Are Electrolyte Supplements Worth It?

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.

When To Take Electrolytes (And When We Shouldn’t!)

Any sports nutrition outlet will sell electrolyte supplements. Sometimes in the form of sports drinks that claim to be more hydrating than water, or tablets that can be dissolved in water to make the same. How do they work, and should we be drinking them?

What are electrolytes?

They’re called “electrolytes” because they are ionized particles (so, they have a positive or negative electrical charge, depending on which kind of ion they are) that are usually combined in the form of salts.

The “first halves” of the salts include:

  • Sodium
  • Potassium
  • Calcium
  • Magnesium

The “second halves” of the salts include:

  • Chloride
  • Phosphate
  • Bicarbonate
  • Nitrate

It doesn’t matter too much which way they’re combined, provided we get what we need. Specifically, the body needs them in a careful balance. Too much or too little, and bad things will start happening to us.

If we live in a temperate climate with a moderate lifestyle and a balanced diet, and have healthy working kidneys, usually our kidneys will keep them all in balance.

Why might we need to supplement?

Firstly, of course, you might have a dietary deficiency. Magnesium deficiency in particular is very common in North America, as people simply do not eat as much greenery as they ideally would.

But, also, you might sweat out your electrolytes, in which case, you will need to replace them.

In particular, endurance training and High Intensity Interval Training are likely to prompt this.

However… Are you in a rush? Because if not, you might just want to recover more slowly:

❝Vigorous exercise and warm/hot temperatures induce sweat production, which loses both water and electrolytes. Both water and sodium need to be replaced to re-establish “normal” total body water (euhydration).

This replacement can be by normal eating and drinking practices if there is no urgency for recovery.

But if rapid recovery (<24 h) is desired or severe hypohydration (>5% body mass) is encountered, aggressive drinking of fluids and consuming electrolytes should be encouraged to facilitate recovery❞

Source: Fluid and electrolyte needs for training, competition, and recovery

Should we just supplement anyway, as a “catch-all” to be sure?

Probably not. In particular, it is easy to get too much sodium in one’s diet, let alone by supplementation.And, oversupplementation of calcium is very common, and causes its own health problems. See:

To look directly to the science on this one, we see a general consensus amongst research reviews: “this is complicated and can go either way depending on what else people are doing”:

Well, that’s not helpful. Any clearer pointers?

Yes! Researchers Latzka and Mountain put together a very practical list of tips. Rather, they didn’t put it as a list, but the following bullet points are information extracted directly from their abstract, though we’ve also linked the full article below:

  • It is recommended that individuals begin exercise when adequately hydrated.
    • This can be facilitated by drinking 400 mL to 600 mL of fluid 2 hours before beginning exercise and drinking sufficient fluid during exercise to prevent dehydration from exceeding 2% body weight.
  • A practical recommendation is to drink small amounts of fluid (150-300 mL) every 15 to 20 minutes of exercise, varying the volume depending on sweating rate.
    • During exercise lasting less than 90 minutes, water alone is sufficient for fluid replacement
    • During prolonged exercise lasting longer than 90 minutes, commercially available carbohydrate electrolyte beverages should be considered to provide an exogenous carbohydrate source to sustain carbohydrate oxidation and endurance performance.
  • Electrolyte supplementation is generally not necessary because dietary intake is adequate to offset electrolytes lost in sweat and urine; however, during initial days of hot-weather training or when meals are not calorically adequate, supplemental salt intake may be indicated to sustain sodium balance.

Source: Water and electrolyte requirements for exercise

Bonus tip:

We’ve talked before about the specific age-related benefits of creatine supplementation, but if you’re doing endurance training or HIIT, you might also want to consider a creatine-electrolyte combination sports drink (even if you make it yourself):

Creatine-electrolyte supplementation improves repeated sprint cycling performance: a double-blind randomized control study

Where can I get electrolyte supplements?

They’re easy to find in any sports nutrition store, or you can buy them online; here’s an example product on Amazon for your convenience

You can also opt for natural and/or homemade electrolyte drinks:

Healthline | 8 Healthy Drinks Rich in Electrolytes

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Glutathione: More Than An Antioxidant
  • The Evidence-Based Skincare That Beats Product-Specific Hype
    Ditch the cluttered skincare hype and embrace Dr. Usama Syed’s 4 simple, science-backed skin essentials: moisturize, sunscreen, retinoids, and maybe cleanse.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • More Salt, Not Less?

    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

    ❝I’m curious about the salt part – learning about LMNT and what they say about us needing more salt than what’s recommended by the government, would you mind looking into that? From a personal experience, I definitely noticed a massive positive difference during my 3-5 day water fasts when I added salt to my water compared to when I just drank water. So I’m curious what the actual range for salt intake is that we should be aiming for.❞

    That’s a fascinating question, and we’ll have to tackle it in several parts:

    When fasting

    3–5 days is a long time to take only water; we’re sure you know most people fast from food for much less time than that. Nevertheless, when fasting, the body needs more water than usual—because of the increase in metabolism due to freeing up bodily resources for cellular maintenance. Water is necessary when replacing cells (most of which are mostly water, by mass), and for ferrying nutrients around the body—as well as escorting unwanted substances out of the body.

    Normally, the body’s natural osmoregulatory process handles this, balancing water with salts of various kinds, to maintain homeostasis.

    However, it can only do that if it has the requisite parts (e.g. water and salts), and if you’re fasting from food, you’re not replenishing lost salts unless you supplement.

    Normally, monitoring our salt intake can be a bit of a guessing game, but when fasting for an entire day, it’s clear how much salt we consumed in our food that day: zero

    So, taking the recommended amount of sodium, which varies but is usually in the 1200–1500mg range (low end if over aged 70+; high end if aged under 50), becomes sensible.

    More detail: How Much Sodium You Need Per Day

    See also, on a related note:

    When To Take Electrolytes (And When We Shouldn’t!)

    When not fasting

    Our readers here are probably not “the average person” (since we have a very health-conscious subscriber-base), but the average person in N. America consumes about 9g of salt per day, which is several multiples of the maximum recommended safe amount.

    The WHO recommends no more than 5g per day, and the AHA recommends no more than 2.3g per day, and that we should aim for 1.5g per day (this is, you’ll note, consistent with the previous “1200–1500mg range”).

    Read more: Massive efforts needed to reduce salt intake and protect lives

    Questionable claims

    We can’t speak for LMNT (and indeed, had to look them up to discover they are an electrolytes supplement brand), but we can say that sometimes there are articles about such things as “The doctor who says we should eat more salt, not less”, and that’s usually about Dr. James DiNicolantonio, a doctor of pharmacy, who wrote a book that, because of this question today, we’ve now also reviewed:

    The Salt Fix: Why the Experts Got It All Wrong—and How Eating More Might Save Your Life – by Dr. James DiNicolantonio

    Spoiler, our review was not favorable.

    The body knows

    Our kidneys (unless they are diseased or missing) do a full-time job of getting rid of excess things from our blood, and dumping them into one’s urine.

    That includes excess sugar (which is how diabetes was originally diagnosed) and excess salt. In both cases, they can only process so much, but they do their best.

    Dr. DiNicolantino recognizes this in his book, but chalks it up to “if we do take too much salt, we’ll just pass it in urine, so no big deal”.

    Unfortunately, this assumes that our kidneys have infinite operating capacity, and they’re good, but they’re not that good. They can only filter so much per hour (it’s about 1 liter of fluids). Remember we have about 5 liters of blood, consume 2–3 liters of water per day, and depending on our diet, several more liters of water in food (easy to consume several more liters of water in food if one eats fruit, let alone soups and stews etc), and when things arrive in our body, the body gets to work on them right away, because it doesn’t know how much time it’s going to have to get it done, before the next intake comes.

    It is reasonable to believe that if we needed 8–10g of salt per day, as Dr. DiNicolantonio claims, our kidneys would not start dumping once we hit much, much lower levels in our blood (lower even than the daily recommended intake, because not all of the salt in our body is in our blood, obviously).

    See also: How Too Much Salt Can Lead To Organ Failure

    Lastly, a note about high blood pressure

    This is one where the “salt’s not the bad guy” crowd have at least something close to a point, because while salt is indeed still a bad guy (if taken above the recommended amounts, without good medical reason), when it comes to high blood pressure specifically, it’s not the worst bad guy, nor is it even in the top 5:

    Hypertension: Factors Far More Relevant Than Salt

    Thanks for writing in with such an interesting question!

    Share This Post

  • Inhaled Eucalyptus’s Immunomodulatory and Antimicrobial Effects

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

    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

    ❝At the first hint of a cough or a cold, I resort to steam inhalation. Some people add herbs or aromatic oils to the boiling water. What do you recommend?❞

    First of all, please do be careful:

    Severe scalds sustained during steam inhalation therapy in an adult population: Analysis of patient outcomes and the financial burden to healthcare services

    Western science’s view is predominantly “this is popular and/but evidence for its usefulness is lacking”:

    Theoretical effectiveness of steam inhalation against SARS-CoV-2 infection: updates on clinical trials, mechanism of actions, and traditional approaches

    But! Traditional Chinese Medicine indicates shuanghuanglian, yuxingcao and qingkailing, which the China Food and Drug Administration has also approved:

    Chinese Medicine in Inhalation Therapy: A Review of Clinical Application and Formulation Development

    Indian scientists are also looking at modern scientific applications of certain Ayurvedic herbs:

    Promising phytochemicals of traditional Indian herbal steam inhalation therapy to combat COVID-19

    In terms of what is likely more available to you, there are several reasons to choose eucalyptus over popular alternatives:

    Immune-modifying and antimicrobial effects of Eucalyptus oil and simple inhalation devices

    For the sake of being methodical, here’s an example product on Amazon, though we’re sure you’d have no trouble finding this in your local pharmacy if you prefer.

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Watermelon vs Grapes – 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 watermelon to grapes, we picked the watermelon.

    Why?

    It was close! And certainly both are very healthy.

    Both fruits are (like most fruits) good sources of water, fiber, vitamins, and minerals. Any sugar content (of which grapes are slightly higher) is offset by their fiber content and polyphenols.

    See: Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?

    While both are good sources of vitamins A and C, watermelon has about 10x as much vitamin A, and about 6x as much vitamin C (give or take individual plants, how they were grown, etc, but the overall balance is clearly in watermelon’s favor).

    When it comes to antioxidants, both fruits are good, but again watermelon is the more potent source. Grapes famously contain resveratrol, and they also contain quercetin, albeit you’d have to eat quite a lot of grapes to get a large portion.

    Now, having to eat a lot of grapes might not sound like a terrible fate (who else finds that the grapes are gone by the time the groceries are put away?), but we are comparing the fruits here, and on a list of “100 best foods for quercetin”, for example, grapes took 99th place.

    Watermelon’s main antioxidant meanwhile is lycopene, and watermelon is one of the best sources of lycopene in existence (better even than tomatoes).

    We’ll have to do a main feature about lycopene sometime soon, so watch this space

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Glutathione: More Than An Antioxidant
  • More Mediterranean – by American’s Test Kitchen

    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.

    Regular 10almonds readers will know that we talk about the Mediterranean diet often, and with good reason; it’s been for quite a while now the “Gold Standard” when it comes to scientific consensus on what constitutes a good diet for healthy longevity.

    However, it’s easy to get stuck in a rut of cooking the same three meals and thinking “I must do something different, but not today, because I have these ingredients and don’t know what to cook” and then when one is grocery-shopping, it’s “I should have researched a new thing to cook, but since I haven’t, I’ll just get the ingredients for what I usually cook, since we need to eat”, and so the cycle continues.

    This book will help break you out of that cycle! With (as the subtitle promises) hundreds of recipes, there’s no shortage of good ideas. The recipes are “plant-forward” rather than plant-based per se (i.e. there are some animal products in them), though for the vegetarians and vegans, it’s nothing that’s any challenge to substitute.

    Bottom line: if you’re looking for “delicious and nutritious”, this book is sure to put a rainbow on your plate and a smile on your face.

    Click here to check out More Mediterranean, and inspire your kitchen!

    Don’t Forget…

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

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • What is silicosis and what does research say about it?

    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.

    Silicosis is a progressive, debilitating and sometimes fatal lung disease caused by breathing silica dust from cutting, drilling, chipping or grinding materials such as granite, sandstone, slate or artificial stone. The dust gets trapped in the lung tissue, causing inflammation, scarring and permanent damage.

    Silicosis is a job-related lung disease and has no cure. The disease mostly affects workers in construction, stone countertop fabrication, mining, and even those who sandblast and stonewash denim jeans to create a ‘worn out’ look.

    Silica is one of the most common minerals in nature. About 59% of the Earth’s crust is made of silica, found in quartz, granite, sandstone, slate and sand. Historically, people at the highest risk for the disease have worked in natural environments — mining, digging tunnels or doing quarry work. The disease was first documented by the Greek physician Hippocrates, who in 430 B.C. described breathing disorders in metal diggers.

    But in recent decades there’s been renewed attention to the disease due to its more rapid progression and severity among younger workers. Research has shown that the culprit is artificial stone mostly used for countertops for kitchens and bathrooms, which has a very high silica content.

    The new generation of coal miners is also at an increased risk of silicosis, in addition to black lung, because layers of coal have become thinner, forcing them to dig deeper into rock, as explained in a joint investigation by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Medill Investigative Lab at Northwestern University published on Dec. 4. CBS Sunday Morning also had a report on the same issue among West Virginia coal miners, aired as part of its Dec. 10 episode.

    Silicosis in modern industries

    Artificial, or engineered, stone used for countertops, also known as “quartz,” is formed from finely crushed rocks mixed with resin. Quartz is a natural mineral, but man-made products like many quartz countertops consist of not just quartz, but also resin, colors and other materials that are used to style and strengthen them.

    The silica content of artificial stone is about 90%, compared with the 3% silica content of natural marble and 30% silica content in granite stones, according to the authors of a 2019 systematic review published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

    The first reported case of silicosis associated with working with artificial stone was from Italy in 2010, according to a 2020 study published in Allergy. Since then, more studies have documented the growing number of cases among artificial stone workers, many of whom are from marginalized populations, such as immigrants.

    A July 2023 study published in JAMA Internal Medicine found that in California, the disease mainly occurred among young Latino immigrant men. The disease was severe in most men by the time they sought care.

    An August 2022 study, published in Occupational & Environmental Medicine, analyzing the Global Silicosis Registry, with workers in Israel, Spain, Australia and the U.S., found “a substantial emerging population of workers worldwide with severe and irreversible silica-associated diseases,” due to exposure from silica dust from engineered stone.

    Other modern occupations such as denim sandblasting, work on dental prostheses, manufacturing of electrical cables and working on jewelry and semi-precious stones also put workers at risk of silicosis.

    In the wake of modern-day silicosis cases, researchers have called for larger studies to better understand the disease and the discovery of effective treatments.

    In the U.S. about 2.3 million workers are exposed to silica dust on the job, according to the American Lung Association. Other estimates show approximately 10 million workers in India, 3.2 million in the European Union and 2 million in Brazil work with material containing silica.

    However, “the reporting system for occupational injuries and illnesses in the United States fails to capture many cases, leading to a poor understanding of silicosis incidence and prevalence,” writes Ryan F. Hoy, who has published extensively on the topic, in a June 2022 article in Respirology.

    A 2015 study in the Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report found the annual number of silicosis deaths declined from 185 people in 1999 to 111 in 2013, but the decline appeared to have leveled off between 2010 and 2013, the authors write. Another 2015 study in MMWR, examining silicosis deaths between 2001 and 2010, found the death rate from silicosis was significantly higher among Black people compared with whites and other races. Men also have a significantly higher death rate from silicosis than women.

    The 2019 Global Burden of Disease Study estimates that more than 12,900 people worldwide die from silicosis each year.

    Silicosis has no cure, but it’s preventable when workers have access to proper respiratory protection and are educated on safe practices set by regulatory bodies such as the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The European Network on Silica also has guidelines on handling and using materials containing silica. A March 2023 study published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research International finds that “education, training, and marketing strategies improve respirator use, while training and education motivate workers to use dust control measures.”

    Silicosis symptoms and treatment

    Symptoms of silicosis include cough, fatigue, shortness of breath and chest pain. There’s no specific test for silicosis. The first signs may show in an abnormal chest X-ray and a slowly developing cough, according to the American Lung Association.

    Silicosis symptoms don’t appear right away in most cases, usually taking several years to develop working with silica dust. However, studies indicate that symptoms of silicosis due to exposure to artificial stone appear quicker than exposure to natural silica sources, potentially due to the higher concentration of silica in artificial stone.

    There are three types of silicosis: acute (most commonly caused by working with artificial stone), accelerated and chronic, depending on the level of exposure to silica dust, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which explains the severity of each type on its website.

    Complications from silicosis can include tuberculosis, lung cancer, chronic bronchitis, kidney disease and autoimmune disorders. In some cases, silicosis can cause severe scarring of the lung tissue, leading to a condition called progressive massive fibrosis, or PMF. Some patients may require a lung transplant.

    Lung damage from silicosis is irreversible, so treatment of silicosis is aimed at slowing down the disease and relieving its symptoms.

    In 1995, the World Health Organization called for the elimination of silicosis by 2030, but research studies and news stories show it remains a threat to many workers.

    Below, we have gathered several studies on the topic to help journalists bolster their reporting with academic research.

    Research roundup

    Artificial Stone Associated Silicosis: A Systematic Review
    Veruscka Leso, et al. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, February 2019.

    This systematic review aims to verify the association between exposure to silica dust in artificial stone and the development of silicosis.

    Researchers narrowed down their selection from 75 papers to seven studies that met their inclusion criteria. The seven studies were from Australia, Israel and Spain. Most of the studies are observational and impede a definite association between exposure to silica while working with artificial stone and developing silicosis, the authors note.

    However, “the unusually high incidence of the disease that was reported over short periods of investigations, and the comparable occupational histories of affected workers, all being involved in the manufacture and manipulation of engineered stones, may indicate a cause-effect relationship of this type.”

    The review of studies reveals a lack of basic preventive measures such as lack of access to disposable masks; lack of information and training on the dangers of silica dust; and lack of periodic medical examinations, including a chest X-ray, among workers. There was limited environmental monitoring of dust levels at the workplace. Also, there was no dust suppression system, such as the use of water when polishing the stones, or effective ventilation. Machinery and tools weren’t properly set up and didn’t undergo routine checks, the authors write.

    The authors recommend environmental monitoring for assessing silica levels in the workplace and verifying the effectiveness of personal protections. They also recommend the health surveillance of workers exposed to silica dust.

    “Stakeholders, manufacturers, occupational risk prevention services, insurance companies for occupational accidents and diseases, business owners, occupational health physicians, general practitioners, and also employees should be engaged, not only in designing/planning processes and operational working environments, but also in assessing the global applicability of proactive preventive and protective measures to identify and control crystalline silica exposure, especially in new and unexpected exposure scenarios, the full extent of which cannot yet be accurately predicted,” they write.

    Silica-Related Diseases in the Modern World
    Ryan F. Hoy and Daniel C. Chambers. Allergy, November 2020.

    The study is a review of the mineralogy of silica, epidemiology, clinical and radiological features of the various forms of silicosis and other diseases associated with exposure to silica.

    The primary factor associated with the development of silicosis is the intensity and duration of cumulative exposure to silica dust. Most countries regulate silica dust occupational exposure limits, generally in the range of 0.05 mg/m3 to 0.1 mg/m3, although the risk of dust exposure to workers still remains high at those levels.

    The study provides a list of activities that could expose workers to silica dust. They include abrasive blasting of sand and sandstone; cement and brick manufacturing; mixing, glazing or sculpting of china, ceramic and pottery; construction involving bricklaying, concrete cutting, paving and demolition; sandblasting denim jeans; working with and polishing dental materials; mining and related milling; handling raw material during paint manufacturing; road and highway construction and repair; soap and cosmetic production; blasting and drilling tunnels; and waste incineration.

    “Despite the large number of workers in the construction sector, there have been few studies of [silica dust] exposure in this industry,” the authors note.

    Other than silicosis, conditions associated with silica exposure include sarcoidosis, an inflammatory disease that commonly affects the lungs and lymph nodes, autoimmune disease, lung cancer and pulmonary infections.

    “Recent outbreaks of silica-associated disease highlight the need for constant vigilance to identify and control new and well-established sources of silica exposure. While there are currently no effective treatments for silicosis, it is a completely preventable lung disease,” the authors write.

    A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Dust Control Measures Adopted to Reduce Workplace Exposure
    Frederick Anlimah, Vinod Gopaldasani, Catherine MacPhail and Brian Davies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, March 2023.

    This study provides an overview of various interventions and their effectiveness in preventing exposure to silica dust based on a review of 133 studies from 16 countries, including the U.S., Canada, China, India, Taiwan and Australia, and published between 2010 and 2020.

    These dust control measures range from simple work practices such as the use of respirators to more sophisticated technologies, such as water and air curtains and foam technology, the authors note.

    The review finds increasing research interest in dust reduction, mainly in China. But overall, regulatory influence remains inadequate in preventing miners’ exposure to silica dust.

    “Results from the review suggest that adopted interventions increase knowledge, awareness, and attitudes about respirator usage and generate positive perceptions about respirator usage while reducing misconceptions,” the authors write. “Interventions can increase the use, proper use, and frequency of use of respirators and the adoption readiness for dust controls but may not provide sustained motivation in workers for the continual use of dust controls or [personal protective equipment.]”

    Notes from the Field: Surveillance of Silicosis Using Electronic Case Reporting — California, December 2022–July 2023
    Jennifer Flattery, et al. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, November 2023.

    This study examines the use of electronic case reporting to identify silicosis cases in California. Electronic case reporting, or eCR, is the automated, real-time exchange of case report information between electronic health records at health facilities at state and local public health agencies in the U.S. It is a joint effort between the Association of Public Health Laboratories, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, and the CDC. Currently, 208 health conditions can be reported using eCR. All 50 states and other U.S.-affiliated jurisdictions are connected to eCR. Once a public health agency receives a case report, it reaches out to the patient for contact tracing or other actions.

    From October 2022 to July 2023, the California Department of Public Health received initial silicosis case reports for 41 individuals. A review of medical records confirmed 19 cases and 16 probable cases. Six of the 41 cases were considered unlikely to be silicosis after a review of medical records.

    Notably, engineered stone countertop fabrication was a significant source of exposure, especially among Hispanic and Latino workers.

    At least seven of the 19 confirmed cases were associated with the fabrication of engineered stone — quartz — countertops. The 19 patients’ ages ranged from 33 to 51 and all were Hispanic or Latino. One patient died and two had both lungs replaced. One was evaluated for a lung transplant.

    The median age of the 35 patients with probable or confirmed silicosis was 65, ranging from 33 to 89 years, and 91% were men.

    “It is important that health care providers routinely ask patients about their work as an important determinant of health,” the authors write. “Being aware of the risks associated with work exposures, as well as the regulations, medical monitoring, and prevention strategies that address those risks can help guide patient care.”

    Additional research

    Understanding the Pathogenesis of Engineered Stone-Associated Silicosis: The Effect of Particle Chemistry on the Lung Cell Response
    Chandnee Ramkissoon, et al. Respirology, December 2023.

    Silicosis, Tuberculosis and Silica Exposure Among Artisanal and Small-Scale Miners: A Systematic Review and Modelling Paper
    Patrick Howlett, et al. PLOS Global Public Health, September 2023.

    Silicosis Among Immigrant Engineered Stone (Quartz) Countertop Fabrication Workers in California
    Jane C. Fazio, et al. JAMA Internal Medicine, July 2023.

    Silicosis and Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    P. Jamshidi, et al. Pulmonology, June 2023.

    From Basic Research to Clinical Practice: Considerations for Treatment Drugs for Silicosis
    Rou Li, Huimin Kang and Shi Chen. International Journal of Molecular Science, May 2023.

    Silicosis After Short-Term Exposure
    J. Nowak-Pasternak, A. Lipińska-Ojrzanowska and B. Świątkowska. Occupational Medicine, January 2023.

    Occupational Silica Exposure and Dose-Response for Related Disorders—Silicosis, Pulmonary TB, AIDs and Renal Diseases: Results of a 15-Year Israeli Surveillance
    Rachel Raanan, et al. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, November 2022.

    Demographic, Exposure and Clinical Characteristics in a Multinational Registry of Engineered Stone Workers with Silicosis
    Jeremy Tang Hua, et al. Occupational & Environmental Medicine, August 2022.

    Current Global Perspectives on Silicosis — Convergence of Old and Newly Emergent Hazards
    Ryan F. Hoy, et al. Respirology, March 2022.

    The Association Between Silica Exposure, Silicosis and Tuberculosis: A systematic Review and Metal-Analysis
    Rodney Ehrlich, Paula Akugizibwe, Nandi Siegfried and David Rees. BMC Public Health, May 2021.

    Silicosis, Progressive Massive Fibrosis and Silico-Tuberculosis Among Workers with Occupational Exposure to Silica Dusts in Sandstone Mines of Rajasthan State
    Subroto Nandi, Sarang Dhatrak, Kamalesh Sarkar. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, February 2021.

    Artificial Stone Silicosis: Rapid Progression Following Exposure Cessation
    Antonio León-Jiménez, et al. Chest, September 2020.

    Silica-Associated Lung Disease: An Old-World Exposure in Modern Industries
    Hayley Barnes, Nicole S.L. Goh, Tracy L. Leong and Ryan Hoy. Respirology, September 2019.

    Australia Reports on Audit of Silicosis for Stonecutters
    Tony Kirby. The Lancet, March 2019.

    Artificial Stone-Associated Silicosis: A Rapidly Emerging Occupational Lung Disease
    Ryan F. Hoy, et al. Occupational & Environmental Medicine, December 2017.

    This article first appeared on The Journalist’s Resource and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    Don’t Forget…

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

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Getting antivirals for COVID too often depends on where you live and how wealthy you are

    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.

    Medical experts recommend antivirals for people aged 70 and older who get COVID, and for other groups at risk of severe illness and hospitalisation from COVID.

    But many older Australians have missed out on antivirals after getting sick with COVID. It is yet another way the health system is failing the most vulnerable.

    CGN089/Shutterstock

    Who missed out?

    We analysed COVID antiviral uptake between March 2022 and September 2023. We found some groups were more likely to miss out on antivirals including Indigenous people, people from disadvantaged areas, and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.

    Some of the differences will be due to different rates of infection. But across this 18-month period, many older Australians were infected at least once, and rates of infection were higher in some disadvantaged communities.

    How stark are the differences?

    Compared to the national average, Indigenous Australians were nearly 25% less likely to get antivirals, older people living in disadvantaged areas were 20% less likely to get them, and people with a culturally or linguistically diverse background were 13% less likely to get a script.

    People in remote areas were 37% less likely to get antivirals than people living in major cities. People in outer regional areas were 25% less likely.

    Dispensing rates by group. Grattan Institute

    Even within the same city, the differences are stark. In Sydney, people older than 70 in the affluent eastern suburbs (including Vaucluse, Point Piper and Bondi) were nearly twice as likely to have had an antiviral as those in Fairfield, in Sydney’s south-west.

    Older people in leafy inner-eastern Melbourne (including Canterbury, Hawthorn and Kew) were 1.8 times more likely to have had an antiviral as those in Brimbank (which includes Sunshine) in the city’s west.

    Why are people missing out?

    COVID antivirals should be taken when symptoms first appear. While awareness of COVID antivirals is generally strong, people often don’t realise they would benefit from the medication. They wait until symptoms get worse and it is too late.

    Frequent GP visits make a big difference. Our analysis found people 70 and older who see a GP more frequently were much more likely to be dispensed a COVID antiviral.

    Regular visits give an opportunity for preventive care and patient education. For example, GPs can provide high-risk patients with “COVID treatment plans” as a reminder to get tested and seek treatment as soon as they are unwell.

    Difficulty seeing a GP could help explain low antiviral use in rural areas. Compared to people in major cities, people in small rural towns have about 35% fewer GPs, see their GP about half as often, and are 30% more likely to report waiting too long for an appointment.

    Just like for vaccination, a GP’s focus on antivirals probably matters, as does providing care that is accessible to people from different cultural backgrounds.

    Care should go those who need it

    Since the period we looked at, evidence has emerged that raises doubts about how effective antivirals are, particularly for people at lower risk of severe illness. That means getting vaccinated is more important than getting antivirals.

    But all Australians who are eligible for antivirals should have the same chance of getting them.

    These drugs have cost more than A$1.7 billion, with the vast majority of that money coming from the federal government. While dispensing rates have fallen, more than 30,000 packs of COVID antivirals were dispensed in August, costing about $35 million.

    Such a huge investment shouldn’t be leaving so many people behind. Getting treatment shouldn’t depend on your income, cultural background or where you live. Instead, care should go to those who need it the most.

    Doctor types on laptop
    Getting antivirals shouldn’t depend on who your GP is. National Cancer Institute/Unsplash

    People born overseas have been 40% more likely to die from COVID than those born here. Indigenous Australians have been 60% more likely to die from COVID than non-Indigenous people. And the most disadvantaged people have been 2.8 times more likely to die from COVID than those in the wealthiest areas.

    All those at-risk groups have been more likely to miss out on antivirals.

    It’s not just a problem with antivirals. The same groups are also disproportionately missing out on COVID vaccination, compounding their risk of severe illness. The pattern is repeated for other important preventive health care, such as cancer screening.

    A 3-step plan to meet patients’ needs

    The federal government should do three things to close these gaps in preventive care.

    First, the government should make Primary Health Networks (PHNs) responsible for reducing them. PHNs, the regional bodies responsible for improving primary care, should share data with GPs and step in to boost uptake in communities that are missing out.

    Second, the government should extend its MyMedicare reforms. MyMedicare gives general practices flexible funding to care for patients who live in residential aged care or who visit hospital frequently. That approach should be expanded to all patients, with more funding for poorer and sicker patients. That will give GP clinics time to advise patients about preventive health, including COVID vaccines and antivirals, before they get sick.

    Third, team-based pharmacist prescribing should be introduced. Then pharmacists could quickly dispense antivirals for patients if they have a prior agreement with the patient’s GP. It’s an approach that would also work for medications for chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease.

    COVID antivirals, unlike vaccines, have been keeping up with new variants without the need for updates. If a new and more harmful variant emerges, or when a new pandemic hits, governments should have these systems in place to make sure everyone who needs treatment can get it fast.

    In the meantime, fairer access to care will help close the big and persistent gaps in health between different groups of Australians.

    Peter Breadon, Program Director, Health and Aged Care, Grattan Institute

    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: