Macadamias vs Hazelnuts – 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 macadamias to hazelnuts, we picked the hazelnuts.

Why?

In terms of macros first, hazelnuts have 2x the protein, and slightly more carbs and fiber. We call this a win for hazelnuts.

When it comes to vitamins, macadamias have more of vitamins B1, B2, and B3, while hazelnuts have more of vitamins A, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, and E. Notably, 28x more vitamin E, so that’s not inconsiderable. Also 10x the vitamin B9, and 5x the vitamin C, and the rest, more modest wins. In any case, clearly a strong win for hazelnuts here.

In the category of minerals, macadamias have more selenium, while hazelnuts have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc. Another clear win for hazelnuts.

In short, hazelnuts win in all categories. However, by all means enjoy either or both (unless you have a nut allergy, in which case, obviously don’t).

Want to learn more?

You might like to read:

Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Apple Cider Vinegar vs Apple Cider Vinegar Gummies – Which is Healthier?
  • Yoga Nidra Made Easy – by Dr. Uma Dinsmore-Tuli and Nirlipta Tuli
    This book teaches yoga nidra, a practice that promotes restful sleep and relaxation without the need for complicated poses or Sanskrit terms.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Vibration Plate, Review After 6 Months: Is It 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.

    Is it push-button exercise, or an expensive fad, or something else entirely? Robin, from “The Science of Self-Care”, has insights:

    Science & Experience

    According to the science (studies cited in the video and linked-to in the video description, underneath it on YouTube), vibration therapy does have some clear benefits, namely:

    • Bone health (helps with bone density, particularly beneficial for postmenopausal women)
    • Muscle recovery (reduces lactate levels, aiding faster recovery)
    • Joint health (reduces pain and improves function in osteoarthritis patients)
    • Muscle stimulation (helps older adults maintain muscle mass)
    • Cognitive function (due to increased blood flow to the brain)

    And from her personal experience, the benefits included:

    • Improved recovery after exercise, reducing muscle soreness and stiffness
    • Reduced back pain and improved posture (not surprising, given the need for stabilizing muscles when using one of these)
    • Better circulation and (likely resulting from same) skin clarity

    She did not, however, notice:

    • Any reduction in cellulite
    • Any change in body composition (fat loss or muscle gain)

    For a deeper look into these things and more, plus a demonstration of how the machine actually operates, enjoy:

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

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Frozen/Thawed/Refrozen Meat: How Much Is Safety, And How Much Is Taste?

    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.

    What You Can (And Can’t) Safely Do With Frozen Meat

    Yesterday, we asked you:

    ❝You have meat in the freezer. How long is it really safe to keep it?❞

    …and got a range of answers, mostly indicating to a) follow the instructions (a very safe general policy) and b) do not refreeze if thawed because that would be unsafe. Fewer respondents indicated that meat could be kept for much longer than guidelines say, or conversely, that it should only be kept for weeks or less.

    So, what does the science say?

    Meat can be kept indefinitely (for all intents and purposes) in a freezer; it just might get tougher: True or False?

    False, assuming we are talking about a normal household electrical freezer that bottoms out at about -18℃ / 0℉.

    Fun fact: cryobiologists cryopreserve tissue samples (so basically, meat) at -196℃ / -320℉, and down at those temperatures, the tissues will last a lot longer than you will (and, for all practical purposes: indefinitely). There are other complications with doing so (such as getting the sample through the glass transition point without cracking it during the vitrification process) but those are beyond the scope of this article.

    If you remember back to your physics or perhaps chemistry classes at school, you’ll know that molecules move more quickly at higher temperatures, and more slowly at lower ones, only approaching true stillness as they near absolute zero (-273℃ / -459℉ / 0K ← we’re not saying it’s ok, although it is; rather, that is zero kelvin; no degree sign is used with kelvins)

    That means that when food is frozen, the internal processes aren’t truly paused; it’s just slowed to a point of near imperceptibility.

    So, all the way up at the relatively warm temperatures of a household freezer, a lot of processes are still going on.

    What this means in practical terms: those guidelines saying “keep in the freezer for up to 4 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 9 months”, “keep in the freezer for up to 12 months” etc are being honest with you.

    More or less, anyway! They’ll usually underestimate a little to be on the safe side—but so should you.

    Bad things start happening within weeks at most: True or False?

    False, for all practical purposes. Again, assuming a normal and properly-working household freezer as described above.

    (True, technically but misleadingly: the bad things never stopped; they just slowed down to a near imperceptible pace—again, as described above)

    By “bad” here we should clarify we mean “dangerous”. One subscriber wrote:

    ❝Meat starts losing color and flavor after being in the freezer for too long. I keep meat in the freezer for about 2 months at the most❞

    …and as a matter of taste, that’s fair enough!

    It is unsafe to refreeze meat that has been thawed: True or False?

    False! Assuming it has otherwise been kept chilled, just the same as for fresh meat.

    Food poisoning comes from bacteria, and there is nothing about the meat previously having been frozen that will make it now have more bacteria.

    That means, for example…

    • if it was thawed (but chilled) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been chilled for that period of time (so probably: use it or freeze it, unless it’s been more than a few days)
    • if it was thawed (and at room temperature) for a period of time, treat it like you would any other meat that has been at room temperature for that period of time (so probably: throw it out, unless the period of time is very small indeed)

    The USDA gives for 2 hours max at room temperature before considering it unsalvageable, by the way.

    However! Whenever you freeze meat (or almost anything with cells, really), ice crystals will form in and between cells. How much ice crystallization occurs depends on several variables, with how much water there is present in the food is usually the biggest factor (remember that animal cells are—just like us—mostly water).

    Those ice crystals will damage the cell walls, causing the food to lose structural integrity. When you thaw it out, the ice crystals will disappear but the damage will be left behind (this is what “freezer burn” is).

    So if your food seems a little “squishy” after having been frozen and thawed, that’s why. It’s not rotten; it’s just been stabbed countless times on a microscopic level.

    The more times you freeze and thaw and refreeze food, the more this will happen. Your food will degrade in structural integrity each time, but the safety of it won’t have changed meaningfully.

    Want to know more?

    Further reading:

    You can thaw and refreeze meat: five food safety myths busted

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Strawberries vs Raspberries – 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 strawberries to raspberries, we picked the raspberries.

    Why?

    They’re both very respectable fruits, of course! But it’s not even close, and there is a clear winner here…

    In terms of macros, the biggest difference is that raspberries have moderately more carbs, and more than 3x the fiber. Technically they also have 2x the protein, but that’s a case of “two times almost nothing is still almost nothing”. All in all, and especially for the “more than 3x the fiber” (6.5g/100g to strawberries’ 2g/100g), this one’s an easy win for raspberries.

    When it comes to vitamins, strawberries have more vitamin C, while raspberries have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, E, K, and choline. Another clear and easy win for raspberries.

    In the category of minerals, guess what, raspberries win this hands-down, too: strawberries are higher in selenium, while raspberries have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and zinc.

    Adding up all the individual wins (all for raspberries), it’s not hard to say that raspberries win the day. Still, of course, enjoy either or both; diversity is good!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    From Apples to Bees, and High-Fructose Cs: Which Sugars Are Healthier, And Which Are Just The Same?

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Apple Cider Vinegar vs Apple Cider Vinegar Gummies – Which is Healthier?
  • This Is Your Brain on Music – by Dr. Daniel Levitin

    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.

    Music has sometimes been touted as having cognitive benefits, by its practice and even by the passive experience of it. But what’s the actual science of it?

    Dr. Levitin, an accomplished musician and neuroscientist, explores and explains.

    We learn about how music in all likelihood allowed our ancestors to develop speech, something that set us apart (and ahead!) as a species. How music was naturally-selected-for in accordance with its relationship with health. How processing music involves almost every part of the brain. How music pertains specifically to memory. And more.

    As a bonus, as well as explaining a lot about our brain, this book offers those of us with limited knowledge of music theory a valuable overview of the seven main dimensions of music, too.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to know more about the many-faceted relationship between music and cognitive function, this is a top-tier book about such.

    Click here to check out “This Is Your Brain On Music”, and learn more about yours!

    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:

  • Ideal Blood Pressure Numbers Explained

    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

    ❝Maybe I missed it but the study on blood pressure did it say what the 2 numbers should read ideally?❞

    We linked it at the top of the article rather than including it inline, as we were short on space (and there was a chart rather than a “these two numbers” quick answer), but we have a little more space today, so:

    CategorySystolic (mm Hg)Diastolic (mm Hg)
    Normal< 120AND< 80
    Elevated120 – 129AND< 80
    Stage 1 – High Blood Pressure130 – 139OR80 – 89
    Stage 2 – High Blood Pressure140 or higherOR90 or higher
    Hypertensive CrisisAbove 180AND/ORAbove 120

    To oversimplify for a “these two numbers” answer, under 120/80 is generally considered good, unless it is under 90/60, in which case that becomes hypotension.

    Hypotension, the blood pressure being too low, means your organs may not get enough oxygen and if they don’t, they will start shutting down.

    To give you an idea how serious this, this is the closed-circuit equivalent of the hypovolemic shock that occurs when someone is bleeding out onto the floor. Technically, bleeding to death also results in low blood pressure, of course, hence the similarity.

    So: just a little under 120/80 is great.

    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:

  • Broccoli vs Cauliflower – 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 broccoli to cauliflower, we picked the broccoli.

    Why?

    This one is quite straightforward. Superficially, they’re very similar:

    Both are great cruciferous vegetables with many health benefits to offer. Even for those keen to avoid oxalates, which cruciferous vegetables in general can be high in, these ones are quite low.

    However, if you have IBS, you might want to avoid both, for their raffinose content that may cause problems for you.

    For pretty much everyone else, unless you have a special reason why it’s not the case for you, both are a good source of abundant vitamins and minerals, and yet…

    Anything cauliflower can do, broccoli can do better!

    Broccoli contains more of the vitamins they both contain, and more of the minerals they both contain.

    Broccoli also beats cauliflower on amino acids (except lysine), and contains a lot more lutein and zeaxanthin, carotenoids important for healthy eyes and brain.

    So by all means enjoy both, but if you’re going to pick one, pick broccoli!

    Want to know more?

    Check out: Brain Food? The Eyes Have It!

    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: