Muhammara
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.
This is a Levantine dish, Syrian in origin (although Lebanese cuisine uses it plenty too) and popularly enjoyed all the way up to Turkey, down to Egypt, and across to Armenia. And today, perhaps rather further afield! It’s first and foremost a spicy dip/spread, though it can be lengthened into a sauce, and/or made more substantial by adding an extra protein. We’ll give you the basic recipe though, and let you see where it takes you! Healthwise, it’s very nutritionally dense, mostly thanks to the walnuts and red peppers, though spices and olive oil bring their healthy benefits too.
You will need
- ½ cup chopped walnuts (ideally: toasted)
- 3 red peppers, from a jar (jarred over fresh not only improves the consistency, but also makes it extra gut-healthy due to the fermentation bacteria present; if you must use fresh, roast them first)
- 2 tbsp extra virgin olive oil
- 1 tbsp pomegranate molasses (you can omit if you don’t like sweetness, but this is traditional)
- 1 tbsp tomato purée
- 1 tbsp Aleppo pepper flakes (less, if you don’t like heat) (substitute another hot pepper if necessary)
- ½ bulb garlic, crushed
- 2 tsp ground smoked paprika
- 1 tsp ground cumin
- ½ tsp MSG or 1 tsp low-sodium salt
- Juice of 1 lemon
- Optional: handful of pomegranate seeds
- Optional: herb garnish, e.g. cilantro or parsley
Method
(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)
1) Add everything except the pomegranate seeds and herbs to a blender, and blend to a smooth consistency.
2) Add the pomegranate seeds and herbs, as a garnish.
3) Serve! Can be enjoyed as a dip (perhaps using our Homemade Healthy Flatbreads recipe), or as a spread, or used as a sauce poured over chickpeas or some other bulky protein, to make a more substantial dish.
Enjoy!
Want to learn more?
For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:
- Walnuts vs Cashews – Which is Healthier?
- Capsaicin For Weight Loss And Against Inflammation
- Red Bell Peppers vs Tomatoes – Which is Healthier?
- Bell Peppers: A Spectrum Of Specialties
- Lycopene’s Benefits For The Gut, Heart, Brain, & More
Take care!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
-
Death by Food Pyramid – by Denise Minger
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.
This one is less about “here’s the perfect way of eating” or even “these specific foods are ontologically evil”, but more about teaching science literacy.
The author explores various health trends from the 70s until time of writing (the book was published in 2014), what rationales originally prompted them, and what social phenomena either helped them to persist, or caused them to get dropped quite quickly.
Of course, even in the case of fads that are societally dropped quite quickly, on an individual level there will always be someone just learning about it for the first time, reading some older material, and thinking “that sounds like just the miracle life-changer I need!”
What she teaches the reader to do is largely what we do a lot of here at 10almonds—examine the claims, go to the actual source material (studies! Not just books about studies!), and see whether the study conclusions actually support the claim, to start with, and then further examine to see if there’s some way (or sometimes, a plurality of ways) in which the study itself is methodologically flawed.
Which does happen sometimes, do actually watch out for that!
The style is quite personal and entertaining for the most part, and yet even moving sometimes (the title is not hyperbole; deaths will be discussed). As one might expect of a book teaching science literacy, it’s very easy to read, with copious footnotes (well, actually they are at the back of the book doubling up as a bibliography, but they are linked-to throughout) for those who wish to delve deeper—something the author, of course, encourages.
Bottom line: if you’d like to be able to sort the real science from the hype yourself, then this book can set you on the right track!
Share This Post
-
Daily Activity Levels & The Measurable Difference They Make To Brain Health
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.
Most studies into the difference that exercise makes to cognitive decline are retrospective, i.e. they look backwards in time, asking participants what their exercise habits were like in the past [so many] years, and tallying that against their cognitive health in the present.
Some studies are interventional, and those are most often 3, 6, or 12 months, depending on funding. In those cases, they make a hypothesis (e.g. this intervention will boost this measure of brain health) and then test it.
However, humans aren’t generally great at making short term decisions for long term gains. In other words: if it’s rainy out, or you’re a little pushed for time, you’re likely to take the car over walking regardless of what data point this adjusts in an overarching pattern that will affect your brain’s amyloid-β clean-up rates in 5–20 years time.
Nine days
The study we’re going to look at today was a 9-day observational study, using smartphone-based tracking with check-ins every 3½ hours, with participants reporting their physical activity as light, moderate, or intense (these terms were defined and exemplified, so that everyone involved was singing from the same songsheet in terms of what activities constitute what intensity).
The sample size was reasonable (n=204) and was generally heterogenous sample (i.e. varied in terms of sex, racial background, and fitness level) of New Yorkers aged 40–65.
So, the input variable was activity level, and the output variable was cognitive fitness.
As to how they measured the output, two brain games assessed:
- cognitive processing speed, and
- working memory (a proxy for executive function).
What they found:
- participants active within the last 3½ hours had faster processing speed, equivalent to being four years younger
- response times in the working memory (for: executive function) task reflected similar processing speed improvements, for participants active in the last 3½ hours
And, which is important to note,
❝This benefit was observed regardless of whether the activities they reported were higher intensity (e.g., running/jogging) or lower intensity (e.g., walking, chores).❞
Source: Cognitive Health Benefits of Everyday Physical Activity in a Diverse Sample of Middle-Aged Adults
Practical take-away:
Move more often! At least every couple of hours (when not sleeping)!
The benefits will benefit you in the now, as well as down the line.
See also:
The Doctor Who Wants Us To Exercise Less, & Move More
and, for that matter:
Do You Love To Go To The Gym? No? Enjoy These “No-Exercise Exercises”!
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Ouch. That ‘Free’ Annual Checkup Might Cost You. Here’s Why.
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 Kristy Uddin, 49, went in for her annual mammogram in Washington state last year, she assumed she would not incur a bill because the test is one of the many preventive measures guaranteed to be free to patients under the 2010 Affordable Care Act. The ACA’s provision made medical and economic sense, encouraging Americans to use screening tools that could nip medical problems in the bud and keep patients healthy.
So when a bill for $236 arrived, Uddin — an occupational therapist familiar with the health care industry’s workings — complained to her insurer and the hospital. She even requested an independent review.
“I’m like, ‘Tell me why am I getting this bill?’” Uddin recalled in an interview. The unsatisfying explanation: The mammogram itself was covered, per the ACA’s rules, but the fee for the equipment and the facility was not.
That answer was particularly galling, she said, because, a year earlier, her “free” mammogram at the same health system had generated a bill of about $1,000 for the radiologist’s reading. Though she fought that charge (and won), this time she threw in the towel and wrote the $236 check. But then she dashed off a submission to the KFF Health News-NPR “Bill of the Month” project:
“I was really mad — it’s ridiculous,” she later recalled. “This is not how the law is supposed to work.”
The ACA’s designers might have assumed that they had spelled out with sufficient clarity that millions of Americans would no longer have to pay for certain types of preventive care, including mammograms, colonoscopies, and recommended vaccines, in addition to doctor visits to screen for disease. But the law’s authors didn’t reckon with America’s ever-creative medical billing juggernaut.
Over the past several years, the medical industry has eroded the ACA’s guarantees, finding ways to bill patients in gray zones of the law. Patients going in for preventive care, expecting that it will be fully covered by insurance, are being blindsided by bills, big and small.
The problem comes down to deciding exactly what components of a medical encounter are covered by the ACA guarantee. For example, when do conversations between doctor and patient during an annual visit for preventive services veer into the treatment sphere? What screenings are needed for a patient’s annual visit?
A healthy 30-year-old visiting a primary care provider might get a few basic blood tests, while a 50-year-old who is overweight would merit additional screening for Type 2 diabetes.
Making matters more confusing, the annual checkup itself is guaranteed to be “no cost” for women and people age 65 and older, but the guarantee doesn’t apply for men in the 18-64 age range — though many preventive services that require a medical visit (such as checks of blood pressure or cholesterol and screens for substance abuse) are covered.
No wonder what’s covered under the umbrella of prevention can look very different to medical providers (trying to be thorough) and billers (intent on squeezing more dollars out of every medical encounter) than it does to insurers (who profit from narrower definitions).
For patients, the gray zone has become a billing minefield. Here are a few more examples, gleaned from the Bill of the Month project in just the past six months:
Peter Opaskar, 46, of Texas, went to his primary care doctor last year for his preventive care visit — as he’d done before, at no cost. This time, his insurer paid $130.81 for the visit, but he also received a perplexing bill for $111.81. Opaskar learned that he had incurred the additional charge because when his doctor asked if he had any health concerns, he mentioned that he was having digestive problems but had already made an appointment with his gastroenterologist. So, the office explained, his visit was billed as both a preventive physical and a consultation. “Next year,” Opasker said in an interview, if he’s asked about health concerns, “I’ll say ‘no,’ even if I have a gunshot wound.”
Kevin Lin, a technology specialist in Virginia in his 30s, went to a new primary care provider to take advantage of the preventive care benefit when he got insurance; he had no physical complaints. He said he was assured at check-in that he wouldn’t be charged. His insurer paid $174 for the checkup, but he was billed an additional $132.29 for a “new patient visit.” He said he has made many calls to fight the bill, so far with no luck.
Finally, there’s Yoori Lee, 46, of Minnesota, herself a colorectal surgeon, who was shocked when her first screening colonoscopy yielded a bill for $450 for a biopsy of a polyp — a bill she knew was illegal. Federal regulations issued in 2022 to clarify the matter are very clear that biopsies during screening colonoscopies are included in the no-cost promise. “I mean, the whole point of screening is to find things,” she said, stating, perhaps, the obvious.
Though these patient bills defy common sense, room for creative exploitation has been provided by the complex regulatory language surrounding the ACA. Consider this from Ellen Montz, deputy administrator and director of the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, in an emailed response to queries and an interview request on this subject: “If a preventive service is not billed separately or is not tracked as individual encounter data separately from an office visit and the primary purpose of the office visit is not the delivery of the preventive item or service, then the plan issuer may impose cost sharing for the office visit.”
So, if the doctor decides that a patient’s mention of stomach pain does not fall under the umbrella of preventive care, then that aspect of the visit can be billed separately, and the patient must pay?
And then there’s this, also from Montz: “Whether a facility fee is permitted to be charged to a consumer would depend on whether the facility usage is an integral part of performing the mammogram or an integral part of any other preventive service that is required to be covered without cost sharing under federal law.”
But wait, how can you do a mammogram or colonoscopy without a facility?
Unfortunately, there is no federal enforcement mechanism to catch individual billing abuses. And agencies’ remedies are weak — simply directing insurers to reprocess claims or notifying patients they can resubmit them.
In the absence of stronger enforcement or remedies, CMS could likely curtail these practices and give patients the tools to fight back by offering the sort of clarity the agency provided a few years ago regarding polyp biopsies — spelling out more clearly what comes under the rubric of preventive care, what can be billed, and what cannot.
The stories KFF Health News and NPR receive are likely just the tip of an iceberg. And while each bill might be relatively small compared with the stunning $10,000 hospital bills that have become all too familiar in the United States, the sorry consequences are manifold. Patients pay bills they do not owe, depriving them of cash they could use elsewhere. If they can’t pay, those bills might end up with debt-collection agencies and, ultimately, harm their credit score.
Perhaps most disturbing: These unexpected bills might discourage people from seeking preventive screenings that could be lifesaving, which is why the ACA deemed them “essential health benefits” that should be free.
KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.
Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.
Share This Post
Related Posts
-
What Flexible Dieting Really Means
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 Flexibility Is The Dish Of The Day
This is Alan Aragon. Notwithstanding not being a “Dr. Alan Aragon”, he’s a research scientist with dozens of peer-reviewed nutrition science papers to his name, as well as being a personal trainer and fitness educator. Most importantly, he’s an ardent champion of making people’s pursuit of health and fitness more evidence-based.
We’ll be sharing some insights from a book of his that we haven’t reviewed yet, but we will link it at the bottom of today’s article in any case.
What does he want us to know?
First, get out of the 80s and into the 90s
In the world of popular dieting, the 80s were all about calorie-counting and low-fat diets. They did not particularly help.
In the 90s, it was discovered that not only was low-fat not the way to go, but also, regardless of the diet in question, rigid dieting leads to “disinhibition”, that is to say, there comes a point (usually not far into a diet) whereby one breaks the diet, at which point, the floodgates open and the dieter binges unhealthily.
Aragon would like to bring our attention to a number of studies that found this in various ways over the course of the 90s measuring various different metrics including rigid vs flexible dieting’s impacts on BMI, weight gain, weight loss, lean muscle mass changes, binge-eating, anxiety, depression, and so forth), but we only have so much room here, so here’s a 1999 study that’s pretty much the culmination of those:
Flexible vs. Rigid Dieting Strategies: Relationship with Adverse Behavioral Outcomes
So in short: trying to be very puritan about any aspect of dieting will not only not work, it will backfire.
Next, get out of the 90s into the 00s
…which is not only fun if you read “00s” out loud as “naughties”, but also actually appropriate in this case, because it is indeed important to be comfortable being a little bit naughty:
In 2000, Dr. Marika Tiggemann found that dichotomous perceptions of food (e.g. good/bad, clean/dirty, etc) were implicated as a dysfunctional cognitive style, and predicted not only eating disorders and mood disorders, but also adverse physical health outcomes:
Dieting and Cognitive Style: The Role of Current and Past Dieting Behaviour and Cognitions
This was rendered clearer, in terms of physical health outcomes, by Dr. Susan Byrne & Dr. Emma Dove, in 2009:
❝Weight loss was negatively associated with pre-treatment depression and frequency of treatment attendance, but not with dichotomous thinking. Females who regard their weight as unacceptably high and who think dichotomously may experience high levels of depression irrespective of their actual weight, while depression may be proportionate to the degree of obesity among those who do not think dichotomously❞
Aragon’s advice based on all this: while yes, some foods are better than others, it’s more useful to see foods as being part of a spectrum, rather than being absolutist or “black and white” about it.
Next: hit those perfect 10s… Imperfectly
The next decade expanded on this research, as science is wont to do, and for this one, Aragon shines a spotlight on Dr. Alice Berg’s 2018 study with obese women averaging 69 years of age, in which…
In other words (and in fact, to borrow Dr. Berg’s words from that paper),
❝encouraging a flexible approach to eating behavior and discouraging rigid adherence to a diet may lead to better intentional weight loss for overweight and obese older women❞
You may be wondering: what did this add to the studies from the 90s?
And the key here is: rather than being observational, this was interventional. In other words, rather than simply observing what happened to people who thought one way or another, this study took people who had a rigid, dichotomous approach to food, and gave them a 6-month behavioral intervention (in other words, support encouraging them to be more flexible and open in their approach to food), and found that this indeed improved matters for them.
Which means, it’s not a matter of fate or predisposition, as it could have been back in the 90s, per “some people are just like that; who’s to say which factor causes which”. Instead, now we know that this is an approach that can be adopted, and it can be expected to work.
Beyond weight loss
Now, so far we’ve talked mostly about weight loss, and only touched on other health outcomes. This is because:
- weight loss a very common goal for many
- it’s easy to measure so there’s a lot of science for it
Incidentally, if it’s a goal of yours, here’s what 10almonds had to say about that, along with two follow-up articles for other related goals:
Spoiler: we agree with Aragon, and recommend a relaxed and flexible approach to all three of these things
Aragon’s evidence-based approach to nutrition has found that this holds true for other aspects of healthy eating, too. For example…
To count or not to count?
It’s hard to do evidence-based anything without counting, and so Aragon talks a lot about this. Indeed, he does a lot of counting in scientific papers of his own, such as:
and
The effect of protein timing on muscle strength and hypertrophy: a meta-analysis
…as well as non-protein-related but diet-related topics such as:
But! For the at-home health enthusiast, Aragon recommends that the answer to the question “to count or not to count?” is “both”:
- Start off by indeed counting and tracking everything that is important to you (per whatever your current personal health intervention is, so it might be about calories, or grams of protein, or grams of carbs, or a certain fat balance, or something else entirely)
- Switch to a more relaxed counting approach once you get used to the above. By now you probably know the macros for a lot of your common meals, snacks, etc, and can tally them in your head without worrying about weighing portions and knowing the exact figures.
- Alternatively, count moderately standardized portions of relevant foods, such as “three servings of beans or legumes per day” or “no more than one portion of refined carbohydrates per day”
- Eventually, let habit take the wheel. Assuming you have established good dietary habits, this will now do you just fine.
This latter is the point whereby the advice (that Aragon also champions) of “allow yourself an unhealthy indulgence of 10–20% of your daily food”, as a budget of “discretionary calories”, eventually becomes redundant—because chances are, you’re no longer craving that donut, and at a certain point, eating foods far outside the range of healthiness you usually eat is not even something that you would feel inclined to do if offered.
But until that kicks in, allow yourself that budget of whatever unhealthy thing you enjoy, and (this next part is important…) do enjoy it.
Because it is no good whatsoever eating that cream-filled chocolate croissant and then feeling guilty about it; that’s the dichotomous thinking we had back in the 80s. Decide in advance you’re going to eat and enjoy it, then eat and enjoy it, then look back on it with a sense of “that was enjoyable” and move on.
The flipside of this is that the importance of allowing oneself a “little treat” is that doing so actively helps ensure that the “little treat” remains “little”. Without giving oneself permission, then suddenly, “well, since I broke my diet, I might as well throw the whole thing out the window and try again on Monday”.
On enjoying food fully, by the way:
Mindful Eating: How To Get More Nutrition Out Of The Same Food
Want to know more from Alan Aragon?
Today we’ve been working heavily from this book of his; we haven’t reviewed it yet, but we do recommend checking it out:
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:
-
This Book May Save Your Life – by Dr. Karan Rajan
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.
The title is a bold sell, but the book does include a lot of information about what can go wrong in your body, and how those things can be avoided.
What it’s not: a reiteration of Dr. Michael Greger’s “How Not To Die“. It’s not dense medical information, and it doesn’t cite papers at a rate of ten per page.
What it is: an easy-reading tour guide of the human body and its many quirks and foibles, and how we can leverage those to our benefit. On which note…
Hopefully, your insides will never see the light of day, but this author is a general surgeon and as such, is an experienced and well-qualified tour guide. Here, we learn about everything from the long and interesting journey through our gut, to the unique anatomical features and liabilities of the brain. From the bizarre oddities of the genitals, to things most people don’t know about the process of death.
The style of the book is very casual, with lots of short sections (almost mini chapters-within-chapters, really) making for very light reading—and certainly enjoyable reading too, unless you are inclined to squeamishness.
Bottom line: in honesty, the book is more informative than it is instructional, though it does contain the promised health tips too. With that in mind, it’s a very enjoyable and educational read, and we do recommend it.
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:
-
Galveston Diet Cookbook for Beginners – by Martha McGrew
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.
We recently reviewed “The Galveston Diet”, and here’s a cookbook (by a nutritionist) to support that.
For the most part, it’s essentially keto-leaning, with an emphasis on protein and fats, but without quite the carb-cut that keto tends to have. It’s also quite plant-centric, but it’s not by default vegan or even vegetarian; you will find meat and fish in here. As you might expect from an anti-inflammatory cookbook, it’s light on the dairy too, though fermented dairy products such as yogurt do feature as well.
The recipes are quite simple and easy to follow, with suggestions of alternative ingredients along the way, making for extra variety as well as convenience.
If you are going to buy this book, you might want to take a look at the buying options, to ensure you get a full-color version, as recent reprints have photos in black and white, whereas older runs have color throughout.
Bottom line: if you’d like to cook the Galveston Diet way, this is as good a way to start as any.
Click here to check out the Galveston Diet Cookbook for Beginners, and get cooking!
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: