Macadamias vs Hazelnuts – 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 macadamias to hazelnuts, we picked the hazelnuts.
Why?
In terms of macros first, hazelnuts have 2x the protein, and slightly more carbs and fiber. We call this a win for hazelnuts.
When it comes to vitamins, macadamias have more of vitamins B1, B2, and B3, while hazelnuts have more of vitamins A, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, and E. Notably, 28x more vitamin E, so that’s not inconsiderable. Also 10x the vitamin B9, and 5x the vitamin C, and the rest, more modest wins. In any case, clearly a strong win for hazelnuts here.
In the category of minerals, macadamias have more selenium, while hazelnuts have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc. Another clear win for hazelnuts.
In short, hazelnuts win in all categories. However, by all means enjoy either or both (unless you have a nut allergy, in which case, obviously don’t).
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Eggplant vs Zucchini – 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 eggplant to zucchini, we picked the zucchini.
Why?
In terms of macros, eggplant has more carbs and fiber while zucchini has more protein; we’ll generally prioritize fiber, so call this a subjective win for eggplant in this category, though an argument could be made for a tie.
In the category of vitamins, eggplant has more of vitamins B3, B5, and E, while zucchini has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B6, B9, C, K, and choline, scoring a win for zucchini here.
Looking at minerals, eggplant has more copper, manganese, and selenium, while zucchini has more calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium and zinc, meaning another win for zucchini in this round.
In terms of polyphenols, eggplant has a greater variety of polyphenols, while zucchini has greater total mass of polyphenols, so we’re calling this one a tie.
Adding up the sections makes for an overall win for zucchini, but by all means enjoy either or both (perhaps together!); diversity is good!
Want to learn more?
You might like:
What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?
Enjoy!
Share This Post
-
Pistachios 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 pistachios to cashews, we picked the pistachios.
Why?
In terms of macros, both are great sources of protein and healthy fats, and considered head-to-head:
- pistachios have slightly more protein, but it’s close
- pistachios have slightly more (health) fat, but it’s close
- cashews have slightly more carbs, but it’s close
- pistachios have a lot more fiber (more than 3x more!)
All in all, both have a good macro balance, but pistachios win easily on account of the fiber, as well as the slight edge for protein and fats.
When it comes to vitamins, pistachios have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B6, B9, C, & E.
Cashews do have more vitamin B5, also called pantothenic acid, pantothenic literally meaning “from everywhere”. Guess what’s not a common deficiency to have!
So pistachios win easily on vitamins, too.
In the category of minerals, things are more balanced, though cashews have a slight edge. Pistachios have more notably more calcium and potassium, while cashews have notably more selenium, zinc, and magnesium.
Both of these nuts have anti-inflammatory, anti-diabetic, and anti-cancer benefits, often from different phytochemicals, but with similar levels of usefulness.
Taking everything into account, however, one nut comes out in the clear lead, mostly due to its much higher fiber content and better vitamin profile, and that’s the pistachios.
Want to learn more?
Check out:
Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts
Enjoy!
Share This Post
-
Good to Go – by Christie Aschwanden
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.
Many of us may more often need to recover from a day of moving furniture than running a marathon, but the science of recovery can still teach us a lot. The author, herself an endurance athlete and much-decorated science journalist, sets out to do just that.
She explores a lot of recovery methods, and examines whether the science actually backs them up, and if so, to what degree. She also, in true science journalism style, talks to a lot of professionals ranging from fellow athletes to fellow scientists, to get their input too—she is nothing if not thorough, and this is certainly not a book of one person’s opinion with something to sell.
Indeed, on the contrary, her findings show that some of the best recovery methods are the cheapest, or even free. She also looks at the psychological aspect though, and why many people are likely to continue with things that objectively do not work better than placebo.
The style is very easy-reading jargon-free pop-science, while nevertheless being backed up with hundreds of studies cited in the bibliography—a perfect balance of readability and reliability.
Bottom line: for those who wish to be better informed about how to recover quickly and easily, this book is a treasure trove of information well-presented.
Click here to check out Good To Go, and always be good to go!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Midwives Blame California Rules for Hampering Birth Centers Amid Maternity Care Crisis
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.
Jessie Mazar squeezed the grab handle in her husband’s pickup and groaned as contractions struck her during the 90-minute drive from her home in rural northeastern California to the closest hospital with a maternity unit.
She could have reached Plumas District Hospital, in Quincy, in just seven minutes. But it no longer delivers babies.
Local officials have a plan for a birth center in Quincy, where midwives could deliver babies with backup from on-call doctors and a standby perinatal unit at the hospital, but state health officials have yet to approve it.
That left Mazar to brave the long, winding road — one sometimes blocked by snow, floods, or forest fires — to have her baby. Women across California are facing similar ordeals as hospitals increasingly close money-losing maternity units, especially in rural areas.
Midwife-operated birth centers offer an alternative for women with low-risk pregnancies and can play a crucial role in filling the gap left by hospitals’ retreat from obstetrics, maternal health advocates say.
Declining birth rates, staffing shortages, and financial pressures have led 56 California hospitals — about 1 in 6 — to shutter maternity units over the past dozen years.
But midwives say California’s regulatory regime around birth centers is unnecessarily preventing new centers from opening and leading some existing facilities to close. Obtaining a license can take as long as four years.
“All they’ve essentially done is made it more dangerous to have a baby,” said Sacramento midwife Bethany Sasaki. “People have to drive two hours now because a birth center can’t open, so it’s more dangerous. People are going to be having babies in cars on the side of the road.”
Last month, state Assembly member Mia Bonta introduced legislation to streamline the regulatory process and fix what she calls “a broken system” for licensing birth centers.
“We know that alternative birth centers lead to often better outcomes, lower-risk births, more opportunity for children to be born healthy, and also to lower maternal mortality and morbidity,” she said.
The proposed bill would remove various bureaucratic requirements, though many details have yet to be finalized. Bonta introduced the bill in its current form as a jumping-off point for discussions about how to expedite licensing.
“It’s a starting place,” said Sandra Poole, health policy advocate for the Western Center on Law & Poverty, a co-sponsor of the legislation.
For now, birth centers struggle with a gantlet of rules, only some clearly connected to patient safety. Over the past decade, the number of licensed birth centers in California dropped from 12 to five, according to Bonta.
Plumas County officials are trying to address one key issue: how far a birth center can be from a hospital with a round-the-clock obstetrics unit. State regulations say it can be no more than a 30-minute drive, a distance set when many more hospitals had maternity units.
The first-of-its-kind “Plumas model” aims to take advantage of flexibility provisions in the law to address the obstacle in a way that could potentially be replicated elsewhere in the state.
But the hospital’s application for a birth center and a perinatal unit has been “languishing” with the California Department of Public Health, which is “looking for cover from the legislature,” said Robert Moore, chief medical officer of Partnership HealthPlan of California, a Medi-Cal managed-care plan serving most of Northern California. Asked about the application, a CDPH spokesperson said only that it was under review.
The goal should be for all women to be within an hour’s drive of a hospital with an obstetrics unit, Moore said. Data shows the complication rate goes up after an hour and even higher after two hours, he said, while the benefit is less compelling between 30 and 60 minutes.
Numerous other regulations have made it difficult for birth centers to keep their doors open.
Since August, birth centers in Sacramento and Monterey have had to stop operating because their heating ducts failed to meet licensing requirements. The facilities fall under the same state Department of Health Care Access and Information regulations as primary care clinics, though birth centers see healthy families, not sick ones, and don’t need hospital-grade ventilation, said midwife Caroline Cusenza.
She had spent $50,000 remodeling the Monterey Birth & Wellness Center to include state-required items, such as nursing and hand-washing stations and a housekeeping closet. In the end, a requirement for galvanized steel heating vents, which would have required opening the ceiling at an unaffordable cost, prompted her heart-wrenching decision to close.
“We’re turning women away in tears,” said Sasaki, who owned Midtown Birth Center in Sacramento. She bought the building for $760,000 and spent $250,000 remodeling it in a way she believed met all licensing requirements. But regulators would not license it unless the heating system was redone. Sasaki estimated it would have cost an additional $50,000 to bring it into compliance — too much to keep operating.
She blamed her closure on “regulatory dysfunction.”
Legislation signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year could ease onerous building codes such as those governing Sasaki’s and Cusenza’s heating systems, said Poole, the health policy advocate.
The state has taken two to four years to issue birth center licenses, according to a brief by the Osher Center for Integrative Health at the University of California-San Francisco. The state Department of Public Health “works tirelessly to ensure health facilities are able to be properly licensed and follow all applicable requirements within our authority before and during their operation,” spokesperson Mark Smith said.
Bonta, an Oakland Democrat who chairs the Assembly’s health committee, said she would consider increasing the allowable drive time between a birth center and a hospital maternity unit as part of her new legislation.
The state last updated birth center regulations more than a decade ago, before hospitals’ mass exodus from obstetrics. “The hurdle is the time and distance standards without compromising safety,” Poole said. “But where there’s nothing right now, we would say a birth center is certainly a better alternative to not having any maternal care.”
Moore noted that midwife-led births in homes and birth centers are the mainstay of obstetric care in Europe, where the infant mortality rate is considerably lower than in the U.S. More than 98% of American babies are born in hospitals.
Babies delivered by midwives are more likely to be born vaginally, less likely to require intensive care, and more likely to breastfeed, the California Maternal Quality Care Collaborative has found. Midwife-led births also lead to fewer infant emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and neonatal deaths. And they cost far less: Birth centers generally charge one-quarter or less of the average cost of about $36,000 for a vaginal birth in a California hospital.
If they catered only to private-pay clients, Cusenza and Sasaki could have continued operating without licenses. They must be licensed, however, to receive payments from Medi-Cal and some private insurance companies, which they needed to remain in business. Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid health insurance program, which covers low-income residents, paid for about 40% of the state’s births in 2022.
Bonta has heard reports from midwives that the key to getting licensed is hunting down the right state health department advocate. “I don’t believe that we should be building resources based on the model of ‘Where’s Waldo?’ in finding a champion inside CDPH,” she said.
Lori Link, director of midwifery at Plumas District Hospital, believes the Plumas model can turn what’s become a maternity desert into an oasis. Jessie Mazar, whose son was born in September without complications at a Truckee hospital, would welcome the opportunity to deliver her planned second child in Quincy.
“That would be convenient,” she said. “We’re not holding our breath.”
This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.
USE OUR CONTENT
This story can be republished for free (details).
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
This article first appeared on KFF Health 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:
-
Nobody’s Sleeping – by Dr. Bijoy John
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.
Firstly, let’s mention: yes, for the sake of being methodical and comprehensive this book does give the same baseline advice as every other sleep book out there. However, it gives something else, too:
It goes beyond that baseline, to a) give more personalized advice for various demographics (e.g. per age, sex, health conditions, etc) and b) give direction for further personalizing one’s own sleep improvement journey, by troubleshooting and fixing things that may pertain to you very specifically and not to most people.
This means, that if you’re doing “all the right things” but still having sleep-related problems, there is hope and there are more approaches to try.
The style in which this is delivered is very readable, which is good, because if one hasn’t been sleeping well, then chances are that an intellectual challenge would be about as welcome as a physical challenge—that is to say: not at all.
Bottom line: if sleep is not your strength and you would like it to be and all the usual things haven’t yet worked, this book may well help you to overcome the hurdles between you and a good night’s sleep each night.
Click here to check out Nobody’s Sleeping, and refute that title!
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:
-
Pineapple vs Passion Fruit – 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 pineapple to passion fruit, we picked the passion fruit.
Why?
Both are certainly great, and both have won their respective previous comparisons! And this one’s close:
In terms of macros, passion fruit has about 4x the protein, nearly 2x the carbs, and more than 7x the fiber. So, this one’s a clear and overwhelming win for passion fruit.
Vitamins are quite close; pineapple has more of vitamins B1, B5, B6, B9, and C, while passion fruit has more of vitamins A, B2, B3, and choline. So, a 5:4 marginal win for pineapple.
When it comes to minerals, pineapple has more calcium, copper, manganese, and zinc, while passion fruit has more iron, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and selenium. Superficially, this would be a 5:5 tie, but looking at the numbers, passion fruit’s margins of difference are much greater, which means it gives the better overall mineral coverage, and thus wins the category.
Looking at polyphenols, pineapple wins this category with its variety of lignans, while passion fruit has just secoisolariciresinol, of which pineapple has more anyway. Plus, not a polyphenol but doing much of the same job of same, pineapple has bromelain, which is unique to it. So pineapple wins on the phytochemicals reckoning.
Adding up the sections and weighting them for importance (e.g. what a difference it makes to health) and statistical relevance (e.g. greater or smaller margins of difference) makes for a nominal passion fruit win, but like we say, both of these fruits are great, so enjoy both!
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Bromelain vs Inflammation & Much More
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: