Your Daily Dose Of B12 From Just 15g Of Pea Shoots!

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.

…and other items from this week’s health news:

Efficient and inexpensive B12-bearing pea shoots

Because plants don’t create vitamin B12, and meat and dairy carry assorted health risks, what’s a person to do, who wants to be healthy?

Well, there is yeast, which has the best of both worlds, but maybe you don’t want nutritional yeast with every meal. There’s supplementation too, but wouldn’t it be nicer to get it from our diet?

Researchers (Dr. Bethany Eldridge et al.) have found an answer, having developed pea shoots that naturally contain high levels of vitamin B12 using indoor aeroponic farming.

How it works: much like how cows are supplemented with B12 that is then passed on to humans to eat them, they simply supplemented the pea plants, via their exposed roots in an aeroponics setting. Drawing nutrients up from the roots, the leaves accumulated enough B12 that a 15-gram serving of pea shoots provides more than the recommended daily allowance of vitamin B12.

The researchers estimate adding B12 through this method could increase the price of a bag of pea shoots by less than 1 penny, making it extremely inexpensive at scale:

Read in full: New aeroponic technology delivers essential Vitamin B12 through salad crops ← small error in the article; it says cyanocobalamin is the most bioavailable form of B12; it isn’t, that would be methylcobalamin or adenosylcobalamin. However, they did test the cyanocobalamine stored in the pea shoots and found that it was bioavailable, including after harvesting and storage. To be clear, the “most bioavailable” claim error was only in the pop-science article, not in the paper to which it links.

Related: Which B Vitamins? It Makes A Difference

Worse than “just” measles

Measles is bad enough already, to the point that it has a body count in the US in the past year, mostly unvaccinated children.

However, even if one recovers from an initial measles infection, there’s another problem that can strike later.

Subacute sclerosing panencephalitis (SSPE) is a rare but usually fatal neurological disease caused by the measles virus persisting in the brain for years after the original infection. Early signs often include stumbling, personality changes, jerking movements, seizures, hallucinations, and gradual loss of speech and mobility as brain damage progresses. The disease usually worsens steadily, leading to severe disability such as paralysis or inability to swallow, and it is almost always fatal.

Again, children suffer most. Or rather, the adolescents that these children briefly survived to become. That’s because children who catch measles very young—especially before age 5 or during infancy—have the highest risk of later developing SSPE.

Due to declining vaccinations in the US and parts of Europe, clinicians have begun seeing cases again after decades when they were extremely rare, including a California child who died after contracting measles as an infant. Doctors expect many more SSPE cases to appear in years to come as the “delayed echo” of the recent waves of infections.

Some quick notes on treatment and prevention:

  • Treatment: doctors currently have no cure for SSPE, and available therapies only slow the disease slightly rather than reversing brain damage.
  • Prevention: the two-dose measles vaccine dramatically reduces infection risk—from about 90% to roughly 3% after exposure—making vaccination the most effective way to prevent SSPE entirely.

Read in full: Doctors warn of a deadly complication from measles outbreaks

Related: Vaccine Mythbusting

Save money, save your heart

What’s better, simple red meat, or plant-based meats?

Research (linked below) has answered this question and found that replacing red meat with processed plant-based meat substitutes significantly (and rapidly!) lowers levels of the cardiovascular-risk metabolite trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO).

The benefits at a glance:

  • TMAO levels: the plant-based meat diet significantly lowered circulating TMAO levels compared with the red-meat diet by about 0.61 log units, showing that the metabolite can change within only a few days of dietary substitution.
  • Cholesterol changes: during the plant-based phase, total cholesterol dropped by about 7 mg/dL and LDL cholesterol by about 6 mg/dL, although the trial was powered primarily to detect TMAO changes rather than lipid outcomes.

Were there any drawbacks? Yes, two:

  1. Participants gained an average of 0.6 kg during the plant-based phase, which researchers suggested may reflect fluid retention from the higher sodium content of processed plant-based patties. In practical terms, this means that…
    • one can still have too much of a good thing, and while the swap is a mostly healthier one, it’s still important to watch the sodium levels, and
    • if you are going to consume more sodium for some reason (most of us will have a saltier meal once in a while), it’s good to balance that with water and non-sodium electrolytes, especially potassium, which counterbalances sodium in the body’s homeostatic system.
  2. A few participants reported mild gastrointestinal symptoms, including abdominal discomfort and diarrhea, during the plant-based diet phase. Basically, since this was an interventional trial, this was a case of “people who aren’t used to eating plant-based don’t yet have a gut that’s accustomed to plant-based fiber levels“, and would not be relevant after a short period, when the gut adapts.

Read in full: Swapping red meat for plant-based meat rapidly lowers a key heart risk metabolite, trial finds

Related: Are plant-based burgers really bad for your heart? Here’s what’s behind the scary headlines

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

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

  • Farmed Fish vs Wild Caught
    Discover the pros and cons of farmed fish versus wild, uncover the secrets to maintaining a healthy blood pressure, and more.

Learn to Age Gracefully

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

  • 3 Life-Changing Mobility Movements To Train

    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’ve ever momentarily struggled to stand up straight after sitting for too long, or had to take a moment to get up off the floor, this one’s for you.

    And if you’ve never done those things? Well, this one’s still for you—prevention is better than cure, after all!

    From the hips

    Most movements that we need to do in life depend on our hips. They support our spine, on which almost everything else depends, and on the flipside, they’re where our legs are plugged in, so they’re pretty critical for lower body mobility too.

    So, with that in mind, here are the three exercise promised—or five, depending on how you want to count them:

    1. For hip mobility most directly: start with a combination of donkey kicks and fire hydrants. From a tabletop position, lift one leg behind you as if putting a footprint on the ceiling, keeping your tailbone tucked in and your core engaged to avoid using your lower back. Then, bring your leg back and lift it sideways like a dog peeing on a hydrant, keeping your torso level and pelvis stable. Alternate between the two movements for 20 total reps (i.e. 10 each), then switch legs.
    2. For hip, spinal, and upper body mobility: now we get to thread the needle. From all fours, inhale and reach one arm up (as far as comfortable), then exhale and thread it under your body to the opposite side. Lower your shoulder close to the mat but without touching it, using your core to twist. Follow your breath rhythm—inhale to lift, exhale to thread—and do 10 reps on each side.
    3. For hip and ankle mobility: use a split lunge with two parts. From an upright lunge, put your hands on your front thigh and tuck your tailbone in to engage the back glute. Lunge forwards while keeping your front heel flat on the floor, while your knee moves past the toes. Then, without changing pelvis position, lift your back knee and try to straighten your leg, pushing your heel backwards without raising your hips. Return to start and repeat 10 times per side.

    For more on all of this plus visual demonstrations, enjoy:

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

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like:

    How Tight Are Your Hips? Test (And Fix!) With This

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Guava vs Kiwi – 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 guava to kiwi, we picked the guava.

    Why?

    Both are great! But…

    In terms of macros, guava has nearly 2x the fiber for the same carbs, and more than 2x the protein, winning in this category.

    In the category of vitamins, guava has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7, B9, and C, while kiwi has more of vitamins E and K, giving guava a 9:2 win in this round.

    Looking at minerals, guava has more copper, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while kiwi has more calcium and iron, meaning a 7:2 win for guava here.

    In other considerations, kiwi does have some anticancer properties beyond what guava can boast, so that’s a point for kiwi.

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

    Want to learn more?

    You might like:

    Top 8 Fruits That Prevent & Kill Cancer

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • Getting antivirals for COVID too often depends on where you live and how wealthy you are

    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.

    Medical experts recommend antivirals for people aged 70 and older who get COVID, and for other groups at risk of severe illness and hospitalisation from COVID.

    But many older Australians have missed out on antivirals after getting sick with COVID. It is yet another way the health system is failing the most vulnerable.

    CGN089/Shutterstock

    Who missed out?

    We analysed COVID antiviral uptake between March 2022 and September 2023. We found some groups were more likely to miss out on antivirals including Indigenous people, people from disadvantaged areas, and people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.

    Some of the differences will be due to different rates of infection. But across this 18-month period, many older Australians were infected at least once, and rates of infection were higher in some disadvantaged communities.

    How stark are the differences?

    Compared to the national average, Indigenous Australians were nearly 25% less likely to get antivirals, older people living in disadvantaged areas were 20% less likely to get them, and people with a culturally or linguistically diverse background were 13% less likely to get a script.

    People in remote areas were 37% less likely to get antivirals than people living in major cities. People in outer regional areas were 25% less likely.

    Dispensing rates by group. Grattan Institute

    Even within the same city, the differences are stark. In Sydney, people older than 70 in the affluent eastern suburbs (including Vaucluse, Point Piper and Bondi) were nearly twice as likely to have had an antiviral as those in Fairfield, in Sydney’s south-west.

    Older people in leafy inner-eastern Melbourne (including Canterbury, Hawthorn and Kew) were 1.8 times more likely to have had an antiviral as those in Brimbank (which includes Sunshine) in the city’s west.

    Why are people missing out?

    COVID antivirals should be taken when symptoms first appear. While awareness of COVID antivirals is generally strong, people often don’t realise they would benefit from the medication. They wait until symptoms get worse and it is too late.

    Frequent GP visits make a big difference. Our analysis found people 70 and older who see a GP more frequently were much more likely to be dispensed a COVID antiviral.

    Regular visits give an opportunity for preventive care and patient education. For example, GPs can provide high-risk patients with “COVID treatment plans” as a reminder to get tested and seek treatment as soon as they are unwell.

    Difficulty seeing a GP could help explain low antiviral use in rural areas. Compared to people in major cities, people in small rural towns have about 35% fewer GPs, see their GP about half as often, and are 30% more likely to report waiting too long for an appointment.

    Just like for vaccination, a GP’s focus on antivirals probably matters, as does providing care that is accessible to people from different cultural backgrounds.

    Care should go those who need it

    Since the period we looked at, evidence has emerged that raises doubts about how effective antivirals are, particularly for people at lower risk of severe illness. That means getting vaccinated is more important than getting antivirals.

    But all Australians who are eligible for antivirals should have the same chance of getting them.

    These drugs have cost more than A$1.7 billion, with the vast majority of that money coming from the federal government. While dispensing rates have fallen, more than 30,000 packs of COVID antivirals were dispensed in August, costing about $35 million.

    Such a huge investment shouldn’t be leaving so many people behind. Getting treatment shouldn’t depend on your income, cultural background or where you live. Instead, care should go to those who need it the most.

    Doctor types on laptop
    Getting antivirals shouldn’t depend on who your GP is. National Cancer Institute/Unsplash

    People born overseas have been 40% more likely to die from COVID than those born here. Indigenous Australians have been 60% more likely to die from COVID than non-Indigenous people. And the most disadvantaged people have been 2.8 times more likely to die from COVID than those in the wealthiest areas.

    All those at-risk groups have been more likely to miss out on antivirals.

    It’s not just a problem with antivirals. The same groups are also disproportionately missing out on COVID vaccination, compounding their risk of severe illness. The pattern is repeated for other important preventive health care, such as cancer screening.

    A 3-step plan to meet patients’ needs

    The federal government should do three things to close these gaps in preventive care.

    First, the government should make Primary Health Networks (PHNs) responsible for reducing them. PHNs, the regional bodies responsible for improving primary care, should share data with GPs and step in to boost uptake in communities that are missing out.

    Second, the government should extend its MyMedicare reforms. MyMedicare gives general practices flexible funding to care for patients who live in residential aged care or who visit hospital frequently. That approach should be expanded to all patients, with more funding for poorer and sicker patients. That will give GP clinics time to advise patients about preventive health, including COVID vaccines and antivirals, before they get sick.

    Third, team-based pharmacist prescribing should be introduced. Then pharmacists could quickly dispense antivirals for patients if they have a prior agreement with the patient’s GP. It’s an approach that would also work for medications for chronic diseases, such as cardiovascular disease.

    COVID antivirals, unlike vaccines, have been keeping up with new variants without the need for updates. If a new and more harmful variant emerges, or when a new pandemic hits, governments should have these systems in place to make sure everyone who needs treatment can get it fast.

    In the meantime, fairer access to care will help close the big and persistent gaps in health between different groups of Australians.

    Peter Breadon, Program Director, Health and Aged Care, Grattan Institute

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

    Share This Post

  • The Whole Heart Solution – by Dr. Joel Kahn

    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 there’s a single central focus here is on the evidence for including a lot of plants in our diet, and in particular, certain ones that are particularly impactful (positively) for our health. However, it’s not all about diet; Dr. Kahn also discusses (as the subtitle suggests) making the most of every safe, useful tool available for us for good heart health. Including, where appropriate, drugs and surgery, but definitely with a preference to avoid their necessity with lifestyle adjustments and regular pre-emptive testing of various kinds.

    Indeed, the promised “75 low-cost things you can do right away” are mostly lifestyle adjustments, and as well as the dietary tips, they include non-dietary things such as opening your windows and walking barefoot, for example—we’ll learn tips relating to all areas of life, in fact.

    An interesting note on diet, though: he also talks about how all requests for reimbursement for Medicare and Medicaid services are evaluated with regard to whether they are appropriate, and of all the programs for intensive cardiac rehabilitation that have been requested, only two have been approved (at time of going to press, at least). Both are plan-based programs, of which, one is the dietary approach described in this book. Bearing in mind that Medicare and Medicate have a mandate to save money, they will only approve a program that results in costing them less in hospital care and prescriptions. Which means that their interests are aligned with yours, in this case!

    The style is enthusiastic pop science, that is to say, it is written with extreme conviction—there is plenty of science cited to back it up, of course, but certainly this is not an indifferent book.

    Bottom line: if you’d like to improve your heart health, this book is a top-tier one-stop solution (if you implement its contents, anyway!)

    Click here to check out the Whole Heart Solution, and live wholeheartedly!

    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:

  • How old are you really? Are the latest ‘biological age’ tests all they’re cracked up to be?

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

    We all like to imagine we’re ageing well. Now a simple blood or saliva test promises to tell us by measuring our “biological age”. And then, as many have done, we can share how “young” we really are on social media, along with our secrets to success.

    While chronological age is how long you have been alive, measures of biological age aim to indicate how old your body actually is, purporting to measure “wear and tear” at a molecular level.

    The appeal of these tests is undeniable. Health-conscious consumers may see their results as reinforcing their anti-ageing efforts, or a way to show their journey to better health is paying off.

    But how good are these tests? Do they actually offer useful insights? Or are they just clever marketing dressed up to look like science?

    How do these tests work?

    Over time, the chemical processes that allow our body to function, known as our “metabolic activity”, lead to damage and a decline in the activity of our cells, tissues and organs.

    Biological age tests aim to capture some of these changes, offering a snapshot of how well, or how poorly, we are ageing on a cellular level.

    Our DNA is also affected by the ageing process. In particular, chemical tags (methyl groups) attach to our DNA and affect gene expression. These changes occur in predictable ways with age and environmental exposures, in a process called methylation.

    Research studies have used “epigenetic clocks”, which measure the methylation of our genes, to estimate biological age. By analysing methylation levels at specific sites in the genome from participant samples, researchers apply predictive models to estimate the cumulative wear and tear on the body.

    What does the research say about their use?

    Although the science is rapidly evolving, the evidence underpinning the use of epigenetic clocks to measure biological ageing in research studies is strong.

    Studies have shown epigenetic biological age estimation is a better predictor of the risk of death and ageing-related diseases than chronological age.

    Epigenetic clocks also have been found to correlate strongly with lifestyle and environmental exposures, such as smoking status and diet quality.

    In addition, they have been found to be able to predict the risk of conditions such as cardiovascular disease, which can lead to heart attacks and strokes.

    Taken together, a growing body of research indicates that at a population level, epigenetic clocks are robust measures of biological ageing and are strongly linked to the risk of disease and death

    But how good are these tests for individuals?

    While these tests are valuable when studying populations in research settings, using epigenetic clocks to measure the biological age of individuals is a different matter and requires scrutiny.

    For testing at an individual level, perhaps the most important consideration is the “signal to noise ratio” (or precision) of these tests. This is the question of whether a single sample from an individual may yield widely differing results.

    A study from 2022 found samples deviated by up to nine years. So an identical sample from a 40-year-old may indicate a biological age of as low as 35 years (a cause for celebration) or as high as 44 years (a cause of anxiety).

    While there have been significant improvements in these tests over the years, there is considerable variability in the precision of these tests between commercial providers. So depending on who you send your sample to, your estimated biological age may vary considerably.

    Another limitation is there is currently no standardisation of methods for this testing. Commercial providers perform these tests in different ways and have different algorithms for estimating biological age from the data.

    As you would expect for commercial operators, providers don’t disclose their methods. So it’s difficult to compare companies and determine who provides the most accurate results – and what you’re getting for your money.

    A third limitation is that while epigenetic clocks correlate well with ageing, they are simply a “proxy” and are not a diagnostic tool.

    In other words, they may provide a general indication of ageing at a cellular level. But they don’t offer any specific insights about what the issue may be if someone is found to be “ageing faster” than they would like, or what they’re doing right if they are “ageing well”.

    So regardless of the result of your test, all you’re likely to get from the commercial provider of an epigenetic test is generic advice about what the science says is healthy behaviour.

    Are they worth it? Or what should I do instead?

    While companies offering these tests may have good intentions, remember their ultimate goal is to sell you these tests and make a profit. And at a cost of around A$500, they’re not cheap.

    While the idea of using these tests as a personalised health tool has potential, it is clear that we are not there yet.

    For this to become a reality, tests will need to become more reproducible, standardised across providers, and validated through long-term studies that link changes in biological age to specific behaviours.

    So while one-off tests of biological age make for impressive social media posts, for most people they represent a significant cost and offer limited real value.

    The good news is we already know what we need to do to increase our chances of living longer and healthier lives. These include:

    • improving our diet
    • increasing physical activity
    • getting enough sleep
    • quitting smoking
    • reducing stress
    • prioritising social connection.

    We don’t need to know our biological age in order to implement changes in our lives right now to improve our health.

    Hassan Vally, Associate Professor, Epidemiology, Deakin 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:

  • Chickpeas vs Pinto Beans – Which is Healthier?

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

    Our Verdict

    When comparing chickpeas to pinto beans, we picked the pinto beans.

    Why?

    Both are great! And an argument could be made for either…

    In terms of macros, pinto beans have slightly more fiber and slightly more protein, while chickpeas have slightly more carbs, and thus predictably higher net carbs. In the category of those proteins, they both have a comparable spread of amino acods, with pinto beans having very slightly more of each amino acid. All this adds up to a clear, but moderate, win for pinto beans.

    When it comes to vitamins, technically chickpeas have more of vitamins A, B3, B5, C, K, and choline, but the margins are so small as to be almost meaningless. Meanwhile, pinto beans have more of vitamins B1, B6, and E, and/but the only one where the margin is enough to really care about is vitamin E (a little over 2x what chickpeas have). So, an argument could be made either way, but we’re going to call this category a tie.

    The story with minerals is similar; chickpeas have more copper, iron, manganese, phosphorus, and zinc, all with small margins, while pinto beans have more potassium and selenium, and/but also less sodium. We’d call this either a tie, or a very slight win for chickpeas.

    Adding up the sections gives for a very modest win for pinto beans, but as we say, an argument could be made for either.

    Certainly, enjoy both!

    Want to learn more?

    You might 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!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

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