Cilantro vs Parsley – 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 cilantro to parsley, we picked the parsley.

Why?

Notwithstanding that some of our recipes include “cilantro, or if you have the this-tastes-like-soap gene, parsley”, that choice is more for the taste profile than the nutrition profile. Both are good, though, and it is quite close!

Like many herbs, they’re both full of vitamins and minerals and assorted phytochemicals.

In the category of vitamins, they’re both very good sources of vitamins A, C, and K, but parsley has more of each (and in vitamin K’s case, 4–5 times more). Parsley also has about twice as much folate. For the other vitamins, they’re mostly quite equal except that cilantro has more vitamin E.

When it comes to minerals, again they’re both good but again parsley is better on average, with several times more iron, and about twice as much calcium, zinc, and magnesium. Cilantro only wins noticeably for selenium.

Both have an array of anti-inflammatory phytochemicals, and each boasts antioxidants with anticancer potential.

Both have mood-improving qualities and have research for their anxiolytic and antidepressant effects—sufficient that these deserve their own main feature sometime.

For now though, we’ll say: healthwise, these two wonderful herbs are equal on most things, except that parsley has the better micronutrient profile.

Enjoy!

Further reading

You might also enjoy:

Herbs For (Evidence-Based) Health & Healing

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Salmon vs Tuna – Which is Healthier?
  • Our ‘food environments’ affect what we eat. Here’s how you can change yours to support healthier eating
    Changing our eating habits is challenging due to unhealthy food environments. Removing temptations, planning non-food activities, and creating rules can help achieve healthier eating goals.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • How To Nap Like A Pro (No More “Sleep Hangovers”!)

    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.

    How To Be An Expert Nap-Artist

    There’s a lot of science to say that napping can bring us health benefits—but mistiming it can just make us more tired. So, how to get some refreshing shut-eye, without ending up with a case of the midday melatonin blues?

    First, why do we want to nap?

    Well, maybe we’re just tired, but there are specific benefits even if we’re not. For example:

    What can go wrong?

    There are two main things that can go wrong, physiologically speaking:

    1. We can overdo it, and not sleep well at night
    2. We can awake groggy and confused and tired

    The first is self-explanatory—it messes with the circadian rhythm. For this reason, we should not sleep more than 90 minutes during the day. If that seems like a lot, and maybe you’ve heard that we shouldn’t sleep more than half an hour, there is science here, so read on…

    The second is a matter of sleep cycles. Our brain naturally organizes our sleep into multiples of 20-minute segments, with a slight break of a few minutes between each. Consequently, naps should be:

    • 25ish minutes
    • 40–45 minutes
    • 90ish minutes

    If you wake up mid-cycle—for example, because your alarm went off, or someone disturbed you, or even because you needed to pee, you will be groggy, disoriented, and exhausted.

    For this reason, a nap of one hour (a common choice, since people like “round” numbers) is a recipe for disaster, and will only work if you take 15 minutes to fall asleep. In which case, it’d really be a nap of 45 minutes, made up of two 20-minute sleep cycles.

    Some interruptions are better/worse than others

    If you’re in light or REM sleep, a disruption will leave you not very refreshed, but not wiped out either. And as a bonus, if you’re interrupted during a REM cycle, you’re more likely to remember your dreams.

    If you’re in deep sleep, a disruption will leave you with what feels like an incredible hangover, minus the headache, and you’ll be far more tired than you were before you started the nap.

    The best way to nap

    Taking these factors into account, one of the “safest” ways to nap is to set your alarm for the top end of the time-bracket above the one you actually want to nap for (e.g., if you want to nap for 25ish minutes, set your alarm for 45).

    Unless you’re very sleep-deprived, you’ll probably wake up briefly after 20–25 minutes of sleep. This may seem like nearer 30 minutes, if it took you some minutes to fall asleep!

    If you don’t wake up then, or otherwise fail to get up, your alarm will catch you later at what will hopefully be between your next sleep cycles, or at the very least not right in the middle of one.

    When you wake up from a nap before your alarm, get up. This is not the time for “5 more minutes” because “5 more minutes” will never, ever, be refreshing.

    Rest well!

    Share This Post

  • Reflexology: What The Science Says

    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.

    How Does Reflexology Work, Really?

    In Wednesday’s newsletter, we asked you for your opinion of reflexology, and got the above-depicted, below-described set of responses:

    • About 63% said “It works by specific nerves connecting the feet and hands to various specific organs, triggering healing remotely”
    • About 26% said “It works by realigning the body’s energies (e.g. qi, ki, prana, etc), removing blockages and improving health“
    • About 11% said “It works by placebo, at best, and has no evidence for any efficacy beyond that”

    So, what does the science say?

    It works by realigning the body’s energies (e.g. qi, ki, prana, etc), removing blockages and improving health: True or False?

    False, or since we can’t prove a negative: there is no reliable scientific evidence for this.

    Further, there is no reliable scientific evidence for the existence of qi, ki, prana, soma, mana, or whatever we want to call it.

    To save doubling up, we did discuss this in some more detail, exploring the notion of qi as bioelectrical energy, including a look at some unreliable clinical evidence for it (a study that used shoddy methodology, but it’s important to understand what they did wrong, to watch out for such), when we looked at [the legitimately very healthful practice of] qigong, a couple of weeks ago:

    Qigong: A Breath Of Fresh Air?

    As for reflexology specifically: in terms of blockages of qi causing disease (and thus being a putative therapeutic mechanism of action for attenuating disease), it’s an interesting hypothesis but in terms of scientific merit, it was pre-emptively supplanted by germ theory and other similarly observable-and-measurable phenomena.

    We say “pre-emptively”, because despite orientalist marketing, unless we want to count some ancient pictures of people getting a foot massage and say it is reflexology, there is no record of reflexology being a thing before 1913 (and that was in the US, by a laryngologist working with a spiritualist to produce a book that they published in 1917).

    It works by specific nerves connecting the feet and hands to various specific organs, triggering healing remotely: True or False?

    False, or since we can’t prove a negative: there is no reliable scientific evidence for this.

    A very large independent review of available scientific literature found the current medical consensus on reflexology is that:

    • Reflexology is effective for: anxiety (but short lasting), edema, mild insomnia, quality of sleep, and relieving pain (short term: 2–3 hours)
    • Reflexology is not effective for: inflammatory bowel disease, fertility treatment, neuropathy and polyneuropathy, acute low back pain, sub acute low back pain, chronic low back pain, radicular pain syndromes (including sciatica), post-operative low back pain, spinal stenosis, spinal fractures, sacroiliitis, spondylolisthesis, complex regional pain syndrome, trigger points / myofascial pain, chronic persistent pain, chronic low back pain, depression, work related injuries of the hip and pelvis

    Source: Reflexology – a scientific literary review compilation

    (the above is a fascinating read, by the way, and its 50 pages go into a lot more detail than we have room to here)

    Now, those items that they found it effective for, looks suspiciously like a short list of things that placebo is often good for, and/or any relaxing activity.

    Another review was not so generous:

    ❝The best evidence available to date does not demonstrate convincingly that reflexology is an effective treatment for any medical condition❞

    ~ Dr. Edzard Ernst (MD, PhD, FMedSci)

    Source: Is reflexology an effective intervention? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials

    In short, from the available scientific literature, we can surmise:

    • Some researchers have found it to have some usefulness against chiefly psychosomatic conditions
    • Other researchers have found the evidence for even that much to be uncompelling

    It works by placebo, at best, and has no evidence for any efficacy beyond that: True or False?

    Mostly True; of course reflexology runs into similar problems as acupuncture when it comes to testing against placebo:

    How Does One Test Acupuncture Against Placebo Anyway?

    …but not quite as bad, since it is easier to give a random foot massage while pretending it is a clinical treatment, than to fake putting needles into key locations.

    However, as the paper we cited just above (in answer to the previous True/False question) shows, reflexology does not appear to meaningfully outperform placebo—which points to the possibility that it does work by placebo, and is just a placebo treatment on the high end of placebo (because the placebo effect is real, does work, isn’t “nothing”, and some placebos work better than others).

    For more on the fascinating science and useful (applicable in daily life!) practicalities of how placebo does work, check out:

    How To Leverage Placebo Effect For Yourself

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Mental Health Courts Can Struggle to Fulfill Decades-Old Promise

    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.

    GAINESVILLE, Ga. — In early December, Donald Brown stood nervously in the Hall County Courthouse, concerned he’d be sent back to jail.

    The 55-year-old struggles with depression, addiction, and suicidal thoughts. He worried a judge would terminate him from a special diversion program meant to keep people with mental illness from being incarcerated. He was failing to keep up with the program’s onerous work and community service requirements.

    “I’m kind of scared. I feel kind of defeated,” Brown said.

    Last year, Brown threatened to take his life with a gun and his family called 911 seeking help, he said. The police arrived, and Brown was arrested and charged with a felony of firearm possession.

    After months in jail, Brown was offered access to the Health Empowerment Linkage and Possibilities, or HELP, Court. If he pleaded guilty, he’d be connected to services and avoid prison time. But if he didn’t complete the program, he’d possibly face incarceration.

    “It’s almost like coercion,” Brown said. “‘Here, sign these papers and get out of jail.’ I feel like I could have been dealt with a lot better.”

    Advocates, attorneys, clinicians, and researchers said courts such as the one Brown is navigating can struggle to live up to their promise. The diversion programs, they said, are often expensive and resource-intensive, and serve fewer than 1% of the more than 2 million people who have a serious mental illness and are booked into U.S. jails each year.

    People can feel pressured to take plea deals and enter the courts, seeing the programs as the only route to get care or avoid prison time. The courts are selective, due in part to political pressures on elected judges and prosecutors. Participants must often meet strict requirements that critics say aren’t treatment-focused, such as regular hearings and drug screenings.

    And there is a lack of conclusive evidence on whether the courts help participants long-term. Some legal experts, like Lea Johnston, a professor of law at the University of Florida, worry the programs distract from more meaningful investments in mental health resources.

    Jails and prisons are not the place for individuals with mental disorders, she said. “But I’m also not sure that mental health court is the solution.”

    The country’s first mental health court was established in Broward County, Florida, in 1997, “as a way to promote recovery and mental health wellness and avoid criminalizing mental health problems.” The model was replicated with millions in funding from such federal agencies as the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Department of Justice.

    More than 650 adult and juvenile mental health courts were operational as of 2022, according to the National Treatment Court Resource Center. There’s no set way to run them. Generally, participants receive treatment plans and get linked to services. Judges and mental health clinicians oversee their progress.

    Researchers from the center found little evidence that the courts improve participants’ mental health or keep them out of the criminal justice system. “Few studies … assess longer-term impacts” of the programs “beyond one year after program exit,” said a 2022 policy brief on mental health courts.

    The courts work best when paired with investments in services such as clinical treatment, recovery programs, and housing and employment opportunities, said Kristen DeVall, the center’s co-director.

    “If all of these other supports aren’t invested in, then it’s kind of a wash,” she said.

    The courts should be seen as “one intervention in that larger system,” DeVall said, not “the only resource to serve folks with mental health needs” who get caught up in the criminal justice system.

    Resource limitations can also increase the pressures to apply for mental health court programs, said Lisa M. Wayne, executive director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. People seeking help might not feel they have alternatives.

    “It’s not going to be people who can afford mental health intervention. It’s poor people, marginalized folks,” she said.

    Other court skeptics wonder about the larger costs of the programs.

    In a study of a mental health court in Pennsylvania, Johnston and a University of Florida colleague found participants were sentenced to longer time under government supervision than if they’d gone through the regular criminal justice system.

    “The bigger problem is they’re taking attention away from more important solutions that we should be investing in, like community mental health care,” Johnston said.

    When Melissa Vergara’s oldest son, Mychael Difrancisco, was arrested on felony gun charges in Queens in May 2021, she thought he would be an ideal candidate for the New York City borough’s mental health court because of his diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder and other behavioral health conditions.

    She estimated she spent tens of thousands of dollars to prepare Difrancisco’s case for consideration. Meanwhile, her son sat in jail on Rikers Island, where she said he was assaulted multiple times and had to get half a finger amputated after it was caught in a cell door.

    In the end, his case was denied diversion into mental health court. Difrancisco, 22, is serving a prison sentence that could be as long as four years and six months.

    “There’s no real urgency to help people with mental health struggles,” Vergara said.

    Critics worry such high bars to entry can lead the programs to exclude people who could benefit the most. Some courts don’t allow those accused of violent or sexual crimes to participate. Prosecutors and judges can face pressure from constituents that may lead them to block individuals accused of high-profile offenses.

    And judges often aren’t trained to make decisions about participants’ care, said Raji Edayathumangalam, senior policy social worker with New York County Defender Services.

    “It’s inappropriate,” she said. “We’re all licensed to practice in our different professions for a reason. I can’t show up to do a hernia operation just because I read about it or sat next to a hernia surgeon.”

    Mental health courts can be overly focused on requirements such as drug testing, medication compliance, and completing workbook assignments, rather than progress toward recovery and clinical improvement, Edayathumangalam said.

    Completing the programs can leave some participants with clean criminal records. But failing to meet a program’s requirements can trigger penalties — including incarceration.

    During a recent hearing in the Clayton County Behavioral Health Accountability Court in suburban Atlanta, one woman left the courtroom in tears when Judge Shana Rooks Malone ordered her to report to jail for a seven-day stay for “being dishonest” about whether she was taking court-required medication.

    It was her sixth infraction in the program — previous consequences included written assignments and “bench duty,” in which participants must sit and think about their participation in the program.

    “I don’t like to incarcerate,” Malone said. “That particular participant has had some challenges. I’m rooting for her. But all the smaller penalties haven’t worked.”

    Still, other participants praised Malone and her program. And, in general, some say such diversion programs provide a much-needed lifeline.

    Michael Hobby, 32, of Gainesville was addicted to heroin and fentanyl when he was arrested for drug possession in August 2021. After entry into the HELP Court program, he got sober, started taking medication for anxiety and depression, and built a stable life.

    “I didn’t know where to reach out for help,” he said. “I got put in handcuffs, and it saved my life.”

    Even as Donald Brown awaited his fate, he said he had started taking medication to manage his depression and has stayed sober because of HELP Court.

    “I’ve learned a new way of life. Instead of getting high, I’m learning to feel things now,” he said.

    Brown avoided jail that early December day. A hearing to decide his fate could happen in the next few weeks. But even if he’s allowed to remain in the program, Brown said, he’s worried it’s only a matter of time before he falls out of compliance.

    “To try to improve myself and get locked up for it is just a kick in the gut,” he said. “I tried really hard.”

    KFF Health News senior correspondent Fred Clasen-Kelly 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.

    USE OUR CONTENT

    This story can be republished for free (details).

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Salmon vs Tuna – Which is Healthier?
  • Feta or Parmesan – 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 feta to parmesan, we picked the parmesan.

    Why?

    It’s close! Looking at the macros, parmesan has more protein and slightly less fat. Of the fat content, parmesan also has slightly less saturated fat, but neither of them are doing great in this category. Still, a relative win for parmesan.

    In the category of vitamins, feta is a veritable vitamin-B-fest with more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, and B9. On the other hand, parmesan has more of vitamins A, B12, and choline. By strength of numbers, this is a win for feta.

    Minerals tell a different story; parmesan has a lot more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc. Meanwhile, feta is not higher in any minerals. A clear win for parmesan.

    Both cheeses offer gut-healthy benefits (if consumed regularly in small portions), while neither are great for the heart.

    On balance, we say parmesan wins the day.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Feta Cheese vs Mozzarella – Which is Healthier?

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

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

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Brown Rice vs Wild Rice – 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 brown rice to wild rice, we picked the wild.

    Why?

    It’s close! But there are important distinctions.

    First let’s clarify: despite the name and appearance, wild rice is botanically quite different from rice per se; it’s not the same species, it’s not even the same genus, though it is the same umbrella family. In other words, they’re about as closely related as humans and gorillas are to each other.

    In terms of macros, wild rice has considerably more protein and a little more fiber, for slightly lower carbs.

    Notably, however, wild rice’s carbs are a close-to-even mix of sucrose, fructose, and glucose, while brown rice’s carbs are 99% starch. Given the carb to fiber ratio, it’s worth noting that wild rice also has lower net carbs, and the lower glycemic index.

    In the category of vitamins, wild rice leads with more of vitamins A, B2, B9, E, K, and choline. In contrast, brown rice has more of vitamins B1, B3, and B5. So, a moderate win for wild rice.

    When it comes to minerals, brown rice finally gets a tally in its favor, even if only slightly: brown rice has more magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and selenium, while wild rice has more copper, potassium, and zinc. They’re equal in calcium and iron, by the way. Still, this category stands as a 4:3 win for brown rice.

    Adding up the categories makes a modest win for wild rice, and additionally, if we had to consider one of these things more important than the others, it’d be wild rice being higher in fiber and protein and lower in total carbs and net carbs.

    Still, enjoy either or both, per your preference!

    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:

  • Butter vs Margarine

    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.

    Butter vs Margarine

    Yesterday, we asked you for your (health-related) opinion on butter vs margarine, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

    • A little over 60% said butter is a health food and margarine is basically plastic with trans fats
    • A little over 20% said that both are woeful and it’s better to avoid both
    • A little over 10% said that margarine is a lighter option, and butter is a fast track to cardiovascular disease.

    Comments included (we will summarize/paraphrase, for space):

    • “…in moderation, though”
    • “I’m vegan so I use vegan butter but I know it’s not great, so I use it sparingly”
    • “butter is healthy if and only if it’s grass-fed”
    • “margarine has unpronounceable ingredients”

    To address those quickly:

    • “…in moderation” is a stipulation with which one can rarely go too far wrong
    • Same! Speaking for myself (your writer here, hi) and not for the company
    • Grass-fed is indeed better; alas that so little of it is grass-fed, in the US!
    • Butter contains eicosatrienoic acid, linolelaidic acid, and more*. Sometimes big words don’t mean that something is worse for the health, though!

    *Source: Quality characteristics, chemical composition, and sensory properties of butter from cows on pasture versus indoor feeding systems

    So, what does the science say?

    Butter is a health food: True or False?

    True or False, depending on amount! Moderation is definitely key, but we’ll return to that (and why not to have more than a small amount of butter) later. But it is a rich source of many nutrients, iff it’s grass-fed, anyway.

    The nutritional profile of something isn’t a thing that’s too contentious, so rather than take too much time on it, in this case we’ll point you back up to the scientific paper we linked above, or if you prefer a pop-science rendering, here’s a nice quick rundown:

    7 Reasons to Switch to Grass-Fed Butter

    Margarine is basically plastic with trans fats: True or False?

    False and usually False now, respectively, contingently.

    On the first part: chemically, it’s simply not “basically plastic” and everything in it is digestible

    On the second part: it depends on the margarine, and here’s where it pays to read labels. Historically, margarines all used to be high in trans fats (which are indeed woeful for the health). Nowadays, since trans fats have such a (well-earned) bad press, there are increasingly many margarines with low (or no) trans fats, and depending on your country, it may be that all margarines no longer have such:

    ❝It’s a public health success story. Consumers no longer have to worry about reading product nutritional labels to see if they contain hydrogenated oils and trans fats. They can just know that they no longer do❞

    Source: Margarines now nutritionally better than butter after hydrogenated oil ban

    So this is one where the science is clear (trans fats are unequivocally bad), but the consumer information is not always (it may be necessary to read labels, to know whether a margarine is conforming to the new guidelines).

    Butter is a fast track to cardiovascular disease: True or False?

    True or False depending on amount. In moderation, predictably it’s not a big deal.

    But for example, the World Health Organization recommends that saturated fats (of which butter is a generous source) make up no more than 10% of our calorie intake:

    Source: Saturated fatty acid and trans-fatty acid intake for adults and children: WHO guideline

    So if you have a 2000 kcal daily intake, that would mean consuming not more than 200 kcal from butter, which is approximately two tablespoons.

    If you’d like a deeper look into the complexities of saturated fats (for and against), you might like our previous main feature specifically about such:

    Can Saturated Fats Be Healthy?

    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: