Margarine vs Butter – 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 margarine to butter, we picked the butter.

Why?

Once upon a time, when margarines were filled with now-banned trans fats, this would have been an easy win for butter.

Nowadays, the macronutrient/lipid profiles are generally more similar (although margarine often has a little less saturated fat), except one thing that butter has in its favor:

More micronutrients. What exactly they are (and how much) depends on the diet and general health of the cows from whom the milk to make the butter came, but they’re not something found in plant-based butter alternatives at this time.

Nevertheless, because of the saturated fat content, it’s not advisable to use more than a very small amount of either (two tablespoons of butter would put one at the daily limit already, without eating any other saturated fat that day).

Read more: Butter vs Margarine

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Greek Yogurt vs Cottage Cheese – Which is Healthier?
  • Curing Hiccups And Headaches At Home With Actual Science
    Quick fixes for bodily annoyances: Learn a simple breathing exercise to cure hiccups and a quick trick to relieve most headaches caused by increased blood pressure in the forehead.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Kidney Beans vs White Beans – Which is Healthier?

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

    Our Verdict

    When comparing kidney beans to white beans, we picked the white.

    Why?

    It was close, and each has its strengths! Bear in mind, these are very closely-related beans. But as we say, there are distinguishing factors…

    In terms of macros, kidney beans have very slightly more fiber and white beans have very slightly more protein. But both are close enough in both of those things to call this a tie in this category.

    When it comes to vitamins, there are two ways of looking at this:

    1. kidney beans have more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B6, B9, C, and K, while white beans have more vitamin B5, E, and choline
    2. kidney beans have slightly more of some vitamins that don’t usually see a deficiency, while white beans have 31x more vitamin E

    Nevertheless, we’re sticking by our usual method of noting that this is a 7:3 win for kidney beans in this category; we just wanted to note that in practical health terms, an argument can be made for white beans on the vitamin front too.

    In the category of minerals, kidney beans have slightly more phosphorus, while white beans have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, selenium, and zinc. An easy win for white beans this time.

    (In case you’re wondering about the margin on phosphorus, it was 0.2x more, so we’re not seeing a situation like white beans’ 31x more vitamin E)

    In short: both are great and both have their strengths. Enjoy both, together if you like! But if we have to pick one, we’re going with white beans.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Beat Cancer Kitchen – by Chris Wark & Micah Wark

    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 we eat, many things can increase our cancer risk. Some we might remember to avoid, like ultra-processed foods and red meat. Others might be more neutral when it comes to cancer, neither good nor bad.

    But! Some foods also have cancer-fighting properties. Which means reducing cancer risk, and/or having an anti-proliferative effect (i.e., shrinks or at least slows growth of tumors), in the event of already having cancer.

    That’s what Chris & Micah Wark are offering here; a cookbook built around anti-cancer foods—after the former beat his own cancer with the help of the latter. He had surgery, but skipped chemo, preferring to look to nutrition to keep cancer-free. Now 18 years later, and so far, so good.

    The dietary advice here is entirely consistent with what we’d offer at 10almonds; it’s plant-based, and high in anti-cancer phytonutrients.

    The recipes themselves (of which there are about 70-ish) are as delicious and simple as the title suggests, and/but you might want to know:

    • On the one hand, many recipes are things like sauces, condiments, or dressings, which in a recipe book can sometimes feel like underdelivering on the promise of recipes when we expect full meals
    • On the other hand, those things if you just purchase them ready-made are usually the things with the most ultra-processed products, thus, having anticancer homemade versions instead here can actually make a very big difference
    • On the third hand, there areplenty of starters/mains/desserts too!

    Bottom line: if you’re looking for an anti-cancer cookbook, this is a very good one whose ingredients aren’t obscure (which can otherwise be a problem for some books of this kind)

    Click here to check out Beat Cancer Kitchen, and take good care of yourself and your loved ones!

    Share This Post

  • Walk Yourself Happy – by Dr. Julia Bradbury

    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.

    Notwithstanding her (honorary) doctorate, Dr. Bradbury is not, in fact, a scientist. But…

    • She has a lot of experience walking all around the world, and her walking habit has seen her through all manner of things, from stress and anxiety to cancer and grief and more.
    • She does, throughout this book, consult many scientists and other experts (indeed, some we’ve featured here before at 10almonds), so we still get quite a dose of science too.

    The writing style of this book is… Compelling. Honestly, the biggest initial barrier to you getting out of the door will be putting this book down first.If you have good self-discipline, you might make it last longer by treating yourself to a chapter per day

    Bottom line: you probably don’t need this book to know how to go for a walk, but it will motivate, inspire, and even inform you of how to get the most out of it. Treat yourself!

    Click here to check out Walk Yourself Happy, and prepare for a new healthy habit!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Greek Yogurt vs Cottage Cheese – Which is Healthier?
  • Natural Remedies and Foods for Osteoarthritis

    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

    ❝Natural solutions for osteoarthritis. Eg. Rosehip tea, dandelion root tea. Any others??? What foods should I absolutely leave alone?❞

    We’ll do a main feature on arthritis (in both its main forms) someday soon, but meanwhile, we recommend eating for good bone/joint health and against inflammation. To that end, you might like these main features we did on those topics:

    Of these, probably the last one is the most critical, and also will have the speediest effects if implemented.

    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:

  • Ice Baths: To Dip Or Not To Dip?

    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.

    Many Are Cold, But Few Are Frozen

    We asked you for your (health-related) view of ice baths, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

    • About 31% said “ice baths are great for the health; we should take them”
    • About 29% said “ice baths’ risks outweigh their few benefits”
    • About 26% said “ice baths’ benefits outweigh their few risks”
    • About 14% said “ice baths are dangerous and can kill you; best avoided”

    So what does the science say?

    Freezing water is very dangerous: True or False?

    True! Water close to freezing point is indeed very dangerous, and can most certainly kill you.

    Fun fact, though: many such people are still saveable with timely medical intervention, in part because the same hypothermia that is killing them also slows down the process* of death

    Source (and science) for both parts of that:

    Cold water immersion: sudden death and prolonged survival

    *and biologically speaking, death is a process, not an event, by the way. But we don’t have room for that today!

    (unless you die in some sudden violent way, such as a powerful explosion that destroys your brain instantly; then it’s an event)

    Ice baths are thus also very dangerous: True or False?

    False! Assuming that they are undertaken responsibly and you have no chronic diseases that make it more dangerous for you.

    What does “undertaken responsibly” mean?

    Firstly, the temperature should not be near freezing. It should be 10–15℃, which for Americans is 50–59℉.

    You can get a bath thermometer to check this, by the way. Here’s an example product on Amazon.

    Secondly, your ice bath should last no more than 10–15 minutes. This is not a place to go to sleep.

    What chronic diseases would make it dangerous?

    Do check with your doctor if you have any doubts, as no list we make can be exhaustive and we don’t know your personal medical history, but the main culprits are:

    • Cardiovascular disease
    • Hypertension
    • Diabetes (any type)

    The first two are for heart attack risk; the latter is because diabetes can affect core temperature regulation.

    Ice baths are good for the heart: True or False?

    True or False depending on how they’re done, and your health before starting.

    For most people, undertaking ice baths responsibly, repeated ice bath use causes the cardiovascular system to adapt to better maintain homeostasis when subjected to thermal shock (i.e. sudden rapid changes in temperature).

    For example: Respiratory and cardiovascular responses to cold stress following repeated cold water immersion

    And because that was a small study, here’s a big research review with a lot of data; just scroll to where it has the heading“Specific thermoregulative adaptations to regular exposure to cold air and/or cold water exposure“ for many examples and much discussion:

    Health effects of voluntary exposure to cold water: a continuing subject of debate

    Ice baths are good against inflammation: True or False?

    True! Here’s one example:

    Winter-swimming as a building-up body resistance factor inducing adaptive changes in the oxidant/antioxidant status

    Uric acid and glutathione levels (important markers of chronic inflammation) are also significantly affected:

    Uric acid and glutathione levels during short-term whole body cold exposure

    Want to know more?

    That’s all we have room for today, but check out our previous “Expert Insights” main feature looking at Wim Hof’s work in cryotherapy:

    A Cold Shower A Day Keeps The Doctor Away?

    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:

  • When BMI Doesn’t Measure Up

    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 BMI Doesn’t Quite Measure Up

    Last month, we did a “Friday Mythbusters” edition of 10almonds, tackling many of the misconceptions surrounding obesity. Amongst them, we took a brief look at the usefulness (or lack thereof) of the Body Mass Index (BMI) scale of weight-related health for individuals. By popular subscriber request, we’re now going to dive a little deeper into that today!

    The wrong tool for the job

    BMI was developed as a tool to look at large-scale demographic trends, stemming from a population study of white European men, who were for the purpose of the study (the widescale health of the working class in that geographic area in that era), considered a reasonable default demographic.

    In other words: as a system, it’s now being used in a way it was never made for, and the results of that misappropriation of an epidemiological tool for individual health are predictably unhelpful.

    If you want to know yours…

    Here’s the magic formula for calculating your BMI:

    • Metric: divide your weight in kilograms by your height in square meters
    • Imperial: divide your weight in pounds by your height in square inches and then multiply by 703

    “What if my height doesn’t come in square meters or square inches, because it’s a height, not an area?”

    We know. Take your height and square it anyway. If this seems convoluted and arbitrary, yes, it is.

    But!

    While on the one hand it’s convoluted and arbitrary… On the other hand, it’s also a gross oversimplification. So, yay for the worst of both worlds?

    If you don’t want to grab a calculator, here’s a quick online tool to calculate it for you.

    So, how did you score?

    According to the CDC, a BMI score…

    • Under 18.5 is underweight
    • 18.5 to 24.9 is normal
    • 25 to 29.9 is overweight
    • 30 and over is obese

    And, if we’re looking at a representative sample of the population, where the representation is average white European men of working age, that’s not a bad general rule of thumb.

    For the rest of us, not so representative

    BMI is a great and accurate tool as a rule of thumb, except for…

    Women

    An easily forgotten demographic, due to being a mere 51% of the world’s population, women generally have a higher percentage of body fat than men, and this throws out BMI’s usefulness.

    If pregnant or nursing

    A much higher body weight and body fat percentage—note that these are two things, not one. Some of the extra weight will be fat to nourish the baby; some will be water weight, and if pregnant, some will be the baby (or babies!). BMI neither knows nor cares about any of these things. And, this is a big deal, because BMI gets used by healthcare providers to judge health risks and guide medical advice.

    People under the age of 16 or over the age of 65

    Not only do people below and above those ages (respectively) tend to be shorter—which throws out the calculations and mean health risks may increase before the BMI qualifies as overweight—but also:

    • BMI under 23 in people over the age of 65 is associated with a higher health risk
    • A meta-analysis showed that a BMI of 27 was the best in terms of decreased mortality risk for the over-65 age group

    This obviously flies in the face of conventional standards regards BMI—as you’ll recall from the BMI brackets we listed above.

    Read the science: BMI and all-cause mortality in older adults: a meta-analysis

    Athletic people

    A demographic often described in scientific literature as “athletes”, but that can be misleading. When we say “athletes”, what comes to mind? Probably Olympians, or other professional sportspeople.

    But also athletic, when it comes to body composition, are such people as fitness enthusiasts and manual laborers. Which makes for a lot more people affected by this!

    Athletic people tend to have more lean muscle mass (muscle weighs more than fat), and heavier bones (can’t build strong muscles on weak bones, so the bones get stronger too, which means denser)… But that lean muscle mass can actually increase metabolism and help ward off many of the very same things that BMI is used as a risk indicator for (e.g. heart disease, and diabetes). So people in this category will actually be at lower risk, while (by BMI) getting told they are at higher risk.

    If not white

    Physical characteristics of race can vary by more than skin color, relevant considerations in this case include, for example:

    • Black people, on average, not only have more lean muscle mass and less fat than white people, but also, have completely different risk factors for diseases such as diabetes.
    • Asian people, on average, are shorter than white people, and as such may see increased health risks before BMI qualifies as overweight.
    • Hispanic people, on average, again have different physical characteristics that throw out the results, in a manner that would need lower cutoffs to be even as “useful” as it is for white people.

    Further reading on this: BMI and the BIPOC Community

    In summary:

    If you’re an average white European working-age man, BMI can sometimes be a useful general guide. If however you fall into one or more of the above categories, it is likely to be inaccurate at best, if not outright telling the opposite of the truth.

    What’s more useful, then?

    For heart disease risk and diabetes risk both, waist circumference is a much more universally reliable indicator. And since those two things tend to affect a lot of other health risks, it becomes an excellent starting point for being aware of many aspects of health.

    Pregnancy will still throw off waist circumference a little (measure below the bump, not around it!), but it will nevertheless be more helpful than BMI even then, as it becomes necessary to just increase the numbers a little, according to gestational month and any confounding factors e.g. twins, triplets, etc. Ask your obstetrician about this, as it’s beyond the scope of today’s newsletter!

    As to what’s considered a risk:
    • Waist circumference of more than 35 inches for women
    • Waist circumference of more than 40 inches for men

    These numbers are considered applicable across demographics of age, sex, ethnicity, and lifestyle.

    Source: Waist circumference as a vital sign in clinical practice: a Consensus Statement from the IAS and ICCR Working Group on Visceral Obesity

    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: