Pine Nuts vs Macadamia Nuts – 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 pine nuts to macadamias, we picked the pine nuts.

Why?

In terms of macros, it’s subjective depending on what you want to prioritize; the two nuts are equal in carbs, but pine nuts have more protein and macadamias have more fiber. We’d generally prioritize the fiber, which so far would give macadamias a win in this category, but if you prefer the protein, then consider it pine nuts. Next, we must consider fats; macadamias have slightly more fat, and of which, proportionally more saturated fat, resulting in 3x the total saturated fat compared to pine nuts, gram for gram. With this in mind, we consider this category a tie or a marginal nominal win for pine nuts.

In the category of vitamins, pine nuts have more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B9, E, K, and choline, while macadamias have more of vitamins B1, B5, B6, and C. A clear win for pine nuts this time, especially with pine nuts having more than 17x the vitamin E of macadamias.

When it comes to minerals, pine nuts have more copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc, while macadamias have more calcium and selenium. Another easy win for pine nuts.

In short, enjoy either or both (diversity is good), but pine nuts are the healthier by most metrics.

Want to learn more?

You might like to read:

Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Blueberries vs Cranberries – Which is Healthier?
  • How To Avoid Carer Burnout (Without Dropping Care)
    How to Avoid Carer Burnout: Consider if you’re the right person for the role. Learn about the person’s condition and ask for help. Take care of yourself and find support.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • The Seven Circles – by Chelsey Luger & Thosh Collins

    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.

    At first glance, this can seem like an unscientific book—you won’t find links to studies in this one, for sure! However, if we take a look at the seven circles in question, they are:

    1. Food
    2. Movement
    3. Sleep
    4. Ceremony
    5. Sacred Space
    6. Land
    7. Community

    Regular 10almonds readers may notice that these seven items contain five of the things strongly associated with the “supercentenarian Blue Zones”. (If you are wondering why Native American reservations are not Blue Zones, the answer there lies less in health science and more in history and sociology, and what things have been done to a given people).

    The authors—who are Native American, yes—present in one place a wealth of knowledge and know-how. Not even just from their own knowledge and their own respective tribes, but gathered from other tribes too.

    Perhaps the strongest value of this book to the reader is in the explanation of noting the size of each of those circles, how they connect with each other, and providing a whole well-explained system for how we can grow each of them in harmony with each other.

    Or to say the same thing in sciencey terms: how to mindfully improve integrated lifestyle factors synergistically for greater efficacy and improved health-adjusted quality-of-life years.

    Bottom line: if you’re not averse to something that mostly doesn’t use sciencey terms of have citations to peer-reviewed studies peppered through the text, then this book has wisdom that’s a) older than the pyramids of Giza, yet also b) highly consistent with our current best science of Blue Zone healthy longevity.

    Click here to check out The Seven Circles, and live well!

    Share This Post

  • Do You Know Which Supplements You Shouldn’t Take Together? (10 Pairs!)

    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. LeGrand Peterson wants us to get the most out of our supplements, so watch out for these…

    Time to split up some pairs…

    In most cases these are a matter of competing for absorption; sometimes to the detriment of both, sometimes to the detriment of one or the other, and sometimes, the problem is entirely different and they just interact in a way that could potentially cause other problems. Dr. Peterson advises as follows:

    1. Vitamin C and vitamin B12: taking these together can reduce the absorption of Vitamin B12, as vitamin C can overpower it.
    2. Vitamin C and copper: high amounts of vitamin C can decrease copper absorption, especially in those who are severely copper deficient.
    3. Magnesium and calcium: these two minerals compete for absorption in the intestines, potentially reducing the effectiveness of both.
    4. Calcium and iron: calcium can decrease iron absorption, so they should not be taken together, especially if you are iron deficient.
    5. Calcium and zinc: calcium also competes with zinc, reducing zinc absorption; they should be taken at different times.
    6. Zinc and copper: zinc and copper compete for absorption, so they should be taken at separate times.
    7. Iron and zinc: iron can decrease zinc absorption, and thus, they should not be taken together.
    8. Iron and green tea: perhaps a surprising one, but green tea can reduce iron absorption, so they should not be taken simultaneously.
    9. Vitamin E and vitamin K: vitamin E increases bleeding risk, while vitamin K promotes clotting, making them opposites and risky to take together.
    10. Fish oil and ginkgo biloba: both are anticoagulants and can increase the risk of bleeding, especially if taken with blood thinners like warfarin.

    If you need to take supplements that compete (or conflict or otherwise potentially adversely interact) with each other, it’s recommended to separate them by at least 4 hours, or better yet, take one in the morning and the other at night. If in doubt, do speak with your pharmacist or doctor for personalized advice

    You may be thinking: half my foods contain half of these nutrients! And yes, assuming you have a nutritionally dense diet, this is probably the case. Foods typically release nutrients more slowly than supplements, and unlike supplements, do not usually contain megadoses (although they can, such as the selenium content of Brazil nuts, or vitamin A in carrots). Basically, food is in most cases safer and gentler than supplements. If concerned, do speak with your nutritionist or doctor for personalized advice.

    For more information 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:

    Do We Need Supplements, And Do They Work?

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Improving Women’s Health Across the Lifespan – by Dr. Michelle Tollefson et al.

    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 say “et al.”, because this hefty book (504 pages) is a compilation of contributions by about 60 authors, of whom, 100% are doctors and about 90% are women.

    As one might expect from a book with many small self-contained chapters by such a lot of doctors, the content is very diverse, though the style is consistent throughout, likely due to the authors working from a style sheet, plus the work of the editorial team.

    About that content: the focus here is lifestyle medicine, and while much of the advice will go for men too (most people are unlikely to go wrong with “eat more fruits and vegetables and get better sleep” etc), anything more detailed than that (of which there’s a lot) is focussed on women. Hence, we get chapters on optimal nutrition for women, physical activity for women, sleep and women’s health, etc, as well as topics that can affect everyone but disproportionately affect women—ranging from autoimmune diseases to social burdens that affect health in measurable ways. There’s also, as you might expect, plenty about sexual health, pregnancy-related health, menopausal health, and so forth.

    The strength of this book is really in its diversity; it’s very much a case of “60 heads are better than one”, and as such, we’re pretty much getting 60 books for the price of one here, as each author brings what they are most specialized in.

    Bottom line: if you are a woman and/or love a woman, this book is packed with information that will be of interest and applicable use.

    Click here to check out Improving Women’s Health Across The Lifespan, and do just that!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Blueberries vs Cranberries – Which is Healthier?
  • Sugar Blues – by William Dufty

    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 is a “read it cover to cover” book. It charts the rise of sugar’s place in world diets in general and the American diet in particular, and draws many conclusions about the effect this has had on us.

    This book will challenge you. Sometimes, it will change your mind. Sometimes, you’ll go “no, I’m sure that’s not right”, and you’ll go Googling. Either way, you’ll learn something.

    And that, for us, is the most important measure of any informational book: did we gain something from it? In Sugar Blues, perhaps the single biggest “gain” for the reader is that it’s an eye-opener and a call-to-arms—the extent to which you heed that is up to you, but it sure is good to at least be familiar with the battlefield.

    Check Out Sugar Blues on 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:

  • Ouch. That ‘Free’ Annual Checkup Might Cost You. Here’s Why.

    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 Kristy Uddin, 49, went in for her annual mammogram in Washington state last year, she assumed she would not incur a bill because the test is one of the many preventive measures guaranteed to be free to patients under the 2010 Affordable Care Act. The ACA’s provision made medical and economic sense, encouraging Americans to use screening tools that could nip medical problems in the bud and keep patients healthy.

    So when a bill for $236 arrived, Uddin — an occupational therapist familiar with the health care industry’s workings — complained to her insurer and the hospital. She even requested an independent review.

    “I’m like, ‘Tell me why am I getting this bill?’” Uddin recalled in an interview. The unsatisfying explanation: The mammogram itself was covered, per the ACA’s rules, but the fee for the equipment and the facility was not.

    That answer was particularly galling, she said, because, a year earlier, her “free” mammogram at the same health system had generated a bill of about $1,000 for the radiologist’s reading. Though she fought that charge (and won), this time she threw in the towel and wrote the $236 check. But then she dashed off a submission to the KFF Health News-NPR “Bill of the Month” project:

    “I was really mad — it’s ridiculous,” she later recalled. “This is not how the law is supposed to work.”

    The ACA’s designers might have assumed that they had spelled out with sufficient clarity that millions of Americans would no longer have to pay for certain types of preventive care, including mammograms, colonoscopies, and recommended vaccines, in addition to doctor visits to screen for disease. But the law’s authors didn’t reckon with America’s ever-creative medical billing juggernaut.

    Over the past several years, the medical industry has eroded the ACA’s guarantees, finding ways to bill patients in gray zones of the law. Patients going in for preventive care, expecting that it will be fully covered by insurance, are being blindsided by bills, big and small.

    The problem comes down to deciding exactly what components of a medical encounter are covered by the ACA guarantee. For example, when do conversations between doctor and patient during an annual visit for preventive services veer into the treatment sphere? What screenings are needed for a patient’s annual visit?

    A healthy 30-year-old visiting a primary care provider might get a few basic blood tests, while a 50-year-old who is overweight would merit additional screening for Type 2 diabetes.

    Making matters more confusing, the annual checkup itself is guaranteed to be “no cost” for women and people age 65 and older, but the guarantee doesn’t apply for men in the 18-64 age range — though many preventive services that require a medical visit (such as checks of blood pressure or cholesterol and screens for substance abuse) are covered.

    No wonder what’s covered under the umbrella of prevention can look very different to medical providers (trying to be thorough) and billers (intent on squeezing more dollars out of every medical encounter) than it does to insurers (who profit from narrower definitions).

    For patients, the gray zone has become a billing minefield. Here are a few more examples, gleaned from the Bill of the Month project in just the past six months:

    Peter Opaskar, 46, of Texas, went to his primary care doctor last year for his preventive care visit — as he’d done before, at no cost. This time, his insurer paid $130.81 for the visit, but he also received a perplexing bill for $111.81. Opaskar learned that he had incurred the additional charge because when his doctor asked if he had any health concerns, he mentioned that he was having digestive problems but had already made an appointment with his gastroenterologist. So, the office explained, his visit was billed as both a preventive physical and a consultation. “Next year,” Opasker said in an interview, if he’s asked about health concerns, “I’ll say ‘no,’ even if I have a gunshot wound.”

    Kevin Lin, a technology specialist in Virginia in his 30s, went to a new primary care provider to take advantage of the preventive care benefit when he got insurance; he had no physical complaints. He said he was assured at check-in that he wouldn’t be charged. His insurer paid $174 for the checkup, but he was billed an additional $132.29 for a “new patient visit.” He said he has made many calls to fight the bill, so far with no luck.

    Finally, there’s Yoori Lee, 46, of Minnesota, herself a colorectal surgeon, who was shocked when her first screening colonoscopy yielded a bill for $450 for a biopsy of a polyp — a bill she knew was illegal. Federal regulations issued in 2022 to clarify the matter are very clear that biopsies during screening colonoscopies are included in the no-cost promise. “I mean, the whole point of screening is to find things,” she said, stating, perhaps, the obvious.

    Though these patient bills defy common sense, room for creative exploitation has been provided by the complex regulatory language surrounding the ACA. Consider this from Ellen Montz, deputy administrator and director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, in an emailed response to queries and an interview request on this subject: “If a preventive service is not billed separately or is not tracked as individual encounter data separately from an office visit and the primary purpose of the office visit is not the delivery of the preventive item or service, then the plan issuer may impose cost sharing for the office visit.”

    So, if the doctor decides that a patient’s mention of stomach pain does not fall under the umbrella of preventive care, then that aspect of the visit can be billed separately, and the patient must pay?

    And then there’s this, also from Montz: “Whether a facility fee is permitted to be charged to a consumer would depend on whether the facility usage is an integral part of performing the mammogram or an integral part of any other preventive service that is required to be covered without cost sharing under federal law.”

    But wait, how can you do a mammogram or colonoscopy without a facility?

    Unfortunately, there is no federal enforcement mechanism to catch individual billing abuses. And agencies’ remedies are weak — simply directing insurers to reprocess claims or notifying patients they can resubmit them.

    In the absence of stronger enforcement or remedies, CMS could likely curtail these practices and give patients the tools to fight back by offering the sort of clarity the agency provided a few years ago regarding polyp biopsies — spelling out more clearly what comes under the rubric of preventive care, what can be billed, and what cannot.

    The stories KFF Health News and NPR receive are likely just the tip of an iceberg. And while each bill might be relatively small compared with the stunning $10,000 hospital bills that have become all too familiar in the United States, the sorry consequences are manifold. Patients pay bills they do not owe, depriving them of cash they could use elsewhere. If they can’t pay, those bills might end up with debt-collection agencies and, ultimately, harm their credit score.

    Perhaps most disturbing: These unexpected bills might discourage people from seeking preventive screenings that could be lifesaving, which is why the ACA deemed them “essential health benefits” that should be free.

    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.

    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:

  • Make Overnight Oats Shorter Or Longer For Different Benefits!

    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.

    It’s Q&A Day at 10almonds!

    Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!

    In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!

    As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!

    So, no question/request too big or small

    ❝How long do I have to soak oats for to get the benefits of “overnight oats”?❞

    The primary benefit of overnight oats (over cooked oats) is that they are soft enough to eat without having been cooked (as cooking increases their glycemic index).

    So, if it’s soft, it’s good to eat. A few hours should be sufficient.

    Bonus information

    If, by the way, you happen to leave oats and milk (be it animal or plant milk) sealed in a jar at room temperature for a 2–3 days (less if your “room temperature” is warmer than average), it will start to ferment.

    • Good news: fermentation can bring extra health benefits!
    • Bad news: you’re on your own if something pathogenic is present

    For more on this, you might like to read:

    Fermenting Everything: How to Make Your Own Cultured Butter, Fermented Fish, Perfect Kimchi, and Beyond

    Enjoy!

    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: