Jump to content

'Blue zones' diets


Recommended Posts

I just made a double search: by the forum engine and by the google engine. There appears to be no thread specifically on the blue zones in this forum so I'm going to open one.


I've just read the chapter on the blue zones diets in Dan Buettner's book: 



He lists 5 verified (where birth certificate confirm exceptional longevity) blue zones as you guys well know:


  1. Ikaria island, greece
  2. Okinawa island, japan
  3. Sardinia island, Italy
  4. Loma Prieta adventists, ca., USA
  5. Nicoya peninsula, Costa Rica
Edited by mccoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I realized from the detailed reports of the blue zones diets is that most the areas (except Loma Prieta) are or were pretty rural or isolated and probably poor. Sure the Italian and Costarican zones were poor. Also, most areas are/were pretty isolated (islands or peninsula with montainous terrain) hence maybe more amenable to genetic selection. Some aspects that I realized and were not given maybe very much importance in the book whereas others factors are well known:


  1. The zones, except maybe Loma Prieta, all practiced caloric restriction. Food was not abundant and poverty ruled supreme. That is for sure in Sardinia, pretty sure in Nicoya and Ikaria, whereas I'm not sure of Okinawa but there the habits entailed leaving the table with a 20% empty stomach
  2. Most diets were plant based but never 100%, except the adventist vegans
  3. Some of the food items regularly eaten were not healthy at all, like lard (used in Sardinia and Nicoya)
  4. In all the blue zones except possibly Loma prieta (which is the only blue zone in a modern western society) there was extensive use of wild plants and fruit (I'm not sure about Okinawa but that's possible)
  5. Most plant foods were organic, grown on private gardens and chemicals were nto used in those areas
  6. Carbs were prevalent in all zones, with varying quantities of fats (Buettner published no macros, just percentges by weight of various foods), protein usually 10-20%
  7. Life is/was very boring in all zones, again except probably Loma Prieta. No stress but the stress to partly fill the stomach daily
  8. Bland physical exercise is common to all areas, often montainous
  9. Some security against social stressors is given by the community/family in a quasi tribal pattern.


Now, I remained pretty perplexed about some areas like the Sardinian shepherds (in my region there is a similar shepherding tradition). That area was extremely poor, isolated, the shepherds led very rough and boring lives, all day long herding sheep or goats in rocky lands, little food, very often eating mainly sheep or goat cheese and drinking their milk, along with dry flat bread and surely some wild plants. While on the move they sure could not follow the diet described by Buettner. I see no recipe of longevity here, maybe the genetic development of a very resilient body, with a brutal natural selection which eliminated the weaker individuals. The life and diet of farmers probably were healthier (as we construe healthy) than the Sardinian shepherds'. 


Nowadays we most often don't have that wide access to organic and wild food but we do have access to extreme food variety which was not granted in those areas.


I still miss a strong common denominator in those cultures. OK, food was mainly plant based but so was the diet for example in all rural Italy (not just Sardinia) before the fifties. And it was mainly based on whole grain carbs and legumes, the poor men's food because unexpensive. And all the farmers who had their own land plot of whatsoever size did grow their produce and many fell back on wild plants when produce was not available. And in hilly areas they didn't use pig's lard but EVOO as a main source of fat. However, there are no blue zones in the hilly areas of Italy, where apparently diet and life conditions are better than in the rough isolated areas of Ogliastra, Sardinia.

Bottom line, I remain a little perplexed by this blue zones topic, I feel like I'm missing something.  Sure it is an undisputable fact that the diet was prevalently plant based and rich of carbs and fats, very low in animal proteins (with the possible exception of Sardinia). 


But again, I cannot pinpoint that something very special that seems to be the cause of extensive longevity in those communities (for most of them the present diet is even very different from the traditional diet, with poverty less a concern). Unless the social aspects of a strong sense of belonging, purpose and so on govern. Sorry if the posts may appear a little confused but that just reflects my mild state of confusion on the issue.

Edited by mccoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mechanism, with reference to the genetic component, if the Okinawans have been shown to loose their longevity if they follow a western diet, what about the other zones?

Also, a western diet , rich in junk foods and poor in phytochemicals, might have suppressed the genetic expressions favouring longevity.

That is, both genetics and environmental factors may be at play here, both being necessary. The robust genetics needs the right regimen and phytochemicals and all other conditions to express its fullest potential. Just speculation.


Re. caloric restriction, Buettner does not cite that except the Okinawans but he cites a 1800 Kcal daily diet for the Costaricans. He doesn't specify though if it is males, females or both.

The Ogliastra region in Sardinia was such a poor area that it is very plausible to expect scarcity of food and imposed caloric restriction. That's a montainous, rocky, not at all fertile area. No wonder food was little.


What I meant by security against social stressors is that those communities supported other members in case of need, economical or other. In okinawa they had these 5-people very close friendships, sort of a compact for life. In Sardinia there is the extended families which provide full support.


One point which still is obscure: like you say 




I think this is a reflection of the fact there are many versions of eat food, not too much, mostly plants ( plus exercise moderately incorporated, community support, etc) all of which can lead you to an overall healthy pattern. These may be simple rules but they are far from general practice in the West. I don't see it is a "secret" to longevity so much as they walked the talk of a healthy lifestyle - not by choice, but by necessity and cultural background


Of course all of the above is true, but in many other areas different than the blue zones overall healthy patterns were practiced, very often by necessity. I cited the farmers in the mediterranean parts of Italy, the area where I live. This is before hte sixties. They ate lots of EVOO, they ate mostly plants, legumes and grains, very little meat (reserved to the rich people), many wild plants, fruit when in season, usually very little fish, sometimes eggs and cheese but not always. They were compelled to engage in physical exercise. Why these areas usually do not exhibit extraordinaty longevity?

Actually, Valter Longo speaks about this isolated village in Italy (Molochio, Calabria) with a concentration of centenaries. This is closer to the mediterranean lifestyle than Sardinia. Also, in Italy there is another area in Basilicata, again a mediterranean lifestyle, with an unusual concentration of centenarians.

This may suggests that Italy has actually 3 blue zones so far pinpointed, not just one. This might also suggest that Buettner's blue zones list is not a complete one.

Also Again, why the concentration of centenaries in particular, restricted areas if everywhere else the same or very similar regimen was present? Genetics triggered by environment? Some specific environmental factors like exposure to some hormetic compounds unknown to us? 

I still feel that there is something we are missing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I confess that I would be tempted to dismiss the blue zones phenomena as fluke situations occurring in very isolated areas where development of a specific genetic pool and natural selection govern. However, the Loma Linda example disproves that, being the genetic pool of Americans so diversified (the same happens in peninsular Italy).


All in all, it is very convenient to have an evidence of a diet/lifestyle which allows the expression of the longevity genes, to some extent. In a very concise way this is what I grasped.


  • Diet in the blue zones tends to be mainly plant based but with the almost inevitable presence of some animal foods (dairy products, eggs, fish and meat), always in moderate amounts
  • The animal food may be a factor in that it just avoids B12 deficiency, or it maybe that it really provides some necessary ingredients. The example of the Loma Linda vegans would tend to mitigate the importance of animal food
  • Diet in the blue zones tends to be calorically moderated, because of poverty or lack of abundance (with the possible exception of Loma Linda, where dietary abuse would  anyway constitute a sign of disrespect toward God)
  • Diet in the blue zones is usually lacking of pollutants and rich in phytochemicals, although often lacking in variety
  • Diet in Loma Linda probably does carry pollutants but there is the possibility of extreme  variety (this making up for the lack of wild plants)
  • Macros ratios in the blue zones favour carbs, with variable amounts of fats and moderate to small amounts of protein
  • Carbs are usually complex but often simple natural carbs are present (honey, fruit)
  • The lifestyle in the blue zones often includes lenghty periods in outdoor, healthy environments
  • Almost continuos, mild to moderately strenuos physical activity is often present by necessity (Loma Linda being a possible exception)
  • The blue zones communities exhibit customs which constitute robust built-in stress management systems
  • The blue zones communities tend to place an high value on elder people, motivating them to live longer
  • There is a pervasive sense of purpose in the blue zones communities which does not peter out with age
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With reference to the above list, it's interesting to note that the evidence would tend to refute some of the assertions of the paleo and low-carb communities:

  • Meat, fish and dairy products as a main part of a dietary regimen are healty (disproven, possibly true only if in moderate amounts and in the context of a plant-based regimen)
  • A low carb diet is healthy (disproven, at least as far as longevity and healthspan are concerned, carbs is the main macronutrient of all the BZs diets)
  • Lectins in beans, gluten and phytates in grains and nuts are extremely unhealthy (drastically disproven, since the blue zones diets are practically based on lectins and phytates rich foods)
  • simple sugars are unhealthy (disproven, fresh and dried fruits are eaten in abundance when available: tropical fruit in Nicoya, figs, peaches and other mediterranean fruit in Ikaria and Sardinia when available, all fruit by the Loma Linda adventists. Plus natural, unrefined bee honey in modest quantities)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks mechanism for the interesting links you posted. It is reported that the average energy consumption of Okinawans was 1785 kCal (not specified man/woman), which is practically the same of the 1800 kCal of the Nicoyans. So the hypothesis of a common condition of calorie moderation or restriction in the blue zones (barring perhaps Loma Linda) appears perhaps more likely.


I'm presently ruminating about food diversity and am probably going to start a thread on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the three most important factors that make Blue Zones are: high intake of fermentable fibers, high polyphenol intake to modulate gut bacteria (wild herbs, anthocyanins from purple sweet potatoes, resveratrol from wine), and abundance of low-moderate intensity exercise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...


Nice visit to Ikaria.

“Now, what are the major factors, that give Ikarians longevity? Researches have shown that there are many key elements that lead to their longevity and here are just a few:

-good physical condition, due to daily exercise of manual work and rural life. The daily walks, which includes mountain hikes enhances good physical condition.

-midday rest, even if it’s a short nap, has proven to protect and improve heart function.

-the Mediterranean diet, combined with fresh, organic produce, that’s consumed on the island. This includes vegetables, fruits, fish, olive oil, local honey and of course the famous red wine. Surveys conducted also show that a significant factor in the longevity of Ikarians is the consumption of Greek coffee and mountain tea, which are key antioxidants for the body.

-the minimal use of medicine.

-sexual activity, even in older people.

-strong family and social ties between Ikarian people.

-and of course, the relaxed pace of daily life, without anxiety and stress, and a full of optimism attitude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In small population "blue zones" like Ikaria (less than 10,000), my guess is that genetics plays an important role.

But notably, the diet has changed since those over 90 were in their prime. Olive oil and meat consumption has increased significantly, as well as the consumption of processed foods.

The same trend is seen elsewhere, especially in Okinawa, where dietary changes since the 1950s have been dramatic, with a corresponding increase of disease and mortality.

Edited by Ron Put
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, we've been discussing that, it seems reasonably to assume that:

  1. Given that the blue zones seem to occur in restricted or isolated areas, genetic pooling is a significant governing effect.
  2. Given that the descendants of the original inhabitants of the blue zones tend to lose the longevity benefits because of the change in diet and lifestyle, it also seems that the expression of the genetic setup favourable to longevity must occur trhough interventions which have been part of the traditional lifestyle in these regions.

In conclusion: 

Occurrence of longevity = favourable genetic potential + actual expression of such genes

Edited by mccoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Recently, a docuseries on Netflix was released profiling the Blue Zones titled Live to 100: Secrets of the Blue ZonesAnyone interested in longevity is likely quite familiar with Dan Buettner's work on these famed longevity regions with the highest concentration of long-lived people in the world. It was just released a few days ago and the cinematic element is very well done. To those familiar with the work, much of the information presented is unlikely to be new. Having said that, it is still quite enjoyable and makes for some pleasurable viewing for most longevity enthusiasts. 

Edited by drewab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went fast forward and saw the episodes on Okinawa, Sardinia, Loma Linda and the beginning of Ikaria. All very interesting, but it's amazing that Buetner has not spoken about the genetic hypothesis. After all, all places, in his same words, were isolated. Ikaria had no harbours. The 'barbarian' inhabitants of Sardinia retired up the mountains and were very wary of strangers for a couple of millennia. Okinawa, again, another island. Loma Linda, a rural, relatively isolated area in California. In the areas of Sardinia and Ikaria conditions were particularly ruthless and natural selection favoured the strongest. Some genetic combinations of physical resilience shaped up and were not diluted by population mixing. That's the main cause of longevity in these areas, I believe, as has been discussed in previous posts. Of course I too am convinced that all other environmental factors created a favorable phenotype, but the genotype was probably the main cause of longevity. Not speaking about this, is weird.

Edited by mccoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I have neither netflix nor book mentioned. Is there body frame size topic discussed as one of the potentially main influencing factor? I came to a conclusion that it is not just a consequence of calories limitation but rather a positive feedback loop for longevity, especially looking via oxygen requirements <-> rbc's inability to create own chole <-> total chole produced/circulating <-> limits (described by Tom Dayspring and others) regarding the quantitave risks for chole deposition in unwanted places.

(not talking regarding oxygen requirements and consequences themselves).

While I tried to search if there is already collected data from centenarians studies regarding their body sizes that IMHO is the 3/3 part of a key to their resistance to ASCVD (together with genes/selection and calories+lifestyle) I found https://thedietwars.com/height-and-longevity-being-taller-means-dying-younger-or-a-possible-way-to-explain-the-worlds-longest-lived-populations/

as a similar speculation regarding body frame size and longevity and from here an article with a lot of links to data I am interested in this context (not read yet)

How height is related
to our health and
longevity: A review
Thomas T Samaras

DOI: 10.1177/0260106013510996

(author was already mentioned here in the forums).


If there are centenarians studies in populations with 60+kg 175+cm median or higher - please point me out on them, I am really interested if these people have TC less than 150.




Edited by IgorF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, the article I mentioned https://archive.wphna.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/12-Nutrition-and-Health.-Samaras.-Height-size-and-health.pdf


Sardinia study: Salaris et al. (2012) looked at a population of elderly men in an
isolated village, Villagrande Strisaili, in Sardinia. This village is known for its
long-living people and their short stature (about 160 cm in their youth). It finds
that shorter men within this relatively homogeneous population lived for about 2
years longer than taller men.

From Donald Craig Willcox' papers (reseacher involved for decades within Okinawans studies) it is also clear that centenarians are smaller than others. The same pattern is everywhere but I am far from being sure I saw the most known publications on this topic. Very often it is mentioned that studied centenarians do have a median bmi of 21 and they are lean. This is misleading without keeping in mind their height. They are actually not lean, they are IMHO "hypernormal" as for our species' time span.

I selected 175cm for male as an upper cut off based on more closer for me easter european figure in  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Malgorzata-Mossakowska/publication/7560200_Anthropometric_chest_structure_of_Polish_centenarians/links/00b495156b15b005eb000000/Anthropometric-chest-structure-of-Polish-centenarians.pdf?origin=publication_detail

That is why I wonder if there are some known studies with people of higher body frames, I think ASCVD is something that is just emerged among other negative outcomes of bigger bodies. From athletes cohorts NBA players also seems demonstrate the same intraphenotypic pattern https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0185617#sec009



Edited by IgorF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, IgorF said:

That is why I wonder if there are some known studies with people of higher body frames,

Hi, Igor. I just did a quick search and you might find this list interesting:

Supercentenarian Heights – Lists – Global Supercentenarian Forum

We should keep in mind that over the last couple of centuries and until fairly recently, each generation was generally taller than the previous one. The US is currently getting a bit shorter, but it is more likely due to demographics. My guess is that much of it has to do with body mass which may govern the number of cell divisions and mutations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't remember the source(s), but I think that it is well-known that, in general, taller people, ON AVERAGE, don't live as long as shorter people.  (There was an old post by Paul: "Must the tall die young"?  (Paul is tall).  I remember responding, pointing out that other factors -- such as CR, exercise and sleep -- are certainly more important.

There is study now, using large pet dogs, on the efficacy of Rapamycin on possible health/life extension -- reason why large pet dogs instead of small ones -- they die sooner (on average).

  --  Saul 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


These blue zones first started to be discussed in the 2000s which means that people aged 100 or older were born sometime around 1900. What do we know about that period of history? It was before vital records were uniformly established. And what happens when state-wide certification goes into effect? Saul Justin Newman shows that the number of supercentarians [100+] drops sharply a hundred or so years later!

The sentence quoted is from the article link posted by Inquiline, but...

AFAIK, the records on centenarians, at least in Italy, have been rigirously checked by official birth certifications. In the specialized literature, this is the standard operations porcedure.

So, it could be told that we know that the blue zones have been the cradle of supercentenarians, but only after the birth certificates were available. We know little before this era. Birt certificates were available from the end of 1800, about 1890 onward. So, actually and rigorously speaking, we can only extrapolate backwards, which is not a very scientific procedure.

The facts are telling to us that it has been observed a higher concentration of supercentenarians in the blue zones, but only after the onset of birth certificates.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been ruminating about the netflix documentary, in particular the part on the Barbagia region, in Sardinina (Ogliastra is part of Barbagia).

The data provided by Buettner are a little more than anecdotal. This does not mean that there is not a contribution from diet and lifestyle and social patterns.

My impression is that Buettner has let a substantial bias seep into into his studies. After all, the blue zones are his adopted baby. He does not speak about genetics, for example, when it may be the most important contributing factor.

He seemed to ignore the fact that many Sardinians in the blue zones have been or are shepherds. The diet of shepherds is often based upon sheep ricotta cheese, which has 30% fat (mostly saturated) and about 10% protein.  This is the poorest of the dairy products produced by shepherds, and they ate it because cheese was mostly sold and provided income.

He did not split his observations in homogeneous groups (by occupation, income, males/females and so on). How many supercentenarians were shepherds? How many civil servants? How many mason workers? Main activities in Sardinia were masonry and sheep raising.

Women are a more homogeneous group but, fact is that, in Sardinia guys and gals enjoy the same longevity, uniqe fact in the whole world. Is this a dietary/lifestyle characteristic or rather another genetic combination?

Again, the work of Buettner is not at all a scientific illustration, rather a group of case histories and anecdotal recounts.



Edited by mccoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...