io9 
Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #caloricrestriction more → 
Can Food Prevent Age-Related Dementia?
San Francisco, 6:17 PM
Sat Nov 7
12 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors: tips@io9.com
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz | Email
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders | Email
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner | Email
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis | Email
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan | Email
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier | Email
Ed Grabianowski | Email
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan | Email
Lauren Davis | Email
Chris Hsiang | Email
Lynn Peril | Email
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins | Email
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox | Email
Interns:
Tim Barribeau | Email
Julia Carusillo | Email
Alex Eichler | Email
Cyriaque Lamar | Email
Caitlin Petrakovitz | Email
Mary Ratliff | Email
Josh Snyder | Email
| posts about #caloricrestriction more → |
Can Food Prevent Age-Related Dementia? |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
07/09/09
07/09/09
I'll have to wait until I travel to the big city, or learn how to make it myself by: a) using locally available seafood (which ain't much), and b) overcoming my incredible laziness--and Jebus knows that ain't happening...
07/09/09
07/09/09
07/09/09
07/09/09
In addition, I've read evidence that it's likely that calorie restriction works in most animals due to the fact that it requires their metabolic functions be reduced to levels that just sustain them, with no "frivolous" functions (i.e. reproduction). Also, it engages some life-prolonging response that lets them live through tough periods long enough to have an extra season or two to breed when food becomes more abundant. If you're a mouse that's going to live 2 years, an extra 6 months can mean you live until spring and have babies instead of dying, without issue, in the winter.
Now, it's possible that this works in most animals, but the problem with generalizing animal results to humans is that we are already ridiculously long-lived creatures. We are one of only a few mammals that undergo menopause -- in itself, the shutting down of the reproductive cycle to protect older females from dying through childbirth after it can no longer be tolerated by the aging body. We have a high degree of neoteny -- we are basically frozen evolutionarily in a stage that appears like the juvenile version of many primates -- possibly to allow us to remain adaptive (and our brains to remain plastic) longer. That allows us to invest in a 13-year childhood, followed by a long adulthood, followed by a period of being an "elder" who generally doesn't contribute genetically so much as culturally. We don't need to eek out one more year in a tough year, because we have more years than we need to begin with (certainly many more than reproduce for).
I would not be surprised if humans have already evolved in such a way that longevity is the norm and thus can't be increased through environmental pressure (like CR). Mice and monkeys are not as neotenous, they do not undergo menopause, they do not contribute to their societies after reproductive age, and their aging speeds are much more rapid than ours. To conflate what works for them with what might work for us -- without empirical evidence -- is foolhardy. There's evidence that calorie restriction's significant effects on growth hormones in mice, for example, is not replicated at all in humans. Not only that, but recent evidence shows that people with low BMIs have higher mortality (link).
That being said, I do think that an overabundance of nutrients can lead to harm (look at the new research on the possible deleterious effects of too much folate on older people). But I don't think skipping dessert will make my life significantly longer than it already will be, thanks to humanity's evolution.
07/09/09
Nevertheless, you bring up a very good point; that humans live significantly longer than most mammals/primates (monkeys average around 15 years, mice are around 4 years?). I for one, don't feel that living past 90, or 100, or whatever it might be, is worth not eating delicious (and most likely unhealthy) foods. Especially when this new theory is so far unknown to be true. After all, it is just a theory.
You bring up a lot of good points, and have thus enlightened me.
07/09/09
I, too, would gladly give up living past 90 if the alternative was living abstemiously for 120 years. I mean, just think of all the people who used Zicam and lost their senses of taste and smell -- they are no longer able to enjoy food, and many have gone through periods of depression because of it. I'll take a block of cheese and happiness over that any day.
07/09/09
07/09/09
I think you're right that most people wouldn't be willing to give up tasty food in order to live a little longer. (In fact, we seem to be going in the opposite direction.) But the point of all these studies is to find out what the mechanism is by which caloric restriction works, and replicate it without major lifestyle changes.
07/10/09
So my point of contention is the same thing that always bothers me about science reporting: the article says "A new study has confirmed that primates who eat a low-calorie diet can, according to researchers, 'slow the aging process.' Restricting your calorie intake means you're three times less likely to develop age-related disorders, particularly in the brain." (emphasis mine). It's not all primates, it's rhesus monkeys; and there's no proof this works on humans, so counseling people to do CR (as the article later does) is irresponsible. There's not always an immediate generalizable benefit to humans from animal research.
I say the above for the sake of clarifying my position, not because I think you disagree ^_^.
07/10/09
So it probably just SEEMS longer.
07/09/09
Your cells are reproductions of the originals and have a gradual generation loss. Like making a copy of a sheet of paper then making another copy from the first copy and so on, the image quality will degrade quickly.
Calories are like nickels that run the copy machine.
07/09/09
There are lots of unexpected side-effects to having a high fat content in your body. Artery and vein clogging, high blood pressure, and a buildup of chemicals in the body that dissolve into lipids and are never purged.
07/09/09
07/09/09
Most of my 80+ year old relatives who are mentally sharp are skinny as rails.
07/09/09
07/09/09
07/09/09
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090708132800.htm
Another drug that may slow aging is clioquinol, but there is at least a suspicion of neurotoxicity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clioquinol
07/09/09