The China Study – by Dr. T Colin Campbell and Dr. Thomas M. Campbell
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.
This is not the newest book we’ve reviewed (originally published 2005; this revised and expanded edition 2016), but it is a seminal one.
You’ve probably heard it referenced, and maybe you’ve wondered what the fuss is about. Now you can know!
The titular study itself was huge. We tend to think “oh there was one study” and look to discount it, but it literally looked at the population of China. That’s a large study.
And because China is relatively ethnically homogenous, especially per region, it was easier to isolate what dietary factors made what differences to health. Of course, that did also create a limitation: follow-up studies would be needed to see if the results were the same for non-Chinese people. But even for the rest of us (this reviewer is not Chinese), it already pointed science in the right direction. And sure enough, smaller follow-up studies elsewhere found the same.
But enough about the research; what about the book? This is a book review, not a research review, after all.
The book itself is easy for a lay reader to understand. It explains how the study was conducted (no small feat), and how the data was examined. It also discusses the results, and the conclusions drawn from those results.
In light of all this, it also offers simple actionable advices, on how to eat to avoid disease in general, and cancer in particular. In especially that latter case, one take-home conclusion was: get more of your protein from plants for a big reduction in cancer risk, for example.
Bottom line: this book is an incredible blend of “comprehensive” and “readable” that we don’t often find in the same book! It contains not just a lot of science, but also an insight into how the science works, on a research level. And, of course, its results and conclusions have strong implications for all our lives.
Click here to check out The China Study, to know more about 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:
Boost Your Digestive Enzymes
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’ll Try To Make This Easy To Digest
Do you have a digestion-related problem?
If so, you’re far from alone; around 40% of Americans have digestive problems serious enough to disrupt everyday life:
New survey finds forty percent of Americans’ daily lives are disrupted by digestive troubles
…which puts Americans just a little over the global average of 35%:
Mostly likely on account of the Standard American Diet, or “SAD” as it often gets abbreviated in scientific literature.
There’s plenty we can do to improve gut health, for example:
- Making Friends With Your Gut (You Can Thank Us Later)
- Level-Up Your Fiber Intake! (Without Difficulty Or Discomfort)
- How Much Difference Do Probiotic Supplements Make?
Today we’re going to be examining digestive enzyme supplements!
What are digestive enzymes?
Digestive enzymes are enzymes that break down food into stuff we can use. Important amongst them are:
- Protease: breaks down proteins (into amino acids)
- Amylase: breaks down starches (into sugars)
- Lipase: breaks down fats (into fatty acids)
All three are available as popular supplements to aid digestion. How does the science stack up for them?
Protease
For this, we only found animal studies like this one, but the results have been promising:
Amylase
Again, the studies for this alone (not combined with other enzymes) have been solely from animal agriculture; here’s an example:
The Effect of Exogenous Amylase Supplementation on the Nutritional Value of Peas
Lipase
Unlike for protease and amylase, now we have human studies as well, and here’s what they had to say:
❝Lipase supplementation significantly reduced stomach fullness without change of EGG.
Furthermore, lipase supplementation may be helpful in control of FD symptom such as postprandial symptoms❞
~ Dr. Seon-Young Park & Dr. Jong-Sun Rew
Read more: Is Lipase Supplementation before a High Fat Meal Helpful to Patients with Functional Dyspepsia?
(short answer: yes, it is)
More studies found the same, such as:
Lipase Supplementation before a High-Fat Meal Reduces Perceptions of Fullness in Healthy Subjects
All together now!
When we look at studies for combination supplementation of digestive enzymes, more has been done, and/but it’s (as you might expect) less specific.
The following paper gives a good rundown:
Pancrelipase Therapy: A Combination Of Protease, Amylase, & Lipase
Is it safe?
For most people it is quite safe, but if taking high doses for a long time it can cause problems, and also there may be complications if you have diabetes, are otherwise immunocompromised, or have some other conditions (listed towards the end of the above-linked paper, along with further information that we can’t fit in here).
As ever, check with your doctor/pharmacist if you’re not completely sure!
Want some?
We don’t sell them, but for your convenience, here’s an example product on Amazon that contains all three
Enjoy!
We’ll Try To Make This Easy To Digest
Do you have a digestion-related problem?
If so, you’re far from alone; around 40% of Americans have digestive problems serious enough to disrupt everyday life:
New survey finds forty percent of Americans’ daily lives are disrupted by digestive troubles
…which puts Americans just a little over the global average of 35%:
Mostly likely on account of the Standard American Diet, or “SAD” as it often gets abbreviated in scientific literature.
There’s plenty we can do to improve gut health, for example:
- Making Friends With Your Gut (You Can Thank Us Later)
- Level-Up Your Fiber Intake! (Without Difficulty Or Discomfort)
- How Much Difference Do Probiotic Supplements Make?
Today we’re going to be examining digestive enzyme supplements!
What are digestive enzymes?
Digestive enzymes are enzymes that break down food into stuff we can use. Important amongst them are:
- Protease: breaks down proteins (into amino acids)
- Amylase: breaks down starches (into sugars)
- Lipase: breaks down fats (into fatty acids)
All three are available as popular supplements to aid digestion. How does the science stack up for them?
Protease
For this, we only found animal studies like this one, but the results have been promising:
Amylase
Again, the studies for this alone (not combined with other enzymes) have been solely from animal agriculture; here’s an example:
The Effect of Exogenous Amylase Supplementation on the Nutritional Value of Peas
Lipase
Unlike for protease and amylase, now we have human studies as well, and here’s what they had to say:
❝Lipase supplementation significantly reduced stomach fullness without change of EGG.
Furthermore, lipase supplementation may be helpful in control of FD symptom such as postprandial symptoms❞
~ Dr. Seon-Young Park & Dr. Jong-Sun Rew
Read more: Is Lipase Supplementation before a High Fat Meal Helpful to Patients with Functional Dyspepsia?
(short answer: yes, it is)
More studies found the same, such as:
Lipase Supplementation before a High-Fat Meal Reduces Perceptions of Fullness in Healthy Subjects
All together now!
When we look at studies for combination supplementation of digestive enzymes, more has been done, and/but it’s (as you might expect) less specific.
The following paper gives a good rundown:
Pancrelipase Therapy: A Combination Of Protease, Amylase, & Lipase
Is it safe?
For most people it is quite safe, but if taking high doses for a long time it can cause problems, and also there may be complications if you have diabetes, are otherwise immunocompromised, or have some other conditions (listed towards the end of the above-linked paper, along with further information that we can’t fit in here).
As ever, check with your doctor/pharmacist if you’re not completely sure!
Want some?
We don’t sell them, but for your convenience, here’s an example product on Amazon that contains all three
Enjoy!
Share This Post
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.
Share This Post
AI: The Doctor That Never Tires?
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.
AI: The Doctor That Never Tires?
We asked you for your opinion on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in healthcare, and got the above-depicted, below-described set of results:
- A little over half of respondents to the poll voted for “It speeds up research, and is more methodical about diagnosis, so it’s at least a good extra tool”
- A quarter of respondents voted for “I’m on the fence—it seems to make no more nor less mistakes than human doctors do”
- A little under a fifth of respondents voted for “AI is less prone to fatigue/bias than human doctors, making it an essential new tech”
- Three respondents voted for “AI is a step too far in medical technology, and we’re not ready for it”
Writer’s note: I’m a professional writer (you’d never have guessed, right?) and, apparently, I really did write “no more nor less mistakes”, despite the correct grammar being “no more nor fewer mistakes”. Now, I know this, and in fact, people getting less/fewer wrong is a pet hate of mine. Nevertheless, I erred.
Yet, now that I’m writing this out in my usual software, and not directly into the poll-generation software, my (AI!) grammar/style-checker is highlighting the error for me.
Now, an AI could not do my job. ChatGPT would try, and fail miserably. But can technology help me do mine better? Absolutely!
And still, I dismiss a lot of the AI’s suggestions, because I know my field and can make informed choices. I don’t follow it blindly, and I think that’s key.
AI is less prone to fatigue/bias than human doctors, making it an essential new tech: True or False?
True—with one caveat.
First, a quick anecdote from a subscriber who selected this option in the poll:
❝As long as it receives the same data inputs as my doctor (ie my entire medical history), I can see it providing a much more personalised service than my human doctor who is always forgetting what I have told him. I’m also concerned that my doctor may be depressed – not an ailment that ought to affect AI! I recently asked my newly qualified doctor goddaughter whether she would prefer to be treated by a human or AI doctor. No contest, she said – she’d go with AI. Her argument was that human doctors leap to conclusions, rather than properly weighing all the evidence – meaning AI, as long as it receives the same inputs, will be much more reliable❞
Now, an anecdote is not data, so what does the science say?
Well… It says the same:
❝Of 6695 responding physicians in active practice, 6586 provided information on the areas of interest: 3574 (54.3%) reported symptoms of burnout, 2163 (32.8%) reported excessive fatigue, and 427 (6.5%) reported recent suicidal ideation, with 255 of 6563 (3.9%) reporting a poor or failing patient safety grade in their primary work area and 691 of 6586 (10.5%) reporting a major medical error in the prior 3 months. Physicians reporting errors were more likely to have symptoms of burnout (77.6% vs 51.5%; P<.001), fatigue (46.6% vs 31.2%; P<.001), and recent suicidal ideation (12.7% vs 5.8%; P<.001).❞
See the damning report for yourself: Physician Burnout, Well-being, and Work Unit Safety Grades in Relationship to Reported Medical Errors
AI, of course, does not suffer from burnout, fatigue, or suicidal ideation.
So, what was the caveat?
The caveat is about bias. Humans are biased, and that goes for medical practitioners just the same. AI’s machine learning is based on source data, and the source data comes from humans, who are biased.
See: Bias and Discrimination in AI: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective
So, AI can perpetuate human biases and doesn’t have a special extra strength in this regard.
The lack of burnout, fatigue, and suicidal ideation, however, make a big difference.
AI speeds up research, and is more methodical about diagnosis: True or False?
True! AI is getting more and more efficient at this, and as has been pointed out, doesn’t make errors due to fatigue, and often comes to accurate conclusions near-instantaneously. To give just one example:
❝Deep learning algorithms achieved better diagnostic performance than a panel of 11 pathologists participating in a simulation exercise designed to mimic routine pathology workflow; algorithm performance was comparable with an expert pathologist interpreting whole-slide images without time constraints. The area under the curve was 0.994 (best algorithm) vs 0.884 (best pathologist).❞
About that “getting more and more efficient at this”; it’s in the nature of machine learning that every new piece of data improves the neural net being used. So long as it is getting fed new data, which it can process at rate far exceeding humans’ abilities, it will always be constantly improving.
AI makes no more nor
lessfewer mistakes than humans do: True or False?False! AI makes fewer, now. This study is from 2021, and it’s only improved since then:
❝Professionals only came to the same conclusions [as each other] approximately 75 per cent of the time. More importantly, machine learning produced fewer decision-making errors than did all the professionals❞
See: AI can make better clinical decisions than humans: study
All that said, we’re not quite at Star Trek levels of “AI can do a human’s job entirely” just yet:
BMJ | Artificial intelligence versus clinicians: pros and cons
To summarize: medical AI is a powerful tool that:
- Makes healthcare more accessible
- Speeds up diagnosis
- Reduces human error
…and yet, for now at least, still requires human oversights, checks and balances.
Essentially: it’s not really about humans vs machines at all. It’s about humans and machines giving each other information, and catching any mistakes made by the other. That way, humans can make more informed decisions, and still keep a “hand on the wheel”.
Share This Post
Related Posts
Best Salt for Neti Pots?
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.
❓ Q&A With 10almonds Subscribers!
Q: What kind of salt is best for neti pots?
A: Non-iodised salt is usually recommended, but really, any human-safe salt is fine. By this we mean for example:
- Sodium chloride (like most kitchen salts),
- Potassium chloride (as found in “reduced sodium” kitchen salts), or
- Magnesium sulfate (also known as epsom salts).
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:
Olive Oil vs Coconut Oil – 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 extra virgin olive oil to cold-pressed coconut oil, we picked the olive oil.
Why?
While the cold-pressed coconut oil may offer some health benefits due to its lauric acid content, its 80–90% saturated fat content isn’t great for most people. It’s a great oil when applied topically for healthy skin and hair, though!
The extra virgin olive oil has a much more uncontroversially healthy blend of triglycerides, and (in moderation) is universally recognized as very heart-healthy.
Your local supermarket, most likely, has a good extra virgin olive oil, but if you’d like to get some online, here’s an example product on Amazon for your convenience.
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:
Lime-Charred Cauliflower Popcorn
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.
Called “popcorn” for its appearance and tasty-snackness, this one otherwise bears little relation to the usual movie theater snack, and it’s both tastier and healthier. All that said, it can be eaten on its own as a snack (even with a movie, if you so wish), or served as one part of a many-dish banquet, or (this writer’s favorite) as a delicious appetizer that also puts down a healthy bed of fiber ready for the main course to follow it.
You will need
- 1 cauliflower, cut into small (popcorn-sized) florets
- 2 tbsp extra virgin olive oil
- 1 tbsp lime pickle
- 1 tsp cumin seeds
- 1 tsp smoked paprika
- 1 tsp chili flakes
- 1 tsp black pepper, coarse ground
- ½ tsp ground turmeric
Method
(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)
1) Preheat your oven as hot as it will go
2) Mix all the ingredients in a small bowl except the cauliflower, to form a marinade
3) Drizzle the marinade over the cauliflower in a larger bowl (i.e. big enough for the cauliflower), and mix well until the cauliflower is entirely, or at least almost entirely, coated. Yes, it’s not a lot of marinade but unless you picked a truly huge cauliflower, the proportions we gave will be enough, and you want the end result to be crisp, not dripping.
4) Spread the marinaded cauliflower florets out on a baking tray lined with baking paper. Put it in the oven on the middle shelf, so it doesn’t cook unevenly, but keeping the temperature as high as it goes.
5) When it is charred and crispy golden, it’s done—this should take about 20 minutes, but we’ll say ±5 minutes depending on your oven, so do check on it periodically—and time to serve (it is best enjoyed warm).
Enjoy!
Want to learn more?
For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:
- We must do a main feature on the merits of cruciferous vegetables! Watch this space.
- All About Olive Oils (Extra Virgin & Otherwise)
- Capsaicin For Weight Loss And Against Inflammation
- Black Pepper’s Impressive Anti-Cancer Arsenal (And More)
- Why Curcumin (Turmeric) Is Worth Its Weight In Gold
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:
