Do we need animal products to be healthy?

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.

Do we need animal products to be healthy?

We asked you for your (health-related) perspective on plant-based vs anima-based foods, and got the above-pictured spread of answers.

“Some or all of us may need small amounts of animal products” came out on top with more votes than the two more meat-eatery options combined, and the second most popular option was the hard-line “We can all live healthily and happily on just plants”.

Based on these answers, it seems our readership has quite a lot of vegans, vegetarians, and perhaps “flexitarians” who just have a little of animal products here and there.

Perhaps we should have seen this coming; the newsletter is “10almonds”, not “10 rashers of bacon”, after all.

But what does the science say?

We are carnivores and are best eating plenty of meat: True or False?

False. Let’s just rip the band-aid off for this one.

In terms of our anatomy and physiology, we are neither carnivores nor herbivores:

  • We have a mid-length digestive tract (unlike carnivores and herbivores who have short and long ones, respectively)
  • We have a mouthful of an assortment of teeth; molars and premolars for getting through plants from hard nuts to tough fibrous tubers, and we have incisors for cutting into flesh and (vestigial, but they’re there) canines that really serve us no purpose now but would have been a vicious bite when they were bigger, like some other modern-day primates.
  • If we look at our closest living relatives, the other great apes, they are mostly frugivores (fruit-eaters) who supplement their fruity diet with a small quantity of insects and sometimes other small animals—of which they’ll often eat only the fatty organ meat and discard the rest.

And then, there’s the health risks associated with meat. We’ll not linger on this as we’ve talked about it before, but for example:

If we avoid processed and/or red meat, that’s good enough: True or False?

True… Ish.

Really this one depends on one’s criteria for “good enough”. The above-linked studies, and plenty more like them, give the following broad picture:

  • Red and/or processed meats are unequivocally terrible for the health in general
  • Other mammalian meats, such as from pigs, are really not much better
  • Poultry, on the other hand, the science is less clear on; the results are mixed, and thus so are the conclusions. The results are often barely statistically significant. In other words, when it comes to poultry, in the matter of health, the general consensus is that you can take it or leave it and will be fine. Some studies have found firmly for or against it, but the consensus is a collective scientific shrug.
  • Fish, meanwhile, has almost universally been found to be healthful in moderation. You may have other reasons for wanting to avoid it (ethics, environmentalism, personal taste) but those things are beyond the scope of this article.

Some or all of us may need small amounts of animal products: True or False?

True! With nuances.

Let’s divide this into “some” and “all”. Firstly, some people may have health conditions and/or other mitigating circumstances that make an entirely plant-based diet untenable.

We’re going light on quotations from subscriber comments today because otherwise this article will get a bit long, but here’s a great example that’s worth quoting, from a subscriber who voted for this option:

❝I have a rare genetic disease called hereditary fructose intolerance. It means I lack the enzyme, Aldolase B, to process fructose. Eating fruits and veggies thus gives me severe hypoglycemia. I also have anemia caused by two autoimmune diseases, so I have to eat meat for the iron it supplies. I also supplement with iron pills but the pills alone can’t fix the problem entirely.❞

And, there’s the thing. Popular vegan talking-points are very good at saying “if you have this problem, this will address it; if you have that problem, that will address it”, etc. For every health-related objection to a fully plant-based diet there’s a refutation… Individually.

But actual real-world health doesn’t work like that; co-morbidities are very common, and in some cases, like our subscriber above, one problem undermines the solution to another. Add a third problem and by now you really just have to do what you need to do to survive.

For this reason, even the Vegan Society’s definition of veganism includes the clause “so far as is possible and practicable”.

Now, as for the rest of us “all”.

What if we’re really healthy and are living in optimal circumstances (easy access to a wide variety of choice of food), can we live healthily and happily just on plants?

No—on a technicality.

Vegans famously need to supplement vitamin B12, which is not found in plants. Ironically, much of the B12 in animal products comes from the animals themselves being given supplements, but that’s another matter. However, B12 can also be enjoyed from yeast. Popular options include the use of yeast extract (e.g. Marmite) and/or nutritional yeast in cooking.

Yeast is a single-celled microorganism that’s taxonomically classified as a fungus, even though in many ways it behaves like an animal (which series of words may conjure an amusing image, but we mean, biologically speaking).

However, it’s also not technically a plant, hence the “No—on a technicality”

Bottom line:

By nature, humans are quite versatile generalists when it comes to diet:

  • Most of us can live healthily and happily on just plants if we so choose.
  • Some people cannot, and will require varying kinds (and quantities) of animal products.
  • As for red and/or processed meats, we’re not the boss of you, but from a health perspective, the science is clear: unless you have a circumstance that really necessitates it, just don’t.
    • Same goes for pork, which isn’t red and may not be processed, but metabolically it’s associated with the same problems.
  • The jury is out on poultry, but it strongly appears to be optional, healthwise, without making much of a difference either way
  • Fish is roundly considered healthful in moderation. Enjoy it if you want, don’t if you don’t.

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Migraine Mythbusting
  • GABA Against Stress/Anxiety
    GABA: the lesser-known neurotransmitter with big benefits. From reducing stress to enhancing cognition, here’s what you need to know.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Vit D + Calcium: Too Much Of A Good Thing?

    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.

    Vit D + Calcium: Too Much Of A Good Thing?

    • Myth: you can’t get too much calcium!
    • Myth: you must get as much vitamin D as possible!

    Let’s tackle calcium first:

    ❝Calcium is good for you! You need more calcium for your bones! Be careful you don’t get calcium-deficient!❞

    Contingently, those comments seem reasonable. Contingently on you not already having the right amount of calcium. Most people know what happens in the case of too little calcium: brittle bones, osteoporosis, and so forth.

    But what about too much?

    Hypercalcemia

    Having too much calcium—or “hypercalcemia”— can lead to problems with…

    • Groans: gastrointestinal pain, nausea, and vomiting. Peptic ulcer disease and pancreatitis.
    • Bones: bone-related pains. Osteoporosis, osteomalacia, arthritis and pathological fractures.
    • Stones: kidney stones causing pain.
    • Moans: refers to fatigue and malaise.
    • Thrones: polyuria, polydipsia, and constipation
    • Psychic overtones: lethargy, confusion, depression, and memory loss.

    (mnemonic courtesy of Sadiq et al, 2022)

    What causes this, and how do we avoid it? Is it just dietary?

    It’s mostly not dietary!

    Overconsumption of calcium is certainly possible, but not common unless one has an extreme diet and/or over-supplementation. However…

    Too much vitamin D

    Again with “too much of a good thing”! While keeping good levels of vitamin D is, obviously, good, overdoing it (including commonly prescribed super-therapeutic doses of vitamin D) can lead to hypercalcemia.

    This happens because vitamin D triggers calcium absorption into the gut, and acts as gatekeeper to the bloodstream.

    Normally, the body only absorbs 10–20% of the calcium we consume, and that’s all well and good. But with overly high vitamin D levels, the other 80–90% can be waved on through, and that is very much Not Good™.

    See for yourself:

    How much is too much?

    The United States’ Office of Dietary Supplements defines 4000 IU (100μg) as a high daily dose of vitamin D, and recommends 600 IU (15μg) as a daily dose, or 800 IU (20μg) if aged over 70.

    See for yourself: Vitamin D Fact Sheet for Health Professionals ← there’s quite a bit of extra info there too

    Share This Post

  • Skin Care Down There (Incl. Butt Acne, Hyperpigmentation, & More)

    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.

    Dr. Sam Ellis, dermatologist, gives us the low-down:

    Where the sun don’t shine

    Common complaints and remedies that Dr. Ellis covers in this video include:

    • Butt acne/folliculitis: most butt breakouts are actually folliculitis, not traditional acne. Folliculitis is caused by friction, sitting for long periods, or wearing tight clothes. Solutions include antimicrobial washes like benzoyl peroxide and changing sitting habits (i.e. to sit less)
    • Keratosis pilaris: rough bumps around hair follicles can appear on the butt, often confused with acne.
    • Boils and abscesses: painful, large lumps; these need medical attention for drainage.
    • Hidradenitis suppurativa: recurrent painful cysts and boils in skin creases, often in the groin and buttocks. These require medical intervention and treatment.
    • Ingrown hairs: are common in people who shave or wax. Treat with warm compresses and gentle exfoliants.
    • Hyperpigmentation: is often caused by hormonal changes, friction, or other irritation. Laser hair removal and gentle chemical exfoliants can help.

    In the event that the sun does, in fact, shine on your genitals (for example you sunbathe nude and have little or no pubic hair), then sun protection is essential to prevent further darkening (and also, incidentally, reduce the risk of cancer).

    For more on all of this, plus a general introduction to skincare in the bikini zone (i.e. if everything’s fine there right now and you’d like to keep it that way), enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    The Evidence-Based Skincare That Beats Product-Specific Hype

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • CBD Against Diabetes!

    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

    ❝CBD for diabetes! I’ve taken CBD for body pain. Did no good. Didn’t pay attention as to diabetes. I’m type 1 for 62 years. Any ideas?❞

    Thanks for asking! First up, for reference, here’s our previous main feature on the topic of CBD:

    CBD Oil: What Does The Science Say?

    There, we touched on CBD’s effects re diabetes:

    in mice / in vitro / in humans

    In summary, according to the above studies, it…

    • lowered incidence of diabetes in non-obese diabetic mice. By this they mean that pancreatic function improved (reduced insulitis and reduced inflammatory Th1-associated cytokine production). Obviously this has strong implications for Type 1 Diabetes in humans—but so far, just that, implications (because you are not a mouse).
    • attenuated high glucose-induced endothelial cell inflammatory response and barrier disruption. Again, this is promising, but it was an in vitro study in very controlled lab conditions, and sometimes “what happens in the Petri dish, stays in the Petri dish”—in order words, these results may or may not translate to actual living humans.
    • Improved insulin response ← is the main take-away that we got from reading through their numerical results, since there was no convenient conclusion given. Superficially, this may be of more interest to those with type 2 diabetes, but then again, if you have T1D and then acquire insulin resistance on top of that, you stand a good chance of dying on account of your exogenous insulin no longer working. In the case of T2D, “the pancreas will provide” (more or less), T1D, not so much.

    So, what else is there out there?

    The American Diabetes Association does not give a glowing review:

    ❝There’s a lot of hype surrounding CBD oil and diabetes. There is no noticeable effect on blood glucose (blood sugar) or insulin levels in people with type 2 diabetes. Researchers continue to study the effects of CBD on diabetes in animal studies. ❞

    ~ American Diabetes Association

    Source: ADA | CBD & Diabetes

    Of course, that’s type 2, but most research out there is for type 2, or else have been in vitro or rodent studies (and not many of those, at that).

    Here’s a relatively more recent study that echoes the results of the previous mouse study we mentioned; it found:

    ❝CBD-treated non-obese diabetic mice developed T1D later and showed significantly reduced leukocyte activation and increased FCD in the pancreatic microcirculation.

    Conclusions: Experimental CBD treatment reduced markers of inflammation in the microcirculation of the pancreas studied by intravital microscopy. ❞

    ~ Dr. Christian Lehmann et al.

    Read more: Experimental cannabidiol treatment reduces early pancreatic inflammation in type 1 diabetes

    …and here’s a 2020 study (so, more recent again) that was this time rats, and/but still more promising, insofar as it was with rats that had full-blown T1D already:

    Read in full: Two-weeks treatment with cannabidiol improves biophysical and behavioral deficits associated with experimental type-1 diabetes

    Finally, a paper in July 2023 (so, since our previous article about CBD), looked at the benefits of CBD against diabetes-related complications (so, applicable to most people with any kind of diabetes), and concluded:

    ❝CBDis of great value in the treatment of diabetes and its complications. CBD can improve pancreatic islet function, reduce pancreatic inflammation and improve insulin resistance. For diabetic complications, CBD not only has a preventive effect but also has a therapeutic value for existing diabetic complications and improves the function of target organs

    ~ Dr. Jin Zhang et al.

    …before continuing:

    ❝However, the safety and effectiveness of CBD are still needed to prove. It should be acknowledged that the clinical application of CBD in the treatment of diabetes and its complications has a long way to go.

    The dissecting of the pharmacology and therapeutic role of CBD in diabetes would guide the future development of CBD-based therapeutics for treating diabetes and diabetic complications❞

    ~ Ibid.

    Now, the first part of that is standard ass-covering, and the second part of that is standard “please fund more studies please”. Nevertheless, we must also not fail to take heed—little is guaranteed, especially when it comes to an area of research where the science is still very young.

    In summary…

    It seems well worth a try, and with ostensibly nothing to lose except the financial cost of the CBD.

    If you do, you might want to keep careful track of a) your usual diabetes metrics (blood sugar levels before and after meals, insulin taken), and b) when you took CBD, what dose, etc, so you can do some citizen science here.

    Lastly: please remember our standard disclaimer; we are not doctors, let alone your doctors, so please do check with your endocrinologist before undertaking any such changes!

    Want to read more?

    You might like our previous main feature:

    How To Prevent And Reverse Type 2 Diabetes ← obviously this will not prevent or reverse Type 1 Diabetes, but avoiding insulin resistance is good in any case!

    If you’re not diabetic and you’ve perhaps been confused throughout this article, then firstly thank you for your patience, and secondly you might like this quick primer:

    The Sweet Truth About Diabetes: Debunking Diabetes Myths! ← this gives a simplified but fair overview of types 1 & 2

    (for space, we didn’t cover the much less common types 3 & 4; perhaps another time we will)

    Meanwhile, take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Migraine Mythbusting
  • ‘Emergency’ or Not, Covid Is Still Killing People. Here’s What Doctors Advise to Stay Safe.

    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.

    With around 20,000 people dying of covid in the United States since the start of October, and tens of thousands more abroad, the covid pandemic clearly isn’t over. However, the crisis response is, since the World Health Organization and the Biden administration ended their declared health emergencies last year.

    Let’s not confuse the terms “pandemic” and “emergency.” As Abraar Karan, an infectious disease physician and researcher at Stanford University, said, “The pandemic is over until you are scrunched in bed, feeling terrible.”

    Pandemics are defined by neither time nor severity, but rather by large numbers of ongoing infections worldwide. Emergencies are acute and declared to trigger an urgent response. Ending the official emergency shifted the responsibility for curbing covid from leaders to the public. In the United States, it meant, for example, that the government largely stopped covering the cost of covid tests and vaccines.

    But the virus is still infecting people; indeed, it is surging right now.

    With changes in the nature of the pandemic and the response, KFF Health News spoke with doctors and researchers about how to best handle covid, influenza, and other respiratory ailments spreading this season.

    A holiday wave of sickness has ensued as expected. Covid infections have escalated nationwide in the past few weeks, with analyses of virus traces in wastewater suggesting infection rates as high as last year’s. More than 73,000 people died of covid in the U.S. in 2023, meaning the virus remains deadlier than car accidents and influenza. Still, compared with last year’s seasonal surge, this winter’s wave of covid hospitalizations has been lower and death rates less than half.

    “We’re seeing outbreaks in homeless shelters and in nursing homes, but hospitals aren’t overwhelmed like they have been in the past,” said Salvador Sandoval, a doctor and health officer at the Merced County public health department in California. He attributes that welcome fact to vaccination, covid treatments like Paxlovid, and a degree of immunity from prior infections.

    While a new coronavirus variant, JN.1, has spread around the world, the current vaccines and covid tests remain effective.

    Other seasonal illnesses are surging, too, but rates are consistent with those of previous years. Between 9,400 and 28,000 people died from influenza from Oct. 1 to Jan. 6, estimates the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and millions felt so ill from the flu that they sought medical care. Cases of pneumonia — a serious condition marked by inflamed lungs that can be triggered by the flu, covid, or other infections — also predictably rose as winter set in. Researchers are now less concerned about flare-ups of pneumonia in China, Denmark, and France in November and December, because they fit cyclical patterns of the pneumonia-causing bacteria Mycoplasma pneumoniae rather than outbreaks of a dangerous new bug.

    Public health researchers recommend following the CDC guidance on getting the latest covid and influenza vaccines to ward off hospitalization and death from the diseases and reduce chances of getting sick. A recent review of studies that included 614,000 people found that those who received two covid vaccines were also less likely to develop long covid; often involving fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and joint pain, the condition is marked by the development or continuation of symptoms a few months after an infection and has been debilitating for millions of people. Another analysis found that people who had three doses of covid vaccines were much less likely to have long covid than those who were unvaccinated. (A caveat, however, is that those with three doses might have taken additional measures to avoid infections than those who chose to go without.)

    It’s not too late for an influenza vaccine, either, said Helen Chu, a doctor and epidemiologist at the University of Washington in Seattle. Influenza continues to rise into the new year, especially in Southern states and California. Last season’s shot appeared to reduce adults’ risk of visits to the emergency room and urgent care by almost half and hospitalization by more than a third. Meanwhile, another seasonal illness with a fresh set of vaccines released last year, respiratory syncytial virus, appears to be waning this month.

    Another powerful way to prevent covid, influenza, common colds, and other airborne infections is by wearing an N95 mask. Many researchers say they’ve returned to socializing without one but opt for the masks in crowded, indoor places when wearing one would not be particularly burdensome. Karan, for example, wears his favorite N95 masks on airplanes. And don’t forget good, old-fashioned hand-washing, which helps prevent infections as well.

    If you do all that and still feel sick? Researchers say they reach for rapid covid tests. While they’ve never been perfect, they’re often quite helpful in guiding a person’s next steps.

    When President Joe Biden declared the end of the public health emergency last year, many federally funded testing sites that sent samples to laboratories shut their doors. As a result, people now mainly turn to home covid tests that signal an infection within 15 minutes and cost around $6 to $8 each at many pharmacies. The trick is to use these tests correctly by taking more than one when there’s reason for concern. They miss early infections more often than tests processed in a lab, because higher levels of the coronavirus are required for detection — and the virus takes time to multiply in the body. For this reason, Karan considers other information. “If I ran into someone who turned out to be sick, and then I get symptoms a few days later,” he said, “the chance is high that I have whatever they had, even if a test is negative.”

    A negative result with a rapid test might mean simply that an infection hasn’t progressed enough to be detected, that the test had expired, or that it was conducted wrong. To be sure the culprit behind symptoms like a sore throat isn’t covid, researchers suggest testing again in a day or two. It often takes about three days after symptoms start for a test to register as positive, said Karan, adding that such time estimates are based on averages and that individuals may deviate from the norm.

    If a person feels healthy and wants to know their status because they were around someone with covid, Karan recommends testing two to four days after the exposure. To protect others during those uncertain days, the person can wear an N95 mask that blocks the spread of the virus. If tests remain negative five days after an exposure and the person still feels fine, Chu said, they’re unlikely to be infected — and, if they are, viral levels would be so low that they would be unlikely to pass the disease to others.

    Positive tests, on the other hand, reliably flag an infection. In this case, people can ask a doctor whether they qualify for the antiviral drug Paxlovid. The pills work best when taken immediately after symptoms begin so that they slash levels of the virus before it damages the body. Some studies suggest the medicine reduces a person’s risk of long covid, too, but the evidence is mixed. Another note on tests: Don’t worry if they continue to turn out positive for longer than symptoms last; the virus may linger even if it’s no longer replicating. After roughly a week since a positive test or symptoms, studies suggest, a person is unlikely to pass the virus to others.

    If covid is ruled out, Karan recommends tests for influenza because they can guide doctors on whether to prescribe an antiviral to fight it — or if instead it’s a bacterial infection, in which case antibiotics may be in order. (One new home test diagnoses covid and influenza at the same time.) Whereas antivirals and antibiotics target the source of the ailment, over-the-counter medications may soothe congestion, coughs, fevers, and other symptoms. That said, the FDA recently determined that a main ingredient in versions of Sudafed, NyQuil, and other decongestants, called phenylephrine, is ineffective.

    Jobs complicate a personal approach to staying healthy. Emergency-era business closures have ended, and mandates on vaccination and wearing masks have receded across the country. Some managers take precautions to protect their staff. Chu, for example, keeps air-purifying devices around her lab, and she asks researchers to stay home when they feel sick and to test themselves for covid before returning to work after a trip.

    However, occupational safety experts note that many employees face risks they cannot control because decisions on if and how to protect against outbreaks, such as through ventilation, testing, and masking, are left to employers. Notably, people with low-wage and part-time jobs — occupations disproportionately held by people of color — are often least able to control their workplace environments.

    Jessica Martinez, co-executive director of the National Council for Occupational Safety and Health, said the lack of national occupational standards around airborne disease protection represents a fatal flaw in the Biden administration’s decision to relinquish its control of the pandemic.

    “Every workplace needs to have a plan for reducing the threat of infectious disease,” she said. “If you only focus on the individual, you fail workers.”

    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.

    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:

  • Is still water better for you than sparkling water?

    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.

    Still or sparkling? It’s a question you’ll commonly hear in a café or restaurant and you probably have a preference. But is there any difference for your health?

    If you love the fizz, here’s why you don’t have to pass on the sparkling water.

    Brent Hofacker/Shutterstock

    What makes my water sparkle?

    This article specifically focuses on comparing still filtered water to carbonated filtered water (called “sparkling water” or “unflavoured seltzer”). Soda water, mineral water, tonic water and flavoured water are similar, but not the same product.

    The bubbles in sparkling water are created by adding carbon dioxide to filtered water. It reacts to produce carbonic acid, which makes sparkling water more acidic (a pH of about 3.5) than still (closer to neutral, with a pH around 6.5-8.5).

    Which drink is healthiest?

    Water is the best way to hydrate our bodies. Research shows when it comes to hydration, still and sparkling water are equally effective.

    Some people believe water is healthier when it comes from a sealed bottle. But in Australia, tap water is monitored very carefully. Unlike bottled water, it also has the added benefit of fluoride, which can help protect young children against tooth decay and cavities.

    Sparkling or still water is always better than artificially sweetened flavoured drinks or juices.

    Isn’t soda water bad for my teeth and bones?

    There’s no evidence sparkling water damages your bones. While drinking a lot of soft drinks is linked to increased fractures, this is largely due to their association with higher rates of obesity.

    Sparkling water is more acidic than still water, and acidity can soften the teeth’s enamel. Usually this is not something to be too worried about, unless it is mixed with sugar or citrus, which has much higher levels of acidity and can harm teeth.

    However, if you grind your teeth often, the softening could enhance the damage it causes. If you’re undertaking a home whitening process, sparkling water might discolour your teeth.

    In most other cases, it would take a lot of sparkling water to pass by the teeth, for a long period of time, to cause any noticeable damage.

    How does drinking water affect digestion?

    There is a misconception drinking water (of any kind) with a meal is bad for digestion.

    While theoretically water could dilute stomach acid (which breaks down food), the practice of drinking it doesn’t appear to have any negative effect. Your digestive system simply adapts to the consistency of the meal.

    Some people do find that carbonated beverages cause some stomach upset. This is due to the build-up of gases, which can cause bloating, cramping and discomfort. For people with an overactive bladder, the acidity might also aggravate the urinary system.

    Interestingly, the fizzy “buzz” you feel in your mouth from sparkling water fades the more you drink it.

    Is cold water harder to digest?

    You’ve chosen still or sparkling water. What about its temperature?

    There are surprisingly few studies about the effect of drinking cold water compared to room temperature. There is some evidence colder water (at two degrees Celsius) might inhibit gastric contractions and slow down digestion. Ice water may constrict blood vessels and cause cramping.

    However other research suggests drinking cold water might temporarily boost metabolism, as the body needs to expend energy to warm it up to body temperature. This effect is minimal and unlikely to lead to significant weight loss.

    Which water wins?

    The bottom line is water is essential, hydrates us and has countless other health benefits. Water, with carbonated bubbles or without, will always be the healthiest drink to choose.

    And if you’re concerned about any impact to teeth enamel, one trick is to follow sparkling water with a glass of still. This helps rinse the teeth and return your mouth’s acidity back to normal.

    Christian Moro, Associate Professor of Science & Medicine, Bond University and Charlotte Phelps, Senior Teaching Fellow, Medical Program, Bond 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:

  • Do Probiotics Work For Weight Loss?

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

    It’s 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

    ❝Can you talk about using probiotics for weight loss? Thanks❞

    Great question! First, a quick catch-up:

    How Much Difference Do Probiotic Supplements Make, Really?

    Our above-linked article covers a number of important benefits of probiotic supplements, but we didn’t talk about weight loss at all. So let’s examine whether probiotics are useful for weight loss.

    Up-front summary: the science is unclear

    This 2021 systematic review found that they are indeed very effective:

    ❝The intake of probiotics or synbiotics could lead to significant weight reductions, either maintaining habitual lifestyle habits or in combination with energy restriction and/or increased physical activity for an average of 12 weeks.

    Specific strains belonging to the genus Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium were the most used and those that showed the best results in reducing body weight.

    Both probiotics and synbiotics have the potential to help in weight loss in overweight and obese populations.❞

    Source: Effects of Probiotics and Synbiotics on Weight Loss in Subjects with Overweight or Obesity: A Systematic Review

    This slightly older (2015) systematic review and meta-analysis found the opposite:

    ❝Collectively, the RCTs examined in this meta-analysis indicated that probiotics have limited efficacy in terms of decreasing body weight and BMI and were not effective for weight loss.❞

    Source: Probiotics for weight loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    And in case that’s not balanced enough, this 2020 randomized controlled trial got mixed results:

    ❝Regression analysis performed to correlate abundance of species following supplementation with body composition parameters and biomarkers of obesity found an association between a decrease over time in blood glucose and an increase in Lactobacillus abundance, particularly in the synbiotic group.

    However, the decrease over time in body mass, BMI, waist circumstance, and body fat mass was associated with a decrease in Bifidobacterium abundance.❞

    Source: Effects of Synbiotic Supplement on Human Gut Microbiota, Body Composition and Weight Loss in Obesity

    Summary

    Probiotics may or may not work for weight loss.

    In all likelihood, it depends on the blend of cultures contained in the supplement. It’s possible that Lactobacillus is more beneficial for weight loss than Bifidobacterium, which latter may actually reduce weight loss.

    Or it might not, because that was just one study and correlation ≠ causation!

    We’d love to give you a hard-and-fast answer, but if the data doesn’t support a hard-and-fast answer, we’re not going to lie to you.

    What we can say for sure though is that probiotics come with very many health benefits, so whether or not weight loss is one of them, they’re a good thing to have for most people.

    Some further articles that may interest you:

    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: