Cabbage vs Onion – 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 cabbage to onion, we picked the cabbage.

Why?

In terms of macros, cabbage has more fiber while onion has more carbs, making cabbage the winner in this category as most people need more fiber, and especially a better fiber-to-carbs ratio.

In the category of vitamins, cabbage has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, E, and K, while onions are not higher in any vitamins, giving cabbage a complete win in this round.

Looking at minerals, cabbage has more calcium, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, and zinc, while onions have more copper, phosphorus, and selenium, meaning cabbage enjoys a 6:3 win here.

In other considerations, polyphenols will vary a lot for these, but both are strong contenders in this regard and we say it averages out to a tie in this round.

Adding up the sections makes for a clear overall win for cabbage, but by all means enjoy either or both, as diversity is good!

Want to learn more?

You might like:

Enjoy Bitter Foods For Your Heart & Brain

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:

  • Mastering Diabetes – by Dr. Cyrus Khambatta & Robby Barbaro

    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 many competing diets out there, for dealing with diabetes. Most focus on different strategies for keeping blood sugar levels even, but that’s only part of the story, and that approach will run into problems if undertaken in isolation, because insulin sensitivity—or as the case may be, insulin resistance—is ultimately the more important factor, and contrary to popular belief, the two things (insulin sensitivity and blood sugar levels) are not so perfectly linked as many might think.

    For this reason, this book focuses on reducing insulin resistance, by minimizing how much insulin-triggering food we consume in favor of foods that help rather than harm. Based on extensive research (discussed in detail in the book), this doesn’t mean “low-carb at all costs”, but rather, sensible carbs (a lot of whole fruits and vegetables) while avoiding insulin triggers (refined carbs, animal products, especially fatty ones, because yes, that triggers insulin too).

    However, this is a lot more than 400 pages to say “eat some fruit”.

    Rather, the authors (Type 1 Diabetics themselves) discuss the different tiers of foods with respect to insulin response, various tests that can and should be done (this is not a “just trust us” approach), and flowcharts to personalize one’s own ideal diet.

    The style is a good balance of being to-the-point and yet comprehensive, with a very heavy weight of evidence and many studies to back every claim. It’s also very easy to read as a reference guide, with many tables of information, callout boxes of key points, and the like.

    Bottom line: if you have any kind of diabetes, or just want to take care of your metabolic health, this book provides not only a blueprint for doing so, but also for personalizing it to your own physiology as you go, so that you can be sure of the results and ongoing beneficial effects, without guesswork.

    Click here to check out Mastering Diabetes, and take control of your insulin sensitivity!

    Share This Post

  • Arugula vs Spinach – 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 arugula to spinach, we picked the spinach.

    Why?

    Both are great, but there’s a clear winner here:

    In terms of macros, spinach has more fiber and protein for the same carbs, scoring an easy first-round win.

    In the category of vitamins, arugula has more vitamin B5 (that is, the vitamin that’s in nearly all foods and in which it’s almost impossible to be deficient unless literally starving to death), while spinach has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B6, B7, B9, C, E, and K, winning its second round convincingly.

    Looking at minerals, arugula’s a little higher in calcium, while spinach has more copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, selenium, and zinc, for another clear win.

    In other considerations, spinach is much higher in oxalates, which is a non-issue for most people, but if you have certain kidney disorders, you might want to avoid those, so it’s worth knowing.

    In any case, adding up the sections makes for a clear overall win for spinach, but by all means enjoy either or both, unless you need to avoid oxalates, in which case, arugula is on the menu for you!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like:

    Make Your Vegetables Work Better Nutritionally ← there are a lot of tips here for many kinds of foods and kinds of cooking/preparation, including that cooking (any kind) reduces oxalates by breaking them down; not so useful if you want a leafy salad, but good for other purposes!

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Lost Connections – by Johann Hari

    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.

    Johann Hari had a long journey through (and out of!) depression, and shares his personal findings, including his disappointment with medical options, and a focus on the external factors that lead to depression.

    And that’s key to this book—while he acknowledges later in the book that there are physiological factors involved in depression, he wants to look past things we can’t change (like genes accounting for 37% of depression) or things that there may be unwanted side-effects to changing (as in the case of antidepressants, for many people), to things we genuinely can choose.

    And no, it’s not a “think yourself happy” book either; rather, it looks at nine key external factorsthat a) influence depression b) can mostly be changed.

    If the book has a downside, it’s that the author does tend to extrapolate his own experience a lot more than might be ideal. If SSRIs didn’t help him, they are useless, and also the only kind of antidepressant. If getting into a green space helped him, a Londoner, someone who lives in the countryside will not be depressed in the first place. And so forth. It can also be argued that he cherry-picked data to arrive at some of his pre-decided conclusions. He also misinterprets data sometimes; which is understandable; he is after all a journalist, not a scientist.

    Nevertheless, he offers a fresh perspective with a lot of ideas, and whether or not we agree with them all, new ideas tend to be worth reading. And if even one of his nine ideas helps you, that’s a win.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to explore the treatment of depression from a direction other than medicalization or psychotherapy, then this is will be a good book for you.

    Click here to check out Lost Connections, and reforge yours!

    Share This Post

  • The Trick That Makes Spices More Than 100x More Anti-Inflammatory

    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’re a regular 10almonds reader, you’ll know that many spices have potent anti-inflammatory benefits (as well as other benefits beyond the scope of today’s article), and you may even remember our top picks:

    Our Top 5 Spices: How Much Is Enough For Benefits? ← which also links to separate main features for each of the 5 spices, respectively

    You might even know the trick of “enjoy some black pepper with your turmeric to increase the bioavailability”.

    But, it can get a lot better than just that!

    Variety is the spice of spice

    Here at 10almonds, we’re often encouraging readers to enjoy a wide variety of plants, as diversity really does make a huge difference.

    We even did a main feature about it: What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?

    There are many reasons, and the main one discussed there is for the benefit of gut health, which in turn affects all other aspects of health.

    So, what about spices in that regard?

    Well, in the matter of spices and gut health specifically, we’ve written about that too: Spicy Foods & Your Gut

    It gets more exciting though! Researchers (Dr. Gen-Ichiro Arimura et al.) tested whether combining plant compounds produces stronger anti-inflammatory effects than using them alone (like the good old “black pepper with turmeric” trick).

    The compounds in question included menthol (mint), 1,8-cineole (eucalyptus), capsaicin (chili peppers), and β-eudesmol (found in hops and ginger), using immune cells exposed to a bacterial trigger to simulate inflammation.

    What they found is that while capsaicin alone was the most potent single compound, combining it with menthol or cineole boosted anti-inflammatory effects by up to 699x and 154x more, respectively

    ❝We demonstrated that this synergistic effect is not a coincidence, but is based on a novel mode of action resulting from the simultaneous activation of different intracellular signaling pathways❞

    ~ Dr. Gen-Ichiro Arimura

    How the signaling synergy works: menthol and cineole act through TRP channel–driven calcium signaling, while capsaicin works through a separate pathway, creating a multi-pathway “stacking” effect inside cells.

    In other words: this supports the idea that plant-rich diets work at their best through compound interactions rather than isolated “superfoods” (however good they may genuinely be even when used alone).

    You can read the paper in full, here: Functional Phytochemicals Cooperatively Suppress Inflammation

    This is, of course, very consistent with our own article: How to Prevent (or Reduce) Inflammation

    …and the more diet-specific: Anti-Inflammatory Diet 101 (What to Eat to Fight Inflammation)

    Want to learn more?

    You might like this excellent book we reviewed a while back:

    Healing Spices – by Dr. Bharat Aggarwal & Debora Yost

    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:

  • Dentists Are Pulling ‘Healthy’ and Treatable Teeth To Profit From Implants, Experts Warn

    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.

    Becky Carroll was missing a few teeth, and others were stained or crooked. Ashamed, she smiled with lips pressed closed. Her dentist offered to fix most of her teeth with root canals and crowns, Carroll said, but she was wary of traveling a long road of dental work.

    Then Carroll saw a TV commercial for another path: ClearChoice Dental Implant Centers. The company advertises that it can give patients “a new smile in as little as one day” by surgically replacing teeth instead of fixing them.

    So Carroll saved and borrowed for the surgery, she said. In an interview and a lawsuit, Carroll said that at a ClearChoice clinic in New Jersey in 2021, she agreed to pay $31,000 to replace all her natural upper teeth with pearly-white prosthetic ones. What came next, Carroll said, was “like a horror movie.”

    Carroll alleged that her anesthesia wore off during implant surgery, so she became conscious as her teeth were removed and titanium screws were twisted into her jawbone. Afterward, Carroll’s prosthetic teeth were so misaligned that she was largely unable to chew for more than two years until she could afford corrective surgery at another clinic, according to a sworn deposition from her lawsuit.

    ClearChoice has denied Carroll’s claims of malpractice and negligence in court filings and did not respond to requests for comment on the ongoing case.

    “I thought implants would be easier, and all at once, so you didn’t have to keep going back to the dentist,” Carroll, 52, said in an interview. “But I should have asked more questions … like, Can they save these teeth?”

    Dental implants have been used for more than half a century to surgically replace missing or damaged teeth with artificial duplicates, often with picture-perfect results. While implant dentistry was once the domain of a small group of highly trained dentists and specialists, tens of thousands of dental providers now offer the surgery and place millions of implants each year in the U.S.

    Amid this booming industry, some implant experts worry that many dentists are losing sight of dentistry’s fundamental goal of preserving natural teeth and have become too willing to remove teeth to make room for expensive implants, according to a months-long investigation by KFF Health News and CBS News. In interviews, 10 experts said they had each given second opinions to multiple patients who had been recommended for mouths full of implants that the experts ultimately determined were not necessary. Separately, lawsuits filed across the country have alleged that implant patients like Carroll have experienced painful complications that have required corrective surgery, while other lawsuits alleged dentists at some implant clinics have persuaded, pressured, or forced patients to remove teeth unnecessarily.

    The experts warn that implants, for a single tooth or an entire mouth, expose patients to costs and surgery complications, plus a new risk of future dental problems with fewer treatment options because their natural teeth are forever gone.

    “There are many cases where teeth, they’re perfectly fine, and they’re being removed unnecessarily,” said William Giannobile, dean of the Harvard School of Dental Medicine. “I really hate to say it, but many of them are doing it because these procedures, from a monetary standpoint, they’re much more beneficial to the practitioner.”

    Giannobile and nine other experts say they are combating a false public perception that implants are more durable and longer-lasting than natural teeth, which some believe stems in part from advertising on TV and social media. Implants require upkeep, and although they can’t get cavities, studies have shown that patients can be susceptible to infections in the gums and bone around their implants.

    “Just because somebody can afford implants doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re a good candidate,” said George Mandelaris, a Chicago-area periodontist and member of the American Academy of Periodontology Board of Trustees. “When an implant has infection, or when an implant has bone loss, an implant dies a much quicker death than do teeth.”

    In its simplest form, implant surgery involves extracting a single tooth and replacing it with a metal post that is screwed into the jaw and then affixed with a prosthetic tooth commonly made of porcelain, also known as a crown. Patients can also use “full-arch” or “All-on-4” implants to replace all their upper or lower teeth — or all their teeth.

    For this story, KFF Health News and CBS News sought interviews with large dental chains whose clinics offer implant surgery — ClearChoice, Aspen Dental, Affordable Care, and Dental Care Alliance — each of which declined to be interviewed or did not respond to multiple requests for comment. The Association of Dental Support Organizations, which represents these companies and others like them, also declined an interview request.

    ClearChoice, which specializes in full-arch implants, did not answer more than two dozen questions submitted in writing. In an emailed statement, the company said full-arch implants “have become a well-accepted standard of care for patients with severe tooth loss and teeth with poor prognosis.”

    “The use of full-arch restorations reflects the evolution of modern dentistry, offering patients a solution that restores their ability to eat, speak, and live comfortably — far beyond what traditional dentures can provide,” the company said.

    Carroll said she regrets not letting her dentist try to fix her teeth and rushing to ClearChoice for implants.

    “Because it was a nightmare,” she said.

    ‘They Are Not Teeth’

    Dental implant surgery can be a godsend for patients with unsalvageable teeth. Several experts said implants can be so transformative that their invention should have contended for a Nobel Prize. And yet, these experts still worry that implants are overused, because it is generally better for patients to have their natural teeth.

    Paul Rosen, a Pennsylvania periodontist who said he has worked with implants for more than three decades, said many patients believe a “fallacy” that implants are “bulletproof.”

    “You can’t just have an implant placed and go off riding into the sunset,” Rosen said. “In many instances, they need more care than teeth because they are not teeth.”

    Generally, a single implant costs a few thousand dollars while full-arch implants cost tens of thousands. Neither procedure is well covered by dental insurance, so many clinics partner with credit companies that offer loans for implant surgeries. At ClearChoice, for example, loans can be as large as $65,000 paid off over 10 years, according to the company’s website.

    Despite the price, implants are more popular than ever. Sales increased by more than 6% on average each year since 2010, culminating in more than 3.7 million implants sold in the U.S. in 2022, according to a 2023 report produced by iData Research, a health care market research firm.

    Some worry implant dentistry has gone too far. In 10 interviews, dentists and dental specialists with expertise in implants said they had witnessed the overuse of implants firsthand. Each expert said they’d examined multiple patients in recent years who were recommended for full-arch implants by other dentists despite their teeth being treatable with conventional dentistry.

    Giannobile, the Harvard dean, said he had given second opinions to “dozens” of patients who were recommended for implants they did not need.

    “I see many of these patients now that are coming in and saying, ‘I’ve been seen, and they are telling me to get my entire dentition — all of my teeth — extracted.’ And then I’ll take a look at them and say that we can preserve most of your teeth,” Giannobile said.

    Tim Kosinski, who is a representative of the Academy of General Dentistry and said he has placed more than 19,000 implants, said he examines as many as five patients a month who have been recommended for full-arch implants that he deems unnecessary.

    “There is a push in the profession to remove teeth that could be saved,” Kosinski said. “But the public isn’t aware.”

    Luiz Gonzaga, a periodontist and prosthodontist at the University of Florida, said he, too, had turned away patients who wanted most or all their teeth extracted. Gonzaga said some had received implant recommendations that he considered “an atrocity.”

    “You don’t go to the hospital and tell them ‘I broke my finger a couple of times. This is bothering me. Can you please cut my finger off?’ No one will do that,” Gonzaga said. “Why would I extract your tooth because you need a root canal?”

    Jaime Lozada, director of an elite dental implant residency program at Loma Linda University, said he’d not only witnessed an increase in dentists extracting “perfectly healthy teeth” but also treated a rash of patients with mouths full of ill-fitting implants that had to be surgically replaced.

    Lozada said in August that he’d treated seven such patients in just three months.

    “When individuals just make a decision of extracting teeth to make it simple and make money quick, so to speak, that’s where I have a problem,” Lozada said. “And it happens quite often.”

    When full-arch implants fail, patients sometimes don’t have enough jawbone left to anchor another set. These patients have little choice but to get implants that reach into cheekbones, said Sohail Saghezchi, an oral and maxillofacial surgeon at the University of California-San Francisco.

    “It’s kind of like a last resort,” Saghezchi said. “If those fail, you don’t have anywhere else to go.”

    ‘It Was Horrendous Dentistry’

    Most of the experts interviewed for this article said their rising alarm corresponded with big changes in the availability of dental implants. Implants are now offered by more than 70,000 dental providers nationwide, two-thirds of whom are general dentists, according to the iData Research report.

    Dentists are not required to learn how to place implants in dental school, nor are they required to complete implant training before performing the surgery in nearly all states. This year, Oregon started requiring dentists to complete 56 hours of hands-on training before placing any implants. Stephen Prisby, executive director of the Oregon Board of Dentistry, said the requirement — the first and only of its kind in the U.S. — was a response to dozens of investigations in the state into botched surgeries and other implant failures, split evenly between general dentists and specialists.

    “I was frankly stunned at how bad some of these dentists were practicing,” Prisby said. “It was horrendous dentistry.”

    Many dental clinics that offer implants have consolidated into chains owned by private equity firms that have bought out much of implant dentistry. In health care, private equity investment is sometimes criticized for overtreatment and prioritizing short-term profit over patients.

    Private equity firms have spent about $5 billion in recent years to buy large dental chains that offer implants at hundreds of clinics owned by individual dentists and dental specialists. ClearChoice was bought for an estimated $1.1 billion in 2020 by Aspen Dental, which is owned by three private equity firms, according to PitchBook, a research firm focused on the private equity industry. Private equity firms also bought Affordable Care, whose largest clinic brand is Affordable Dentures & Implants, for an estimated $2.7 billion in 2021, according to PitchBook. And the private equity wing of the Abu Dhabi government bought Dental Care Alliance, which offers implants at many of its affiliated clinics, for an estimated $1 billion in 2022, according to PitchBook.

    ClearChoice and Aspen Dental each said in email statements that the companies’ private equity owners “do not have influence or control over treatment recommendations.” Both companies said dentists or dental specialists make all clinical decisions.

    Private equity deals involving dental practices increased ninefold from 2011 to 2021, according to an American Dental Association study published in August. The study also said investors showed an interest in oral surgery, possibly because of the “high prices” of implants.

    “Some argue this is a negative thing,” said Marko Vujicic, vice president of the association’s Health Policy Institute, who co-authored the study. “On the other hand, some would argue that involvement of private equity and outside capital brings economies of scale, it brings efficiency.”

    Edwin Zinman, a San Francisco dental malpractice attorney and former periodontist who has filed hundreds of dental lawsuits over four decades, said he believed many of the worst fears about private equity owners had already come true in implant dentistry.

    “They’ve sold a lot of [implants], and some of it unnecessarily, and too often done negligently, without having the dentists who are doing it have the necessary training and experience,” Zinman said. “It’s for five simple letters: M-O-N-E-Y.”

    Hundreds of Implant Clinics With No Specialists

    For this article, journalists from KFF Health News and CBS News analyzed the webpages for more than 1,000 clinics in the nation’s largest private equity-owned dental chains, all of which offer some implants. The analysis found that more than 70% of those clinics listed only general dentists on their websites and did not appear to employ the specialists — oral surgeons, periodontists, or prosthodontists — who traditionally have more training with implants.

    Affordable Dentures & Implants listed specialists at fewer than 5% of its more than 400 clinics, according to the analysis. The rest were staffed by general dentists, most of whom did not list credentialing from implant training organizations, according to the analysis.

    ClearChoice, on the other hand, employs at least one oral surgeon or prosthodontist at each of its more than 100 centers, according to the analysis. But its new parent company, Aspen Dental, which offers implants in many of its more than 1,100 clinics, does not list any specialists at many of those locations.

    Not everyone is worried about private equity in implant dentistry. In interviews arranged by the American Academy of Implant Dentistry, which trains dentists to use implants, two other implant experts did not express concerns about private equity firms.

    Brian Jackson, a former academy president and implant specialist in New York, said he believed dentists are too ethical and patients are too smart to be pressured by private equity owners “who will never see a patient.”

    Jumoke Adedoyin, a chief clinical officer for Affordable Care, who has placed implants at an Affordable Dentures & Implants clinic in the Atlanta suburbs for 15 years, said she had never felt pressure from above to sell implants.

    “I’ve actually felt more pressure sometimes from patients who have gone around and been told they need to take their teeth out,” she said. “They come in and, honestly, taking a look at them, maybe they don’t need to take all their teeth out.”

    Still, lawsuits filed across the country have alleged that dentists at implant clinics have extracted patients’ teeth unnecessarily.

    For example, in Texas, a patient alleged in a 2020 lawsuit that an Affordable Care dentist removed “every single tooth from her mouth when such was not necessary,” then stuffed her mouth with gauze and left her waiting in the lobby as he and his staff left for lunch. In Maryland, a patient alleged in a 2021 lawsuit that ClearChoice “convinced” her to extract “eight healthy upper teeth,” by “greatly downplay[ing] the risks.” In Florida, a patient alleged in a 2023 lawsuit that ClearChoice provided her with no other treatment options before extracting all her teeth, “which was totally unnecessary.”

    ClearChoice and Affordable Care denied wrongdoing in their respective lawsuits, then privately settled out of court with each patient. ClearChoice and Affordable Care did not respond to requests for comment submitted to the companies or attorneys. Lawyers for all three plaintiffs declined to comment on these lawsuits or did not respond to requests for comment.

    Fred Goldberg, a Maryland dental malpractice attorney who said he has represented at least six clients who sued ClearChoice, said each of his clients agreed to get implants after meeting with a salesperson — not a dentist.

    “Every client I’ve had who has gone to ClearChoice has started off meeting a salesperson and actually signing up to get their financing through ClearChoice before they ever meet with a dentist,” Goldberg said. “You meet with a salesperson who sells you on what they like to present as the best choice, which is almost always that they’re going to take out all your natural teeth.”

    Becky Carroll, the ClearChoice patient from New Jersey, told a similar story.

    Carroll said in her lawsuit that she met first with a ClearChoice salesperson referred to as a “patient education consultant.” In an interview, Carroll said the salesperson encouraged her to borrow money from family members for the surgery and it was not until after she agreed to a loan and passed a credit check that a ClearChoice dentist peered into her mouth.

    “It seems way backwards,” Carroll said. “They just want to know you’re approved before you get to talk to a dentist.”

    CBS News producer Nicole Keller contributed to this report.

    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.

    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:

  • What is creatine? What does the science say about its claims to build muscle and boost brain 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.

    If you’ve walked down the wellness aisle at your local supermarket recently, or scrolled the latest wellness trends on social media, you’ve likely heard about creatine.

    Creatine is a compound our body naturally makes to deliver energy to our muscles during exercise. Most (95%) is stored in muscle, with small amounts stored in the brain.

    We use about 1–3 grams of creatine a day. Our body makes around half of this and we get the rest from protein-rich foods, such as meat and fish.

    Creatine supplements come as powders, tablets and other forms, with doses ranging from 3–5g a day, to up to 20g. It’s difficult to get these levels from diet alone: you would need to eat about 1kg of meat to get 5g of creatine.

    But can consuming greater levels of creatine help you build muscle, improve athletic performance or boost brain health, as social media influencers claim?

    Athletic performance

    Creatine increases the rate at which the body re-synthesises a molecule called adenosine triphosphate, or ATP, which provides us with energy. When we use ATP for energy, it’s broken down to another molecule, adenosine diphosphate, or ADP.

    To be used as ATP again, ADP needs phosphate. This is where creatine helps. Creatine enters cells and adds the phosphate which was lost. The newly formed creatine phopshate then helps to very quickly re-synthesise ADP back to ATP.

    Other energy systems we have to create ATP are comparatively slower.

    Because of this quick action, creatine helps with short bursts of activities such as jumping and lifting weights.

    This has an indirect effect on muscle-building and sports performance by allowing increased training that leads to improved strength, speed and power.

    The evidence shows creatine is an effective nutritional supplement for athletes who want to improve physical performance and function in response to their training.

    And you don’t have to be an elite athlete: gym-goers and weekend warriors can get similar benefits.

    What about muscle and bone health in older adults?

    Most of the research on creatine outside of athletes has been in older adults. This is due to its ability to indirectly help with muscle gain and reduce sarcopeania (age-related muscle wasting).

    There is good evidence that creatine supplements (5–20g per day) can improve muscle mass and strength when combined with resistance training in older people.

    A review of the research, which included 22 studies in people aged 57–70, found it improved muscle mass by 1.4kg and resulted in a small increase in strength.

    Another review of 12 studies considered older adults taking 3–20 grams of creatine supplements a day. It found combining creatine with resistance training 2–3 times per week resulted in more muscle and strength gains compared to resistance training alone.

    When it comes to bone health and improving bone density, the evidence is not clear. Some studies show benefits, while others don’t. An overall analysis of five studies found there was no effect.

    However, there is some evidence that creatine improves older people’s ability to go from sitting to standing, which is a good predictor of falls.

    What about cognition?

    Another review looked at the impact on cognitive function across 16 studies. Participants were aged 20 to 77 years and were either healthy or had conditions such as fibromyalgia, mild cognitive impairment associated with Parkinson’s disease, and schizophrenia.

    The reviewers found creatine supplementation (5–20g a day) had positive effects on memory, attention time and information processing speed. The benefits were greater in people with disease, those aged between 18 and 60, and among women.

    Another review of eight studies also showed creatine improved memory in healthy people, with greater improvements in older adults aged 66 to 76. The effect was similar between those who took high (20g) and low doses (3g).

    An earlier review showed similar improvements with memory and reasoning among healthy people who consumed 5-20g of creatine for between five days and six weeks.

    What about for other adults?

    A 2021 review of creatine across the lifespan indicates creatine maybe useful for pre- and post-menopausal women to improve strength and brain function, and reduce mental fatigue.

    For adults aged over 60, supplementation may provide some benefits for cognitive and muscle mass, particularly if you’re physically active.

    But there isn’t an evidence base to support its general use across the younger population, beyond athletic performance.

    What are the risks?

    Creatine is generally considered to be safe. Some users report side effects, mostly related to gastrointestinal problems such as nausea and stomach upset. Some people also experience headaches and muscle cramps when they change the amount or frequency.

    Creatine may lead to temporary water gain, seen with a small increase in weight. But this subsides after a few days of supplementation.

    The evidence is not clear yet for creatine supplementation for certain people, including those who are pregnant, breastfeeding, have kidney disease or liver disease, or who have psychiatric disorders.

    As with any supplement, and in particular if you have underlying health conditions, talk to your doctor if you’re considering taking creatine.

    What should you look out for?

    Creatine as a supplement is synthetically made from sarcosine and cyanamide (no, it’s not related to cyanide). There are different forms of creatine supplements, but the research uses a type called creatine monohydrate.

    There is no difference between brands that manufacture creatine monohydrate and you don’t need to buy it with added ingredients.

    If you do want to try creatine, monitor your use over 4–8 weeks to see if you notice an improvement. And if you don’t, you might want to save your money.

    Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

    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: