating like a fat person”. She was not at a higher weight at the time, and looks back at photos of that time and thinks “what was mum doing?”. Dr Aamodt began making complicated food rules for herself, like not being allowed to open the refrigerator herself. It was almost like that comment unlocked disordered eating for her. Sandra then spent about 30 years cycling through diets, and while she never met the definition for an eating disorder she veered very close. Sandra vividly remembers how difficult it was to force herself to move away from dieting. In her early 30’s, Sandra was exposed to some feminist writings about dieting which seemed to unlock some things she’d kind of known for years but hadn’t been paying attention to, such as weight being neurologically controlled. She hadn’t connected the dots that her own body would behave that way. We’re biological animals with physiological regulation, but we’re also social animals living in culture where we’re expected to look and eat a certain way. It’s as if one day someone said to Sandra, “you don’t have to do that”. A blog Sandra credits with some of these early moments of unlearning is ‘Shapely Prose’. The biggest advantage of not dieting for Sandra turned out to be psychological, not physical - the amount of mental space that weight and eating were taking up in her brain turned out to be unbelievable when it stopped. She describes it as like having ringing in your ears for your entire life, then one day someone turns the ringing off. In Susan’s experience, you can’t just tell people ‘don’t diet’ - you have to tell them what to do instead. The message of ‘don’t control your weight’ is too uncomfortable.  Sandra came across mindful eating, which gave some structure to make that transition away from dieting. Sandra initially didn’t know when she was hungry - how could she, after all those years of strictly regulating herself?  There’s a lot of psychological research showing that people who diet frequently are not good at picking up interoception signals from their bodies - such as feeling your heart beating. But even after many years of ignoring your body, you can reconnect and hear those signals again. Sandra is much better at it than she used to be. Unlearning takes time! All those neuroplastic changes can be reversed, if you take the time and energy to do it. For Sandra, moving from dieting to not dieting was a huge upgrade. What is the ‘set point’? Scientists call it the ‘defended range’ which Sandra says is a better term. It’s a small range of weight where your body is comfortable. When you’re within your defended range, weight works the way that random people on the internet think that it works all the time. You can make your lifestyle changes and nudge it a little up or down. It’s the range where your body and your brain are not fighting you. The body is comfortable. Once you get outside that range, in either direction, this is where the brain says ‘this is not right, we’re not regulating properly, we need to fix this’. And this is where calories in, calories out becomes unreliable and the way you process food starts to change in dramatic ways. Metabolism changes to try and get you back into that defended range.  It’s normal to be more hungry when you’re not getting enough food! It does seem as though the responses are asymmetrical - that the body’s compensatory mechanisms become more intense over time if you’re under your defended range, but will become less intense over time if you’re above your defended range. So, your brain is much more relaxed with being at a higher weight than being under your defended range. From an evolutionary perspective, starving is really serious and you should never take it lightly.  How do we know our defended range? It’s genetic to begin with - there are strong genetic influences on it. A number of life experiences can affect it, for instance people who didn’t get enough sleep as children generally have a higher defended range as adults. Also, children who had a lot of stress and/or trauma in their lives have a higher defended range as adults.  If your childhood environment is scary, unpredictable, like something bad will happen at any time - there’s a strong evolutionary argument that it would be okay for your body to store extra energy for future dangerous times. The body makes sense! Your body does its best to survive. There’s a genetic link as well in who is susceptible to constantly being invited to ignore their bodies, and whose bodies have such strong hunger and fullness signals that they seem to be completely immune to those kinds of external messaging.  And then dieting itself - attempting to get under your ‘defended range’. The brain desires that we stay within that defended range and functions 24/7 without a break - and we try to combat this with willpower, which we cannot do 24/7. We can do a lot of these things for a while, but at some point it gets to be like holding your breath.  The food addiction model - the idea that if we remove certain foods from our diet we can permanently change our set point, our weight, and our brains will relax and finally do what diet culture says they should do. What does Sandra think about that? Sandra thinks the food addiction model is basically a rebranding of Binge Eating Disorder. The restriction itself is what produces the sense of being ‘out of control’. The easiest way to see that is in experiments on rodents, who aren’t bombarded with media messages telling them their bodies are unacceptable.  Inducing Binge Eating Disorder in rats is actually done quite reliably - rats are starved to about 70-80% of their starting weight, then given high sugar foods. The rats will eat past fullness - they will ‘stuff’ themselves. If you make this a cycle and repeat several times, you can get rats to the point where they will binge on regular boring rat chow. They don’t even require the food to taste good to overeat it. That sounds familiar, right? We are those rats. We often miss the deprivation with Binge Eating Disorder and focus only on the eating. There are also changes in the brain’s reward system that are associated with that behaviour, but that doesn’t immediately jump out at Sandra as being that the solution is to restrict what we eat. If the restriction causes the disorder, it probably isn’t also the cure. If the rats weren’t starved, would they have this response to high sugar food? No. Rats who aren’t starved and are presented with novel foods will eat until full and then stop. These rats are not trying to diet, they’re not struggling with mixed cultural messages - they’re just having a straightforward biological response to a stimulus that suggests that maybe you should put away some reserves for the future because every so often, somebody comes and takes your food away. It’s quite a simple, elegant, neurobiological response to famine. So, the food addiction model is rebranded deprivation models, or Binge Eating Disorder models. Nobody has come up with evidence that is convincing Sandra that it’s any more than that. The scales that measure food addiction have a lot of overlap with the scales that measure Binge Eating Disorder. A definition of addiction that Sandra likes is ‘when we continue to want things that we do not like” being drawn to repeat behaviours that you don’t actually enjoy. And some people would describe Binge Eating Disorder in that way, but Sandra doesn’t think that implies that the treatment is doing more of what created it in the first place (restriction). Huge thanks to Dr Sandra Aamodt for sharing her experience and  bringing us some logic and more of a whole picture, not just a narrow view. In some ways, Dr Aamodt and Susan Peirce Thompson are quite similar. They both grew up in diet culture, both developed eating issues as a result of trying to control their body weight, and they’re both neuroscientists. However, one has chosen to monetize this in the Bright Line Eating program, and one has chosen to help people find real freedom. The idea of ‘freedom’ in Bright Line Eating is very, very different from the idea of freedom that Dr Aamodt and I (Louise) have. Ours is about laying down our weapons and learning to reconnect.  Next episode we’ll talk with Dr Martina Zangger about her experience with Bright Line Eating, and look at the economic reality of how enormous this machine is. And more dodgy research claims! It’ll be a zinger.  Resources Here's Dr Aamodt's wonderful Ted Talk And her awesome book You can get in touch with Dr Sandra Aamodt at sandra.aamodt@gmail.com and on twitter at @sandra_aamodt

Sandra Aamodt Why Diets Make Us Fat Book Summary --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/bestbookbits/support

★DOWNLOAD THIS FREE PDF SUMMARY BY CLICKING BELOW https://go.bestbookbits.com/freepdf

In this episode, we focus on weight loss — why dieting doesn't work and why focusing on weight loss is actually harmful. Studies show that dieting to lose weight does not work long-term: while initially people often lose weight, if we zoom out and look 2-5 years past the diet, 85-95% of the time people gain back all the weight and often even more. Listen in to find out what to focus on instead. The healthcare industry also contributes to harm by focusing on weight. When we focus on weight rather than health, people are not treated as thoroughly and are stigmatized. Ellen Maud Bennett’s obituary, where her final message is her experience of fat shaming by the healthcare industry, is highlighted. https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/timescolonist/obituary.aspx?pid=189588876 In this article, Laura Fraser writes about her sister, Jan, whose symptoms were disregarded, likely due to weight bias while her cancer went undiagnosed: https://www.statnews.com/2017/08/15/cancer-diagnosis-weight-doctors/ These are our other noteworthy acknowledgements: Great article by the Intuitive Eating founders, Evelyn Tribole, MS, RDN, CEDRD-S and Elyse Resch, MS, RDN, CEDRD-S, Fiaedp, FADA, FAND, about risk of increasing weight from dieting referencing the twin study: https://www.intuitiveeating.org/warning-dieting-increases-your-risk-of-gaining-more-weight-an-update/ Interesting article by Melissa Gerson, LCSW, on the conscientious objectors starvation experiment: https://www.theprojectheal.org/healblog/impact-of-starvation-on-behavior The New York Times article focused on the biggest loser study by Sandra Aamodt, a neuroscientist - https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/opinion/sunday/why-you-cant-lose-weight-on-a-diet.html We invite you to subscribe to our podcast, and tell us the ways in which you’re breaking free in our free Facebook community: Breaking Free Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/breakingfreecommunity. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/breakingfreerecovery/message

Several years ago I read an article in the New York Times by Dr. Sandra Aamodt that made me feel like it was Christmas morning. It was the first time I had seen a legitimate scientist say authoritatively that dieting is completely counterproductive, and in many cases damaging. This was something I knew already, after years of bulimia and yo-yo dieting, but no one had ever articulated the principles I discovered in my own path to healing so well. When her book Why Diets Make us Fat came out, I rushed to buy it, and I think it is a truly groundbreaking book. I couldn't recommend it more highly, and I was thrilled that Dr. Aamodt was willing to join me for this podcast! I am a huge fan of hers, and can't wait to see what she creates in the future!

This week I'm speaking at the Food & Nutrition Conference & Expo here in Washington DC, together with neuroscientist Sandra Aamodt. Our session is called The Neurobiology of Dieting: Evidence for Improving Mental Health with a Self-Care Approach. So it's the perfect time to revisit Sandra's popular appearance on the podcast. Sandra's TED Talk "Why dieting usually doesn't work" has been viewed over 4 million times. She really didn't want to do a TED Talk, but she was so driven to put a science-based, anti-diet book out into the world that she marched her introverted self onto the TED stage, stood on the big red dot, said what we needed to hear, and eventually landed her book 'Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss'. Tune in and listen to Sandra and I discuss why dieting and the brain are NOT friends and why dieting will never support a human's healthy brain function. Sandra explains how and why body weight is regulated by the brain (thank goodness!) and that may mean (gasp) that fat people will be fat no matter what they do! And people who diet are likely to end up regaining the weight they lost (and then some). We get into genetic factors that impact our weight and have a laugh at the idea of canceling our'memberships' to the BS-measurement, otherwise known as the BMI. You'll hear us talk about stress, the pros and cons of cortisol, the value of sleep, and why mindful eating is such an essential part of self-care. By the time you're done listening to this show, you will either feel super pumped about your commitment to never diet again -- OR you'll realize that dieting is a losing game, you'll probably get angry, (I did!) and then you'll get to work at creating your better life with Body Kindness. Links mentioned Sandra's TED Talk Why Diets Don't Work - Sandra's presentation from Aspen Ideas Festival A selection of Sandra's articles: You can't 'willpower' your way to lasting weight loss. The human brain attack on weight loss Why you can't lose weight on a diet About Sandra Sandra is the author of Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss (2016). She also coauthored two popular neuroscience books with Sam Wang. Welcome to Your Brain (2008) was named Young Adult Science Book of the Year by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and has been translated into twenty languages. Welcome to Your Child's Brain (2011) was published in twelve languages. She received a degree in biophysics from Johns Hopkins University and a doctorate in neuroscience from the University of Rochester. After four years of research at Yale University, she joined Nature Neuroscience, a leading scientific journal in the field of brain research, at its founding in 1998 and was editor in chief from 2003-2008. She lives in Northern California. Follow Sandra Website | Twitter | Sandra's book --- Get started with Body Kindness If you’re ready for more Body Kindness, the book is a great place to start. Read reviews on Amazon and pick up your copy today! Want signed copies or bulk orders? Click here. Get started today with my free body kindness coaching, straight to your inbox. Sign up right here. --- Support the show Thank you to our generous supporters! We are working toward our goal to fund the full season. Can you donate? Please visit our Go Fund Me page. --- You can subscribe to Body Kindness on iTunes, Stitcher, Spotify and iHeartRadio. Enjoy the show? Please rate it on iTunes! - http://getpodcast.reviews/id/1073275062   --- Enjoy the show? Please subscribe and rate it. Have a show idea or guest recommendation (even yourself!) E-mail podcast@bodykindnessbook.com to get in touch. Join us on the Body Kindness Podcast Facebook group where you can continue the episode conversations with the hosts, guests, and fellow listeners. See you there! Nothing in this podcast is meant to provide medical diagnosis, treatment, cure, or prevent any disease or condition. Individuals should consult a qualified healthcare provider for medical advice and answers to personal health questions.

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientists and science writers Sandra Aamodt and Darya Rose suggest what you should do instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 33595]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientists and science writers Sandra Aamodt and Darya Rose suggest what you should do instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 33595]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientists and science writers Sandra Aamodt and Darya Rose suggest what you should do instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 33595]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientists and science writers Sandra Aamodt and Darya Rose suggest what you should do instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 33595]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientists and science writers Sandra Aamodt and Darya Rose suggest what you should do instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 33595]

Millions attempt some form of diet yet only a small fraction achieve permanent weight loss. Neuroscientists and science writers Sandra Aamodt and Darya Rose suggest what you should do instead. Series: "Mini Medical School for the Public" [Health and Medicine] [Show ID: 33595]

The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss Guest: Sandra Aamodt, Ph.D. Are you one of the 108 million people who went on a diet last year, but are ... The post Sandra Aamodt: Why Diets Make Us Fat appeared first on Danielle Lin Show.

Neuroscientist Sandra Aamodt's TED Talk "Why dieting usually doesn't work" has been viewed over 4 million times. She really didn't want to do a TED Talk, but she was so driven to put a science-based, anti-diet book out into the world that she marched her introverted self onto the TED stage, stood on the big red dot, said what we needed to hear, and eventually landed her book 'Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss'. Tune in and listen to Sandra and I discuss why dieting and the brain are NOT friends and why dieting will never support a human's healthy brain function. Sandra explains how and why body weight is regulated by the brain (thank goodness!) and that may mean (gasp) that fat people will be fat no matter what they do! And people who diet are likely to end up regaining the weight they lost (and then some). We get into genetic factors that impact our weight and have a laugh at the idea of canceling our'memberships' to the BS-measurement, otherwise known as the BMI. You'll hear us talk about stress, the pros and cons of cortisol, the value of sleep, and why mindful eating is such an essential part of self-care. By the time you're done listening to this show, you will either feel super pumped about your commitment to never diet again -- OR you'll realize that dieting is a losing game, you'll probably get angry, (I did!) and then you'll get to work at creating your better life with Body Kindness. Links mentioned Sandra's TED Talk Why Diets Don't Work - Sandra's presentation from Aspen Ideas Festival A selection of Sandra's articles: You can't 'willpower' your way to lasting weight loss. The human brain attack on weight loss Why you can't lose weight on a diet About Sandra Sandra is the author of Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss (2016). She also coauthored two popular neuroscience books with Sam Wang. Welcome to Your Brain (2008) was named Young Adult Science Book of the Year by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and has been translated into twenty languages. Welcome to Your Child's Brain (2011) was published in twelve languages. She received a degree in biophysics from Johns Hopkins University and a doctorate in neuroscience from the University of Rochester. After four years of research at Yale University, she joined Nature Neuroscience, a leading scientific journal in the field of brain research, at its founding in 1998 and was editor in chief from 2003-2008. She lives in Northern California. Follow Sandra Website | Twitter | Sandra's book --- You can subscribe to Body Kindness on iTunes and Stitcher. Enjoy the show? Please rate it on iTunes! - http://getpodcast.reviews/id/1073275062 Are you ready for Body Kindness? Get started today with my free e-course and on-demand digital training. Learn more - http://bit.ly/2k23nbT The New York Times Book Review calls Body Kindness 'simple and true'. Publisher's Weekly says it's 'a rousing guide to better health.' http://bit.ly/2k228t9 Watch my videos about why we need Body Kindness on YouTube. https://youtu.be/W7rATQpv5y8?list=PLQPvfnaYpPCUT9MOwHByVwN1f-bL2rn1V --- Enjoy the show? Please subscribe and rate it. Have a show idea or guest recommendation (even yourself!) E-mail podcast@bodykindnessbook.com to get in touch. Join us on the Body Kindness Podcast Facebook group where you can continue the episode conversations with the hosts, guests, and fellow listeners. See you there! Nothing in this podcast is meant to provide medical diagnosis, treatment, cure, or prevent any disease or condition. Individuals should consult a qualified healthcare provider for medical advice and answers to personal health questions.  

Download Neuroscientist Sandra Aamodt Explains Why Diets Make Us Fat Every year, millions of Americans turn to diets to lose weight, but an increasing number of studies are showing that dieters are more likely to gain more weight over the next two to 15 years than those who don’t diet. Many people hear phrases like “diets don’t work” and “diets make you fat,” but rarely believe these concepts are true – until they experience it themselves. On today’s episode, I’m talking with neuroscientist Sandra Aamodt. Sandra serves on the board of The Center for Mindful Eating and is the author of the recently published book – Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession with Weight Loss. She joins me today to share her journey through dieting, starvation, and explains what happens in the brain when we diet. “Low fitness, smoking, high blood pressure, low income, and loneliness are better predictors of early death than obesity when considered individually.” – Sandra Aamodt This Week on the Every Body Podcast: Our culture’s “amazing brainwashing job” regarding dieting and weight loss What long-term diet studies reveal The physiological effects of losing weight How human evolution and food availability has impacted our body’s natural weight regulation process Genetic disposition and environmental factors influencing our body’s natural weight regulation process Sandra’s personal journey with dieting, when she chose to stop dieting, and her results Shifting your mindset around exercise Study conclusions on health and weight connections Defining what a “healthy diet” really means Society’s impact on dieting and the money-making aspect of it New, exciting research studies becoming known in the industry Encouraging children to eat healthy without dieting Sandra’s experience as a Ted Talk speaker and its success Marketing shifts around the words “health” and “diet” Sandra’s Advice to Dieters: Do not pay attention to short-run studies. Eat plenty of vegetables. Avoid processed foods. Find ways to seek pleasure in moving your body. Rate & Share Thank you for joining me this week on the Every Body podcast. If you enjoyed this week’s episode, head over to iTunes, subscribe to the show and leave a review to help us spread the word to Every Body! Don’t forget to  visit our website, follow us on  Facebook,  Twitter, and  Instagram, and join our mailing list so you never miss an episode!

Sandra Aamodt is a neuroscientist and former lifestyle dieter who wants to shout what she’s learned from the rooftops: according to the leading research in neuroscience, your brain has decided how much it wants you to weigh and will keep pushing you back to that weight *forever*. If you were already skeptical of popular weight loss methods, the ideas in Sandra’s book, Why Diets Make Us Fat, will be empowering. For the latest episode of Blinkist Podcast, I spoke to Sandra about the science of weight loss, the health advantages of mindful eating, what it’s like to sail to New Zealand, and why depriving yourself of office doughnuts never works. You can find her book on Blinkist: http://blnk.st/2qbi13o ---------------------- Highlights: On the myth of self-control: "It's just not true that somebody can simply decide to take control of their physiology and change it through sheer force of will." On decision fatigue: "Most people make 200 to 300 food-related decisions per day." On weight loss longevity: “Your brain will continue to try to push you back to the weight that it prefers forever.” On food and common sense: "The best way to approach food is by relaxing and enjoying it and paying attention to what your body wants from moment to moment, and trusting that people have been maintaining stable weights for hundreds and thousands of years before anybody ever invented that little scale that you use to weigh chicken breasts." -------------------------- That excellent intro and outro music you heard is by Nico Guiang. You can find more of it on SoundCloud [@niceaux] and Facebook [www.facebook.com/niceaux]. Hop on over to iTunes to subscribe to the podcast or give us a review: blnk.st/28JBVIY

Support The Recovery Warrior Show on Patreon! www.patreon.com/recoverywarriorshow Show Notes: https://www.recoverywarriors.com/sandra-aamodt/ What You'll Learn: • How and why our brains regulate weight • Why diets are ineffective at long term weight management • The negative impact of weight shaming and fat talk • A useful analogy to explains how new neural pathways are created Diets are among the highest risk factors for the development of an eating disorder. The rigid rules can make anyone seeking control in life to feel as though they have found it. Ironically, it is the diet that ends up controlling you and dictating when, where, and what you can eat. In neuroscientist Sandra Aamodt's latest book Why Diets Make Us Fat: The Unintended Consequences of Our Obsession With Weight Loss she explains why diets actually lead to long-term weight gain, health damaging stress and eating disorders. In this show, Sandra uses personal experience and in-depth research to build a compelling case that if we want to be healthier, we should diet less, not more.

The only thing we can be sure of is that we don't know anything. So, isn't it weird that everyone pretends to be so sure of what they're doing with their life when you meet them at a braai? This leads Sam and Simon down a conversation rabbit hole involving consciousness, language and how to train your washing machine."Screw Finding Your Passion" - an excellent short read by Mark MansonThings boytjies talk about while they're grilling animal flesh over an open flameWaitButWhy on how Elon Musk does amazing thingsHow to answer the question, "So, what do you do?"SelfLife, the religion Simon's kid invented (which is super profound)Life in the Mediterranean, and why people live so long in the Blue ZonesEpicureanism's four principles of happiness (the "Tetrapharmakos") Mindfulness and the spectrum of consciousness your own brain is capable ofThe amazing interactive version of Nam Lee's story, "The Boat"Join the hunt to find out what happened to the refugee boat that went missing on the Mediterranean, Ghost BoatGoogle's open sourced machine learning project, TensorFlow, also, WTF is machine learning?Chomsky on how the brain learns grammarWelcome to your Brain by Sandra Aamodt and Sam Wang This is the washing machine you heard in the background of the episode. That's Simon on the left, Sam on the right, and a creepy demon child that's possessing Simon's flat on the floor.  “... ‘Not knowing’ is the whole fucking point. Life is all about not knowing, and then doing something anyway. All of life is like this. All of it. And it’s not going to get any easier just because you found out you love your job cleaning septic tanks or you scored a dream gig writing indie movies.” — Mark Manson

In the US, 80% of girls have been on a diet by the time they're 10 years old. In this honest, raw talk, neuroscientist Sandra Aamodt uses her personal story to frame an important lesson about how our brains manage our bodies, as she explores the science behind why dieting not only doesn't work, but is likely to do more harm than good. She suggests ideas for how to live a less diet-obsessed life, intuitively.

Nos EUA, 80% das meninas fizeram dieta por volta dos 10 anos de idade. Nesta palestra franca e direta, a neurocientista Sandra Aamodt usa sua história pessoal para trazer uma lição importante sobre como nosso cérebro controla nosso corpo, ao explorar a ciência por trás do porquê fazer dieta não só não funciona, como também pode fazer mais mal do que bem. Ela dá dicas de como viver uma vida menos obcecada por dietas, de forma intuitiva.

미국에서 80%의 10대 소녀들이 다이어트를 한 적이 있다고 합니다. 신경과학자 산드라 애모트는 그의 진심어린 생생한 연설에서 자신의 이야기를 하면서 다이어트가 왜 효과가 없고 좋은 면보다 손해가 더 많은지에 대한 과학적인 분석을 통하여 두뇌가 어떻게 우리의 신체를 관리하는지에 대한 중요한 강연을 하였습니다. 그녀는 어떻게 다이어트에 집착하지 않고 살것인가에 대한 생각을 직관적으로 제시하였습니다.

Aux États-Unis, 80% des filles de l'âge de 10 ans ont suivi un régime. Cette constatation et son expérience personnelle ont poussé Sandra Aamodt, neurobiologiste, à étudier comment notre cerveau gère notre poids. Sur un ton franc et honnête, elle nous explique scientifiquement pourquoi les régimes ne fonctionnent pas et font en fait plus de mal que de bien, puis propose une approche plus intuitive de la nourriture, pour vivre sans être obsédé par les régimes.

En los EE. UU., el 80 % de las niñas ya han estado a dieta a la edad de 10 años. En esta charla honesta y clara, Sandra Aamodt utiliza su historia personal para transmitirnos una valiosa reflexión acerca de cómo el cerebro maneja nuestro cuerpo, al tiempo que explora la ciencia detrás del por qué hacer dieta no solo no funciona, sino que puede causar más daño que bien. Propone ideas sobre cómo vivir una vida menos obsesionada con las dietas, intuitivamente.

In den USA haben 80 % der Mädchen im Alter von 10 schon einmal eine Diät gemacht. In diesem ehrlichen, unverblümten Vortrag erzählt Neurowissenschaftlerin Sandra Aamodt ihre persönliche Geschichte als Hintergrund für wichtige Erkenntnisse darüber, wie unser Gehirn unseren Körper steuert. Dabei erklärt sie die wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisse für die Gründe dafür, dass Diäten nicht nur meistens nicht funktionieren, sondern wahrscheinlich mehr schaden als nutzen. Sie macht Vorschläge, wie man ein weniger auf Diäten zentriertes Leben führen kann - auf intuitive Art und Weise.

Many parents are interested in learning about how their children develop, and pretty much all parents want to do a good job with their kids. So, often they turn to parenting books. Unfortunately, many books for parents do not present the developmental research accurately, probably because the authors of those books are trying to find a way to sell more books. Parents can be left feeling confused and anxious that they aren’t doing things the “right” way, and often the more books they read the more confused and anxious they feel! That is why the book Welcome to Your Child’s Brain: How the Mind Grows from Conception to College (Bloomsbury, 2011), by Sandra Aamodt and Sam Wang, is refreshing. Aamodt and Wang present child development in an accessible, balanced, and reassuring way that is true to the current research about child development. The book covers everything from infant learning, to language development, to sleep, to social development, all the way from the prenatal phase through adolescence. This work is will interest those who want to know more about the neuroscience of child development, as well as parents who just want to understand their children better and learn a few reasonable tips. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Many parents are interested in learning about how their children develop, and pretty much all parents want to do a good job with their kids. So, often they turn to parenting books. Unfortunately, many books for parents do not present the developmental research accurately, probably because the authors of those books are trying to find a way to sell more books. Parents can be left feeling confused and anxious that they aren't doing things the “right” way, and often the more books they read the more confused and anxious they feel! That is why the book Welcome to Your Child's Brain: How the Mind Grows from Conception to College (Bloomsbury, 2011), by Sandra Aamodt and Sam Wang, is refreshing. Aamodt and Wang present child development in an accessible, balanced, and reassuring way that is true to the current research about child development. The book covers everything from infant learning, to language development, to sleep, to social development, all the way from the prenatal phase through adolescence. This work is will interest those who want to know more about the neuroscience of child development, as well as parents who just want to understand their children better and learn a few reasonable tips. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

Many parents are interested in learning about how their children develop, and pretty much all parents want to do a good job with their kids. So, often they turn to parenting books. Unfortunately, many books for parents do not present the developmental research accurately, probably because the authors of those books are trying to find a way to sell more books. Parents can be left feeling confused and anxious that they aren’t doing things the “right” way, and often the more books they read the more confused and anxious they feel! That is why the book Welcome to Your Child’s Brain: How the Mind Grows from Conception to College (Bloomsbury, 2011), by Sandra Aamodt and Sam Wang, is refreshing. Aamodt and Wang present child development in an accessible, balanced, and reassuring way that is true to the current research about child development. The book covers everything from infant learning, to language development, to sleep, to social development, all the way from the prenatal phase through adolescence. This work is will interest those who want to know more about the neuroscience of child development, as well as parents who just want to understand their children better and learn a few reasonable tips. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to Your Brain

Guest: Sandra Aamodt, PhD Host: Leslie P. Lundt, MD Our patients use their brains every moment of their lives. So do we! How well do you know your brain? You may be distressed at the answer. Dr. Sandra Aamodt, co-author along with Dr. Sam Wang of Welcome to Your Brain joins host Dr. Leslie Lundt to discuss common misconceptions about neurobiology.

'Welcome to Your Brain : Why You Lose Your Car Keys but Never Forget How to Drive'