5 Drinks High in Magnesium, Say Dietitians
Magnesium plays a direct role in more than 300 enzymatic processes in the body, from brain function to muscle contractions to energy production and more. Jaclyn London, MS, RD, CDN, explains that, despite its critical nature, unfortunately, most of us do not get enough magnesium in our diets.
'Magnesium is an electrolyte that plays a role in blood pressure regulation, muscle and nerve function, protein synthesis, and bone cell regeneration,' says London. 'While its role in the body is crucial — it's involved in hundreds of chemical reactions in the body! — it's estimated that about half of Americans aren't consuming enough of it.'
There are lots of supplements and health products that can boost your magnesium intake and help support these vital life processes. Pureboost, for example, is an all-natural energy drink that boasts an impressive 25% of the recommended daily magnesium intake. There are also electrolyte mixes and drinks, like this one from Protekt and this canned watermelon water Mela Water, both of which feature magnesium, potassium, and sodium without added sugars.
On the other end of the spectrum, there are recovery drinks like Nuun Rest, and relaxation supplements like neuroSleep, which promote natural rest and recovery with magnesium.
While these kinds of supplements aid in magnesium intake, London says whole foods and natural dietary sources are still important because they provide the best format for metabolization.
'While dietary supplements can be useful as exactly that — to supplement, not replace, dietary intake — food sources of magnesium are the most biologically efficient source and have the added benefit of providing additional nutrients that your body needs for you to feel your best,' explains London.
Here are five drinks high in magnesium you probably already have at home that can help you get more of this mineral into your diet.
Related:
Time for a spot of tea and a boost of magnesium. A 2021 study in Molecules concluded that the antioxidant activity of tea is related to the presence of magnesium and potassium. Of the teas studied, green tea was shown to have the highest concentration of both phenolic compounds and magnesium, and it also presented the most antioxidant activity.
While supplement powders and sports drinks often do include magnesium, naturally occurring magnesium is typically a better choice. Grapefruit and orange juice both feature about 6% of the recommended daily value of magnesium, making them an excellent option to include in your regular diet.
Just be sure to choose full juice options with no added sugars. Jaclyn London explains that fruit juices provide more bang for the buck than sports drinks.
'For optimizing your intake of magnesium, a 100% fruit juice without added sugar will provide more per serving and provide a wider variety of vitamins and minerals from the fruit itself,' she says.
Also in the juice category, prune juice provides 30 milligrams of magnesium per cup, or about 8% of the daily recommended value, bringing prune juice in slightly higher than its citrus juice counterparts.
Additionally, prune juice features fiber, sorbitol, and potassium, making it a digestive-friendly choice.
Milk chocolate and dark chocolate are both good sources of magnesium; however, for a true magnesium density, consider something like raw cacao, which is thought to be among the richest sources of magnesium on the planet. This hot chocolate recipe stars cacao powder and maple syrup, a delicious and cozy choice to keep you warm all winter.
Another great addition for colder months, bone broth features a slew of vitamins and minerals, making it a perfect choice for savory sipping.
Kristen Carli, MS, RD, explains that bone broth provides many critical nutrients. 'Because bone broth is made from animal bones, it is high in magnesium, potassium, omega 3 fatty acids, calcium, and more.'
Read next:
The post 5 Drinks High in Magnesium, Say Dietitians appeared first on Clean Plates.
Related Headlines
Why I'll never fly without Travelzoo — savings, perks, and peace of mind
5 Energizing Snack Recipes to Make Ahead and Eat All Week
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
4 minutes ago
- CNN
More than 290 feared dead after plane crashes outside airport in Indian city of Ahmedabad
At least 290 people are feared to have died after a plane bound for London crashed into a residential area shortly after taking off from an airport in India's western city of Ahmedabad. Images from the scene showed thick black smoke rising up into the sky after the Air India plane crashed, with part of the aircraft pictured resting on top of a building. Other images showed scorched trees and a fire-blackened building with first responders hosing down the area. Among those killed were passengers on the flight, including some minors, local residents, and people who were inside the BJ Medical College and Hospital hostel when the plane crashed into it, a senior doctor at the Ahmedabad Civil Hospital, where a majority of the dead and injured people were taken, told CNN. The doctor added that the death toll is likely to rise. Air India said that 242 people were on board the plane, 169 of them Indian nationals and 53 British nationals. There were also seven Portuguese nationals and one Canadian national, the airline added in a statement. It confirmed there had been a single survivor among those on board, a British national. The Hindustan Times named the survivor as a British national, Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, and said he was receiving treatment. What appears to be a copy of the flight manifest, shared by news agency IANS, lists Vishwash Kumar Ramesh as having been assigned seat 11A. The Hindustan Times said it spoke to Ramesh in a local hospital, and quoted him as saying: 'Thirty seconds after takeoff, there was a loud noise and then the plane crashed. It all happened so quickly.' A senior police officer told reporters that the plane had hit a doctors' hostel belonging to the BJ Medical College and Hospital. At least three medical students died, Swapnil Bhalodia of the Indian Medical Association Medical Students Network in Gujarat said. Between 50 and 60 medical students have been admitted to local hospitals, according to the Federation of All India Medical Association. The statement said two or three students are in intensive care. The flight, AI171, was bound for London's Gatwick Airport, where it was due to land at 6.25 p.m. local time (1.25 p.m. ET). A reception center has been set up at the airport to provide information and support to relatives of victims. One video captured the moment the aircraft, gaining altitude after just taking off, suddenly began to descend in mid air, before crashing down in a huge plume of fire and smoke. The plane made a Mayday call to Air Traffic Control shortly after takeoff, according to India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). 'But thereafter no response was given by the aircraft to the calls made by ATC. Aircraft immediately after departure from Runway 23, fell on ground outside the airport perimeter. Heavy black smoke was seen coming from the accident site,' the statement said. According to the DCGA statement, the flight departed at 1.39 p.m. local time (4.09 a.m. ET). The aircraft's signal was lost less than a minute after takeoff, at an altitude of 625 feet, according to FlightRadar24 data. The plane then started to descend with a vertical speed of -475 feet per minute, the data showed. All flights out of Ahmedabad's Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport were suspended following the incident. However, they have since resumed at a limited capacity, the airport said in a post on X. India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi said the plane crash had 'stunned and saddened' the country. He described the incident as 'heartbreaking beyond words,' adding that he was in touch with the authorities involved in the disaster. Natarajan Chandrasekaran, the chairman of Air India, said that Air India Flight AI171 had been involved in a 'tragic accident.' He added, 'We are doing everything in our power to assist the emergency response teams at the site and to provide all necessary support and care to those impacted.' Prev Next British Prime Minister Keir Starmer described the scenes as 'devastating,' and said he is 'being kept updated as the situation develops.' He added that his 'thoughts are with the passengers and their families at this deeply distressing time.' Meanwhile British Foreign Secretary David Lammy told the UK House of Commons: 'This morning, we know that British nationals were on board. And Mr. Speaker, I can confirm that the (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) is working urgently with local authorities to support British nationals and their families, and has stood up a crisis team in both Delhi and in London.' The UK's King Charles said he and Queen Camilla are 'desperately shocked' by the 'terrible events' in Ahmedabad. He also paid tribute to the 'heroic efforts' of the emergency services and all those 'providing help and support at this most heartbreaking and traumatic time.' The UK and India have strong cultural and historic ties and a complicated history dating back to Britain's colonial era. The UK has a large Indian diaspora – according to data from the British government, in 2021, 1.9 million people or 3.1% of the country's population identified as having Indian ethnicity. Thursday's crash marks the first involving a Boeing 787 Dreamliner since the aircraft first entered into service in 2011, according to Boeing's Statistical Summary of Commercial Jet Airplane Accidents. According to Boeing, there are over 1,175 Dreamliners in service, which account for 2,100 flights each day. Boeing issued a statement in wake of the crash, saying it is in contact with Air India and stands 'ready to support them.' 'Our thoughts are with the passengers, crew, first responders and all affected,' it added in an X post. This is a developing story and will be updated. CNN's Olivia Kemp contributed to this report.
USA Today
28 minutes ago
- USA Today
Northern lights may be visible in these states this weekend
Northern lights may be visible in these states this weekend Show Caption Hide Caption Watch as a vibrant aurora dances across the night sky About 20 U.S. states caught a glimpse of the northern lights, according to NOAA. Americans in some northern U.S. states may have another opportunity to catch a glimpse of the night sky's greatest spectacle. The northern lights are slated to be visible in states from Idaho to New York on the night of Saturday, June 14 as a geomagnetic storm watch was issued, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The agency's Space Weather Prediction Center classified the geomagnetic storm as a G2, the second lowest level on its G scale that sorts intensity from G1 (least) to G5 (most). The stunning natural phenomenon, formally known as aurora borealis, is expected to be visible over some northern-tier and upper Midwest states, according to the NOAA. Hopeful viewers may have a smaller window to see the lights because of longer daylight hours as the summer solstice arrives between June 20 and 21. Earlier this month, people in around 16 different states were blessed with the opportunity to see the swirling green, red and purple lights. What are the northern lights? Aurora borealis, commonly known as the northern lights, are colorful ribbons of light that weave across Earth's northern or southern polar regions, according to NASA. Geomagnetic storms are caused by solar activity like solar flares or coronal mass ejections. The solar wind moves energetic charged particles from these events away from the sun to produce the northern lights. Can you see northern lights with the naked eye? Northern lights can be safely viewed without a telescope or microscope. The visibility of the aurora depends on multiple factors, including location, weather, time of night and the level of geomagnetic activity present. Contributing: Julia Gomez, Doyle Rice, and Dinah Voyles Pulver, USA TODAY
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. Is Barely Even Pretending Anymore
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. accepted his new position as health secretary, he made a big show of distancing himself from his past life. 'News reports have claimed that I am anti-vaccine or anti-industry,' Kennedy, who has for decades promoted the debunked notion that vaccines cause autism and has baselessly sown doubt over the ability of the U.S. government to vet shots, said at his confirmation hearing in January. 'I am neither. I am pro-safety.' But for all Kennedy's talk, this week, he did exactly what a person would do if they were trying to undermine the scientific consensus on vaccination in the United States. He abruptly dismissed the entire expert committee that advises the CDC on its nationwide vaccine recommendations—and began to fill the roster with like-minded people ready to cast doubt on the benefits of vaccination. Like Kennedy, few of these new appointees to the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practice, or ACIP, have openly embraced the notion that they are anti-vaccine. But among them are individuals who have spoken out against COVID vaccines and policies, claimed vaccine injuries for their own children, and falsely linked COVID shots to deaths—or even baselessly accused those vaccines of 'causing a form of acquired immunity deficiency syndrome.' In January, I wrote that remaking the committee in exactly this way would be an especially harmful blow to Americans' health: Perhaps more than any other body of experts in the U.S., ACIP guides the nation's future preparedness against infectious disease. By appointing a committee that is poised to legitimize more of his own radical views, Kennedy is giving his skewed version of scientific reality the government's imprimatur. Whether he will admit to it or not, he is serving the most core goal of the anti-vaccine movement—eroding access to, and trust in, immunization. In an emailed statement, Health and Human Services Press Secretary Emily G. Hilliard reiterated that 'Secretary Kennedy is not anti-vaccine—he is pro-safety, pro-transparency, and pro-accountability,' and added that his 'evidence-based approach puts accountability and radical transparency first, which will restore trust in our public health system.' (Kennedy, notably, promised Senator Bill Cassidy during his confirmation process that he would maintain ACIP, as Cassidy put it, 'without changes.') Since the 1960s, ACIP has lent government policy on vaccines the clout of scientific evidence. Its mandate is to convene experts across fields such as infectious disease, immunology, pediatrics, vaccinology, and public health to carefully vet the data on immunizations, weigh their risks and benefits, and vote on recommendations that guide the public on how to use them—who should get vaccines, and when. Those guidelines are then passed to the CDC director, who—with only the rarest of exceptions—accepts that advice wholesale. 'These recommendations are what states look to, what providers look to,' Rupali Limaye, an expert in vaccine behavior at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, told me. Medicare, for instance, is required to fully cover the vaccines that ACIP recommends; ACIP also determines which vaccines are covered by the Vaccines for Children Program, which provides free vaccines for children whose families cannot afford them. The experts who serve on ACIP have the opportunity, more than just about any of their scientific peers, to translate their vaccine rhetoric into reality. So far, Kennedy has dismissed the 17 people who were serving on ACIP, and filled eight of the newly open slots. Most of the new nominees have an obvious bone to pick with at least some vaccines, especially COVID shots, and have publicly advocated for limiting their use. Among the new members, for instance, is Robert Malone, a controversial physician who has spoken at anti-vaccine events, where he has denounced COVID vaccines and, without evidence, suggested that they can worsen coronavirus infections. Another appointee is Vicky Pebsworth, who serves on the board of the National Vaccine Information Center, an anti-vaccine nonprofit previously known as Dissatisfied Parents Together. A third, Retsef Levi, a health-care-management expert, called for the administration of COVID vaccines to be halted in 2023, and has questioned the shots' safety, despite a large body of evidence from clinical trials supporting their continued use. Overall, 'this is not a list that would increase confidence in vaccine decisions,' Dorit Reiss, a vaccine-policy expert at UC San Francisco, told me. (None of these new ACIP members returned a request for comment.) The next ACIP meeting is scheduled for the end of this month—and the agenda includes discussion about anthrax vaccines, chikungunya vaccines, COVID-19 vaccines, cytomegalovirus vaccine, the human-papillomavirus vaccine, influenza vaccines, the Lyme-disease vaccine, meningococcal vaccines, pneumococcal vaccines, and RSV vaccines. That's a big slate of topics for a brand-new panel of members, Paul Offit, a pediatrician and a vaccine expert who has previously served on ACIP, told me: Depending on how the meeting is structured, and on the input from CDC scientists, these new committee members could substantially alter the guidelines on several immunizations—perhaps so much so that certain shots could stop being recommended to certain groups of Americans. Based on the composition of the committee so far, Offit predicts that the new ACIP will eventually push the CDC away from full-throated endorsement of many of these vaccines. Even subtle changes in the wording of CDC recommendations—a should swapped for a may—can have big ripple effects, Limaye told me. Insurers, for instance, may be more reluctant to cover vaccines that are not actively endorsed by the CDC; some states—especially those in which vaccines have become a political battleground—may stop mandating those types of shots. If the CDC softens its recommendations, 'we will likely see more partisan divides' in who opts for protection nationwide, Jason Schwartz, a vaccine-policy expert at Yale, told me. Pharmaceutical companies may, in turn, cut down production of vaccines that don't have full CDC backing, perpetuating a cycle of reduced availability and reduced enthusiasm. And primary-care physicians, who look to the CDC's vaccination schedule as an essential reference, may shift the language they use to describe childhood shots, nudging more parents to simply opt out. Historically, medical and public-health associations, such as the American Academy of Pediatrics, have aligned their vaccine recommendations with ACIP's—because those recommendations were all driven by scientific evidence. Now, though, scientific consensus and government position are beginning to diverge: Multiple groups of physicians, scientists, and public-health scholars have issued statements condemning the vaccine decisions of Kennedy and his allies; a number of prominent scientists have now banded together to form a kind of alt-ACIP, dubbing themselves the Vaccine Integrity Project. As the views of fringe vaccine groups become the government's stance, Americans may soon have to choose between following the science and following what their nation's leaders say. Identifying as 'anti-vaccine' has historically been taboo: In a nation where most people remain largely in favor of shots, the term is pejorative, an open acknowledgment that one's views lie outside of the norm. But the more vaccine resistance infiltrates HHS and its advisers, the more what's considered normal may shift toward Kennedy's own views on vaccines; ACIP's reputation for evidence-backed thinking could even gild those views with scientific legitimacy. Assembling one's own team of friendly experts is an especially effective way to sanewash extremism, Reiss told me, and to overturn the system through what appear to be normal channels. If the nation's most prominent group of vaccine advisers bends toward anti-vaccine, the term loses its extremist edge—and the scientists who argue, based on sound data, that vaccines are safe and effective risk being labeled anti-government. Article originally published at The Atlantic
