Pistachios vs Cashews – 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 pistachios to cashews, we picked the pistachios.
Why?
In terms of macros, both are great sources of protein and healthy fats, and considered head-to-head:
- pistachios have slightly more protein, but it’s close
- pistachios have slightly more (health) fat, but it’s close
- cashews have slightly more carbs, but it’s close
- pistachios have a lot more fiber (more than 3x more!)
All in all, both have a good macro balance, but pistachios win easily on account of the fiber, as well as the slight edge for protein and fats.
When it comes to vitamins, pistachios have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B6, B9, C, & E.
Cashews do have more vitamin B5, also called pantothenic acid, pantothenic literally meaning “from everywhere”. Guess what’s not a common deficiency to have!
So pistachios win easily on vitamins, too.
In the category of minerals, things are more balanced, though cashews have a slight edge. Pistachios have more notably more calcium and potassium, while cashews have notably more selenium, zinc, and magnesium.
Both of these nuts have anti-inflammatory, anti-diabetic, and anti-cancer benefits, often from different phytochemicals, but with similar levels of usefulness.
Taking everything into account, however, one nut comes out in the clear lead, mostly due to its much higher fiber content and better vitamin profile, and that’s the pistachios.
Want to learn more?
Check out:
Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts
Enjoy!
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:
Vaccines and cancer: The myth that won’t die
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.
Two recent studies reported rising cancer rates among younger adults in the U.S. and worldwide. This prompted some online anti-vaccine accounts to link the studies’ findings to COVID-19 vaccines.
But, as with other myths, the data tells a very different story.
What you need to know
- Baseless claims that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer have persisted online for several years and gained traction in late 2023.
- Two recent reports finding rising cancer rates among younger adults are based on pre-pandemic cancer incidence data. Cancer rates in the U.S. have been on the rise since the 1990s.
- There is no evidence of a link between COVID-19 vaccination and increased cancer risk.
False claims about COVID-19 vaccines began circulating months before the vaccines were available. Chief among these claims was misinformed speculation that vaccine mRNA could alter or integrate into vaccine recipients’ DNA.
It does not. But that didn’t prevent some on social media from spinning that claim into a persistent myth alleging that mRNA vaccines can cause or accelerate cancer growth. Anti-vaccine groups even coined the term “turbo cancer” to describe a fake phenomenon of abnormally aggressive cancers allegedly linked to COVID-19 vaccines.
They used the American Cancer Society’s 2024 cancer projection—based on incidence data through 2020—and a study of global cancer trends between 1999 and 2019 to bolster the false claims. This exposed the dishonesty at the heart of the anti-vaccine messaging, as data that predated the pandemic by decades was carelessly linked to COVID-19 vaccines in viral social media posts.
Some on social media cherry-pick data and use unfounded evidence because the claims that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer are not true. According to the National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society, there is no evidence of any link between COVID-19 vaccines and an increase in cancer diagnosis, progression, or remission.
Why does the vaccine cancer myth endure?
At the root of false cancer claims about COVID-19 vaccines is a long history of anti-vaccine figures falsely linking vaccines to cancer. Polio and HPV vaccines have both been the target of disproven cancer myths.
Not only do HPV vaccines not cause cancer, they are one of only two vaccines that prevent cancer.
In the case of polio vaccines, some early batches were contaminated with simian virus 40 (SV40), a virus that is known to cause cancer in some mammals but not humans. The contaminated batches were discovered, and no other vaccine has had SV40 contamination in over 60 years.
Follow-up studies found no increase in cancer rates in people who received the SV40-contaminated polio vaccine. Yet, vaccine opponents have for decades claimed that polio vaccines cause cancer.
Recycling of the SV40 myth
The SV40 myth resurfaced in 2023 when vaccine opponents claimed that COVID-19 vaccines contain the virus. In reality, a small, nonfunctional piece of the SV40 virus is used in the production of some COVID-19 vaccines. This DNA fragment, called the promoter, is commonly used in biomedical research and vaccine development and doesn’t remain in the finished product.
Crucially, the SV40 promoter used to produce COVID-19 vaccines doesn’t contain the part of the virus that enters the cell nucleus and is associated with cancer-causing properties in some animals. The promoter also lacks the ability to survive on its own inside the cell or interact with DNA. In other words, it poses no risk to humans.
Over 5.6 billion people worldwide have received COVID-19 vaccines since December 2020. At that scale, even the tiniest increase in cancer rates in vaccinated populations would equal hundreds of thousands of excess cancer diagnoses and deaths. The evidence for alleged vaccine-linked cancer would be observed in real incidence, treatment, and mortality data, not social media anecdotes or unverifiable reports.
This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
Share This Post
Body Language (In The Real World)
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.
Forget What You Think You Know About Body Language
…unless it’s about a specific person whose habits and mannerisms you know intimately, in which case, you probably have enough personal data stored up to actually recognize patterns à la “when my spouse does this, then…”, and probably do know what’s going on.
For everyone else… our body language can be as unique as our idiolect
What’s an idiolect? It’s any one given person’s way of speaking/writing, in their natural state (i.e. without having to adjust their style for some reason, for example in a public-facing role at work, where style often becomes much narrower and more consciously-chosen).
Extreme example first
To give an extreme example of how non-verbal communication can be very different than a person thinks, there’s an anecdote floating around the web of someone whose non-verbal autistic kid would, when he liked someone who was visiting the house, hide their shoes when they were about to leave, to cause them to stay longer. Then one day some relative visited and when she suggested that she “should be going sometime soon”, he hurried to bring her her shoes. She left, happy that the kid liked her (he did not).
The above misunderstanding happened because the visitor had the previous life experience of “a person who brings me things is being helpful, and if they do it of their own free will, it’s because they like me”.
In other words…
Generalizations are often sound… In general
…which does not help us when dealing with individuals, which as it turns out, everyone is.
Clenched fists = tense and angry… Except when it’s just what’s comfortable for someone, or they have circulation issues, or this, or that, or the other.
Pacing = agitated… Except when it’s just someone who finds the body in motion more comfortable
Relaxed arms and hands = at ease and unthreatening… Unless it’s a practitioner of various martial arts for whom that is their default ready-for-action state.
Folded arms = closed-off, cold, distant… Or it was just somewhere to put one’s hands.
Lack of eye contact = deceitful, hiding something… Unless it’s actually for any one of a wide number of reasons, which brings us to our next section:
A liar’s “tells”
Again, if you know someone intimately and know what signs are associated with deceit in them, then great, that’s a thing you know. But for people in general…
A lot of what is repeated about “how to know if someone is lying” has seeped into public consciousness from “what police use to justify their belief that someone is lying”.
This is why many of the traditional “this person is lying” signs are based around behaviors that show up when in fact “this person is afraid, under pressure, and talking to an authority figure who has the power to ruin their life”:
Research on Non-verbal Signs of Lies and Deceit: A Blind Alley
But what about eye-accessing cues? They have science to them, right?
For any unfamiliar: this is about the theory that when we are accessing different parts of our mind (such as memory or creativity, thus truthfulness or lying), our eyes move one way or another according to what faculty we’re accessing.
Does it work? No
But, if you carefully calibrate it for a specific person, such as by asking them questions along the lines of “describe your front door” or “describe your ideal holiday”, to see which ways they look for recall or creativity… Then also no:
The Eyes Don’t Have It: Lie Detection and Neuro-Linguistic Programming
How can we know what non-verbal communication means, then?
With strangers? We can’t, simply. It’s on us to be open-minded, with a healthy balance of optimism and wariness.
With people we know? We can build up a picture over time, learn the person’s patterns. Best of all, we can ask them. In the moment, and in general.
For more on optimizing interpersonal communication, check out:
Save Time With Better Communication
…and the flipside of that:
The Problem With Active Listening (And How To Do It Better)
Take care!
Share This Post
F*ck You Chaos – by Dominika Choroszko
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’ve all read decluttering books. Some may even have decluttering books cluttering bookshelves. This one’s a little different, though:
Dominika Choroszko looks at assessing, decluttering, and subsequently organizing:
- Your home
- Your mind
- Your finances
In other words
- she starts off like Marie Kondo, and…
- phases through doing the jobs of Queer Eye’s “Fab Five”, before…
- sitting us down with some CBT worksheets, and…
- finally going through finances à la Martin Lewis.
By the time we’ve read the book, it’s as though Mary Poppins has breezed through our house, head, and bank account, leaving everything “practically perfect in every way”.
Of course, it’s on us to actually do the work, but as many of us struggle with “how” and the ever-dreaded “but where to begin”, Choroszko’s whirlwind impetus and precision guidance (many very direct practical steps to take) really grease the wheels of progress.
In short, this could be the book that kickstarts your next big “getting everything into better order” drive, with a clear step-by-step this-then-this-then-this linear process.
Share This Post
Related Posts
Popcorn vs Peanuts – 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 air-popped popcorn to peanuts (without an allergy), we picked the peanuts.
Why?
Peanuts, if we were to list popular nuts in order of healthfulness, would not be near the top of the list. Many other nuts have more nutrients and fewer/lesser drawbacks.
But the comparison to popcorn shines a different light on it:
Popcorn has very few nutrients. It’s mostly carbs and fiber; it’s just not a lot of carbs because the manner of its consumption makes it a very light snack (literally). You can eat a bowlful and it was perhaps 30g. It has some small amounts of some minerals, but nothing that you could rely on it for. It’s mostly fresh air wrapped in fiber.
Peanuts, in contrast, are a much denser snack. High in calories yes, but also high in protein, their fats are mostly healthy, and they have not only a fair stock of vitamins and minerals, but also a respectable complement of beneficial phytochemicals: mostly assorted antioxidant polyphenols, but also oleic acid (as in olives, good for healthy triglyceride levels).
Another thing worth a mention is their cholesterol-reducing phytosterols (these reduce the absorption of dietary cholesterol, “good” and “bad”, so this is good for most people, bad for some, depending on the state of your cholesterol and what you ate near in time to eating the nuts)
Peanuts do have their clear downsides too: its phytic acid content can reduce the bioavailability of iron and zinc taken at the same time.
In summary: while popcorn’s greatest claim to dietary beneficence is its fiber content and that it’s close to being a “zero snack”, peanuts (eaten in moderation, say, the same 30g as the popcorn) have a lot to contribute to our daily nutritional requirements.
We do suggest enjoying other nuts though!
Read more: Why You Should Diversify Your Nuts!
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:
Measles cases are rising—here’s how to protect your family
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 U.S. is currently experiencing a spike in measles cases across several states. Measles a highly contagious and potentially life-threatening disease caused by a virus. The measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine prevents measles; unvaccinated people put themselves and everyone around them at risk, including babies who are too young to receive the vaccine.
Read on to learn more about measles: what it is, how to stay protected, and what to do if a measles outbreak happens near you.
What are the symptoms of measles?
Measles symptoms typically begin 10 to 14 days after exposure. The disease starts with a fever followed by a cough, runny nose, and red eyes and then produces a rash of tiny red spots on the face and body. Measles can affect anyone, but is most serious for children under 5, immunocompromised people, and pregnant people, who may give birth prematurely or whose babies may have low birth weight as a result of a measles infection.
Measles isn’t just a rash—the disease can cause serious health problems and even death. About one in five unvaccinated people in the U.S. who get measles will be hospitalized and could suffer from pneumonia, dehydration, or brain swelling.
If you get measles, it can also damage your immune system, making you more vulnerable to other diseases.
How do you catch measles?
Measles spreads through the air when an infected person coughs or sneezes. It’s so contagious that unvaccinated people have a 90 percent chance of becoming infected if exposed.
An infected person can spread measles to others before they have symptoms.
Why are measles outbreaks happening now?
The pandemic caused many children to miss out on routine vaccinations, including the MMR vaccine. Delayed vaccination schedules coincided with declining confidence in vaccine safety and growing resistance to vaccine requirements.
Skepticism about the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines has resulted in some people questioning or opposing the MMR vaccine and other routine immunizations.
How do I protect myself and my family from measles?
Getting an MMR vaccine is the best way to prevent getting sick with measles or spreading it to others. The CDC recommends that children receive the MMR vaccine at 12 to 15 months and again at 4 to 6 years, before starting kindergarten.
One dose of the MMR vaccine provides 93 percent protection and two doses provide 97 percent protection against all strains of measles. Because some children are too young to be immunized, it’s important that those around them are vaccinated to protect them.
Is the MMR vaccine safe?
The MMR vaccine has been rigorously tested and monitored over 50 years and determined to be safe. Adverse reactions to the vaccine are extremely rare.
Receiving the MMR vaccine is much safer than contracting measles.
What do I do if there’s a measles outbreak in my community?
Anyone who is not fully vaccinated for measles should be immunized with a measles vaccine as soon as possible. Measles vaccines given within 72 hours after exposure may prevent or reduce the severity of disease.
Children as young as 6 months old can receive the MMR vaccine if they are at risk during an outbreak. If your child isn’t fully vaccinated with two doses of the MMR vaccine—or three doses, if your child received the first dose before their first birthday—talk to your pediatrician.
Unvaccinated people who have been exposed to the virus should stay home from work, school, day care, and other activities for 21 days to avoid spreading the disease.
For more information, talk to your health care provider.
This article first appeared on Public Good News 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:
Never Enough – by Dr. Judith Grisel
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’ve reviewed books about addiction before—specifically about alcohol, at least. This one’s more general in that it covers different addictions.
On the other hand, it’s also more specific, in that it covers them from the author’s field: neuroscience.
…and experience too. The author had a plethora of addictions (the serious kind), got sober, and then undertook to study neuroscience. Her hope was to help others avoid, or escape from the same as‚ what she went through.
Dr. Grisel (as she now is) takes a methodical approach in this book. She works her way through the addictive mechanisms of a broad selection of common drugs, explaining each.
The focus here is on neutral explanations, rather than the propagandizing scaremongering that failed at least one generation. Why each drug is alluring, what it really does do—and the neurological price it exacts, down to the molecular level.
She also covers risk factors for addiction; genetic, epigenetic, and environmental. There’s no “if you were stronger”, or “these people made bad choices”, so much as… Many addicts were, in effect, sabotaged from before birth.
That doesn’t mean that to become addicted or not is just fate, but it does mean… There but for the grace of factors completely outside of our control go we.
Why is this useful to us, be we a reader without any meaningful addiction (we’re not counting coffee etc here)? Well, as this book illustrates and explains, many of us could be one (more) mishap away from a crippling addiction and not know it. Forewarned is forearmed.
Bottom line: almost all of us are, have been, or will be touched by addiction in some way. Either directly, or a loved one, or a loved one’s loved one, or perhaps a parent who gave us an epigenetic misfortune. This book gives understanding that can help.
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:
