Wholewheat Bread vs Seeded White – 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 wholewheat bread to seeded bread, we picked the wholewheat.
Why?
First, we will acknowledge that this is a false dichotomy; it is possible to have seeded wholewheat bread. However, it is very common to have wholewheat bread that isn’t seeded, and white bread that is seeded. So, it’s important to be able to decide which is the healthier option, since very often, this false dichotomy is what’s on offer.
We will also advise checking labels (or the baker, if getting from a bakery) to ensure that visibly brown bread is actually wholewheat, and not just dyed brown with caramel coloring or such (yes, that is a thing that some companies do).
Now, as for why we chose the wholewheat over the seeded white…
In terms of macronutrients, wholewheat bread has (on average; individual breads may vary of course) has 2x the protein and a lot more fiber.
Those seeds in seeded bread? They just aren’t enough to make a big impact on the overall nutritional value of the bread in those regards. Per slice, you are getting, what, 10 seeds maybe? This is not a meaningful dietary source of much.
Seeded bread does have proportionally more healthy fats, but the doses are still so low as to make it not worth the while; it just looks like a lot of expressed as a percentage of comparison, because of the wholewheat bread has trace amounts, and the seeded bread has several times those trace amounts, it’s still a tiny amount. So, we’d recommend looking to other sources for those healthy fats.
Maybe dip your bread, of whatever kind, into extra virgin olive oil, for example.
Wholewheat bread of course also has a lower glycemic index. Those seeds in seeded white bread don’t really slow it down at all, because they’re not digested until later.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
- Carb-Strong or Carb-Wrong?
- Level-Up Your Fiber Intake! (Without Difficulty Or Discomfort)
- Gluten: What’s The Truth?
Enjoy!
Don’t Forget…
Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!
Recommended
Learn to Age Gracefully
Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:
Constipation increases your risk of a heart attack, new study finds – and not just on the toilet
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 Google the terms “constipation” and “heart attack” it’s not long before the name Elvis Presley crops up. Elvis had a longstanding history of chronic constipation and it’s believed he was straining very hard to poo, which then led to a fatal heart attack.
We don’t know what really happened to the so-called King of Rock “n” Roll back in 1977. There were likely several contributing factors to his death, and this theory is one of many.
But after this famous case researchers took a strong interest in the link between constipation and the risk of a heart attack.
This includes a recent study led by Australian researchers involving data from thousands of people.
Elvis Presley was said to have died of a heart attack while straining on the toilet. But is that true? Kraft74/Shutterstock Are constipation and heart attacks linked?
Large population studies show constipation is linked to an increased risk of heart attacks.
For example, an Australian study involved more than 540,000 people over 60 in hospital for a range of conditions. It found constipated patients had a higher risk of high blood pressure, heart attacks and strokes compared to non-constipated patients of the same age.
A Danish study of more than 900,000 people from hospitals and hospital outpatient clinics also found that people who were constipated had an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes.
It was unclear, however, if this relationship between constipation and an increased risk of heart attacks and strokes would hold true for healthy people outside hospital.
These Australian and Danish studies also did not factor in the effects of drugs used to treat high blood pressure (hypertension), which can make you constipated.
Researchers have studied thousands of people to see if there’s a link between constipation and heart attacks. fongbeerredhot/Shutterstock How about this new study?
The recent international study led by Monash University researchers found a connection between constipation and an increased risk of heart attacks, strokes and heart failure in a general population.
The researchers analysed data from the UK Biobank, a database of health-related information from about half a million people in the United Kingdom.
The researchers identified more than 23,000 cases of constipation and accounted for the effect of drugs to treat high blood pressure, which can lead to constipation.
People with constipation (identified through medical records or via a questionnaire) were twice as likely to have a heart attack, stroke or heart failure as those without constipation.
The researchers found a strong link between high blood pressure and constipation. Individuals with hypertension who were also constipated had a 34% increased risk of a major heart event compared to those with just hypertension.
The study only looked at the data from people of European ancestry. However, there is good reason to believe the link between constipation and heart attacks applies to other populations.
A Japanese study looked at more than 45,000 men and women in the general population. It found people passing a bowel motion once every two to three days had a higher risk of dying from heart disease compared with ones who passed at least one bowel motion a day.
How might constipation cause a heart attack?
Chronic constipation can lead to straining when passing a stool. This can result in laboured breathing and can lead to a rise in blood pressure.
In one Japanese study including ten elderly people, blood pressure was high just before passing a bowel motion and continued to rise during the bowel motion. This increase in blood pressure lasted for an hour afterwards, a pattern not seen in younger Japanese people.
One theory is that older people have stiffer blood vessels due to atherosclerosis (thickening or hardening of the arteries caused by a build-up of plaque) and other age-related changes. So their high blood pressure can persist for some time after straining. But the blood pressure of younger people returns quickly to normal as they have more elastic blood vessels.
As blood pressure rises, the risk of heart disease increases. The risk of developing heart disease doubles when systolic blood pressure (the top number in your blood pressure reading) rises permanently by 20 mmHg (millimetres of mercury, a standard measure of blood pressure).
The systolic blood pressure rise with straining in passing a stool has been reported to be as high as 70 mmHg. This rise is only temporary but with persistent straining in chronic constipation this could lead to an increased risk of heart attacks.
High blood pressure from straining on the toilet can last after pooing, especially in older people. Andrey_Popov/Shutterstock Some people with chronic constipation may have an impaired function of their vagus nerve, which controls various bodily functions, including digestion, heart rate and breathing.
This impaired function can result in abnormalities of heart rate and over-activation of the flight-fight response. This can, in turn, lead to elevated blood pressure.
Another intriguing avenue of research examines the imbalance in gut bacteria in people with constipation.
This imbalance, known as dysbiosis, can result in microbes and other substances leaking through the gut barrier into the bloodstream and triggering an immune response. This, in turn, can lead to low-grade inflammation in the blood circulation and arteries becoming stiffer, increasing the risk of a heart attack.
This latest study also explored genetic links between constipation and heart disease. The researchers found shared genetic factors that underlie both constipation and heart disease.
What can we do about this?
Constipation affects around 19% of the global population aged 60 and older. So there is a substantial portion of the population at an increased risk of heart disease due to their bowel health.
Managing chronic constipation through dietary changes (particularly increased dietary fibre), increased physical activity, ensuring adequate hydration and using medications, if necessary, are all important ways to help improve bowel function and reduce the risk of heart disease.
Vincent Ho, Associate Professor and clinical academic gastroenterologist, Western Sydney University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Share This Post
Pumpkin Seeds vs Watermelon Seeds – 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 pumpkin seeds to watermelon seeds, we picked the watermelon.
Why?
Starting with the macros: pumpkin seeds have a lot more carbs, while watermelon seeds have a lot more protein, despite pumpkin seeds being famous for such. They’re about equal on fiber. In terms of fats, watermelon seeds are higher in fats, and yes, these are healthy fats, mostly polyunsaturated.
When it comes to vitamins, pumpkin seeds are marginally higher in vitamins A and C, while watermelon seeds are a lot higher in vitamins B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, and B9. An easy win for watermelon seeds here.
In the category of minerals, despite being famous for zinc, pumpkin seeds are higher only in potassium, while watermelon seeds are higher in iron, magnesium, manganese, and phosphorus; the two seeds are equal on calcium, copper, and zinc. Another win for watermelon seeds.
In short, enjoy both, but watermelon has more to offer. Of course, if buying just the seeds and not the whole fruit, it’s generally easier to find pumpkin seeds than watermelon seeds, so do bear in mind that pumpkin seeds’ second place isn’t that bad here—it’s just a case of a very nutritious food looking bad by standing next to an even better one.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Seed Saving Secrets – by Alice Mirren
Take care!
Share This Post
Scattered Minds – by Dr. Gabor Maté
10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.
This was not the first book that Dr. Maté sat down to write, by far. But it was the first that he actually completed. Guess why.
Writing from a position of both personal and professional experience and understanding, Dr. Maté explores the inaptly-named Attention Deficit Disorder (if anything, there’s often a surplus of attention, just, to anything and everything rather than necessarily what would be most productive in the moment), its etiology, its presentation, and its management.
This is a more enjoyable book than some others by the same author, as while this condition certainly isn’t without its share of woes (often, for example, a cycle of frustration and shame re “why can’t I just do the things; this is ruining my life and it would be so easy if I could just do the things!”), it’s not nearly so bleak as entire books about trauma, addiction, and so forth (worthy as those books also are).
Dr. Maté frames it specifically as a development disorder, and one whereby with work, we can do the development later that (story of an ADHDer’s life) we should have done earlier but didn’t. In terms of practical advice, he includes a program for effecting this change, including as an adult.
The style is easy-reading, in small chapters, with ADHD’d-up readers in mind, giving a strong sense of speeding pleasantly through the book.
Bottom line: when it’s a book by Dr. Gabor Maté, you know it’s going to be good, and this is no exception. Certainly read it if you, anyone you care about, or even anyone you just spend a lot of time around, has ADHD or similar.
Click here to check out Scattered Minds, and unscatter yours!
Share This Post
Related Posts
Boundary-Setting Beyond “No”
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.
More Than A “No”
A lot of people struggle with boundary-setting, and it’s not always the way you might think.
The person who “can’t say no” to people probably comes to mind, but the problem is more far-reaching than that, and it’s rooted in not being clear over what a boundary actually is.
For example: “Don’t bring him here again!”
Pretty clear, right?
And while it is indeed clear, it’s not a boundary; it’s a command. Which may or may not be obeyed, and at the end of the day, what right have we to command people in general?
Same goes for less dramatic things like “Don’t talk to me about xyz”, which can still be important or trivial, depending on whether the topic of xyz is deeply traumatizing for you, or mildly annoying, or something else entirely.
Why this becomes a problem
It becomes a problem not because of any lack of clarity about your wishes, but rather, because it opens the floor for a debate. The listener may be given to wonder whether your right to not experience xyz is greater or lesser than their right to do/say/etc xyz.
“My right to swing my fist ends where someone else’s nose begins”
…does not help here, firstly because both sides will believe themself (or nobody) to be the injured party; for the fist-swinger, the other person’s nose made a vicious assault on their freedom. Or secondly, maybe there was some higher principle at stake; a reason why violence was justified. And then ten levels of philosophical debate. We see this a lot when it comes to freedom of expression, and vigorous debate over whether this entails freedom from social consequences of one’s words/actions.
How a good boundary-setting works (if this, then that)
Consider two signs:
- No trespassing!
- Trespassers will be shot!
Superficially, the second just seems like a more violent rendition of the first. But in fact, the second is more informationally useful: it explains what will happen if the boundary is not respected, and allows the reader to make their own informed decision with regard to what to do with that information.
We can employ this method (and can even do so gently, if we so wish and hopefully we mostly do wish to be gentle) when it comes to social and interpersonal boundary-setting:
- If you bring him here again, I will refuse you entrance
- If you bring up that topic again, I will ask you to leave
- If you do that, I will never speak to you again
- If you don’t stop drinking, I will divorce you
This “if-this-then-that” model does the very first thing that any good boundary does: make itself clear.
It doesn’t rely on moral arguments; it doesn’t invite debate. For example in that last case, it doesn’t argue that the partner doesn’t have the right to drink—it simply expresses what the speaker will exercise their own right to do, in that eventuality.
(as an aside, the situation that occurs when one is enmeshed with someone who is dependent on a substance is a complex topic, and if you’re interested in that, check out: Codependency Isn’t What Most People Think)
Back on track: boundary-setting is not about what’s right or good—it’s about nothing more nor less than a clear delineation between what we will and won’t accept, and how we’ll enforce that.
We can also, in particularly personal boundary-setting (such as with sexual boundaries’ oft-claimed “gray areas”), fix an improperly-set boundary that forgot to do the above, e.g:
“How about [proposition]?”
“No thank you” ← casually worded answer; contextually reasonable, and yet not a clear boundary per what we discussed above
“Come on, I think you’d like it”
“I said no. No means no. Ask me again and I will [consequences that are appropriate and actionable]”What’s “appropriate and actionable” may vary a lot from one situation to another, but it’s important that it’s something you can do and are prepared to do and will do if the condition for doing it is met.
Anything less than that is not a boundary—it’s just a request.
Note: this does not require that we have power, by the way. If we have zero power in a situation, well, that definitely sucks, but even then we can still express what is actionable, e.g. “I will never trust you again”.
“Price of entry”
You may have wondered, upon reading “boundary-setting is not about what’s right or good—it’s about nothing more nor less than a clear delineation between what we will and won’t accept, and how we’ll enforce that”, can’t that be used to control and manipulate people, essentially coercing them to do or not do things with the threat of consequences (specifically: bad ones)?
And the answer is: yes, yes it can.
But that’s where the flipside comes into play—the other person gets to set their boundaries, too.
For all of us, if we have any boundaries at all, there is a “price of entry” and all who want to be in our lives, or be close to us, have to decide for themselves whether that price of entry is worth it.
- If a person says “do not talk about topic xyz to me or I will leave”, that is a price of entry for being close to them.
- If you are passionate about talking about topic xyz to the point that you are unwilling to shelve it when in their presence, then that is the price of entry for being close to you.
- If one or more of you is not willing to pay the price of entry, then guess what, you’re just not going to be close.
In cases of forced proximity (e.g. workplaces or families) this is likely to get resolved by the workplace’s own rules (i.e. the price of entry that you agreed to when signing a contract to work there), and if something like that doesn’t exist (such as in families), well, that forced proximity is going to reach a breaking point, and somebody may discover it wasn’t enforceable after all.
See also: Family Estrangement: More Common Than Most People Think
…which also details how to fix it, where possible.
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:
Older adults need another COVID-19 vaccine
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.
What you need to know
- The CDC recommends people 65 and older and immunocompromised people receive an additional dose of the updated COVID-19 vaccine this spring—if at least four months have passed since they received a COVID-19 vaccine.
- Updated COVID-19 vaccines are effective at protecting against severe illness, hospitalization, death, and long COVID.
- The CDC also shortened the isolation period for people who are sick with COVID-19.
Last week, the CDC said people 65 and older should receive an additional dose of the updated COVID-19 vaccine this spring. The recommendation also applies to immunocompromised people, who were already eligible for an additional dose.
Older adults made up two-thirds of COVID-19-related hospitalizations between October 2023 and January 2024, so enhancing protection for this group is critical.
The CDC also shortened the isolation period for people who are sick with COVID-19, although the contagiousness of COVID-19 has not changed.
Read on to learn more about the CDC’s updated vaccination and isolation recommendations.
Who is eligible for another COVID-19 vaccine this spring?
The CDC recommends that people ages 65 and older and immunocompromised people receive an additional dose of the updated COVID-19 vaccine this spring—if at least four months have passed since they received a COVID-19 vaccine. It’s safe to receive an updated COVID-19 vaccine from Pfizer, Moderna, or Novavax, regardless of which COVID-19 vaccines you received in the past.
Updated COVID-19 vaccines are available at pharmacies, local clinics, or doctor’s offices. Visit Vaccines.gov to find an appointment near you.
Under- and uninsured adults can get the updated COVID-19 vaccine for free through the CDC’s Bridge Access Program. If you’re over 60 and unable to leave your home, call the Aging Network at 1-800-677-1116 to learn about free at-home vaccination options.
What are the benefits of staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines?
Staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines prevents severe illness, hospitalization, death, and long COVID.
Additionally, the CDC says staying up to date on COVID-19 vaccines is a safer and more reliable way to build protection against COVID-19 than getting sick from COVID-19.
What are the new COVID-19 isolation guidelines?
According to the CDC’s general respiratory virus guidance, people who are sick with COVID-19 or another common respiratory illness, like the flu or RSV, should isolate until they’ve been fever-free for at least 24 hours without the use of fever-reducing medication and their symptoms improve.
After that, the CDC recommends taking additional precautions for the next five days: wearing a well-fitting mask, limiting close contact with others, and improving ventilation in your home if you live with others.
If you’re sick with COVID-19, you can infect others for five to 12 days, or longer. Moderately or severely immunocompromised patients may remain infectious beyond 20 days.
For more information, talk to your health care provider.
This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.
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:
Eat Better, Feel Better – by Giada de Laurentis
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 yesterday’s edition of 10almonds, we reviewed Dr. Aujla’s “The Doctor’s Kitchen“; today we’re reviewing a different book about healing through food—in this case, with a special focus on maintaining energy and good health as we get older.
De Laurentis may not be a medical doctor, but she is a TV chef, and not only holds a lot of influence, but also has access to a lot of celebrity doctors and such; that’s reflected a lot in her style and approach here.
The recipes are clear and easy to follow; well-illustrated and nicely laid-out.
This cookbook’s style is less “enjoy this hearty dish of rice and beans with these herbs and spices” and more “you can serve your steak salad with white beans and sweet shallot dressing on a bed of organic quinoa if you haven’t already had your day’s serving of grains, of course”.
It’s a little fancier, in short, and more focused on what to cut out, than what to include. On account of that, this could make it a good contrast to yesterday’s book, which had the opposite focus.
She also recommends assorted adjuvant practices; some that are evidence-based, like intermittent fasting and meditation, and some that are not, like extreme detox-dieting, and acupuncture (which has no bearing on gut health).
Bottom line: if you like the idea of eating for good health, and prefer a touch of celebrity lifestyle to your meals, this one’s a good book for 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:
