[HN Gopher] Inflammation, but Not Telomere Length, Predicts Agei...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Inflammation, but Not Telomere Length, Predicts Ageing at Extreme
       Old Age
        
       Author : evo_9
       Score  : 281 points
       Date   : 2021-04-16 19:14 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | derefr wrote:
       | Anyone know how long mice live with all the genes for
       | inflammatory responses knocked out?
        
         | pmiller2 wrote:
         | Such an organism probably wouldn't be compatible with life.
         | Inflammation is necessary for healing wounds and immune
         | response, among other things.
        
       | Robotbeat wrote:
       | What is inflammation, exactly?
        
         | frombody wrote:
         | It's an immune system response.
         | 
         | It's your body trying to fix itself.
         | 
         | If you get injured, the inflammation around the wound is
         | signaling your body to bring white blood cells to that
         | location.
         | 
         | Unless you have some sort of imbalance in your body, like a
         | genetic issue, it's usually better to target controlling the
         | source of the inflammation rather than the inflammation itself.
         | 
         | Inflammation can be more mental than physical in many cases, as
         | your body is going to react to your environment and the way you
         | perceive it and raise and lower your cortisol levels
         | accordingly.
         | 
         | This likely doesn't answer your question fully, but just some
         | items to consider.
        
         | mattowen_uk wrote:
         | Redness round a sore or cut? Inflammation.
         | 
         | Swollen gums around a dying tooth? Inflammation.
         | 
         | Sore stomach due to food intolerance? Inflammation.
        
           | Robotbeat wrote:
           | But what _is_ inflammation?
        
       | TimSchumann wrote:
       | Anecdote, but this may explain why I feel so much healthier when
       | I'm fasting regularly.
       | 
       | Turns out, if you stop putting everything but water/salt in your
       | body, there's not much left that causes inflammation.
        
         | gopalv wrote:
         | > why I feel so much healthier when I'm fasting regularly.
         | 
         | Considering this is Ramadan and fasting is pretty much on-
         | topic, I notice a big difference between the religious fasts
         | and the self-regulated ones.
         | 
         | The ramadan fasting without water seems to result in a net
         | weight loss between the morning and the first meal.
         | 
         | On the other hand, people like me who do drink
         | water/electrolytes, see our weight go up in the day from
         | drinking water to compensate for the hunger.
         | 
         | A small part of what you experience might just be reaching
         | adequate hydration and dropping salt levels to a more healthy
         | level over the day.
        
           | mahkeiro wrote:
           | Ramadan is not really about fasting in the way science is
           | studying it. During Ramadan people really eat a lot when it
           | is allowed. It may be considered intermittent fasting...
        
         | treeman79 wrote:
         | Was in a massive Sjogrens flare. Stopped eating for a month.
         | Collapsing aside, my inflammation was fixed.
         | 
         | Did a month on sweet potatoes. Very boring but same result.
        
           | cauliflower2718 wrote:
           | Why sweet potatoes?
        
             | mkoubaa wrote:
             | Yeah why not cauliflower
        
               | nwienert wrote:
               | Okinawa diet is some 40% sweet potatoes and top
               | percentile life span so can't hurt.
        
               | foerbert wrote:
               | Sure it could. You can't just isolate some portion of a
               | highly complex system and claim that the isolated portion
               | will be beneficial in any similar system.
               | 
               | Just for an extreme example to make the point - say some
               | diet included a poisonous component as well as the
               | antidote. Those eating the diet may well be just fine.
               | However if somebody else simply looked at the poisonous
               | part and copied only that, they would not do so well.
               | 
               | I'm not saying sweet potatoes are bad. And I'm sure this
               | was a somewhat flippant statement, but this is the kind
               | of thinking we're very prone to and I think it's
               | important to recognize when it actually tries to lead us
               | down the wrong path.
        
               | nwienert wrote:
               | It was a flippant statement, but it's still more right
               | than your righteous reply.
               | 
               | I have experience here, literally with isolation diets
               | for immune issues on starches, common for immunologists
               | to run, see AIP which can start extreme down to one
               | thing. I had a friend who had to do a super intense
               | version, luckily, mine was quick.
               | 
               | There's no problem with flippant statements, just bad
               | faith replies that try and pick fights over nothing.
               | 
               | Also didn't claim benefit. It's potato. If there were
               | some significant problem we'd have known by now.
        
               | foerbert wrote:
               | I never said it was bad either.
               | 
               | I was specifically taking umbrage with the reasoning
               | provided - X does a lot of Y in their complex thing and
               | gets good results, so lots of Y can't be bad - and tried
               | to be clear about that.
        
               | nwienert wrote:
               | > claim that the isolated portion will be beneficial
               | 
               | > gets good results
               | 
               | You claim I said it's "good", but I said "can't be bad"
               | _in relation to a short term allergy diet_. Your super
               | pedantic bone you picked is based on exaggerating what I
               | said twice and generalizing it out of context, which is
               | funny coming from a pedant.
        
               | treeman79 wrote:
               | Yea. Never eat only one food for extended periods.
               | 
               | This was a pure desperation move.
        
               | nwienert wrote:
               | It's actually common for immune/allergy issues, I did
               | rice once on a doctors recommendation, worked fine.
        
               | [deleted]
        
             | treeman79 wrote:
             | I never feel bad afterwards. It's a safe food for me. Plus
             | it's filling.
        
             | UncleOxidant wrote:
             | Not the OP, but I'm going to guess that it's because sweet
             | potatoes have pretty high nutritional content such that you
             | can survive by only eating them for some time without
             | developing deficiencies.
        
               | treeman79 wrote:
               | It's because it was literally the only food I knew that
               | didn't bother me. Look at AIP diet for a better plan. But
               | this was something I could follow when I was barely able
               | to get out of bed.
               | 
               | Boiled or microwaved. Always plain.
               | 
               | I Felt a lot better afterwards.
        
               | hanniabu wrote:
               | FYI the AIP diet says to avoid vegetables in the
               | nightshade family, which includes potatoes.
        
               | UncleOxidant wrote:
               | Sweet potatoes are not in the nightshade family.
        
           | andreygrehov wrote:
           | Not the first time I read about sweet potatoes on HN. Could
           | you describe a little more on that front, eg what was your
           | breakfast/lunch/dinner like during that month?
        
             | treeman79 wrote:
             | Microwaved or boiled. Plain. 2 a day. It was very boring.
        
           | andy_ppp wrote:
           | Sjogrens sounds horrendous! I'm glad you found some way to
           | managing the symptoms, even if quite extreme. Has it been
           | well managed since a return to a more normal diet, have you
           | considered OMAD instead?
        
             | treeman79 wrote:
             | In general The longer I can hold off eating the better I do
             | during the day. At least until I collapse. If I have
             | regular food I feel flushed and feverish. Often triggering
             | migraines. Basically my ability to function is near zero.
             | 
             | Non trigger foods, ie. sweet potatoes allow me to avoid
             | such problems.
             | 
             | As to well managed. No, not really. I was physically doing
             | much better when taking proper meds, (plaqunial)
             | 
             | However side effects were to much.
        
         | ryandvm wrote:
         | My experience with a 3 day fast was that for the first day it
         | was no problem. I can generally ignore hunger pretty easily.
         | But days 2 and 3 were just a brutal lack of energy. I have
         | never felt so depleted as when I was finishing my 3-day fast.
         | Other than that, I didn't really experience any positive
         | benefits.
        
           | vimy wrote:
           | Probably had more to do with electrolytes being depleted than
           | hunger.
        
         | heavyset_go wrote:
         | Fasting also has a significant impact on the immune system,
         | causing it to downregulate certain immune cells and responses,
         | and to upregulate others.
         | 
         | The results you feel might not be from the lack of inflammation
         | from food, but from a change in immune responses, some of which
         | can reduce inflammation and other bad feelings.
        
         | legerdemain wrote:
         | Inflammation is a basic life process, not a reaction to the
         | food you eat. Inflammation plays an active part in wound-
         | healing. Teething in infants has an inflammatory component.
         | Systemic inflammation is ubiquitous during and following
         | parturition in mammals. There is inflammation everywhere, it's
         | as generic a word as "oxidation" and "metabolism."
        
           | andy_ppp wrote:
           | No-one is say _all_ inflammation is bad, just that constantly
           | being in that state is really bad for you...
        
           | nabla9 wrote:
           | Inflammation is immune system response. Nothing to do with
           | metabolism or oxidation.
        
             | keymone wrote:
             | You're wrong, insulin is inflammatory hormone, google it.
        
               | nabla9 wrote:
               | Googling ...
               | 
               | Result: Insulin is anti-inflammatory and
               | antiatherosclerotic hormone.
        
               | keymone wrote:
               | Ok, this is dumb, I meant to say there is connection
               | between insulin and inflammatory processes (hence it is
               | definitely connected to metabolism), insulin itself has
               | anti-inflammatory effect, but insulin resistance and
               | chronic inflammation are also linked. And I managed to
               | say something completely opposite. Sorry.
        
           | tartoran wrote:
           | That's like saying cell division is a basic life process and
           | nothing can stop this process from going haywire, but what
           | about cancer. It is widely believed that inflammation levels
           | spike for certain foods and the overall effect on the body is
           | not optimal to say the least.
        
             | JMTQp8lwXL wrote:
             | There's a middle ground: some is probably beneficial in
             | certain cases, but you can have too much of a good thing--
             | then it's an issue.
        
               | tartoran wrote:
               | Yes, that is obvious. It is a natural process as much as
               | apoptosis or cell suicide is.
        
           | atat7024 wrote:
           | Every time you eat, the body enters a state of heightened
           | inflammation. This is well documented. Please don't spread
           | disinformation.
        
             | andy_ppp wrote:
             | https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/01/170116121912.
             | h... For example suggests this is true...
        
               | atat7024 wrote:
               | Yeah, honestly this is no different than real life.
               | 
               | People don't want to be told that alcohol, sugar, too
               | many calories, etc inflames the hell out of the body. So
               | be it.
               | 
               | Wait for your own wakeup call. I hope it never comes.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | voxl wrote:
             | Two things:
             | 
             | First, if this is as well documented as you say then you
             | should provide such documentation as you seem to think it
             | should be at the finger tips of others.
             | 
             | Second, your comment doesn't actually counter the main
             | point of what you are responding to. The point is that what
             | "inflammation" means is too general. Even if it is true
             | that you enter a "heightened inflammation" state when
             | eating, that doesn't discredit the idea that inflammation
             | as a category is being overloaded.
        
             | darkteflon wrote:
             | Pseudoscience schooling science.
        
               | andy_ppp wrote:
               | No, please do some research, even a cursory Google leads
               | to many papers on this.
        
           | rsync wrote:
           | "Inflammation is a basic life process, not a reaction to the
           | food you eat. Inflammation plays an active part in wound-
           | healing. Teething in infants has an inflammatory component.
           | Systemic inflammation is ubiquitous during and following
           | parturition in mammals. There is inflammation everywhere,
           | it's as generic a word as "oxidation" and "metabolism.""
           | 
           | Everything you have said is true.
           | 
           | What I think you are missing is that there is _both_ a per-
           | calorie inflammation cost for all food inputs _and_ a minimum
           | inflammatory startup cost _just to metabolize at all_.
           | 
           | More simply: 1000 calories spread across two meals will
           | generate more inflammation than 1000 calories in a single
           | meal.
           | 
           | There are two analogies that I think are useful when thinking
           | about this:
           | 
           | First, introducing food inputs appears to be _an interrupt_
           | for most other bodily activities - even very essential ones
           | like sleep and reproduction, etc. You might consider how many
           | hours each day your body spends _not digesting_. It doesn 't
           | take much to increase that by 50% or more...
           | 
           | Second, electric motors like pumps and fans have failures
           | ("deaths") that are much more accurately predicted by number
           | of start-stop cycles than by the number of hours run. Startup
           | is expensive for these devices and I suspect that startup is
           | expensive for our food metabolism as well.
        
             | andy_ppp wrote:
             | Yes, also we know cell machinery operates in a different
             | mode when the body is without fuel, it's moves in a
             | repair/conserve mode that includes preferential autophagy
             | of damaged cells. It makes sense, eating used to be
             | _extremely_ dangerous so the body mounts an immune response
             | including inflammation every time.
        
               | jk7tarYZAQNpTQa wrote:
               | > eating used to be extremely dangerous
               | 
               | You're talking a very long time ago. Shouldn't that be
               | already disregarded from an evolutionary POV?
        
               | MrBuddyCasino wrote:
               | > You're talking a very long time ago.
               | 
               | We've made strong progress in food security in the last
               | 100-200 years, not sure about before that. I suspect
               | hunter/gatherers had it actually better than farmers.
               | What time spans are you talking about?
        
               | jk7tarYZAQNpTQa wrote:
               | > What time spans are you talking about?
               | 
               | I would assume (from ignorance) than knowledge about food
               | security is older than us as a species. And by food
               | security I mean "don't eat plant A", or "don't eat plant
               | B raw, put it first on the fire or it will make you sick"
               | etc.
        
         | kossTKR wrote:
         | Same here. It's the closest thing to an actual wonder drug i
         | have ever come across.
         | 
         | My skin clears up, brainfog disappears, the white in my eyes
         | get brighter, etc.
         | 
         | After reading a bit i have come to the same conclusion - if
         | your diet is already extremely clean / bland, maybe you won't
         | get the same effect, but for most people that eats lots of
         | different foods, processed stuff, fast food, alcohol, harsh
         | additives, fried/burned food etc. on occasion then i think you
         | really need to give yourself a break at least once a month. For
         | a minimum of 48 hours.
        
           | wsinks wrote:
           | I'm here for it. You're saying that a water only fast for
           | approximately 48 hours once every full moon helps out?
           | 
           | I've done some intermittent fasting before (I think that's
           | where you make sure you don't eat after 18:00 and only start
           | at 9:00)
        
             | kossTKR wrote:
             | Yes, exactly how long probably depends on a lot of factors,
             | but the benefits really starts for me after 30+ hours.
             | 
             | Drinking water with potassium + magnesium + salt also helps
             | a lot, to replenish electrolytes, but some people can
             | manage without. Some people can continue workouts, others
             | continue for 7+ days. It's all about experimentation.
             | 
             | Atm. i start each week fasting and just fast for as long as
             | it feels ok. Often 1-3 days.
             | 
             | I would recommend 2 fasts per month 36-48 hours, and with
             | electrolyte water for newcomers.
             | 
             | Off course starting weight, activity level etc. is also
             | important factors, i'm personally trying to lose some
             | "corona weight" atm.
        
               | DoreenMichele wrote:
               | I really appreciate some of the detailed comments here,
               | but I will caution people that if you have a serious
               | medical condition you may find fasting is a lot harder on
               | you than the above suggests it will be.
               | 
               | If it benefits you, it may get easier over time. I have a
               | serious medical condition. I used to routinely throw up
               | when I was even just underfed for one day.
               | 
               | It now takes longer than one day for me to start having
               | strong reactions. Fasting and semi-fasting have been
               | beneficial for my condition, but it was amazingly hard on
               | me for a really long time and is still not easy.
               | 
               | I tend to semi-fast for somewhere between one and two
               | days (often around 36 hours) most months. I've done
               | longer -- up to a week -- but two per month for a
               | newcomer sounds like a lot to me and I assume that's
               | because of how hard it is on me.
               | 
               | So YMMV and probably will.
        
           | NotSammyHagar wrote:
           | Come on, don't use the word clean with regards to diet. It's
           | a bs and meaningless word that specifies nothing. Is it no
           | sugar, no salt, no meat, no gc organisms, no alcohol no
           | processed, low carb, high carb? Clean is a word that suggests
           | Instagram influencers. Clean does not mean bland or not
           | bland, whole foods or not. It's a meaningless word like good,
           | healthy, natural.
        
             | jk7tarYZAQNpTQa wrote:
             | > It's a bs and meaningless word that specifies nothing
             | 
             | It's neither bs nor meaningless. It intuitively describes a
             | good diet if you have a basic knowledge of food and diet.
             | It basically means "what is good for you". What would you
             | describe as "clean", deep fried butter or broccoli sprouts?
             | See how it's intuitive?
        
               | shawnz wrote:
               | "what is good for you" is a completely tautological way
               | of defining "a good diet". How can you say you are not
               | just reinforcing your own presuppositions?
               | 
               | The only intuitive difference I see in those scenarios is
               | that one has less calories and less fat (which are
               | obviously both essential components of any diet).
        
             | kbaker wrote:
             | I mean, they did qualify it in the same sentence with
             | "different foods, processed stuff, fast food, alcohol,
             | harsh additives, fried/burned food etc. on occasion".
             | 
             | Although I don't know any diet that would be "clean"
             | compared with a water fast...
        
               | PartiallyTyped wrote:
               | > Although I don't know any diet that would be "clean"
               | compared with a water fast...
               | 
               | Vegan perhaps?
        
             | imwillofficial wrote:
             | Subjective meaning is not no meaning. Good absolutely has a
             | meaning. So does healthy, as does natural.
             | 
             | Your lack of understanding of the context of use, and
             | underlying meaning, is nobody's problem but your own.
             | 
             | Perhaps you should have asked what He meant by clean,
             | because clearly you don't understand.
        
               | NotSammyHagar wrote:
               | what does clean mean to you then? Everything we consume
               | has been modified from the original. Apples, wheat,
               | tomatoes, corn - everything we eat has been significantly
               | modified from what it was 10,000 years ago. Early farmers
               | modified potatoes and everything else to grow more
               | calories by genetic manipulation - like planting the ones
               | that grow faster or bigger. Nothing and I mean nothing is
               | like it was before mankind started eating it. We put
               | selective breeding pressure on cows by breeding the ones
               | we grow. I can make up a definition of clean but everyone
               | has a sense of it themselves. Whole foods that are not
               | significantly modified seems reasonable. But modified
               | from what?
               | 
               | https://www.primalorganicmiami.com/eat-clean-miami/ As
               | this website says "There is not a strict definition for
               | "eating clean". I still assert clean eating is
               | meaningless.
               | 
               | I'm not against healthy eating. But "healthy eating" or
               | "clean foods" don't have definitions.
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | ::woosh::
        
               | imwillofficial wrote:
               | Asking somebody to clarify what they mean who is using a
               | vague phrase is useful. Telling them to stop using a
               | phrase that you personally don't understand is not
               | useful.
               | 
               | Think of it this way, there may not be a nailed down
               | definition of "clean" or healthy" eating. However, it
               | gets you in a "range of uncertainty"
               | 
               | Is McDonalds clean? No. Is Pizza clean? Nope. Is brown
               | rice clean? Maybe. I should ask what they mean by their
               | usage of clean.
               | 
               | Have I made my point a little bitter? I view usage of
               | vague terms like that not as useless, but as "gets you
               | close to the target without getting lost in the weeds."
               | 
               | Hope this helps.
        
             | kossTKR wrote:
             | That's definately not true, also what's up with the hostile
             | tone?
             | 
             | "Clean" is pretty well understood as what's left after you
             | finish an elimination diet.
             | 
             | As i just described it can be different for different
             | people but in general, super high fat, super high
             | carbohydrate, meals that are too large or too frequent, too
             | much alcohol, lots of additives, lots of candy or cake, too
             | many heavy metals from fish, too much fried food, too much
             | low quality processed foods including cheap oils that has
             | gone semi rancid, corn syrup, various carcinogens are all
             | agreed upon across various a large spectrum of diets from
             | Vegan to Paleo including nutrition research.
             | 
             | It probably also depends on ones own gut flora.
             | 
             | Pausing eating or just eating a pretty bland diet without
             | above "luxuries" and you definitely get less of these
             | things, that's partly why fasting works for a lot of
             | people.
        
           | UncleOxidant wrote:
           | If I could make it past the first 24 hours of fasting I could
           | probably go further, but I get really bad headaches when
           | fasting and usually give up somewhere close to 24 hours. I
           | hear that if I were to push through for a few more hours that
           | the headache would clear up, but haven't been able to do that
           | yet.
        
             | fao_ wrote:
             | This doesn't tell us anything, and drinking water alone
             | isn't enough. How much and how often did you drink water,
             | and consume salt or rehydration salts. The latter is just
             | as important as the former in keeping your body
             | functioning. If you experience significant salt loss, you
             | will get a headache as your body tries to maintain
             | homeostasis. This is exactly one of the reasons for the
             | headache part of a hangover, and if you adequately
             | replenish your water and electrolytes, you will be vastly
             | less likely to get one.
        
             | rorykoehler wrote:
             | The headaches could be due to electrolyte imbalance. Are
             | you taking 4g potassium-citrate and 300mg magnesium-citrate
             | a day when you fast? If not that could solve your
             | headaches.
        
           | moneywoes wrote:
           | Is there any science behind it? Anecdotally I notice the same
           | things especially with my skin CL earning up.
        
         | agumonkey wrote:
         | I cut antidepressant but I know how brain chemistry feels now.
         | While I was doing the "one meal a day thing", whenever I felt
         | hunger, a few minutes after my brain felt a bit like when I
         | used pills. It's a very shallow anecdata but I can't help but
         | to think about importance of the gut-brain axis.
        
       | sparrc wrote:
       | It's always strange to me how certain studies seem to gain so
       | many upvotes on hackernews....a few thoughts:
       | 
       | 1. This is a single study published in 2015, what does the wider
       | literature say? Any dieticians or clinicians recommending
       | anything from this?
       | 
       | 2. The journal is EBioMedicine, which is not nothing but not
       | exactly pre-eminent either.
       | 
       | 3. This seems like just a common sense conclusion: "In Cox
       | proportional hazard models, inflammation predicted all-cause
       | mortality". So...people who die have inflammation? Wouldn't that
       | be expected that people who are dieing are likely experiencing
       | significant inflammation of at least one organ of their body?
       | 
       | 4. In short, the conclusion of this paper seems like essentially
       | "people who are dying are likely to die". Am I missing something
       | here?
        
         | coldtea wrote:
         | > _1. This is a single study published in 2015, what does the
         | wider literature say? Any dieticians or clinicians recommending
         | anything from this?_
         | 
         | Dieticians and clinicians seem to say all kinds of
         | contradicting things all the time, for half a century...
        
         | BurningFrog wrote:
         | Outside of physics, a single study with a surprising result is
         | usually wrong.
        
           | Robotbeat wrote:
           | Even in physics...
        
         | johnisgood wrote:
         | I suppose emphasis is on this: "telomere length was not a
         | predictor of successful ageing".
        
           | sparrc wrote:
           | yet everyone in the comments is sounding off as if this
           | scientifically proves their random anecdotes about fasting
        
             | andy_ppp wrote:
             | What's wrong with fasting, isn't it likely to increase life
             | expectancy. I certainly feel better from this attempt at
             | Ramadan (not religious just interested to try it as flat
             | mate is Syrian). What evidence do you have that fasting ->
             | less inflammation -> better ageing is wrong?
        
               | f6v wrote:
               | > What evidence do you have that fasting -> less
               | inflammation -> better ageing is wrong?
               | 
               | It's wrong to frame the question as you did. The evidence
               | should be provided to prove something, not disprove it.
               | Is there enough evidence that fasting ultimately leads to
               | better aging? If so, for which groups of people? Is there
               | any underlying condition that negates the effect? That's
               | how science work, not the other way around.
        
               | Out_of_Characte wrote:
               | >Is there enough evidence that fasting ultimately leads
               | to better aging?
               | 
               | There never is any evidence than anything leads to better
               | aging because longevity studies are notoriously
               | expensive, hard to do, and prone to be inconclusive. like
               | those diet studies that pinhole certain foods like chili
               | peppers which supposedly reduce vascular disease.
               | 
               | https://newsroom.heart.org/news/people-who-eat-chili-
               | pepper-...
               | 
               | "eating chili pepper has an anti-inflammatory,
               | antioxidant, anticancer and blood-glucose regulating
               | effect" Similar things have been said for fasting. But
               | just like people who eat chili peppers in these studies,
               | they differ from the normal population, most likely in
               | more ways than just consuming chili peppers. even though
               | there is significant consensus, like this article also
               | affirms, that reducing inflammation might help you live
               | longer.
               | 
               | You could test the theory more conclusively if you had
               | 100.000 people participating in fasting over entire
               | generations but you'd also have to account for changes in
               | their diet as response to such insane study. I bet
               | everyone would think longer and harder over shoving high-
               | sugar foods in their mouths after explicitly consuming
               | nothing for a period of time.
        
               | andy_ppp wrote:
               | I guess we will see who is right once the studies are
               | done. There is definitely proof that fasting reduces
               | inflammation, if reducing inflammation helps with ageing
               | is being worked on by people like David Sinclair at
               | Harvard and others.
        
               | loopz wrote:
               | Fasting is good when following recommendations. But
               | people in West are very ignorant about the practice
               | still. It's natural to be sceptical about foreign
               | practices, until they become medicine.
        
         | DoreenMichele wrote:
         | It looks like it is actually a meta-analysis: A study of
         | several other studies, which has good points and pitfalls.
         | 
         |  _we combined community-based prospective cohorts: Tokyo Oldest
         | Old Survey on Total Health (TOOTH), Tokyo Centenarians Study
         | (TCS) and Japanese Semi-Supercentenarians Study (JSS)
         | comprising 1554 individuals including 684 centenarians and
         | (semi-)supercentenarians, 167 pairs of centenarian offspring
         | and spouses, and 536 community-living very old (85 to 99
         | years)._
         | 
         | One of the good points is that it tends to include data from a
         | great many more people than most studies can include. One of
         | the pitfalls is that it is challenging to combine data from
         | multiple studies because they probably used different
         | methodologies, were measuring different things, etc and this
         | puts a lot of noise in the data and cleaning the data to get
         | something useful and meaningful can be quite hard.
         | 
         | Meta studies can be a case of "garbage in, garbage out." But
         | when they are done well, they can roll up a whole lot of
         | information together to draw conclusions we simply don't have
         | the resources to meaningfully study some other way.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | jader201 wrote:
         | I think you're overthinking it.
         | 
         | Certain studies gain so many upvotes on HN because they
         | generate interesting discussion, and may be worth storing in
         | our favorites for sharing and/or future reference.
         | 
         | I almost always upvote articles when there is interesting
         | discussion (or the potential for interesting discussion)
         | related to the article. I very rarely (but do sometimes) upvote
         | articles solely based on the content of the articles
         | themselves.
         | 
         | Or rather, I'm much more interested in a collection of people's
         | thoughts vs. a single person's thoughts.
        
           | dheera wrote:
           | On the other hand, isn't it a peer-reviewed journal? If we
           | have to do the legwork of going around asking what other
           | clinicians think of it, it has failed at its mission as a
           | peer-reviewed journal.
        
             | coldtea wrote:
             | > _it has failed at its mission as a peer-reviewed journal_
             | 
             | Peer-reviewed just means:
             | 
             | (a) a bunch of guys had a cursory look at the research,
             | which they might or might not be able to follow (even basic
             | math), and left some hasty criticism on low hanging fruits
             | (or the personal pet peeves they always mention) to pretend
             | they thoroughly read it, and accepted it
             | 
             | (b) Some scholar friends accepted this as a favor to other
             | academic friends, who will backrub them when they submit
             | their own research, and help each other pad their paper
             | counts
             | 
             | And meta-analysis means:
             | 
             | (c) Let's take 80 crap papers, study them as if they're
             | relevant, and get some statistical takeways...
        
             | Retric wrote:
             | Peer review only is the initial smell test, and don't mean
             | it's actually true. Fraud for example can often pass peer
             | review just fine. That said, it does catch errors and
             | rejects a lot of junk which is why it's considered
             | important.
        
             | adamjb wrote:
             | You have a weird view of academia
        
             | refurb wrote:
             | No, peer review is "there doesn't seem to be an major
             | errors and the thinking is reasonable"
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | m463 wrote:
         | All the things I've listened to regarding health an longevity
         | have a recurring theme - inflammation happens a lot in modern
         | life - and it decreases your lifespan.
         | 
         | I think type 2 diabetes is basically an inflammatory disease.
         | More and more people are "pre-diabetes", which is basically
         | lifestyle moving them towards type 2 diabetes.
        
           | tittenfick wrote:
           | But inflammation is just the body's natural respond to
           | disease. Claiming inflammation hurts you is like saying wet
           | streets cause rain.
        
             | m463 wrote:
             | It might also be the body's natural response to a poor
             | diet, or carrying too much weight.
        
               | tittenfick wrote:
               | Yes, you're more vulnerable to disease when you are
               | living an unhealthy lifestyle. Shocker.
        
               | samus wrote:
               | Please define "unhealthy". This is a higly ambiguous
               | term, and its definition differs a lot between cultures
               | and across time, therefore it is far from obvious what
               | living an unhealthy lifestyle means.
        
             | samus wrote:
             | This is slightly incorrect, because inflammation is not
             | only triggered by "diseases". Inflammation indeed hurts the
             | body. Some of the weapons it deploys, for example
             | Neutrophil extracellular traps (basically, playing Spider
             | Man with webs of DNA) make subsequent cadiovascular disease
             | more likely. Others are just generally bad for the body or
             | uncomfortable (fever, ratches, ulcers).
             | 
             | Chronic systemic inflammation is known to play a role in
             | the development and progression of coronary heart disease
             | and diabetes, and accelerate the transformation of the
             | immune system into an aged state, which makes it more
             | likely to develop immune system disregulations such as
             | autoimmune diseases, and to cause cytokine storms when
             | exposed to agents such a N1H1, Epstein-Barr or Covid.
             | 
             | The immune system consists of many moving parts
             | coordinating each other via the exchange of signalling
             | molecules, which results in a large distributed system with
             | lots of unintuitive emergent behaviors. We are only just
             | starting to understand what effects our everyday behavior
             | has on the immune system, and what happens to it when we
             | age.
        
             | Broken_Hippo wrote:
             | Inflammation can be good or bad.
             | 
             | You really don't want a section of a nerve to be inflamed
             | because the body is attacking the coating, for example. You
             | do, however, want the skin surrounding the scratch on your
             | leg to have some inflammation to help close the cut.
             | 
             | None of this means you should regularly take an anti-
             | inflammatory drug nor does it mean that an "anti-
             | inflammatory" diet or other preventative measures will
             | help, either. I view some of this as the latest pseudo-
             | science, at least in the hands of most folks.
        
       | asadkn wrote:
       | Most people talk food when inflammation is mentioned. But let's
       | not forget, arguably, an even bigger contributor: stress - mental
       | or physical, say via a chronic illness.
       | 
       | Relevant:
       | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5476783/#s2titl...
        
         | f6v wrote:
         | We're just scratching the surface there. So many things can go
         | wrong with the immune system that lead to inflammation.
        
         | andreygrehov wrote:
         | Curious - are there legitimate ways to measure stress?
        
           | sradman wrote:
           | Heart Rate Variability (HRV), a relatively new feature in
           | wearables with optical heart rate monitors, is a good proxy
           | for stress. Some years ago, IBM did a study that found that
           | HRV in newborns served as an early warning system of illness.
           | Athletes have long used this measure to determine when off
           | days are needed.
        
           | bregma wrote:
           | Stress is measured in metric units of "handwaves." One
           | handwave ()is 1 angst (a) per second.
        
           | koolba wrote:
           | You could count the amount of hair loss or lack thereof. I
           | bet hours of nightly REM sleep would be inversely correlated
           | as well.
        
             | raducu wrote:
             | I have terrible sleep, but my hours of REM sleep are fine.
             | 
             | It's my deep sleep that's toast; also I get to the REM
             | stage too quickly, I think it's supposed to be a sign of
             | depression.
             | 
             | So it's a bit more complicated.
        
             | bbarnett wrote:
             | There is nothing wrong with hair loss, it is perfectly
             | natural, even when young and it doesn't mean you are
             | getting old, not even a little bit, it even can look good,
             | OK?
        
               | koolba wrote:
               | I never said it's not natural or that there's anything
               | wrong with it. It's known to be associated with stress so
               | barring other known factors, if you suddenly start losing
               | your hair then stress could be a cause. In contrast to
               | long term loss, short term loss from stress tends to be
               | reversible if it's caught early enough.
        
           | thatcat wrote:
           | only short term via cortisol, long term burnout is as
           | mysterious as it is destructive
        
             | raducu wrote:
             | I guess I'll check it out.
             | 
             | I'm 37 and I think my room started having the old person
             | smell.
        
               | hobofan wrote:
               | That might also be something less dramatic. After a year
               | of mostly staying at home, I had the same feeling, but in
               | the end I think it was mostly stank from some of the more
               | extreme diets I had in recent times. Now that the weather
               | allows for full days of ventilation again (combined with
               | baking soda) that smell was pretty quickly gone.
        
           | throwaway_isms wrote:
           | cortisol levels can be tested
        
         | gadf wrote:
         | Take aspirin daily forever, if your stomach hurts, stop. Start
         | again.
        
           | pengaru wrote:
           | https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-heart-
           | aspirin/with...
           | 
           | https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704511304575075.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/aug/03/painkillers-.
           | ..
           | 
           | https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/18/health/aspirin-
           | health.htm...
           | 
           | https://www.npr.org/sections/health-
           | shots/2018/09/16/6474154...
        
         | gogopuppygogo wrote:
         | CBD is great at helping alleviate inflammation in most people.
        
           | f6v wrote:
           | Was there a study?
        
             | gogopuppygogo wrote:
             | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31881765/
        
               | f6v wrote:
               | I skimmed through that review and it mostly references
               | mice and rats, as well as cell models. There is a huge
               | difference between that and "in most people". In fact,
               | you'd need a lot studies in actual people(not cell
               | models) of different ages and and conditions to say it
               | works.
        
         | virtuallynathan wrote:
         | The mechanism may be via the gut, stress increases intestinal
         | permeability.
        
         | briefcomment wrote:
         | Don't forget environmental factors.
        
         | synthmeat wrote:
         | Serendipitously, this popped up for me right as I was reading
         | this thread https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QezLxFuBxvM
        
       | mrwaffle wrote:
       | hi, i'm a just stupid waffle. can someone give me the TLDR of
       | this [nearly] impossible to understand piece of writing?
        
         | mattowen_uk wrote:
         | From what I understand, is that if your body is quite good at
         | fighting infection (and thus creates inflammation) you'll live
         | longer.
         | 
         | Seems a bit obvious to me, but what do I know? I'm not an
         | academic scientist...
        
           | jobigoud wrote:
           | It's the other way around. Their finding is that lower levels
           | of inflammation correlates with survival, capability and
           | cognition in centenarians.
        
             | mattowen_uk wrote:
             | Ahhh. Thanks!
        
         | pazimzadeh wrote:
         | > We conclude that inflammation is an important malleable
         | driver of ageing up to extreme old age in humans
        
       | kgin wrote:
       | Epigenetic clocks measuring methylation sites across DNA are
       | currently the most accurate way to measure aging
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epigenetic_clock
       | 
       | What's more, it seems that it is possible to reset the epigenetic
       | of cells to their youthful state and reverse actual the
       | biological age of those cells. They don't just "measure younger",
       | they function as they did when they were younger.
       | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2975-4
        
         | jaygernaught wrote:
         | interesting, what are your thoughts on modifying our
         | epigenetics via crisper to pulse Yamanaka factors? also what
         | ever happened to that CEO who gave her immune system a boost
         | with stem cells?
        
         | perl4ever wrote:
         | >currently the most accurate way to measure aging
         | 
         | I don't understand what people mean by statements like this.
         | Per the Wiki page, they found something that on average is
         | highly correlated to chronological age.
         | 
         | But in individual cases, it may be off a little or a lot. What
         | tells you this is meaningful information and not random noise?
         | What is the reference point for the "real" age that is not
         | chronological age?
        
           | fao_ wrote:
           | > But in individual cases, it may be off a little or a lot.
           | What tells you this is meaningful information and not random
           | noise?
           | 
           | Because it was more accurate than other data sources we've
           | tried
        
             | perl4ever wrote:
             | It appears to me to be "more accurate" because they have
             | defined the discrepancies as more accurate. Why not just
             | define them as _inaccuracy_?
        
           | chub500 wrote:
           | I just watched an interesting Veritasium on this aspect of
           | aging: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QRt7LjqJ45k
        
       | legerdemain wrote:
       | It is rapidly becoming clear that inflammation drives many
       | processes of disease and ageing. Many people are turning to anti-
       | inflammatory diets rich in fruits like blueberries, fish with
       | Omega Acids and turmeric. For example, there are many yoga
       | practitioners in India who have extreme old age and great health
       | that people worldwide can all benefit from listening to, like
       | Baba Ramdev.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | cjmaria wrote:
         | I imagine you did not mean to imply that Baba Ramdev is of
         | extreme old age, it seems he's only 55?
        
         | alecco wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramdev#Claimed_cure_for_COVID-...
        
           | waihtis wrote:
           | If there's one thing that has become apparent during COVID,
           | it's that there is great reason to be skeptical of "official
           | government guidelines" of in situations like COVID (acutely
           | emerging and constantly changing scenario.)
           | 
           | They simply can't process information fast enough to make
           | well informed statements.
           | 
           | Now I don't have an opinion on ayurvedic medicine and it's
           | legitimacy but something being "banned by the government"
           | alone means nothing today.
        
             | loopz wrote:
             | Traditional auyrveda and yoga is great. Cult leaders and
             | wondercures aren't.
        
               | waihtis wrote:
               | So if something legitimate is being promoted by a "cult
               | leader", it makes it illegitimate?
        
       | ibigb wrote:
       | I found this interview very germane to the subject of extra
       | inflammation from the diet and the newly discovered cellular
       | mechanisms for turning it off. Some of the latest research from a
       | few years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXm28_2ctpU "23
       | Years in the Zone: Journalist and Author Gary Taubes Interviews
       | Dr. Barry Sears"
        
       | lawwantsin17 wrote:
       | They really need a more nuanced word than inflamation, since
       | there are no flames involved, just an immune system and chronic
       | infection.
        
       | jbritton wrote:
       | How do you measure inflammation?
        
         | legerdemain wrote:
         | Serum concentration of C-reactive protein and other molecular
         | markers of ongoing inflammation processes.
        
           | NotSammyHagar wrote:
           | You made a lot of good comments on this article, do you have
           | a background in nutrition?
        
             | nabla9 wrote:
             | He has made horrible comments like
             | 
             | > There is inflammation everywhere, it's as generic a word
             | as "oxidation" and "metabolism."
             | 
             | He is probably googling for answers and making it up as he
             | goes.
        
             | fsflover wrote:
             | Nice try, NSA.
        
         | atat7024 wrote:
         | Look at it, feel its affects.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-17 23:02 UTC)