Bath vs Shower – 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 bathing to showering, we picked the shower.

Why?

For the basic task of getting your body clean, the shower is better as it is an entirely one-way process. Clean water hits your body, dirty water leaves it, and no dirt is making its way back.

Baths do not have this advantage, and if you enter a bath dirty, you will then be sitting in dirty water. You will leave it a lot cleaner than you entered it (because a lot of the dirt stayed in the bathwater to be drained away after the bath), but not as clean as if you had showered.

One could argue soap or equivalent will prevent the dirt re-sticking, and that’s true, but it’s true for soap in the shower too, so it doesn’t offset anything.

Additionally, being immersed in water for more than 15 minutes can start to have a (paradoxically) dehydrating effect on the skin; this happens not only because of losing skin oils to the water, but also because of osmosis, the resultant mild edema, the body’s homeostatic response to the mild edema, then getting out the bath and drying, leaving one with the response having now just caused dehydrated skin.

Baths do have some health advantages! And these come primarily from the mental health benefits of relaxation in warm water and/or generally pampering oneself. Additionally, some bath oils or bath salts can be beneficial in a way that couldn’t be administered the same way in the shower.

Best of both worlds?

In some parts of the world (Thailand and Turkey come to mind; doubtlessly there are many others) there are traditions of first taking a shower to get clean, and then taking a bath for the rest of the bathing experience. As a bonus, the bathing experience is then all the more pleasant for the water remaining just as clean as it was to start with.

However, if you do have to pick one (and for the purpose of our “This or That” exercise, we do), then it’s the shower, hands-down.

Want to read more?

You might want to also take into account how it’s still possible to have too much of a good thing:

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Cacao vs Carob – Which is Healthier?
  • 12 Things Your Urine Says About Your Health (Test At Home)
    From fluorescent to dark brown, urine’s colors reveal health secrets – learn what your body’s telling you!

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • One More Resource Against Osteoporosis!

    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.

    Your Bones Were Made For Moving Too!

    We know that to look after bone health, resistance training is generally what’s indicated. Indeed, we mentioned it yesterday, and we’ve talked about it before:

    Resistance Is Useful! (Especially As We Get Older)

    We also know that if you have osteoporosis already, some exercises are a better or worse idea than others:

    Osteoporosis & Exercises: Which To Do (And Which To Avoid)

    However! New research suggests that also getting in your recommended 150 minutes per week of moderate exercise slows bone density loss.

    The study by Dr. Tiina Savikangas et al. looked at 299 people in their 70s (just over half being women) and found that, over the course of a year, bone mineral density loss was inversely correlated with moderate exercise as recorded by an accelerometer (as found in most fitness-tracking wearables and smartphones).

    In other words: those who got more minutes of exercise, kept more bone mineral density.

    As well as monitoring bone mineral density, the study also looked at cross-sectional area, but that remained stable throughout.

    As for how much is needed:

    ❝Even short bursts of activity can be significant for the skeleton, so we also looked at movement in terms of the number and intensity of individual impacts. For example, walking and running cause impacts of different intensities.

    We found that impacts that were comparable to at least brisk walking were associated with better preservation of bone mineral density.❞

    ~ Dr. Tiina Savikangas

    Read more: Impacts during everyday physical activity can slow bone loss ← pop-science source, interviewing the lead researcher

    On which note, we’ve a small bone to pick…

    As a small correction, the pop-science source says that the subjects’ ages ranged from 70 to 85 years; the paper, meanwhile, clearly shows that the age-range was 74.4±3.9 years (shown in the “Results” table), rounded to 74.4 ± 4 years, in the abstract. So, certainly no participant was older than 78 years and four months.

    Why this matters: the age range itself may be critical or it might not, but what is important is that this highlights how we shouldn’t just believe figures cited in pop-science articles, and it’s always good to click through to the source!

    Read the study: Changes in femoral neck bone mineral density and structural strength during a 12-month multicomponent exercise intervention among older adults – Does accelerometer-measured physical activity matter?

    This paper is a particularly fascinating read if you have time, because—unlike a lot of studies—they really took great care to note what exactly can and cannot be inferred from the data, and how and why.

    Especially noteworthy was the diligence with which they either controlled for, or recognized that they could not control for, far more variables than most studies even bother to mention.

    This kind of transparency is critical for good science, and we’d love to see more of it!

    Want to apply this to your life?

    Tracking minutes-of-movement is one of the things that fitness trackers are best at, so connect your favourite app (one of these days we’ll do a fitness tracker comparison article) and get moving!

    And as for the other things that fitness trackers do? As it turns out, they do have their strengths and weaknesses, which are good to bear in mind:

    Thinking of using an activity tracker to achieve your exercise goals? Here’s where it can help—and where it probably won’t

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Why do disinfectants only kill 99.9% of germs? Here’s the science

    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.

    Have you ever wondered why most disinfectants indicate they kill 99.9% or 99.99% of germs, but never promise to wipe out all of them? Perhaps the thought has crossed your mind mid-way through cleaning your kitchen or bathroom.

    Surely, in a world where science is able to do all sorts of amazing things, someone would have invented a disinfectant that is 100% effective?

    The answer to this conundrum requires understanding a bit of microbiology and a bit of mathematics.

    Davor Geber/Shutterstock

    What is a disinfectant?

    A disinfectant is a substance used to kill or inactivate bacteria, viruses and other microbes on inanimate objects.

    There are literally millions of microbes on surfaces and objects in our domestic environment. While most microbes are not harmful (and some are even good for us) a small proportion can make us sick.

    Although disinfection can include physical interventions such as heat treatment or the use of UV light, typically when we think of disinfectants we are referring to the use of chemicals to kill microbes on surfaces or objects.

    Chemical disinfectants often contain active ingredients such as alcohols, chlorine compounds and hydrogen peroxide which can target vital components of different microbes to kill them.

    Gloved hands spraying and wiping a surface.
    Diseinfectants can contain a range of ingredients. Maridav/Shutterstock

    The maths of microbial elimination

    In the past few years we’ve all become familiar with the concept of exponential growth in the context of the spread of COVID cases.

    This is where numbers grow at an ever-accelerating rate, which can lead to an explosion in the size of something very quickly. For example, if a colony of 100 bacteria doubles every hour, in 24 hours’ time the population of bacteria would be more than 1.5 billion.

    Conversely, the killing or inactivating of microbes follows a logarithmic decay pattern, which is essentially the opposite of exponential growth. Here, while the number of microbes decreases over time, the rate of death becomes slower as the number of microbes becomes smaller.

    For example, if a particular disinfectant kills 90% of bacteria every minute, after one minute, only 10% of the original bacteria will remain. After the next minute, 10% of that remaining 10% (or 1% of the original amount) will remain, and so on.

    Because of this logarithmic decay pattern, it’s not possible to ever claim you can kill 100% of any microbial population. You can only ever scientifically say that you are able to reduce the microbial load by a proportion of the initial population. This is why most disinfectants sold for domestic use indicate they kill 99.9% of germs.

    Other products such as hand sanitisers and disinfectant wipes, which also often purport to kill 99.9% of germs, follow the same principle.

    A tub of cleaning supplies.
    You might have noticed none of the cleaning products in your laundry cupboard kill 100% of germs. Africa Studio/Shutterstock

    Real-world implications

    As with a lot of science, things get a bit more complicated in the real world than they are in the laboratory. There are a number of other factors to consider when assessing how well a disinfectant is likely to remove microbes from a surface.

    One of these factors is the size of the initial microbial population that you’re trying to get rid of. That is, the more contaminated a surface is, the harder the disinfectant needs to work to eliminate the microbes.

    If for example you were to start off with only 100 microbes on a surface or object, and you removed 99.9% of these using a disinfectant, you could have a lot of confidence that you have effectively removed all the microbes from that surface or object (called sterilisation).

    In contrast, if you have a large initial microbial population of hundreds of millions or billions of microbes contaminating a surface, even reducing the microbial load by 99.9% may still mean there are potentially millions of microbes remaining on the surface.

    Time is is a key factor that determines how effectively microbes are killed. So exposing a highly contaminated surface to disinfectant for a longer period is one way to ensure you kill more of the microbial population.

    This is why if you look closely at the labels of many common household disinfectants, they will often suggest that to disinfect you should apply the product then wait a specified time before wiping clean. So always consult the label on the product you’re using.

    A woman cleaning a kitchen counter with a pink cloth.
    Disinfectants won’t necessarily work in your kitchen exactly like they work in a lab. Ground Picture/Shutterstock

    Other factors such as temperature, humidity and the type of surface also influence how well a disinfectant works outside the lab.

    Similarly, microbes in the real world may be either more or less sensitive to disinfection than those used for testing in the lab.

    Disinfectants are one part infection control

    The sensible use of disinfectants plays an important role in our daily lives in reducing our exposure to pathogens (microbes that cause illness). They can therefore reduce our chances of getting sick.

    The fact disinfectants can’t be shown to be 100% effective from a scientific perspective in no way detracts from their importance in infection control. But their use should always be complemented by other infection control practices, such as hand washing, to reduce the risk of infection.

    Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin University

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

    Share This Post

  • Rebounding Into The Best Of Health

    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.

    “Trampoline” is a brand-name that’s been popularized as a generic name, and “rebounding”, the name used in this video, is the same thing as “trampolining”. With that in mind, let us bounce swiftly onwards:

    Surprising benefits

    It’s easy to think “isn’t that cheating?” to the point that such “cheating” could be useless, since surely the device is doing most of the work?

    The thing is, while indeed it’s doing a lot of the work for you, your muscles are still doing a lot—mostly stabilization work, which is of course a critical thing for our muscles to be able to do. While it’s rare that we need to do a somersault in everyday life, it’s common that we have to keep ourselves from falling over, after all.

    It also represents a kind of gentle resistance exercise, and as such, improves bone density—something first discovered during NASA research for astronauts. Other related benefits pertain to the body’s ability to deal with acceleration and deceleration; it also benefits the lymphatic system, which unlike the blood’s circulatory system, has no pump of its own. Rebounding does also benefit the cardiovascular system, though, as now the heart gets confused (in the healthy way, a little like it gets confused with high-intensity interval training).

    Those are the main evidence-based benefits; anecdotally (but credibly, since these things can be said of most exercise) it’s also claimed that it benefits posture, improves sleep and mood, promotes weight loss and better digestion, reduces bloating, improves skin (the latter being due to improved circulation), and alleviates arthritis (most moderate exercise improves immune response, and thus reduces chronic inflammation, so again, this is reasonable, even if anecdotal).

    For more details on all of these and more, 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

Related Posts

  • Cacao vs Carob – Which is Healthier?
  • Kale vs Watercress – 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 kale to watercress, we picked the kale.

    Why?

    It was very close! If ever we’ve been tempted to call something a tie, this has been the closest so far.

    Their macros are close; watercress has a tiny amount more protein and slightly lower carbs, but these numbers are tiny, so it’s not really a factor. Nevertheless, on macros alone we’d call this a slight nominal win for watercress.

    In terms of vitamins, they’re even. Watercress has higher vitamin E and choline (sometimes considered a vitamin), as well as being higher in some B vitamins. Kale has higher vitamins A and K, as well as being higher in some other B vitamins.

    In the category of minerals, watercress has higher calcium, magnesium, phosphorus, and potassium, while kale has higher copper, iron, manganese, and zinc. The margins are slightly wider for kale’s more plentiful minerals though, so we’ll call this section a marginal win for kale.

    When it comes to polyphenols, kale takes and maintains the lead here, with around 2x the quercetin and 27x the kaempferol. Watercress does have some lignans that kale doesn’t, but ultimately, kale’s strong flavonoid content keeps it in the lead.

    So of course: enjoy both if both are available! But if we must pick one, it’s kale.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    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:

  • From Lupus To Arthritis: New Developments

    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 week’s health news round-up highlights some things that are getting better, and some things that are getting worse, and how to be on the right side of both:

    New hope for lupus sufferers

    Lupus is currently treated mostly with lifelong medications to suppress the immune system, which is not only inconvenient, but also can leave people more open to infectious diseases. The latest development uses CAR T-cell technology (as has been used in cancer treatment for a while) to genetically modify cells to enable the body’s own immune system to behave properly:

    Read in full: Exciting new lupus treatment could end need for lifelong medication

    Related: How to Prevent (Or Reduce The Severity Of) Inflammatory Diseases

    It’s in the hips

    There are a lot of different kinds of hip replacements, and those with either delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head with a highly cross-linked polyethylene liner/cup have the lowest risk of need for revision in the 15 years after surgery. This is important, because obviously, once it’s in there, you want it to be able to stay in there and not have to be touched again any time soon:

    Read in full: Study identifies hip implant materials with the lowest risk of needing revision

    Related: Nobody Likes Surgery, But Here’s How To Make It Much Less Bad

    Sooner is better than later

    Often, people won’t know about an unwanted pregnancy in the first six weeks, but for those who are able to catch it early, Very Early Medical Abortion (VEMA) offers a safe an effective way of doing so, with success rate being linked to earliness of intervention:

    Read in full: Very early medication abortion is effective and safe, study finds

    Related: What Might A Second Trump Presidency Look Like for Health Care?

    Increased infectious disease risks from cattle farms

    Many serious-to-humans infectious diseases enter the human population via the animal food chain, and in this case, bird flu becoming more rampant amongst cows is starting to pose a clear threat to humans, so this is definitely something to be aware of:

    Read in full: Bird flu infects 1 in 14 dairy workers exposed; CDC urges better protections

    Related: With Only Gloves To Protect Them, Farmworkers Say They Tend Sick Cows Amid Bird Flu

    Herald of woe

    Gut health affects most of the rest of health, and there are a lot of links between gut and bone health. In this case, an association has been found between certain changes in the gut microbiome, and subsequent onset of rheumatoid arthritis:

    Read in full: Changes in gut microbiome could signal onset of rheumatoid arthritis

    Related: Stop Sabotaging Your Gut

    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:

  • The Power of Fun – by Catherine Price

    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 said that nobody’s dying regret is to wish they’d spent more time at the office, yet many of don’t make enough time for fun.

    This book has been published with two different subtitles:

    • Why fun is the key to a happy and healthy life
    • How to feel alive again

    One offers a sensible reason to read this book; the other offers a deeply emotional reason. Both are entirely valid.

    Catherine Price sets out in this work to identify what fun actually is (she puts it at the intersection of playfulness, connection and flow) and how to have more of it (she gives a five-step method to build and integrate it into life).

    In the category of criticism, this 334-page book is (in this reviewer’s opinion) a little padded and could have been an article instead. But the advice contained within it is sound, and the impact it can have might be profound.

    Bottom line: if you find you’ve settled into a routine that’s perhaps comfortable, but not actually that much fun, this book will help you to liven things up.

    Click here to check out The Power Of Fun, and feel more alive!

    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: