Castor Oil: All-Purpose Life-Changer, Or Snake Oil?

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.

As “trending” health products go, castor oil is enjoying a lot of popularity presently, lauded as a life-changing miracle-worker, and social media is abuzz with advice to put it everywhere from your eyes to your vagina.

But:

  • what things does science actually say it’s good for,
  • what things lack evidence, and
  • what things go into the category of “wow definitely do not do that”?

We don’t have the space to go into all of its proposed uses (there are simply far too many), but we’ll examine some common ones:

To heal/improve the skin barrier

Like most oils, it’s functional as a moisturizer. In particular, its high (90%!) ricinoleic fatty acid content does indeed make it good at that, and furthermore, has properties that can help reduce skin inflammation and promote wound healing:

Bioactive polymeric formulations for wound healing ← there isn’t a conveniently quotable summary we can just grab here, but you can see the data and results, from which we can conclude:

  • formulations with ricinoleic acid (such as with castor oil) performed very well for topical anti-inflammatory purposes
  • they avoided the unwanted side effects associated with some other contenders
  • they consistently beat other preparations in the category of wound-healing

To support hair growth and scalp health

There is no evidence that it helps. We’d love to provide a citation for this, but it’s simply not there. There’s also no evidence that it doesn’t help. For whatever reason, despite its popularity, peer-reviewed science has simply not been done for this, or if it has, it wasn’t anywhere publicly accessible.

It’s possible that if a person is suffering hair loss specifically as a result of prostaglandin D2 levels, that ricinoleic acid will inhibit the PGD2, reversing the hair loss, but even this is hypothetical so far, as the science is currently only at the step before that:

In silico prediction of prostaglandin D2 synthase inhibitors from herbal constituents for the treatment of hair loss

However, due to some interesting chemistry, the combination of castor oil and warm water can result in acute (and irreversible) hair felting, in other words, the strands of hair suddenly glue together to become one mass which then has to be cut off:

“Castor Oil” – The Culprit of Acute Hair Felting

👆 this is a case study, which is generally considered a low standard of evidence (compared to high-quality Randomized Controlled Trials as the highest standard of evidence), but let’s just say, this writer (hi, it’s me) isn’t risking her butt-length hair on the off-chance, and doesn’t advise you to, either. There are other hair-oils out there; argan oil is great, coconut oil is totally fine too.

As a laxative

This time, there’s a lot of evidence, and it’s even approved for this purpose by the FDA, but it can be a bit too good, insofar as taking too much can result in diarrhea and uncomfortable cramping (the cramps are a feature not a bug; the mechanism of action is stimulatory, i.e. it gets the intestines squeezing, but again, it can result in doing that too much for comfort):

Castor Oil: FDA-Approved Indications

To soothe dry eyes

While putting oil in your eyes may seem dubious, this is another one where it actually works:

❝Castor oil is deemed safe and tolerable, with strong anti-microbial, anti-inflammatory, anti-nociceptive, analgesic, antioxidant, wound healing and vasoconstrictive properties.

These can supplement deficient physiological tear film lipids, enabling enhanced lipid spreading characteristics and reducing aqueous tear evaporation.

Studies reveal that castor oil applied topically to the ocular surface has a prolonged residence time, facilitating increased tear film lipid layer thickness, stability, improved ocular surface staining and symptoms.❞

Source: Therapeutic potential of castor oil in managing blepharitis, meibomian gland dysfunction and dry eye

Against candidiasis (thrush)

We couldn’t find science for (or against) castor oil’s use against vaginal candidiasis, but here’s a study that investigated its use against oral candidiasis:

Rosemary, Castor Oils, and Propolis Extract: Activity Against Candida Albicans and Alterations on Properties of Dental Acrylic Resins

…in which castor oil was the only preparation that didn’t work against the yeast.

Summary

We left a lot unsaid today (so many proposed uses, it feels like a shame to skip them), but in few words: it’s good for skin (including wound healing) and eyes; but we’d give it a miss for hair, candidiasis, and digestive disorders.

Want to try some?

We don’t sell it, but here for your convenience is an example product on Amazon 😎

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Rapamycin Can Slow Aging By 20% (But Watch Out)
  • 28-Day FAST Start Day-by-Day – by Gin Stephens
    Troubleshoot intermittent fasting pitfalls with Gin Stephens’ “28-Day FAST Start” for lasting success. Easy reading, quick learning, and practical tips to make IF stick.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Osteoarthritis Of The Knee

    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 Q&A Day at 10almonds!

    Have a question or a request? We love to hear from you!

    In cases where we’ve already covered something, we might link to what we wrote before, but will always be happy to revisit any of our topics again in the future too—there’s always more to say!

    As ever: if the question/request can be answered briefly, we’ll do it here in our Q&A Thursday edition. If not, we’ll make a main feature of it shortly afterwards!

    So, no question/request too big or small

    ❝Very informative thank you. And made me think. I am a 72 yr old whitewoman, have never used ( or even been offered) HRT since menopause ~15 yrs ago. Now I’m wondering if it would have delayed the onset of osteoarthritis ( knee) and give me more energy in general. And is it wise to start taking hrt after being without those hormones for so long?❞

    (this was in response to our article about menopausal HRT)

    Thanks for writing! To answer your first question, obviously we can never know for sure now, but it certainly is possible, per for example a large-ish (n=1003) study of women aged 45–64, in which:

    • Those with HRT were significantly less likely to have knee arthritis than those without
    • However, to enjoy this benefit depended on continued use (those who used it for a bit and then stopped did not enjoy the same results)
    • While it made a big difference to knee arthritis, it made only a small (but still beneficial) difference to wrist/hand arthritis.

    We could hypothesize that this is because the mechanism of action is more about strengthening the bones (proofing against osteoporosis is one of the main reasons many people take HRT) and cartilage than it is against inflammation directly.

    Since the knee is load-bearing and the hand/wrist joints usually are not, this would mean the HRT strengthening the bones makes a big difference to the “wear and tear” aspect of potential osteoarthritis of the knee, but not the same level of benefit for the hand/wrist, which is less about wear and tear and more about inflammatory factors. But that latter, about it being load-bearing, is just this writer’s hypothesis as to why the big difference.

    The researchers do mention:

    ❝In OA the mechanisms by which HRT might act are highly speculative, but could entail changes in cartilage repair or bone turnover, perhaps with cytokines such as interleukin 6, for example.❞

    ~ Dr. Spector et al.

    What is clear though, is that it does indeed appear to have a protective effect against osteoarthritis of the knee.

    With regard to the timing, the researchers do note:

    ❝Why as little as three years of HRT should have a demonstrable effect is unclear. Given the difficulty in ascertaining when the disease starts, it is hard to be sure of the importance of the timing of HRT, and whether early or subclinical disease was present.

    These results taken together suggest that HRT has a metabolic action that is only effective if given continuously, perhaps by preventing disease initiation; once HRT is stopped there might be a ‘rebound’ effect, explaining the rapid return to normal risk❞

    ~ Ibid.

    You can read the study here:

    Is hormone replacement therapy protective for hand and knee osteoarthritis in women?: The Chingford Study

    On whether it is worth it now…

    Again, do speak with an endocrinologist because your situation may vary, but:

    • hormones are simply messengers, and your body categorically will respond to those messages regardless of age, or time elapsed without having received such a message. Whether it will repair all damage done is another matter entirely, but it would take a biological miracle for it to have no effect at all.
    • anecdotally, many women do enjoy life-changing benefits upon starting HRT at your age and older!

    (We don’t like to rely on “anecdotally”, but we couldn’t find studies isolating according to “length of time since menopause”—we’ll keep an eye out and if we find something in the future, we’ll mention it!)

    Meanwhile, take care!

    Share This Post

  • Make Your Coffee Heart-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.

    Health-Hack Your Coffee

    We have previously written about the general health considerations (benefits and potential problems) of coffee:

    The Bitter Truth About Coffee (or is it?)

    Today, we will broadly assume that you are drinking coffee (in general, not necessarily right now, though if you are, same!) and would like to continue to do so. We also assume you’d like to do so as healthily as possible.

    Not all coffees are created equal

    If you order a coffee in France or Italy without specifying what kind, the coffee you receive will be short, dark, and handsome and without sugar. Healthwise, this is not a bad starting point. However…

    • It will usually be espresso
    • Or it may be what in N. America is called a French press (in Europe it’s just called a cafetière)

    Both of these kinds of coffee mean that cafestol, a compound found in the oily part of coffee and which is known to raise LDL (“bad” cholesterol”), stays in the drink.

    Read: Cafestol and Kahweol: A Review on Their Bioactivities and Pharmacological Properties

    Also: Cafestol extraction yield from different coffee brew mechanisms

    If you’re reading that second one and wondering what a mocha pot or a Turkish coffee is, they are these things:

    So, wonderful as they are for those of us who love strong coffee, they also produce the highest in-drink levels of cafestol. If you’d like to cut the cafestol (for example, if you are keeping an eye on your LDL), we recommend…

    The humble filter coffee

    Whether by your favorite filter coffee machine or a pour-over low-tech coffee setup of the kind you could use even without an electricity supply, the filter keeps more than just the coffee grinds out; it keeps the cafestol out too; most of it, anyway, depending on what kind of filter you use, and the grind of the coffee:

    Physical characteristics of the paper filter and low cafestol content filter coffee brews

    What about instant coffee?

    It has very little cafestol in it. It’s up to you whether that’s sufficient reason to choose it over any other form of coffee (this coffee-lover could never)

    Want to make any coffee healthier?

    This one isn’t about the cafestol, but…

    If you take l-theanine (see here for our previous main feature about l-theanine), the l-theanine acts as a moderator and modulator of the caffeine, amongst other benefits:

    The Cognitive-Enhancing Outcomes of Caffeine and L-theanine: A Systematic Review

    As to where to get that, we don’t sell it, but here’s an example product on Amazon

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Eat to Beat Your Diet – by Dr. William Li

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    We previously reviewed Dr. Li’s excellent “Eat To Beat Disease”, so you may be wondering how much overlap there is. While he does still cover such topics as angiogenesis, organ regeneration, microbiome health, DNA protection, and immunological considerations, and much of the dietary advice is similar, most of the explanation is different.

    Because, this time, rather than looking at beating disease in general, there’s a much stronger focus on metabolic disease in particular, and yes, for those who want to do so, losing fat.

    The scientific explanations are in-depth, such that you come way with not merely “I should eat an avocado once in a while”, but a comprehensive understanding of the body’s metabolic processes, from the chemistry to the organs involved, from the cellular to the systemic.

    The style is on the hard end of pop-science. It’s approachably readable, while having a lot of densely-packed information with minimal fluff. You will be more than getting your money’s worth out of its 496 pages.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to perk up your metabolism with a dietary approach that’s enjoyable and very restrictive, then this book will arm you with the knowledge to do that.

    Click here to check out Eat To Beat Your Diet, and eat to beat your diet!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Rapamycin Can Slow Aging By 20% (But Watch Out)
  • Greek Yogurt vs Cottage Cheese – 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 Greek yogurt to cottage cheese, we picked the yogurt.

    Why?

    These are both dairy products popularly considered healthy, mostly for their high-protein, low-carb, low-fat profile. We’re going to assume that both were made without added sugars. Thus, their macro profiles are close to identical, and nothing between them there.

    In the category of vitamins, both are a good source of some B vitamins, and neither are good source of much else. The B-vitamins they have most of, B2 and B12, Greek yogurt has more.

    We’ll call this a small win for Greek yogurt.

    As they are dairy products, you might have expected them to contain vitamin D—however (unless they have been artificially fortified, as is usually done with plant-based equivalents) they contain none or trace amounts only.

    When it comes to minerals, both are reasonable sources of calcium, selenium, and phosphorus. Of these, they’re equal on the selenium, while cottage cheese has more phosphorus and Greek yogurt has more calcium.

    Since it’s also a mineral (even if it’s usually one we’re more likely to be trying to get less of), it’s also worth noting here that cottage cheese is quite high in sodium, while Greek yogurt is not.

    Another win for Greek yogurt.

    Beyond those things, we’d be remiss not to mention that Greek yogurt contains plenty of probiotic bacteria, while cottage cheese does not.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

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

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Surgery won’t fix my chronic back pain, so what will?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    This week’s ABC Four Corners episode Pain Factory highlighted that our health system is failing Australians with chronic pain. Patients are receiving costly, ineffective and risky care instead of effective, low-risk treatments for chronic pain.

    The challenge is considering how we might reimagine health-care delivery so the effective and safe treatments for chronic pain are available to millions of Australians who suffer from chronic pain.

    One in five Australians aged 45 and over have chronic pain (pain lasting three or more months). This costs an estimated A$139 billion a year, including $12 billion in direct health-care costs.

    The most common complaint among people with chronic pain is low back pain. So what treatments do – and don’t – work?

    Opioids and invasive procedures

    Treatments offered to people with chronic pain include strong pain medicines such as opioids and invasive procedures such as spinal cord stimulators or spinal fusion surgery. Unfortunately, these treatments have little if any benefit and are associated with a risk of significant harm.

    Spinal fusion surgery and spinal cord stimulators are also extremely costly procedures, costing tens of thousands of dollars each to the health system as well as incurring costs to the individual.

    Addressing the contributors to pain

    Recommendations from the latest Australian and World Health Organization clinical guidelines for low back pain focus on alternatives to drug and surgical treatments such as:

    • education
    • advice
    • structured exercise programs
    • physical, psychological or multidisciplinary interventions that address the physical or psychological contributors to ongoing pain.
    Woman sits on exercise ball and uses stretchy band
    Pain education is central. Monkey Business Images/Shutterstock

    Two recent Australian trials support these recommendations and have found that interventions that address each person’s physical and psychological contributors to pain produce large and sustained improvements in pain and function in people with chronic low back pain.

    The interventions have minimal side effects and are cost-effective.

    In the RESOLVE trial, the intervention consists of pain education and graded sensory and movement “retraining” aimed to help people understand that it’s safe to move.

    In the RESTORE trial, the intervention (cognitive functional therapy) involves assisting the person to understand the range of physical and psychological contributing factors related to their condition. It guides patients to relearn how to move and to build confidence in their back, without over-protecting it.

    Why isn’t everyone with chronic pain getting this care?

    While these trials provide new hope for people with chronic low back pain, and effective alternatives to spinal surgery and opioids, a barrier for implementation is the out-of-pocket costs. The interventions take up to 12 sessions, lasting up to 26 weeks. One physiotherapy session can cost $90–$150.

    In contrast, Medicare provides rebates for just five allied health visits (such as physiotherapists or exercise physiologists) for eligible patients per year, to be used for all chronic conditions.

    Private health insurers also limit access to reimbursement for these services by typically only covering a proportion of the cost and providing a cap on annual benefits. So even those with private health insurance would usually have substantial out-of-pocket costs.

    Access to trained clinicians is another barrier. This problem is particularly evident in regional and rural Australia, where access to allied health services, pain specialists and multidisciplinary pain clinics is limited.

    Higher costs and lack of access are associated with the increased use of available and subsidised treatments, such as pain medicines, even if they are ineffective and harmful. The rate of opioid use, for example, is higher in regional Australia and in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage than metropolitan centres and affluent areas.

    So what can we do about it?

    We need to reform Australia’s health system, private and public, to improve access to effective treatments for chronic pain, while removing access to ineffective, costly and high-risk treatments.

    Better training of the clinical workforce, and using technology such as telehealth and artificial intelligence to train clinicians or deliver treatment may also improve access to effective treatments. A recent Australian trial, for example, found telehealth delivered via video conferencing was as effective as in-person physiotherapy consultations for improving pain and function in people with chronic knee pain.

    Advocacy and improving the public’s understanding of effective treatments for chronic pain may also be helpful. Our hope is that coordinated efforts will promote the uptake of effective treatments and improve the care of patients with chronic pain.

    Christine Lin, Professor, University of Sydney; Christopher Maher, Professor, Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney; Fiona Blyth, Professor, University of Sydney; James Mcauley, Professor of Psychology, UNSW Sydney, and Mark Hancock, Professor of Physiotherapy, 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:

  • Garlic vs Ginger – 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 garlic to ginger, we picked the ginger.

    Why?

    Both are great, and it is close!

    Notwithstanding that (almost?) nobody eats garlic or ginger for the macros, let’s do a moment’s due diligence on that first: garlic has more than 3x the protein and about 2x the fiber (and slightly higher carbs). But, given the small quantities in which people usually consume these foods, these numbers aren’t too meaningful.

    In the category of micronutrients, garlic has a lot more vitamins and minerals. We’ll not do a full breakdown for this though, because again, unless you’re eating it by the cupful, this won’t make a huge difference.

    Which means that so far, we have two nominal wins for garlic.

    Both plants have many medicinal properties. They are both cardioprotective and anticancer, and both full of antioxidants. The benefits of both are comparable in these regards.

    Both have antidiabetic action also, but ginger’s effects are stronger when compared head-to head.

    So that’s an actual practical win for ginger.

    Each plant’s respective effects on the gastrointestinal tract sets them further apart—ginger has antiemetic effects and can be used for treating nausea and vomiting from a variety of causes. Garlic, meanwhile, can cause adverse gastrointestinal effects in some people—but it’s usually neutral for most people in this regard.

    Another win for ginger in practical terms.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

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

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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