Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Wednesday January 18 2017, @07:39PM   Printer-friendly
from the monkey-business dept.

Settling a persistent scientific controversy, a long-awaited report shows that restricting calories does indeed help rhesus monkeys live longer, healthier lives.
...
First, the animals in the two studies had their diets restricted at different ages. Comparative analysis reveals that eating less is beneficial in adult and older primates but is not beneficial for younger animals. This is a major departure from prior studies in rodents, where starting at an earlier age is better in achieving the benefits of a low-calorie diet.

Second, in the old-onset group of monkeys at NIA, the control monkeys ate less than the Wisconsin control group. This lower food intake was associated with improved survival compared to the Wisconsin controls. The previously reported lack of difference in survival between control and restricted groups for older-onset monkeys within NIA emerges as beneficial differences when compared to the UW-Madison data. In this way, it seems that small differences in food intake in primates could meaningfully affect aging and health.

Third, diet composition was substantially different between studies. The NIA monkeys ate naturally sourced foods and the UW-Madison monkeys, part of the colony at the Wisconsin National Primate Research Center, ate processed food with higher sugar content. The UW-Madison control animals were fatter than the control monkeys at NIA, indicating that at nonrestricted levels of food intake, what is eaten can make a big difference for fat mass and body composition.

The study says nothing about whether the monkeys lived happier lives.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Username on Thursday January 19 2017, @04:50PM

    by Username (4557) on Thursday January 19 2017, @04:50PM (#456102)

    Now I have a drawer with more narcotics than any sane person should have.

    That’s dangerous to have. There is a common tactic of leftist crybullies called swatting. If you offend them, they call the police with wild stories of you being a dangerous drug dealer, rapist, home intruder. SWAT will crash through your door, arrest you and find this stash. Now you’re up a creek without a paddle.

    I’ve assembled a lot of medical supplies in order to have my kitchen double as an infirmary for when SHTF and I cannot get to the bunker. The main thing it’s laking is good set of analgesics and anesthetics, not because I cannot get them, but because the liability they pose to my non-incarceration lifestyle. It irritates me to no end. I hope Trump legalizes all drugs.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:10PM

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:10PM (#456232) Journal

    I don't think it's enough to get into trouble for. They all have a prescription label. My doctor knows exactly why I have them.

    --
    To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
  • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday January 20 2017, @02:49PM

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 20 2017, @02:49PM (#456546) Journal

    One other thing. People who would engage in swatting are not all leftist. While I'm sure beyond doubt that some of them are, you would have to be blind to think that (some) right leaning people would not also engage in such a despicable act.

    --
    To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.