Delicious Quinoa Avocado Bread

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.

They’re gluten-free, full of protein and healthy fats, generous with the fiber, easy to make, and tasty too! What’s not to love? Keep this recipe (and its ingredients) handy for next time you want healthy burger buns or similar:

You will need

  • 2½ cups quinoa flour
  • 2 cups almond flour (if allergic, just substitute more quinoa flour)
  • 1 avocado, peeled, pitted, and mashed
  • zest and juice of 1 lime
  • 2 tbsp ground flaxseed
  • 1 tsp baking powder
  • ½ tsp MSG or 1 tsp low-sodium salt
  • Optional: seeds, oats, or similar for topping the buns

Method

(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

1) Preheat the oven to 350℉/175℃.

2) Mix the flaxseed with ⅓ cup warm water and set aside.

3) Mix, in a large bowl, the quinoa flour and almond flour with the baking powder and the MSG or salt.

4) Mix, in a separate smaller bowl, the avocado and lime.

5) Add the wet ingredients to the dry, slowly, adding an extra ½ cup water as you do, and knead into a dough.

6) Divide the dough into 4 equal portions, each shaped into a ball and then slightly flattened, to create a burger bun shape. If you’re going to add any seeds or similar as a topping, add those now.

7) Bake them in the oven (on a baking sheet lined with baking paper) for 20–25 minutes. You can check whether they’re done the same way you would a cake, by piercing them to the center with a toothpick and seeing whether it comes out clean.

8) Serve when sufficiently cooled.

Enjoy!

Want to learn more?

For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Rainbow Roasted Potato Salad
  • Fruit, Fiber, & Leafy Greens… On A Low-FODMAP Diet!
    Navigating a FODMAP-sensitive diet? Learn how to maintain fiber intake without the discomfort, from low-FODMAP fruits and veggies to grains that won’t trigger IBS.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • The Squat Bible – by Dr. Aaron Horschig

    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.

    You probably know the following three things about squats:

    1. Squatting is great for the health in many ways
    2. There are many different ways to squat
    3. Not all of them are correct, and some may even do harm

    Dr. Aaron Horschig makes the case for squats being a movement first, and an exercise second. To this end, he takes us on a joint-by-joint tour of the anatomy of squatting, so that we get it right from top to toe.

    Or rather: from toe to top, since he starts with the best foundation.

    What this means is that if you’ve struggled to squat because you find some discomfort in your ankles, or a weakness in the knees, or you can’t get your back quite right, Dr. Horschig will have a fix for you. He also takes a realistic look about how people’s anatomy varies from person to person, and what differences this makes to how we each should best squat.

    The explanations are clear and so are the pictures—we recommend getting the color print edition (linked), as the image quality is better than the black and white and/or Kindle edition.

    Bottom-line: squats are one of the single best exercises we can do for our health—but we can miss out on benefits (or even do ourselves harm) if we don’t do them well. This book is a comprehensive reference resource for making sure we get the most out of our squatting ability.

    Click here to check out The Squat Bible, and master this all-important movement!

    Share This Post

  • Is cold water bad for you? The facts behind 5 water myths

    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.

    We know the importance of staying hydrated, especially in hot weather. But even for something as simple as a drink of water, conflicting advice and urban myths abound.

    Is cold water really bad for your health? What about hot water from the tap? And what is “raw water”? Let’s dive in and find out.

    Myth 1: Cold water is bad for you

    Some recent TikToks have suggested cold water causes health problems by somehow “contracting blood vessels” and “restricting digestion”. There is little evidence for this.

    While a 2001 study found 51 out of 669 women tested (7.6%) got a headache after drinking cold water, most of them already suffered from migraines and the work hasn’t been repeated since.

    Cold drinks were shown to cause discomfort in people with achalasia (a rare swallowing disorder) in 2012 but the study only had 12 participants.

    For most people, the temperature you drink your water is down to personal preference and circumstances. Cold water after exercise in summer or hot water to relax in winter won’t make any difference to your overall health.

    Myth 2: You shouldn’t drink hot tap water

    This belief has a grain of scientific truth behind it. Hot water is generally a better solvent than cold water, so may dissolve metals and minerals from pipes better. Hot water is also often stored in tanks and may be heated and cooled many times. Bacteria and other disease-causing microorganisms tend to grow better in warm water and can build up over time.

    It’s better to fill your cup from the cold tap and get hot water for drinks from the kettle.

    Myth 3: Bottled water is better

    While bottled water might be safer in certain parts of the world due to pollution of source water, there is no real advantage to drinking bottled water in Australia and similar countries.

    According to University of Queensland researchers, bottled water is not safer than tap water. It may even be tap water. Most people can’t tell the difference either. Bottled water usually costs (substantially) more than turning on the tap and is worse for the environment.

    What about lead in tap water? This problem hit the headlines after a public health emergency in Flint, Michigan, in the United States. But Flint used lead pipes with a corrosion inhibitor (in this case orthophosphate) to keep lead from dissolving. Then the city switched water sources to one without a corrosion inhibitor. Lead levels rose and a public emergency was declared.

    Fortunately, lead pipes haven’t been used in Australia since the 1930s. While lead might be present in some old plumbing products, it is unlikely to cause problems.

    Myth 4: Raw water is naturally healthier

    Some people bypass bottled and tap water, going straight to the source.

    The “raw water” trend emerged a few years ago, encouraging people to drink from rivers, streams and lakes. There is even a website to help you find a local source.

    Supporters say our ancestors drank spring water, so we should, too. However, our ancestors also often died from dysentery and cholera and their life expectancy was low.

    While it is true even highly treated drinking water can contain low levels of things like microplastics, unless you live somewhere very remote, the risks of drinking untreated water are far higher as it is more likely to contain pollutants from the surrounding area.

    Myth 5: It’s OK to drink directly from hoses

    Tempting as it may be, it’s probably best not to drink from the hose when watering the plants. Water might have sat in there, in the warm sun for weeks or more potentially leading to bacterial buildup.

    Similarly, while drinking water fountains are generally perfectly safe to use, they can contain a variety of bacteria. It’s useful (though not essential) to run them for a few seconds before you start to drink so as to get fresh water through the system rather than what might have been sat there for a while.

    We are fortunate to be able to take safe drinking water for granted. Billions of people around the world are not so lucky.

    So whether you like it hot or cold, or somewhere in between, feel free to enjoy a glass of water this summer.

    Just don’t drink it from the hose.The Conversation

    Oliver A.H. Jones, Professor of chemistry, RMIT University

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • When supplies resume, should governments subsidise drugs like Ozempic for weight loss? We asked 5 experts

    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.

    Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide are taking drugs like Ozempic to lose weight. But what do we actually know about them? This month, The Conversation’s experts explore their rise, impact and potential consequences.

    You’ve no doubt heard of Ozempic but have you heard of Wegovy? They’re both brand names of the drug semaglutide, which is currently in short supply worldwide.

    Ozempic is a lower dose of semaglutide, and is approved and used to treat diabetes in Australia. Wegovovy is approved to treat obesity but is not yet available in Australia. Shortages of both drugs are expected to last throughout 2024.

    Both drugs are expensive. But Ozempic is listed on Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule (PBS), so people with diabetes can get a three-week supply for A$31.60 ($7.70 for concession card holders) rather than the full price ($133.80).

    Wegovy isn’t listed on the PBS to treat obesity, meaning when it becomes available, users will need to pay the full price. But should the government subsidise it?

    Wegovy’s manufacturer will need to make the case for it to be added to the PBS to an independent advisory committee. The company will need to show Wegovy is a safe, clinically effective and cost-effective treatment for obesity compared to existing alternatives.

    In the meantime, we asked five experts: when supplies resume, should governments subsidise drugs like Ozempic for weight loss?

    Four out of five said yes

    This is the last article in The Conversation’s Ozempic series. Read the other articles here.

    Disclosure statements: Clare Collins is a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Leadership Fellow and has received research grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the Australian Research Council (ARC), the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF), the Hunter Medical Research Institute, Diabetes Australia, Heart Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, nib foundation, Rijk Zwaan Australia, the Western Australian Department of Health, Meat and Livestock Australia, and Greater Charitable Foundation. She has consulted to SHINE Australia, Novo Nordisk (for weight management resources and an obesity advisory group), Quality Bakers, the Sax Institute, Dietitians Australia and the ABC. She was a team member conducting systematic reviews to inform the 2013 Australian Dietary Guidelines update, the Heart Foundation evidence reviews on meat and dietary patterns and current co-chair of the Guidelines Development Advisory Committee for Clinical Practice Guidelines for Treatment of Obesity; Emma Beckett has received funding for research or consulting from Mars Foods, Nutrition Research Australia, NHMRC, ARC, AMP Foundation, Kellogg and the University of Newcastle. She works for FOODiQ Global and is a fat woman. She is/has been a member of committees/working groups related to nutrition or food, including for the Australian Academy of Science, the NHMRC and the Nutrition Society of Australia; Jonathan Karnon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment; Nial Wheate in the past has received funding from the ACT Cancer Council, Tenovus Scotland, Medical Research Scotland, Scottish Crucible, and the Scottish Universities Life Sciences Alliance. He is a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, a member of the Australasian Pharmaceutical Science Association and a member of the Australian Institute of Company Directors. Nial is the chief scientific officer of Vaihea Skincare LLC, a director of SetDose Pty Ltd (a medical device company) and a Standards Australia panel member for sunscreen agents. Nial regularly consults to industry on issues to do with medicine risk assessments, manufacturing, design and testing; Priya Sumithran has received grant funding from external organisations, including the NHMRC and MRFF. She is in the leadership group of the Obesity Collective and co-authored manuscripts with a medical writer provided by Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly.

    Fron Jackson-Webb, Deputy Editor and Senior Health Editor, The Conversation

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Rainbow Roasted Potato Salad
  • Is Chiropractic All It’s Cracked Up To Be?

    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.

    Is Chiropractic All It’s Cracked Up To Be?

    Yesterday, we asked you for your opinions on chiropractic medicine, and got the above-depicted, below-described set of results:

    • 38% of respondents said it keeps us healthy, and everyone should do it as maintenance
    • 33% of respondents said it can correct some short-term skeletal issues, but that’s all
    • 16% of respondents said that it’s a dangerous pseudoscience and can cause serious harm
    • 13% of respondents said that it’s mostly just a combination of placebo and endorphins

    Respondents also shared personal horror stories of harm done, personal success stories of things cured, and personal “it didn’t seem to do anything for me” stories.

    What does the science say?

    It’s a dangerous pseudoscience and can cause harm: True or False?

    False and True, respectively.

    That is to say, chiropractic in its simplest form that makes the fewest claims, is not a pseudoscience. If somebody physically moves your bones around, your bones will be physically moved. If your bones were indeed misaligned, and the chiropractor is knowledgeable and competent, this will be for the better.

    However, like any form of medicine, it can also cause harm; in chiropractic’s case, because it more often than not involves manipulation of the spine, this can be very serious:

    ❝Twenty six fatalities were published in the medical literature and many more might have remained unpublished.

    The reported pathology usually was a vascular accident involving the dissection of a vertebral artery.

    Conclusion: Numerous deaths have occurred after chiropractic manipulations. The risks of this treatment by far outweigh its benefit.❞

    Source: Deaths after chiropractic: a review of published cases

    From this, we might note two things:

    1. The abstract doesn’t note the initial sample size; we would rather have seen this information expressed as a percentage. Unfortunately, the full paper is not accessible, and nor are many of the papers it cites.
    2. Having a vertebral artery fatally dissected is nevertheless not an inviting prospect, and is certainly a very reasonable cause for concern.

    It’s mostly just a combination of placebo and endorphins: True or False?

    True or False, depending on what you went in for:

    • If you went in for a regular maintenance clunk-and-click, then yes, you will get your clunk-and-click and feel better for it because you had a ritualized* experience and endorphins were released.
    • If you went in for something that was actually wrong with your skeletal alignment, to get it corrected, and this correction was within your chiropractor’s competence, then yes, you will feel better because a genuine fault was corrected.

    *this is not implying any mysticism, by the way. Rather it means simply that placebo effect is strongest when there is a ritual associated with it. In this case it means going to the place, sitting in a pleasant waiting room, being called in, removing your shoes and perhaps some other clothes, getting the full attention of a confident and assured person for a while, this sort of thing.

    With regard to its use to combat specifically spinal pain (i.e., perhaps the most obvious thing to treat by chiropractic spinal manipulation), evidence is slightly in favor, but remains unclear:

    ❝Due to the low quality of evidence, the efficacy of chiropractic spinal manipulation compared with a placebo or no treatment remains uncertain. ❞

    Source: Clinical Effectiveness and Efficacy of Chiropractic Spinal Manipulation for Spine Pain

    It can correct some short-term skeletal issues, but that’s all: True or False?

    Probably True.

    Why “probably”? The effectiveness of chiropractic treatment for things other than short-term skeletal issues has barely been studied. From this, we may wish to keep an open mind, while also noting that it can hardly claim to be evidence-based—and it’s had hundreds of years to accumulate evidence. In all likelihood, publication bias has meant that studies that were conducted and found inconclusive or negative results were simply not published—but that’s just a hypothesis on our part.

    In the case of using chiropractic to treat migraines, a very-related-but-not-skeletal issue, researchers found:

    ❝Pre-specified feasibility criteria were not met, but deficits were remediable. Preliminary data support a definitive trial of MCC+ for migraine.❞

    Translating this: “it didn’t score as well as we hoped, but we can do better. We got some positive results, and would like to do another, bigger, better trial; please fund it”

    Source: Multimodal chiropractic care for migraine: A pilot randomized controlled trial

    Meanwhile, chiropractors’ claims for very unrelated things have been harshly criticized by the scientific community, for example:

    Misinformation, chiropractic, and the COVID-19 pandemic

    About that “short-term” aspect, one of our subscribers put it quite succinctly:

    ❝Often a skeletal correction is required for initial alignment but the surrounding fascia and muscles also need to be treated to mobilize the joint and release deep tissue damage surrounding the area. In combination with other therapies chiropractic support is beneficial.❞

    This is, by the way, very consistent with what was said in the very clinically-dense book we reviewed yesterday, which has a chapter on the short-term benefits and limitations of chiropractic.

    A truism that holds for many musculoskeletal healthcare matters, holds true here too:

    ❝In a battle between muscle and bone, muscle will always win❞

    In other words…

    Chiropractic can definitely help put misaligned bones back where they should be. However, once they’re there, if the cause of their misalignment is not treated, they will just re-misalign themselves shortly after you walking out of your session.

    This is great for chiropractors, if it keeps you coming back for endless appointments, but it does little for your body beyond give you a brief respite.

    So, by all means go to a chiropractor if you feel so inclined (and you do not fear accidental arterial dissection etc), but please also consider going to a physiotherapist, and potentially other medical professions depending on what seems to be wrong, to see about addressing the underlying cause.

    Take care!

    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:

  • Lime-Charred Cauliflower Popcorn

    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.

    Called “popcorn” for its appearance and tasty-snackness, this one otherwise bears little relation to the usual movie theater snack, and it’s both tastier and healthier. All that said, it can be eaten on its own as a snack (even with a movie, if you so wish), or served as one part of a many-dish banquet, or (this writer’s favorite) as a delicious appetizer that also puts down a healthy bed of fiber ready for the main course to follow it.

    You will need

    • 1 cauliflower, cut into small (popcorn-sized) florets
    • 2 tbsp extra virgin olive oil
    • 1 tbsp lime pickle
    • 1 tsp cumin seeds
    • 1 tsp smoked paprika
    • 1 tsp chili flakes
    • 1 tsp black pepper, coarse ground
    • ½ tsp ground turmeric

    Method

    (we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

    1) Preheat your oven as hot as it will go

    2) Mix all the ingredients in a small bowl except the cauliflower, to form a marinade

    3) Drizzle the marinade over the cauliflower in a larger bowl (i.e. big enough for the cauliflower), and mix well until the cauliflower is entirely, or at least almost entirely, coated. Yes, it’s not a lot of marinade but unless you picked a truly huge cauliflower, the proportions we gave will be enough, and you want the end result to be crisp, not dripping.

    4) Spread the marinaded cauliflower florets out on a baking tray lined with baking paper. Put it in the oven on the middle shelf, so it doesn’t cook unevenly, but keeping the temperature as high as it goes.

    5) When it is charred and crispy golden, it’s done—this should take about 20 minutes, but we’ll say ±5 minutes depending on your oven, so do check on it periodically—and time to serve (it is best enjoyed warm).

    Enjoy!

    Want to learn more?

    For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

    Take care!

    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:

  • How does cancer spread to other parts of the body?

    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.

    All cancers begin in a single organ or tissue, such as the lungs or skin. When these cancers are confined in their original organ or tissue, they are generally more treatable.

    But a cancer that spreads is much more dangerous, as the organs it spreads to may be vital organs. A skin cancer, for example, might spread to the brain.

    This new growth makes the cancer much more challenging to treat, as it can be difficult to find all the new tumours. If a cancer can invade different organs or tissues, it can quickly become lethal.

    When cancer spreads in this way, it’s called metastasis. Metastasis is responsible for the majority (67%) of cancer deaths.

    Cells are supposed to stick to surrounding tissue

    Our bodies are made up of trillions of tiny cells. To keep us healthy, our bodies are constantly replacing old or damaged cells.

    Each cell has a specific job and a set of instructions (DNA) that tells it what to do. However, sometimes DNA can get damaged.

    This damage might change the instructions. A cell might now multiply uncontrollably, or lose a property known as adherence. This refers to how sticky a cell is, and how well it can cling to other surrounding cells and stay where it’s supposed to be.

    If a cancer cell loses its adherence, it can break off from the original tumour and travel through the bloodstream or lymphatic system to almost anywhere. This is how metastasis happens.

    Many of these travelling cancer cells will die, but some will settle in a new location and begin to form new cancers.

    Cancer cells
    Some cells settle in a new location.
    Scipro/Shutterstock

    Particular cancers are more likely to metastasise to particular organs that help support their growth. Breast cancers commonly metastasise to the bones, liver, and lungs, while skin cancers like melanomas are more likely to end up in the brain and heart.

    Unlike cancers which form in solid organs or tissues, blood cancers like leukaemia already move freely through the bloodstream, but can escape to settle in other organs like the liver or brain.

    When do cancers metastasise?

    The longer a cancer grows, the more likely it is to metastasise. If not caught early, a patient’s cancer may have metastasised even before it’s initially diagnosed.

    Metastasis can also occur after cancer treatment. This happens when cancer cells are dormant during treatment – drugs may not “see” those cells. These invisible cells can remain hidden in the body, only to wake up and begin growing into a new cancer months or even years later.

    For patients who already have cancer metastases at diagnosis, identifying the location of the original tumour – called the “primary site” – is important. A cancer that began in the breast but has spread to the liver will probably still behave like a breast cancer, and so will respond best to an anti-breast cancer therapy, and not anti-liver cancer therapy.

    As metastases can sometimes grow faster than the original tumour, it’s not always easy to tell which tumour came first. These cancers are called “cancers of unknown primary” and are the 11th most commonly diagnosed cancers in Australia.

    One way to improve the treatment of metastatic cancer is to improve our ways of detecting and identifying cancers, to ensure patients receive the most effective drugs for their cancer type.

    What increases the chances of metastasis and how can it be prevented?

    If left untreated, most cancers will eventually acquire the ability to metastasise.

    While there are currently no interventions that specifically prevent metastasis, cancer patients who have their tumours surgically removed may also be given chemotherapy (or other drugs) to try and weed out any hidden cancer cells still floating around.

    The best way to prevent metastasis is to diagnose and treat cancers early. Cancer screening initiatives such as Australia’s cervical, bowel, and breast cancer screening programs are excellent ways to detect cancers early and reduce the chances of metastasis.

    Older woman has mammogram
    The best way to prevent cancer spreading is to diagnose and treat them early.
    Peakstock/Shutterstock

    New screening programs to detect cancers early are being researched for many types of cancer. Some of these are simple: CT scans of the body to look for any potential tumours, such as in England’s new lung cancer screening program.

    Using artificial intelligence (AI) to help examine patient scans is also possible, which might identify new patterns that suggest a cancer is present, and improve cancer detection from these programs.

    More advanced screening methods are also in development. The United States government’s Cancer Moonshot program is currently funding research into blood tests that could detect many types of cancer at early stages.

    One day there might even be a RAT-type test for cancer, like there is for COVID.

    Will we be able to prevent metastasis in the future?

    Understanding how metastasis occurs allows us to figure out new ways to prevent it. One idea is to target dormant cancer cells and prevent them from waking up.

    Directly preventing metastasis with drugs is not yet possible. But there is hope that as research efforts continue to improve cancer therapies, they will also be more effective at treating metastatic cancers.

    For now, early detection is the best way to ensure a patient can beat their cancer.The Conversation

    Sarah Diepstraten, Senior Research Officer, Blood Cells and Blood Cancer Division, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute and John (Eddie) La Marca, Senior Resarch Officer, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    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: