Physical Health Resources
On Chronic Pain
Moseley, G. L., & Butler, D. S. (2017). Explain pain supercharged; and Butler & Moseley (2013), Explain pain. Noigroup.
The foundational accessible works on modern pain science, by the field’s leading communicators. The single best starting point for understanding persistent pain as an overprotective alarm rather than a damage report. The basis of the Chronic Pain page.
Geneen, L. J., et al. (2017). Physical activity and exercise for chronic pain in adults: An overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
The evidence behind exercise as the best-supported treatment for chronic musculoskeletal pain. Dry, but authoritative.
Williams, A. C. de C., et al. (2020). Psychological therapies for chronic pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
The systematic-review evidence for CBT and related therapies acting on the pain mechanism itself, not just the distress around it.
Moseley, G. L. (2007). Reconceptualising pain according to modern pain science. Physical Therapy Reviews, 12(3).
The short, readable primary statement of the reframe, for those who want it from the source.
On Gut Health
Mayer, E. (2016). The mind-gut connection. Harper Wave.
The best accessible book on the bidirectional gut-brain axis, by a leading researcher. Anchors the Gut Health page’s beyond-nutrition view of the gut as a sensing organ.
Enders, G. (2015). Gut: The inside story of our body’s most underrated organ. Greystone.
A hugely popular, warm, accessible tour of the digestive system as an organ. Light on the contested microbiome hype, strong on the basics.
Black, C. J., et al. (2020). Efficacy of psychological therapies for irritable bowel syndrome: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Gut, 69(8).
The evidence for gut-directed hypnotherapy and CBT, the surprising, strongly-supported, non-dietary treatments for IBS.
Drossman, D. A. (2016). Functional gastrointestinal disorders: Rome IV. Gastroenterology, 150(6).
The clinical reconceptualisation of IBS and related conditions as disorders of gut-brain interaction. Technical, definitive.
On the Senses
Eagleman, D. (2020). Livewired: The inside story of the ever-changing brain. Pantheon.
The best accessible book on neuroplasticity, the principle underlying the whole Senses page: that perception is trainable at the level of the brain.
Hummel, T., et al. (2009). Effects of olfactory training in patients with olfactory loss. The Laryngoscope, 119(3).
The primary evidence for olfactory training, the best-supported tool for recovering and sharpening the sense of smell.
World Health Organization. (2021). World report on hearing and Make listening safe.
The authoritative source on hearing loss, safe-listening thresholds, and the 60/60 principle. The hearing protocols rest on this.
Lawrenson, J. G., et al. (2022). Time spent outdoors for myopia prevention and control in children. Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics, 42(3).
The systematic-review evidence behind the two-hours-outdoors protection against childhood myopia.
Livingston, G., et al. (2020). Dementia prevention, intervention, and care: 2020 Lancet Commission. The Lancet, 396.
Among much else, the evidence establishing hearing loss as a major modifiable dementia risk factor, the reason hearing protection matters beyond convenience.
Note: several of the finer eye-training and sensory protocols on the Senses page derive from the synthesis work of Andrew Huberman (Stanford); these are reasonable and low-risk, but rest more on expert synthesis than on large trials, and are presented as such.
On Posture and Movement
Slater, D., et al. (2019). “Sit up straight”: Time to re-evaluate. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy, 49(8).
The clearest short statement of the modern evidence that there is no single correct posture and that the “sit up straight” dogma is largely unsupported. The reframe behind the Postural Health page.
Swain, C. T. V., et al. (2020). No consensus on causality of spine postures and low back pain: A systematic review of systematic reviews. Journal of Biomechanics, 102.
The umbrella-review evidence that posture is a weak predictor of back pain. Essential calibration against posture-blaming.
Bowman, K. (2015). Whole body barefoot; and Bowman, Move your DNA (2nd ed., 2017). Propriometrics Press.
Genuinely useful on restoring natural foot and whole-body movement and transitioning to minimal footwear. Bowman’s “we are under-moved, not just under-exercised” thesis is sound; take the specific mechanical claims as informed practice rather than settled science.
Lieberman, D. E. (2012). What we can learn about running from barefoot running. Exercise and Sport Sciences Reviews, 40(2).
The evolutionary-biology evidence on feet, footwear, and natural gait, by the Harvard researcher who anchors the barefoot discussion in actual science.
Splichal, E. (2015). Barefoot strong.
The source of the foot-to-core cascade material. Useful and detailed on foot function; some claims run ahead of the evidence, so read as expert practice.
Bordoni, B., & Zanier, E. (2013). Anatomic connections of the diaphragm. Journal of Multidisciplinary Healthcare, 6.
The anatomy behind the diaphragm-as-canister-roof and its links to posture and the pelvic floor.
Starrett, K. (2015). Becoming a supple leopard.
Hugely popular on mobility and movement preparation. Genuinely useful drills, but its strong “correct position” and injury-prevention claims run ahead of the evidence and sit awkwardly with the posture-is-not-a-fixed-ideal research above; take the practice, leave the certainty.
Myers, T. (2014). Anatomy trains: Myofascial meridians.
The influential “fascial lines” model used in some of the foot-and-chain material. A useful organising metaphor that has shaped bodywork, but its specific anatomical claims about continuous force-transmitting lines are debated; hold it as a model, not established anatomy.
On Beauty and Attractiveness
Etcoff, N. (1999). Survival of the prettiest: The science of beauty. Doubleday.
The classic accessible synthesis of the science of human attractiveness. Still the best single starting point, even decades on.
Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57.
The authoritative review establishing symmetry, averageness, and sexual dimorphism as cross-culturally attractive, and the health-signalling hypothesis behind them. The backbone of the Beautification Cheat Sheet.
Little, A. C., Jones, B. C., & DeBruine, L. M. (2011). Facial attractiveness: Evolutionary based research. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 366.
The comprehensive review of the specific facial cues and the sex differences in how attractiveness is judged.
Langlois, J. H., et al. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3).
The large meta-analysis showing striking within- and cross-cultural agreement on attractiveness, the evidence against “beauty is purely cultural.”
Axelsson, J., et al. (2010). Beauty sleep: Experimental study on the perceived attractiveness of sleep-deprived people. BMJ, 341.
The controlled study behind the literal “beauty sleep” claim: the same people look less attractive when sleep-deprived.
Alam, M., et al. (2025). Expert consensus on evidence-based topical skincare ingredients (Delphi study).
The dermatology consensus behind the skin protocols: sunscreen, retinoids, and vitamin C as the proven core, against a sea of unproven trendy ingredients.