Non-Alcohol Mouthwash vs Alcohol Mouthwash – Which is Healthier?

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

Our Verdict

When comparing non-alcohol mouthwash to alcohol mouthwash, we picked the alcohol.

Why?

Note: this is a contingent choice and is applicable to most, but not all, people.

In short, there has been some concern about alcohol mouthwashes increasing cancer risk, but research has shown this is only the case if you already have an increased risk of oral cancer (for example if you smoke, and/or have had an oral cancer before).

For those for whom this is not the case (for example, if you don’t smoke, and/or have no such cancer history), then best science currently shows that alcohol mouthwash does not cause any increased risk.

What about non-alcohol mouthwashes? Well, they have a different problem; they usually use chlorine-based chemicals like chlorhexidine or cetylpyridinium chloride, which are (exactly as the label promises) exceptionally good at killing oral bacteria.

(They’d kill us too, at higher doses, hence: swill and spit)

Unfortunately, much like the rest of our body, our mouth is supposed to have bacteria there and bad things happen when it doesn’t. In the case of our oral microbiome, cleaning it with such powerful antibacterial agents can kill our “good” bacteria along with the bad, which lowers the pH of our saliva (that’s bad; it means it is more acidic), and thus indirectly erodes tooth enamel.

You can read more about the science of all of the above (with references), here:

Toothpastes & Mouthwashes: Which Help And Which Harm?

Summary:

For most people, alcohol mouthwashes are a good way to avoid the damage that can be done by chlorhexidine in non-alcohol mouthwashes.

Here are some examples, but there will be plenty in your local supermarket:

Non-Alcohol, by Colgate | Alcohol, by Listerine

If you have had oral cancer, or if you smoke, then you may want to seek a third alternative (and also, please, stop smoking if you can).

Or, really, most people could probably skip mouthwashes, if you’ve good oral care already by other means. See also:

Toothpastes & Mouthwashes: Which Help And Which Harm?

(yes, it’s the same link as before, but we’re now drawing your attention to the fact it has information about toothpastes too)

If you do want other options though, might want to check out:

Less Common Oral Hygiene Options ← miswak sticks are especially effective

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • Avocado Oil vs Olive Oil – Which is Healthier?
  • Red Lentils vs Green Lentils – Which is Healthier?
    Green beats red: Our head-to-head lentil comparison shows green lentils triumph with more fiber, antioxidants, magnesium, and potassium.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Hazelnuts vs Cashews – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing hazelnuts to cashews, we picked the hazelnuts.

    Why?

    It’s close! This one’s interesting…

    In terms of macros, hazelnuts have more fiber and fats, while cashews have more protein and carbs. All in all, all good stuff all around; maybe a win for one or the other depending on your priorities. We’d pick hazelnuts here, but your preference may vary.

    When it comes to vitamins, hazelnuts have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, C, and E, while cashews have more vitamin K. An easy win for hazelnuts here, and the margins weren’t close.

    In the category of minerals, hazelnuts have more calcium, manganese, and potassium, while cashews have more copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, selenium, and zinc. This is a win for cashews, but it’s worth noting that cup for cup, both of these nuts provide more than the daily requirement of most of those minerals. This means that in practical terms, it doesn’t matter too much that (for example), while cashews provide 732% of the daily requirement for copper, hazelnuts “only” provide 575%. So while this category remains a victory for cashews, it’s something of a “on paper” thing for the most part.

    Adding up the sections (ambivalent + clear win for hazelnuts + nominal win for cashews) means that in total today we’re calling it in favour of hazelnuts… But as ever, enjoy both, because both are good and so is diversity!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • The Other Significant Others – by Rhaina Cohen

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    As we get older, it’s a function of statistics that increasingly many of us are divorced or widowed. While some will—after whatever time seems right to them—get back into dating, what about those of us who decide that we won’t?

    Rhaina Cohen explores the importance of friendship, mutual support, and (Platonic!) closeness and yes, even kinds of intimacy (for that too can be Platonic!) as we go on.

    Even from a purely evolutionary approach, we are fundamentally social creatures, and while as individuals we may exist on a spectrum from reclusive to extroverted, we all thrive better when we at least have access to community and friends.

    The style of the book is easy-reading and exploratory, and is very compelling as a call-to-arms for those who may wish to give/receive support to/from those with whom we are not necessarily sleeping.

    Because at the end of the day, why should sex and/or romance be a required feature for legal protections? Aren’t we adults who can make our own decisions about whom we trust to care for us?

    Bottom line: if you’re happily partnered and expect to pre-decease your partner, this book might not be directly important for you (it might for your partner, though). Everyone else? This book may be important at some point. That point might even be now already; only you know.

    Click here to check out The Other Significant Others, and make your own choices in life!

    Share This Post

  • Strawberries vs Blackberries – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing strawberries to blackberries, we picked the blackberries.

    Why?

    Shocking nobody, both are very healthy options. However, blackberries do come out on top:

    In terms of macros, the main thing that sets them apart is that blackberries have more than 2x the fiber. Other differences in macros are also in blackberries’ favor, but only very marginally, so we’ll not distract with those here. The fiber difference is distinctly significant, though.

    In the category of vitamins, blackberries lead with more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, B9, E, and K, as well as more choline. Meanwhile, strawberries boast more of vitamins B1, B6, and C. So, a 8:2 advantage for blackberries (and some of the margins are very large, such as 9x more choline, 4x more vitamin E, and nearly 18x more vitamin A).

    When it comes to minerals, things are not less clear: blackberries have considerably more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, and zinc. The two fruits are equal in other minerals that they both contain, and strawberries don’t contain any mineral in greater amounts than blackberries do.

    A discussion of these berries’ health benefits would be incomplete without at least mentioning polyphenols, but both of them are equally good sources of such, so there’s no distinction to set one above the other in this category.

    As ever, enjoy both, though! Diversity is good.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Avocado Oil vs Olive Oil – Which is Healthier?
  • Young Forever – by Dr. Mark Hyman

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    A lot of work on the topic of aging looks at dealing with symptoms of aging, rather than the causes. And, that’s worthy too! Those symptoms often do need addressing. But this book is about treating the causes.

    Dr. Hyman outlines:

    • How and why we age
    • The root causes of aging
    • The ten hallmarks of aging

    From there, we go on to learn about the foundations of longevity, and balancing our seven core biological systems:

    1. Nutrition, digestion, and the microbiome
    2. Immune and inflammatory system
    3. Cellular energy
    4. Biotransformation and elimination/detoxification*
    5. Hormones, neurotransmitters, and other signalling molecules
    6. Circulation and lymphatic flow
    7. Structural health, from muscle and bones to cells and tissues

    *This isn’t about celery juice fasts and the like; this talking about the work your kidneys, liver, and other organs do

    The book goes on to detail how, precisely, with practical actionable advices, to optimize and take care of each of those systems.

    All in all: if you want a great foundational understanding of aging and how to slow it to increase your healthy lifespan, this is a very respectable option.

    Click here to get your copy of “Young Forever” from Amazon today!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • When BMI Doesn’t Measure Up

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    When BMI Doesn’t Quite Measure Up

    Last month, we did a “Friday Mythbusters” edition of 10almonds, tackling many of the misconceptions surrounding obesity. Amongst them, we took a brief look at the usefulness (or lack thereof) of the Body Mass Index (BMI) scale of weight-related health for individuals. By popular subscriber request, we’re now going to dive a little deeper into that today!

    The wrong tool for the job

    BMI was developed as a tool to look at large-scale demographic trends, stemming from a population study of white European men, who were for the purpose of the study (the widescale health of the working class in that geographic area in that era), considered a reasonable default demographic.

    In other words: as a system, it’s now being used in a way it was never made for, and the results of that misappropriation of an epidemiological tool for individual health are predictably unhelpful.

    If you want to know yours…

    Here’s the magic formula for calculating your BMI:

    • Metric: divide your weight in kilograms by your height in square meters
    • Imperial: divide your weight in pounds by your height in square inches and then multiply by 703

    “What if my height doesn’t come in square meters or square inches, because it’s a height, not an area?”

    We know. Take your height and square it anyway. If this seems convoluted and arbitrary, yes, it is.

    But!

    While on the one hand it’s convoluted and arbitrary… On the other hand, it’s also a gross oversimplification. So, yay for the worst of both worlds?

    If you don’t want to grab a calculator, here’s a quick online tool to calculate it for you.

    So, how did you score?

    According to the CDC, a BMI score…

    • Under 18.5 is underweight
    • 18.5 to 24.9 is normal
    • 25 to 29.9 is overweight
    • 30 and over is obese

    And, if we’re looking at a representative sample of the population, where the representation is average white European men of working age, that’s not a bad general rule of thumb.

    For the rest of us, not so representative

    BMI is a great and accurate tool as a rule of thumb, except for…

    Women

    An easily forgotten demographic, due to being a mere 51% of the world’s population, women generally have a higher percentage of body fat than men, and this throws out BMI’s usefulness.

    If pregnant or nursing

    A much higher body weight and body fat percentage—note that these are two things, not one. Some of the extra weight will be fat to nourish the baby; some will be water weight, and if pregnant, some will be the baby (or babies!). BMI neither knows nor cares about any of these things. And, this is a big deal, because BMI gets used by healthcare providers to judge health risks and guide medical advice.

    People under the age of 16 or over the age of 65

    Not only do people below and above those ages (respectively) tend to be shorter—which throws out the calculations and mean health risks may increase before the BMI qualifies as overweight—but also:

    • BMI under 23 in people over the age of 65 is associated with a higher health risk
    • A meta-analysis showed that a BMI of 27 was the best in terms of decreased mortality risk for the over-65 age group

    This obviously flies in the face of conventional standards regards BMI—as you’ll recall from the BMI brackets we listed above.

    Read the science: BMI and all-cause mortality in older adults: a meta-analysis

    Athletic people

    A demographic often described in scientific literature as “athletes”, but that can be misleading. When we say “athletes”, what comes to mind? Probably Olympians, or other professional sportspeople.

    But also athletic, when it comes to body composition, are such people as fitness enthusiasts and manual laborers. Which makes for a lot more people affected by this!

    Athletic people tend to have more lean muscle mass (muscle weighs more than fat), and heavier bones (can’t build strong muscles on weak bones, so the bones get stronger too, which means denser)… But that lean muscle mass can actually increase metabolism and help ward off many of the very same things that BMI is used as a risk indicator for (e.g. heart disease, and diabetes). So people in this category will actually be at lower risk, while (by BMI) getting told they are at higher risk.

    If not white

    Physical characteristics of race can vary by more than skin color, relevant considerations in this case include, for example:

    • Black people, on average, not only have more lean muscle mass and less fat than white people, but also, have completely different risk factors for diseases such as diabetes.
    • Asian people, on average, are shorter than white people, and as such may see increased health risks before BMI qualifies as overweight.
    • Hispanic people, on average, again have different physical characteristics that throw out the results, in a manner that would need lower cutoffs to be even as “useful” as it is for white people.

    Further reading on this: BMI and the BIPOC Community

    In summary:

    If you’re an average white European working-age man, BMI can sometimes be a useful general guide. If however you fall into one or more of the above categories, it is likely to be inaccurate at best, if not outright telling the opposite of the truth.

    What’s more useful, then?

    For heart disease risk and diabetes risk both, waist circumference is a much more universally reliable indicator. And since those two things tend to affect a lot of other health risks, it becomes an excellent starting point for being aware of many aspects of health.

    Pregnancy will still throw off waist circumference a little (measure below the bump, not around it!), but it will nevertheless be more helpful than BMI even then, as it becomes necessary to just increase the numbers a little, according to gestational month and any confounding factors e.g. twins, triplets, etc. Ask your obstetrician about this, as it’s beyond the scope of today’s newsletter!

    As to what’s considered a risk:
    • Waist circumference of more than 35 inches for women
    • Waist circumference of more than 40 inches for men

    These numbers are considered applicable across demographics of age, sex, ethnicity, and lifestyle.

    Source: Waist circumference as a vital sign in clinical practice: a Consensus Statement from the IAS and ICCR Working Group on Visceral Obesity

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Egg Whites vs Whole Eggs – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing egg whites to whole eggs, we picked the whole eggs.

    Why?

    Egg whites are mostly protein. Egg yolks are mostly fat, with some protein.

    However, fat ≠ bad, and the yolk is also where the choline is stored, which itself (as well as its benefits for your brain) will tend to reduce fat storage in the body.

    Furthermore, the yolk contains an assortment of vitamins, minerals, and essential amino acids. After all, the yolk is there specifically to contain everything needed to turn a cluster of cells into a small bird.

    Read more: Eggs: All Things In Moderation?

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: