Soap vs Sanitizer – 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 soap to sanitizer, we picked the soap.

Why?

Both are good at killing bacteria / inactivating viruses, but there are several things that set them apart:

  • Soap doesn’t just kill them; it slides them off and away down the drain. That means that any it failed to kill are also off and down the drain, not still on your hands. This is assuming good handwashing technique, of course!
  • Sanitizer gel kills them, but can take up to 4 minutes of contact to do so. Given that people find 20 seconds of handwashing laborious, 240 seconds of sanitizer gel use seems too much to hope for.

Both can be dehydrating for the hands; both can have ingredients added to try to mitigate that.

We recommend a good (separate) moisturizer in either case, but the point is, the dehydration factor doesn’t swing it far either way.

So, we’ll go with the one that gets rid of the germs the most quickly: the soap

10almonds tip: splash out on the extra-nice hand-soaps for your home—this will make you and others more likely to wash your hands more often! Sometimes, making something a more pleasant experience makes all the difference.

Want to know more?

Check out:

Mythbusting Handwashing

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Kumquat vs Persimmon – Which is Healthier?
  • Make Your Coffee Heart-Healthier!
    Health-Hack Your Coffee: Tips for a Healthier Cup. Not all coffees are equal. Filter coffee is recommended to reduce cafestol levels. Consider adding l-theanine for cognitive benefits. Enjoy!

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Thinking of trying a new diet? 4 questions to ask yourself before you do

    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 live in a society that glorifies dieting, with around 42% of adults globally having tried to lose weight. Messages about dieting and weight loss are amplified on social media, with a never-ending cycle of weight loss fads and diet trends.

    Amid often conflicting messages and misinformation, if you’re looking for diet advice online, it’s easy to become confused and overwhelmed.

    So before diving into the latest weight loss trend or extreme diet, consider these four questions to help you make a more informed decision.

    PeopleImages.com – Yuri A/Shutterstock

    1. Is the diet realistic?

    Have you considered the financial cost of maintaining the diet or lifestyle, and the time and resources that would be required? For example, do you need to purchase specific products, supplements, or follow a rigid meal plan?

    If the diet is coming from someone who is trying to sell you something – such as a particular weight-loss product you need in order to follow the diet – this could be a particular red flag.

    Many extreme diet recommendations come from a place of privilege and overlook food access, affordability, cooking skills, where you live, or even your culture and ethics.

    If the diet has these sorts of issues it can lead to frustration, stress, stigmatisation and feelings of failure for the person trying to adhere to the diet. But the problem may be with the diet itself – not with you.

    Man looks at flour at the supermarket
    Many diets promoted online will be expensive, or require a lot of time and resources. artem evdokimov/Shutterstock

    2. Is there evidence to support this diet?

    Self-proclaimed “experts” online will often make claims focused on specific groups, known as target populations. This might be 30- to 50-year-old men with diabetes, for example.

    In some cases, evidence for claims made may come from animal studies, which might not be applicable to humans at all.

    So be aware that if research findings are for a group that doesn’t match your profile, then the results might not be relevant to you.

    It takes time and a lot of high-quality studies to tell us a “diet” is safe and effective, not just one study. Ask yourself, is it supported by multiple studies in humans? Be critical and question the claims before you accept them.

    For accurate information look for government websites, or ask your GP or dietitian.

    3. How will this diet affect my life?

    Food is much more than calories and nutrients. It plays many roles in our lives, and likewise diets can influence our lives in ways we often overlook.

    Socially and culturally, food can be a point of connection and celebration. It can be a source of enjoyment, a source of comfort, or even a way to explore new parts of the world.

    So when you’re considering a new diet, think about how it might affect meaningful moments for you. For example, if you’re going travelling, will your diet influence the food choices you make? Will you feel that you can’t sample the local cuisine? Or would you be deterred from going out for dinner with friends because of their choice of restaurant?

    4. Will this diet make me feel guilty or affect my mental health?

    What is your favourite meal? Does this diet “allow” you to eat it? Imagine visiting your mum who has prepared your favourite childhood meal. How will the diet affect your feelings about these special foods? Will it cause you to feel stressed or guilty about enjoying a birthday cake or a meal cooked by a loved one?

    Studies have shown that dieting can negatively impact our mental health, and skipping meals can increase symptoms of depression and anxiety.

    Many diets fail to consider the psychological aspects of eating, even though our mental health is just as important as physical health. Eating should not make you feel stressed, anxious, or guilty.

    So before starting another diet, consider how it might affect your mental health.

    Moving away from a dieting mindset

    We’re frequently told that weight loss is the path to better health. Whereas, we can prioritise our health without focusing on our weight. Constant messages about the need to lose weight can also be harmful to mental health, and not necessarily helpful for physical health.

    Our research has found eating in a way that prioritises health over weight loss is linked to a range of positive outcomes for our health and wellbeing. These include a more positive relationship with food, and less guilt and stress.

    Our research also indicates mindful and intuitive eating practices – which focus on internal cues, body trust, and being present and mindful when eating – are related to lower levels of depression and stress, and greater body image and self-compassion.

    But like anything, it takes practice and time to build a positive relationship with food. Be kind to yourself, seek out weight-inclusive health-care professionals, and the changes will come. Finally, remember you’re allowed to find joy in food.

    Melissa Eaton, Accredited Practising Dietitian; PhD Candidate, University of Wollongong; Verena Vaiciurgis, Accredited Practising Dietitian; PhD Candidate, University of Wollongong, and Yasmine Probst, Associate Professor, School of Medical, Indigenous and Health Sciences, University of Wollongong

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

    Share This Post

  • Red Bell Peppers vs Tomatoes – 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 red bell peppers to tomatoes, we picked the peppers.

    Why?

    In terms of macronutrients, these two fruits-that-get-used-as-vegetables are similar in most respects; they’re mostly water, negligible protein and fat, similar amounts of carbs, even a similar carb breakdown (mostly fructose and glucose). One thing that does set them apart is that peppers* have about 2x the fiber, which difference results in peppers having the lower Glycemic Index—though tomatoes are quite low in GI too.

    *for brevity we’re just going to write “peppers”, but we are still talking about sweet red bell peppers throughout. This is important, as different color peppers have different nutrient profiles.

    In the category of vitamins, peppers have much more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, C, and E. In contrast, tomatoes have more vitamin K. An easy win for peppers.

    When it comes to minerals, the margins are narrower, but peppers have more iron, zinc, and selenium, while tomatoes have more calcium and copper. They’re approximately equal on other minerals they both contain, making this category a slight (3:2) win for peppers.

    As for phytochemical benefits, both are good sources of lycopene (both better when cooked) and other carotenes (for example lutein), and both have an array of assorted flavonoids.

    All in all, a win for peppers, but both are great!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Behind Book Recommendations

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

    It’s Q&A Day!

    Each Thursday, we respond to subscriber questions and requests! If it’s something small, we’ll answer it directly; if it’s something bigger, we’ll do a main feature in a follow-up day instead!

    So, no question/request to big or small; they’ll just get sorted accordingly

    Remember, you can always hit reply to any of our emails, or use the handy feedback widget at the bottom. We always look forward to hearing from you!

    Q: What’s the process behind the books you recommend? You seem to have a limitless stream of recommendations

    We do our best!

    The books we recommend are books that…

    • are on Amazon—it makes things tidy, consistent, and accessible. And if you end up buying one of the books, we get a small affiliate commission*.
    • we have read—we would say “obviously”, but you might be surprised how many people write about books without having read them.
    • pertain in at least large part to health and/or productivity.
    • are written by humans—bookish people (and especially Kindle Unlimited users) may have noticed lately that there are a lot of low quality AI-written books flooding the market, sometimes with paid 5-star reviews to bolster them. It’s frustrating, but we can tell the difference and screen those out.
    • are of a certain level of quality. They don’t have to be “top 5 desert-island books”, because well, there’s one every day and the days keep coming. But they do have to genuinely deliver the value that we describe, and merit a sincere recommendation.
    • are varied—we try to not give a run of “samey” books one after another. We will sometimes review a book that covers a topic another previously-reviewed book did, but it must have something about it that makes it different. It may be a different angle or a different writing style, but it needs something to set it apart.

    *this is from Amazon and isn’t product-specific, so this is not affecting our choice of what books to review at all—just that they will be books that are available on Amazon.

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Kumquat vs Persimmon – Which is Healthier?
  • Cows’ Milk, Bird Flu, & You

    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 it comes to dairy products, generally speaking, fermented ones (such as most cheeses and yogurts) are considered healthy in moderation, and unfermented ones have their pros and cons that can be argued and quibbled “until the cows come home”. We gave a broad overview, here:

    Is Dairy Scary?

    Furthermore, you may recall that there’s some controversy/dissent about when human babies can have cows’ milk:

    When can my baby drink cow’s milk? It’s sooner than you think

    So, what about bird flu now?

    Earlier this year, the information from the dairy industry was that it was nothing to be worried about for the time being:

    Bird Flu Is Bad for Poultry and Dairy Cows. It’s Not a Dire Threat for Most of Us — Yet.

    More recently, the latest science has found:

    ❝We found a first-order decay rate constant of −2.05 day–1 equivalent to a T99 of 2.3 days. Viral RNA remained detectable for at least 57 days with no degradation. Pasteurization (63 °C for 30 min) reduced infectious virus to undetectable levels and reduced viral RNA concentrations, but reduction was less than 1 log10.

    The prolonged persistence of viral RNA in both raw and pasteurized milk has implications for food safety assessments and environmental surveillance❞

    You can find the study here:

    Infectivity and Persistence of Influenza A Virus in Raw Milk

    In short: raw milk keeps the infectious virus; pasteurization appears to render it uninfectious, though viral RNA remains present.

    This is relevant, because of the bird flu virus being found in milk:

    World Health Organization | H5N1 strain of bird flu found in milk

    To this end, a moratorium has been placed on the sale of raw milk, first by the California Dept of Public Health (following an outbreak in California):

    California halts sales of raw milk due to bird flu virus contamination

    And then, functionally, by the USDA, though rather than an outright ban, it’s requiring testing for the virus:

    USDA orders testing of milk supply for presence of bird flu virus

    So, is pasteurized milk safe?

    The official answer to this, per the FDA, is… Honestly, a lot of hand-wringing and shrugging. What we do know is:

    • the bird flu virus has been found in pasteurized milk too
    • the test for this is very sensitive, and has the extra strength/weakness that viral fragments will flag it as a positive
    • it is assumed that the virus was inactivated by the pasteurization process
    • it could, however, have been the entire virus, the test simply does not tell us which

    In the FDA’s own words:

    ❝The pasteurization process has served public health well for more than 100 years. Even if the virus is detected in raw milk, pasteurization is generally expected to eliminate pathogens to a level that does not pose a risk to consumer health❞

    So, there we have it: the FDA does not have a reassurance exactly, but it does have a general expectation.

    Source: US Officials: Bird flu viral fragments found in pasteurized milk

    Want to know more?

    You might like this mythbusting edition we did a little while back:

    Pasteurization: What It Does And Doesn’t Do ← this is about its effect on risks and nutrients

    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:

  • Blue Cheese vs Brunost – 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 blue cheese to brunost, we picked the brunost.

    Why?

    First, for the unfamiliar, as brunost isn’t necessarily as popular as blue cheese in N. America where most of our readers are:

    Brunost, literally “brown cheese” is a traditional Norwegian affair made from aggressively boiling milk, cream, and whey in an iron cauldron. Whereas the blue in blue cheese comes from mold, the brown in brown cheese comes from caramelizing the milk sugars in the cauldron. When we say “cauldron”, yes, there is nowadays mass-produced brunost that is no longer made in something that could be mistaken for a witch’s brew, but the use of cast iron is actually important to the process, and has been the subject of regulatory controversy in Norway; first the cast iron was abandoned, then because that changed the cheese they fortified the product with added iron supplementation, then that was banned, then they reversed it because it affected iron levels in the general population. Nowadays, it is usually made with iron, one way or another.

    Ok, so let’s see how they stack up against each other:

    In terms of macronutrients, the two cheeses are comparable in fat, but brunost has more carbs—because whereas bacteria (and to a lesser extent, the mold) ate nearly all the carbs in the blue cheese, the caramelization of the milk sugars in brunost meant the result stayed higher in carbs. Both are considered “low GI” foods, but this category is still at least a moderate win for blue cheese.

    When it comes to vitamins, brunost is higher in vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, and B12, while blue cheese is higher in vitamin B9. In other words, a clear and easy win for brunost.

    In the category of minerals, brunost has more copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and potassium. Meanwhile, blue cheese contains more zinc, although we can also mention that blue cheese has about 2x the sodium, which is generally not considered a benefit. The two cheeses are about equal in calcium and selenium. Adding these up makes for another clear and easy win for brunost.

    In short, unless you are strongly avoiding [even low-GI foods’] carbs for some reason, brunost wins the day by virtue of its overwhelmingly better vitamin and mineral content.

    Still, like most fermented dairy products, both cheeses can be enjoyed in moderation as part of a healthy diet (assuming you don’t have an allergy/intolerance).

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Is Dairy Scary?

    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:

  • Kava vs Anxiety

    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.

    Kava, sometimes also called “kava kava” but we’re just going to call it kava once for the sake of brevity, is a heart-shaped herb that bestows the powers of the Black Panther is popularly enjoyed for its anxiolytic (anxiety-reducing) effects. Despite the similarity of the name in many languages, it is unrelated to coffee (except insofar as they are both plants), and its botanical name is Piper methysticum.

    Does it work?

    Yes! At least in the short-term; more on that later.

    Firstly, you may be wondering how it works; it works by its potentiation of GABA receptors in the brain. GABA (or gamma-aminobutyric acid, to give it its full name), as you may recall, is a neurotransmitter that is associated with feelings of calm; we wrote about it here:

    GABA Against Stress/Anxiety

    So, what does “potentiation of GABA receptors” mean? It means… Scientists don’t for 100% sure know how it works yet, but it does make GABA receptors fire more. It’s possible that to some degree GABA fits the “molecular lock” of the receptors and causes them to say “GABA is here”; it’s also possible that they just make them more sensitive to the real GABA that is there, or there could be another explanation as yet undiscovered. Either way, it means that taking kava has a similar effect to having increased GABA levels in the brain:

    Kavain, the Major Constituent of the Anxiolytic Kava Extract, Potentiates GABAA Receptors: Functional Characteristics and Molecular Mechanism

    As for how much to use, 20–300mg appears to be an effective dose, and most sources recommend 80–250mg:

    Kava as a Clinical Nutrient: Promises and Challenges

    This review of clinical trials found that it was more effective than placebo in only 3 of 7 trials; specifically, it was beneficial in the short-term and not in the long-term. For these reasons, the researchers concluded:

    ❝Kava Kava appears to be a short-term treatment for anxiety, but not a replacement for prolonged anti-anxiety use. Although not witnessed in this review, liver toxicity is especially possible if taken longer than 8 weeks.❞

    Source: The effectiveness and safety of Kava Kava for treating anxiety symptoms: A systematic review and analysis of randomized clinical trials

    Another review of clinical trials found better results over the course of 11 clinical trials, though again, short-term treatment only was considered to be where the “safe and effective” claim can be placed:

    ❝Compared with placebo, kava extract appears to be an effective symptomatic treatment option for anxiety. The data available from the reviewed studies suggest that kava is relatively safe for short-term treatment (1 to 24 weeks), although more information is required. Further rigorous investigations, particularly into the long-term safety profile of kava are warrant❞

    Source: Kava extract for treating anxiety

    Is it safe?

    Nope! It has been associated with liver damage:

    FDA | Consumer Advisory: Kava-Containing Dietary Supplements May be Associated With Severe Liver Injury

    The likely main mechanism of toxicity is that it simply monopolizes the liver’s metabolic abilities, meaning that while it’s metabolizing the kava, it’s not metabolizing other things (such as alcohol or other medications), which will then build up, and potentially overwhelm the liver:

    Constituents in kava extracts potentially involved in hepatotoxicity: a review

    However, traditionally-prepared kava has not had the same effect as modern extracts; at first it seemed the difference was the traditional aqueous extracts vs modern acetonic/ethanolic extracts, but eventually that was found not to be the case, as toxicity occurred with industrial aqueous extracts too. The conclusion so far is that it is about the quality of the source ingredients, and the problems inherent to mass-production:

    Kava hepatotoxicity in traditional and modern use: the presumed Pacific kava paradox hypothesis revisited

    Meanwhile, short-term use doesn’t seem to have this problem, if you’re not drinking alcohol or taking medications that affect the liver:

    Mechanisms/risk factors – kava-associated hepatotoxicity ← you’ll need to scroll down to 4.2.4 to read about this

    Want to try it?

    If the potential for hepatotoxicity doesn’t put you off, here’s an example product on Amazon ← we do not recommend it, but we are not the boss of you, and maybe you’re confident about your liver and want to use it only very short-term?

    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: