Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
[...]Research on 5,834 U.S. adults by Brigham Young University exercise science professor Larry Tucker, Ph.D., found people who drink low-fat milk experience several years less biological aging than those who drink high-fat (2% and whole) milk.
[...]Tucker investigated the relationship between telomere length and both milk intake frequency (daily drinkers vs. weekly drinkers or less) and milk fat content consumed (whole vs. 2% vs. 1% vs. skim). Telomeres are the nucleotide endcaps of human chromosomes. They act like a biological clock and they're extremely correlated with age; each time a cell replicates, humans lose a tiny bit of the endcaps. Therefore, the older people get, the shorter their telomeres.
And, apparently, the more high-fat milk people drink, the shorter their telomeres are, according to the new BYU study, published in Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity. The study revealed that for every 1% increase in milk fat consumed (drinking 2% vs. 1% milk), telomeres were 69 base pairs shorter in the adults studied, which translated into more than four years in additional biological aging. When Tucker analyzed the extremes of milk drinkers, adults who consumed whole milk had telomeres that were a striking 145 base pairs shorter than non-fat milk drinkers.
-- submitted from IRC
Larry A. Tucker. Milk Fat Intake and Telomere Length in U.S. Women and Men: The Role of the Milk Fat Fraction. Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, 2019; 2019: 1 DOI: 10.1155/2019/1574021
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday January 26 2020, @01:16AM (2 children)
First of all, I'm talking about researchers not doctors. And in the literature most of the meta agrees they don't do better more than placebo.
That being said, doctors and medical authorities keep prescribing SSRIs for the same reason parents check under the bed for monsters: Placebos work and there's a genuine risk in taking it away from patients that believe in it while it also conductive to the rest of the treatment for doctors to able to say "take this and go to therapy" instead of "go to therapy" as if they're shoeing them away. I believe it was around here where I heard how in Germany some clinics instruct doctors to prescribe actual placebos (sugar pills) when referring to psychiatric / psychological care for that reason as well. They also give them a whole list of side-effects and tell them to phone back just so the patients feel they're being looked after.
Hold on now. Seems you're mixing things up. This is the bad stuff by the following order per importance:
1. Obesity.
2. Carbs.
3. Saturated fat.
So, when talking about no.3, we're assuming no caloric surplus otherwise there's obesity which fucks everything up regardless. I'm also assuming no deficit since you literally burn through it all when cutting anyhow so you only really want high proteins to keep the muscles from breaking apart but otherwise you can eat anything up to the caloric limit.
So, in that context, the Mediterranean diet is simply a name space for high protein, high fat, low carbs, low saturated fats diet. It's actually quite close to the Atkins-like bacon and milk diet we're enjoying. Just slightly better. How much better? Well, I'm thinking, 3-5years worth telomere length speaking :D
How relevant is it? Well, from what I read, about 90% of the population is stuck dealing with no.1 and no.2 with the regulations over emphasizing no.3, almost entirely ignoring no.2 and failing to deal with no.1. So, with this in mind, the researchers basically just started advocating the Mediterranean diet as a catch all. Sure, most people would be fine with just cutting on the carbs and getting their BMI in check. But there are a LOT of skinny young people getting heart attacks despite doing cardio and eating right due to no.3 so they figured they might as well cover all their bases. And as for an added bonus, there's this new telomere length thing now so they clearly weren't all wrong recommending it.
Maybe it's too much of fad. But it's not a myth. It's just over rated a bit. Still, it's easy to find good recipes googling Mediterranean diet cook books so I'm not complaining.
compiling...
(Score: 2) by barbara hudson on Sunday January 26 2020, @01:35AM (1 child)
Also, telomeres are bullshit. They can grow longer, as they did in the astronaut twins where one spent a year in space. Upon return, his telomeres were shorter, but they grew back to their normal length. The research assumes this is not possible. Same as I assumed it wasn't possible because nobody checked it until recently.
So telomeres are not an indication of aging, because people don't grow younger as they age unless they're Benjamin Button.
All those reports of Scott Kelly aging faster in space than his twin Mark on earth turned out to be both premature and wrong, unless you believe that he got younger upon return.
SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday January 26 2020, @03:49AM
And the food industry. The unsaturated fats thing started when the industry tried to push in trans fats, then resisted their removal, then resisted replacing saturated fats with unsaturated, then finally accepted it but tried to push more carbs in.
But the thing is, for every bad paper, there's a dozen good ones that the regulator ignores and no one mentions. Now at least researchers are required to reveal funding sources in most publications so we're starting to see less and less fake science. Doesn't change the fact the administration simply ignores the science... But still, the science is better at least.
First of all, they're biomarkers, not aging itself. That being said, I think you got your facts critically wrong not reading the next paragraph through:
( https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/nasas-twins-study-creates-portrait-human-body-after-year-space-180971945/ [smithsonianmag.com] )
So, the telomeres elongated during spaceflight but shorten back and even further shortened once back on earth for a while eventually being shorter than his brother's. But again, just bio markers. They reflect age over time in the same sense wrinkles can tell how you're aging. Some days will be drier... Sometimes I'll get facial dandruff... Sometimes you'll shine like a 12 year old... Doesn't change the fact they add up, aren't getting fuller and I'm getting old. At least, where gravity is involved...
compiling...