Answering Life's Health Questions, One Week at a Time
Sometimes, though, you're just wondering: Does hot water with lemon really have health benefits?
Well, maybe, according to experts — but it's not a miracle drink, as some social media influencers might have you believe.
That answer came from nutrition experts featured in Ask Well, a New York Times column that aims to fill in the gaps surrounding health topics like allergies, microplastics, toxic chemicals in home goods and depression.
Julia Calderone, the column's editor, fields questions submitted by readers or posed by colleagues. She then taps journalists from the Well section or health and science freelance writers to report the answers, with the help of experts and research. The column, which publishes every Tuesday morning, aims to provide a judgment-free zone for people to pose even their most personal health concerns. (The questions are published anonymously.)
In an interview, Ms. Calderone spoke about how she picks questions, what topics she won't assign and what she hopes people take away from the column. This interview has been edited and condensed.
Do you look for questions that are topical? Or is it whatever strikes your interest?
It's a combination. Sometimes, it's seasonal — like if we're in allergy season, I'll look for questions around allergies. Then it's based on what we've published in the past and what we're running that month.
I try to create a nice mix. One week I'll do mental health; another week, I'll do nutrition. I try to have a good variety. I also look at what other stories we published in the Well section that week to make sure there's no overlap.
Do you notice general themes with reader questions?
Often what will happen is we'll publish an Ask Well and then readers will ask more questions about that topic. One that was really popular was 'How Much Advil Is Too Much?' Then we heard: 'Do it for Tylenol.' We get a lot of those thematic questions.
If there's something happening in the news, we'll get a lot of questions around it. If ultraprocessed foods are in the news, for example, we'll get a ton of ultraprocessed questions, or stuff related to Robert F. Kennedy Jr., like, are food dyes or seed oils going to kill me?
When you assign an Ask Well column, is there a stable of experts that you rely on? Or do reporters research people to speak with each time?
It depends on the topic. Everyone we work with is an established health and science reporter — this is what they do, and they've been doing it for many years. They all have their own vetted experts that they rely on.
This didn't happen with a story, but if someone reached out to a chef and asked, 'Does lemon water have health benefits?' The chef is not an expert on the health benefits. I'd say, 'You need to find someone with a Ph.D. who has studied this, or maybe a dietitian.' But our reporters know how to find good experts.
Are there any questions that you won't assign?
There are some stories I won't assign because I know that there's no way we'll be able to have nuanced conversations about the topics in 850 words.
There was a recent pitch about the health risks of hair straighteners like Brazilian Blowouts and keratin smoothing treatments, many of which contain formaldehyde. The question is, How can I think about the risk of getting these treatments? Much of the science is not clear, and a lot of it is very preliminary. We really don't know much about the true health risks.
I don't think we could take the reader through the science and the nuance of this topic in 850 words, and I don't think we could answer the question in a helpful way.
Have you read a question that made you raise an eyebrow?
We did one recently on dental X-rays. I grew up in the '80s and '90s, and the technology then was a lot different; you were exposed to more radiation. This reader asked if getting dental X-rays at regular checkups would increase the risk of cancer. Going into the story, I thought, For sure, it's bad for you and it might cause cancer. Actually, I learned through the reporting and the story that the technology is a lot better now, and you're exposed to much less radiation than you used to be, and at levels far lower than what is considered risky for cancer.
It's such a good example of a simple question that probably many people have when they go to the dentist. Addressing it gives people peace of mind that they probably otherwise wouldn't have.
Would you say that's the mission of Ask Well?
It's letting people know that they're not alone in having health questions that are sometimes really intimate or maybe embarrassing to ask. Sometimes they don't want to ask their doctors or people in their family. Submitting a form semi-anonymously maybe feels a little bit easier.
Ask Well stories are some of our most popular stories. So, clearly, lots of people have these questions that they're maybe too afraid to ask or didn't think to ask, and we're supplying that service.
Do you have a question for our health and science editors? Ask us here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
4 hours ago
- New York Post
Stop obsessing over protein goals — the latest health craze — and just enjoy your food
The cookbook section of any used bookstore is a museum of past health trends. Browse through the stock and you'll trace the rise and fall of nutritional villains: eggs, butter, red meat and more — first demonized, then rehabilitated by the next wave of experts. We've all seen America's food rules shift beneath our feet, as nutritional gospel one year becomes heresy the next. In 2025, we're in the era of protein. More specifically, we're in the era of more protein. Advertisement Inspired by bodybuilders, weight-lifters and hardcore health gurus, packing on the protein has gone mainstream. But while these athletes need the nutrient to build muscle and maintain their exercise routines, the average carpooling mom has no such requirement. Yet grocery-store shelves shout their macronutrient stats like badges of honor: '18 grams per serving!' 'Protein-rich!' Advertisement Social-media influencers cheerfully explain how to sneak ever more protein into cookies, pancakes and even ice cream; cottage cheese is the new star of the show, blended into everything from pasta sauce to dessert bars. Ads hawk 'gourmet protein powders' to be dumped into your morning latte. Many women's Instagram feeds have become a stream of 'high-protein lunchbox' reels and 'six ways to eat 100g of protein' posts. Advertisement I recently watched as one food blogger, a former champion of plant-based eating, crammed half a rotisserie chicken into her mouth on camera. Her caption: 'Gotta hit those protein goals!' Curious about my own goals, I calculated how much protein I'd need to eat in a day to meet the online experts' frequently cited benchmarks. The result was nauseating: seven eggs for breakfast, a whole chicken breast for lunch, meat again for dinner, plus multiple high-protein snacks — Greek yogurt, nuts, cottage cheese, protein bars — to stay on target. This isn't just a quirky health trend. It's disordered eating with a veneer of wellness. Advertisement That's not to say protein is bad for you; quite the opposite. It's a vital macronutrient, essential for muscle repair, hormone production and immune function; it also provides a sense of fullness after meals, helping to maintain a healthy weight. For growing kids, pregnant women, aging adults and those recovering from illness or intense exercise, protein is especially crucial. The problem isn't the nutrient itself, but the obsessive, all-consuming fixation on it. Consider this: For a healthy, active 175-pound man, the National Institutes of Health recommends about 63 grams of protein per day. But the popular MyFitnessPal website advises that same man to aim for 164 grams, well more than double the federal guideline. 'The average man in the United States is overshooting the federal protein recommendation by more than 55%,' says Alice Callahan, a New York Times health reporter who holds a nutrition PhD, 'and the average woman by more than 35%.' What happens to all that extra protein? The body can't store it. Instead, the liver converts the surplus into energy — and if that isn't used, packs it on as fat. Advertisement So if we're already getting enough, why the obsession? Maybe it has something to do with who's leading the conversation. A 2017 study published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics found that 49.5% of registered dietitians were at risk for orthorexia nervosa, a condition marked by an unhealthy fixation on eating 'correctly.' Another 13% were at risk for traditional eating disorders like anorexia, and 8% had previously received treatment for them. Advertisement In other words, the very people we look to for food guidance may be struggling with disordered eating habits themselves. Women are more prone to eating disorders than men by orders of magnitude — and the current protein craze is largely female-led. Compared to other nutrition fads, the high-protein trend might seem harmless; after all, it's not demanding the total elimination of food groups, or promoting outright starvation. Advertisement However, it's steeped in the same obsessive mindset. When every bite must be justified by its protein content, when food becomes math instead of nourishment, something has gone wrong. A healthy approach to protein centers on real, unprocessed foods like eggs, fish, beans, nuts, meat and dairy — not processed powders with ingredients you can't pronounce, or bars that taste like compressed chalk. You don't need to count every gram or hit some arbitrary benchmark. Just eat a variety of whole foods, and you'll get what you need. Food fuels our bodies, but it's also meant to be enjoyed. We shouldn't have to choke down dry chicken or gag on cottage-cheese brownies in the name of health. Advertisement Because if wellness doesn't include balance, sanity and flexibility, it isn't wellness at all. Bethany Mandel writes and podcasts at The Mom Wars and is a homeschooling mother of six in greater Washington, DC.
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Abortion pioneer died at 93 in hospital after being diagnosed with dementia
A pioneer of abortion services in the United States died at the age of 93 after being detained under the mental health act at a Dorset hospital after suffering paranoia and delirium having been diagnosed with dementia, an inquest has heard. Dr Horace Hale Harvey III, who was born in New Orleans in December 1931, opened one of the first independent abortion clinics in the US in Manhattan in July 1970 after New York State had reformed its laws. The clinic, called Women's Services, provided safe and affordable abortions. In an obituary, the New York Times reported that Dr Harvey had become an abortion provider to 'combat what he felt was an epidemic of unsafe abortions at a time when unmarried women were denied access to contraceptives, and when comprehensive sex education was discouraged'. Dr Harvey, who had a son and a daughter, later moved to the Isle of Wight and worked for public health services there but in 2014 moved to Dorset after his house burned down. The obituary states that Dr Harvey had chosen the Isle of Wight because 'according to his research, it had the highest average temperature and received more hours of sunlight than anywhere else in England'. In a statement read to the Bournemouth inquest, his daughter Kate said that her father was 'very determined' to keep healthy by walking a mile and doing 20 squats each day and said he 'enjoyed laughter and making up jokes' as well as activities such as dance, table tennis and snooker. She added that he was a scholar who was 'committed to Aristotelian ethics and scientific learning'. The inquest heard that in late 2024, Dr Harvey was diagnosed with Alzheimer's and PTSD after the house fire 10 years earlier. On January 22 2025, he was taken to Dorset County Hospital having suffered a rib fracture in a fall at home. After physiotherapists expressed concerns at his ability to understand care instructions, he was assessed by psychiatrists and was detained under the mental health act. Coroner Richard Middleton said that Dr Harvey was increasingly experiencing delirium and paranoia. He said that Dr Harvey was found dead in his hospital bed in the early hours of February 14 and a post-mortem examination found he died of natural causes from ischaemic heart disease and coronary artery disease. The coroner, recording a conclusion of death by natural causes, explained that the inquest had to be held by law because Dr Harvey was formally detained by the state at the time of his death. Mr Middleton added: 'I express my deepest condolences to all of Dr Harvey's family and friends for their loss.'
The Hill
10 hours ago
- The Hill
‘Make America Healthy Again' is winning young voters — Democrats should worry
Could RFK Jr. prove to be the Trump administration's secret weapon? Recent polling shows Americans trust Republicans over Democrats on nearly every major issue confronting our country: the economy, immigration, foreign policy and inflation. The two areas where Democrats hold the upper hand is health care and vaccines. RFK Jr. has a shot of undermining that advantage, especially with young voters. Although the Health and Human Services secretary has been relentlessly blasted by the liberal media for being 'anti-vaccine' (which Kennedy denies), a great many Americans like Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again agenda and agree that corporate interests are helping to make Americans sick and overly reliant on pharmaceuticals. A poll conducted by NBC News last month (in which Trump earned only a 45 percent job approval) showed that a majority of the country (51 percent) liked what RFK is doing, whereas only 48 percent disapproved. Interestingly, when asked who was to blame for America's chronic health problems, including obesity and heart disease, a plurality of respondents blamed the food industry. Much of RFK's agenda makes sense. A New York Times author last fall set out to debunk five of Kennedy's main claims about the nation's health, but ended up supporting three of them. For example, she concluded that 'many public health and nutrition experts agree' with his assertion that 'Ultraprocessed foods are driving the obesity epidemic, and they should be removed from school lunches.' On the subject of food dyes, which the HHS secretary says 'cause cancer, and ADHD in children,' she wrote, 'some small clinical trials have suggested that certain synthetic food dyes may increase hyperactivity in children.' 'Many experts agree,' she continued, 'it wouldn't hurt to avoid them.' How about his suggestion 'that consuming too many added sugars, especially from high fructose corn syrup, contributes to childhood obesity and cardiovascular disease?' Answer: 'Correct.' RFK Jr. is shaking up the food industry. In April, the Food and Drug Administration announced it would move to eliminate several petroleum-based dyes, which Kennedy claims can cause cancer and ADHD in kids, by the end of next year. Already, a large number of top brands, including General Mills, Kraft Heinz, Nestlé, Hershey, J.M. Smucker, McCormick, Pepsico and Sam's Club, have taken steps to replace the artificial dyes used in candy, ice cream and other products with natural ingredients, despite the costs of doing so. The changes are likely to be popular, despite the less alluring colors of mint chip ice cream or Froot Loops. In Canada and Europe, foods colored with artificial dyes are required to carry a warning label. Consequently, manufacturers generally use natural products instead. Call me crazy, but the fact that so many food companies are making the switch, despite the expense and possibility of lost sales, suggests they know something they're not publicizing about these dyes and that Kennedy is on the right track. In May, Kennedy and his 'Make America Healthy Again' commission targeted ultra-processed foods in a 69-page report. Ultraprocessed foods, which make up 70-plus percent of Americans' diet, are made with manufactured rather than natural ingredients and formulated to encourage people to eat more, which adds to our obesity problems. A study last year of the dietary habits of nearly 10 million people published in the British Medical Journal revealed that exposure to ultra-processed food 'was associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, especially cardiometabolic, common mental disorder, and mortality outcomes.' In particular, the study linked ultraprocessed foods to increased incidents of some 30 health conditions, including obesity, diabetes, heart disease, certain cancers and mental health disorders. Is Kennedy right to take them on? Absolutely. The wonder is that no one has investigated the industry before this. It is actually not a puzzle. According to Open Secrets, agribusiness PACs donated nearly $31 million to politicians last year, while food sales and processing firms threw in another $3 million. Moreover, the food industry spilled $16 million on lobbying. That buys a lot of protection. Meanwhile, RFK Jr.'s concerns over widely prescribed vaccines has been harshly criticized by the medical establishment. The left has accused him of downplaying a measles outbreak in Texas, and talking up cures rather than advocating for increased vaccinations. But Kennedy has acknowledged that public trust in U.S. vaccine mandates and indeed in our health industries need to be rebuilt. He is right. That has led to a complete overhaul of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices, citing 'persistent conflicts of interest' among members of the former board which, he wrote in a recent op-ed, 'has never recommended against a vaccine — even those later withdrawn for safety reasons.' Having new, independent researchers take a fresh look at Americans' vaccine regimen should be welcomed. Kennedy's willingness to gore sacred cows and ask tough questions make him popular with young people, and is likely contributing to Republican gains with young male and female Gen-Zers. A recent Fox News interviewer asked a young influencer why young voters are 'flocking to MAHA.' Lexi Vrachalus answered that she and others were alarmed by the rise chronic diseases in their peers — diseases that are preventable with diet and lifestyle choices. Asked about her focus on the gut, she explained, 'if we eat bad, we are going to feel bad mentally and physically, so I think it's crucial that we fuel our bodies with real, whole, single ingredient, unprocessed foods.' In May, The New York Times published a piece about 'The Rise of the 'Crunchy Teen' Wellness Influencer' writing, 'High schoolers are appealing to other health-conscious kids online, sometimes by expressing views in line with the 'Make America Healthy Again' movement.' The skeptical Times writer found plenty of reason to find the trend concerning, as teens may, for instance, over-emphasize one diet component or another. But Democrats should find the trend concerning as well, especially as Kennedy's MAHA program continues to win over young voters.
