“Would you like to see the dessert menu?”

For anyone trying to eat healthy, this seemingly innocent query can seem like an absurd question and a downright hostile provocation. Of course, you would like to see the dessert menu and to inhale the chocolate mousse, but as someone who cares about health, you grit your teeth and order a tea instead. Or not…

Truth be told, dessert is extremely hard to resist, even for those with a great deal of self-control, when everyone else at the table is indulging. Research shows that we make similar choices to the people we dine with. If all of your friends are ordering cheesecake, odds are you will too, or at least take a bite.

The good news is that not all desserts created are equally bad for you. Research from Harvard’s School of Public Health found a delicious option that is healthier than the traditional and decadent triple chocolate cake but is still a treat — a trio of fruit, nuts, and dark chocolate. Motivated by his own sweet tooth, nutrition scientist Walter Willett was on a mission to create a smart dessert without all the added sugar, refined flour, and unhealthy fat. Based on his research he concocted a “better” dessert that skips the unhealthy stuff, is tasty and combines what he calls The Three Pleasures:

Fruit

A refreshing and naturally sweet option that brings a burst of color to the plate. Dried fruits can also work well.

Nuts

Along with a satisfying crunch and a variety of flavors, nuts are a great source of healthy fat and protein.

Dark chocolate

Depending on the brand and cocoa percentage, dark chocolate offers a wide range of complex and delightful flavors. Remember that the higher the cocoa percentage, the less sweet it will be — 70% or higher is a nice complement to the sweetness of the fruit!

Next time you’re out, look for this trio or ask the chef to prepare a dessert with The Three Pleasures in mind. Willett hopes that if the public gets involved on a mass scale, this request will challenge chefs everywhere to harness their creativity and redesign dessert.

At last, you can have your dessert and eat it, too.

“In happiness, as in so many other things, location is key.”

According to research, a location that maximizes proximity to the natural world is one of the best ways to maximize well-being. Studies show a link between nature and wellbeing.

Just 20 minutes outside can boost your mood, broaden thinking and improve memory. Even exercise performed in outdoor natural environments versus indoors has been shown to be associated with greater feelings of revitalization and positive engagement, decreases in tension, anger and depression and increased energy. Moreover, participants reported greater enjoyment and satisfaction with outdoor activity and declared greater intent to repeat the activity at a later date.

There is a consistent positive relationship between being outdoors and subjective experiences of vitality—feeling engaged and alive. This effect appears to be independent of physical activity. In other words, just sitting on a park bench and taking in the beauty of one’s natural surroundings is revitalizing and conducive to well-being.

Even people who have had surgery recover more quickly if they can see trees from their window, require fewer painkillers and call the nurse less often. “The view of nature was enough to make them feel better and to hasten their recovery.” Cognitive functioning in children has been shown to improve with proximity to nature and other studies show that contact with nature may improve symptoms of ADHD. The “greener” a child’s play area, the less severe his or her attention deficit symptoms. Some studies suggest there is less ADHD in countries like the Netherlands where children walk or bike to school.

Green spaces also help buffer against stress, especially for urban dwellers. Studies show that metropolitan populations are far more likely than rural ones to suffer from mental illnesses such as depression and schizophrenia and that the pressure of city life can charge brain physiology thereby increasing the risk of emotional disorders. Green spaces and parks can help combat this stress and promote well-being.

Simply put, being outdoors makes people happier and healthier. Pulitzer prize winning evolutionary biologist E.O. Wilson calls this biophilia—our inherent love and attraction to natural environments.

Catie Marron captures our inborn affinity for nature in her beautiful book, City Parks: Public Places, Private Thoughts. It is a compilation of beautifully written essays by Zadie Smith, Jonathan Alter, Bill Clinton and other fellow biophiles about their favorite parks. Oberto Gili’s beautiful photographs capture the mood and essence of dozens of park during various seasons the world over.

As Catie Marron writes in her introduction:

“Parks are of the earth, they are of the people, and they give the best possible glimpse of the sky and stars amid the high-rises and rooftops of crowded urban life.”

Parks reconnect us with our fundamental need for nature. They take the edge off. They are where you get lost and where you can also find yourself. They are natural Prozac. If you cannot take a walk in the park today, City Parks is the next best thing. I wholeheartedly recommend it.

In the words of Frederick Law Olmsted:

“The enjoyment of scenery employs the mind without fatigue and yet exercises it; tranquilizes it and yet enlivens it; and thus, through the influence of the mind over the body gives the effect of refreshing rest and reinvigoration to the whole system.”

There are many things computers already do better than we do. In fact, a 2013 Oxford study forecast that machines might be able to perform half of all U.S jobs in the next 20 years.

I never imagined my job could ever be “computerizable.” How on earth could a machine do a better job than I do in evaluating patients, providing therapy and recommending treatment?

Well, in some cases, it can. By using cameras to follow subtle cues such as micro-facial expressions, the frequency of looking at the floor, as well as speech patterns, new research reveals computers can spot symptoms of depression that psychiatrists may not catch.

Other research suggests people are more honest in therapy sessions when they believe they are communicating with computers, because unlike humans they do not pass moral judgment. Similarly, people are more likely to report suicidal feelings on a smartphone than on a printed questionnaire at a doctor’s office. Computers provide an anonymous and a shame-free environment. Indeed:

Google and WebMD already may be answering questions once reserved for one’s therapist.

Scientists are also using smartphones to collect passive data (such as how many steps someone takes each day, how many emails they send, etc.) and active data (voice samples, mood trackers) to provide objective measurements of mental health.

That said, I don’t think anyone is proposing that computers replace psychiatrists just yet. The secret sauce seems to lie in the combination of the two.

It might seem old-fashioned, but if you want to get something done or make a good impression, pick up the phone. Better yet, say it in person.

New research shows that text-based communications may make individuals sound less intelligent and employable than when the same information is communicated orally.

In other words, if you are trying to impress someone, close a deal, get a job, or make yourself more appealing, don’t let your fingers do the talking.

As the lead researcher explains:

How do we know that another person has a mind at all? The closest you ever get to the mind of another person is through their mouth.

One area where this is loud and clear is on the dating scene. Interpreting text messages is particularly challenging. Punctuation, capital letters, and response time are open to interpretation.

For example, when someone writes “I’ll text you later,” do they really mean they will text later? Is it a blow off? Wired.com offers some insightful decoding tips. For example, an exclamation point can fundamentally alter the meaning of a message. Compare:

Sounds good. Not sure if we’re going but I might see you at the party. If you leave, let me know.

Sounds good. Not sure if we’re going but I might see you at the party. If you leave, let me know!

The tone of the first one is passive whereas the tone of the latter example is enthusiastic and encouraging. Even with a punctuation guide as in this example, it is often impossible to read the tone of a text message.

My advice: pick up the phone.