Slashdot Mirror
Low-Protein Diet May Extend Lifespan
sciencehabit writes "A new theory about the foods that can extend life is taking shape, and it's sure to be a controversial one. Two studies out this week, one in mice (PDF) and another primarily in people (PDF), suggest that eating relatively little protein and lots of carbohydrates — the opposite of what's urged by many human diet plans, including the popular Atkins Diet — extends life and fortifies health."
Fixed that for you....
In the late 80's and early 90's, fat was the energy source of the devil that needed to be avoided at all costs. Then in the early 2000's, carbs were the new nutrient to avoid. And now, another decade later, they're telling us to avoid protein. I'll stick to eating a variety of foods in moderate portions supplemented by exercise, thank you very much.
Any reasonable recommendations can only come from large, longitudinal studies, over multiple generations. You know, those that shape the food pyramid / WHO guidelines. And they do exist, and give pretty clear ideas. Such as that halving your meat intake is a good idea.
But I guess that's not exciting, news needs to either repackage (MyPlate) or go after highly fluctuating results from microstudies which is the latest research, but in the stage of formation (all these diet fads, X is bad for you, Y heals cancer, drink a glass of red wine a day [because a encyme in a petri dish did something], etc. ).
By the way, why does there need to be one right way of nutrition? Why can't we accept that multiple ways to obtain the basic building blocks are possible.
In the end, we can't be so off by so much: We have so many people living with such a big variety of foods, and they are doing pretty similarly well (i.e. get older than, and are healthy at, 65). The need to prove that everyones diet is completely wrong is ridiculous.
NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
As others, the study was done on mice, who are herbivores in the wild. They say what happens to them will also happen to us, but we have been eating meat a long while now.
I wonder if also applies to my cat? <scarcasm>I know cat's are predominately carnivores, but that shouldn't matter, right?</scarcasm>
The best diet is probably a balanced diet of about 1200 calories a day. The safest way to avoid getting hit by a car is not to walk across streets or drive a car. The safest way to avoid dying via plane is to not fly, etc...
Who the fuck wants to live like that?
Pfft, and next thing we know, you'll be telling us to exercise too! My sedentary lifestyle has kept me out of the hospital while the active lifestyles kept by the rest of my immediate family have resulted in...
- Broken collarbone (ultimate frisbee collision)
- Broken nose (a different ultimate frisbee collision)
- Hairline fractures in both shins (playing too much ultimate frisbee)
- Blown out knees (too much jogging for one, carrying a couch for the other)
- Severed index finger tendon (landed wrong after tripping while jogging)
- Blown out achilles tendons (they said he'd never jog again, but he was back at it in 6 months)
And that's just off the top of my head in the last five years, none of which occurred at the same time, and none of which they've learned from, since they're all still engaged in those activities. Man, am I showing them!
*says the guy who would strongly advocate that others follow his family members' lifestyle choices rather than his own and is VERY aware of the fact that he's setting himself up for significant complications later in life if he doesn't succeed in following his own advice*
Focusing on diet for human lifespan is like focusing on gasoline for car lifespan.
Studies have been done of places where people tend to live longer. Some common threads are: genetics, happiness, close community ties, everyday physical labor, low stress, diet and maybe a few other things.
Yeah sure, diet is in there; but if your Daddy died at 40, you're pissed off all the time, you don't know your neighbors and you spend 60 hours a day stressing in a cube-farm then the quinoa salad you ate probably won't help much. Go ahead though. It probably won't hurt; just don't expect miracles. Look at *all* the factors.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
You can eat a tasty and balanced and varied diet on 1900 calories a day.
So, would you rather have a tasty diet and live till 88, or eat the same tasty diet, just more of it, and die at 68?
This is not the answer you would like, but I'll take 68 over 88 any day of the week
My experience in my family and relatives has been that while we are really good at extending life, it's all on the wrong end of the lifespan. I've seen too many relatives who once would have made it to maybe 70, and now spend their last 15 years as demented zombies, kept alive by the miracles of modern medicine. They have low cholesterol, low blood pressure, and are having their savings, retirement ans SS checks going ot the nursing home, while they luxuriate in their Depends, catheters, and whatever experimental meds they give to Alzheimer's patients to keep them alive in order to extract those last pennies. Seriously undignified and unnaturally drawn out. THere are fates worse than dying.
People in America get portions far larger then they need. People get used to over eating, so when they get a properly portioned meal they feel hungry, even though rationally they have enough.
While I don't disagree with you that Americans overeat, the concept of getting people to eat less in times of plenty is going to be difficult to achieve. And the slovenly Americans are not the only people with an overeating problem.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
This idiot developed and sold some of the world's best respiratory monitoring equipment. One of our repeat customers was a big tobacco company - they paid well, and even sponsored some customization for their research. They never published anything, but they know quite a bit about the science of smoking. The investors and management of the tobacco companies did, indeed, diversify into food in the 1980s, and they have been driving the "improvements" found on grocery store shelves since then, using a similar systematic, scientific approach to selling profitable food products. I believe the consumer's health is at a similar priority for them in food as it was in the tobacco industry.
Yes, people should stop eating garbage, exercise regularly, save for retirement, etc. However, judging from past performance, they need a little encouragement in the right direction, and the available food choices, and pricing structure of those food choices in the U.S. today do not seem to be the encouragement that most people need to make healthy choices. Next, we can go down a whole health-care profit machine conspiracy hole, if you like.
Nobody is forcing you to buy pre-processed, packaged foods, you are absolutely free to go to the grocery and buy fresh produce, meats, dairy, and do all the cooking yourself. Look at the shelf space in your local grocery store and tell me where they are making the bulk of their profits. It's not in the produce aisle.