Vibration Plate, Review After 6 Months: Is It Worth 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.

Is it push-button exercise, or an expensive fad, or something else entirely? Robin, from “The Science of Self-Care”, has insights:

Science & Experience

According to the science (studies cited in the video and linked-to in the video description, underneath it on YouTube), vibration therapy does have some clear benefits, namely:

  • Bone health (helps with bone density, particularly beneficial for postmenopausal women)
  • Muscle recovery (reduces lactate levels, aiding faster recovery)
  • Joint health (reduces pain and improves function in osteoarthritis patients)
  • Muscle stimulation (helps older adults maintain muscle mass)
  • Cognitive function (due to increased blood flow to the brain)

And from her personal experience, the benefits included:

  • Improved recovery after exercise, reducing muscle soreness and stiffness
  • Reduced back pain and improved posture (not surprising, given the need for stabilizing muscles when using one of these)
  • Better circulation and (likely resulting from same) skin clarity

She did not, however, notice:

  • Any reduction in cellulite
  • Any change in body composition (fat loss or muscle gain)

For a deeper look into these things and more, plus a demonstration of how the machine actually operates, enjoy:

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

Want to learn more?

You might also 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

  • 25 Healthy Habits That Will Change Your Life
  • HRT: Bioidentical vs Animal
    Bioidentical hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is safer and more effective than other forms, reducing the risk of breast cancer and cardiovascular disease.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Kettlebell Sport & Fitness Basics – by Audrey Burgio

    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.

    Professional athlete & coach Audrey Burgio covers how to get a full-body workout that will make you stronger and more flexible (there are stretches here too, and many exercises are about strength and suppleness), as well as building stability and balance. In short, more robust and with better mobility.

    Which is one of the best things about kettlebell training—unlike dumbbells and barbells, a kettlebell requires the kind of strength that one has to use when doing many routine tasks, from carrying the groceries to moving a big pan in the kitchen.

    Because it is otherwise absolutely possible to look like Arnold Schwarzenegger in the gym, and then still pull a muscle moving something at home because the angle was awkward or somesuch!

    However, making one’s body so robust does require training safely, and the clear instructions in this book will help the reader avoid injuries that might otherwise be incurred by just picking up some kettlebells and guessing.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to get strong and supple from the comfort of your own home, this book can definitely lead the way!

    Click here to check out Kettlebell Sport & Fitness Basics, and see the difference in your body!

    Share This Post

  • Do We Need Supplements, And Do They Work?

    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.

    Does our diet need a little help?

    We asked you for your take on supplements, and got the above-illustrated, below-described set of results.

    • The largest minority of respondents (a little over a third) voted for “I just take something very specific”
    • The next most respondents voted for “I take so many supplements; every little helps!”
    • Almost as many voted for “I just take a vitamin or two / a multivitamin”
    • Fewest, about 8%, voted for “I get everything I need from my diet”

    But what does the science say?

    Food is less nutritious now than it used to be: True or False?

    True or False depending on how you measure it.

    An apple today and an apple from a hundred years ago are likely to contain the same amounts of micronutrients per apple, but a lower percentage of micronutrients per 100g of apple.

    The reason for this is that apples (and many other food products; apples are just an arbitrary example) have been selectively bred (and in some cases, modified) for size, and because the soil mineral density has remained the same, the micronutrients per apple have not increased commensurate to the increase in carbohydrate weight and/or water weight. Thus, the resultant percentage will be lower, despite the quantity remaining the same.

    We’re going to share some science on this, and/but would like to forewarn readers that the language of this paper is a bit biased, as it looks to “debunk” claims of nutritional values dropping while skimming over “yes, they really have dropped percentage-wise” in favor of “but look, the discrete mass values are still the same, so that’s just a mathematical illusion”.

    The reality is, it’s no more a mathematical illusion than is the converse standpoint of saying the nutritional value is the same, despite the per-100g values dropping. After all, sometimes we eat an apple as-is; sometimes we buy a bag of frozen chopped fruit. That 500g bag of chopped fruit is going to contain less copper (for example) than one from decades past.

    Here’s the paper, and you’ll see what we mean:

    Mineral nutrient composition of vegetables, fruits and grains: The context of reports of apparent historical declines

    Supplements aren’t absorbed properly and thus are a waste of money: True or False?

    True or False depending on the supplement (and your body, and the rest of your diet)

    Many people are suffering from dietary deficiencies of vitamins and minerals, that could be easily correctable by supplementation:

    However, as this study by Dr. Fang Fang Zhang shows, a lot of vitamin and mineral supplementation does not appear to have much of an effect on actual health outcomes, vis-à-vis specific diseases. She looks at:

    • Cardiovascular disease
    • Cancer
    • Type 2 diabetes
    • Osteoporosis

    Her key take-aways from this study were:

    • Randomised trial evidence does not support use of vitamin, mineral, and fish oil supplements to reduce the risk of non-communicable diseases
    • People using supplements tend to be older, female, and have higher education, income, and healthier lifestyles than people who do not use them
    • Use of supplements appreciably reduces the prevalence of inadequate intake for most nutrients but also increases the prevalence of excess intake for some nutrients
    • Further research is needed to assess the long term effects of supplements on the health of the general population and in individuals with specific nutritional needs, including those from low and middle income countries

    Read her damning report: Health effects of vitamin and mineral supplements

    On the other hand…

    This is almost entirely about blanket vitamin-and-mineral supplementation. With regard to fish oil supplementation, many commercial fish oil supplements break down in the stomach rather than the intestines, and don’t get absorbed well. Additionally, many people take them in forms that aren’t pleasant, and thus result in low adherence (i.e., they nominally take them, but in fact they just sit on the kitchen counter for a year).

    One thing we can conclude from this is that it’s good to check the science for any given supplement before taking it, and know what it will and won’t help for. Our “Monday Research Review” editions of 10almonds do this a lot, although we tend to focus on herbal supplements rather than vitamins and minerals.

    We can get everything we need from our diet: True or False?

    Contingently True (but here be caveats)

    In principle, if we eat the recommended guideline amounts of various macro- and micro-nutrients, we will indeed get all that we are generally considered to need. Obviously.

    However, this may come with:

    • Make sure to get enough protein… Without too much meat, and also without too much carbohydrate, such as from most plant sources of protein
    • Make sure to get enough carbohydrates… But only the right kinds, and not too much, nor at the wrong time, and without eating things in the wrong order
    • Make sure to get enough healthy fats… Without too much of the unhealthy fats that often exist in the same foods
    • Make sure to get the right amount of vitamins and minerals… We hope you have your calculators out to get the delicate balance of calcium, magnesium, potassium, phosphorus, and vitamin D right.

    That last one’s a real pain, by the way. Too much or too little of one or another and the whole set start causing problems, and several of them interact with several others, and/or compete for resources, and/or are needed for the others to do their job.

    And, that’s hard enough to balance when you’re taking supplements with the mg/µg amount written on them, never mind when you’re juggling cabbages and sardines.

    On the topic of those sardines, don’t forget to carefully balance your omega-3, -6, and -9, and even within omega-3, balancing ALA, EPA, and DHA, and we hope you’re juggling those HDL and LDL levels too.

    So, when it comes to getting everything we need from our diet, for most of us (who aren’t living in food deserts and/or experiencing food poverty, or having a medical condition that restricts our diet), the biggest task is not “getting enough”, it’s “getting enough of the right things without simultaneously overdoing it on the others”.

    With supplements, it’s a lot easier to control what we’re putting in our bodies.

    And of course, unless our diet includes things that usually can’t be bought in supermarkets, we’re not going to get the benefits of taking, as a supplement, such things as:

    Etc.

    So, there definitely are supplements with strong science-backed benefits, that probably can’t be found on your plate!

    Share This Post

  • Apricots vs Peaches – 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 apricots to peaches, we picked the apricots.

    Why?

    Both are great! But there’s a clear winner:

    In terms of macros, apricots have more fiber and, which is less important because the numbers are small, more protein. Apricots do also have more carbs, and/but carbs from whole fruit are not a problem for most people (especially because of the fiber), unless undertaking a very carb-controlled diet.

    When it comes to vitamins, apricots sweep with more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B5, B6, B9, C, E, & K. Peaches meanwhile boast more vitamin B3, and that only marginally, as well as more choline.

    In the category of minerals, apricots sweep again with more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc. Peaches are not higher in any minerals.

    Finally, if we consider polyphenols, apricots sweep yet again. The flavonols that peaches have, apricots have more of, and apricots have a long list of flavonols that peaches don’t.

    Outside of flavonols, there is one (1) phenolic acid that peaches have more of (it’s 3-Caffeoylquinic acid), and it’s only slightly more, and it’s mostly in the skin which isn’t included if you buy your fruit ready-chopped. So in those cases, apricots would have the higher 3-Caffeoylquinic acid content anyway.

    All in all, with their higher content of fiber, vitamins, minerals, and polyphenols, apricots easily win the day.

    Enjoy both, though! Diversity is healthy!

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • 25 Healthy Habits That Will Change Your Life
  • What’s Keeping the US From Allowing Better Sunscreens?

    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 dermatologist Adewole “Ade” Adamson sees people spritzing sunscreen as if it’s cologne at the pool where he lives in Austin, Texas, he wants to intervene. “My wife says I shouldn’t,” he said, “even though most people rarely use enough sunscreen.”

    At issue is not just whether people are using enough sunscreen, but what ingredients are in it.

    The Food and Drug Administration’s ability to approve the chemical filters in sunscreens that are sold in countries such as Japan, South Korea, and France is hamstrung by a 1938 U.S. law that has required sunscreens to be tested on animals and classified as drugs, rather than as cosmetics as they are in much of the world. So Americans are not likely to get those better sunscreens — which block the ultraviolet rays that can cause skin cancer and lead to wrinkles — in time for this summer, or even the next.

    Sunscreen makers say that requirement is unfair because companies including BASF Corp. and L’Oréal, which make the newer sunscreen chemicals, submitted safety data on sunscreen chemicals to the European Union authorities some 20 years ago.

    Steven Goldberg, a retired vice president of BASF, said companies are wary of the FDA process because of the cost and their fear that additional animal testing could ignite a consumer backlash in the European Union, which bans animal testing of cosmetics, including sunscreen. The companies are asking Congress to change the testing requirements before they take steps to enter the U.S. marketplace.

    In a rare example of bipartisanship last summer, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) thanked Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) for urging the FDA to speed up approvals of new, more effective sunscreen ingredients. Now a bipartisan bill is pending in the House that would require the FDA to allow non-animal testing.

    “It goes back to sunscreens being classified as over-the-counter drugs,” said Carl D’Ruiz, a senior manager at DSM-Firmenich, a Switzerland-based maker of sunscreen chemicals. “It’s really about giving the U.S. consumer something that the rest of the world has. People aren’t dying from using sunscreen. They’re dying from melanoma.”

    Every hour, at least two people die of skin cancer in the United States. Skin cancer is the most common cancer in America, and 6.1 million adults are treated each year for basal cell and squamous cell carcinomas, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The nation’s second-most-common cancer, breast cancer, is diagnosed about 300,000 times annually, though it is far more deadly.

    Dermatologists Offer Tips on Keeping Skin Safe and Healthy

    – Stay in the shade during peak sunlight hours, 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. daylight time.– Wear hats and sunglasses.– Use UV-blocking sun umbrellas and clothing.– Reapply sunscreen every two hours.You can order overseas versions of sunscreens from online pharmacies such as Cocooncenter in France. Keep in mind that the same brands may have different ingredients if sold in U.S. stores. But importing your sunscreen may not be affordable or practical. “The best sunscreen is the one that you will use over and over again,” said Jane Yoo, a New York City dermatologist.

    Though skin cancer treatment success rates are excellent, 1 in 5 Americans will develop skin cancer by age 70. The disease costs the health care system $8.9 billion a year, according to CDC researchers. One study found that the annual cost of treating skin cancer in the United States more than doubled from 2002 to 2011, while the average annual cost for all other cancers increased by just 25%. And unlike many other cancers, most forms of skin cancer can largely be prevented — by using sunscreens and taking other precautions.

    But a heavy dose of misinformation has permeated the sunscreen debate, and some people question the safety of sunscreens sold in the United States, which they deride as “chemical” sunscreens. These sunscreen opponents prefer “physical” or “mineral” sunscreens, such as zinc oxide, even though all sunscreen ingredients are chemicals.

    “It’s an artificial categorization,” said E. Dennis Bashaw, a retired FDA official who ran the agency’s clinical pharmacology division that studies sunscreens.

    Still, such concerns were partly fed by the FDA itself after it published a study that said some sunscreen ingredients had been found in trace amounts in human bloodstreams. When the FDA said in 2019, and then again two years later, that older sunscreen ingredients needed to be studied more to see if they were safe, sunscreen opponents saw an opening, said Nadim Shaath, president of Alpha Research & Development, which imports chemicals used in cosmetics.

    “That’s why we have extreme groups and people who aren’t well informed thinking that something penetrating the skin is the end of the world,” Shaath said. “Anything you put on your skin or eat is absorbed.”

    Adamson, the Austin dermatologist, said some sunscreen ingredients have been used for 30 years without any population-level evidence that they have harmed anyone. “The issue for me isn’t the safety of the sunscreens we have,” he said. “It’s that some of the chemical sunscreens aren’t as broad spectrum as they could be, meaning they do not block UVA as well. This could be alleviated by the FDA allowing new ingredients.”

    Ultraviolet radiation falls between X-rays and visible light on the electromagnetic spectrum. Most of the UV rays that people come in contact with are UVA rays that can penetrate the middle layer of the skin and that cause up to 90% of skin aging, along with a smaller amount of UVB rays that are responsible for sunburns.

    The sun protection factor, or SPF, rating on American sunscreen bottles denotes only a sunscreen’s ability to block UVB rays. Although American sunscreens labeled “broad spectrum” should, in theory, block UVA light, some studies have shown they fail to meet the European Union’s higher UVA-blocking standards.

    “It looks like a number of these newer chemicals have a better safety profile in addition to better UVA protection,” said David Andrews, deputy director of Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit that researches the ingredients in consumer products. “We have asked the FDA to consider allowing market access.”

    The FDA defends its review process and its call for tests of the sunscreens sold in American stores as a way to ensure the safety of products that many people use daily, rather than just a few times a year at the beach.

    “Many Americans today rely on sunscreens as a key part of their skin cancer prevention strategy, which makes satisfactory evidence of both safety and effectiveness of these products critical for public health,” Cherie Duvall-Jones, an FDA spokesperson, wrote in an email.

    D’Ruiz’s company, DSM-Firmenich, is the only one currently seeking to have a new over-the-counter sunscreen ingredient approved in the United States. The company has spent the past 20 years trying to gain approval for bemotrizinol, a process D’Ruiz said has cost $18 million and has advanced fitfully, despite attempts by Congress in 2014 and 2020 to speed along applications for new UV filters.

    Bemotrizinol is the bedrock ingredient in nearly all European and Asian sunscreens, including those by the South Korean brand Beauty of Joseon and Bioré, a Japanese brand.

    D’Ruiz said bemotrizinol could secure FDA approval by the end of 2025. If it does, he said, bemotrizinol would be the most vetted and safest sunscreen ingredient on the market, outperforming even the safety profiles of zinc oxide and titanium dioxide.

    As Congress and the FDA debate, many Americans have taken to importing their own sunscreens from Asia or Europe, despite the risk of fake products.

    “The sunscreen issue has gotten people to see that you can be unsafe if you’re too slow,” said Alex Tabarrok, a professor of economics at George Mason University. “The FDA is just incredibly slow. They’ve been looking at this now literally for 40 years. Congress has ordered them to do it, and they still haven’t done it.”

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    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:

  • A Cold Shower A Day Keeps The Doctor Away?

    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.

    A Cold Shower A Day Keeps The Doctor Away?

    This is Dutch extreme athlete Wim Hof, also known as “The Iceman”! He’s broken many world records mostly relating to the enduring the cold, for example:

    • climbing Mount Kilimanjaro in shorts
    • running a half-marathon above the Arctic Circle barefoot
    • standing in a container completely covered with ice cubes for more than 112 minutes

    You might not want to do yoga in your pyjamas on an iceberg, but you might like…

    • better circulatory health
    • reduced risk of stroke
    • a boosted immune system
    • healthier skin
    • more energy and alertness

    …and things like that. Wim Hof’s method is not just about extreme athletic achievements; most of what he does, the stuff that can benefit the rest of us, is much more prosaic.

    The Wim Hof Method

    For Wim Hof, three things are key:

    Today, we’re going to be focusing on the last one there.

    What are the benefits of Cold Therapy?

    Once upon a time, we didn’t have central heating, electric blankets, thermal underwear, and hot showers. In fact, once upon a time, we didn’t have houses or clothes. We used to be a lot more used to the elements! And while it’s all well and good to enjoy modern comforts, it has left our bodies lacking practice.

    Practice at what? Most notably: vasodilation and vasoconstriction, in response to temperature changes. Either:

    • vasodilation, because part of our body needs more blood to keep it warm and nourished, or
    • vasoconstriction, because part of our body needs less blood running through it to get cooled down.

    Switching between the two gives the blood vessels practice at doing it, and improves vascular muscle tone. If your body doesn’t get that practice, your blood vessels will be sluggish at making the change. This can cause circulation problems, which in turn have a big impact in many other areas of health, including:

    • cardiovascular disease
    • stroke risk
    • mood instability
    • nerve damage in extremities

    On the flipside, if the blood vessels do get regular practice at dilating and constricting, you might enjoy lower risk of those things, and instead:

    • improved immune response
    • healthier skin
    • better quality sleep
    • more energy and alertness
    • improved sexual performance/responsiveness

    So, how to get that, without getting extreme?

    As today’s title suggests, “a cold shower a day” is a great practice.

    You don’t have to jump straight in, especially if you think your circulation and vascular responses might be a bit sluggish in the first instance. In fact, Wim Hof recommends:

    • Week 1: Thirty seconds of cold water at the end of a warm shower each morning
    • Week 2: One minute of cold water at the end of a warm shower each morning
    • Week 3: A minute and a half of cold water at the end of a warm shower each morning
    • Week 4: Two minutes of cold water at the end of a warm shower each morning

    How cold is cold?

    The benefits of cold exposure begin at around 16ºC / 60ºF, so in most places, water from the cold water mains is sufficiently cold.

    As your body becomes more used to making the quick-change on a vascular level, the cold water will seem less shocking to your system. In other words, on day 30 it won’t hit you like it did on day one.

    At that point, you can either continue with your two-minutes daily cold shower, and reap the benefits, or if you’re curious to push it further, that’s where ice baths come in!

    Can anyone do it, or are any conditions contraindicated?

    As ever, we’re a health and productivity newsletter, not doctors, let alone your doctors. Nothing here is medical advice. However, Wim Hof himself says:

    ❝Listen to your body, and never force the practices. We advise against doing Wim Hof Method if you are dealing with any of the following:

    • Epilepsy
    • High blood pressure
    • Coronary heart disease
    • A history of serious healthy issues like heart failure or stroke
    • Pregnancy*
    • Childhood*❞

    *There is simply not enough science regarding the effects of cold exposure on people who are pregnant, or children. Obviously, we don’t expect this to be remedied anytime soon, because the study insitutions’ ethics boards would (rightly!) hold up the study.

    As for the other conditions, and just generally if unsure, consult a doctor.

    As you can see, this does mean that a limitation of Cold Therapy is that it appears to be far better as a preventative, since it helps guard against the very conditions that could otherwise become contraindications.

    We haven’t peppered today’s main feature with study papers, partly because Wim Hof’s own website has kindly collated a collection of them (with links and summaries!) onto one page:

    Further reading: The Science Behind The Wim Hof Method

    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:

  • Rise And (Really) Shine!

    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: Would love to hear more ideas about effective first thing in the morning time management to get a great start on your day.

    A: There are a lot of schools of thought about what’s best in this regard! Maybe we’ll do a main feature sometime. But some things that are almost universally agreed upon are:

    • Prepare your to-do list the night before
    • Have some sort of buffer between waking up and getting to productivity.
    • For me (hi, your writer here) it’s my first coffee of the day. It’s not even about the caffeine, it’s about the ritual of it, it’s a marker that separates my night from the day and tells my brain what gear to get into.
      • Others may like to exercise first thing in the morning
      • For still yet others, it could be a shower, cold or otherwise
      • Some people like a tall glass of lemon water to rehydrate after sleeping!
      • If you take drinkable morning supplements such as this pretty awesome nootropic stack, it’s a great time for that and an excellent way to get the brain-juices flowing!
    • When you do get to productivity: eat the frog first! What this means is: if eating a frog is the hardest thing you’ll have to do all day, do that first. Basically, tackle the most intimidating task first. That way, you won’t spend your day stressed/anxious and/or subconsciously wasting time in order to procrastinate and avoid it.
    • Counterpart to the above: a great idea is to also plan something to look forward to when your working day is done. It doesn’t matter much what it is, provided it’s rewarding to you, that makes you keen to finish your tasks to get to it.

    Have a question you’d like to see answered here? Hit reply to this email, or use the feedback widget at the bottom! We always love to hear from you

    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: