An Unexpected Extra Threat Of Alcohol
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.
If You Could Use Some Exotic Booze…
…then for health reasons, we’re going to have to say “nay”.
We’ve written about alcohol before, and needless to say, it’s not good:
(the answer is “no, we cannot”)
In fact, the WHO (which unlike government regulatory bodies setting “safe” limits on drinking, makes no profit from taxes on alcohol sales) has declared that “the only safe amount of alcohol is zero”:
WHO: No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health
Up there, where the air is rarefied…
If you’re flying somewhere this summer (Sinatra-style flying honeymoon or otherwise), you might want to skip the alcohol even if you normally do imbibe, because:
❝…even in young and healthy individuals, the combination of alcohol intake with sleeping under hypobaric conditions poses a considerable strain on the cardiac system and might lead to exacerbation of symptoms in patients with cardiac or pulmonary diseases.
These effects might be even greater in older people; cardiovascular symptoms have a prevalence of 7% of inflight medical emergencies, with cardiac arrest causing 58% of aircraft diversions.❞
Source: Alcohol plus cabin pressure at higher altitude may threaten sleeping plane passengers’ heart health
The experiment divided subjects into a control group and a study group; the study group were placed in simulated cabin pressure as though at altitude, which found, when giving some of them two small(we’re talking the kind given on flights) alcoholic drinks:
❝The combination of alcohol and simulated cabin pressure at cruising altitude prompted a fall in SpO2 to an average of just over 85% and a compensatory increase in heart rate to an average of nearly 88 beats/minute during sleep.❞
In contrast, that was 77 beats/minute for those who had alcohol but weren’t at altitude pressure, or 64 beats/minute for those who neither drank nor were at altitude pressure.
Lots more metrics were recorded and the study is interesting to read; if you’ve ever slept on a plane and thought “that sleep was not restful at all”, then know: it wasn’t just the seat’s fault, nor the engine, nor the recycled nature of the air—it was the reduced pressure causing hypoxia (defined as having oxygen levels lower than the healthy clinical norm of 90%) and almost halving your sleep’s effectiveness for a less than 10% drop in available oxygen in the blood (the sleepers not at altitude pressure averaged 96% SpO2, compared to the 85% at altitude).
We say “almost halving” because the deep sleep phase of sleep was reduced from 84 minutes (control) to 67.5 minutes at altitude without alcohol, or 46.5 minutes at altitude with alcohol.
Again, this was a pressure cabin in a lab—so this wasn’t about the other conditions of an airplane (seats, engine hundreds of other people, etc).
Which means: in an actual airplane it’s probably even worse.
Oh, and the study participants? All healthy individuals aged 18–40, so again probably worse for those older (or younger) than that range, or with existing health conditions!
Want to know more?
You can read the study in full here:
Want to drop the drink at any altitude? Check out:
Want to get that vacation feel without alcohol? You’re going to love:
Mocktails – by Moira Clark (book)
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:
-
Most People Who Start GLP-1 RAs Quit Them Within A Year (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.
Specifically, 54% quit within one year, with that number rising to 72% within two years.
We first wrote about GLP-1 receptor agonists (i.e. semaglutide drugs like Ozempic and Wegovy) a couple of years ago when popularity was just beginning to take off:
However, as we had room only to touch briefly on the side effects and what happens when you stop taking it, you might also want to check out:
What happens when I stop taking a drug like Ozempic or Mounjaro?
…and:
Notwithstanding all this information, there’s a lot of science that has still yet to be done. If you’re a regular 10almonds reader, you’ll be familiar with our research review articles—this one was more of a non-research review, i.e. looking at the great absence of evidence in certain areas, and the many cases of research simply not asking the right questions, for example:
❝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.❞
Read in full: Semaglutide’s Surprisingly Unexamined Effects ← there are a lot more (equally concerning) items discussed in this article
Why people quit GLP-1 RAs
There was a large (n=125,474) study of US adults. The average age was about 54 years, and about 65% were female.
From the total data pool (i.e. not narrowing it down by demographic), 54% stopped within a year, and 72% within two years.
The factors most associated with discontinuation were:
- age above 65 years
- not having type 2 diabetes
The main reasons given for discontinuation were:
- High costs: self-explanatory, but it’s worth noting that people who stopped for this reason were more likely to restart later.
- Adverse side effects: the most common ones were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, stomach pain, and loss of appetite. Rarer, but more seriously, side effects included: pancreatitis (severe abdominal pain, nausea, vomiting), gallbladder issues (gallstones, cholecystitis), kidney problems, severe allergic reactions (rash, swelling, difficulty breathing), hypoglycemia, especially if taken with insulin or other diabetes medications, changes in vision (worsening diabetic retinopathy), and an increased heart rate.
- Disappointingly little weight loss: the researchers noted that GLP-1 RA results are “heterogenous”, meaning, they differ a lot. For those for whom it didn’t work, quitting was more likely, for obvious reasons. See also: 10 Mistakes To Sabotage Your Ozempic Progress
- Successful weight loss: while it is widely known that if one stops taking GLP-1 RAs, weight regain is the usual next thing to happen, there are a lot of people who go onto GLP-1 RAs with the rationale “I’ll just use this to lose the weight, and then I’ll keep the weight off with my diet and lifestyle”. Which sounds reasonable, but because of the specific mechanisms of actions of GLP-1 RAs, it simply doesn’t work that way (and, as we mentioned above, there are reasons that you may, after stopping taking GLP-1 RAs, be more disposed to put weight on than you were before you started). So, by the best of current science (which admittedly is not amazing when it comes to this topic), it does seem that taking GLP-1 RAs is a lifetime commitment.
You can read the study itself here:
Want to get similar results, without GLP-1 RAs?
Then check out:
5 Ways To Naturally Boost The “Ozempic Effect” ← this is about natural ways of doing similar hormone-hacking to what GLP-1 RAs do
and
Ozempic vs Five Natural Supplements ← this is about metabolism-tweaking supplements
and
Hack Your Hunger ← this is about appetite management
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Celeriac vs Celery – 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 celeriac to celery, we picked the celeriac.
Why?
Yes, these are essentially the same plant, but there are important nutritional differences:
In terms of macros, celeriac has more than 2x the protein, and slightly more carbs and fiber. Both are very low glycemic index, so the higher protein and fiber makes celeriac the winner in this category.
In the category of vitamins, celeriac has more of vitamins B1, B3, B5, B6, C, E, K, and choline, while celery has more of vitamins A and B9. An easy win for celeriac.
When it comes to minerals, celeriac has more copper, calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while celery is not higher in any minerals. Another obvious win for celeriac.
Adding these sections up makes for a clear overall win for celeriac, but by all means enjoy either or both!
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Stevia vs Acesulfame Potassium – 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 stevia to acesulfame potassium, we picked the stevia.
Why?
You may be wondering: is acesulfame potassium a good source of potassium?
And the answer is: no, it is not. Obviously, it does contain potassium, but let’s do some math here:
- Acesulfame potassium is 200x sweeter than sugar
- Therefore replacing a 15g teaspoon of sugar = 75mg acesulfame potassium
- Acesulfame potassium’s full name is “potassium 6-methyl-2,2-dioxo-2H-1,2λ6,3-oxathiazin-4-olate”
- That’s just one potassium atom in there with a lot of other stuff
- Acesulfame potassium has a molar mass of 201.042 g/mol
- Potassium itself has a molar mass of 39.098 g/mol
- Therefore acesulfame potassium is 100(39.098/201.042) = 19.45% potassium by mass
- So that 75mg of acesulfame potassium contains just under 15mg of potassium, which is less than 0.5% of your recommended daily amount of potassium. Please consider eating a fruit instead.
So, that’s that, and the rest of the nutritional values of both sweeteners are just a lot of zeros.
What puts stevia ahead? Simply, based on studies available so far, moderate consumption of stevia improves gut microdiversity, whereas acesulfame potassium harms gut microdiversity:
- The Effects of Stevia Consumption on Gut Bacteria: Friend or Foe?
- The Artificial Sweetener Acesulfame Potassium Affects the Gut Microbiome
Want to give stevia a try?
Here’s an example product on Amazon
Enjoy!
Share This Post
-
Carbonated Water: For Weight Loss, Satiety, Or Just Gas?
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.
There are two main mechanisms of action by which sparkling water is considered to help satiety and/or weight loss; they are:
- It “fills us up” such that we feel fuller sooner, and thus eat less, and thus (all other things being equal) perhaps lose weight
- The carbon dioxide is absorbed into the bloodstream, where (as a matter of chemistry) it improves glucose metabolism, thus lowering blood sugars and indirectly leading (potentially) to weight loss, but even if not, lowered blood sugars are good for most people most of the time, right?
However, there are just a few problems:
Full of gas?
Many people self-report enjoying sparkling water as a way to feel fuller while fasting (or even while eating). However, the plural of “anecdote” is not “data”, so, here be data… Ish:
❝In order to determine whether such satiating effects occur through oral carbonic stimulation alone, we conducted modified sham-feeding (SF) tests (carbonated water ingestion (CW), water ingestion (W), carbonated water sham-feeding (CW-SF), and water sham-feeding (W-SF)), employing an equivalent volume and standardized temperature of carbonated and plain water, in a randomized crossover design.
Thirteen young women began fasting at 10 p.m. on the previous night and were loaded with each sample (15ºC, 250 mL) at 9 a.m. on separate days. Electrogastrography (EGG) recordings were obtained from 20 min before to 45 min after the loading to determine the power and frequency of the gastric myoelectrical activity. Appetite was assessed using visual analog scales. After ingestion, significantly increased fullness and decreased hunger ratings were observed in the CW group. After the load, transiently but significantly increased fullness as well as decreased hunger ratings were observed in the CW-SF group. The powers of normogastria (2-4 cpm) and tachygastria (4-9 cpm) showed significant increases in the CW and W groups, but not in the CW-SF and W-SF groups. The peak frequency of normogastria tended to shift toward a higher band in the CW group, whereas it shifted toward a lower band in the CW-SF group, indicating a different EGG rhythm.
Our results suggest that CO2-induced oral stimulation is solely responsible for the feeling of satiety.❞
~ Dr. Maki Suzuki et al.
Now, that’s self-reported, and a sample size of 13, so it’s not the most airtight science ever, but it is at least science. Here’s the paper, by the way:
Oral Carbonation Attenuates Feeling of Hunger and Gastric Myoelectrical Activity in Young Women
Here’s another small study with 8 people, which found that still and sparkling water had the exact same effect:
Effect of carbonated water on gastric emptying and intragastric meal distribution
However, drinking water (still or sparkling) with a meal will not have anywhere near the same effect for satiety as consuming food that has a high water-content.
See also: Some Surprising Truths About Hunger And Satiety ← our main feature in which we examine the science of volumetrics, including a study that shows how water incorporated into a food (but not served with a food) decreases caloric intake.
As an aside, one difference that carbonation can make is to increase ghrelin levels—that’s the hunger hormone (the satiety hormone is leptin, by the way). This one’s a rat study, but it seems reasonable that the same will be true of humans:
…which is worth bearing in mind even if you yourself are not, in fact, a male rat.
The glucose guzzler?
This one has simply been the case of a study being misrepresented, for example here:
Fizzy water might aid weight loss by providing a small boost to glucose uptake and metabolism
The idea is that higher levels of carbon dioxide in the blood mean faster glucose metabolism, which is technically true. Now, often “technically true” is the best kind of true, but not here, because it’s simply not useful.
In short, we produce so much carbon dioxide as part of our normal respiratory processes, that any carbon dioxide we might consume in a carbonated water is barely a blip in the graph.
Oh, and that article we just linked? Even within the article, despite running with that headline, the actual scientists quoted are saying such things as:
❝While there is a hypothetical link between carbonated water and glucose metabolism, this has yet to be tested in well-designed human intervention studies❞
~ Professor Sumantra Ray
Note: the word “hypothetical” means “one level lower than theoretical”. This is very far from being a conclusion.
And the study itself? Wasn’t even about carbonated water, it was about kidney dialysis and how the carbon dioxide content can result in hypoglycemia:
The mechanism of hypoglycemia caused by hemodialysis
…which got referenced in this paper (not a study):
Can carbonated water support weight loss?
…and even that concluded:
❝CO2 in carbonated water may promote weight loss by enhancing glucose uptake and metabolism in red blood cells.
However, the amount is so small that it is difficult to expect weight loss effects solely from the CO2 in carbonated water.
Drinking carbonated water may also affect blood glucose measurements.❞
Note: the word “may”, when used by a scientist and in the absence of any stronger claims, means “we haven’t ruled out the possibility”.
What breaking news that is.
Stop the press! No, really, stop it!
So… What does work?
There are various ways of going about actually hacking hunger (and they stack; i.e. you can use multiple methods and get cumulative results), and we wrote about them here:
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:
-
The Anti-Viral Gut – by Dr. Robynne Chutkan
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.
Some people get a virus and feel terrible for a few days; other people get the same virus and die. Then there are some who never even get it at all despite being in close proximity with the other two. So, what’s the difference?
Dr. Robynne Chutkan outlines the case for the difference not being in the virus, but in the people. And nor is it a matter of mysterious fate, but rather, a matter of the different levels of defenses (or lack thereof) that we each have.
The key, she explains, is in our microbiome, and the specific steps to make sure that ours is optimized and ready to protect us. The book goes beyond “eat prebiotics and probiotics”, though, and goes through other modifiable factors, based on data from this pandemic and the last one a hundred years ago. We also learn about the many different kinds of bacteria that live in our various body parts (internal and external), because as it turns out, our gut microbiome (however important; hence the title) isn’t the only relevant microbiome when it comes to whether or not a given disease will take hold or be eaten alive on the way in.
The style is very polished—Dr. Chutkan is an excellent educator who makes her points clearly and comprehensibly without skimping on scientific detail.
Bottom line: if you’d like your chances of surviving any given virus season to not be left to chance, then this is a must-read book.
Click here to check out The Anti-Viral Gut, and make your body a fortress!
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:
-
Healthy Brain, Happy Life – by Dr. Wendy Suzuki
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 talked about Dr. Wendy Suzuki’s research in the category of exercise and brain-benefits in our main feature the other day. But she has more to say than we can fit into an article!
This book chronicles her discoveries, through her work in memory and neuroplasticity, to her discoveries about exercise, and her dive into broader neurology-based mental health. So what does neurology-based mental health look like?
The answer is: mitigating brain-busters such as stress and anxiety, revitalizing a fatigued brain, boosting creativity, and other such benefits.
Does she argue that exercise is a cure-all? No, not quite. Sometimes there are other things she’s recommending (such as in her chapter on challenging the neurobiology of the stress response, or her chapter on meditation and the brain).
The writing style is mostly casual, interspersed with occasional mini-lectures (complete with diagrams and other illustrations), and is very readable and informative throughout.
Bottom line: if you’d like the more in-depth details of Dr. Suzuki’s work, this book is a very accessible way to get 320 pages of that!
Click here to check out Healthy Brain, Happy Life, and give yours the best!
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:
