New Research Says This Daily Practice Could Stave Off Memory Loss. Here's What Doctors Say.
New research suggests practicing having a positive mindset could influence your memory down the road.
There was a small link between participants who reported higher levels of wellbeing and those who performed better on memory tests.
Here's what you need to know about mental health and its ties to your brain health.
There is nothing worse than being told to "stay positive" after a rough day at the office, bad doctor's visit, or messy breakup. Yet, while it can be incredibly difficult to stay positive during difficult times in your life (and, of course, anxiety and depression are very, very real), new research suggests that striving to stay positive could influence your memory down the road.
Of course, memory is complex, and it's impossible to stay upbeat and slap a smile on all the time, but these findings definitely provide a good reminder to focus on the good in your life. Because when you're able to proactively change your mindset, you might be better off down the road!
Here's exactly what the study found, plus, what doctors want you to keep in mind when taking this information into consideration.
Meet the experts: Clifford Segil, DO, a neurologist at Providence Saint John's Health Center in Santa Monica, CA; Thea Gallagher, PsyD, a clinical assistant professor at NYU Langone Health and a cohost of the "Mind in View" podcast
The study, which was published in the journal Aging & Mental Health, analyzed data from nearly 11,000 women and men who participated in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, a long-term research study on adults over the age of 50.
During the 16 year study, the participants answered questions on their wellbeing and memory every two years. Wellbeing questions included things like, 'I can do the things that I want to do,' and 'I feel that life is full of opportunities,' while the memory tests challenged the participants to recall 10 words immediately and then with a delay.
The researchers found a small link between people who said they had higher levels of wellbeing and those who performed better on the memory tests. They also found that the link was still there, even after the researchers adjusted for participants who had depression.
'Higher levels of wellbeing are associated with better memory function over 16 years,' the researchers wrote in the conclusion. 'Better wellbeing may be a protective factor in retaining memory function from middle to later adulthood.'
The researchers defined 'psychological wellbeing' as the balance between psychological, social, and physical challenges a person faces, along with their available resources to meet those challenges.
The researchers refer to psychological wellbeing as a 'multifaceted construct' of emotional health (like happiness and confidence) and effective functioning (control over your life and your sense of purpose).
The study didn't dive into this exact question (i.e. figuring out why they saw these results with participants), but experts certainly have a few theories.
'Feeling happy and smiling has been shown to increase brain neurotransmitter levels like serotonin,' says Clifford Segil, DO, a neurologist at Providence Saint John's Health Center in Santa Monica, CA. (In case you're not familiar with it, serotonin is considered a feel-good hormone, and it plays a role in regulating your mood and boosting feelings of happiness.)
'Feeling well is healthy and good for your brain health,' Dr. Segil says. 'Many patients with memory loss have lost the ability to feel happiness and wellbeing, which is bad for their brain health.'
Good psychological wellbeing may also serve as a 'protective factor' for your brain, says Thea Gallagher, PsyD, a clinical assistant professor at NYU Langone Health and a cohost of the "Mind in View" podcast. 'Depression and anxiety can add stress to your life, and that can impact your memory and how well your brain works,' she says. So, it makes sense that being free from anxiety and depression have the opposite effect.
We've already established that your mental health could have an impact on your brain health, but prior research already shows it has a major effect on your physical health. 'We have a lot of data to support the concept that stress, anxiety, and depression can take years off of your life,' Gallagher says. 'It impacts our whole health and our physical health.'
On the flip side, thinking positively about life may be more helpful for life in the long-run, she says. And yes, your attitude can have an impact on your health outcomes, Dr. Segil adds. 'Fear about having a chronic neurological condition like memory loss often causes worsening memory loss,' he says.
Again, some amount of stress and anxiety in life is normal. But trying your best to look at the glass as half-full, it may end up doing your health—and your memory—a solid in the long-term.
You Might Also Like
Jennifer Garner Swears By This Retinol Eye Cream
These New Kicks Will Help You Smash Your Cross-Training Goals
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Associated Press
3 hours ago
- Associated Press
CCHR wants electroshocking children prohibited under child abuse laws
LOS ANGELES, Calif., June 30, 2025 (SEND2PRESS NEWSWIRE) — Child and adolescent psychiatrists have issued a policy statement urging broader access to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for children and adolescents despite growing international condemnation of the practice on minors. Both the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Human Rights Office have called for an outright ban on ECT for children, explicitly stating: 'ECT is not recommended for children, and this should be prohibited through legislation.'[1] The Citizens Commission on Human Rights International (CCHR), a mental health industry watchdog, condemned the statement as 'medically reckless, legally dangerous, and morally indefensible.' CCHR is demanding federal and state lawmakers move urgently to outlaw the electroshocking of children, classifying it as a form of child abuse. ECT, also known as shock treatment, sends up to 460 volts of electricity through the brain to induce a grand mal seizure. This disruption of the brain's electrical activity alters its structure and function, an especially serious risk to the developing brains of children. Yet child psychiatrists not only call for expanded use of ECT on minors but also oppose 'any efforts—legal, legislative, and otherwise—to block access to ECT.' Through US Freedom of Information Act requests, CCHR uncovered that children as young as five have been electroshocked. The full scope remains hidden due to the lack of national transparency requirements on ECT usage. Internationally, some countries have already banned ECT entirely (e.g., Slovenia and Luxembourg). In the U.S., California prohibits it under age 12, and Texas under 16. In Western Australia, ECT on minors under 14 is illegal, with criminal penalties—including jail time—for administering it to children. CCHR was instrumental in helping secure that law, along with state bans in the US. Disturbingly, a child and adolescent psychiatry group has also called for more research involving ECT on youth, potentially exposing children under age 13 to an unproven and highly invasive procedure. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restricts its use to individuals aged 13 and older for limited diagnoses. The psychiatry group's statement fails to disclose that brain damage is a known risk of ECT. Yet, the American Psychiatric Association concedes that 'ECT can result in persistent or permanent memory loss.' The joint WHO/UN report adds: 'People being offered ECT should also be made aware of all its risks and potential short- and long-term harmful effects, such as memory loss and brain damage.' [2] In June 2024, the California Supreme Court ruled that an ECT device manufacturer must warn doctors of the risks of brain damage and permanent memory loss.[3] In 2018, a US District Court judge found there was sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that an ECT device could cause brain injury.[4] Neuropathologist Dr. Bennet Omalu—known for discovering chronic traumatic encephalopathy ( brain diseases or damage) in football players—publicly condemned ECT, stating: ' The amounts of electrical energy introduced to the human brain by ECT machines can be nothing but harmful and dangerous…. The patient who receives ECT therapy will manifest permanent and cumulative brain injury, which can be progressive over time and result in chronic encephalopathies and brain degeneration.' [5] Despite pediatric psychiatry's claim that ECT is 'safe and effective,' the FDA has never required manufacturers to prove ECT's safety or efficacy through clinical trials.[6] Internationally renowned researcher Prof. John Read reports that only 11 placebo-controlled trials of ECT have ever been conducted—all prior to 1985, and all deeply flawed. 'None found any benefit beyond the end of treatment,' he stated. Further, children's developing brains are 'particularly susceptible to the memory loss caused by ECT.' [7] Legal precedent exists for holding professionals and psychiatric facilities accountable for misleading parents about the safety and nature of treatment. In June 2024, an Arizona jury awarded $2.5 million in punitive damages to the family of a teen girl who suffered coercion and abuse at a troubled teen treatment facility. They successfully argued that they were misled by marketing materials portraying the program as therapeutic and safe, when it was abusive.[8] CCHR says that this same legal framework must apply to misleading promotion of ECT's benefits to desperate parents. Failing to disclose the full risks of ECT should be subject to the same scrutiny and liability as cases in the troubled teen treatment industry. CCHR asserts that electroshocking should not only be banned nationwide, but if administered to children, should be held accountable under child abuse laws. Jan Eastgate, president of CCHR International, stated, 'The electroshocking of children is without moral or scientific justification and should be indefensible under the law. As international bodies condemn it, and legal rulings establish precedent for holding programs accountable for misleading parents, the U.S. must act. We urge lawmakers at all levels to ban ECT, especially on minors, and define it as a form of child abuse.' CCHR, which was established in 1969 by the Church of Scientology and professor of psychiatry, Dr. Thomas Szasz, recommends parents watch its documentary, Therapy or Torture: The Truth About Electroshock, with expert opinions about how ECT damages minds. To learn more, visit: Sources: [1] World Health Organization, OHCHR, 'Guidance on Mental Health, Human Rights and Legislation,' pp. 58 & 59 [2] [3] [4] 'ECT Litigation Update: Are Patients Being Warned of Brain Damage Risk?' MAD, 13 June 2019 [5] [6] [7] [8] MULTIMEDIA: Image link for media: Image caption: Through US Freedom of Information Act requests, CCHR uncovered that children as young as five have been electroshocked. The full scope remains hidden due to the lack of national transparency requirements on ECT usage. NEWS SOURCE: Citizens Commission on Human Rights Keywords: AP, ban ECT, child abuse laws, ECT usage, Citizens Commission on Human Rights, CCHR International, electroshock, Jan Eastgate, LOS ANGELES, Calif. This press release was issued on behalf of the news source (Citizens Commission on Human Rights) who is solely responsibile for its accuracy, by Send2Press® Newswire. Information is believed accurate but not guaranteed. Story ID: S2P127282 APNF0325A To view the original version, visit: © 2025 Send2Press® Newswire, a press release distribution service, Calif., USA. RIGHTS GRANTED FOR REPRODUCTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART BY ANY LEGITIMATE MEDIA OUTLET - SUCH AS NEWSPAPER, BROADCAST OR TRADE PERIODICAL. MAY NOT BE USED ON ANY NON-MEDIA WEBSITE PROMOTING PR OR MARKETING SERVICES OR CONTENT DEVELOPMENT. Disclaimer: This press release content was not created by nor issued by the Associated Press (AP). Content below is unrelated to this news story.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Teenage girls are the loneliest group in the world, a new WHO study finds
One in six people worldwide is lonely, and hundreds of thousands die every year as a result, according to a new analysis from the World Health Organization (WHO). Concerns about an epidemic of loneliness have made their way into pop culture and politics in recent years – and the WHO's Commission on Social Connection aimed to pinpoint exactly who is at risk and what it means for their wellbeing. Young people are most affected by loneliness, the report found, with about 20.9 per cent of adolescents and 17.4 per cent of adults under 30 saying they feel lonely. That's compared with 11.8 per cent of those aged 60 or older. Overall, men and women fare about the same – but teenage girls are the loneliest group, with 24.3 per cent saying they are lonely. 'There are many factors that are driving loneliness and isolation,' Dr Vivek Murthy, the former US surgeon general and the commission's co-chair, said during a press briefing. He cited 'poor physical and mental health, which can unfortunately further isolate individuals' as well as 'social marginalisation' and the 'increasingly harmful or excessive use of digital media, especially among youth' as key problems. Not everyone who spends time alone is lonely. The WHO says someone is socially isolated if they lack enough social connections, while it defines loneliness as the 'painful feeling' that arises when people do not have the kind of relationships they want. Data on social isolation is more limited, but the commission believes it affects up to one in three older adults and one in four young people. Both loneliness and social isolation can have severe health consequences. They are linked to an estimated 871,000 deaths per year, raising the risk of stroke, heart disease, diabetes, cognitive decline, and poor mental health, the report found. But having strong social connections can boost people's health and even help them live longer, the commission said. Related Thinking of retiring abroad? You might be lonelier than if you stayed home, new study suggests WHO experts called for national governments to make loneliness a policy priority and for more research into strategies that can help bolster social connections. 'For too long, we have not recognised the importance of social health,' Murthy said. 'That must change'. Some countries are already taking steps in that direction. Sweden, for example, launched a €30 million plan this year to combat loneliness, for example by doing outreach to elderly people who may be isolated, said Jakob Forssmed, Sweden's minister for social affairs and public health. Related People tend to get lonelier as they age, but it's worse for seniors in these European countries In the coming months, Sweden will start giving 16- to 18-year-olds 'activity cards' with money that can be spent on civil society groups, sports, outdoor activities, and cultural events – but only on activities that involve other people, Forssmed said during the briefing. The goal is to better equip young people with social skills and boost connections between people of all ages. 'This is not a problem for those who are lonely, those who are isolated,' Forssmed said. 'This is a problem for the whole of society'.


Medscape
5 hours ago
- Medscape
Health Management Challenges: A Burden for Older US Adults
TOPLINE: Over 80% of US adults aged 50 years or older reported that managing their health and healthcare was challenging, with some facing great difficulty. Administrative and financial challenges were major factors contributing to this. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study using the 2022 Health and Retirement Study Treatment Burden Questionnaire to evaluate how the perceived effort of managing health and healthcare (treatment burden) affects community-dwelling adults aged 50 years or older in the US. They included 1795 adults who completed the questionnaire (mean age, 68.5 years; 56% women; 75% non-Hispanic White individuals), which featured 15 items across various domains, including burden related to medications, appointments, self-monitoring, lifestyle changes, and the impact on relationships. Participants rated their perceived level of effort or burden on a scale from 0 (no burden) to 10 (high burden). The primary outcome was the total treatment burden score, calculated by summing the scores of all 15 items on the questionnaire, with scores above a threshold indicating high burden. Associations between treatment burden and various factors such as age, sociodemographic characteristics, physical and mental health, and functional status were also assessed. TAKEAWAY: Overall, 87% of respondents reported some treatment burden, with 5.4% experiencing a high burden. The greatest treatment burden was associated with being reminded of health problems, followed by administrative tasks and financial costs. More adults aged 50-64 years reported administrative (58.7% vs 49.0%) and financial (55.6% vs 39.4%) burdens as well as difficulty scheduling appointments (37.1% vs 26.2%) than those aged 65 years or older (P < .05 for all). They also experienced a greater burden from treatment impacts on their relationships, whereas older adults (aged ≥ 65 years) reported more burden from reminders of their health issues. Lower treatment burden scores were linked to older age (≥ 65 years vs < 65 years; P < .001), female sex (P = .003), and having Medicaid vs other insurance (P = .03). Higher treatment burden scores were associated with more chronic conditions (P < .001), depression (P < .001), vision impairment (P = .01) and hearing impairment (P = .006), and mobility difficulties (P < .001). IN PRACTICE: 'Reducing treatment burden in the US may require efforts extending beyond reducing healthcare utilization alone, including reforms to reduce administrative and financial burden in healthcare delivery and financing systems, and interventions to improve patient capacity to respond to burden,' the authors of the study wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Audrey D. Zhang, of the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston. It was published online on June 19, 2025, in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. LIMITATIONS: The need to adjust the questionnaire for assessing the burden in the US context may have resulted in lower median values compared with those reported in earlier studies. The reliance on self-reported data may not accurately reflect the severity or progression of chronic conditions. The limited sample size may not include all subgroups, which restricts the conclusions that can be made. DISCLOSURES: This study was supported by grants from the Health Resources and Services Administration. One author received support from the Health Resources and Services Administration and three authors from the National Institute on Aging. The authors declared having no conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.