Strawberries vs Blackberries – 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 strawberries to blackberries, we picked the blackberries.

Why?

Shocking nobody, both are very healthy options. However, blackberries do come out on top:

In terms of macros, the main thing that sets them apart is that blackberries have more than 2x the fiber. Other differences in macros are also in blackberries’ favor, but only very marginally, so we’ll not distract with those here. The fiber difference is distinctly significant, though.

In the category of vitamins, blackberries lead with more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, B9, E, and K, as well as more choline. Meanwhile, strawberries boast more of vitamins B1, B6, and C. So, a 8:2 advantage for blackberries (and some of the margins are very large, such as 9x more choline, 4x more vitamin E, and nearly 18x more vitamin A).

When it comes to minerals, things are not less clear: blackberries have considerably more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, and zinc. The two fruits are equal in other minerals that they both contain, and strawberries don’t contain any mineral in greater amounts than blackberries do.

A discussion of these berries’ health benefits would be incomplete without at least mentioning polyphenols, but both of them are equally good sources of such, so there’s no distinction to set one above the other in this category.

As ever, enjoy both, though! Diversity is good.

Want to learn more?

You might like to read:

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Tahini vs Hummus – Which is Healthier?
  • Lyme Disease At-A-Glance
    The 241st day of the year brought unexpected surprises and a sense of anticipation for what lay ahead.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Life Extension Multivitamins vs Centrum Multivitamins – 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 Life Extension Multivitamins to Centrum Multivitamins, we picked the Life Extension.

    Why?

    The clue here was on the label: “two per day”. It’s not so that they can sell extra filler! It’s because they couldn’t fit it all into one.

    While the Centrum Multivitamins is a (respectably) run-of-the-mill multivitamin (and multimineral) containing reasonable quantities of most vitamins and minerals that people supplement, the Life Extension product has the same plus more:

    • More of the vitamins and minerals; i.e. more of them are hitting 100%+ of the RDA
    • More beneficial supplements, including:
      • Inositol, Alpha lipoic acid, Bio-Quercetin phytosome, phosphatidylcholine complex, Marigold extract, Apigenin, Lycopene, and more that we won’t list here because it starts to get complicated if we do.

    We’ll have to write some main features on some of those that we haven’t written about before, but suffice it to say, they’re all good things.

    Main take-away for today: sometimes more is better; it just necessitates then reading the label to check.

    Want to get some Life Extension Multivitamins (and/or perhaps just read the label on the back)? Here they are on Amazon

    PS: it bears mentioning, since we are sometimes running brands against each other head-to-head in this section: nothing you see here is an advertisement/sponsor unless it’s clearly marked as such. We haven’t, for example, been paid by Life Extension or any agent of theirs, to write the above. It’s just our own research and conclusion.

    Share This Post

  • Ageless Aging – by Maddy Dychtwald

    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.

    Maddy Dychtwald, herself 73, has spent her career working in the field of aging. She’s not a gerontologist or even a doctor, but she’s nevertheless been up-to-the-ears in the industry for decades, mostly as an organizer, strategist, facilitator, and so forth. As such, she’s had her finger on the pulse of the healthy longevity movement for a long time.

    This book was written to address a problem, and the problem is: lifespan is increasing (especially for women), but healthspan has not been keeping up the pace.

    In other words: people (especially women) are living longer, but often with more health problems along the way than before.

    And mostly, it’s for lack of information (or sometimes: too much competing incorrect information).

    Fortunately, information is something that a woman in Dychtwald’s position has an abundance of, because she has researchers and academics in many fields on speed-dial and happy to answer her questions (we get a lot of input from such experts throughout the book—which is why this book is so science-based, despite the author not being a scientist).

    The book answers a lot of important questions beyond the obvious “what diet/exercise/sleep/supplements/etc are best for healthy aging” (spoiler: it’s quite consistent with the things we recommend here, because guess what, science is science), questions like how best to prepare for this that or the other, how to get a head start on preventative healthcare for some things, how to avoid being a burden to our families (one can argue that families are supposed to look after each other, but still, it’s a legitimate worry for many, and understandably so), and even how to balance the sometimes conflicting worlds of health and finances.

    Unlike many authors, she also talks about the different kinds of aging, and tackles each of them separately and together. We love to see it!

    Bottom line: this book is a very good one-stop-shop for all things healthy aging. It’s aimed squarely at women, but most advice goes for men the same too, aside from the section on hormones and such.

    Click here to check out Ageless Aging, and plan your future!

    Share This Post

  • No, COVID-19 vaccines don’t cause ‘turbo cancer’

    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.

    What you need to know

    • COVID-19 vaccines do not cause “turbo cancer” or contain SV40, a virus that has been suspected of causing cancer.
    • There is no link between rising cancer rates and COVID-19 vaccines.
    • Staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is a safe, free way to support long-term health.

    Myths that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer have been circulating since the vaccines were first developed. These false claims resurfaced last month after Princess Kate Middleton announced that she is undergoing cancer treatment, with some vaccine opponents falsely claiming Middleton has a “turbo cancer” caused by COVID-19 vaccines.

    Here’s what we know: “Turbo cancer” is a made-up term for a fake phenomenon, and there is strong evidence that COVID-19 vaccines do not cause cancer or increase cancer risk.

    Read on to learn how to recognize false claims about COVID-19 vaccines and cancer.


    Do COVID-19 vaccines contain cancer-causing ingredients?

    No. Some vaccine opponents claim that COVID-19 vaccines contain SV40, a virus that has been suspected of causing cancer. This claim is false.

    A piece of SV40’s DNA sequence—called a “promoter”—was used as starting material to develop COVID-19 vaccines, but the virus itself is not present in the vaccines. The promoter does not contain the part of the virus that enters the cell nucleus, so it poses no risk.

    COVID-19 vaccines and their ingredients have been rigorously studied in millions of people worldwide and have been determined to be safe. The National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society agree that COVID-19 vaccines do not increase cancer risk or accelerate cancer growth.

    Why are cancer rates rising in the U.S.?

    Since the 1990s, cancer rates have been on the rise globally and in the U.S., most notably in people under 50. Increased cancer screening may partially explain the rising number of cancer diagnoses. Exposure to air pollution and lifestyle factors like tobacco use, alcohol use, and diet may also be contributing factors.

    What are the benefits of staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines?

    Staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is a safe way to protect our long-term health. COVID-19 vaccines prevent severe illness, hospitalization, death, and long COVID.

    The CDC says staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is a safer and more reliable way to build protection against COVID-19 than getting sick from COVID-19.

    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.

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Tahini vs Hummus – Which is Healthier?
  • How do I handle it if my parent is refusing aged care? 4 things to consider

    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 a shock when we realise our parents aren’t managing well at home.

    Perhaps the house and garden are looking more chaotic, and Mum or Dad are relying more on snacks than nutritious meals. Maybe their grooming or hygiene has declined markedly, they are socially isolated or not doing the things they used to enjoy. They may be losing weight, have had a fall, aren’t managing their medications correctly, and are at risk of getting scammed.

    You’re worried and you want them to be safe and healthy. You’ve tried to talk to them about aged care but been met with swift refusal and an indignant declaration “I don’t need help – everything is fine!” Now what?

    Here are four things to consider.

    1. Start with more help at home

    Getting help and support at home can help keep Mum or Dad well and comfortable without them needing to move.

    Consider drawing up a roster of family and friends visiting to help with shopping, cleaning and outings. You can also use home aged care services – or a combination of both.

    Government subsidised home care services provide from one to 13 hours of care a week. You can get more help if you are a veteran or are able to pay privately. You can take advantage of things like rehabilitation, fall risk-reduction programs, personal alarms, stove automatic switch-offs and other technology aimed at increasing safety.

    Call My Aged Care to discuss your options.

    An older man with a serious expression on his face looks out a window.
    Is Mum or Dad OK at home?
    Nadino/Shutterstock

    2. Be prepared for multiple conversations

    Getting Mum or Dad to accept paid help can be tricky. Many families often have multiple conversations around aged care before a decision is made.

    Ideally, the older person feels supported rather than attacked during these conversations.

    Some families have a meeting, so everyone is coming together to help. In other families, certain family members or friends might be better placed to have these conversations – perhaps the daughter with the health background, or the auntie or GP who Mum trusts more to provide good advice.

    Mum or Dad’s main emotional support person should try to maintain their relationship. It’s OK to get someone else (like the GP, the hospital or an adult child) to play “bad cop”, while a different person (such as the older person’s spouse, or a different adult child) plays “good cop”.

    3. Understand the options when help at home isn’t enough

    If you have maximised home support and it’s not enough, or if the hospital won’t discharge Mum or Dad without extensive supports, then you may be considering a nursing home (also known as residential aged care in Australia).

    Every person has a legal right to choose where we live (unless they have lost capacity to make that decision).

    This means families can’t put Mum or Dad into residential aged care against their will. Every person also has the right to choose to take risks. People can choose to continue to live at home, even if it means they might not get help immediately if they fall, or eat poorly. We should respect Mum or Dad’s decisions, even if we disagree with them. Researchers call this “dignity of risk”.

    It’s important to understand Mum or Dad’s point of view. Listen to them. Try to figure out what they are feeling, and what they are worried might happen (which might not be rational).

    Try to understand what’s really important to their quality of life. Is it the dog, having privacy in their safe space, seeing grandchildren and friends, or something else?

    Older people are often understandably concerned about losing independence, losing control, and having strangers in their personal space.

    Sometimes families prioritise physical health over psychological wellbeing. But we need to consider both when considering nursing home admission.

    Research suggests going into a nursing home temporarily increases loneliness, risk of depression and anxiety, and sense of losing control.

    Mum and Dad should be involved in the decision-making process about where they live, and when they might move.

    Some families start looking “just in case” as it often takes some time to find the right nursing home and there can be a wait.

    After you have your top two or three choices, take Mum or Dad to visit them. If this is not possible, take pictures of the rooms, the public areas in the nursing home, the menu and the activities schedule.

    We should give Mum or Dad information about their options and risks so they can make informed (and hopefully better) decisions.

    For instance, if they visit a nursing home and the manager says they can go on outings whenever they want, this might dispel a belief they are “locked up”.

    Having one or two weeks “respite” in a home may let them try it out before making the big decision about staying permanently. And if they find the place unacceptable, they can try another nursing home instead.

    An older Asian woman sits with her daughter.
    You might need to have multiple conversations about aged care.
    CGN089/Shutterstock

    4. Understand the options if a parent has lost capacity to make decisions

    If Mum or Dad have lost capacity to choose where they live, family may be able to make that decision in their best interests.

    If it’s not clear whether a person has capacity to make a particular decision, a medical practitioner can assess for that capacity.

    Mum or Dad may have appointed an enduring guardian to make decisions about their health and lifestyle decisions when they are not able to.

    An enduring guardian can make the decision that the person should live in residential aged care, if the person no longer has the capacity to make that decision themselves.

    If Mum or Dad didn’t appoint an enduring guardian, and have lost capacity, then a court or tribunal can appoint that person a private guardian (usually a family member, close friend or unpaid carer).

    If no such person is available to act as private guardian, a public official may be appointed as public guardian.

    Deal with your own feelings

    Families often feel guilt and grief during the decision-making and transition process.

    Families need to act in the best interest of Mum or Dad, but also balance other caring responsibilities, financial priorities and their own wellbeing.The Conversation

    Lee-Fay Low, Professor in Ageing and Health, University of Sydney

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

    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:

  • Black Olives vs Green Olives – 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 black olives to green olives, we picked the black olives.

    Why?

    First know this: they are the same plant, just at different stages of ripening (green olives are, as you might expect, less ripe).

    Next: the nutritional values of both, from macros down to the phytochemicals, are mostly very similar, but there are a few things that stand out:
    • Black olives usually have more calories per serving, average about 25% more. But these are from healthy fats, so unless you’re on a calorie-restricted diet, this is probably not a consideration.
    • Green olives are almost always “cured” for longer, which results in a much higher sodium content often around 200% that of black olives. Black olives are often not “cured” at all.

    Hence, we chose the black olives!

    You may be wondering: do green olives have anything going for them that black olives don’t?

    And the answer has a clue in the taste: green olives generally have a stronger, more bitter/pungent taste. And remember what we said about things that have a stronger, more bitter/pungent taste:

    Tasty Polyphenols: Enjoy Bitter Foods For Your Heart & Brain

    That’s right, green olives are a little higher in polyphenols than black olives.

    But! If you want to enjoy the polyphenol content of green olives without the sodium content, the best way to do that is not olives, but olive oil—which is usually made from green olives.

    For more about olive oil, check out:

    All About Olive Oils: Is “Extra Virgin” Worth It?

    Don’t Forget…

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

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • What is silicosis and what does research say about it?

    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.

    Silicosis is a progressive, debilitating and sometimes fatal lung disease caused by breathing silica dust from cutting, drilling, chipping or grinding materials such as granite, sandstone, slate or artificial stone. The dust gets trapped in the lung tissue, causing inflammation, scarring and permanent damage.

    Silicosis is a job-related lung disease and has no cure. The disease mostly affects workers in construction, stone countertop fabrication, mining, and even those who sandblast and stonewash denim jeans to create a ‘worn out’ look.

    Silica is one of the most common minerals in nature. About 59% of the Earth’s crust is made of silica, found in quartz, granite, sandstone, slate and sand. Historically, people at the highest risk for the disease have worked in natural environments — mining, digging tunnels or doing quarry work. The disease was first documented by the Greek physician Hippocrates, who in 430 B.C. described breathing disorders in metal diggers.

    But in recent decades there’s been renewed attention to the disease due to its more rapid progression and severity among younger workers. Research has shown that the culprit is artificial stone mostly used for countertops for kitchens and bathrooms, which has a very high silica content.

    The new generation of coal miners is also at an increased risk of silicosis, in addition to black lung, because layers of coal have become thinner, forcing them to dig deeper into rock, as explained in a joint investigation by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Medill Investigative Lab at Northwestern University published on Dec. 4. CBS Sunday Morning also had a report on the same issue among West Virginia coal miners, aired as part of its Dec. 10 episode.

    Silicosis in modern industries

    Artificial, or engineered, stone used for countertops, also known as “quartz,” is formed from finely crushed rocks mixed with resin. Quartz is a natural mineral, but man-made products like many quartz countertops consist of not just quartz, but also resin, colors and other materials that are used to style and strengthen them.

    The silica content of artificial stone is about 90%, compared with the 3% silica content of natural marble and 30% silica content in granite stones, according to the authors of a 2019 systematic review published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

    The first reported case of silicosis associated with working with artificial stone was from Italy in 2010, according to a 2020 study published in Allergy. Since then, more studies have documented the growing number of cases among artificial stone workers, many of whom are from marginalized populations, such as immigrants.

    A July 2023 study published in JAMA Internal Medicine found that in California, the disease mainly occurred among young Latino immigrant men. The disease was severe in most men by the time they sought care.

    An August 2022 study, published in Occupational & Environmental Medicine, analyzing the Global Silicosis Registry, with workers in Israel, Spain, Australia and the U.S., found “a substantial emerging population of workers worldwide with severe and irreversible silica-associated diseases,” due to exposure from silica dust from engineered stone.

    Other modern occupations such as denim sandblasting, work on dental prostheses, manufacturing of electrical cables and working on jewelry and semi-precious stones also put workers at risk of silicosis.

    In the wake of modern-day silicosis cases, researchers have called for larger studies to better understand the disease and the discovery of effective treatments.

    In the U.S. about 2.3 million workers are exposed to silica dust on the job, according to the American Lung Association. Other estimates show approximately 10 million workers in India, 3.2 million in the European Union and 2 million in Brazil work with material containing silica.

    However, “the reporting system for occupational injuries and illnesses in the United States fails to capture many cases, leading to a poor understanding of silicosis incidence and prevalence,” writes Ryan F. Hoy, who has published extensively on the topic, in a June 2022 article in Respirology.

    A 2015 study in the Morbidity & Mortality Weekly Report found the annual number of silicosis deaths declined from 185 people in 1999 to 111 in 2013, but the decline appeared to have leveled off between 2010 and 2013, the authors write. Another 2015 study in MMWR, examining silicosis deaths between 2001 and 2010, found the death rate from silicosis was significantly higher among Black people compared with whites and other races. Men also have a significantly higher death rate from silicosis than women.

    The 2019 Global Burden of Disease Study estimates that more than 12,900 people worldwide die from silicosis each year.

    Silicosis has no cure, but it’s preventable when workers have access to proper respiratory protection and are educated on safe practices set by regulatory bodies such as the U.S. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. The European Network on Silica also has guidelines on handling and using materials containing silica. A March 2023 study published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research International finds that “education, training, and marketing strategies improve respirator use, while training and education motivate workers to use dust control measures.”

    Silicosis symptoms and treatment

    Symptoms of silicosis include cough, fatigue, shortness of breath and chest pain. There’s no specific test for silicosis. The first signs may show in an abnormal chest X-ray and a slowly developing cough, according to the American Lung Association.

    Silicosis symptoms don’t appear right away in most cases, usually taking several years to develop working with silica dust. However, studies indicate that symptoms of silicosis due to exposure to artificial stone appear quicker than exposure to natural silica sources, potentially due to the higher concentration of silica in artificial stone.

    There are three types of silicosis: acute (most commonly caused by working with artificial stone), accelerated and chronic, depending on the level of exposure to silica dust, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which explains the severity of each type on its website.

    Complications from silicosis can include tuberculosis, lung cancer, chronic bronchitis, kidney disease and autoimmune disorders. In some cases, silicosis can cause severe scarring of the lung tissue, leading to a condition called progressive massive fibrosis, or PMF. Some patients may require a lung transplant.

    Lung damage from silicosis is irreversible, so treatment of silicosis is aimed at slowing down the disease and relieving its symptoms.

    In 1995, the World Health Organization called for the elimination of silicosis by 2030, but research studies and news stories show it remains a threat to many workers.

    Below, we have gathered several studies on the topic to help journalists bolster their reporting with academic research.

    Research roundup

    Artificial Stone Associated Silicosis: A Systematic Review
    Veruscka Leso, et al. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, February 2019.

    This systematic review aims to verify the association between exposure to silica dust in artificial stone and the development of silicosis.

    Researchers narrowed down their selection from 75 papers to seven studies that met their inclusion criteria. The seven studies were from Australia, Israel and Spain. Most of the studies are observational and impede a definite association between exposure to silica while working with artificial stone and developing silicosis, the authors note.

    However, “the unusually high incidence of the disease that was reported over short periods of investigations, and the comparable occupational histories of affected workers, all being involved in the manufacture and manipulation of engineered stones, may indicate a cause-effect relationship of this type.”

    The review of studies reveals a lack of basic preventive measures such as lack of access to disposable masks; lack of information and training on the dangers of silica dust; and lack of periodic medical examinations, including a chest X-ray, among workers. There was limited environmental monitoring of dust levels at the workplace. Also, there was no dust suppression system, such as the use of water when polishing the stones, or effective ventilation. Machinery and tools weren’t properly set up and didn’t undergo routine checks, the authors write.

    The authors recommend environmental monitoring for assessing silica levels in the workplace and verifying the effectiveness of personal protections. They also recommend the health surveillance of workers exposed to silica dust.

    “Stakeholders, manufacturers, occupational risk prevention services, insurance companies for occupational accidents and diseases, business owners, occupational health physicians, general practitioners, and also employees should be engaged, not only in designing/planning processes and operational working environments, but also in assessing the global applicability of proactive preventive and protective measures to identify and control crystalline silica exposure, especially in new and unexpected exposure scenarios, the full extent of which cannot yet be accurately predicted,” they write.

    Silica-Related Diseases in the Modern World
    Ryan F. Hoy and Daniel C. Chambers. Allergy, November 2020.

    The study is a review of the mineralogy of silica, epidemiology, clinical and radiological features of the various forms of silicosis and other diseases associated with exposure to silica.

    The primary factor associated with the development of silicosis is the intensity and duration of cumulative exposure to silica dust. Most countries regulate silica dust occupational exposure limits, generally in the range of 0.05 mg/m3 to 0.1 mg/m3, although the risk of dust exposure to workers still remains high at those levels.

    The study provides a list of activities that could expose workers to silica dust. They include abrasive blasting of sand and sandstone; cement and brick manufacturing; mixing, glazing or sculpting of china, ceramic and pottery; construction involving bricklaying, concrete cutting, paving and demolition; sandblasting denim jeans; working with and polishing dental materials; mining and related milling; handling raw material during paint manufacturing; road and highway construction and repair; soap and cosmetic production; blasting and drilling tunnels; and waste incineration.

    “Despite the large number of workers in the construction sector, there have been few studies of [silica dust] exposure in this industry,” the authors note.

    Other than silicosis, conditions associated with silica exposure include sarcoidosis, an inflammatory disease that commonly affects the lungs and lymph nodes, autoimmune disease, lung cancer and pulmonary infections.

    “Recent outbreaks of silica-associated disease highlight the need for constant vigilance to identify and control new and well-established sources of silica exposure. While there are currently no effective treatments for silicosis, it is a completely preventable lung disease,” the authors write.

    A Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Dust Control Measures Adopted to Reduce Workplace Exposure
    Frederick Anlimah, Vinod Gopaldasani, Catherine MacPhail and Brian Davies. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, March 2023.

    This study provides an overview of various interventions and their effectiveness in preventing exposure to silica dust based on a review of 133 studies from 16 countries, including the U.S., Canada, China, India, Taiwan and Australia, and published between 2010 and 2020.

    These dust control measures range from simple work practices such as the use of respirators to more sophisticated technologies, such as water and air curtains and foam technology, the authors note.

    The review finds increasing research interest in dust reduction, mainly in China. But overall, regulatory influence remains inadequate in preventing miners’ exposure to silica dust.

    “Results from the review suggest that adopted interventions increase knowledge, awareness, and attitudes about respirator usage and generate positive perceptions about respirator usage while reducing misconceptions,” the authors write. “Interventions can increase the use, proper use, and frequency of use of respirators and the adoption readiness for dust controls but may not provide sustained motivation in workers for the continual use of dust controls or [personal protective equipment.]”

    Notes from the Field: Surveillance of Silicosis Using Electronic Case Reporting — California, December 2022–July 2023
    Jennifer Flattery, et al. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, November 2023.

    This study examines the use of electronic case reporting to identify silicosis cases in California. Electronic case reporting, or eCR, is the automated, real-time exchange of case report information between electronic health records at health facilities at state and local public health agencies in the U.S. It is a joint effort between the Association of Public Health Laboratories, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists, and the CDC. Currently, 208 health conditions can be reported using eCR. All 50 states and other U.S.-affiliated jurisdictions are connected to eCR. Once a public health agency receives a case report, it reaches out to the patient for contact tracing or other actions.

    From October 2022 to July 2023, the California Department of Public Health received initial silicosis case reports for 41 individuals. A review of medical records confirmed 19 cases and 16 probable cases. Six of the 41 cases were considered unlikely to be silicosis after a review of medical records.

    Notably, engineered stone countertop fabrication was a significant source of exposure, especially among Hispanic and Latino workers.

    At least seven of the 19 confirmed cases were associated with the fabrication of engineered stone — quartz — countertops. The 19 patients’ ages ranged from 33 to 51 and all were Hispanic or Latino. One patient died and two had both lungs replaced. One was evaluated for a lung transplant.

    The median age of the 35 patients with probable or confirmed silicosis was 65, ranging from 33 to 89 years, and 91% were men.

    “It is important that health care providers routinely ask patients about their work as an important determinant of health,” the authors write. “Being aware of the risks associated with work exposures, as well as the regulations, medical monitoring, and prevention strategies that address those risks can help guide patient care.”

    Additional research

    Understanding the Pathogenesis of Engineered Stone-Associated Silicosis: The Effect of Particle Chemistry on the Lung Cell Response
    Chandnee Ramkissoon, et al. Respirology, December 2023.

    Silicosis, Tuberculosis and Silica Exposure Among Artisanal and Small-Scale Miners: A Systematic Review and Modelling Paper
    Patrick Howlett, et al. PLOS Global Public Health, September 2023.

    Silicosis Among Immigrant Engineered Stone (Quartz) Countertop Fabrication Workers in California
    Jane C. Fazio, et al. JAMA Internal Medicine, July 2023.

    Silicosis and Tuberculosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    P. Jamshidi, et al. Pulmonology, June 2023.

    From Basic Research to Clinical Practice: Considerations for Treatment Drugs for Silicosis
    Rou Li, Huimin Kang and Shi Chen. International Journal of Molecular Science, May 2023.

    Silicosis After Short-Term Exposure
    J. Nowak-Pasternak, A. Lipińska-Ojrzanowska and B. Świątkowska. Occupational Medicine, January 2023.

    Occupational Silica Exposure and Dose-Response for Related Disorders—Silicosis, Pulmonary TB, AIDs and Renal Diseases: Results of a 15-Year Israeli Surveillance
    Rachel Raanan, et al. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, November 2022.

    Demographic, Exposure and Clinical Characteristics in a Multinational Registry of Engineered Stone Workers with Silicosis
    Jeremy Tang Hua, et al. Occupational & Environmental Medicine, August 2022.

    Current Global Perspectives on Silicosis — Convergence of Old and Newly Emergent Hazards
    Ryan F. Hoy, et al. Respirology, March 2022.

    The Association Between Silica Exposure, Silicosis and Tuberculosis: A systematic Review and Metal-Analysis
    Rodney Ehrlich, Paula Akugizibwe, Nandi Siegfried and David Rees. BMC Public Health, May 2021.

    Silicosis, Progressive Massive Fibrosis and Silico-Tuberculosis Among Workers with Occupational Exposure to Silica Dusts in Sandstone Mines of Rajasthan State
    Subroto Nandi, Sarang Dhatrak, Kamalesh Sarkar. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, February 2021.

    Artificial Stone Silicosis: Rapid Progression Following Exposure Cessation
    Antonio León-Jiménez, et al. Chest, September 2020.

    Silica-Associated Lung Disease: An Old-World Exposure in Modern Industries
    Hayley Barnes, Nicole S.L. Goh, Tracy L. Leong and Ryan Hoy. Respirology, September 2019.

    Australia Reports on Audit of Silicosis for Stonecutters
    Tony Kirby. The Lancet, March 2019.

    Artificial Stone-Associated Silicosis: A Rapidly Emerging Occupational Lung Disease
    Ryan F. Hoy, et al. Occupational & Environmental Medicine, December 2017.

    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: