Blueberries vs Rosehips – 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 blueberries to rosehips, we picked the rosehips.
Why?
While you may not find rosehips at the supermarket, both of these berries are absolutely things you might grow in your garden, climate-permitting. So, what’s the score?
In terms of macros, rosehips have around 10x the fiber for 2x the carbs; that’s an easy calculation and an easy first-round win for rosehips.
In the category of vitamins, blueberries boast more of vitamins B1 and B9, while rosehips have a lot more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, B6, C, E, and K. That’s a landslide for rosehips even before we consider rosehips’ much greater margins of difference (kicking off with 80x the vitamin A, for instance, and many multiples of many of the others).
Looking at minerals, blueberries are not higher in any minerals, while rosehips have a lot more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc.
In other considerations, blueberries are famously abundant in polyphenols, but rosehips are too, and have some special properties of their own (see the “learn more” section for details), so this round’s perhaps a tie, unless we want to get very subjective about it, in which case it could be swung either way.
However we do that last round, the sum is clear: it’s an overall win for rosehips—but do by all means enjoy either or both, as diversity is best!
Want to learn more?
You might like:
It’s In The Hips: Rosehip’s Benefits, Inside & Out
Enjoy!
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:
-
Melatonin vs Lupus!
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.
Lupus is not fun.
First, a recap on how lupus works: lupus is an autoimmune disease where the immune system attacks its own tissues, causing inflammation and organ damage (to oversimplify it in very few words).
Next, how lupus is currently treated: mostly with immunosuppressant drugs, which reduce symptoms but have significant side effects, not least of all the fact that your immune system will be suppressed, leaving you vulnerable to infections, cancer, aging, and the like. So, there’s really a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” aspect here (because untreated lupus will run your immune system into the ground with its chronic inflammation, which will also leave you vulnerable to the aforementioned things).
See also: How to Prevent (or Reduce) Inflammation
And now it seems there is a new (cheap and accessible!) potential avenue for treatment…
Why melatonin matters
Melatonin, a hormone naturally produced mostly by the pineal gland, has antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties that directly target immune dysregulation and oxidative stress central to lupus pathology, including that of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and lupus nephritis (LN).
For a refresher on melatonin, check out: Melatonin: A Safe, Natural Sleep Aid? ← since most people who take supplemental melatonin do so in order to sleep, that was the focus of this article, but it discusses its safety issues and so forth too.
On which note, do also be aware of: Can kids overdose on melatonin gummies? Yes, and an online store has suspended sales ← the problem here is primarily twofold, e.g. 1) children errantly eating gummies as though they are candies 2) shoddy regulation and deceptive labelling meaning that dosing is far from precise. But you will note that both of those things are circumstantial, rather than intrinsic problems with melatonin.
Lastly, before we get back to lupus, let’s mention that the recent sensationalist headlines about melatonin and heart health were a little overstated, insofar as it was based on an associative observational study, and could not prove causality. Still the numbers do give cause for attentiveness at the very least: Melatonin Supplementation & Your Heart
As for how this works for lupus, researchers (Dr. Farnoosh Seirafianpour et al.) investigated this and worked from the initial finding that people with SLE typically have lower serum melatonin levels, with increasing reductions correlating with higher disease activity.
What Dr. Seirafianpour and her team did next was look at animal and cellular lupus models, which show melatonin reduces renal inflammation, oxidative stress, fibrosis, and structural kidney damage, indicating a protective role in LN in particular (remembering that the “N” there stands for nephritis, i.e. renal inflammation, oxidative stress, and the resulting fibrosis and structural kidney damage).
Next up, she and the other researchers turned to a double-blind randomized controlled trial, to show how melatonin supplementation lowers oxidative stress markers such as malondialdehyde (MDA), and:
❝Administration of melatonin has shown potential in significantly reducing renal damage caused by systemic lupus erythematosus by modulating the expression of specific proteins associated with fibrosis, apoptosis, oxidative stress, and inflammation.
Moreover, melatonin effectively attenuated the severity of lupus nephritis, primarily by mitigating oxidative stress and inflammation, which are critical factors in lupus nephritis pathogenesis.❞
Read in full: Melatonin: Diagnostic evidence and therapeutic roles in systemic lupus erythematosus
One final thing noted in the paper was that circulating melatonin follows circadian rhythms, making standardized timing and sampling protocols essential for both research and clinical interpretation.
On an end-user level (i.e: for you or your loved one with lupus)? This means that it’s important to work with your circadian rhythm rather than against it.
For how to do that beyond the obvious, see: The Circadian Rhythm: Far More Than Most People Know
Want to learn more?
For a much more in-depth treatment of lupus management, you might like this excellent book we reviewed a while back:
The “et al.” in question? Jemima Albayda, MD; Divya Angra, MD; Alan N. Baer, MD; Sasha Bernatsky, MD, PhD; George Bertsias, MD, PhD; Ashira D. Blazer, MD; Ian Bruce, MD; Jill Buyon, MD; Yashaar Chaichian, MD; Maria Chou, MD; Sharon Christie, Esq; Angelique N. Collamer, MD; Ashté Collins, MD; Caitlin O. Cruz, MD; Mark M. Cruz, MD; Dana DiRenzo, MD; Jess D. Edison, MD; Titilola Falasinnu, PhD; Andrea Fava, MD; Cheri Frey, MD; Neda F. Gould, PhD; Nishant Gupta, MD; Sarthak Gupta, MD; Sarfaraz Hasni, MD; David Hunt, MD; Mariana J. Kaplan, MD; Alfred Kim, MD; Deborah Lyu Kim, DO; Rukmini Konatalapalli, MD; Fotios Koumpouras, MD; Vasileios C. Kyttaris, MD; Jerik Leung, MPH; Hector A. Medina, MD; Timothy Niewold, MD; Julie Nusbaum, MD; Ginette Okoye, MD; Sarah L. Patterson, MD; Ziv Paz, MD; Darryn Potosky, MD; Rachel C. Robbins, MD; Neha S. Shah, MD; Matthew A. Sherman, MD; Yevgeniy Sheyn, MD; Julia F. Simard, ScD; Jonathan Solomon, MD; Rodger Stitt, MD; George Stojan, MD; Sangeeta Sule, MD; Barbara Taylor, CPPM, CRHC; George Tsokos, MD; Ian Ward, MD; Emma Weeding, MD; Arthur Weinstein, MD; Sean A. Whelton, MD
The reason we mention this is to render it clear that this isn’t one man’s opinions (as happens with many books about certain topics), but rather, a panel of that many doctors all agreeing that this is correct and good, evidence-based, up-to-date (as of the publication of this latest revised edition all so recently) information.
Want to learn less?
If the aforementioned 848-page opus seems a little too overwhelming, then you might prefer:
The Lupus Solution – by Dr. Tiffany Caplan & Dr. Brent Caplan ← a much slimmer tome; just 182 pages 🙂
Take care!
Share This Post
-
The Surprising Relationship Between Glucosamine & Alzheimer’s
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.
Glucosamine is popularly taken for joint health,
and it really is the best thing out there for that.No wait, it’s not: Cucumber Extract Beats Glucosamine & Chondroitin… At 1/135th Of The Dose?!
Today, we’re not doing glucosamine’s PR any favors, but well, we’re a health science publication and the truth is there may be a problem:
Glucosamine, hyperglycosylation, & you
Researchers (Dr. Tara Hawkinson et al.) analyzed thousands of US health records, and found that glucosamine use was associated with:
- 25% higher likelihood of progressing from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to dementia
- 25% higher mortality risk among people who already had Alzheimer’s disease or related dementias.
Among the patients studied, about 8% reported taking glucosamine supplements, including 2,750 people with MCI and 1,896 people with dementia.
And as for how this happened?
Dr. Hawkinson and her team found that excessive protein glycosylation (the attachment of sugar structures to proteins) appeared to be a significant driver of Alzheimer’s disease progression, suggesting that glucosamine may worsen an already overactive “sugar-tagging pathway” in the Alzheimer’s brain.
Now, that data was from humans, and/but this was an observational retrospective study, meaning it couldn’t prove cause and effect by itself.
However, when they went on to test it in mice with Alzheimer’s disease, glucosamine increased protein glycosylation and worsened social-memory performance, while suppressing glycosylation improved memory.
Back to humans: examination of post-mortem Alzheimer’s brain tissue showed significantly higher levels of protein glycosylation than in non-Alzheimer’s control brains, further supporting the idea that this pathway likely contributes to disease progression.
This is important, because glucosamine has often been considered relatively safe and has even been linked in some studies to lower risks of certain chronic diseases, but this research suggests that effects may depend on the disease context, and quite possibly may be harmful in the context of Alzheimer’s disease.
In other words:
❝A lot of these people actively take an over-the-counter supplement that could be making their disease progression worse.❞
~ Dr. Ramon Sun, a colleague of Dr. Hawkinson and fellow researcher in this study
You can read the paper itself, here: Hyperglycosylation is a metabolic driver of Alzheimer’s disease ← notice the bold statement in the title; scientists are very reticent to make concrete claims without concrete evidence. Here, they are expressing their strong clear finding that hyperglycosylation is a metabolic driver or Alzheimer’s disease.
Want to learn more?
We’ve written quite a bit about reducing the risk of cognitive decline in general and Alzheimer’s in particular; here are just a few:
- Alzheimer’s Causative Factors To Avoid
- How To Reduce Your Alzheimer’s Risk
- How To Walk Away From Alzheimer’s
- How To Clean Your Brain (Glymphatic Health Primer)
- Take Care Of Your Lymphatic System To Beat Cognitive Decline
- Goodnight, Glymphatic System: How Your Sleep Position Changes Dementia Risk
- The 6 Dimensions Of Sleep (And Why They Matter)
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Non-Alcohol Mouthwash vs Alcohol Mouthwash – 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 non-alcohol mouthwash to alcohol mouthwash, we picked the alcohol.
Why?
Note: this is a contingent choice and is applicable to most, but not all, people.
In short, there has been some concern about alcohol mouthwashes increasing cancer risk, but research has shown this is only the case if you already have an increased risk of oral cancer (for example if you smoke, and/or have had an oral cancer before).
For those for whom this is not the case (for example, if you don’t smoke, and/or have no such cancer history), then best science currently shows that alcohol mouthwash does not cause any increased risk.
What about non-alcohol mouthwashes? Well, they have a different problem; they usually use chlorine-based chemicals like chlorhexidine or cetylpyridinium chloride, which are (exactly as the label promises) exceptionally good at killing oral bacteria.
(They’d kill us too, at higher doses, hence: swill and spit)
Unfortunately, much like the rest of our body, our mouth is supposed to have bacteria there and bad things happen when it doesn’t. In the case of our oral microbiome, cleaning it with such powerful antibacterial agents can kill our “good” bacteria along with the bad, which lowers the pH of our saliva (that’s bad; it means it is more acidic), and thus indirectly erodes tooth enamel.
You can read more about the science of all of the above (with references), here:
Toothpastes & Mouthwashes: Which Help And Which Harm?
Summary:
For most people, alcohol mouthwashes are a good way to avoid the damage that can be done by chlorhexidine in non-alcohol mouthwashes.
Here are some examples, but there will be plenty in your local supermarket:
Non-Alcohol, by Colgate | Alcohol, by Listerine
If you have had oral cancer, or if you smoke, then you may want to seek a third alternative (and also, please, stop smoking if you can).
Or, really, most people could probably skip mouthwashes, if you’ve good oral care already by other means. See also:
Toothpastes & Mouthwashes: Which Help And Which Harm?
(yes, it’s the same link as before, but we’re now drawing your attention to the fact it has information about toothpastes too)
If you do want other options though, might want to check out:
Less Common Oral Hygiene Options ← miswak sticks are especially effective
Take care!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Boundary-Setting Beyond “No”
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.
More Than A “No”
A lot of people struggle with boundary-setting, and it’s not always the way you might think.
The person who “can’t say no” to people probably comes to mind, but the problem is more far-reaching than that, and it’s rooted in not being clear over what a boundary actually is.
For example: “Don’t bring him here again!”
Pretty clear, right?
And while it is indeed clear, it’s not a boundary; it’s a command. Which may or may not be obeyed, and at the end of the day, what right have we to command people in general?
Same goes for less dramatic things like “Don’t talk to me about xyz”, which can still be important or trivial, depending on whether the topic of xyz is deeply traumatizing for you, or mildly annoying, or something else entirely.
Why this becomes a problem
It becomes a problem not because of any lack of clarity about your wishes, but rather, because it opens the floor for a debate. The listener may be given to wonder whether your right to not experience xyz is greater or lesser than their right to do/say/etc xyz.
“My right to swing my fist ends where someone else’s nose begins”
…does not help here, firstly because both sides will believe themself (or nobody) to be the injured party; for the fist-swinger, the other person’s nose made a vicious assault on their freedom. Or secondly, maybe there was some higher principle at stake; a reason why violence was justified. And then ten levels of philosophical debate. We see this a lot when it comes to freedom of expression, and vigorous debate over whether this entails freedom from social consequences of one’s words/actions.
How a good boundary-setting works (if this, then that)
Consider two signs:
- No trespassing!
- Trespassers will be shot!
Superficially, the second just seems like a more violent rendition of the first. But in fact, the second is more informationally useful: it explains what will happen if the boundary is not respected, and allows the reader to make their own informed decision with regard to what to do with that information.
We can employ this method (and can even do so gently, if we so wish and hopefully we mostly do wish to be gentle) when it comes to social and interpersonal boundary-setting:
- If you bring him here again, I will refuse you entrance
- If you bring up that topic again, I will ask you to leave
- If you do that, I will never speak to you again
- If you don’t stop drinking, I will divorce you
This “if-this-then-that” model does the very first thing that any good boundary does: make itself clear.
It doesn’t rely on moral arguments; it doesn’t invite debate. For example in that last case, it doesn’t argue that the partner doesn’t have the right to drink—it simply expresses what the speaker will exercise their own right to do, in that eventuality.
(as an aside, the situation that occurs when one is enmeshed with someone who is dependent on a substance is a complex topic, and if you’re interested in that, check out: Codependency Isn’t What Most People Think)
Back on track: boundary-setting is not about what’s right or good—it’s about nothing more nor less than a clear delineation between what we will and won’t accept, and how we’ll enforce that.
We can also, in particularly personal boundary-setting (such as with sexual boundaries’ oft-claimed “gray areas”), fix an improperly-set boundary that forgot to do the above, e.g:
“How about [proposition]?”
“No thank you” ← casually worded answer; contextually reasonable, and yet not a clear boundary per what we discussed above
“Come on, I think you’d like it”
“I said no. No means no. Ask me again and I will [consequences that are appropriate and actionable]”What’s “appropriate and actionable” may vary a lot from one situation to another, but it’s important that it’s something you can do and are prepared to do and will do if the condition for doing it is met.
Anything less than that is not a boundary—it’s just a request.
Note: this does not require that we have power, by the way. If we have zero power in a situation, well, that definitely sucks, but even then we can still express what is actionable, e.g. “I will never trust you again”.
“Price of entry”
You may have wondered, upon reading “boundary-setting is not about what’s right or good—it’s about nothing more nor less than a clear delineation between what we will and won’t accept, and how we’ll enforce that”, can’t that be used to control and manipulate people, essentially coercing them to do or not do things with the threat of consequences (specifically: bad ones)?
And the answer is: yes, yes it can.
But that’s where the flipside comes into play—the other person gets to set their boundaries, too.
For all of us, if we have any boundaries at all, there is a “price of entry” and all who want to be in our lives, or be close to us, have to decide for themselves whether that price of entry is worth it.
- If a person says “do not talk about topic xyz to me or I will leave”, that is a price of entry for being close to them.
- If you are passionate about talking about topic xyz to the point that you are unwilling to shelve it when in their presence, then that is the price of entry for being close to you.
- If one or more of you is not willing to pay the price of entry, then guess what, you’re just not going to be close.
In cases of forced proximity (e.g. workplaces or families) this is likely to get resolved by the workplace’s own rules (i.e. the price of entry that you agreed to when signing a contract to work there), and if something like that doesn’t exist (such as in families), well, that forced proximity is going to reach a breaking point, and somebody may discover it wasn’t enforceable after all.
See also: Family Estrangement: More Common Than Most People Think
…which also details how to fix it, where possible.
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:
-
Do women really need more sleep than men? A sleep psychologist 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.
If you spend any time in the wellness corners of TikTok or Instagram, you’ll see claims women need one to two hours more sleep than men.
But what does the research actually say? And how does this relate to what’s going on in real life?
As we’ll see, who gets to sleep, and for how long, is a complex mix of biology, psychology and societal expectations. It also depends on how you measure sleep.
klebercordeiro/Getty What does the evidence say?
Researchers usually measure sleep in two ways:
- by asking people how much they sleep (known as self-reporting). But people are surprisingly inaccurate at estimating how much sleep they get
- using objective tools, such as research-grade, wearable sleep trackers or the gold-standard polysomnography, which records brain waves, breathing and movement while you sleep during a sleep study in a lab or clinic.
Looking at the objective data, well-conducted studies usually show women sleep about 20 minutes more than men.
One global study of nearly 70,000 people who wore wearable sleep trackers found a consistent, small difference between men and women across age groups. For example, the sleep difference between men and women aged 40–44 was about 23–29 minutes.
Another large study using polysomnography found women slept about 19 minutes longer than men. In this study, women also spent more time in deep sleep: about 23% of the night compared to about 14% for men. The study also found only men’s quality of sleep declined with age.
The key caveat to these findings is that our individual sleep needs vary considerably. Women may sleep slightly more on average, just as they are slightly shorter on average. But there is no one-size-fits-all sleep duration, just as there is no universal height.
Suggesting every woman needs 20 extra minutes (let alone two hours) misses the point. It’s the same as insisting all women should be shorter than all men.
Even though women tend to sleep a little longer and deeper, they consistently report poorer sleep quality. They’re also about 40% more likely to be diagnosed with insomnia.
This mismatch between lab findings and the real world is a well-known puzzle in sleep research, and there are many reasons for it.
For instance, many research studies don’t consider mental health problems, medications, alcohol use and hormonal fluctuations. This filters out the very factors that shape sleep in the real world.
This mismatch between the lab and the bedroom also reminds us sleep doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Women’s sleep is shaped by a complex mix of biological, psychological and social factors, and this complexity is hard to capture in individual studies.
Let’s start with biology
Sleep problems begin to diverge between the sexes around puberty. They spike again during pregnancy, after birth and during perimenopause.
Fluctuating levels of ovarian hormones, particularly oestrogen and progesterone, seem to explain some of these sex differences in sleep.
For example, many girls and women report poorer sleep during the premenstrual phase just before their periods, when oestrogen and progesterone begin to fall.
Perhaps the most well-documented hormonal influence on our sleep is the decline in oestrogen during perimenopause. This is linked to increased sleep disturbances, particularly waking at 3am and struggling to get back to sleep.
Some health conditions also play a part in women’s sleep health. Thyroid disorders and iron deficiency, for instance, are more common in women and are closely linked to fatigue and disrupted sleep.
How about psychology?
Women are at much higher risk of depression, anxiety and trauma-related disorders. These very often accompany sleep problems and fatigue. Cognitive patterns, such as worry and rumination, are also more common in women and known to affect sleep.
Women are also prescribed antidepressants more often than men, and these medications tend to affect sleep.
Society also plays a role
Caregiving and emotional labour still fall disproportionately on women. Government data released this year suggests Australian women perform an average nine more hours of unpaid care and work each week than men.
While many women manage to put enough time aside for sleep, their opportunities for daytime rest are often scarce. This puts a lot of pressure on sleep to deliver all the restoration women need.
In my work with patients, we often untangle the threads woven into their experience of fatigue. While poor sleep is the obvious culprit, fatigue can also signal something deeper, such as underlying health issues, emotional strain, or too-high expectations of themselves. Sleep is certainly part of the picture, but it’s rarely the whole story.
For instance, rates of iron deficiency (which we know is more common in women and linked to sleep problems) are also higher in the reproductive years. This is just as many women are raising children and grappling with the “juggle” and the “mental load”.
Women in perimenopause are often navigating full-time work, teenagers, ageing parents and 3am hot flashes. These women may have adequate or even high-quality sleep (according to objective measures), but that doesn’t mean they wake feeling restored.
Most existing research also ignores gender-diverse populations. This limits our understanding of how sleep is shaped not just by biology, but by things such as identity and social context.
So where does this leave us?
While women sleep longer and better in the lab, they face more barriers to feeling rested in everyday life.
So, do women need more sleep than men? On average, yes, a little. But more importantly, women need more support and opportunity to recharge and recover across the day, and at night.
Amelia Scott, Honorary Affiliate and Clinical Psychologist at the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, and Macquarie University Research Fellow, Macquarie University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
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:
-
Taking a GLP-1? Doctors Say Not To Forget About Movement and Mental 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.
LISTEN: Taking a GLP-1? Doctors say don’t forget to move your body and tend to your mental health, too.
Severe ankle pain drove Jelon Smart to start taking a weight loss injection a year and a half ago.
Smart was 285 pounds and worked as a caterer in Savannah, Georgia. After she’d been standing on her feet for long hours, her ankles would be “as swollen as a football,” she said. She was walking with a limp. An orthopedic doctor diagnosed her with Achilles tendinitis and recommended losing weight to mitigate the symptoms. Smart began taking the brand-name GLP-1 Ozempic.
The appetite suppression resulted in her shedding pounds quickly, at first.
“I lost 30 pounds initially without changing anything,” said Smart, 48. But then she found herself unable to shed additional pounds.
GLP-1s have quickly become one of the most popular types of weight loss drug in America. Nearly 1 in 5 people have taken them at some point, according to research from KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News. But doctors say it takes more than a regular shot for patients to achieve their weight goals in the long run.
Here’s what to know.
GLP-1s are taken primarily through injections and generally must be refrigerated before use. (Moriah Farmer) The Old-School Rules of Weight Loss and Health Still Apply
Regular exercise, smart food choices, plenty of sleep — those basic, healthy lifestyle choices are not only going to help you lose weight on a weight loss drug but also help you keep it off, said Dafina Allen, an obesity medicine physician who runs a clinic in Saginaw, Michigan. For example, some people find that they eat less on a GLP-1, “but they’re not improving their health because they’re not exercising. They’re not improving the quality of the food they’re eating,” Allen said. The path to weight loss is also guided by hormones, metabolism, and genetics.
After her weight loss on Ozempic plateaued, Smart realized she needed to start moving her body, too. “I’m in the gym now six days a week,” she said. “I went from 285 to 175” pounds. The swelling and pain in her ankle went away as well.
Jelon Smart, from Savannah, Georgia, lost 110 pounds after starting on Ozempic — but only after starting an intensive workout regimen, too. (Christopher Smart, Jennifer Davis) Mental Health Matters, Too
The mind and body are deeply connected. Food and body image can be especially emotional, Allen said. “I can tell you about the patients that I helped lose 50 pounds, that I helped lose 100 pounds, and they still look in the mirror and are not happy.”
The key is seeking help for mental health along the way, said Gerald Onuoha, who practices internal medicine in Nashville, Tennessee. “Making sure that you’re talking to people about your problems, whether it’s a family member or a licensed professional, I think goes a long way,” he said.
Work With a Doctor To Closely Monitor Your Dosage
Onuoha said people can run into serious problems if they increase their GLP-1 dosage too quickly or don’t follow the recommended schedule. He’s seen patients come to the hospital with pancreatitis, gallstones, or acute kidney injury. “I always ask patients that are on GLP-1s: How long have they been on them?” he said. “Are they adhering to the directions? Because those things determine whether or not you’re going to have those complications.”
Part of the issue, Allen said, is that GLP-1s are relatively easy to access — and often much cheaper — through online pharmacies or websites, but those providers may not educate patients about their dosage or side effects. “So they might just go online, find a random company that will ship it to their house, where they don’t even know what dose of the medication they’re taking, or even if the medicine is safe for them as the patient with the medical conditions they have,” she said.
People and Policy
GLP-1 drugs can be costly, and most insurance programs — public or private — don’t cover the medications for weight loss. Medicaid, the government program that covers 69 million Americans, covers GLP-1s for medically accepted conditions like diabetes, but only about a dozen state Medicaid programs cover GLP-1s for obesity treatment, according to KFF. For older Americans with Medicare, the federal government is planning to allow temporary coverage of GLP-1s for weight loss starting in July.
Katherine Ruppelt at Nashville Public Radio contributed to this report.
HealthQ is a health series from reporters Cara Anthony and Blake Farmer, approachable guides to an unapproachable health care system. It’s a collaboration between Nashville Public Radio and KFF Health News.
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.
This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International 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:
