Pomegranate’s Health Gifts Are Mostly In Its Peel

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.

Pomegranate Peel’s Potent Potential

Pomegranates have been enjoying a new surge in popularity in some parts, widely touted for their health benefits. What’s not so widely touted is that most of the bioactive compounds that give these benefits are concentrated in the peel, which most people in most places throw away.

They do exist in the fruit too! But if you’re discarding the peel, you’re missing out:

Food Applications and Potential Health Benefits of Pomegranate and its Derivatives

“That peel is difficult and not fun to eat though”

Indeed. Drying the peel, especially freeze-drying it, is a good first step:

❝Freeze drying peels had a positive effect on the total phenolic, tannins and flavonoid than oven drying at all temperature range. Moreover, freeze drying had a positive impact on the +catechin, -epicatechin, hesperidin and rutin concentrations of fruit peel. ❞

Source: Effect of drying on the bioactive compounds, antioxidant, antibacterial and antityrosinase activities of pomegranate peel

Once it is freeze-dried, it is easy to grind it into a powder for use as a nutritional supplement.

“How useful is it?”

Studies with 500mg and 1000mg per day in people with cases of obesity and/or type 2 diabetes saw significant improvements in assorted biomarkers of cardiometabolic health, including blood pressure, blood sugar levels, cholesterol, and hemoglobin A1C:

It also has anticancer properties:

…and neuroprotective benefits:

…and it may protect against osteopenia and osteoporosis, but we only have animal or in vitro studies so far, for example:

Want to try it?

We don’t sell it, but you can buy pomegranates at your local supermarket, or buy the peel extract ready-made from online sources; here’s an example on Amazon for your convenience

(the marketing there is for use of the 100% pomegranate peel powder as a face mask; it also has health benefits for the skin when applied topically, but we didn’t have time to cover that today)

Enjoy!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Capsaicin For Weight Loss And Against Inflammation
  • How To Beat Loneliness & Isolation
    Overcoming Loneliness & Isolation: As we age, isolation and loneliness become significant mental health challenges. Finding ways to connect with others is essential for our well-being.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Artichoke vs Heart of Palm– 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 artichoke to heart of palm, we picked the artichoke.

    Why?

    If you were thinking “isn’t heart of palm full of saturated fat?” then no… Palm oil is, but heart of palm itself has 0.62g/100g fat, of which, 0.13g saturated fat. So, negligible.

    As for the rest of the macros, artichoke has more protein, carbs, and fiber, thus being the “more food per food” option. Technically heart of palm has the lower glycemic index, but they are both low-GI foods, so it’s really not a factor here.

    Vitamins are where artichoke shines; artichoke has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, C, E, K, and choline, while heart of palm is not higher in any vitamins.

    The minerals situation is more balanced: artichoke has more copper, magnesium, phosphorus, and potassium, while heart of palm has more iron, manganese, selenium, and zinc.

    Adding up the categories, the winner of this “vegetables with a heart” face-off is clearly artichoke.

    Fun fact: in French, “to have the heart of an artichoke” (avoir le coeur d’un artichaut) means to fall in love easily. Perfect vegetable for a romantic dinner, perhaps (especially with all those generous portions of B-vitamins)!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Artichoke vs Cabbage – Which is Healthier?

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • The Truth About Handwashing

    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.

    Washing Our Hands Of It

    In Tuesdays’s newsletter, we asked you how often you wash your hands, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of self-reported answers:

    • About 54% said “More times per day than [the other options]”
    • About 38% said “Whenever using the bathroom or kitchen
    • About 5% said “Once or twice per day”
    • Two (2) said “Only when visibly dirty”
    • Two (2) said “I prefer to just use sanitizer gel”

    What does the science have to say about this?

    People lie about their handwashing habits: True or False?

    True and False (since some people lie and some don’t), but there’s science to this too. Here’s a great study from 2021 that used various levels of confidentiality in questioning (i.e., there were ways of asking that made it either obvious or impossible to know who answered how), and found…

    ❝We analysed data of 1434 participants. In the direct questioning group 94.5% of the participants claimed to practice proper hand hygiene; in the indirect questioning group a significantly lower estimate of only 78.1% was observed.❞

    ~ Dr. Laura Mieth et al.

    Source: Do they really wash their hands? Prevalence estimates for personal hygiene behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic based on indirect questions

    Note: the abstract alone doesn’t make it clear how the anonymization worked (it is explained later in the paper), and it was noted as a limitation of the study that the participants may not have understood how it works well enough to have confidence in it, meaning that the 78.1% is probably also inflated, just not as much as the 94.5% in the direct questioning group.

    Here’s a pop-science article that cites a collection of studies, finding such things as for example…

    ❝With the use of wireless devices to record how many people entered the restroom and used the pumps of the soap dispensers, researchers were able to collect data on almost 200,000 restroom trips over a three-month period.

    The found that only 31% of men and 65% of women washed their hands with soap.❞

    Source: Study: Men Wash Their Hands Much Less Often Than Women (And People Lie About Washing Their Hands)

    Sanitizer gel does the job of washing one’s hands with soap: True or False?

    False, though it’s still not a bad option for when soap and water aren’t available or practical. Here’s an educational article about the science of why this is so:

    UCI Health | Soap vs. Hand Sanitizer

    There’s also some consideration of lab results vs real-world results, because while in principle the alcohol gel is very good at killing most bacteria / inactivating most viruses, it can take up to 4 minutes of alcohol gel contact to do so, as in this study with flu viruses:

    Situations Leading to Reduced Effectiveness of Current Hand Hygiene against Infectious Mucus from Influenza Virus-Infected Patients

    In contrast, 20 seconds of handwashing with soap will generally do the job.

    Antibacterial soap is better than other soap: True or False?

    False, because the main way that soap protects us is not in its antibacterial properties (although it does also destroy the surface membrane of some bacteria and for that matter viruses too, killing/inactivating them, respectively), but rather in how it causes pathogens to simply slide off during washing.

    Here’s a study that found that handwashing with soap reduced disease incidence by 50–53%, and…

    ❝Incidence of disease did not differ significantly between households given plain soap compared with those given antibacterial soap.❞

    ~ Dr. Stephen Luby et al.

    Read more: Effect of handwashing on child health: a randomised controlled trial

    Want to wash your hands more than you do?

    There have been many studies into motivating people to wash their hands more (often with education and/or disgust-based shaming), but an effective method you can use for yourself at home is to simply buy more luxurious hand soap, and generally do what you can to make handwashing a more pleasant experience (taking a moment to let the water run warm is another good thing to do if that’s more comfortable for you).

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • The End of Food Allergy – by Dr. Kari Nadeau & Sloan Barnett

    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 don’t usually mention author credentials beyond their occupation/title. However, in this case it bears acknowledging at least the first line of the author bio:

    ❝Kari Nadeau, MD, PhD, is the director of the Sean N. Parker Center for Allergy and Asthma Research at Stanford University and is one of the world’s leading experts on food allergy❞

    We mention this, because there’s a lot of quack medicine out there [in general, but especially] when it comes to things such as food allergies. So let’s be clear up front that Dr. Nadeau is actually a world-class professional at the top of her field.

    This book is, by the way, about true allergies—not intolerances or sensitivities. It does touch on those latter two, but it’s not the main meat of the book.

    In particular, most of the research cited is around peanut allergies, though the usual other common allergens are all discussed too.

    The authors’ writing style is that of a science educator (Dr. Nadeau’s co-author, Sloan Barnett, is lawyer and health journalist). We get a clear explanation of the science from real-world to clinic and back again, and are left with a strong understanding, not just a conclusion.

    The titular “End of Food Allergy” is a bold implicit claim; does the book deliver? Yes, actually.

    The book lays out guidelines for safely avoiding food allergies developing in infants, and yes, really, how to reverse them in adults. But…

    Big caveat:

    The solution for reversing severe food allergies (e.g. “someone nearby touched a peanut three hours ago and now I’m in anaphylactic shock”), drug-assisted oral immunotherapy, takes 6–24 months of weekly several-hour-long clinic visits, relies on having a nearby clinic offering the service, and absolutely 100% cannot be done at home (on pain of probable death).

    Bottom line: it’s by no means a magic bullet, but yes, it does deliver.

    Click here to check out The End of Food Allergy to learn more!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Capsaicin For Weight Loss And Against Inflammation
  • The push for Medicare to cover weight-loss drugs: An explainer

    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 largest U.S. insurer, Medicare, does not cover weight-loss drugs, making it tougher for older people to get access to promising new medications.

    If you cover stories about drug costs in the U.S., it’s important to understand why Medicare’s Part D pharmacy program, which covers people aged 65 and older and people with certain disabilities, doesn’t cover weight-loss drugs today. It’s also important to consider what would happen if Medicare did start covering weight loss drugs. This explainer will give you a brief overview of the issues and then summarize some recent publications the benefits and costs of drugs like semaglutide and tirzepatide.

    First, what are these new and newsy weight loss drugs?

    Semaglutide is a medication used for both the treatment of type 2 diabetes and for long-term weight management in adults with obesity. It debuted in the United States in 2017 as an injectable diabetes drug called Ozempic, manufactured by Novo Nordisk. It’s part of a class of drugs that mimics the action of glucagon, a substance that the human body makes to aid digestion. 

    Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) drugs like semaglutide help prompt the body to release insulin. But they also cause a minor delay in the pace of digestion, helping people feel sated after eating.

    That second effect turned Ozempic into a widely used weight-loss drug, even before the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave its okay for this use. Doctors in the United States can prescribe medicines for uses beyond those approved by the FDA. This is known as off-label use.

    In writing about her own experience in using the medicine to help her shed 40 pounds, Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus in June noted that Novo Nordisk mentioned the potential for weight loss in its “ubiquitous cable ads (‘Oh-oh-oh, Ozempic!’)” 

    The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists has reported shortages of semaglutide due to demand, leaving some people with diabetes struggling to find supply of the medicine.

    Novo Nordisk won Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 2021 to market semaglutide as an injectable weight loss drug under the name Wegovy, but with a different dosing regimen than Ozempic. Rival Eli Lilly first won FDA approval of its similar GLP-1 diabetes drug, tirzepatide, in the United States in 2022 and sells it under the brand name Mounjaro.

    In November of 2023, Eli Lilly won FDA approval to sell tirzepatide as a weight-loss drug, soon-to-be marketed under the brand name Zepbound. The company said it will set a monthly list price for a month’s supply of the drug at $1,059.87, which the company described as 20% discount to the cost of rival Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy. Wegovy has a list price of $1,349.02, according to the Novo Nordisk website. 

    Even when their insurance plans officially cover costs for weight loss drugs, consumers may face barriers in seeking that coverage for these drugs. Commercial health plans have in place prior authorization requirements to try to limit coverage of new weight-loss shots to those who qualify for these treatments. The Wegovy shot, for example, is intended for people whose weight reaches a certain benchmark for obesity or who are overweight and have a condition related to excess weight, such as diabetes, high blood pressure or high cholesterol.

    State Medicaid programs, meanwhile, have taken approaches that vary by state. For example, the most populous U.S. state, California, provides some coverage to new weight-loss injections through its Medicaid program, but many others, including Texas, the No. 2 state in terms of population,  do not, according to an online tool that Novo Nordisk created to help people check on coverage. 

    Medicare does cover semaglutide for treatment of diabetes, and the insurer reported $3 billion in 2021 spending on the drug under Medicare Part D. Congress last year gave Medicare new tools that might help it try to lower the cost of semaglutide.

    Medicare is in the midst of implementing new authority it gained through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 to negotiate with companies about the cost of certain medicines.

    This legislation gave Medicare, for the first time, tools to directly negotiate with pharmaceutical companies on the cost of some medicines. Congress tailored this program to spare drug makers from negotiations for the first few years they put new medicines on the market, allowing them to recoup investment in these products.

    Why doesn’t Medicare cover weight-loss drugs?

    Congress created the Medicare Part D pharmacy program in 2003 to address a gap in coverage that had existed since the creation of Medicare in 1965. The program long covered the costs of drugs administered by doctors and those given in hospitals, but not the kinds of medicines people took on their own, like Wegovy shots.

    In 2003, there seemed to be good reasons to leave weight-loss drugs out of the benefit, write Inmaculada Hernandez of the University of California, San Diego, and coauthors in their September 2023 editorial in the Journal of General Internal Medicine, “Medicare Part D Coverage of Anti-obesity Medications: a Call for Forward-Looking Policy Reform.”

    When members of Congress worked on the Part D benefit, the drugs available on the market were known to have limited effectiveness and unpleasant side effects. And those members of Congress were aware of how a drug combination called fen-phen, once touted as a weight-loss miracle medicine, turned out in rare cases to cause fatal heart valve damage. In 1997, American Home Products, which later became Wyeth, took its fen-phen product off the market.

    But today GLP-1 drugs like semaglutide appear to offer significant benefits, with far less risk and milder side effects, write Hernandez and coauthors.

    “Other than budget impact, it is hard to find a reason to justify the historical statutory exclusion of weight loss drugs from coverage other than the stigma of the condition itself,” they write.

    What’s happening today that could lead Medicare to start covering weight loss drugs?

    Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly both have hired lobbyists to try to persuade lawmakers to reverse this stance, according to Senate records.  Pro tip: You can use the Senate’s lobbying disclosure database to track this and other issues. Type in the name of the company of interest and then read through the forms. 

    Some members of Congress already have been trying for years to strike the Medicare Part D restriction on weight-loss drugs. Over the past decade, senators Tom Carper (D-DE) and Bill Cassidy, MD, (R-LA) have repeatedly introduced bills that would do that. They introduced the current version, the Treat and Reduce Obesity Act of 2023, in July. It has the support of 10 other Republican senators and seven Democratic ones, as of Dec. 19. The companion House measure has the support of 41 Democrats and 23 Republicans in that chamber, which has 435 seats.

    The influential nonprofit Institute for Clinical and Economic Review conducts in-depth analyses of drugs and medical treatments in the United States. ICER last year recommended passage of a law allowing Medicare Part D to cover weight-loss medications. ICER also called for broader coverage of weight-loss medications in state Medicaid programs. Insurers, including Medicare, consider ICER’s analyses in deciding whether to cover treatments.

    While offering these calls for broader coverage as part of a broad assessment of obesity management, ICER also urged companies to reduce the costs of weight-loss medicines.

    Most people with obesity can’t achieve sustained weight loss through diet and exercise alone, said David Rind, ICER’s chief medical officer in an August 2022 statement. The development of newer obesity treatments represents the achievement of a long-standing goal of medical research, but prices of these new products must be reasonable to allow broad access to them, he noted.

    After an extensive process of reviewing studies, engaging in public debate and processing feedback, ICER concluded that semaglutide for weight loss should have an annual cost of $7,500 to $9,800, based on its potential benefits.

    What does academic research say about the benefits and the potential costs of new obesity drugs?

    Here are a couple of studies to consider when covering the ongoing story of weight-loss drug costs:

    Medicare Part D Coverage of Antiobesity Medications — Challenges and Uncertainty Ahead
    Khrysta Baig, Stacie B. Dusetzina, David D. Kim and Ashley A. Leech. New England Journal of Medicine, March 2023

    In this Perspective piece, researchers at Vanderbilt University create a series of estimates about how much Medicare may have to spend annually on weight-loss drugs if the program eventually covers these drugs.

    These include a high estimate — $268 billion — based on an extreme calculation, one reflecting the potential cost if virtually all people on Medicare who have obesity used semaglutide. In an announcement of the study on the Vanderbilt website, lead author Khrysta Baig described this as a “purely hypothetical scenario,” but one that “ underscores that at current prices, these medications cannot be the only way – or even the main way – we address obesity as a society.”

    In a more conservative estimate, Bhaig and coauthors consider a case where only about 10% of those eligible for obesity treatment opted for semaglutide, which would result in $27 billion in new costs.

     (To put these numbers in context, consider that the federal government now spends about $145 billion a year on the entire Part D program.)

    It’s likely that all people enrolled in Part D would have to pay higher monthly premiums if Medicare were to cover weight-loss injections, Baig and coauthors write.

    Baig and coauthors note that the recent ICER review of weight-loss drugs focused on patients younger than the Medicare population. The balance of benefits and risks associated with weight-loss drugs may be less favorable for older people than the younger ones, making it necessary to study further how these drugs work for people aged 65 and older, they write. For example, research has shown older adults with a high blood sugar level called prediabetes are less likely to develop diabetes than younger adults with this condition.

    SELECTing Treatments for Cardiovascular Disease — Obesity in the Spotlight
    Amit Khera and Tiffany M. Powell-Wiley. New England Journal of Medicine, Dec. 14, 2023
    Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Without Diabetes
    A Michael Lincoff, et. al. New England Journal of Medicine, Dec. 14, 2023.

    An editorial accompanies the publication of a semaglutide study that drew a lot of coverage in the media. The Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Obesity without Diabetes (SELECT) study was a randomized controlled trial, conducted by Novo Nordisk, which looked at rates of cardiovascular events in people who already had known heart risk and were overweight, but not diabetic. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a once-weekly dose of semaglutide (Wegovy) or a placebo.

    In the study, the authors report that of the 8,803 patients who took Wegovy in the trial, 569 (6.5%)  had a heart attack or another cardiovascular event, compared with 701 of the 8801 patients (8.0%) in the placebo group. The mean duration of exposure to semaglutide or placebo in the study was 34.2 months.

    The study also reports a mean 9.4% reduction in body weight among patients taking Wegovy, while those on placebo had a mean loss of 0.88%.

    The findings suggest Wegovy may be a welcome new treatment option for many people who have coronary disease and are overweight, but are not diabetic, write Khera and Powell-Wiley in their editorial. 

    But the duo, both of whom focus on disease prevention in their research, also call for more focus on the prevention and root causes of obesity and on the use of proven treatment approaches other than medication.

    “Socioeconomic, environmental, and psychosocial factors contribute to incident obesity, and therefore equity-focused obesity prevention and treatment efforts must target multiple levels,” they write. “For instance, public policy targeting built environment features that limit healthy behaviors can be coupled with clinical care interventions that provide for social needs and access to treatments like semaglutide.”

    Additional information:

    The nonprofit KFF, formerly known as the Kaiser Family Foundation, has done recent reports looking at the potential for expanded coverage of semaglutide:

    Medicaid Utilization and Spending on New Drugs Used for Weight Loss, Sept. 8, 2023

    What Could New Anti-Obesity Drugs Mean for Medicare? May 18, 2023

    And KFF held an Aug. 4 webinar, New Weight Loss Drugs Raise Issues of Coverage, Cost, Access and Equity, for which the recording is posted here.

    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:

  • Is ADHD Being Over-Diagnosed For Cash?

    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 ADHD Being Systematically Overdiagnosed?

    The BBC’s investigative “Panorama” program all so recently did a documentary in which one of their journalists—who does not have ADHD—went to three private clinics and got an ADHD diagnosis from each of them:

    So… Is it really a case of show up, pay up, and get a shiny new diagnosis?

    The BBC Panorama producers cherry-picked 3 private providers, and during those clinical assessments, their journalist provided answers that would certainly lead to a diagnosis.

    This was contrasted against a three-hour assessment with an NHS psychiatrist—something that rarely happens in the NHS. Which prompts the question…

    How did he walk into a 3-hour psychiatrist assessment, when most people have to wait in long waiting lists for a much more cursory appointment first with assorted gatekeepers, before going on another long waiting list, for an also-much-shorter appointment with a psychiatrist?

    That would be because the NHS psychiatrist was given advance notification that this was part of an investigation and would be filmed (the private clinics were not gifted the same transparency)

    So, maybe just a tad unequal treatment!

    In case you’re wondering, here’s what that very NHS psychiatrist had to say on the topic:

    Is it really too easy to be diagnosed with ADHD?

    (we’ll give you a hint—remember Betteridge’s Law!)

    ❝Since the documentary aired, I have heard from people concerned that GPs could now be more likely to question legitimate diagnoses.

    But as an NHS psychiatrist it is clear to me that the root of this issue is not overdiagnosis.

    Instead, we are facing the combined challenges of remedying decades of underdiagnosis and NHS services that were set up when there was little awareness of ADHD.❞

    ~ Dr. Mike Smith, Psychiatrist

    The ADHD foundation, meanwhile, has issued its own response, saying:

    ❝We are disappointed that BBC Panorama has opted to broadcast a poorly researched, sensationalist piece of television journalism.❞

    Click here to read their full statement!

    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:

  • L-Theanine: What’s The Tea?

    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.

    L-Theanine: What’s The Tea?

    We’ve touched previously on l-theanine, when this newsletter was new, and we had only a few hundred subscribers and the carefully organized format wasn’t yet what it is today.

    So now it’s time to give this potent dietary compound / nutritional supplement the “Monday Research Review” treatment…

    What is it?

    L-theanine is an amino acid found in tea. The human body can’t produce it, and/but it’s not essential for humans. It does have a lot of benefits, though. See for example:

    L-Theanine as a Functional Food Additive: Its Role in Disease Prevention and Health Promotion

    How does it work?

    L-theanine works by moderating and modulating the brain’s neurotransmitters.

    This sounds fancy, but basically it means: it doesn’t actually add anything in the manner of a drug, but it changes how we use what we have naturally.

    What does it do? Read on…

    It increases mental focus

    It has been believed that l-theanine requires the presence of caffeine to achieve this (i.e., it’s a combination-only effect). For example:

    The combination of L-theanine and caffeine improves cognitive performance and increases subjective alertness

    But as it turns out, when a group of researchers actually checked… This isn’t true, as Foxe et al. write:

    ❝We asked whether either compound alone, or both in combination, would affect performance of the task in terms of reduced error rates over time, and whether changes in alpha-band activity would show a relationship to such changes in performance. When treated with placebo, participants showed a rise in error rates, a pattern that is commonly observed with increasing time-on-task, whereas after caffeine and theanine ingestion, error rates were significantly reduced. The combined treatment did not confer any additional benefits over either compound alone, suggesting that the individual compounds may confer maximal benefits at the dosages employed❞

    See: Assessing the effects of caffeine and theanine on the maintenance of vigilance during a sustained attention task

    It promotes a calmly wakeful feeling of serenity

    Those are not words typically found in biopharmaceutical literature, but they’re useful here to convey:

    • L-theanine promotes relaxation without causing drowsiness
    • L-theanine promotes mental alertness without being a stimulant

    Here is where l-theanine really stands out from caffeine. If both substances promote mental focus, but one of them does it by making us “wired” and the other does it while simultaneously promoting calm, it makes the choice between them clearer!

    Read more: L-theanine, a natural constituent in tea, and its effect on mental state

    It relieves stress and anxiety

    Building on from the above, but there’s more: l-theanine relieves stress and anxiety in people experiencing stressful situations, without any known harmful side effects… This is something that sets it apart from a lot of anxiolytic (antianxiety) drugs!

    Here’s what a big systematic review of clinical trials had to say:

    Theanine consumption, stress and anxiety in human clinical trials: A systematic review

    L-theanine has other benefits too

    We’ve talked about some of the most popular benefits of l-theanine, and we can’t make this newsletter too long, but research also suggests that it…

    If you’re interested in this topic, we recommend also reading our previous article on l-theanine—pardon that we hadn’t really nailed down our style yet—but there’s a bunch of useful information about how l-theanine makes caffeine “better” in terms of benefits. We also talk dosage, and reference some other studies we didn’t have room to include today!

    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: