Chickpeas vs Pinto Beans – 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 chickpeas to pinto beans, we picked the pinto beans.

Why?

Both are great! And an argument could be made for either…

In terms of macros, pinto beans have slightly more fiber and slightly more protein, while chickpeas have slightly more carbs, and thus predictably higher net carbs. In the category of those proteins, they both have a comparable spread of amino acods, with pinto beans having very slightly more of each amino acid. All this adds up to a clear, but moderate, win for pinto beans.

When it comes to vitamins, technically chickpeas have more of vitamins A, B3, B5, C, K, and choline, but the margins are so small as to be almost meaningless. Meanwhile, pinto beans have more of vitamins B1, B6, and E, and/but the only one where the margin is enough to really care about is vitamin E (a little over 2x what chickpeas have). So, an argument could be made either way, but we’re going to call this category a tie.

The story with minerals is similar; chickpeas have more copper, iron, manganese, phosphorus, and zinc, all with small margins, while pinto beans have more potassium and selenium, and/but also less sodium. We’d call this either a tie, or a very slight win for chickpeas.

Adding up the sections gives for a very modest win for pinto beans, but as we say, an argument could be made for either.

Certainly, enjoy both!

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!

Recommended

  • Pistachios vs Almonds – Which is Healthier?
  • Beetroot vs Pumpkin – Which is Healthier?
    Beetroot triumphs for its protein, fiber, and mineral content, offering a powerful nutritional punch compared to pumpkin.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Good Health From Head To Toe

    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!

    Have a question or a request? You can always hit “reply” to any of our emails, or use the feedback widget at the bottom!

    This newsletter has been growing a lot lately, and so have the questions/requests, and we love that! 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

    Q: I am now in the “aging” population. A great concern for me is Alzheimers. My father had it and I am so worried. What is the latest research on prevention?

    Very important stuff! We wrote about this not long back:

    (one good thing to note is that while Alzheimer’s has a genetic component, it doesn’t appear to be hereditary per se. Still, good to be on top of these things, and it’s never too early to start with preventive measures!)

    Q: Foods that help build stronger bones and cut inflammation? Thank you!

    We’ve got you…

    For stronger bones / To cut inflammation

    That “stronger bones” article is about the benefits of collagen supplementation for bones, but there’s definitely more to say on the topic of stronger bones, so we’ll do a main feature on it sometime soon!

    Q: Veganism, staying mentally sharp, best exercises for weight gain?

    All great stuff! Let’s do a run-down:

    • Veganism? As a health and productivity newsletter, we’ll only be focusing veganism’s health considerations, but it does crop up from time to time! For example:
    • Staying mentally sharp? You might like the things-against-dementia pieces we linked to in the previous response!
      • It’s also worth noting that some kinds of dementia, such as Alzheimer’s, can begin the neurodegenerative process 20 years before symptoms show, and can be influenced by lifestyle choices 20 years before that, so it’s definitely never too early be on top of these things!
    • Best exercises for weight gain? We’ll do a main feature one of these days (filled with good science and evidence), but in few words meanwhile: core exercises, large muscle groups, heavy weights, few reps, build up slowly. Squats are King.

    Q: I am interested in the following: Aging, Exercise, Diet, Relationships, Purpose, Lowering Stress

    You’re going to love our Psychology Sunday editions of 10almonds! You might like some of these…

    Q: I’d like to know more about type 2 diabetic foot problems

    You probably know that the “foot problems” thing has less to do with the feet and more to do with blood and nerves. So, why the feet?

    The reason feet often get something like the worst of it, is because they are extremities, and in the case of blood sugars being too high for too long too often, they’re getting more damage as blood has to fight its way back up your body. Diabetic neuropathy happens when nerves are malnourished because the blood that should be keeping them healthy, is instead syrupy and sluggish.

    We’ll definitely do a main feature sometime soon on keeping blood sugars healthy, for both types of diabetes plus pre-diabetes and just general advice for all.

    In the meantime, here’s some very good advice on keeping your feet healthy in the context of diabetes. This one’s focussed on Type 1 Diabetes, but the advice goes for both:

    !

    Share This Post

  • ‘I can’t quite shut it off’: Prevalence of insomnia a growing concern for women

    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.

    Tasha Werner, 43, gets up at 3:30 a.m. twice a week for her part-time job at a fitness centre in Calgary. After a five-hour shift, she is back home by 9 a.m. to homeschool her two children, aged 9 and 12. The hardest part of her position – stay-at-home mom, homeschool teacher and part-time worker – is the downtime “lost from my life,” says Werner.

    A study by Howard M. Kravitz, a psychiatrist in Chicago, showed that up to 60 per cent of women experience sleep disorders due to hormonal changes linked to menopause. But there is an increasing prevalence of insomnia symptoms in women that may be attributed, in part, to societal changes.

    “We live in a world that didn’t exist a generation ago. Now everyone is trying to figure it out,” says Michael Grandner, director of the Sleep and Health Research Program at the University of Arizona.

    While women are no longer expected to stay at home, many who are employed outside the home also have the primary responsibility for family matters. And women aged 40 to 60 commonly fall within the “sandwich generation,” caring for both children and parents.

    As women juggle their responsibilities, these duties can take a toll, both emotionally and practically.

    Both Werner and her husband were raised in traditional homes; their mothers stayed at home to oversee childcare, cooking, grocery shopping and household duties. Initially, Werner and her husband followed a similar path, mirroring their parents’ lives as homemakers. “I think we just fell into what we were used to,” says Werner.

    However, a notable shift in their family dynamics occurred once she started working outside the home.

    Her children’s physical needs and illnesses have had major consequences on her sleep. If one of the children is sick with the flu, that’s “a week of not a lot of sleep during the night,” she says, “because that’s my job.” Many nights, she finds herself waking up between 1 a.m. and 3 a.m., worrying about how the kids are doing academically or behaviourally.

    “We face a specific set of anxieties and a different set of pressures than men,” says Emma Kobil, who has been a therapist in Denver, Colo., for 15 years and is now an insomnia coach. There is so much pressure to be everything as a woman – to be an amazing homemaker and worker while maintaining a hot-rocking body and having a cool personality, to “be the cool mom but also the CEO, to follow your dreams and be the boss b****,” says Kobil.

    And there’s an appeal to that concept. Daughters grow up viewing their moms as superwomen juggling responsibilities. But what isn’t always obvious are the challenges women face while managing their lives and the health issues they may encounter.

    A study revealed that women are 41 per cent more at risk of insomnia than men.

    A thorough study revealed that women are 41 per cent more at risk of insomnia than men. Beyond menopausal hormonal shifts, societal pressures, maternal concerns and the challenge of balancing multiple roles contribute to women’s increased susceptibility to insomnia.

    Cyndi Aarrestad, 57, lives on a farm in Saskatchewan with her husband, Denis. Now an empty nester, Aarrestad fills her time working on the farm, keeping house, volunteering at her church and managing her small woodworking business. And she struggles with sleep.

    Despite implementing some remedies, including stretching, drinking calming teas and rubbing her feet before bed, Aarrestad says achieving restful sleep has remained elusive for the past decade.

    Two primary factors contribute to her sleep challenges — her inability to quiet her mind and hormonal hot flashes due to menopause. Faced with family and outside commitments, Aarrestad finds it challenging to escape night time’s mental chatter. “It’s a mom thing for me … I can’t quite shut it off.” Even as her children transitioned to young adulthood and moved out, the worries persisted, highlighting the lasting concerns moms have about their kids’ jobs, relationships and overall well-being.

    Therapist Kobil says that every woman she’s ever worked with experiences this pressure to do everything, to be perfect. These women feel like they’re not measuring up. They’re encouraged to take on other people’s burdens; to be the confidante and the saviour in many ways; to sacrifice themselves. Sleep disruptions simply reflect the consequences of this pressure.

    “They’re trying to fit 20 hours in a 24-hour day, and it doesn’t work,” says Grandner, the sleep specialist.

    Grandner says that consistently sleeping six hours or less as an adult makes one 55 per cent more likely to become obese, 20 per cent more likely to develop high blood pressure, and 30 per cent more likely to develop Type 2 diabetes if you didn’t have it already. This lack of sleep makes you more likely to catch the flu. It makes vaccines less effective, and it increases your likelihood of developing depression and anxiety.

    When is the time to change? Yesterday. Grandner warns that the sleep sacrifices made at a young age impact health later. But it’s never too late to make changes, he says, and “you do the best with what you’ve got.”

    Kobil suggests a practical approach for women struggling with sleep. She emphasizes understanding that sleeplessness isn’t a threat and encourages a shift in mindset about being awake. Instead of fighting sleeplessness, she advises treating oneself kindly, recognizing the difficulty.

    Kobil recommends creating a simple playbook with comforting activities for awake moments during the night. Just as you would comfort a child who’s afraid, she suggests being gentle with yourself, gradually changing the perception of wakefulness into a positive experience.

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

    Share This Post

  • Overdosing on Chemo: A Common Gene Test Could Save Hundreds of Lives Each Year

    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.

    One January morning in 2021, Carol Rosen took a standard treatment for metastatic breast cancer. Three gruesome weeks later, she died in excruciating pain from the very drug meant to prolong her life.

    Rosen, a 70-year-old retired schoolteacher, passed her final days in anguish, enduring severe diarrhea and nausea and terrible sores in her mouth that kept her from eating, drinking, and, eventually, speaking. Skin peeled off her body. Her kidneys and liver failed. “Your body burns from the inside out,” said Rosen’s daughter, Lindsay Murray, of Andover, Massachusetts.

    Rosen was one of more than 275,000 cancer patients in the United States who are infused each year with fluorouracil, known as 5-FU, or, as in Rosen’s case, take a nearly identical drug in pill form called capecitabine. These common types of chemotherapy are no picnic for anyone, but for patients who are deficient in an enzyme that metabolizes the drugs, they can be torturous or deadly.

    Those patients essentially overdose because the drugs stay in the body for hours rather than being quickly metabolized and excreted. The drugs kill an estimated 1 in 1,000 patients who take them — hundreds each year — and severely sicken or hospitalize 1 in 50. Doctors can test for the deficiency and get results within a week — and then either switch drugs or lower the dosage if patients have a genetic variant that carries risk.

    Yet a recent survey found that only 3% of U.S. oncologists routinely order the tests before dosing patients with 5-FU or capecitabine. That’s because the most widely followed U.S. cancer treatment guidelines — issued by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network — don’t recommend preemptive testing.

    The FDA added new warnings about the lethal risks of 5-FU to the drug’s label on March 21 following queries from KFF Health News about its policy. However, it did not require doctors to administer the test before prescribing the chemotherapy.

    The agency, whose plan to expand its oversight of laboratory testing was the subject of a House hearing, also March 21, has said it could not endorse the 5-FU toxicity tests because it’s never reviewed them.

    But the FDA at present does not review most diagnostic tests, said Daniel Hertz, an associate professor at the University of Michigan College of Pharmacy. For years, with other doctors and pharmacists, he has petitioned the FDA to put a black box warning on the drug’s label urging prescribers to test for the deficiency.

    “FDA has responsibility to assure that drugs are used safely and effectively,” he said. The failure to warn, he said, “is an abdication of their responsibility.”

    The update is “a small step in the right direction, but not the sea change we need,” he said.

    Europe Ahead on Safety

    British and European Union drug authorities have recommended the testing since 2020. A small but growing number of U.S. hospital systems, professional groups, and health advocates, including the American Cancer Society, also endorse routine testing. Most U.S. insurers, private and public, will cover the tests, which Medicare reimburses for $175, although tests may cost more depending on how many variants they screen for.

    In its latest guidelines on colon cancer, the Cancer Network panel noted that not everyone with a risky gene variant gets sick from the drug, and that lower dosing for patients carrying such a variant could rob them of a cure or remission. Many doctors on the panel, including the University of Colorado oncologist Wells Messersmith, have said they have never witnessed a 5-FU death.

    In European hospitals, the practice is to start patients with a half- or quarter-dose of 5-FU if tests show a patient is a poor metabolizer, then raise the dose if the patient responds well to the drug. Advocates for the approach say American oncology leaders are dragging their feet unnecessarily, and harming people in the process.

    “I think it’s the intransigence of people sitting on these panels, the mindset of ‘We are oncologists, drugs are our tools, we don’t want to go looking for reasons not to use our tools,’” said Gabriel Brooks, an oncologist and researcher at the Dartmouth Cancer Center.

    Oncologists are accustomed to chemotherapy’s toxicity and tend to have a “no pain, no gain” attitude, he said. 5-FU has been in use since the 1950s.

    Yet “anybody who’s had a patient die like this will want to test everyone,” said Robert Diasio of the Mayo Clinic, who helped carry out major studies of the genetic deficiency in 1988.

    Oncologists often deploy genetic tests to match tumors in cancer patients with the expensive drugs used to shrink them. But the same can’t always be said for gene tests aimed at improving safety, said Mark Fleury, policy director at the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network.

    When a test can show whether a new drug is appropriate, “there are a lot more forces aligned to ensure that testing is done,” he said. “The same stakeholders and forces are not involved” with a generic like 5-FU, first approved in 1962, and costing roughly $17 for a month’s treatment.

    Oncology is not the only area in medicine in which scientific advances, many of them taxpayer-funded, lag in implementation. For instance, few cardiologists test patients before they go on Plavix, a brand name for the anti-blood-clotting agent clopidogrel, although it doesn’t prevent blood clots as it’s supposed to in a quarter of the 4 million Americans prescribed it each year. In 2021, the state of Hawaii won an $834 million judgment from drugmakers it accused of falsely advertising the drug as safe and effective for Native Hawaiians, more than half of whom lack the main enzyme to process clopidogrel.

    The fluoropyrimidine enzyme deficiency numbers are smaller — and people with the deficiency aren’t at severe risk if they use topical cream forms of the drug for skin cancers. Yet even a single miserable, medically caused death was meaningful to the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, where Carol Rosen was among more than 1,000 patients treated with fluoropyrimidine in 2021.

    Her daughter was grief-stricken and furious after Rosen’s death. “I wanted to sue the hospital. I wanted to sue the oncologist,” Murray said. “But I realized that wasn’t what my mom would want.”

    Instead, she wrote Dana-Farber’s chief quality officer, Joe Jacobson, urging routine testing. He responded the same day, and the hospital quickly adopted a testing system that now covers more than 90% of prospective fluoropyrimidine patients. About 50 patients with risky variants were detected in the first 10 months, Jacobson said.

    Dana-Farber uses a Mayo Clinic test that searches for eight potentially dangerous variants of the relevant gene. Veterans Affairs hospitals use a 11-variant test, while most others check for only four variants.

    Different Tests May Be Needed for Different Ancestries

    The more variants a test screens for, the better the chance of finding rarer gene forms in ethnically diverse populations. For example, different variants are responsible for the worst deficiencies in people of African and European ancestry, respectively. There are tests that scan for hundreds of variants that might slow metabolism of the drug, but they take longer and cost more.

    These are bitter facts for Scott Kapoor, a Toronto-area emergency room physician whose brother, Anil Kapoor, died in February 2023 of 5-FU poisoning.

    Anil Kapoor was a well-known urologist and surgeon, an outgoing speaker, researcher, clinician, and irreverent friend whose funeral drew hundreds. His death at age 58, only weeks after he was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer, stunned and infuriated his family.

    In Ontario, where Kapoor was treated, the health system had just begun testing for four gene variants discovered in studies of mostly European populations. Anil Kapoor and his siblings, the Canadian-born children of Indian immigrants, carry a gene form that’s apparently associated with South Asian ancestry.

    Scott Kapoor supports broader testing for the defect — only about half of Toronto’s inhabitants are of European descent — and argues that an antidote to fluoropyrimidine poisoning, approved by the FDA in 2015, should be on hand. However, it works only for a few days after ingestion of the drug and definitive symptoms often take longer to emerge.

    Most importantly, he said, patients must be aware of the risk. “You tell them, ‘I am going to give you a drug with a 1 in 1,000 chance of killing you. You can take this test. Most patients would be, ‘I want to get that test and I’ll pay for it,’ or they’d just say, ‘Cut the dose in half.’”

    Alan Venook, the University of California-San Francisco oncologist who co-chairs the panel that sets guidelines for colorectal cancers at the National Comprehensive Cancer Network, has led resistance to mandatory testing because the answers provided by the test, in his view, are often murky and could lead to undertreatment.

    “If one patient is not cured, then you giveth and you taketh away,” he said. “Maybe you took it away by not giving adequate treatment.”

    Instead of testing and potentially cutting a first dose of curative therapy, “I err on the latter, acknowledging they will get sick,” he said. About 25 years ago, one of his patients died of 5-FU toxicity and “I regret that dearly,” he said. “But unhelpful information may lead us in the wrong direction.”

    In September, seven months after his brother’s death, Kapoor was boarding a cruise ship on the Tyrrhenian Sea near Rome when he happened to meet a woman whose husband, Atlanta municipal judge Gary Markwell, had died the year before after taking a single 5-FU dose at age 77.

    “I was like … that’s exactly what happened to my brother.”

    Murray senses momentum toward mandatory testing. In 2022, the Oregon Health & Science University paid $1 million to settle a suit after an overdose death.

    “What’s going to break that barrier is the lawsuits, and the big institutions like Dana-Farber who are implementing programs and seeing them succeed,” she said. “I think providers are going to feel kind of bullied into a corner. They’re going to continue to hear from families and they are going to have to do something about it.”

    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.

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Pistachios vs Almonds – Which is Healthier?
  • Why scrapping the term ‘long COVID’ would be harmful for people with the condition

    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.

    The assertion from Queensland’s chief health officer John Gerrard that it’s time to stop using the term “long COVID” has made waves in Australian and international media over recent days.

    Gerrard’s comments were related to new research from his team finding long-term symptoms of COVID are similar to the ongoing symptoms following other viral infections.

    But there are limitations in this research, and problems with Gerrard’s argument we should drop the term “long COVID”. Here’s why.

    A bit about the research

    The study involved texting a survey to 5,112 Queensland adults who had experienced respiratory symptoms and had sought a PCR test in 2022. Respondents were contacted 12 months after the PCR test. Some had tested positive to COVID, while others had tested positive to influenza or had not tested positive to either disease.

    Survey respondents were asked if they had experienced ongoing symptoms or any functional impairment over the previous year.

    The study found people with respiratory symptoms can suffer long-term symptoms and impairment, regardless of whether they had COVID, influenza or another respiratory disease. These symptoms are often referred to as “post-viral”, as they linger after a viral infection.

    Gerrard’s research will be presented in April at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. It hasn’t been published in a peer-reviewed journal.

    After the research was publicised last Friday, some experts highlighted flaws in the study design. For example, Steven Faux, a long COVID clinician interviewed on ABC’s television news, said the study excluded people who were hospitalised with COVID (therefore leaving out people who had the most severe symptoms). He also noted differing levels of vaccination against COVID and influenza may have influenced the findings.

    In addition, Faux pointed out the survey would have excluded many older people who may not use smartphones.

    The authors of the research have acknowledged some of these and other limitations in their study.

    Ditching the term ‘long COVID’

    Based on the research findings, Gerrard said in a press release:

    We believe it is time to stop using terms like ‘long COVID’. They wrongly imply there is something unique and exceptional about longer term symptoms associated with this virus. This terminology can cause unnecessary fear, and in some cases, hypervigilance to longer symptoms that can impede recovery.

    But Gerrard and his team’s findings cannot substantiate these assertions. Their survey only documented symptoms and impairment after respiratory infections. It didn’t ask people how fearful they were, or whether a term such as long COVID made them especially vigilant, for example.

    A man sits on a bed, appears exhausted.
    Tens of thousands of Australians, and millions of people worldwide, have long COVID.
    New Africa/Shutterstock

    In discussing Gerrard’s conclusions about the terminology, Faux noted that even if only 3% of people develop long COVID (the survey found 3% of people had functional limitations after a year), this would equate to some 150,000 Queenslanders with the condition. He said:

    To suggest that by not calling it long COVID you would be […] somehow helping those people not to focus on their symptoms is a curious conclusion from that study.

    Another clinician and researcher, Philip Britton, criticised Gerrard’s conclusion about the language as “overstated and potentially unhelpful”. He noted the term “long COVID” is recognised by the World Health Organization as a valid description of the condition.

    A cruel irony

    An ever-growing body of research continues to show how COVID can cause harm to the body across organ systems and cells.

    We know from the experiences shared by people with long COVID that the condition can be highly disabling, preventing them from engaging in study or paid work. It can also harm relationships with their friends, family members, and even their partners.

    Despite all this, people with long COVID have often felt gaslit and unheard. When seeking treatment from health-care professionals, many people with long COVID report they have been dismissed or turned away.

    Last Friday – the day Gerrard’s comments were made public – was actually International Long COVID Awareness Day, organised by activists to draw attention to the condition.

    The response from people with long COVID was immediate. They shared their anger on social media about Gerrard’s comments, especially their timing, on a day designed to generate greater recognition for their illness.

    Since the start of the COVID pandemic, patient communities have fought for recognition of the long-term symptoms many people faced.

    The term “long COVID” was in fact coined by people suffering persistent symptoms after a COVID infection, who were seeking words to describe what they were going through.

    The role people with long COVID have played in defining their condition and bringing medical and public attention to it demonstrates the possibilities of patient-led expertise. For decades, people with invisible or “silent” conditions such as ME/CFS (myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome) have had to fight ignorance from health-care professionals and stigma from others in their lives. They have often been told their disabling symptoms are psychosomatic.

    Gerrard’s comments, and the media’s amplification of them, repudiates the term “long COVID” that community members have chosen to give their condition an identity and support each other. This is likely to cause distress and exacerbate feelings of abandonment.

    Terminology matters

    The words we use to describe illnesses and conditions are incredibly powerful. Naming a new condition is a step towards better recognition of people’s suffering, and hopefully, better diagnosis, health care, treatment and acceptance by others.

    The term “long COVID” provides an easily understandable label to convey patients’ experiences to others. It is well known to the public. It has been routinely used in news media reporting and and in many reputable medical journal articles.

    Most importantly, scrapping the label would further marginalise a large group of people with a chronic illness who have often been left to struggle behind closed doors.The Conversation

    Deborah Lupton, SHARP Professor, Vitalities Lab, Centre for Social Research in Health and Social Policy Centre, and the ARC Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society, UNSW Sydney

    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:

  • The Vitamin Solution – by Dr. Romy Block & Dr. Arielle Levitan

    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.

    A quick note: it would be remiss of us not to mention that the authors of this book are also the founders of a vitamin company, thus presenting a potential conflict of interest.

    That said… In this reviewer’s opinion, the book does seem balanced and objective, regardless.

    We talk a lot about supplements here at 10almonds, especially in our Monday Research Review editions. And yesterday, we featured a book by a doctor who hates supplements. Today, we feature a book by two doctors who have made them their business.

    The authors cover all the most common vitamins and minerals popularly enjoyed as supplements, and examine:

    • why people take them
    • factors affecting whether they help
    • problems that can arise
    • complicating factors

    The “complicating factors” include, for example, the way many vitamins and/or minerals interplay with each other, either by requiring the presence of another, or else competing for resources for absorption, or needing to be delicately balanced on pain of diverse woes.

    This is the greatest value of the book, perhaps; it’s where most people go wrong with supplementation, if they go wrong.

    While both authors are medical doctors, Dr. Romy Block is an endocrinologist specifically, and she clearly brought a lot of extra attention to relevant metabolic/thyroid issues, and how vitamins and minerals (such as thiamin and iron) can improve or sabotage such, depending on various factors that she explains. Informative, and so far as this reviewer could see, objective and well-balanced.

    Bottom line: supplementation is a vast and complex topic, but this book does a fine job of demystifying and simplifying it in a clear and objective fashion, without resorting to either scaremongering or hype.

    Click here to check out The Vitamin Solution, and upgrade your knowledge!

    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:

  • Sunflower Oil vs Canola Oil – 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 sunflower oil to canola oil, we picked the sunflower oil.

    Why?

    They’re both terrible! But canola oil is worse. Sunflower oil is marketed as being higher in polyunsaturated fats, which it is, albeit not by much.

    Canola oil is very bad for the heart, and sunflower oil is only moderately bad for the heart, to the point that it can be heart-neutral if used sparingly.

    As seed oils, they are both sources of vitamin E, but you’d need to drink a cup of oil to get your daily dose, so please just eat some seeds (or nuts, or fruit, or something) instead. It can even be sunflower seeds if you like! Rapeseed* itself (the seed that canola oil is made from) isn’t really sold as a foodstuff, so that one’s less of an option.

    *Fun fact: if you’re N. American and wondering what this “rapeseed” is, know that most of the rest of the Anglosphere calls canola oil “rapeseed oil”, as it’s made from rapeseed, which comes from a plant called rape, whose name is unrelated to the crime of the same name, and comes from rāpa, the Latin word for turnip. Anyway, “canola” is a portmanteau of “Canadian” and “Ola” meaning oil, and is a trademark that has made its way into generic use throughout N. America, as a less alarming name.

    Back to health matters: while sunflower seeds are healthy in moderation, the ultraprocessed and refined sunflower and canola oils are not.

    Canola oil has also been found to be implicated in age-related cognitive decline, whereas sunflower oil has had mixed results in that regard.

    In summary

    Sunflower oil is relatively, and we stress relatively, healthier than canola oil. Please use a healthier oil than either if you can. Olive oil is good for most things, and if you need something with a higher smoke point (and/or less distinctive flavor), consider avocado oil, which is also very healthy and whose smoke point is even higher than the seed oils we’ve been discussing today.

    Want to know more?

    Check out:

    Avocado Oil vs Olive Oil – Which is Healthier?

    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: