Toasted Chick’n Mango Tacos

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.

Tacos aren’t generally held up as the world’s healthiest food, but they can be! There’s so much going on in this dish today, healthwise, in a good way, that it’s hard to know where to start. But suffice it to say, these tacos are great for your gut, heart, blood sugars, and more.

You will need

For the chickpeas:

  • 1 can chickpeas, drained
  • 1 tbsp ras el-hanout*
  • 1 tsp red pepper flakes
  • ½ tsp MSG or 1 tsp low-sodium salt
  • Extra virgin olive oil

*You can easily make this yourself; following our recipe (linked above in the ingredients list) will be better than buying it ready-made, and if you have strong feelings about any of the ingredients, you can adjust per your preference.

For the tahini sauce:

  • ⅓ cup tahini
  • 2 tbsp apple cider vinegar
  • 2 tbsp finely chopped fresh dill
  • ¼ bulb garlic, minced
  • 1 tsp red pepper flakes
  • ½ tsp black pepper, coarse ground

It may seem like salt is conspicuous by its absence, but there is already enough in the chickpeas component; you do not want to overwhelm the dish. Trust us that enjoying these things together will be well-balanced and delicious as written.

For the mango relish:

  • ½ mango, pitted, peeled, and cubed
  • 2 tsp apple cider vinegar
  • 2 tsp cilantro, finely chopped (substitute with parsley if you have the “cilantro tastes like soap” gene)
  • 1 tsp red pepper flakes

For building the taco:

  • Soft corn tortillas
  • Handful of arugula
  • 1 avocado, pitted, peeled, and sliced
  • ½ red onion, sliced

Method

(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

1) Heat a sauté pan with a little olive oil in; add the chickpeas and then the rest of the ingredients from the chickpea section; cook for about 5 minutes, stirring frequently, and set aside.

2) Combine the tahini sauce ingredients in a small bowl, stirring in ¼ cup water, and set aside.

3) Combine the mango relish ingredients in a separate small bowl, and set aside. You can eat the other half of the mango if you like.

4) Lightly toast the tortillas in a dry skillet, or using a grill.

5) Assemble the tacos; we recommend the order: tortillas, arugula, avocado slices, chickpeas, mango relish, red onion slices, tahini sauce.

Enjoy!

Want to learn more?

For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Kimchi Fried Rice
  • Staying Alive – by Dr. Jenny Goodman
    Dr. Goodman’s “Staying Alive” is a reader-friendly guide to healthy living, offering season-specific advice and valuable tips on overcoming cravings and nurturing gut health.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Fluoride Toothpaste vs Non-Fluoride Toothpaste – 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 fluoride toothpaste to non-fluoride toothpaste, we picked the fluoride.

    Why?

    Fluoride is indeed toxic; that’s why it’s in toothpaste (to kill things; namely, bacteria whose waste products would harm our teeth). However, we are much bigger than those bacteria.

    Given the amount of fluoride in toothpaste (usually under 1mg per strip of toothpaste to cover a toothbrush head), the amount that people swallow unintentionally (about 1/20th of that, so about 0.1mg daily if brushing teeth twice daily), and the toxicity level of fluoride (32–64mg/kg), then even if we take the most dangerous ends of all those numbers (and an average body size), to suffer ill effects from fluoride due to brushing your teeth, would require that you brush your teeth more than 23,000 times per day.

    Alternatively, if you were to ravenously eat the toothpaste instead of spitting it out, you’d only need to brush your teeth a little over 1,000 times per day.

    All the same, please don’t eat toothpaste; that’s not the message here.

    However! In head-to-head tests, fluoride toothpaste has almost always beaten non-fluoride toothpaste.

    Almost? Yes, almost: hydroxyapatite performed equally in one study, but that’s not usually an option on as many supermarket shelves.

    We found some on Amazon, though, which is the one we used for today’s head-to-head. Here it is:

    Boka Fluoride-Free Toothpaste

    However, before you rush to buy it, do be aware that the toxicity of hydroxyapatite appears to be about twice that of fluoride:

    Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety Opinion On Hydroxyapatite (Nano)

    …which is still very safe (you’d need to brush your teeth, and eat all the toothpaste, about 500 times per day, to get to toxic levels, if we run with the same numbers we discussed before. Again, please do not do that, though).

    But, since the science so far suggests it’s about twice as toxic as fluoride, then regardless of that still being very safe, the fluoride is obviously (by the same metric) twice as safe, hence picking the fluoride.

    Want more options?

    Check out our previous main feature:

    Less Common Oral Hygiene Options

    (the above article also links back to our discussion of different toothpastes and mouthwashes, by the way)

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Peace Is Every Step – by Thích Nhất Hạnh

    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.

    Mindfulness is one of the few practices to make its way from religion (in this case, Buddhism) into hard science. We’ve written before about its many evidence-based benefits, and many national health information outlets recommend it. So, what does this book have to add?

    Thích Nhất Hạnh spent most of his 95 years devoted to the practice and teaching of mindfulness and compassion. In this book, the focus is on bringing mindfulness off the meditation mat and into general life.

    After all, what if we could extend that “unflappability” into situations that pressure and antagonize us? That would be some superpower!

    The author offers techniques to do just that, simple exercises to transform negative emotions, and to make us more likely to remember to do so.

    After all, “in the heat of the moment” is rarely when many of us are at our best, this book gives way to allow those moments themselves to serve as immediate triggers to be our best.

    The title “Peace Is Every Step” is not a random collection of words; the goal of this book is to enable to reader to indeed carry peace with us as we go.

    Not just “peace is always available to us”, but if we do it right: “we have now arranged for our own peace to automatically step in and help us when we need it most”.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to practice mindfulness, or practice it more consistently, this book offers some powerful tools.

    Click here to check out Peace Is Every Step, and carry yours with you!

    Share This Post

  • Rethinking Exercise: The Workout Paradox

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

    The notion of running a caloric deficit (i.e., expending more calories than we consume) to reduce bodyfat is appealing in its simplicity, but… we’d say “it doesn’t actually work outside of a lab”, but honestly, it doesn’t actually work outside of a calculator.

    Why?

    For a start, exercise calorie costs are quite small numbers compared to metabolic base rate. Our brain alone uses a huge portion of our daily calories, and the rest of our body literally never stops doing stuff. Even if we’re lounging in bed and ostensibly not moving, on a cellular level we stay incredibly busy, and all that costs (and the currency is: calories).

    Since that cost is reflected in the body’s budget per kg of bodyweight, a larger body (regardless of its composition) will require more calories than a smaller one. We say “regardless of its composition” because this is true regardless—but for what it’s worth, muscle is more “costly” to maintain than fat, which is one of several reasons why the average man requires more daily calories than the average woman, since on average men will tend to have more muscle.

    And if you do exercise because you want to run out the budget so the body has to “spend” from fat stores?

    Good luck, because while it may work in the very short term, the body will quickly adapt, like an accountant seeing your reckless spending and cutting back somewhere else. That’s why in all kinds of exercise except high-intensity interval training, a period of exercise will be followed by a metabolic slump, the body’s “austerity measures”, to balance the books.

    You may be wondering: why is it different for HIIT? It’s because it changes things up frequently enough that the body doesn’t get a chance to adapt. To labor the financial metaphor, it involves lying to your accountant, so that the compensation is not made. Congratulations: you’re committing calorie fraud (but it’s good for the body, so hey).

    That doesn’t mean other kinds of exercise are useless (or worse, necessarily counterproductive), though! Just, that we must acknowledge that other forms of exercise are great for various aspects of physical health (strengthening the body, mobilizing blood and lymph, preventing disease, enjoying mental health benefits, etc) that don’t really affect fat levels much (which are decided more in the kitchen than the gym—and even in the category of diet, it’s more about what and how and when you eat, rather than how much).

    For more information on metabolic balance in the context of exercise, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Kimchi Fried Rice
  • Savoy Cabbage vs Pak Choi – 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 savoy cabbage to pak choi, we picked the savoy.

    Why?

    Looking at the macros first, the savoy has a little more protein, just under 3x the carbs, and just over 3x the fiber. A modest yet respectable win for savoy.

    In terms of vitamins, savoy has more of vitamins B1, B5, B9, E, K, and choline, while pak choi has more of vitamins A, B2, B3, and C. Thus, a 6:4 win for savoy.

    When it comes to minerals, savoy has more copper, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while pak choi has more calcium, iron, and potassium. So this time, a 7:3 win for savoy.

    On the other hand, pak choi scores higher on the polyphenols side, especially in the categories of kaempferol and quercetin.

    Still, adding up the sections, we conclude this one’s an overall win for savoy cabbage. Of course, enjoy either or both, though!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Fight Inflammation & Protect Your Brain, With Quercetin

    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:

  • When Doctors Make House Calls, Modern-Style!

    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.

    In Tuesday’s newsletter, we asked you foryour opinion of telehealth for primary care consultations*, and got the above-depicted, below-described, set of responses:

    • About 46% said “It is no substitute for an in-person meeting with a doctor; let’s keep the human touch”
    • About 29% said “It means less waiting and more accessibility, while avoiding transmission of diseases”
    • And 25 % said “I find that the pros and cons of telehealth vs in-person balance out, so: no preference”

    *We specified that by “primary care” we mean the initial consultation with a non-specialist doctor, before receiving treatment or being referred to a specialist. By “telehealth” we mean by videocall or phonecall.

    So, what does the science say?

    A quick note first

    Because telehealth was barely a thing (statistically speaking) before the first stages of the COVID pandemic, compared to how it is now, most of the science for this is young, and a lot of the science simply hasn’t been done yet, and/or has not been published yet, because the process can take years.

    Because of this, some studies we do have aren’t specifically about primary care, and are sometimes about specialists. We think this should not affect the results much, but it bears highlighting.

    Nevertheless, we’ll do what we can with the science we have!

    Telehealth is more accessible than in-person consultations: True or False?

    True, for most people. For example…

    ❝Data was found from a variety of emergency and non-emergency departments of primary, secondary, and specialised healthcare.

    Satisfaction was high among recipients of healthcare, scoring 9-10 on a scale of 0-10 or ranging from 73.3% to 100%.

    Convenience was rated high in every specialty examined. Satisfaction of clinicians was high throughout the specialities despite connection failure and concerns about confidentiality of information.❞

    Dr. Wiam Alashek et al.

    whereas…

    ❝Nonetheless, studies reported perception of increased barriers to accessing care and inequalities for vulnerable patients especially in older people❞

    Ibid.

    Source: Satisfaction with telemedicine use during COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a systematic review

    Now, perception of those things does necessarily equate to an actual increased barrier, but it is reasonable that someone who thinks something is inaccessible will be less inclined to try to access it.

    The quality of care provided via telehealth is as good as in-person: True or False?

    True, ostensibly, with caveats. The caveats are:

    • We’re going offreported patient satisfactionnot objective patient health outcomes (we found little* science as yet for the relative incidence of misdiagnosis, for example—which kind of thing will take time to be revealed).
    • We’re also therefore speaking (as statistics do) for the significant majority of people. However, if we happen to be (statistically speaking) an insignificant minority, well, that just sucks for us personally.

    *we did find some, but it wasn’t very helpful yet. For example:

    An electronic trigger to detect telemedicine-related diagnostic errors

    this one does look at the incidence of diagnostic errors, but provides no control group (i.e. otherwise-comparable in-person consultations) for comparison.

    While most oft-considered demographic groups reported comparable patient satisfaction (per racegender, and socioeconomic status, for example), there was one outlier variable, which was age (as we quoted from that first study above).

    However!

    Looking under the hood of these stats, it seems that age is not the real culprit, so much as technological illiteracy, which is heavily correlated with age:

    ❝Lower eHealth literacy is associated with more negative attitudes towards I/C technology in healthcare. This trend is consistent across diverse demographics and regions. ❞

    Dr. Raghad Elgamal

    Source: Meta-analysis: eHealth literacy and attitudes towards internet/computer technology

    There are things that can be done at an in-person consultation that can’t be done by telehealth: True or False?

    True, of course. It is incredibly rare that we will cite “common sense”, (as sometimes “common sense” is actually “common mistakes” and is simply and verifiably wrong), but in this case, as one 10almonds subscriber put it:

    ❝The doctor uses his five senses to assess. This cannot be attained over the phone❞

    ~ 10almonds subscriber

    A quick note first: if your doctor is using their sense of taste to diagnose you, please get a different doctor, because they should definitely not be doing that!

    Not in this century, anyway… Once upon a time, diabetes was diagnosed by urine-tasting (and yes, that was a fairly reliable method).

    However, nowadays indeed a doctor will use sightsoundtouch, and sometimes even smell.

    In a videocall we’re down to two of those senses (sight and sound), and in a phonecall, down to one (sound) and even that is hampered. Your doctor cannot, for example, use a stethoscope over the phone.

    With this in mind, it really comes down to what you need from your doctor in that consultation.

    • If you’re 99% sure that what you need is to be prescribed an antidepressant, that probably doesn’t need a full physical.
    • If you’re 99% sure that what you need is a referral, chances are that’ll be fine by telehealth too.
    • If your doctor is 99% sure that what you need is a verbal check-up (e.g. “How’s it been going for you, with the medication that I prescribed for you a month ago?”, then again, a call is probably fine.

    If you have a worrying lump, or an unhappy bodily discharge, or an unexplained mysterious pain? These things, more likely an in-person check-up is in order.

    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:

  • Beat Food Addictions!

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

    When It’s More Than “Just” Cravings

    This is Dr. Nicole Avena. She’s a research neuroscientist who also teaches at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, as well as at Princeton. She’s done a lot of groundbreaking research in the field of nutrition, diet, and addition, with a special focus on women’s health and sugar intake specifically.

    What does she want us to know?

    Firstly, that food addictions are real addictions.

    We know it can sound silly, like the famous line from Mad Max:

    ❝Do not, my friends, become addicted to water. It will take hold of you and you will resent its absence!❞

    ~ “Immortan Joe”

    As an aside, it is actually possible to become addicted to water; if one drinks it excessively (we are talking gallons every day) it does change the structure of the brain (no surprise; the brain is not supposed to have that much water!) causing structural damage that then results in dependency, and headaches upon withdrawal. It’s called psychogenic polydipsia:

    Primary polydipsia: Update

    But back onto today’s more specific topic, and by a different mechanism of addiction…

    Food addictions are dopaminergic addictions (as is cocaine)

    If you are addicted to a certain food (often sugar, but other refined carbs such as potato products, and also especially refined flour products, are also potential addictive substances), then when you think about the food in question, your brain lights up with more dopamine than it should, and you are strongly motivated to seek and consume the substance in question.

    Remember, dopamine functions by expectation, not by result. So until your brain’s dopamine-gremlin is sated, it will keep flooding you with motivational dopamine; that’s why the first bite tastes best, then you wolf down the rest before your brain can change its mind, and afterwards you may be left thinking/feeling “was that worth it?”.

    Much like with other addictions (especially alcohol), shame and regret often feature strongly afterwards, even accompanied by notions of “never again”.

    But, binge-eating is as difficult to escape as binge-drinking.

    You can break free, but you will probably have to take it seriously

    Dr. Avena recommends treating a food addiction like any other addiction, which means:

    1. Know why you want to quit (make a list of the reasons, and this will help you stay on track later!)
    2. Make a conscious decision to genuinely quit
    3. Learn about the nature of the specific addiction (know thy enemy!)
    4. Choose a strategy (e.g. wean off vs cold turkey, and decide what replacements, if any, you will use)
    5. Get support (especially from those around you, and/but the support of others facing, or who have successfully faced, the same challenge is very helpful too)
    6. Keep track of your success (build and maintain a streak!)
    7. Lean into how you will better enjoy life without addiction to the substance (it never really made you happy anyway, so enjoy your newfound freedom and good health!)

    Want more from Dr. Avena?

    You can check out her column at Psychology Today here:

    Psychology Today | Food Junkie ← it has a lot of posts about sugar addiction in particular, and gives a lot of information and practical advice

    You can also read her book, which could be a great help if you are thinking of quitting a sugar addiction:

    Sugarless: A 7-Step Plan to Uncover Hidden Sugars, Curb Your Cravings, and Conquer Your Addiction

    Enjoy!

    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: