Sarah Raven’s Garden Cookbook – by Sarah Raven

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.

Note: the US Amazon site currently (incorrectly) lists the author as “Jonathan Buckley”. The Canadian, British, and Australian sites all list the author correctly as Sarah Raven, and some (correctly) credit Jonathan Buckley as the photographer she used.

First, what it’s not: a gardening book. Beyond a few helpful tips, pointers, and “plant here, harvest here” instructions, this book assumes you are already capable of growing your own vegetables.

She does assume you are in a temperate climate, so if you are not, this might not be the book for you. Although! The recipes are still great; it’s just you’d have to shop for the ingredients and they probably won’t be fresh local produce for the exact same reason that you didn’t grow them.

If you are in a temperate climate though, this will take you through the year of seasonal produce (if you’re in a temperate climate but it’s in for example Australia, you’ll need to make a six-month adjustment for being in the S. Hemisphere), with many recipes to use not just one ingredient from your garden at a time, but a whole assortment, consistent with the season.

About the recipes: they (which are 450 in number) are (as you might imagine) very plant-forward, but they’re generally not vegan and often not vegetarian. So, don’t expect that you’ll produce everything yourself—just most of the ingredients!

Bottom line: if you like cooking, and are excited by the idea of growing your own food but are unsure how regularly you can integrate that, this book will keep you happily busy for a very long time.

Click here to check out Sarah Raven’s Garden Cookbook, and level-up your home cooking!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Fermenting Everything – by Andy Hamilton
  • You’re Not Forgetful: How To Remember Everything
    Memory isn’t just about retention; it’s an active process. Elizabeth Filips shares strategies for improving recall and building a robust ‘memory skeleton’.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Cottage cheese is back and all over TikTok. Two dietitians explain why social media’s obsessed

    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.

    You might remember cottage cheese from your childhood. Back then, it was considered “diet food”. You ate it out of the tub, with celery or spread it on crackers for a low-calorie snack. Then cottage cheese went out of fashion.

    But cottage cheese is having a resurgence. In recent months, Google searches for “cottage cheese” have risen to the highest levels since 2004.

    Social media influencers have been promoting its benefits on TikTok and Instagram with hashtags such as #cottagecheese, #cottagecheeseforlife, and #cottagecheeserecipe. Sales of cottage cheese around the world have skyrocketed.

    Let’s see why cottage cheese is having such a moment.

    Karolina Kaboompics/Pexels

    What is cottage cheese?

    Cottage cheese is a fresh dairy cheese product with a mild flavour and a slightly tangy taste. It is made by curdling cow’s milk, then draining the whey, leaving behind the curds. These curds are usually small and lumpy, and the texture can vary from creamy to dry, depending on the amount of whey left in the cheese.

    The term “cottage cheese” is said to have originated because the cheese was generally made in cottage-type houses from leftover milk, after making butter.

    Cottage cheese is cheap, costing about A$12 per kilogram in the supermarket, similar to ricotta cheese.

    It’s also surprisingly simple to make at home using freely available recipes. All you need is milk, salt and a splash of vinegar.

    We’re using cottage cheese in new ways

    It’s difficult to know what started the latest cottage cheese trend. But the creativity of social media means people are sharing alternative ways to use cottage cheese, changing people’s views from it being boring and lacking flavour to it being versatile and healthy.

    People are spreading cottage cheese on toast and using it to make dishes such as porridge, dips, salads, bread and flatbreads. They’re using it in cakes and scones, and in desserts such as mousse and ice cream.

    Is cottage cheese healthy?

    Compared with other cheeses, cottage cheese is low in fat and therefore energy (kilojoules or kJ). This makes it a smart choice for people looking to cut down on their daily energy intake.

    For example, 100 grams of cottage cheese contains about 556kJ. The same amount of cheddar contains 1,254kJ and parmesan 1,565kJ.

    Many cheeses are rich in protein but they often contain higher amounts of kilojoules due to their fat content. But cottage cheese has substantial amounts of protein with fewer kilojoules.

    This makes cottage cheese an ideal option for people aiming to maximise their protein intake without eating large amounts of kilojoules.

    Some 100g of cottage cheese provides 17g protein. This is about the same found in three eggs, 60g chicken breast or 320 millilitres (about 300g) full-fat yoghurt.

    Woman taking picture of pancakes with smartphone
    People are sharing images of their cottage cheese creations on TikTok and Instagram. New Africa/Shutterstock

    Cottage cheese also contains high levels of vitamin B12 (important for healthy brain function), riboflavin (supports healthy skin and eyes), phosphorus (helps build strong bones and teeth) and folate (essential for cell growth).

    However, cottage cheese is lower in calcium compared with other cheeses. It contains just 89 milligrams per 100g. This compares with parmesan (948mg), haloumi (620mg) and ricotta (170mg).

    You’ve convinced me. How can I use cottage cheese?

    Beyond its excellent nutrition profile, the resurgence of cottage cheese is enabling people to experiment in the kitchen. Its neutral flavour and varied textures – ranging from smooth to chunky – makes it suitable for a range of dishes, from sweet to savoury.

    TikTok and Instagram have some great recipes. You could start with an old faithful recipe of celery and cottage cheese, and work your way towards new options such as cottage cheese ice cream.

    The healthiest recipes will be those that combine cottage cheese with wholefoods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts and seeds, and lean protein sources.

    For instance, you can make a cottage cheese wrap then fill it with vegetables and a lean source of protein (such as chicken or fish).

    Other combinations include cottage cheese salad dressings, vegetable dips and egg salads.

    Cottage cheese’s rise in popularity is well deserved. Including more cottage cheese in your diet is a smart choice for getting a high dose of protein without adding processed ingredients or too much energy. Embrace the trend and get creative in the kitchen.

    Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland and Emily Burch, Accredited Practising Dietitian and Lecturer, Southern Cross University

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • Oscar contender Poor Things is a film about disability. Why won’t more people say so?

    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.

    Readers are advised this article includes an offensive and outdated disability term in a quote from the film.

    Poor Things is a spectacular film that has garnered critical praise, scooped up awards and has 11 Oscar nominations. That might be the problem. Audiences become absorbed in another world, so much so our usual frames of reference disappear.

    There has been much discussion about the film’s feminist potential (or betrayal). What’s not being talked about in mainstream reviews is disability. This seems strange when two of the film’s main characters are disabled.

    Set in a fantasy version of Victorian London, unorthodox Dr Godwin Baxter (William Dafoe) finds the just-dead body of a heavily pregnant woman in the Thames River. In keeping with his menagerie of hybrid animals, Godwin removes the unborn baby’s brain and puts it into the skull of its mother, who becomes Bella Baxter (Emma Stone).

    Is Bella really disabled?

    Stone has been praised for her ability to embody a small child who rapidly matures into a hypersexual person – one who has not had time to absorb the restrictive rules of gender or patriarchy.

    But we also see a woman using her behaviour to express herself because she has complex communication barriers. We see a woman who is highly sensitive and responsive to the sensory world around her. A woman moving through and seeing the world differently – just like the fish-eye lens used in many scenes.

    Women like this exist and they have historically been confined, studied and monitored like Bella. When medical student Max McCandless (Ramy Youssef) first meets Bella, he offensively exclaims “what a very pretty retard!” before being told the truth and promptly declared her future husband.

    Even if Bella is not coded as disabled through her movements, speech and behaviour, her onscreen creator and guardian is. Godwin Baxter has facial differences and other impairments which require assistive technology.

    So ignoring disability as a theme of the film seems determined and overt. The absurd humour for which the film is being lauded is often at Bella’s “primitive”, “monstrous” or “damaged” actions: words which aren’t usually used to describe children, but have been used to describe disabled people throughout history.

    In reviews, Bella’s walk and speech are compared to characters like the Scarecrow in The Wizard of Oz, rather than a disabled woman. So why the resistance?

    Freak shows and displays

    Disability studies scholar Rosemarie Gardland-Thomson writes “the history of disabled people in the Western world is in part the history of being on display”.

    In the 19th century, when Poor Things is set, “freak shows” featuring disabled people, Indigenous people and others with bodily differences were extremely popular.

    Doctors used freak shows to find specimens – like Joseph Merrick (also known as the Elephant Man and later depicted on screen) who was used for entertainment before he was exhibited in lecture halls. In the mid-1800s, as medicine became a profession, observing the disabled body shifted from a public spectacle to a private medical gaze that labelled disability as “sick” and pathologised it.

    Poor Things doesn’t just circle around these discourses of disability. Bella’s body is a medical experiment, kept locked away for the private viewing of male doctors who take notes about her every move in small pads. While there is something glorious, intimate and familiar about Bella’s discovery of her own sexual pleasure, she immediately recognises it as worth recording in the third person:

    I’ve discovered something that I must share […] Bella discover happy when she want!

    The film’s narrative arc ends with Bella herself training to be a doctor but one whose more visible disabilities have disappeared.

    Framing charity and sexual abuse

    Even the film’s title is an expression often used to describe disabled people. The charity model of disability sees disabled people as needing pity and support from others. Financial poverty is briefly shown at a far-off port in the film and Bella initially becomes a sex worker in Paris for money – but her more pressing concern is sexual pleasure.

    Disabled women’s sexuality is usually seen as something that needs to be controlled. It is frequently assumed disabled women are either hypersexual or de-gendered and sexually innocent.

    In the real world disabled people experience much higher rates of abuse, including sexual assault, than others. Last year’s Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability found women with disability are nearly twice as likely as women without disability to have been assaulted. Almost a third of women with disability have experienced sexual assault by the age of 15. Bella’s hypersexual curiosity appears to give her some layer of protection – but that portrayal denies the lived experience of many.

    Watch but don’t ignore

    Poor Things is a stunning film. But ignoring disability in the production ignores the ways in which the representation of disabled bodies play into deep and historical stereotypes about disabled people.

    These representations continue to shape lives. The Conversation

    Louisa Smith, Senior lecturer, Deakin University; Gemma Digby, Lecturer – Health & Social Development, Deakin University, and Shane Clifton, Associate Professor of Practice, School of Health Sciences and the Centre for Disability Research and Policy, University of Sydney

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • Celery vs Lettuce – 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 celery to lettuce, we picked the lettuce.

    Why?

    Let us consider the macros first: lettuce has 2x the protein, but of course the numbers are tiny and probably nobody is eating this for the protein. Both of these salad items are roughly comparable in terms of carbs and fiber, being both mostly water with just enough other stuff to hold their shape. Nominally this section is a slight win for lettuce on account of the protein, but in realistic practical terms, it’s a tie.

    In terms of vitamins, celery has more of vitamins B5 and E, while lettuce has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B6, B7, B9, C, K, and choline. An easy win for lettuce here.

    In the category of minerals, celery has more calcium, copper, and potassium, while lettuce has more iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc. So, a fair win for lettuce.

    Adding up the sections makes for an overall win for lettuce; of course, enjoy both, though!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Why You’re Probably Not Getting Enough Fiber (And How To Fix It)

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Fermenting Everything – by Andy Hamilton
  • Spirulina vs Nori – 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 spirulina to nori, we picked the nori.

    Why?

    In the battle of the seaweeds, if spirulina is a superfood (and it is), then nori is a super-dooperfood. So today is one of those “a very nutritious food making another very nutritious food look bad by standing next to it” days. With that in mind…

    In terms of macros, they’re close to identical. They’re both mostly water with protein, carbs, and fiber. Technically nori is higher in carbs, but we’re talking about 2.5g/100g difference.

    In the category of vitamins, spirulina has more vitamin B1, while nori has a lot more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, C, E, K, and choline.

    When it comes to minerals, it’s a little closer but still a clear win for nori; spirulina has more copper, iron, and magnesium, while nori has more calcium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc.

    Want to try some nori? Here’s an example product on Amazon 😎

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    21% Stronger Bones in a Year at 62? Yes, It’s Possible (No Calcium Supplements Needed!) ← nori was an important part of the diet enjoyed here

    Take care!

    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:

  • Digital Minimalism – by Dr. Cal Newport

    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.

    There are a lot of books that advise “Unplug once in a while, and go outside”. But it doesn’t really take a book to convey that, does it? And it just leaves all the digital catching-up once we get back. Surely there must be a better way?

    Rather than relying on a “digital detox”, Dr. Newport offers principles to apply to our digital lives, that allow us to reap the benefits of modern information technology without being obeisant to it.

    The book’s greatest strength lies in that; having clear guidelines that can be applied to cut out the extra weight of digital media that has simply snuck in because of The Almighty Algorithm—and even tips on how to engage more mindfully with that if we still want to, for example using social media only in a web browser rather than on our phones, so that we can ringfence the time for it rather than having it spill into every spare moment.

    In the category of criticism, the book sometimes lacks a little awareness when it comes to assumptions about the reader and the reader’s social circles; that (for example) nobody has any disabilities and everyone lives in the same town. But for most people most of the time, the advices will stand, and the exceptions can be managed by the reader neatly enough.

    Stylistically, the book is not very minimalist, but this is not inconsistent with the advice of the book, if you’re curling up in the armchair with a physical copy, or a single-purpose ereader device.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to streamline your use of digital media, but don’t want to lose out on the value it brings you, this book provides an excellent template

    Click here to check out Digital Minimalism, and choose focused life in a noisy world!

    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:

  • 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: