What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Fibromyalgia – by Dr. R. Paul St Amand

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 core claim of the book is that guaifenesin, an over-the-counter expectorant (with a good safety profile) usually taken to treat a chesty cough, is absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, and is rapidly metabolized and excreted into the urine—and on the way, it lowers uric acid levels, which is a big deal for fibromyalgia sufferers.

He goes on to explain how the guaifenesin, by a similar biochemical mechanism, additionally facilitates the removal of other excess secretions that are associated with fibromyalgia.

The science for all this is… Compelling and logical, while not being nearly so well-established yet as his confidence would have us believe.

In other words, he could be completely wrong, because adequate testing has not yet been done. However, he also could be right; scientific knowledge is, by the very reality of scientific method, always a step behind hypothesis and theory (in that order).

Meanwhile, there are certainly many glowing testimonials from fibromyalgia sufferers, saying that this helped a lot.

Bottom line: if you have fibromyalgia and do not mind trying a relatively clinically untested (yet logical and anecdotally successful) protocol to lessen then symptoms (allegedly, to zero), then this book will guide you through that and tell you everything to watch out for.

Click here to check out What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Fibromyalgia, and [check with your doctor/pharmacist and] try it out!

Don’t Forget…

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

Recommended

  • Laziness Does Not Exist – by Dr. Devon Price
  • How To Reduce Chronic Stress
    Sunday Stress-Buster: Learn how to manage acute and chronic stress. Discover the dangers of too much cortisol and focus on what you can control. Try relaxation techniques and radical acceptance. Breathe.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • Owning Your Weight – by Henri Marcoux

    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 lot of diet books—which this isn’t—presuppose that the reader wants to lose weight, and varyingly encourage and shame the reader into trying to do so.

    Dr. Henri Marcoux takes a completely different approach.

    He starts by assuming we are—whether consciously or not—the weight we want to be, and looks at the various physical and psychological factors that influence us to such. Ranging from food poverty to eating our feelings to social factors and more, he bids us examine our relationship with food and eating—not just in the sense of mindful eating, but from multiple scientific angles too.

    From this, Dr. Marcoux gives us questions and suggestions to ensure that our relationship with food and eating is what we want it to be, for us.

    Much of the latter part of the book covers not just how to go about the requisite lifestyle changes… But also how to implement things in a way that sticks, and is a genuine pleasure to implement. If this sounds over-the-top, the truth is that it’s just because it honestly is a lower-stress way of living.

    Bottom line: if you want to gain or lose weight, there’s a good chance this book will help you. If you want to be happier and healthier at the weight you are, there’s a good chance this book will help you with that, too.

    Click here to check out Owning Your Weight, and take control of yours!

    Share This Post

  • Kumquat vs Persimmon – 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 kumquat to persimmon, we picked the kumquat.

    Why?

    In terms of macros, kumquats have more protein, though like most fruits, it’s unlike anybody’s eating them for the protein content. More importantly, they have a lot more fiber, for less than half the carbs. It bears mentioning though that (again, like most fruits) persimmon isn’t bad for this either, and both fruits are low glycemic index foods.

    When it comes to vitamins, it’s not close: kumquats have more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, E, and choline, while persimmon has more vitamin C. It’s worth noting that kumquats are already a very good source of vitamin C though; persimmon just has more.

    In the category of minerals, kumquats again lead with more calcium, copper, magnesium, manganese, and zinc, while persimmon has more iron, phosphorus, and potassium.

    In short, enjoy both, and/or whatever fruit you enjoy the most, but if looking for nutritional density, kumquats are bringing it.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Why You’re Probably Not Getting Enough Fiber (And How To Fix It)

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Brain Food? The Eyes Have 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.

    Brain Food? The Eyes Have It!

    This is Dr. Michael Greger, M.D. FACLM, of “Dr. Greger’s Daily Dozen” and “How Not To Die” fame, and he wants us to protect our brains (and while we’re at it, our eyesight).

    And the secret is…

    Lutein.

    This is a carotenoid, which is super important for the eyes and brain. Not to be confused with carrots, which despite the name are usually not a good source of carotenoids!

    They do however contain lots of beta-carotene, a form of vitamin A, but that (and the famous WW2-era myth born of deliberate disinformation by the British government) isn’t what we’re covering today.

    We say “eyes and brain” but really, the eyes are just an extension of the brain in any case.

    Pedantry aside, what Dr. Greger wants you to know about lutein is how important it is for the protection of your brain/eyes, both against cognitive decline and against age-related macular degeneration (the most common cause of eyesight loss in old age).

    Important take-away info:

    Want to know more about the Dr. Greger’s Daily Dozen approach to health?

    See the Website / Get the App (Android & iOS) / Get the Science Book / Get the Cookbook!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Laziness Does Not Exist – by Dr. Devon Price
  • I can’t afford olive oil. What else can I use?

    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.

    If you buy your olive oil in bulk, you’ve likely been in for a shock in recent weeks. Major supermarkets have been selling olive oil for up to A$65 for a four-litre tin, and up to $26 for a 750 millilitre bottle.

    We’ve been hearing about the health benefits of olive oil for years. And many of us are adding it to salads, or baking and frying with it.

    But during a cost-of-living crisis, these high prices can put olive oil out of reach.

    Let’s take a look at why olive oil is in demand, why it’s so expensive right now, and what to do until prices come down.

    Joyisjoyful/Shutterstock

    Remind me, why is olive oil so good for you?

    Including olive oil in your diet can reduce your risk of developing type 2 diabetes and improve heart health through more favourable blood pressure, inflammation and cholesterol levels.

    This is largely because olive oil is high in monounsaturated fatty acids and polyphenols (antioxidants).

    Some researchers have suggested you can get these benefits from consuming up to 20 grams a day. That’s equivalent to about five teaspoons of olive oil.

    Why is olive oil so expensive right now?

    A European heatwave and drought have limited Spanish and Italian producers’ ability to supply olive oil to international markets, including Australia.

    This has been coupled with an unusually cold and short growing season for Australian olive oil suppliers.

    The lower-than-usual production and supply of olive oil, together with heightened demand from shoppers, means prices have gone up.

    Green olives on tree
    We’ve seen unfavourable growing conditions in Europe and Australia. KaMay/Shutterstock

    How can I make my olive oil go further?

    Many households buy olive oil in large quantities because it is cheaper per litre. So, if you have some still in stock, you can make it go further by:

    • storing it correctly – make sure the lid is on tightly and it’s kept in a cool, dark place, such as a pantry or cabinet. If stored this way, olive oil can typically last 12–18 months
    • using a spray – sprays distribute oil more evenly than pourers, using less olive oil overall. You could buy a spray bottle to fill from a large tin, as needed
    • straining or freezing it – if you have leftover olive oil after frying, strain it and reuse it for other fried dishes. You could also freeze this used oil in an airtight container, then thaw and fry with it later, without affecting the oil’s taste and other characteristics. But for dressings, only use fresh oil.

    I’ve run out of olive oil. What else can I use?

    Here are some healthy and cheaper alternatives to olive oil:

    • canola oil is a good alternative for frying. It’s relatively low in saturated fat so is generally considered healthy. Like olive oil, it is high in healthy monounsaturated fats. Cost? Up to $6 for a 750mL bottle (home brand is about half the price)
    • sunflower oil is a great alternative to use on salads or for frying. It has a mild flavour that does not overwhelm other ingredients. Some studies suggest using sunflower oil may help reduce your risk of heart disease by lowering LDL (bad) cholesterol and raising HDL (good) cholesterol. Cost? Up to $6.50 for a 750mL bottle (again, home brand is about half the price)
    • sesame oil has a nutty flavour. It’s good for Asian dressings, and frying. Light sesame oil is typically used as a neutral cooking oil, while the toasted type is used to flavour sauces. Sesame oil is high in antioxidants and has some anti-inflammatory properties. Sesame oil is generally sold in smaller bottles than canola or sunflower oil. Cost? Up to $5 for a 150mL bottle.
    Rows of vegetable oil bottles
    There are plenty of alternative oils you can use in salads or for frying. narai chal/Shutterstock

    How can I use less oil, generally?

    Using less oil in your cooking could keep your meals healthy. Here are some alternatives and cooking techniques:

    • use alternatives for baking – unless you are making an olive oil cake, if your recipe calls for a large quantity of oil, try using an alternative such as apple sauce, Greek yoghurt or mashed banana
    • use non-stick cookware – using high-quality, non-stick pots and pans reduces the need for oil when cooking, or means you don’t need oil at all
    • steam instead – steam vegetables, fish and poultry to retain nutrients and moisture without adding oil
    • bake or roast – potatoes, vegetables or chicken can be baked or roasted rather than fried. You can still achieve crispy textures without needing excessive oil
    • grill – the natural fats in meat and vegetables can help keep ingredients moist, without using oil
    • use stock – instead of sautéing vegetables in oil, try using vegetable broth or stock to add flavour
    • try vinegar or citrus – use vinegar or citrus juice (such as lemon or lime) to add flavour to salads, marinades and sauces without relying on oil
    • use natural moisture – use the natural moisture in ingredients such as tomatoes, onions and mushrooms to cook dishes without adding extra oil. They release moisture as they cook, helping to prevent sticking.

    Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland and Emily Burch, Accredited Practising Dietitian and Lecturer, Southern Cross University

    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:

  • Mammography AI Can Cost Patients Extra. 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.

    As I checked in at a Manhattan radiology clinic for my annual mammogram in November, the front desk staffer reviewing my paperwork asked an unexpected question: Would I like to spend $40 for an artificial intelligence analysis of my mammogram? It’s not covered by insurance, she added.

    I had no idea how to evaluate that offer. Feeling upsold, I said no. But it got me thinking: Is this something I should add to my regular screening routine? Is my regular mammogram not accurate enough? If this AI analysis is so great, why doesn’t insurance cover it?

    I’m not the only person posing such questions. The mother of a colleague had a similar experience when she went for a mammogram recently at a suburban Baltimore clinic. She was given a pink pamphlet that said: “You Deserve More. More Accuracy. More Confidence. More power with artificial intelligence behind your mammogram.” The price tag was the same: $40. She also declined.

    In recent years, AI software that helps radiologists detect problems or diagnose cancer using mammography has been moving into clinical use. The software can store and evaluate large datasets of images and identify patterns and abnormalities that human radiologists might miss. It typically highlights potential problem areas in an image and assesses any likely malignancies. This extra review has enormous potential to improve the detection of suspicious breast masses and lead to earlier diagnoses of breast cancer.

    While studies showing better detection rates are extremely encouraging, some radiologists say, more research and evaluation are needed before drawing conclusions about the value of the routine use of these tools in regular clinical practice.

    “I see the promise and I hope it will help us,” said Etta Pisano, a radiologist who is chief research officer at the American College of Radiology, a professional group for radiologists. However, “it really is ambiguous at this point whether it will benefit an individual woman,” she said. “We do need more information.”

    The radiology clinics that my colleague’s mother and I visited are both part of RadNet, a company with a network of more than 350 imaging centers around the country. RadNet introduced its AI product for mammography in New York and New Jersey last February and has since rolled it out in several other states, according to Gregory Sorensen, the company’s chief science officer.

    Sorensen pointed to research the company conducted with 18 radiologists, some of whom were specialists in breast mammography and some of whom were generalists who spent less than 75% of their time reading mammograms. The doctors were asked to find the cancers in 240 images, with and without AI. Every doctor’s performance improved using AI, Sorensen said.

    Among all radiologists, “not every doctor is equally good,” Sorensen said. With RadNet’s AI tool, “it’s as if all patients get the benefit of our very top performer.”

    But is the tech analysis worth the extra cost to patients? There’s no easy answer.

    “Some people are always going to be more anxious about their mammograms, and using AI may give them more reassurance,” said Laura Heacock, a breast imaging specialist at NYU Langone Health’s Perlmutter Cancer Center in New York. The health system has developed AI models and is testing the technology with mammograms but doesn’t yet offer it to patients, she said.

    Still, Heacock said, women shouldn’t worry that they need to get an additional AI analysis if it’s offered.

    “At the end of the day, you still have an expert breast imager interpreting your mammogram, and that is the standard of care,” she said.

    About 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer during their lifetime, and regular screening mammograms are recommended to help identify cancerous tumors early. But mammograms are hardly foolproof: They miss about 20% of breast cancers, according to the National Cancer Institute.

    The FDA has authorized roughly two dozen AI products to help detect and diagnose cancer from mammograms. However, there are currently no billing codes radiologists can use to charge health plans for the use of AI to interpret mammograms. Typically, the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services would introduce new billing codes and private health plans would follow their lead for payment. But that hasn’t happened in this field yet and it’s unclear when or if it will.

    CMS didn’t respond to requests for comment.

    Thirty-five percent of women who visit a RadNet facility for mammograms pay for the additional AI review, Sorensen said.

    Radiology practices don’t handle payment for AI mammography all in the same way.

    The practices affiliated with Boston-based Massachusetts General Hospital don’t charge patients for the AI analysis, said Constance Lehman, a professor of radiology at Harvard Medical School who is co-director of the Breast Imaging Research Center at Mass General.

    Asking patients to pay “isn’t a model that will support equity,” Lehman said, since only patients who can afford the extra charge will get the enhanced analysis. She said she believes many radiologists would never agree to post a sign listing a charge for AI analysis because it would be off-putting to low-income patients.

    Sorensen said RadNet’s goal is to stop charging patients once health plans realize the value of the screening and start paying for it.

    Some large trials are underway in the United States, though much of the published research on AI and mammography to date has been done in Europe. There, the standard practice is for two radiologists to read a mammogram, whereas in the States only one radiologist typically evaluates a screening test.

    Interim results from the highly regarded MASAI randomized controlled trial of 80,000 women in Sweden found that cancer detection rates were 20% higher in women whose mammograms were read by a radiologist using AI compared with women whose mammograms were read by two radiologists without any AI intervention, which is the standard of care there.

    “The MASAI trial was great, but will that generalize to the U.S.? We can’t say,” Lehman said.

    In addition, there is a need for “more diverse training and testing sets for AI algorithm development and refinement” across different races and ethnicities, said Christoph Lee, director of the Northwest Screening and Cancer Outcomes Research Enterprise at the University of Washington School of Medicine. 

    The long shadow of an earlier and largely unsuccessful type of computer-assisted mammography hangs over the adoption of newer AI tools. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, “computer-assisted detection” software promised to improve breast cancer detection. Then the studies started coming in, and the results were often far from encouraging. Using CAD at best provided no benefit, and at worst reduced the accuracy of radiologists’ interpretations, resulting in higher rates of recalls and biopsies.

    “CAD was not that sophisticated,” said Robert Smith, senior vice president of early cancer detection science at the American Cancer Society. Artificial intelligence tools today are a whole different ballgame, he said. “You can train the algorithm to pick up things, or it learns on its own.”

    Smith said he found it “troubling” that radiologists would charge for the AI analysis.

    “There are too many women who can’t afford any out-of-pocket cost” for a mammogram, Smith said. “If we’re not going to increase the number of radiologists we use for mammograms, then these new AI tools are going to be very useful, and I don’t think we can defend charging women extra for them.”

    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:

  • Healthy Living in a Contaminated World – by Dr. Donald Hoernschemeyer

    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.

    There’s a lot going on here, as this book tackles very many kinds of common contaminants, from waste products and industrial chemicals (such as from fracking), pesticides that are banned in most places but not the US, smog and soot from coal and oil power, mercury and other heavy metals, dioxins, Teflon and its close relatives, phthalates, BPA, and other things again regulated out of use in many countries but not entirely in the US (which bans them only in some things, like baby bottles), drinking water issues of various kinds, and much more.

    Indeed, there’s a whole chapter on the US and international regulation of toxic substances; the problem is often that on a political level, the same people who are against nebulous “chemicals” are also against environmentalist regulations that would ban them. This is mostly not a political book though, and rather is chiefly a book of chemistry (the author’s field).

    It does also cover the medical maladies associated with various contaminants, while the bulk of the data is on the chemistry side of such things as “elimination times for toxic chemicals”, “amounts of pesticides in fruit and vegetables”, “antibiotics and hormones used in animal agriculture”, and so forth.

    The style is dense, and/but it is clear the author has made an effort to not be too dry. Still, this is not a fun read; it’s depressing in content and the style is more suited to academia. There are appendices containing glossaries and acronym tables, but reading front-to-back, there’s a lot that’s not explained so unless you also are a PhD chemist, chances are you’ll be needing to leaf forwards and backwards a lot.

    Bottom line: this book is not thrilling, but what you don’t know, can kill you.

    Click here to check out Healthy Living In A Contaminated World, and improve your odds!

    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: