Leek vs Scallions – 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 leek to scallions, we picked the leek.

Why?

In terms of macros, scallions might have a point: scallions have the lower glycemic index, thanks to leek having more carbs for the same amount of fiber. That said, leek already has a low glycemic index, so this is not a big deal.

When it comes to vitamins, leek has more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, E, and choline, while scallions have more of vitamins A, C, and K. Noteworthily, a cup of chopped leek already provides the daily dose of vitamins A and K, and the difference in levels of vitamin C is minimal. All in all, an easy 8:3 win for leeks here, even without taking that into account.

In the category of minerals, leek has more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and selenium, while scallions have a little more zinc.

Both of these allium-family plants (i.e., related to garlic) have an abundance of polyphenols, especially kaempferol.

Of course, enjoy whatever goes best with your meal, but if you’re looking for nutritional density, then leek is where it’s at.

Want to learn more?

You might like to read:

The Many Health Benefits Of Garlic

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • White Bread vs White Pasta – Which Is Healthier?
  • How to Eat (And Still Lose Weight) – by Dr. Andrew Jenkinson
    No diet recommendations here. Instead, this book delves into the science of hunger, metabolism, and weight regulation. It’s like a cheat code for eating and losing weight.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • 3 signs your diet is causing too much muscle loss – and what to do about it

    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 trying to lose weight, it’s natural to want to see quick results. So when the number on the scales drops rapidly, it seems like we’re on the right track.

    But as with many things related to weight loss, there’s a flip side: rapid weight loss can result in a significant loss of muscle mass, as well as fat.

    So how you can tell if you’re losing too much muscle and what can you do to prevent it?

    EvMedvedeva/Shutterstock

    Why does muscle mass matter?

    Muscle is an important factor in determining our metabolic rate: how much energy we burn at rest. This is determined by how much muscle and fat we have. Muscle is more metabolically active than fat, meaning it burns more calories.

    When we diet to lose weight, we create a calorie deficit, where our bodies don’t get enough energy from the food we eat to meet our energy needs. Our bodies start breaking down our fat and muscle tissue for fuel.

    A decrease in calorie-burning muscle mass slows our metabolism. This quickly slows the rate at which we lose weight and impacts our ability to maintain our weight long term.

    How to tell you’re losing too much muscle

    Unfortunately, measuring changes in muscle mass is not easy.

    The most accurate tool is an enhanced form of X-ray called a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scan. The scan is primarily used in medicine and research to capture data on weight, body fat, muscle mass and bone density.

    But while DEXA is becoming more readily available at weight-loss clinics and gyms, it’s not cheap.

    There are also many “smart” scales available for at home use that promise to provide an accurate reading of muscle mass percentage.

    Woman stands on scales
    Some scales promise to tell us our muscle mass. Lee Charlie/Shutterstock

    However, the accuracy of these scales is questionable. Researchers found the scales tested massively over- or under-estimated fat and muscle mass.

    Fortunately, there are three free but scientifically backed signs you may be losing too much muscle mass when you’re dieting.

    1. You’re losing much more weight than expected each week

    Losing a lot of weight rapidly is one of the early signs that your diet is too extreme and you’re losing too much muscle.

    Rapid weight loss (of more than 1 kilogram per week) results in greater muscle mass loss than slow weight loss.

    Slow weight loss better preserves muscle mass and often has the added benefit of greater fat mass loss.

    One study compared people in the obese weight category who followed either a very low-calorie diet (500 calories per day) for five weeks or a low-calorie diet (1,250 calories per day) for 12 weeks. While both groups lost similar amounts of weight, participants following the very low-calorie diet (500 calories per day) for five weeks lost significantly more muscle mass.

    2. You’re feeling tired and things feel more difficult

    It sounds obvious, but feeling tired, sluggish and finding it hard to complete physical activities, such as working out or doing jobs around the house, is another strong signal you’re losing muscle.

    Research shows a decrease in muscle mass may negatively impact your body’s physical performance.

    3. You’re feeling moody

    Mood swings and feeling anxious, stressed or depressed may also be signs you’re losing muscle mass.

    Research on muscle loss due to ageing suggests low levels of muscle mass can negatively impact mental health and mood. This seems to stem from the relationship between low muscle mass and proteins called neurotrophins, which help regulate mood and feelings of wellbeing.

    So how you can do to maintain muscle during weight loss?

    Fortunately, there are also three actions you can take to maintain muscle mass when you’re following a calorie-restricted diet to lose weight.

    1. Incorporate strength training into your exercise plan

    While a broad exercise program is important to support overall weight loss, strength-building exercises are a surefire way to help prevent the loss of muscle mass. A meta-analysis of studies of older people with obesity found resistance training was able to prevent almost 100% of muscle loss from calorie restriction.

    Relying on diet alone to lose weight will reduce muscle along with body fat, slowing your metabolism. So it’s essential to make sure you’ve incorporated sufficient and appropriate exercise into your weight-loss plan to hold onto your muscle mass stores.

    Woman uses weights at the gym
    Strength-building exercises help you retain muscle. BearFotos/Shutterstock

    But you don’t need to hit the gym. Exercises using body weight – such as push-ups, pull-ups, planks and air squats – are just as effective as lifting weights and using strength-building equipment.

    Encouragingly, moderate-volume resistance training (three sets of ten repetitions for eight exercises) can be as effective as high-volume training (five sets of ten repetitions for eight exercises) for maintaining muscle when you’re following a calorie-restricted diet.

    2. Eat more protein

    Foods high in protein play an essential role in building and maintaining muscle mass, but research also shows these foods help prevent muscle loss when you’re following a calorie-restricted diet.

    But this doesn’t mean just eating foods with protein. Meals need to be balanced and include a source of protein, wholegrain carb and healthy fat to meet our dietary needs. For example, eggs on wholegrain toast with avocado.

    3. Slow your weight loss plan down

    When we change our diet to lose weight, we take our body out of its comfort zone and trigger its survival response. It then counteracts weight loss, triggering several physiological responses to defend our body weight and “survive” starvation.

    Our body’s survival mechanisms want us to regain lost weight to ensure we survive the next period of famine (dieting). Research shows that more than half of the weight lost by participants is regained within two years, and more than 80% of lost weight is regained within five years.

    However, a slow and steady, stepped approach to weight loss, prevents our bodies from activating defence mechanisms to defend our weight when we try to lose weight.

    Ultimately, losing weight long-term comes down to making gradual changes to your lifestyle to ensure you form habits that last a lifetime.

    At the Boden Group, Charles Perkins Centre, we are studying the science of obesity and running clinical trials for weight loss. You can register here to express your interest.

    Nick Fuller, Charles Perkins Centre Research Program Leader, University of Sydney

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

    Share This Post

  • The Worst Cookware Lurking In Your Kitchen (Toxicologist Explains)

    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.

    Dr. Yvonne Burkart gives us a rundown of the worst offenders, and what to use instead:

    Hot mess

    The very worst offender is non-stick cookware, the kind with materials such as Teflon. These are the most toxic, due to PFAS chemicals.

    Non-stick pans release toxic gases, leach chemicals into food, and release microplastic particles, which can accumulate in the body.

    One that a lot of people don’t think about, in that category, is the humble air-fryer, which often as not has a non-stick cooking “basket”. These she describes as highly toxic, as they combine plastic, non-stick coatings, and high heat, which can release fumes and other potentially dangerous chemicals into the air and food.

    You may be wondering: how bad is it? And the answer is, quite bad. PFAS chemicals are linked to infertility, hypertension in pregnancy, developmental issues in children, cancer, weakened immune systems, hormonal disruption, obesity, and intestinal inflammation.

    Dr. Burkart’s top picks for doing better:

    1. Pure ceramic cookware: top choice for safety, particularly brands like Xtrema, which are tested for heavy metal leaching.
    2. Carbon steel & cast iron: durable and safe; can leach iron in acidic foods (for most people, this is a plus, but some may need to be aware of it)
    3. Stainless steel: lightweight and affordable but can leach nickel and chromium in acidic foods at high temperatures. Use only if nothing better is available.

    And specifically as alternatives to air-fryers: glass convection ovens or stainless steel ovens are safer than conventional air fryers. The old “combination oven” can often be a good choice here.

    For more on all of these, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Think you’re good at multi-tasking? Here’s how your brain compensates – and how this changes with age

    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’re all time-poor, so multi-tasking is seen as a necessity of modern living. We answer work emails while watching TV, make shopping lists in meetings and listen to podcasts when doing the dishes. We attempt to split our attention countless times a day when juggling both mundane and important tasks.

    But doing two things at the same time isn’t always as productive or safe as focusing on one thing at a time.

    The dilemma with multi-tasking is that when tasks become complex or energy-demanding, like driving a car while talking on the phone, our performance often drops on one or both.

    Here’s why – and how our ability to multi-task changes as we age.

    Doing more things, but less effectively

    The issue with multi-tasking at a brain level, is that two tasks performed at the same time often compete for common neural pathways – like two intersecting streams of traffic on a road.

    In particular, the brain’s planning centres in the frontal cortex (and connections to parieto-cerebellar system, among others) are needed for both motor and cognitive tasks. The more tasks rely on the same sensory system, like vision, the greater the interference.

    This is why multi-tasking, such as talking on the phone, while driving can be risky. It takes longer to react to critical events, such as a car braking suddenly, and you have a higher risk of missing critical signals, such as a red light.

    The more involved the phone conversation, the higher the accident risk, even when talking “hands-free”.

    Generally, the more skilled you are on a primary motor task, the better able you are to juggle another task at the same time. Skilled surgeons, for example, can multitask more effectively than residents, which is reassuring in a busy operating suite.

    Highly automated skills and efficient brain processes mean greater flexibility when multi-tasking.

    Adults are better at multi-tasking than kids

    Both brain capacity and experience endow adults with a greater capacity for multi-tasking compared with children.

    You may have noticed that when you start thinking about a problem, you walk more slowly, and sometimes to a standstill if deep in thought. The ability to walk and think at the same time gets better over childhood and adolescence, as do other types of multi-tasking.

    When children do these two things at once, their walking speed and smoothness both wane, particularly when also doing a memory task (like recalling a sequence of numbers), verbal fluency task (like naming animals) or a fine-motor task (like buttoning up a shirt). Alternately, outside the lab, the cognitive task might fall by wayside as the motor goal takes precedence.

    Brain maturation has a lot to do with these age differences. A larger prefrontal cortex helps share cognitive resources between tasks, thereby reducing the costs. This means better capacity to maintain performance at or near single-task levels.

    The white matter tract that connects our two hemispheres (the corpus callosum) also takes a long time to fully mature, placing limits on how well children can walk around and do manual tasks (like texting on a phone) together.

    For a child or adult with motor skill difficulties, or developmental coordination disorder, multi-tastking errors are more common. Simply standing still while solving a visual task (like judging which of two lines is longer) is hard. When walking, it takes much longer to complete a path if it also involves cognitive effort along the way. So you can imagine how difficult walking to school could be.

    What about as we approach older age?

    Older adults are more prone to multi-tasking errors. When walking, for example, adding another task generally means older adults walk much slower and with less fluid movement than younger adults.

    These age differences are even more pronounced when obstacles must be avoided or the path is winding or uneven.

    Older adults tend to enlist more of their prefrontal cortex when walking and, especially, when multi-tasking. This creates more interference when the same brain networks are also enlisted to perform a cognitive task.

    These age differences in performance of multi-tasking might be more “compensatory” than anything else, allowing older adults more time and safety when negotiating events around them.

    Older people can practise and improve

    Testing multi-tasking capabilities can tell clinicians about an older patient’s risk of future falls better than an assessment of walking alone, even for healthy people living in the community.

    Testing can be as simple as asking someone to walk a path while either mentally subtracting by sevens, carrying a cup and saucer, or balancing a ball on a tray.

    Patients can then practise and improve these abilities by, for example, pedalling an exercise bike or walking on a treadmill while composing a poem, making a shopping list, or playing a word game.

    The goal is for patients to be able to divide their attention more efficiently across two tasks and to ignore distractions, improving speed and balance.

    There are times when we do think better when moving

    Let’s not forget that a good walk can help unclutter our mind and promote creative thought. And, some research shows walking can improve our ability to search and respond to visual events in the environment.

    But often, it’s better to focus on one thing at a time

    We often overlook the emotional and energy costs of multi-tasking when time-pressured. In many areas of life – home, work and school – we think it will save us time and energy. But the reality can be different.

    Multi-tasking can sometimes sap our reserves and create stress, raising our cortisol levels, especially when we’re time-pressured. If such performance is sustained over long periods, it can leave you feeling fatigued or just plain empty.

    Deep thinking is energy demanding by itself and so caution is sometimes warranted when acting at the same time – such as being immersed in deep thought while crossing a busy road, descending steep stairs, using power tools, or climbing a ladder.

    So, pick a good time to ask someone a vexed question – perhaps not while they’re cutting vegetables with a sharp knife. Sometimes, it’s better to focus on one thing at a time.The Conversation

    Peter Wilson, Professor of Developmental Psychology, Australian Catholic University

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

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • White Bread vs White Pasta – Which Is Healthier?
  • Measles cases are rising—here’s how to protect your family

    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.

    The U.S. is currently experiencing a spike in measles cases across several states. Measles a highly contagious and potentially life-threatening disease caused by a virus. The measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine prevents measles; unvaccinated people put themselves and everyone around them at risk, including babies who are too young to receive the vaccine.

    Read on to learn more about measles: what it is, how to stay protected, and what to do if a measles outbreak happens near you.

    What are the symptoms of measles? 

    Measles symptoms typically begin 10 to 14 days after exposure. The disease starts with a fever followed by a cough, runny nose, and red eyes and then produces a rash of tiny red spots on the face and body. Measles can affect anyone, but is most serious for children under 5, immunocompromised people, and pregnant people, who may give birth prematurely or whose babies may have low birth weight as a result of a measles infection. 

    Measles isn’t just a rash—the disease can cause serious health problems and even death. About one in five unvaccinated people in the U.S. who get measles will be hospitalized and could suffer from pneumonia, dehydration, or brain swelling.

    If you get measles, it can also damage your immune system, making you more vulnerable to other diseases.

    How do you catch measles?

    Measles spreads through the air when an infected person coughs or sneezes. It’s so contagious that unvaccinated people have a 90 percent chance of becoming infected if exposed.

    An infected person can spread measles to others before they have symptoms.

    Why are measles outbreaks happening now?

    The pandemic caused many children to miss out on routine vaccinations, including the MMR vaccine. Delayed vaccination schedules coincided with declining confidence in vaccine safety and growing resistance to vaccine requirements.

    Skepticism about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines has resulted in some people questioning or opposing the MMR vaccine and other routine immunizations. 

    How do I protect myself and my family from measles? 

    Getting an MMR vaccine is the best way to prevent getting sick with measles or spreading it to others. The CDC recommends that children receive the MMR vaccine at 12 to 15 months and again at 4 to 6 years, before starting kindergarten.

    One dose of the MMR vaccine provides 93 percent protection and two doses provide 97 percent protection against all strains of measles. Because some children are too young to be immunized, it’s important that those around them are vaccinated to protect them.

    Is the MMR vaccine safe?

    The MMR vaccine has been rigorously tested and monitored over 50 years and determined to be safe. Adverse reactions to the vaccine are extremely rare.

    Receiving the MMR vaccine is much safer than contracting measles.

    What do I do if there’s a measles outbreak in my community?

    Anyone who is not fully vaccinated for measles should be immunized with a measles vaccine as soon as possible. Measles vaccines given within 72 hours after exposure may prevent or reduce the severity of disease.

    Children as young as 6 months old can receive the MMR vaccine if they are at risk during an outbreak. If your child isn’t fully vaccinated with two doses of the MMR vaccine—or three doses, if your child received the first dose before their first birthday—talk to your pediatrician.

    Unvaccinated people who have been exposed to the virus should stay home from work, school, day care, and other activities for 21 days to avoid spreading the disease.

    For more information, talk to your health care provider.

    This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    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:

  • It’s Not A Bloody Trend – by Kat Brown

    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.

    This one’s not a clinical book, and the author is not a clinician. However, it’s not just a personal account, either. Kat Brown is an award-winning journalist (with ADHD) and has approached this journalistically.

    Not just in terms of investigative journalism, either. Rather, also with her knowledge and understanding of the industry, doing for us some meta-journalism and explaining why the press have gone for many misleading headlines.

    Which in this case means for example it’s not newsworthy to say that people have gone undiagnosed and untreated for years and that many continue to go unseen; we know this also about such things as endometriosis, adenomyosis, and PCOS. But some more reactionary headlines will always get attention, e.g. “look at these malingering attention-seekers”.

    She also digs into the common comorbidities of various conditions, the differences it makes to friendships, families, relationships, work, self-esteem, parenting, and more.

    This isn’t a “how to” book, but there’s a lot of value here if a) you have ADHD, and/or b) you spend any amount of time with someone who does.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to understand “what all the fuss is about” in one book, this is the one for ADHD.

    Click here to check out It’s Not A Bloody Trend, and discover a whole world of things that might have passed you by!

    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:

  • Semaglutide’s Surprisingly Unexamined Effects

    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.

    Semaglutide’s Surprisingly Big Research Gap

    GLP-1 receptor agonists like Ozempic, Wegovy, and other semaglutide drugs. are fast becoming a health industry standard go-to tool in the weight loss toolbox. When it comes to recommending that patients lose weight, “Have you considered Ozempic?” is the common refrain.

    Sometimes, this may be a mere case of kicking the can down the road with regard to some other treatment that it can be argued (sometimes even truthfully) would go better after some weight loss:

    How weight bias in health care can harm patients with obesity: Research

    …which we also covered in fewer words in the second-to-last item here:

    Shedding Some Obesity Myths

    But GLP-1 agonists work, right?

    Yes, albeit there’s a litany of caveats, top of which are usually:

    • there are often adverse gastrointestinal side effects
    • if you stop taking them, weight regain generally ensues promptly

    For more details on these and more, see:

    Semaglutide For Weight Loss?

    …but now there’s another thing that’s come to light:

    The dark side of semaglutide’s weight loss

    In academia, “dark” is often used to describe “stuff we don’t have much (or in some cases, any) direct empirical evidence of, but for reasons of surrounding things, we know it’s there”.

    Well-known examples include “dark matter” in physics and the Dark Ages in (European) history.

    In the case of semaglutide and weight loss, a review by a team of researchers (Drs. Sandra Christenen, Katie Robinson, Sara Thomas, and Dominique Williams) has discovered how little research has been done into a certain aspect of GLP-1 agonist’s weight loss effects, namely…

    Dietary changes!

    There’s been a lot of popular talk about “people taking semaglutide eat less”, but it’s mostly anecdotal and/or presumed based on parts of the mechanism of action (increasing insulin production, reducing glucagon secretions, modulating dietary cravings).

    Where studies have looked at dietary changes, it’s almost exclusively been a matter of looking at caloric intake (which has been found to be a 16–39% reduction), and observations-in-passing that patients reported reduction in cravings for fatty and sweet foods.

    This reduction in caloric intake, by the way, is not significantly different to the reduction brought about by counselling alone (head-to-head studies have been done; these are also discussed in the research review).

    However! It gets worse. Very few studies of good quality have been done, even fewer (two studies) actually had a registered dietitian nutritionist on the team, and only one of them used the “gold standard” of nutritional research, the 24-hour dietary recall test. Which, in case you’re curious, you can read about what that is here:

    Dietary Assessment Methods: What Is A 24-Hour Recall?

    Of the four studies that actually looked at the macros (unlike most studies), they found that on average, protein intake decreased by 17.1%. Which is a big deal!

    It’s an especially big deal, because while protein’s obviously important for everyone, it’s especially important for anyone trying to lose weight, because muscle mass is a major factor in metabolic base rate—which in turn is much important for fat loss/maintenance than exercise, when it comes to how many calories we burn by simply existing.

    A reasonable hypothesis, therefore, is that one of the numerous reasons people who quit GLP-1 agonists immediately put fat back on, is because they probably lost muscle mass in amongst their weight loss, meaning that their metabolic base rate will have decreased, meaning that they end up more disposed to put on fat than before.

    And, that’s just a hypothesis and it’s a hypothesis based on very few studies, so it’s not something to necessarily take as any kind of definitive proof of anything, but it to say—as the researchers of this review do loudly say—more research needs to be done into this, because this has been a major gap in research so far!

    Any other bad news?

    While we’re talking research gaps, guess how many studies looked into micronutrient intake changes in people taking GLP-1 agonists?

    If you guessed zero, you guessed correctly.

    You can find the paper itself here:

    Dietary intake by patients taking GLP-1 and dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonists: A narrative review and discussion of research needs

    What’s the main take-away here?

    On a broad, scoping level: we need more research!

    On a “what this means for individuals who want to lose weight” level: maybe we should be more wary of this still relatively new (less than 10 years old) “wonder drug”. And for most of those 10 years it’s only been for diabetics, with weight loss use really being in just the past few years (2021 onwards).

    In other words: not necessarily any need to panic, but caution is probably not a bad idea, and natural weight loss methods remain very reasonable options for most people.

    See also: How To Lose Weight (Healthily!)

    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: