Buckwheat vs Rye – 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 buckwheat to rye, we picked the buckwheat.
Why?
Both are good, wholegrain options for most people! On which note, yes, we are comparing whole groats* vs whole grains here, respectively.
*buckwheat is, you may remember, a flowering plant and not technically a grain or even a grass (and is very unrelated to wheat; it’s as closely related to wheat as a lionfish is to a lion).
In terms of macros, buckwheat has more protein, while rye has more carbs and fiber, the ratios of which mean that rye has the higher glycemic index. All in all, we’re calling this category a win for buckwheat on the basis of those things, but really, both are fine.
When it comes to vitamins, buckwheat has more of vitamins B1, B3, B6, B7, B9, K, and choline, while rye has more of vitamins B2, B5, and E. An easy win for buckwheat here.
In the category of minerals, buckwheat has more copper, calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc, while rye has more manganese and selenium. Another clear win for buckwheat.
Lastly. it’s worth noting that while buckwheat does not contain gluten, rye does. So, if you’re avoiding gluten, buckwheat is the option to choose here for that reason too.
If you don’t have celiac disease, wheat allergy, gluten intolerance, or something like that, then rye is still very worthwhile; buckwheat may have won on numbers in each category, but rye wasn’t far behind on anything; the margins of difference were quite small today.
Still, buckwheat is the best all-rounder here!
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
- Grains: Bread Of Life, Or Cereal Killer?
- Gluten: What’s The Truth?
- Eat More (Of This) For Lower Blood Pressure
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Even small diet tweaks can lead to sustainable weight loss
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 a well-known fact that to lose weight, you either need to eat less or move more. But how many calories do you really need to cut out of your diet each day to lose weight? It may be less than you think.
To determine how much energy (calories) your body requires, you need to calculate your total daily energy expenditure (TDEE). This is comprised of your basal metabolic rate (BMR) – the energy needed to sustain your body’s metabolic processes at rest – and your physical activity level. Many online calculators can help determine your daily calorie needs.
If you reduce your energy intake (or increase the amount you burn through exercise) by 500-1,000 calories per day, you’ll see a weekly weight loss of around one pound (0.45kg).
But studies show that even small calorie deficits (of 100-200 calories daily) can lead to long-term, sustainable weight-loss success. And although you might not lose as much weight in the short-term by only decreasing calories slightly each day, these gradual reductions are more effective than drastic cuts as they tend to be easier to stick with.
Small diet changes can still lead to weight loss in the long run. Monkey Business Images/ Shutterstock Hormonal changes
When you decrease your calorie intake, the body’s BMR often decreases. This phenomenon is known as adaptive thermogenesis. This adaptation slows down weight loss so the body can conserve energy in response to what it perceives as starvation. This can lead to a weight-loss plateau – even when calorie intake remains reduced.
Caloric restriction can also lead to hormonal changes that influence metabolism and appetite. For instance, thyroid hormones, which regulate metabolism, can decrease – leading to a slower metabolic rate. Additionally, leptin levels drop, reducing satiety, increasing hunger and decreasing metabolic rate.
Ghrelin, known as the “hunger hormone”, also increases when caloric intake is reduced, signalling the brain to stimulate appetite and increase food intake. Higher ghrelin levels make it challenging to maintain a reduced calorie diet, as the body constantly feels hungrier.
Insulin, which helps regulate blood sugar levels and fat storage, can improve in sensitivity when we reduce calorie intake. But sometimes, insulin levels decrease instead, affecting metabolism and leading to a reduction in daily energy expenditure. Cortisol, the stress hormone, can also spike – especially when we’re in a significant caloric deficit. This may break down muscles and lead to fat retention, particularly in the stomach.
Lastly, hormones such as peptide YY and cholecystokinin, which make us feel full when we’ve eaten, can decrease when we lower calorie intake. This may make us feel hungrier.
Fortunately, there are many things we can do to address these metabolic adaptations so we can continue losing weight.
Weight loss strategies
Maintaining muscle mass (either through resistance training or eating plenty of protein) is essential to counteract the physiological adaptations that slow weight loss down. This is because muscle burns more calories at rest compared to fat tissue – which may help mitigate decreased metabolic rate.
Portion control is one way of decreasing your daily calorie intake. Fevziie/ Shutterstock Gradual caloric restriction (reducing daily calories by only around 200-300 a day), focusing on nutrient-dense foods (particularly those high in protein and fibre), and eating regular meals can all also help to mitigate these hormonal challenges.
But if you aren’t someone who wants to track calories each day, here are some easy strategies that can help you decrease daily calorie intake without thinking too much about it:
1. Portion control: reducing portion sizes is a straightforward way of reducing calorie intake. Use smaller plates or measure serving sizes to help reduce daily calorie intake.
2. Healthy swaps: substituting high-calorie foods with lower-calorie alternatives can help reduce overall caloric intake without feeling deprived. For example, replacing sugary snacks with fruits or swapping soda with water can make a substantial difference to your calorie intake. Fibre-rich foods can also reduce the calorie density of your meal.
3. Mindful eating: practising mindful eating involves paying attention to hunger and fullness cues, eating slowly, and avoiding distractions during meals. This approach helps prevent overeating and promotes better control over food intake.
4. Have some water: having a drink with your meal can increase satiety and reduce total food intake at a given meal. In addition, replacing sugary beverages with water has been shown to reduce calorie intake from sugars.
4. Intermittent fasting: restricting eating to specific windows can reduce your caloric intake and have positive effects on your metabolism. There are different types of intermittent fasting you can do, but one of the easiest types is restricting your mealtimes to a specific window of time (such as only eating between 12 noon and 8pm). This reduces night-time snacking, so is particularly helpful if you tend to get the snacks out late in the evening.
Long-term behavioural changes are crucial for maintaining weight loss. Successful strategies include regular physical activity, continued mindful eating, and periodically being diligent about your weight and food intake. Having a support system to help you stay on track can also play a big role in helping you maintain weight loss.
Modest weight loss of 5-10% body weight in people who are overweight or obese offers significant health benefits, including improved metabolic health and reduced risk of chronic diseases. But it can be hard to lose weight – especially given all the adaptations our body has to prevent it from happening.
Thankfully, small, sustainable changes that lead to gradual weight loss appear to be more effective in the long run, compared with more drastic lifestyle changes.
Alexandra Cremona, Lecturer, Human Nutrition and Dietetics, University of Limerick
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
-
Pain Clinics Made Millions From ‘Unnecessary’ Injections Into ‘Human Pin Cushions’
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.
McMINNVILLE, Tenn. — Each month, Michelle Shaw went to a pain clinic to get the shots that made her back feel worse — so she could get the pills that made her back feel better.
Shaw, 56, who has been dependent on opioid painkillers since she injured her back in a fall a decade ago, said in both an interview with KFF Health News and in sworn courtroom testimony that the Tennessee clinic would write the prescriptions only if she first agreed to receive three or four “very painful” injections of another medicine along her spine.
The clinic claimed the injections were steroids that would relieve her pain, Shaw said, but with each shot her agony would grow. Shaw said she eventually tried to decline the shots, then the clinic issued an ultimatum: Take the injections or get her painkillers somewhere else.
“I had nowhere else to go at the time,” Shaw testified, according to a federal court transcript. “I was stuck.”
Shaw was among thousands of patients of Pain MD, a multistate pain management company that was once among the nation’s most prolific users of what it referred to as “tendon origin injections,” which normally inject a single dose of steroids to relieve stiff or painful joints. As many doctors were scaling back their use of prescription painkillers due to the opioid crisis, Pain MD paired opioids with monthly injections into patients’ backs, claiming the shots could ease pain and potentially lessen reliance on painkillers, according to federal court documents.
Now, years later, Pain MD’s injections have been proved in court to be part of a decade-long fraud scheme that made millions by capitalizing on patients’ dependence on opioids. The Department of Justice has successfully argued at trial that Pain MD’s “unnecessary and expensive injections” were largely ineffective because they targeted the wrong body part, contained short-lived numbing medications but no steroids, and appeared to be based on test shots given to cadavers — people who felt neither pain nor relief because they were dead.
Four Pain MD employees have pleaded guilty or been convicted of health care fraud, including company president Michael Kestner, who was found guilty of 13 felonies at an October trial in Nashville, Tennessee. According to a transcript from Kestner’s trial that became public in December, witnesses testified that the company documented giving patients about 700,000 total injections over about eight years and said some patients got as many as 24 shots at once.
“The defendant, Michael Kestner, found out about an injection that could be billed a lot and paid well,” said federal prosecutor James V. Hayes as the trial began, according to the transcript. “And they turned some patients into human pin cushions.”
The Department of Justice declined to comment for this article. Kestner’s attorneys either declined to comment or did not respond to requests for an interview. At trial, Kestner’s attorneys argued that he was a well-intentioned businessman who wanted to run pain clinics that offered more than just pills. He is scheduled to be sentenced on April 21 in a federal court in Nashville.
According to the transcript of Kestner’s trial, Shaw and three other former patients testified that Pain MD’s injections did not ease their pain and sometimes made it worse. The patients said they tolerated the shots only so Pain MD wouldn’t cut off their prescriptions, without which they might have spiraled into withdrawal.
“They told me that if I didn’t take the shots — because I said they didn’t help — I would not get my medication,” testified Patricia McNeil, a former patient in Tennessee, according to the trial transcript. “I took the shots to get my medication.”
In her interview with KFF Health News, Shaw said that often she would arrive at the Pain MD clinic walking with a cane but would leave in a wheelchair because the injections left her in too much pain to walk.
“That was the pain clinic that was supposed to be helping me,” Shaw said in her interview. “I would come home crying. It just felt like they were using me.”
‘Not Actually Injections Into Tendons at All’
Pain MD, which sometimes operated under the name Mid-South Pain Management, ran as many as 20 clinics in Tennessee, Virginia, and North Carolina throughout much of the 2010s. Some clinics averaged more than 12 injections per patient each month, and at least two patients each received more than 500 shots in total, according to federal court documents.
All those injections added up. According to Medicare data filed in federal court, Pain MD and Mid-South Pain Management billed Medicare for more than 290,000 “tendon origin injections” from January 2010 to May 2018, which is about seven times that of any other Medicare biller in the U.S. over the same period.
Tens of thousands of additional injections were billed to Medicaid and Tricare during those same years, according to federal court documents. Pain MD billed these government programs for about $111 per injection and collected more than $5 million from the government for the shots, according to the court documents.
More injections were billed to private insurance too. Christy Wallace, an audit manager for BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee, testified that Pain MD billed the insurance company about $40 million for more than 380,000 injections from January 2010 to March 2013. BlueCross paid out about $7 million before it cut off Pain MD, Wallace said.
These kinds of enormous billing allegations are not uncommon in health care fraud cases, in which fraudsters sometimes find a legitimate treatment that insurance will pay for and then overuse it to the point of absurdity, said Don Cochran, a former U.S. attorney for the Middle District of Tennessee.
Tennessee alone has seen fraud allegations for unnecessary billing of urine testing, skin creams, and other injections in just the past decade. Federal authorities have also investigated an alleged fraud scheme involving a Tennessee company and hundreds of thousands of catheters billed to Medicare, according to The Washington Post, citing anonymous sources.
Cochran said the Pain MD case felt especially “nefarious” because it used opioids to make patients play along.
“A scheme where you get Medicare or Medicaid money to provide a medically unnecessary treatment is always going to be out there,” Cochran said. “The opioid piece just gives you a universe of compliant people who are not going to question what you are doing.”
“It was only opioids that made those folks come back,” he said.
The allegations against Pain MD became public in 2018 when Cochran and the Department of Justice filed a civil lawsuit against the company, Kestner, and several associated clinics, alleging that Pain MD defrauded taxpayers and government insurance programs by billing for “tendon origin injections” that were “not actually injections into tendons at all.”
Kestner, Pain MD, and several associated clinics have each denied all allegations in that lawsuit, which is ongoing.Scott Kreiner, an expert on spine care and pain medicine who testified at Kestner’s criminal trial, said that true tendon origin injections (or TOIs) typically are used to treat inflamed joints, like the condition known as “tennis elbow,” by injecting steroids or platelet-rich plasma into a tendon. Kreiner said most patients need only one shot at a time, according to the transcript.
But Pain MD made repeated injections into patients’ backs that contained only lidocaine or Marcaine, which are anesthetic medications that cause numbness for mere hours, Kreiner testified. Pain MD also used needles that were often too short to reach back tendons, Kreiner said, and there was no imaging technology used to aim the needle anyway. Kreiner said he didn’t find any injections in Pain MD’s records that appeared medically necessary, and even if they had been, no one could need so many.
“I simply cannot fathom a scenario where the sheer quantity of TOIs that I observed in the patient records would ever be medically necessary,” Kreiner said, according to the trial transcript. “This is not even a close call.”
Jonathan White, a physician assistant who administered injections at Pain MD and trained other employees to do so, then later testified against Kestner as part of a plea deal, said at trial that he believed Pain MD’s injection technique was based on a “cadaveric investigation.”
According to the trial transcript, White said that while working at Pain MD he realized he could find no medical research that supported performing tendon origin injections on patients’ backs instead of their joints. When he asked if Pain MD had any such research, White said, an employee responded with a two-paragraph letter from a Tennessee anatomy professor — not a medical doctor — that said it was possible to reach the region of back tendons in a cadaver by injecting “within two fingerbreadths” of the spine. This process was “exactly the procedure” that was taught at Pain MD, White said.
During his own testimony, Kreiner said it was “potentially dangerous” to inject a patient as described in the letter, which should not have been used to justify medical care.
“This was done on a dead person,” Kreiner said, according to the trial transcript. “So the letter says nothing about how effective the treatment is.”
Over-Injecting ‘Killed My Hand’
Pain MD collapsed into bankruptcy in 2019, leaving some patients unable to get new prescriptions because their medical records were stuck in locked storage units, according to federal court records.
At the time, Pain MD defended the injections and its practice of discharging patients who declined the shots. When a former patient publicly accused the company of treating his back “like a dartboard,” Pain MD filed a defamation lawsuit, then dropped the suit about a month later.
“These are interventional clinics, so that’s what they offer,” Jay Bowen, a then-attorney for Pain MD, told The Tennessean newspaper in 2019. “If you don’t want to consider acupuncture, don’t go to an acupuncture clinic. If you don’t want to buy shoes, don’t go to a shoe store.”
Kestner’s trial told another story. According to the trial transcript, eight former Pain MD medical providers testified that the driving force behind Pain MD’s injections was Kestner himself, who is not a medical professional and yet regularly pressured employees to give more shots.
One nurse practitioner testified that she received emails “every single workday” pushing for more injections. Others said Kestner openly ranked employees by their injection rates, and implied that those who ranked low might be fired.
“He told me that if I had to feed my family based on my productivity, that they would starve,” testified Amanda Fryer, a nurse practitioner who was not charged with any crime.
Brian Richey, a former Pain MD nurse practitioner who at times led the company’s injection rankings, and has since taken a plea deal that required him to testify in court, said at the trial that he “performed so many injections” that his hand became chronically inflamed and required surgery.
“‘Over injecting killed my hand,’” Richey said on the witness stand, reading a text message he sent to another Pain MD employee in 2017, according to the trial transcript. “‘I was in so much pain Injecting people that didnt want it but took it to stay a patient.’”
“Why would they want to stay there?” a prosecutor asked.
“To keep getting their narcotics,” Richey responded, according to the trial transcript.
Throughout the trial, defense attorney Peter Strianse argued that Pain MD’s focus on injections was a result of Kestner’s “obsession” with ensuring that the company “would never be called a pill mill.”
Strianse said that Kestner “stayed up at night worrying” about patients coming to clinics only to get opioid prescriptions, so he pushed his employees to administer injections, too.
“Employers motivating employees is not a crime,” Strianse said at closing arguments, according to the court transcript. “We get pushed every day to perform. It’s not fraud; it’s a fact of life.”
Prosecutors insisted that this defense rang hollow. During the trial, former employees had testified that most patients’ opioid dosages remained steady or increased while at Pain MD, and that the clinics did not taper off the painkillers no matter how many injections were given.
“Giving them injections does not fix the pill mill problem,” federal prosecutor Katherine Payerle said during closing arguments, according to the trial transcript. “The way to fix being a pill mill is to stop giving the drugs or taper the drugs.”
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.
USE OUR CONTENT
This story can be republished for free (details).
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
-
Strawberries vs Cherries – 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 strawberries to cherries, we picked the cherries.
Why?
Both are great, and an argument could be made for either! But here’s our rationale:
In terms of macros, as with most fruits they are both mostly water, and have similar carbs and fiber. Nominally, cherries have the lower glycemic index, so we could call this category nominally a win for cherries, but honestly, they’re both low-GI foods and nobody is getting metabolic disease from eating strawberries, so it’s fairer to consider this category a tie.
Looking at the vitamins, strawberries have more of vitamins C, B9, E, and K, while cherries have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, and choline. Thus, a modest win for cherries here.
When it comes to minerals, strawberries see their day: strawberries have more iron, magnesium, manganese, and phosphorus, while cherries have more calcium, copper, and potassium. By the numbers, a win for strawberries.
So far, so tied!
What swings it into cherries’ favor is cherries’ slew of specific phytochemical benefits, including cherry-specific anti-inflammatory properties, sleep-improving abilities, and post-exercise recovery boosts, as well as anti-diabetic benefits above and beyond the normal “this is a fruit” level.
In short, both are very respectable fruits, but cherries have some extra qualities that are just special.
Of course, as ever, enjoy either or both; diversity is good!
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Cherries’ Health Benefits Simply Pop
Enjoy!
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
Loaded Mocha Chocolate Parfait
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.
Packed with nutrients, including a healthy dose of protein and fiber, these parfait pots can be a healthy dessert, snack, or even breakfast!
You will need (for 4 servings)
For the mocha cream:
- ½ cup almond milk
- ½ cup raw cashews
- ⅓ cup espresso
- 2 tbsp maple syrup
- 1 tsp vanilla extract
For the chocolate sauce:
- 4 tbsp coconut oil, melted
- 2 tbsp unsweetened cocoa powder
- 1 tbsp maple syrup
- 1 tsp vanilla extract
For the other layers:
- 1 banana, sliced
- 1 cup granola, no added sugar
Garnish (optional): 3 coffee beans per serving
Note about the maple syrup: since its viscosity is similar to the overall viscosity of the mocha cream and chocolate sauce, you can adjust this per your tastes, without affecting the composition of the dish much besides sweetness (and sugar content). If you don’t like sweetness, the maple syrup be reduced or even omitted entirely (your writer here is known for her enjoyment of very strong bitter flavors and rarely wants anything sweeter than a banana); if you prefer more sweetness than the recipe called for, that’s your choice too.
Method
(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)
1) Blend all the mocha cream ingredients. If you have time, doing this in advance and keeping it in the fridge for a few hours (or even up to a week) will make the flavor richer. But if you don’t have time, that’s fine too.
2) Stir all the chocolate sauce ingredients together in a small bowl, and set it aside. This one should definitely not be refrigerated, or else the coconut oil will solidify and separate itself.
3) Gently swirl the the mocha cream and chocolate sauce together. You want a marble effect, not a full mixing. Omit this step if you want clearer layers.
4) Assemble in dessert glasses, alternating layers of banana, mocha chocolate marble mixture (or the two parts, if you didn’t swirl them together), and granola.
5) Add the coffee-bean garnish, if using, and serve!
Enjoy!
Want to learn more?
For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:
- Enjoy Bitter Foods For Your Heart & Brain
- The Bitter Truth About Coffee (Or Is It?)
- Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?
- Cashew Nuts vs Coconut – Which is Healthier?
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:
-
Shredded Wheat vs Organic Crunch – 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 Shredded Wheat to Organic Crunch, we picked the Shredded Wheat.
Why?
In this battle of the cereals, it comes down to the ingredients:
- The Shredded Wheat cereal has two ingredients: wheat (shredded), and BHT. The latter is a phenolic compound and antioxidant.
- The Organic Crunch cereal has lots of ingredients, of which the first two are wheat flour, and sugar.
This means that, per serving…
- The Shredded Wheat cereal has 7g fiber and 0g sugar
- The Organic Crunch cereal has 3g fiber and 12g sugar
Quite a difference! Sometimes, the “Organic Crunch” of a product comes from crunchy sugar.
You can check them out side-by-side here:
Shredded Wheat | Organic Crunch
Want to know more?
There’s a popular view that the only way to get fiber is to eat things that look (and potentially taste) like cardboard. Not so! There are delicious options:
Level-Up Your Fiber Intake! (Without Difficulty Or Discomfort)
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:
-
Get Better Sleep: Beyond “Sleep Hygiene”
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.
Better Sleep, Better Life!
This is Arianna Huffington. Yes, that Huffington, of the Huffington Post. But! She’s also the CEO of Thrive Global, a behavior change tech company with the mission of changing the way we work and live—in particular, by challenging the idea that burnout is the required price of success.
The power of better sleep
Sleep is a very important, but most often neglected, part of good health. Here are some of Huffington’s top insights from her tech company Thrive, and as per her “Sleep Revolution” initiative.
Follow your circadian rhythm
Are you a night owl or a morning lark? Whichever it is, roll with it, and plan around that if your lifestyle allows for such. While it is possible to change from one to the other, we do have a predisposition towards one or the other, and will generally function best when not fighting it.
This came about, by the way, because we evolved to have half of us awake in the mornings and half in the evenings, to keep us all safe. Socially we’ve marched onwards from that point in evolutionary history, but our bodies are about a hundred generations behind the times, and that’s just what we have to work with!
Don’t be afraid (or ashamed!) to take naps
Naps, done right, can be very good for the health—especially if we had a bad night’s sleep the previous night.
Thrive found that workers are more productive when they have nap rooms, and (following on a little from the previous point) are allowed to sleep in or work from home.
See also: How To Nap Like A Pro (No More “Sleep Hangovers”!)
Make sure you have personal space available in bed
The correlation between relationship satisfaction and sleeping close to one’s partner has been found to be so high that it’s even proportional: the further away a couple sleeps from each other, the less happy they are. But…
Partners who got good sleep the previous night, will be more likely to want intimacy on any given night—at a rate of an extra 14% per extra hour of sleep the previous night. So, there’s a trade-off, as having more room in bed tends to result in better sleep. Time to get a bigger bed?
What gets measured, gets done
This goes for sleep, too! Not only does dream-journaling in the morning cue your subconscious to prepare to dream well the following night, but also, sleep trackers and sleep monitoring apps go a very long way to improving sleep quality, even if no extra steps are consciously taken to “score better”.
We’ve previously reviewed some of the most popular sleep apps; you can check out for yourself how they measured up:
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:
