To Medicate or Not? That is the Question! – by Dr. Asha Bohannon

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.

Medications are, of course, a necessity of life (literally!) for many, especially as we get older. Nevertheless, overmedication is also a big problem that can cause a lot of harm too, and guess what, it comes with the exact same “especially as we get older” tag too.

So, what does Dr. Bohannon (a doctor of pharmacy, diabetes educator, and personal trainer too) recommend?

Simply put: she recommends starting with a comprehensive health history assessment and analysing one’s medication/supplement profile, before getting lab work done, tweaking all the things that can be tweaked along the way, and—of course—not neglecting lifestyle medicine either.

The book is prefaced and ended with pep talks that probably a person who has already bought the book does not need, but they don’t detract from the practical content either. Nevertheless, it feels a little odd that it takes until chapter 4 to reach “step 1” of her 7-step method!

The style throughout is conversational and energetic, but not overly padded with hype; it’s just a very casual style. Nevertheless, she brings to bear her professional knowledge and understanding as a doctor of pharmacy, to include her insights into the industry that one might not observe from outside of it.

Bottom line: if you’d like to do your own personal meds review and want to “know enough to ask the right questions” before bringing it up with your doctor, this book is a fine choice for that.

Click here to check out To Medicate Or Not, and make informed choices!

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:

  • White Beans vs Pinto Beans – 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 white beans to pinto beans, we picked the pinto beans.

    Why?

    Both are good and both have their strengths! But we say the pinto beans come out on top in total:

    In terms of macros, the two beans are about equal in protein and carbs, while pinto beans have notably more fiber. White beans were already good, but we say having 1.5x the fiber makes pinto beans the winner in this category.

    In the category of vitamins, white beans are not higher in any vitamins, while pinto beans have more of vitamins B1, B2, B3, B6, B7, B9, and C, making for a 7:0 win for pinto beans. It’s worth mentioning that both beans are equal in vitamins B5, E, K, and choline, though. Still, pinto beans win easily on the strength of those 7 vitamins they have more of.

    When it comes to minerals, white beans have more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, potassium, and zinc, while pinto beans have more phosphorus and selenium, making for a win for white beans this time.

    Adding up the sections makes for an overall win for pinto beans, but by all means, enjoy either or both; diversity is good!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    What’s Your Plant Diversity Score?

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Can kimchi really help you lose weight? Hold your pickle. The evidence isn’t looking great

    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.

    Fermented foods have become popular in recent years, partly due to their perceived health benefits.

    For instance, there is some evidence eating or drinking fermented foods can improve blood glucose control in people with diabetes. They can lower blood lipid (fats) levels and blood pressure in people with diabetes or obesity. Fermented foods can also improve diarrhoea symptoms.

    But can they help you lose weight, as a recent study suggests? Let’s look at the evidence.

    Remind me, what are fermented foods?

    Fermented foods are ones prepared when microbes (bacteria and/or yeast) ferment (or digest) food components to form new foods. Examples include yoghurt, cheese, kefir, kombucha, wine, beer, sauerkraut and kimchi.

    As a result of fermentation, the food becomes acidic, extending its shelf life (food-spoilage microbes are less likely to grow under these conditions). This makes fermentation one of the earliest forms of food processing.

    Fermentation also leads to new nutrients being made. Beneficial microbes (probiotics) digest nutrients and components in the food to produce new bioactive components (postbiotics). These postbiotics are thought to contribute to the health benefits of the fermented foods, alongside the health benefits of the bacteria themselves.

    What does the evidence say?

    A study published last week has provided some preliminary evidence eating kimchi – the popular Korean fermented food – is associated with a lower risk of obesity in some instances. But there were mixed results.

    The South Korean study involved 115,726 men and women aged 40-69 who reported how much kimchi they’d eaten over the previous year. The study was funded by the World Institute of Kimchi, which specialises in researching the country’s national dish.

    Eating one to three servings of any type of kimchi a day was associated with a lower risk of obesity in men.

    Men who ate more than three serves a day of cabbage kimchi (baechu) were less likely to have obesity and abdominal obesity (excess fat deposits around their middle). And women who ate two to three serves a day of baechu were less likely to have obesity and abdominal obesity.

    Eating more radish kimchi (kkakdugi) was associated with less abdominal obesity in both men and women.

    However, people who ate five or more serves of any type of kimchi weighed more, had a larger waist sizes and were more likely to be obese.

    The study had limitations. The authors acknowledged the questionnaire they used may make it difficult to say exactly how much kimchi people actually ate.

    The study also relied on people to report past eating habits. This may make it hard for them to accurately recall what they ate.

    This study design can also only tell us if something is linked (kimchi and obesity), not if one thing causes another (if kimchi causes weight loss). So it is important to look at experimental studies where researchers make changes to people’s diets then look at the results.

    How about evidence from experimental trials?

    There have been several experimental studies looking at how much weight people lose after eating various types of fermented foods. Other studies looked at markers or measures of appetite, but not weight loss.

    One study showed the stomach of men who drank 1.4 litres of fermented milk during a meal took longer to empty (compared to those who drank the same quantity of whole milk). This is related to feeling fuller for longer, potentially having less appetite for more food.

    Another study showed drinking 200 millilitres of kefir (a small glass) reduced participants’ appetite after the meal, but only when the meal contained quickly-digested foods likely to make blood glucose levels rise rapidly. This study did not measure changes in weight.

    Kefir in jar, with kefir grains on wood spoon
    Kefir, a fermented milk drink, reduced people’s appetite.
    Ildi Papp/Shutterstock

    Another study looked at Indonesian young women with obesity. Eating tempeh (a fermented soybean product) led to changes in an appetite hormone. But this did not impact their appetite or whether they felt full. Weight was not measured in this study.

    A study in South Korea asked people to eat about 70g a day of chungkookjang (fermented soybean). There were improvements in some measures of obesity, including percentage body fat, lean body mass, waist-to-hip ratio and waist circumference in women. However there were no changes in weight for men or women.

    A systematic review of all studies that looked at the impact of fermented foods on satiety (feeling full) showed no effect.

    What should I do?

    The evidence so far is very weak to support or recommend fermented foods for weight loss. These experimental studies have been short in length, and many did not report weight changes.

    To date, most of the studies have used different fermented foods, so it is difficult to generalise across them all.

    Nevertheless, fermented foods are still useful as part of a healthy, varied and balanced diet, particularly if you enjoy them. They are rich in healthy bacteria, and nutrients.

    Are there downsides?

    Some fermented foods, such as kimchi and sauerkraut, have added salt. The latest kimchi study said the average amount of kimchi South Koreans eat provides about 490mg of salt a day. For an Australian, this would represent about 50% of the suggested dietary target for optimal health.

    Eating too much salt increases your risk of high blood pressure, heart disease and stroke. The Conversation

    Evangeline Mantzioris, Program Director of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Accredited Practising Dietitian, University of South Australia

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

    Share This Post

  • Does “A Little Dirt” Help Or Harm, vs Allergies?

    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’re not talking about exposure to the allergen in question, by the way.

    But first let’s mention that yes, that can help (albeit should be done under very controlled conditions only with appropriate medical professionals, in the case of things that can cause anaphylactic shock and death).

    If you’re interested in that, see: Peanut Allergy Diagnoses Have Been Halved: What Did They Do?

    But no, we really are talking about “a little dirt” where the dirt in question is not, itself, allergenic.

    Natural inoculation

    Researchers (Dr. Ruslan Medzhitov et al.) have found that early-life exposure to diverse microbes and proteins builds broad immune memory that shifts responses away from allergy-driving IgE antibodies, and towards protective IgG antibodies, reducing later allergic reactions (to anything).

    About that “anything”…

    Yes, it gives cross-reactive immune memory: exposure to many microbes and antigens created immune memory that protected against new, previously unseen allergens.

    No, that doesn’t mean it’ll definitely prevent all and any allergies, it simply means it reduces the risk of all and any allergies.

    How it works: cross-reactive adaptive immunity suppressed type II immune responses and reduced IgE-mediated mast cell activation.

    Or, translating that from sciencese:

    Why it works: immune systems trained by real-world environments respond to harmless real-world allergens in a balanced way, instead of overreacting.

    You can read the paper in full, here: Environmentally driven immune imprinting protects against allergy

    You may be wondering about general hygiene, and isn’t handwashing, use of sanitizer, etc, important to protect against disease? And yes, yes it is.

    See also: The Truth About Handwashing

    However, in the words of Dr. Medzhitov,

    ❝But the tradeoff is that our immune system is in this untrained, unprepared state, and otherwise harmless exposures trigger a pathological allergic response❞

    So, does this “natural inoculation” mean we should skip vaccines?

    No.

    This is about encountering harmless microbes in order to train the immune system to respond in a balanced fashion to something that is neither wanted nor a serious threat.

    With this kind of well-trained reaction, the body is more likely to be able to one day encounter a peanut and not immediately kill itself in response.

    However, that’s about things that are not in and of themselves a serious threat (except insofar as the body might have overreacted to them)

    There is an important difference between a peanut and a deadly virus that has evolved to take over the cells of your body until you die:

    • In the case of a peanut, the ideal bodily response is “don’t worry about it”
    • In the case of a deadly virus or bacterium, the ideal bodily response is “destroy it by any means necessary”

    For more on that, see: Why Some People Get Sick More (And How To Not Be One Of Them)

    Want to learn more?

    For much more detail than we can go into here, check out this excellent book that we reviewed a while back:

    The End of Food Allergy: The First Program To Prevent And Reverse A 21st Century Epidemic – by Dr. Kari Nadeau & Sloan Barnett

    It’s worth noting that with regard to the first-named author there, the bio begins:

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

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

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • AI could help us more accurately screen for breast cancer, new research

    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.

    At least 20,000 Australian women are diagnosed with breast cancer each year. And more than 3,300 die from the disease.

    To save women’s lives, we need to detect breast cancer early. Breast screening, which halves women’s risk of dying from breast cancer, is key to that.

    A new Australian study published today in The Lancet Digital Health suggests AI could help improve how we screen for breast cancer.

    Sasun Bughdaryan/Unsplash

    How do we currently screen for breast cancer?

    Since 1992, Australia has offered free breast X-rays, known as mammograms, every two years to women aged between 50 and 74. Just over half of eligible women participate.

    Of the women found to have cancer, about 25% are diagnosed between the biennial screens. These “interval cancers” are often aggressive and, unfortunately, more likely to be fatal.

    In some cases, a more sensitive screening test may have detected them earlier.

    The role of AI

    Australia’s BreastScreen program was established in response to several major clinical trials conducted between the 1960s and 1980s. The screening technology used by the program has not substantially changed since then.

    Researchers are now exploring risk-adjusted screening, which tailors screening to women based on their risk, as a way to detect more cancers earlier. This may include programs offering different technologies for women at higher risk of developing breast cancer.

    Currently, we generally assess cancer risk via questionnaires that help identify if a woman has any risk factors associated with breast cancer.

    One risk factor is breast density which refers to how much glandular tissue is in the breast. As well as being a risk factor for breast cancer, the higher a woman’s breast density, the harder it is to detect cancer on a mammogram.

    We can also use one-off genetic testing to identify women with a higher lifetime risk of developing breast cancer. This involves looking for high-risk gene mutations such as BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are associated with increased breast and ovarian cancer risk. Genetic testing can also help us estimate a person’s lifetime risk of developing breast cancer.

    More recently, researchers have been investigating artificial intelligence (AI) as a new approach to assess breast cancer risk. A new Australian study, published in The Lancet Digital Health today, focused on a specific AI tool known as BRAIx.

    What did the study involve? And what did it find?

    This study used an AI tool, known as BRAIx, trained using BreastScreen Australia data to help radiologists assess mammograms.

    The study assessed how well BRAIx predicted women’s risk of developing breast cancer in the next four years, among women who had a clear mammogram.

    Of the 95,823 Australian women assessed, 1.1% (1,098) had developed breast cancer in the four years after they received a clear mammogram. Of the 4,430 Swedish women assessed, 6.9% had developed breast cancer within two years of a clear screen.

    The study findings show that BRAIx scores were very useful for identifying women who were more likely to develop cancer one to two years after having a clear screen. Findings from the Australian dataset suggest BRAIx scores identified cancers found three to four years later, but with less accuracy.

    These findings suggest BRAIx could help identify women who might benefit from additional tests. This may include an MRI (which uses a magnetic field to produce images of organs and tissue) or contrast-enhanced mammography (which uses an iodine dye to improve the visibility of a regular mammogram).

    These findings reinforce a 2024 Swedish study that used an AI-based risk assessment to select women for additional testing. The researchers referred 7% of women to have a follow-up MRI, and 6.5% of were found to have cancers missed by mammograms.

    Does the study have any limitations?

    As with most studies, yes. Here are two.

    • it’s difficult to compare BRAIx to genetic testing. This is because BRAIx is trained to find missed or emerging cancers over a four year period. In contrast, genetic testing identifies a person’s risk of developing cancer over their lifetime
    • it might not use the best breast density data. This study found BRAIx more accurately predicts breast cancer risk compared to assessments based on breast density. But this breast density data was collected using a different tool to those used by the Breastscreen program. So this finding should be interpreted carefully.

    So, where to from here?

    The study adds to a growing body of evidence that AI risk assessment could help breast screening programs find cancers earlier.

    BRAIx is now being trialled as part of the BreastScreen Victoria program, to help read mammograms. And other states are already using and evaluating different AI tools for reading mammograms.

    So it may be time for Australia to conduct a national, independent review of these new tools. As part of a more risk-adjusted approach to breast screening, they could save lives.

    Carolyn Nickson, Principal Research Fellow, Cancer Elimination Collaboration, University of Sydney; The University of Melbourne and Bruce Mann, Professor of Surgery, Specialist Breast Surgeon, The University of Melbourne

    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:

  • The Yoga of Breath – by Richard Rosen

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

    You probably know to breathe through your nose, and to breathe with your diaphragm. But did you know you’re usually only breathing through one nostril at a time, and alternate between nostrils every few hours? And did you know how to breathe through both nostrils equally instead, and the benefits that can bring?

    The above is one example of many, of things that make this book stand out from the crowd when it comes to breathing exercises. Author Richard Rosen has a deep expertise in this topic, and explains everything clearly and comprehensively, without leaving room for ambiguity.

    While most of the book focuses on the mechanics and physical techniques of breathing, he does also cover some more mindstate-related things too—without which, it wouldn’t be yoga.

    If the book has a downside, it’s that its comprehensive nature could be off-putting to readers new to breathing work in general. However, since he does explain everything from the ground up, that’s no reason to be put off this book, iff you’re serious about learning.

    Bottom line: if you’d like a deeper understanding of breathwork than “breathe slowly through your nose, using your diaphragm”, this book will teach you depths of breathing you probably didn’t know were possible.

    Click here to check out The Yoga of Breath, and catch yours!

    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:

  • New Year, New Health Habits?

    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 that time of the year, and many of us hope to make this our healthiest year yet—or at least significantly improve it in some particular area that’s important to us! So, what news from the health world?

    The rise of GLP-1 agonists continues

    GLP-1 agonists have surged in popularity in the past year, and it looks like that trend is set to continue in the new one. The title of the below-linked pop-science article is slightly misleading, it’s not “almost three quarters of UK women”, but rather, “72% of the women using the digital weight loss platform Juniper”, which means the sample is confined to people interested in weight loss. Still, of those interested in weight loss, 72% is a lot, and the sample size was over 1000:

    Read in full: New Year, new approach to weight loss: Almost three quarters of UK women are considering using GLP-1s in 2025

    Related: 5 ways to naturally boost the “Ozempic Effect” ← these natural methods “hack” the same metabolic pathways as GLP-1 agonists do (it has to do with incretin levels), causing similar results

    The lesser of two evils

    Smoking is terrible, for everything. Vaping is… Not great, honestly, but as the below-discussed study shows, at the very least it results in much less severe respiratory symptoms than actual smoking. For many, vaping is a halfway-house to actually quitting; for some, it’s just harm reduction, and that too can be worthwhile.

    We imagine that probably very few 10almonds readers smoke cigarettes, but we know quite a few use cannabis, which is discussed also:

    Read in full: Switching to e-cigarettes may ease respiratory symptoms, offering hope for smokers

    Related: Vaping: A Lot Of Hot Air? ← we look at the pros, cons, and popular beliefs that were true a little while ago but now they’re largely not (because of regulatory changes re what’s allowed in vapes)

    Sometimes, more is more

    The below-linked pop-science article has a potentially confusingly-worded title that makes it sound like increased exercise duration results in decreasing marginal returns (i.e., after a certain point, you’re getting very limited extra benefits), but in fact the study says the opposite.

    Rather, increased moderate exercise (so, walking etc) results in a commensurately decreasing weight and a decreasing waistline.

    In short: walk more, lose more (pounds and inches). The study examined those who moved their bodies for 150–300 minutes per week:

    Read in full: Increased exercise duration linked to decreasing results in weight and waistline

    Related: The Doctor Who Wants Us To Exercise Less, & Move More

    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: