Jump to content

Ron Put

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well, it's too late (and cold) for me to search now....
  2. Ron Put

    Does IF damage the heart?

    Yep. Some older rat studies, generally contradicted by other rat studies and more recent human studies (I cited one above, but there are more, and more recent ones that I've come across). I just haven't seen anything notable to lend significant support to the "Mess Up Your Heart..." headline. I am not a big faster, but I have seen enough studies to lend pretty strong support to the practice.
  3. Ron Put

    Does IF damage the heart?

    I don't know about that post, but I don't recall seeing a study which suggests so. Perhaps there is confusion because during fasting, cholesterol levels in the blood shoot up? "... The participants' low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C, the "bad" cholesterol) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C, the "good" cholesterol) both increased (by 14 percent and 6 percent, respectively) raising their total cholesterol -- and catching the researchers by surprise. "Fasting causes hunger or stress. In response, the body releases more cholesterol, allowing it to utilize fat as a source of fuel, instead of glucose. This decreases the number of fat cells in the body," says Dr. Horne. "This is important because the fewer fat cells a body has, the less likely it will experience insulin resistance, or diabetes."" https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110403090259.htm
  4. Haha. Of course, these studies compare the same population in restricted calories state and in free feeding state. And restricting calories appears to be beneficial in terms of lower mortality rates. However, the longevity of the Scandinavians is still lower than that of the Mediterraneans, as per my post above. Cold exposure, higher incomes and better access to more advanced healthcare up North notwithstanding.
  5. Ron Put

    Average age of death per calorie!

    Haha is right :D If your caloric intake is below your BMR, you will eventually shrivel up and die. The numbers in the first post are meaningless, as individual BMR will vary.
  6. Ron Put

    Molecular aging midlife crisis

    Quote from the linked article: "Our study revealed that the complexity of regulation of aging programs may be much greater in humans as compared to other species," Dr. Wahlestedt said. "This is related to our more complex genome, which may have evolved to allow for longer and healthier lifespan." The part in bold is grossly inaccurate and the part in red misrepresents the basic tenets of evolutionary theory. The human genome is relatively complex, but not all that complex, compared to something like Paris Japonica, which has 150 Billion base pairs (we have about 3 Billion). Even the lowly dafnia pulex (a water fly) has about a quarter more genes than a human.... Makes me doubt the rest of what Dr. Wahlestedt says....
  7. Actually, there are a number of appropriate population studies which correlate both calorie/protein restriction and plant diets, with lower mortality/longevity. In addition to Okinawa and Sardinia, there are also other examples of populations which experienced significant caloric restriction, without malnutrition: "During World War 1 in 1917, Danish men and women were forced to reduce food consumption for 2 years, but with a well-planned and adequate consumption of whole grain cereals, vegetables, and milk. The result of this undesired experiment was an impressive 34% reduction in death rates (Hindhede, 1920). Similarly, in Norway during World War 2, the citizens of Oslo underwent a forced 20% CR without malnutrition (i.e. Norwegians were provided with adequate intake of fresh vegetables, potatoes, fish and whole cereals) for approximately 4 years (1941-45). In this forced experiment, mortality dropped by 30% compared to the pre-war level in both men and women (Strom and Jensen, 1951)". https://www.draisistoledo.com/wp-content/uploads/Calorie-restriction-in-humans-An-update.pdf I am not aware of any similar population results showing correlation with cold exposure. As to some of the examples above, we must differentiate between caloric restriction and malnutrition. Just as we must take into account regional lifestyle, education, diet and access to healthcare (all of these are generally worse in the southern US). Anyway, while I am aware of the lab results, I still remain skeptical of long term benefits in humans. If someone enjoys cold showers and ice dunks, that's a different matter, of course. :)
  8. Ron Put

    sex-restriction and longevity

    "A low sperm count may do more than affect a man's ability to have children. It also may be linked to a number of health problems, new research suggests. A study of nearly 5,200 Italian men found that those with low sperm counts were 1.2 times more likely to have more body fat, higher blood pressure, higher bad cholesterol and triglycerides, and lower levels of good cholesterol. Men with low sperm counts also had higher rates of metabolic syndrome, a cluster of these and other risk factors that boost the odds of diabetes, heart disease and stroke. They also had higher rates of insulin resistance, which can lead to diabetes. ... Ferlin said the study associates low sperm count with metabolic changes, heart disease risk and low bone mass. He added, however, that it does not prove that low sperm counts cause these problems. Instead, it shows sperm quality can reveal general health. "Men of couples having difficulties achieving pregnancy should be correctly diagnosed and followed up by their fertility specialists and primary care doctor because they could have an increased chance of morbidity and mortality," Ferlin said in a society news release." https://www.webmd.com/infertility-and-reproduction/news/20180319/low-sperm-count-may-signal-serious-health-risks I seem to recall that the study also found low testerone levels to have an adverse impact on health and longevity (which has been reported before).
  9. Thanks. I am still not convinced that exposure to cold has a significant long-term benefit in humans. For every other major factor, such exercise, diet, caloric restriction, we can find statistically significant trends in population studies. For cold exposure, the trends are generally negatively associated with longevity. Here is another, larger study: "Cold weather kills 20 times as many people as hot weather, according to an international study analyzing over 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 countries. ... Around 7.71% of all deaths were caused by non-optimal temperatures, with substantial differences between countries, ranging from around 3% in Thailand, Brazil, and Sweden to about 11% in China, Italy, and Japan. Cold was responsible for the majority of these deaths (7.29% of all deaths), while just 0.42% of all deaths were attributable to heat." https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150520193831.htm I understand that such population studies have their shortcomings. But I will repeat that one would expect that if long-term cold exposure was of significant benefit to human longevity, we would see a higher proportion of extraordinary longevity in populations subjected to such exposure, yet, we see the opposite (regardless of income and healthcare access):
  10. Dean, thanks for the great summary. I don't disagree with the lab research and the result indicating benefits such as increases brown fat levels. I just don't see the trend in any population study I am aware of, as higher concentrations of centenarians are generally found in temperate or warm climates. You can find significant dietary trends affecting longevity, for example, but the relationship between cold exposure and longevity is, if anything, reversed. Yet it is an easy argument that in places with long, severe winters, the average resident is exposed, over a lifetime, to lower temperatures for longer periods than someplace like Costa Rica or Sardinia. If cold exposure had a significant beneficial effect, it would likely manifest in large population studies, methinks. And here is something to ponder, too: "In this large population-based cohort in Ontario, we found that short-term exposure to cold temperatures significantly increased the daily rates of hospitalisations for CHD, AMI and stroke. High temperatures were associated to a lesser degree with the hospitalisations for these conditions. ... There are several biological mechanisms through which exposure to ambient temperatures can affect the cardiovascular system. Cold exposure are known to increase in blood pressure, heart rate, plasma fibrinogen, platelet viscosity and peripheral vasoconstriction.25 Cold may also increase cardiac load through raised inflammatory markers and coagulation parameters.26 Additionally, cold temperatures may trigger higher haemoglobin A1c levels in people with type 2 diabetes, which is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease.27 Similarly, exposure to heat can elevate heart rate, blood pressure, blood viscosity and coagulability, weaken core temperature regulation and heighten the risk of coronary events and stroke.28" https://heart.bmj.com/content/104/8/673#DC1 As to "a net calorie deficit (rather than a low calorie intake per se) is sufficient to trigger the CR effect," I agree. I posted a study on the subject elsewhere, which found similar of better markers in a group which increased energy expenditure by 12.5% while reducing calories by 12.5%, compared to a group which reduced calories by 25%, without increased energy expenditure.
  11. My post was actually in jest :) On a more serious note, while I understand the underlying theories, I am not convinced that intermittent cold exposure does anything of great significance to slow down aging in humans. IMO, there is certainly much less evidence for it than for the impact of CR, fasting, low protein or plant-based diets. I did a cursory search and found this interesting, if not exactly rigorous overview: https://joshmitteldorf.scienceblog.com/2013/02/25/cold-temperature-and-life-span-its-not-about-the-rate-of-living/ Note the disparity in income (and presumably access to advanced healthcare) and the average lifespan. Mediterranean, average 29,360 82.8 Scandinavia, average: 65,934 82.2 One curious item: "... the same gene, TRPA-1 that is activated by cold in worms and mammals can also be triggered by eating Japanese horseradish (wasabi)" A much more pleasant way to activate it, IMO. I'll try it at dinner tonight. :)
  12. Haha, it actually seems to kill the Siberians, too. Siberia has an average life expectancy of close to a full decade shorter than the rest of Russia. And Russia already has the shortest life expectancy in Europe.
  13. Ron Put

    Coffee Revisited

    This is interesting and may (or may not) be beneficial in (fast-metabolizing?) humans: "Coffee induces autophagy in vivo Abstract Epidemiological studies and clinical trials revealed that chronic consumption coffee is associated with the inhibition of several metabolic diseases as well as reduction in overall and cause-specific mortality. We show that both natural and decaffeinated brands of coffee similarly rapidly trigger autophagy in mice. One to 4 h after coffee consumption, we observed an increase in autophagic flux in all investigated organs (liver, muscle, heart) in vivo, as indicated by the increased lipidation of LC3B and the reduction of the abundance of the autophagic substrate sequestosome 1 (p62/SQSTM1). These changes were accompanied by the inhibition of the enzymatic activity of mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1), leading to the reduced phosphorylation of p70S6K, as well as by the global deacetylation of cellular proteins detectable by immunoblot. Immunohistochemical analyses of transgenic mice expressing a GFP–LC3B fusion protein confirmed the coffee-induced relocation of LC3B to autophagosomes, as well as general protein deacetylation. Altogether, these results indicate that coffee triggers 2 phenomena that are also induced by nutrient depletion, namely a reduction of protein acetylation coupled to an increase in autophagy. We speculate that polyphenols contained in coffee promote health by stimulating autophagy." https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4111762/
  14. Ron Put

    Olive oil? Healthy or not?!

    And eating whole grains (steel cut oats, ground flax, etc.) is not such a bad idea.... One also does not have to regularly eat bread or pasta, in fact I almost never buy those at home. I do indulge when I go out, just as I do with olive oil if at a restaurant which serves it (and I feel weak that evening :) I enjoy cacao nibs daily, and it's worth noting that coffee and tea don't come wrapped in a sea of fat.... I also try not to eat desert, but I do that too, probably once a month or so. Many others seem to practice the same, and it's not all that hard or inconvenient. Perhaps the analogy between EVOO and whole wheat bread is not that far fetched -- both are fine as replacements (EVOO to animal and most processed vegetable fats, and whole wheat bread to something like Wonder Bread). As to the objections to olive leaf extract made above, the most damning was ""Hydroxytyrosol administration enhances atherosclerotic lesion development in apo E deficient mice" and after reading it, I am comfortable that it does not apply to most of us. There were some bioavailability questions, but after a quick search I found a number of studies showing high human bioavailability from olive leaf extract (I posted a couple above). I did not find any studies which found low human bioavailability, BTW. This is not an argument, I am merely trying to present the best facts I can find (if someone has better, I am happy to consider them) and each persons who reads them can make their own decisions. Cheers.
  15. Unless I am misunderstanding something, the only human study on the subject of CR and exercise I am aware of appears to find otherwise: "In this study, we observed a metabolic adaptation over 24-hour in sedentary conditions and during sleep following 6-months of CR. The metabolic adaptation in the CREX group was similar to that observed in CR group, suggesting that energy deficit rather than CR itself is driving the decrease in energy expenditure. Importantly, the metabolic adaptations were closely paralleled by a drop in thyroid hormone plasma concentrations confirming the importance of the thyroid pathway as a determinant of energy metabolism43. Of significance, the metabolic adaptation occurred in the first 3-months after intervention with no further adaptation at 6 months, even though weight loss continued in CR and CREX groups." (CR=25% diet restriction; CREX=12.5%CR+12.5% increase in energy expenditure) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2692623/