[HN Gopher] Blue Zones, where people reach age 100 at 10 times g...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Blue Zones, where people reach age 100 at 10 times greater rates
        
       Author : ivanvas
       Score  : 640 points
       Date   : 2022-07-18 20:38 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
        
       | k__ wrote:
       | Does this account for pension fraud?
        
         | 1-6 wrote:
         | I'd like to see a post mortem on that!
        
       | mesozoic wrote:
       | Summarized it for myself and others maybe
       | 
       | 1 Move naturally. All these activities were not widely done up to
       | 100 years ago. I'd expect they're not much worse so just get
       | exercise. 2 Purpose. Sure good advice have a reason to live 3
       | Downshift. relax and don't be a workaholic check 4 80% Rule.
       | effectively intermittent fasting? 5 Plant slant. already
       | disproved by other comments. anti meat propaganda 6 Wine @ 5. but
       | is this causal or just correlational, probably goes with
       | downshift above 7 Belong. Really seems this is just a subpart of
       | social (below) and purpose (above) 8 Loved ones first. Free elder
       | care is going to add years on it's own. Can try to find that
       | other ways but get cared for when you're old. 9 Right tribe.
       | create peer pressure to promote positive habits
        
       | hamilyon2 wrote:
       | When do we finally regulate sugar like we do with tobacco? I bet
       | nobody mentioned in article drinks sugary carbonated drinks.
        
       | ghufran_syed wrote:
       | https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/blue-zones-diet-speculation....
        
       | fleddr wrote:
       | "Knowing your sense of purpose is worth up to 7 years of extra
       | life expectancy."
       | 
       | Uh-oh.
       | 
       | "Research shows that attending faith-based services 4 times per
       | month will add 4 to 14 years of life expectancy."
       | 
       | Looks like my atheism is is worse than smoking, who knew.
        
         | gsatic wrote:
         | Faith doesn't need to be faith in religion. Have you met sports
         | fans?
        
           | baobabKoodaa wrote:
           | Sports fans are not exactly known for their longevity.
        
         | pcurve wrote:
         | lol! I needed that laugh, thanks. I know you're being funny,
         | but if you already hold similar belief systems and also
         | practice healthy living / thinking on your own, you'll be fine.
        
           | fleddr wrote:
           | I'm technically a Roman Catholic. My parents told me that if
           | I performed the rituals, like communion, I'd get a new bike
           | and it would make grandma happy. My father's belief system:
           | 
           | Dad: "It's freezing in this church".
           | 
           | Mum: "Shhhht! We're in session, have some respect".
           | 
           | Dad: "At least it will be warm in hell".
        
         | jp0d wrote:
         | Makes a strong case for us atheists to form some sort of
         | community and chat about STEM and acknowledge our science gods
         | like Einstein. Now that I think about it, we will probably end
         | up entering into some sort of debate. haha..
        
         | zaptrem wrote:
         | I'm religious and this seems like some serious
         | causation/correlation confusion. Maybe attending
         | services/having purpose is _correlated,_ but establishing
         | causation for such a thing afaik is impossible.
        
         | physicles wrote:
         | Former born-again evangelical Christian here, stopped believing
         | about 10 years ago. I haven't yet found anything like the
         | communities within the churches I was deeply involved in. But I
         | do think it's possible to find outside religion, and I'm
         | getting closer every year.
         | 
         | I've been lucky to live for the last 10 years in a place* where
         | it's easy to form lasting friendships with like-minded, earnest
         | people. For me, I know I'm in the right place when I have
         | friends with whom I can share my insecurities, and they can
         | share theirs, and there's no judgment.
         | 
         | From here I think it's just a matter of prioritizing community
         | whenever it's time to move next, whether it's seeking out
         | groups of friends from our little diaspora or making new
         | friends. That makes sense to do whether I have a partner or
         | not.
         | 
         | (*never expected that Beijing would be so great in this way. I
         | don't know if the expat scene in other major cities is similar;
         | maybe it's just because the community is small here and the
         | city attracts people who prefer not to coast through life)
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | mkoubaa wrote:
         | I don't like the terminology of "faith-based" here. These are
         | religious services, and some religions don't place a big
         | importance on faith
        
         | Qem wrote:
         | Did they control for marriage and divorce? Maybe religious
         | people are just more likely to marry and remain married when
         | older. Lonely elderly people are at increased risk of death, as
         | loneliness increase risk of mental disease and death from
         | disease and accidents, when nobody is around to call help
        
           | fleddr wrote:
           | Maybe, but in that case they could just say "married couples
           | live longer".
           | 
           | I really think they're referring to the communal feeling of
           | religion. Forget about the religion itself, it's an
           | incredibly effective way to get to know hundreds of people,
           | which enriches your life.
           | 
           | We're social creatures and religion is social on steroids.
        
         | ska wrote:
         | > Looks like my atheism is is worse than smoking, who knew.
         | 
         | It's plausible that the faith-based stuff is just a decent
         | proxy for actually having a functional community and community
         | support.
        
           | fleddr wrote:
           | Fully agree.
        
           | rtev wrote:
           | That's a strong possibility. While I'm not religious, I
           | frequently envy the close community that religious life
           | brings.
        
             | zoinks-scoob wrote:
             | Some religions aren't really over the moon with dogma and
             | mostly just loosely hold a community together. Try a
             | Friends meeting sometime and see what you think.
        
               | DoreenMichele wrote:
               | Friends -- aka Quakers, for anyone confused.
               | 
               | https://simple.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Society_of_
               | Fri....
        
               | chmod600 wrote:
               | If the sense of purpose isn't there, usually the
               | "community" behind it is shallow.
               | 
               | I'm not saying only religion offers a sense of purpose.
               | But just a bunch of nice people in a building talking
               | about being nice doesn't often work.
        
               | emmelaich wrote:
               | True, but you never quite know whether people are
               | adopting a pose for the sake of belonging or really
               | really believe.
               | 
               | From my own experience, I'd guess 50pc or more don't
               | _really_ believe.
        
           | quadcore wrote:
           | And meditation - or mind-clearing activities
        
           | gowld wrote:
        
           | bscphil wrote:
           | And "drinks one to two servings of alcohol a day" is a pretty
           | good proxy for "has enough money to afford to drink wine
           | regularly, but is in a stable enough community to not slide
           | into alcoholism".
        
       | wizofaus wrote:
       | Wasn't there some study that showed one of the main reasons the
       | average life expectancy in Okinawa was so high was because many
       | people had just made up their date of birth after records were
       | destroyed in the war in order to maximize government benefits
       | etc.?
        
         | svnt wrote:
         | There is also incentive to lie about meat consumption as it is
         | frequently evidence of status.
        
       | Simon_O_Rourke wrote:
       | Who would want another twenty years once you hit seventy five?
        
         | bergenty wrote:
         | Me, I don't want to die. Just watching the world go by is fun.
        
         | dwighttk wrote:
         | Get back to me when you're 75
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | szeil wrote:
        
         | TaupeRanger wrote:
         | Almost every 75 year old
        
       | boutell wrote:
       | Blinking repeatedly at the idea that Okinawa is in the "South
       | Pacific."
        
       | KerrAvon wrote:
       | I saw the headline and I seriously assumed someone was claiming
       | to have discovered that people in some areas of the world
       | experienced accelerated aging.
       | 
       | (In case it's changed, the headline when I read it: "Blue Zones,
       | where people reach age 100 at 10 times greater rates")
        
         | q7xvh97o2pDhNrh wrote:
         | Yeah, I came here for the obligatory Doppler shift joke. I
         | don't see one, so I'll give it a try:
         | 
         | Maybe they're called Blue Zones because they're moving towards
         | us so quickly that we can see all their wrinkles more clearly.
         | So they're not really centenarians, but they just look older!
        
           | 867-5309 wrote:
           | thought you were going to say "moving towards us so quickly
           | that their electromagnetic wavelengths are blueshifted"
        
             | andyferris wrote:
             | That's right - I was definitely thinking of the twin
             | paradox! (For those that don't know, the twin paradox is a
             | theory of relativity thing - one twin travels out into
             | space and back to Earth near the speed of light and
             | afterward the stationary twin is older than the travelling
             | twin, so the blue-shifted twin "lives longer" at least from
             | Earth's point of view).
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | daveslash wrote:
         | That is _exactly_ how I took it at first. Came to the comment
         | thread to see if I was the only one.
        
       | robocat wrote:
       | The 9 factors:
       | 
       |  _Move naturally_. The world's longest-lived people do not pump
       | iron, run marathons, or join gyms. Instead, they live in
       | environments that constantly nudge them into moving without
       | thinking about it. They grow gardens and do not have mechanical
       | conveniences for house and yard work.
       | 
       |  _Purpose_. The Okinawans call it Ikigai and the Nicoyans call it
       | plan de vida; for both, it translates to "why I wake up in the
       | morning." Knowing your sense of purpose is worth up to 7 years of
       | extra life expectancy.
       | 
       |  _Downshift_. Even people in the Blue Zones experience stress.
       | Stress leads to chronic inflammation, associated with every major
       | age-related disease. What the world's longest-lived people have
       | that others do not are routines to shed that stress. Okinawans
       | take a few moments each day to remember their ancestors;
       | Adventists pray; Ikarians take a nap; and Sardinians do happy
       | hour.
       | 
       |  _80% Rule_. Hara hachi bu--the Okinawan 2500-year old Confucian
       | mantra said before meals reminds them to stop eating when their
       | stomachs are 80% full. The 20% gap between not being hungry and
       | feeling full could be the difference between losing weight or
       | gaining it. People in the Blue Zones eat their smallest meal in
       | the late afternoon or early evening, and then, they do not eat
       | any more the rest of the day.
       | 
       |  _Plant slant_. Beans, including fava, black, soy, and lentils,
       | are the cornerstone of most centenarian diets. Meat--mostly pork
       | --is eaten on average only 5 times per month. Serving sizes are 3
       | to 4 oz, about the size of a deck of cards.
       | 
       |  _Wine @ 5_. People in all Blue Zones (except Adventists) drink
       | alcohol moderately and regularly. Moderate drinkers outlive
       | nondrinkers. The trick is to drink 1 to 2 glasses per day
       | (preferably Sardinian Cannonau wine), with friends and /or with
       | food. And no, you cannot save up all week and have 14 drinks on
       | Saturday.
       | 
       |  _Belong_. All but 5 of the 263 centenarians interviewed belonged
       | to some faith-based community. Denomination does not seem to
       | matter. Research shows that attending faith-based services 4
       | times per month will add 4 to 14 years of life expectancy.
       | 
       |  _Loved ones first_. Successful centenarians in the Blue Zones
       | put their families first. This means keeping aging parents and
       | grandparents nearby or in the home (it lowers disease and
       | mortality rates of children in the home too.). They commit to a
       | life partner (which can add up to 3 years of life expectancy) and
       | invest in their children with time and love. (They'll be more
       | likely to care for aging parents when the time comes.)
       | 
       |  _Right tribe_. The world's longest lived people chose--or were
       | born into--social circles that supported healthy behaviors,
       | Okinawans created moais--groups of 5 friends that committed to
       | each other for life. Research from the Framingham Studies2 shows
       | that smoking, obesity, happiness, and even loneliness are
       | contagious. So the social networks of long-lived people have
       | favorably shaped their health behaviors.
        
       | tolstoshev wrote:
       | My bet is blue zones are just places where they don't have good
       | longevity records so you get a bunch of fake centenarians. That
       | turned out to be the case in Japan:
       | https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-11258071 and I think
       | also in Greece.
       | 
       | People were just keeping dead relatives "alive" for the social
       | security or rent control.
        
         | genjipress wrote:
         | Andrei Codrescu had a monologue once, about how the world is in
         | truth peopled by two-thousand year old men who "arrived at
         | their great age with the aid of daily doses of yogurt,
         | cigarettes, vodka, and dubious birth records. ... With the
         | exception of their eyelashes, which reach to the ground, they
         | are in very good shape."
        
           | dekhn wrote:
           | ha, my grandpa said (this would have been mid 1980s) there
           | were 150-year old people living in communes in russia and I
           | asked how they lived so long and he said they ate yogurt. But
           | I think he must have been referring to this:
           | https://www.nytimes.com/1977/09/09/archives/soviet-
           | centenari...
        
           | gowld wrote:
           | What does the eyelash bit mean?
        
         | jandrese wrote:
         | Sometimes people were assuming a parent's name to avoid paying
         | inheritance tax. I remember speculation about the oldest woman
         | in the world may have in fact been her daughter.
        
         | postsantum wrote:
         | Another common reason is evading the draft during war due to
         | old age. In my country the region with longest living people is
         | infamous with high corruption rates and general poverty. It
         | also has the highest natal mortality rate which might be a
         | contributing factor too
        
           | Terretta wrote:
           | That's an interesting potential correlation, as I'd guess
           | some percentage of Loma Linda CA are likely to have been
           | "conscientious objectors" like this SDA fellow the movie
           | Hacksaw Ridge was made about:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Doss
        
         | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
         | Glad to see this up at the top. Here is another article that
         | specifically talks about Sardinia and Okinawa, 2 of the
         | identified "Blue Zones", and really puts it down to poor record
         | keeping: https://www.vox.com/2019/8/8/20758813/secrets-ultra-
         | elderly-...
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | [deleted]
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | ancorevard wrote:
         | Loma Linda in California?
        
           | pcurve wrote:
           | Apparently they did a study on this..
           | 
           | https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/25/health/longevity-blue-zone-
           | we...
           | 
           | high percentage of vegetarians, active lifestyle, religious
           | folks, etc.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Or (a more positive take), perhaps these are places where the
         | elderly are respected, and youth is not fetishized.
        
         | tsaprailis wrote:
         | I have read the same thing about Greece's Ikaria island
         | centenarians.
         | 
         | As an anecdote my grandfather born in remote mountain village
         | in mainland Greece in the 1900 was actually registered by his
         | father having been born in 1906 as to avoid being drafted as
         | long as possible to fight in the multiple wars fought at the
         | time. So birth records and certificates from that time are not
         | really trustworthy.
        
           | bombcar wrote:
           | I knew someone who came over with "the boat people" from
           | Vietnam when he was six or seven; but his parents adjusted
           | his birthday so he would start kindergarten instead - and he
           | still didn't know for sure his actual birthday day.
        
           | Aeolun wrote:
           | How do you go and register a 7 year old as having been born a
           | few days ago?
        
             | vorpalhex wrote:
             | I don't think you bring the kid with you.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | Or bring another kid with you. In a small village, the
               | gene pool is pretty shallow and it's not hard to look
               | like anyone's child.
               | 
               | It's not like they're going to waste money on
               | photographing every person in a tiny village either.
        
             | omega3 wrote:
             | With the help of a bribe.
        
             | stickfigure wrote:
             | I'm guessing that paper records were not especially
             | rigorous in Greece in the early 1900s.
        
         | scifibestfi wrote:
         | > team of demographers, scientist and anthropologists were able
         | to distill the evidence-based common denominators of these Blue
         | Zones into 9 commonalities that they call the Power 9
         | 
         | Incredibly embarrassing for all involved if your bet is
         | correct. None of them considered that possibility?
        
           | t-3 wrote:
           | They apparently interviewed over 200 centenarians, and
           | visited all the locations.
        
         | Trias11 wrote:
         | If these all are warm places, with good nature, away from
         | nonsense of a big city - chances are people will live longer
         | there.
        
         | ip26 wrote:
         | On the other hand, we know from other research that physical
         | activity, social engagement, low alcohol consumption, and the
         | Mediterranean diet are all healthy. Can it be just coincidence
         | all 7 blue zones exhibit these things?
        
           | ianai wrote:
           | Or are there places with a similar diet without a history of
           | longevity?
        
             | peoplefromibiza wrote:
             | That's not impossible, but where are the records?
        
         | franze wrote:
         | Spending a lot of time in greece in rural areas in the 90ies in
         | my teens. Quite a lot of older greek did not even know or care
         | about their birthday, as it was not celebrated. Name day was
         | the big thing.
         | 
         | And I loved the stories when the government introduced a new
         | land registry (based on reality) and the chaos the ensured, as
         | suddenly lot of land was owned 2 or more times, officially
         | unknown villages were officially discovered ...
         | 
         | I would definitely question the validity of the historic birth
         | register, a lot.
        
           | peoplefromibiza wrote:
           | having spent a good part of my life with Greek relatives, I
           | beg to differ.
           | 
           | Birthdays might not be accurate due to difficulties in
           | registering births, civil wars and fascist coups (they burnt
           | every record so that people from, for example, Macedonia had
           | to take Greek names) but the difference from on paper age and
           | actual age is on average a few months off (plus or minus, so
           | they balance in the end).
           | 
           | They also care a lot about celebrating birthdays with very
           | big family gatherings.
           | 
           | On other note: if we believe that somewhere they kept false
           | records of births, what should make us believe that in other
           | parts of the World they kept perfect records?
           | 
           | What should make us think that birth records in Azerbaijan,
           | Colombia, Ohio or Fiji are more accurate?
        
           | BeefySwain wrote:
           | > And I loved the stories when the government introduced a
           | new land registry (based on reality) and the chaos the
           | ensured
           | 
           | Could you provide some links expanding on this? Or a phrase
           | to Google? Sounds fascinating.
        
             | franze wrote:
             | a quick google showed this
             | 
             | https://www.elra.eu/the-present-landscape-of-land-
             | registrati...
             | 
             | The traditional land registry was from 1853 which seems was
             | just a good enough description of what one owns.
             | 
             | In 1995 a land cadastre was created and it came into law in
             | 1998 to replace the old system. A land survey was started
             | to move presume land ownership from the old into the new
             | system. This land survery / chaos was definitely still
             | going on end of the 2000 years in Crete.
        
           | throw0101a wrote:
           | > _Name day was the big thing._
           | 
           | For anyone curious:
           | 
           | > _In Christianity, a name day is a tradition in many
           | countries of Europe and the Americas, among other parts of
           | Christendom.[1] It consists of celebrating a day of the year
           | that is associated with one 's baptismal name, which is
           | normatively that of a biblical character or other saint.[2]_
           | [...]
           | 
           | > _The custom originated with the Christian calendar of
           | saints: believers named after a saint would celebrate that
           | saint 's feast day. Within Christianity, name days have
           | greater resonance in areas where the Christian denominations
           | of Catholicism, Lutheranism and Orthodoxy predominate.[1]_
           | 
           | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Name_day
        
             | mc32 wrote:
             | Some French I knew followed this and received gifts(IIRC)
             | --or at least they referenced these things as the source of
             | their names --they did not ignore their actual birthdays
             | though.
        
               | tarte-au-poire wrote:
               | Indeed. I had no idea it was so exotic. It's kinda of a
               | old people thing. It's associated with your name a
               | specific saint for it. ( multiple saint are named James
               | or John or Anthony, your name day is specifically for one
               | of them. Anthony of Assisi is not the same day as Anthony
               | of Padou and so on on so forth.)
               | 
               | You usually get a card from your religious grandma and a
               | 20$ bill.
        
           | mfer wrote:
           | The researchers questioned these details, too. Any place
           | labeled a blue zone has to have excellent records they could
           | trace. One of the blue zones is in California. It's worth
           | looking at their process
        
             | nextos wrote:
             | I guess as time progresses, centenarians will come from
             | cohorts with records that can be better trusted. This will
             | confirm or invalidate the blue zone findings.
        
               | bobthepanda wrote:
               | It's not necessarily so easy.
               | 
               | I'm reminded of the Okinawan case, where postwar rule by
               | the US introduced younger cohorts to much unhealthier
               | eating habits.
        
             | teruakohatu wrote:
             | Half the residents of that town are 7th Day Adventists
             | according to Wikipedia:
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loma_Linda,_California
             | 
             | Blue zones could simply be a result of The modifiable areal
             | unit problem (MAUP):
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modifiable_areal_unit_probl
             | e...
        
               | mfer wrote:
               | 7th Day Adventists have food and lifestyle differences
               | from the surrounding population. They are the ones living
               | longer. There have been a bunch of ongoing long term
               | studies on them.
               | 
               | One of the findings is that diet matters. They've looked
               | at diet differences and certain characteristics show up
               | for people who live longer and have more good years.
               | Those same things show up in the other blue zones.
        
         | margalabargala wrote:
         | Things in common across most blue zones: middle latitudes, near
         | a coastline, consistent weather, mild diet with plenty of fish,
         | poor record keeping...
        
           | atourgates wrote:
           | I assume your comment is semi-tongue-in-cheek, but Loma
           | Linda's the counter to several of those points.
           | 
           | Loma Linda's core contributing factors seem to be:
           | 
           | * High incidence of vegetarianism
           | 
           | * High incidence of non-smokers and non-drinkers
           | 
           | * Strong religious / social community
           | 
           | * Access to great healthcare
           | 
           | All while having birth records that are just about as
           | accurate as anyplace else in the United States.
        
             | TylerE wrote:
             | But it conforms to many of the others... it's only 20 miles
             | inland from the pacific, and has an (albeit warmer than
             | normal) Mediterranean climate... "winter" lows are rarely
             | below the mid 40s.
        
               | TimTheTinker wrote:
               | I grew up in the Loma Linda area as a Seventh-day
               | Adventist (though my family left Adventism when I was a
               | teenager after reading some books that explained why some
               | of its core teachings are unbiblical). My grandparents
               | all lived past 90, and my great-grandfather died at 100.
               | 
               | Epidemiologically speaking, I think SDAs in general live
               | longer because they don't smoke, don't drink, and don't
               | eat meat -- and have a religious community in which doing
               | so is against God's law. It also doesn't hurt that they
               | keep Sabbath, which means everyone who doesn't work in
               | healthcare or emergency services has a mandatory day off,
               | no work allowed.
               | 
               | Smog in the whole Inland Empire area is still pretty bad,
               | especially in the summer. It gets pretty hot in the
               | summer, not very cold in the winter - a lot like LA, but
               | hotter :)
        
               | bombcar wrote:
               | Which makes sense, if you assume that any given cohort
               | will have some percentage hit 100 years; and then the
               | cohorts that somehow have people removed "early" will
               | have lower percentages.
               | 
               | For example, the cohort that includes people sent to WWII
               | will have many that died in that war, even if they would
               | have hit 100 otherwise.
               | 
               | And a group that "outlaws" some of the major causes of
               | premature death (alcohol, smoking) would then have more
               | cross the line.
        
               | bcatanzaro wrote:
               | Loma Linda is more like 60 miles from the pacific.
               | 
               | https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Loma+Linda,+CA/Huntington
               | +Be...
        
           | pcurve wrote:
           | Also smaller stature. Large and tall people have more cells,
           | and higher chance of cancer.
        
             | jjtheblunt wrote:
             | that conjecture is famously contradicted by elephants, and
             | it's a topic of research why that is.
        
               | Ardon wrote:
               | No it isn't? Elephants develop cancerous cells at the
               | same rate per cell as every other animal, but have better
               | biological methods of destroying them when those cells do
               | turn cancerous.
        
               | jjtheblunt wrote:
               | Is there a citation for that assertion? It's possible
               | elephants induce apoptosis for aberrant non-cancerous
               | cells, for instance, earlier.
               | 
               | super interesting
        
             | steve_adams_86 wrote:
             | Interesting correlation: Eating more meat seems to cause
             | people to grow larger, but there is no strong evidence that
             | being physically larger has intrinsic benefits outside of
             | physical strength (which is arguably not very important).
             | You do however need to eat more, you're more likely to get
             | cancer, heart disease, suffer from chronic inflammation,
             | etc.
             | 
             | Interestingly, statistics about growing larger are often
             | used to support more meat eating by meat advocates. There
             | is a lot of talk about protein quality, and the implication
             | is that smaller people are disadvantaged - as though they
             | must be growing less by all measures, not just stature. It
             | isn't so clear that this is true though, and there's plenty
             | of evidence to suggest we shouldn't strive to grow larger
             | (either in stature or in lean mass).
             | 
             | I'm not saying there is a certain truth in there at all. I
             | do find the correlations fascinating though. It defies a
             | lot of what I understood about nutrition for most of my
             | life so it's definitely something I'd like to see more data
             | on. I'm open to a meat-based diet being superior overall
             | (or any tasty diet, really).
        
               | TheBlerch wrote:
               | Actually remember reading that a number of studies have
               | linked short stature with heart disease. I'm not up-to-
               | date on the latest research on this. But whether shorter
               | or taller you do the best you can with the factors within
               | your control - nutrition, exercise, sleep, etc.
               | Anecdotally two friends' fathers in elementary school
               | died way prematurely, both quite short of stature.
        
               | ekianjo wrote:
               | You forgot the mating benefit. Taller people have better
               | chances to find mates.
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | Is this true across all cultures?
        
               | ekianjo wrote:
               | I have not of any culture where shorter people are more
               | popular but who knows...
        
               | kzrdude wrote:
               | My health-obsessed doctor friend told me that muscle mass
               | is a good predictor for health in later life, which was
               | surprising to me (I thought fitness, heart/lung etc was
               | the thing). I wouldn't dismiss it. :)
        
               | pengaru wrote:
               | Except body builders tend to not live very long.
               | 
               | Separating the effects of steroids and other growth
               | hormones vs. just having a lot of muscle seems difficult.
               | 
               | My general understanding is that overweight is overweight
               | is overweight, it's hard on your body when excessive,
               | even if it's muscle.
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | It appears that consuming a lot of protein in and of
               | itself (assuming you're not yet 65) is correlated with
               | much worse health and mortality outcomes:
               | https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-
               | matters/protein...
        
               | e9 wrote:
               | It's harder to keep muscles as you grow old. More muscles
               | is indication of good metabolism, which correlates with
               | good health (less chance of getting metabolic syndrome
               | etc, somewhat relevant:
               | https://betterbodychemistry.com/obesity/metabolic-
               | syndrome-m...)
        
               | Swizec wrote:
               | [relative] Muscle mass has a very strong correlation with
               | healthy habits.
               | 
               | You just don't see a lot of sedentary people with poor
               | nutrition who have a high muscle mass index.
        
               | BayAreaEscapee wrote:
               | It makes me think of all those reports that claim that
               | having a single glass of wine per day makes you
               | healthier.
               | 
               | It's probably the case that people who have just one
               | glass of wine are drinking socially, and therefore have
               | friends, and having friends is an indicator of having
               | status and health. The alcohol itself is poison but one
               | glass is more than offset by otherwise living a good
               | life.
        
               | Swizec wrote:
               | Oh they studied this! It's because if you're the kind of
               | person who can afford a glass of wine every day, you're
               | also the kind of person who can afford health care. In
               | USA at least.
               | 
               | Here's the best source I can find right now:
               | 
               | > The study authors write that "the observed cardiac
               | benefits of alcohol have been hypothesized to be the
               | product of residual confounding because of favorable
               | lifestyle, socioeconomic, and behavioral factors that
               | tend to coincide with modest alcohol intake."
               | 
               | https://www.inverse.com/mind-body/health-benefits-
               | alcohol-st...
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | Muscle mass in that equation would be relative to
               | stature, so being smaller wouldn't be a disadvantage in
               | that regard.
               | 
               | In my comment above I didn't mean to suggest strength is
               | useless or irrelevant so much as that scaling it up by a
               | few percent doesn't appear to confer meaningful benefits.
               | Someone 5'6" is probably strong enough to do everything
               | someone 6' can do in every day life, even without modern
               | technology. You can generally scale down what you need
               | to, and for exceptional things, you can likely recruit
               | and partner to solve the problem or apply intelligent
               | solutions.
               | 
               | I'm open to being wrong. Like I was saying, this is just
               | based on correlations I've been reading about lately and
               | far from peer reviewed study results.
        
               | geraldwhen wrote:
               | No man would choose to be 5'6 in America. Anyone under 6'
               | knows how difficult it is to date, especially online.
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | Of course. I'm speaking from a biological rather than
               | cultural perspective (as much as you can separate the
               | two, at least). I'm more so interested in what supports
               | longevity as opposed to what supports dating prospects.
               | 
               | I suppose my question is, all other things being equal,
               | would we be healthier if we were of smaller stature? Some
               | data indicate this might be the case, and that's
               | interesting to me. I suppose my upbringing and culture
               | encourage a "bigger is better" mentality.
               | 
               | A lot of data indicate this could simply be a case of
               | people growing larger because they have access to more
               | food. Genes express, people grow, but the main issue
               | isn't stature so much as having so much food readily
               | available after they finish growing. Perhaps we eat too
               | much and stature has little to do with it; it's just a
               | byproduct of access to calorie and protein rich food.
        
               | beowulfey wrote:
               | That's also an interesting anticorrelation with how we
               | normally relate metabolism and body size; smalller
               | organisms tend to have faster metabolisms and live
               | shorter lives versus much larger organisms.
               | 
               | Maybe the key is being smaller but also having slower (or
               | rather, "calmer") metabolic rates.
        
               | DFHippie wrote:
               | I believe what you want to be is a small member of a
               | large species. Large dogs live much shorter lives than
               | small dogs. Women tend to live longer than men (height or
               | mass probably isn't the only factor here, but this fits
               | the general pattern so one imagines it helps). Giants --
               | people well over six feet -- tend to live shorter lives
               | than people of ordinary stature. My grandmother was about
               | five feet with a straight spine. With a curved spine in
               | her early hundreds she was probably less than 4'6", but
               | she was still there. She had about two giant lifetimes.
               | If you stacked her on top of herself you would have one
               | giant (until her ever more flexible spine folded in two).
        
               | achenet wrote:
               | > but there is no strong evidence that being physically
               | larger has intrinsic benefits outside of physical
               | strength (which is arguably not very important).
               | 
               | Tall people get paid more.
               | 
               | [0]
               | https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/05/the-
               | fin...
        
               | docandrew wrote:
               | How is physical strength unimportant? Stronger people are
               | harder to kill (h/t Rippetoe) and improved strength also
               | helps to avoid carpal tunnel syndrome and neck/back pain
               | for those of us at a computer all day.
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | I can't think of much a human can accomplish with
               | exceptional strength that will aid them in normal day to
               | day life (generally speaking). There are exceptions, but
               | those exceptions would apply only to rare circumstances.
               | Sort of like, say you're going to be murdered by some
               | totally jacked guy, hypothetically, and all you have to
               | defend yourself is your bare hands. Okay great, it would
               | be nice to be ridiculously strong. But how often does
               | that happen to you? Or anyone?
               | 
               | Most predators will kill us even if we're ridiculously
               | ripped, so that's not important either. In most cases,
               | intelligence seems a lot more useful for avoiding or
               | navigating these situations.
               | 
               | There's also a lot to be said for having moderate
               | strength in a wide range of motion. That can matter a lot
               | in a much broader variety of situations where physical
               | strength matters, and it's far more realistic to attain
               | and sustain.
               | 
               | Avoiding carpal tunnel doesn't require special levels of
               | strength so much as normal fitness. It requires regular
               | movement and preventing weaknesses. I'm not saying we
               | should all vegetate at a computer, I'm saying that the
               | evidence seems good that being 5% larger/stronger (or
               | whatever the figure was) is not particularly helpful, and
               | instead potentially harmful.
               | 
               | For example, regular yoga will probably resolve most (not
               | all) people's mobility and repetitive stress issues. They
               | will not need to be large or strong for this to work.
        
               | zacharycohn wrote:
               | Speaking as a fellow Starting Strength fan: this is only
               | true in the modern era to the extent that being healthy
               | is better than being unhealthy.
               | 
               | If you look at the top X causes of death in humans, very
               | very few of them could have been avoided "if only the
               | deceased were stronger."
        
               | spfzero wrote:
               | It helps avoid frailty and it allows you to continue
               | exercising well into old age, for two things. It delays
               | the downward spiral of poor fitness and weak bones that
               | eventually does most of us in.
        
               | kzrdude wrote:
               | Falling and then breaking bones or getting ill otherwise
               | is a common cause of death, and muscle mass and fitness
               | helps avoid it.
               | 
               | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5899404/
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | Although it would help if they were stronger, this isn't
               | the result of them needing to begin a Starting Strength
               | program. My original point was more so that stature and
               | muscle mass might not benefit you beyond a certain point
               | - I don't doubt at all that being fit is still
               | tremendously beneficial.
               | 
               | It's also pure speculation. I read about this stuff for
               | fun and I know just about nothing about anything. Maybe
               | being larger really is a net positive and I just need to
               | be pointed to the right data.
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | Right, and I think an important distinction here is sheer
               | strength from general physical fitness.
               | 
               | If someone is relatively weak with below average lean
               | mass, lower than average markers of muscular strength,
               | etc. it seems like the consensus is that they are
               | statistically likely to die or get diseases earlier in
               | life. On the other hand, being on the other side of that
               | seems to yield diminishing returns. It's great to be fit,
               | but being abnormally strong on the other hand doesn't
               | appear to increase your lifespan proportionally to your
               | strength.
        
               | DoreenMichele wrote:
               | I'm not going to argue this with you. I'm not up for
               | being dragged into a stupid internet fight with a random
               | internet stranger. But this might interest you:
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14667430
        
               | dukeofdoom wrote:
               | Humans are the longest living land mammals, beat only by
               | whales. The bowhead whale is estimated to live to 200
               | years. And it's a huge animal.
        
               | Scoundreller wrote:
               | African elephants do pretty well too at 55-60 years in
               | the wild, but a fraction of that in captivity.
        
               | steve_adams_86 wrote:
               | That's an interesting point. I'm not sure how much
               | genetic overlap we have with whales, but I suspect it's
               | significant. I wonder what allows them to live so long
               | without getting cancer, for example. I can see why they
               | wouldn't get cardiovascular diseases (in humans this
               | seems to be mostly induced by diet and sedentary
               | lifestyle), but it seems likely that there's more to it.
        
               | richcollins wrote:
               | In the people that use meat's superior satiety to stay
               | lean, you see lower inflammation, IGF-1, insulin ... etc.
               | On a purely meat diet with loads of protein, my IGF-1 was
               | 90, a z-score of -1.
        
             | baal80spam wrote:
             | > Large and tall people have more cells, and higher chance
             | of cancer.
             | 
             | I've never looked at it like that. Is it true?
        
               | pcurve wrote:
               | sadly data seems to indicate so. :-/
               | 
               | https://www.wcrf.org/why-taller-people-are-at-greater-
               | risk-o...
               | 
               | https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/taller-people-
               | mor...
        
               | samscully wrote:
               | It does appear to be true for humans. Though
               | interestingly there isn't a correlation between species
               | size and cancer risk [1].
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peto%27s_paradox
        
               | pcurve wrote:
               | Just to clarify:
               | 
               | Across different species, there's no correlation.
               | 
               | Within the same species though, there is correlation.
        
           | tenpies wrote:
           | > poor record keeping...
           | 
           | If I may posit an idea. It's not that poor record keeping
           | leads to blue zones.
           | 
           | It's that not caring about the trivialities of paper pushing
           | and imaginary rules that current Western governments use to
           | exert their power, helps one live longer.
           | 
           |  _Now why do guys like you and me know what a land registry
           | is? Is this essential to our survival, in the hunter-gatherer
           | sense of the word? No. What are we then?_
        
         | mfer wrote:
         | To qualify as a "blue zone" they have to have good records.
         | 
         | Now that they know about these places, scientists have spent a
         | fair amount of time studying and publishing about them.
        
           | franze wrote:
           | Strange then that i.e.: the Okinawa Blue Zone seems to have
           | been dissolved in modern (record keeping) times.
           | 
           | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3362219/
        
             | hahajk wrote:
             | Well, record keeping and also an American occupation. From
             | your link: "We believe that current loss of longevity
             | advantage in Okinawa is a result of diet westernization"
        
             | mfer wrote:
             | In modern times it dissolved due to diet changes. Looking
             | at the blue zone in California is one of the most
             | enlightening because they can control for so many factors,
             | the records are excellent, and the people seem to be
             | generally open to being studied. There they have found how
             | diet and lifestyle plays a huge role in longevity
        
               | franze wrote:
               | In modern (record keeping) times it - might - dissolved
               | due to diet changes.
               | 
               | Nobody disputed that a healthy diet is healthy. And a
               | healthy lifestyle is healthy. Whereby lifestyle is such a
               | broad word that its in fact meaningless.
               | 
               | Maybe the record keeping in Okinawa was correct.
               | 
               | If you look for outliers, you will find outliers.
               | 
               | If you look for correlation, you will find correlation.
               | 
               | Does not mean they are the causation for all the
               | outliers.
               | 
               | So maybe Okinawa just had a lucky streak, which is now
               | over.
        
               | rafaelero wrote:
               | The fact that these outliers share similar habits should
               | put your concerns over "extraordinary" factors at bay.
        
               | franze wrote:
               | but how many communities exist with the same
               | behaviour/setting/factors configuration but are not an
               | centaurian-outlier.
               | 
               | basic science, do not look for verification, but
               | falsification
        
         | SapporoChris wrote:
         | The assumption being that poor longevity records resulted in
         | fake centenarians. But what if it resulted in missed
         | centenarians?
         | 
         | On the flip side and more seriously. From your link: "Officials
         | have found that hundreds of the missing would be at least 150
         | years old if still alive." That's just silly, Japan celebrates
         | their oldest on a regular basis. The false claims would and are
         | scrutinized, not just by Japan.
         | 
         | The link is from 2010. My point being yes, the absurd claims
         | are investigated and debunked. It's a known problem.
        
         | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
         | How many of these places could be explained by random noise?
         | 
         | And what steps did the study take to make sure the results
         | aren't just random noise?
        
         | Terretta wrote:
         | My bet is you didn't gather that one of the blue zones is Loma
         | Linda California.
        
           | function_seven wrote:
           | So the key to living past 100 is either (a) don't drink or
           | smoke, or (b) okay, fine, drink a couple glasses a day, but
           | don't keep good birth records.
        
             | Terretta wrote:
             | The other thing interesting about my family members from
             | the Loma Linda lifestyle is they remained healthy, active,
             | and slim, until their 3-digit expiration dates.
             | 
             | Most were still going on long walks in late 90s, only
             | slowed down by vision degeneration.
        
       | DoreenMichele wrote:
       | _The Danish Twin Study established that only about 20% of how
       | long the average person lives is dictated by our genes, whereas
       | the other 80% is dictated by our lifestyle._
       | 
       | And then lists 9 things that fit with the idea of moving back to
       | the passive solar design vernacular architecture and walkable
       | mixed-use neighborhoods that used to be more the norm before we
       | became victims of our own success and began tearing down SROs
       | left and right and zoning Missing Middle housing out of existence
       | (in the US, at least).
       | 
       | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_room_occupancy
        
         | ETH_start wrote:
         | I think we need to also remember that people cannot focus on
         | healthy living without financial security. Financial insecurity
         | forces people to sacrifice health, safety and wellness to make
         | ends meet.
         | 
         | Fortunately permissive zoning not only facilitates the
         | emergence of densely populated and walkable mixed-use
         | neighborhoods, but also significantly increases incomes. [1]
         | 
         | Other policies that I advocate to this end are a focus on law
         | and order to prevent the emergence of ghettos (Thomas Sowell
         | explains how the 1960s riots and subsequent normalization of
         | criminality contributed to the ghettoization of many inner city
         | neighborhoods [2]), a focus on building public transit and bike
         | infrastructure, and market friendly policies like a light tax
         | burden, and an absence of centralized (regulatory) control over
         | market interaction.
         | 
         | [1] https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/mac.20170388
         | 
         | [2] https://youtu.be/dvbzIwOECmY
        
           | DoreenMichele wrote:
           | In the US, walkable mixed-use neighborhoods, more bike
           | infrastructure and _better access to healthcare_ for the
           | masses would be a huge improvement and also reduce financial
           | stress for people of limited means.
           | 
           | Those are bits I know. This is not a rebuttal of anything.
           | I'm simply unfamiliar with some of your points.
        
         | dash2 wrote:
         | That heritability was estimated based on Danes born 1870-1900.
         | It's likely that heritability has increased since then because
         | there's less variability in the environment: health care has
         | improved, there are fewer accidents, poor Danes are unlikely to
         | be malnourished, etc.
         | 
         | This study shows that heritability is basically zero below the
         | age of 60, but increases a lot thereafter:
         | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00439-006-0144-y
        
       | hartator wrote:
       | > Okinawans take a few moments each day to remember their
       | ancestors; Adventists pray; Ikarians take a nap; and Sardinians
       | do happy hour.
       | 
       | That seems a little of a stretch to find commonalities.
        
       | kosyblysk666 wrote:
        
       | flixo4711 wrote:
       | Guys, one of they key points seems to be too that all blue zones
       | will have great weather and a lot of sun. There is another study
       | which shows that more people die in the winter. Therefore if your
       | winter is mild then it is less likely that you die
       | https://www.acsh.org/news/2019/07/10/more-people-die-winter-...
        
         | samatman wrote:
         | Iceland and Norway are two of the top five countries for life
         | expectancy, so this is bullshit.
        
           | mdp2021 wrote:
           | Some phenomena depend on many factors. Factors with evidence
           | of effect weakened by absence of other factors remain
           | factors.
        
         | jossclimb wrote:
         | As a Brit, I am screwed then.
        
           | gpderetta wrote:
           | As a Sardinian living in London, it is actually not too bad.
           | Winter in the Sardinian coast can be very very mild, but it
           | is a large island and inland, in the mountains it can snow
           | for weeks in the winter and be much colder than London.
        
       | thenerdhead wrote:
       | What about sleep? Do they sleep a consistent amount of time
       | compared to industrialized zones?
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | 1-6 wrote:
       | We're just stumbling on natural Pareto principles.
        
       | garyfirestorm wrote:
       | _One Ikarian in particular, Stamatis Moraitis, moved to America
       | when he was 22 years old to pursue the American dream. He was a
       | painter, and immediately started having success, bought a house,
       | married, and had 3 kids. At the age of 66 years, he developed
       | terminal lung cancer. Instead of dying in America, he decided to
       | move back to Ikaria and moved in with his parents. He started
       | breathing the air, drinking the wine, and eating a Mediterranean
       | diet. After a few months, he planted a garden not planning on
       | ever getting to harvest the vegetables; 37 years later he has a
       | vineyard producing 200 L of wine a year. His secret he says? "I
       | just forgot to die."_
       | 
       | This is where I think the article loses its credibility
       | significantly.
        
         | kashunstva wrote:
         | The story is repeated all over the internet but even reasonably
         | thorough articles fail to bring medical clarity. It's always
         | "nine doctors agreed", "x-rays showed terminal cancer", etc. In
         | 1976, when he was diagnosed its possible, though somewhat
         | unlikely he had a chest CT since scanners were just becoming
         | available then. More importantly, what no accounting of this
         | history mentions is a _biopsy_. Without a tissue diagnosis and
         | without sophisticated imaging the story is sketchy.
        
         | Gatsky wrote:
         | This was likely tuberculosis and not lung cancer. Autopsy
         | series have shown that TB is easily confused with cancers. 40
         | years ago the diagnostic tools available were very crude.
         | 
         | There is a crackpot promoting weird cancer therapies in my
         | country who claims to have cured himself of metastatic sarcoma,
         | but a peer reviewed medical analysis of the details suggests
         | that was also TB.
        
           | badpun wrote:
           | Didn't they have lung biopsies back then?
        
             | Gatsky wrote:
             | These days lung biopsies are performed with CT scan
             | guidance (CT was only invented in 1974, widespread use came
             | much later), endobronchial ultrasound (post 2000), or
             | surgical exploration. Minimally invasive surgical
             | techniques have only been around for 20 years. Patients
             | sometimes cough up cancer cells in sputum, so a definitive
             | diagnosis could have been done that way. But faced with the
             | prospect of a major surgical procedure, he or his doctors
             | may have declined to pursue that, particularly as there
             | wasn't really any treatment.
             | 
             | I don't have the necessary evidence to say for sure, but
             | misdiagnosis is at least an order of magnitude more likely
             | than spontaneous/Ikarian lifestyle induced lung cancer
             | regression.
        
         | phkahler wrote:
         | Japanese women have 1/8 the occurrence of breast cancer
         | compared to American women. This changes when they relocate to
         | the US. One study found the seafood diet to be a big factor.
         | Most of these blue zone places are islands and coastal areas
         | and the low meat intake mentioned probably doesnt consider fish
         | a meat.
         | 
         | BTW the anti-cancer component of sea food is Iodine.
        
           | samatman wrote:
           | Yes, it changes, and rates are rising in Japan as well, but
           | this much lower rate isn't dietary, it's genetic. Cancer is
           | the leading cause of death in Japan.
           | 
           | The Japanese are a long-lived people generally, whether in
           | Brazil, Hawaii, or Japan. It's not diet; Japanese in Hawaii
           | have higher rates of obesity and don't live _quite_ as long
           | as a result.
        
             | blackoil wrote:
             | >Japanese in Hawaii have higher rates of obesity and don't
             | live quite as long as a result
             | 
             | So is it genetic or dietary?
        
               | samatman wrote:
               | The breast cancer? Genetic. The longevity? Genetic.
               | 
               | Dying earlier from unhealthy lifestyle? You guessed it,
               | genetic! That particular genetic response is common to
               | the human species. A person of a given ancestry has a
               | healthy weight for their height, and exceeding it will
               | shorten their lifespan on the average.
               | 
               | Metabolism is genetic, though, no doubt about it. A
               | different species might simply be unable to put on excess
               | adipose tissue, eating too much would lead to purging
               | from one or both ends. A different species might be cold-
               | blooded. A different species might have an exoskeleton,
               | which precludes obesity for mechanical reasons.
        
               | rat9988 wrote:
               | Then it's dietary not genetic.
        
               | blackoil wrote:
               | Isn't that equivalent of saying, dying from drowning is
               | not because of environment but genetic as a different
               | species will very happily take dissolved oxygen from the
               | water, technically true but useless analysis.
        
             | achenet wrote:
             | GP said: > Japanese women have 1/8 the occurrence of breast
             | cancer compared to American women. This changes when they
             | relocate to the US.
             | 
             | That doesn't sound genetic.
        
           | Flankk wrote:
           | _The Salt Fix_ outlines how restricting sodium intake causes
           | kidney issues and disturbs insulin response. It is causing
           | iodine deficiency as well, which leads to thyroid problems.
           | The author suggests HFCS and white sugar caused the obesity
           | epidemic along with the associated health problems. This has
           | been suppressed for decades by the industry. The
           | Mediterranean diet is only a basic hypothesis.
        
           | once_inc wrote:
           | For what it's worth, most of the population of Earth is
           | located at or near the coastal areas.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | Literally every story about kooky shit is like this. If you
         | walk around SF's Sunset District on a Sunday, you'll get like 5
         | flyers in 10 minutes telling you that with Falun Dafa you can
         | cure leukemia or some such shit.
        
         | jquery wrote:
         | Eh, someone with strong cancer fighting genes is a good
         | candidate to live a long time.
        
         | feerfreeflight wrote:
         | Jarring that after years of lurking HN I come across a
         | reference to someone I know personally. While I can't speak to
         | the legitimacy of the original cancer diagnosis, I can say that
         | family oral history from long before the Blue Zone
         | popularization is filled with this kind of story. Immigrants
         | (usually first or second generation) returning to the island to
         | get well. Anecdotal to be sure, and there are stories in the
         | same vein about many old country birthplaces, but the supposed
         | healthful qualities of the island have a long history,
         | stretching back into antiquity.
         | 
         | Still anecdotal but more personal: the original immigrant
         | generation that I descend from all died nonagenarians or over
         | 100. There seems to be diminishing returns on that sadly, as
         | each successive generation's life expectancy seems to be more
         | "normal."
        
       | mberning wrote:
       | The sister in law gave us a blue zones cook book. My wife asked
       | me to look at it and pick two recipes. I couldn't. I would not
       | want to live to 100 if that was what was on the menu.
        
         | hobo_mark wrote:
         | From the recipes I can see at
         | https://www.bluezones.com/recipes/ (which I assume to be the
         | same) what on earth is it that you eat instead?
        
       | JackFr wrote:
       | Pure nonsense.
       | 
       | https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/704080v2
       | 
       | "Supercentenarian and remarkable age records exhibit patterns
       | indicative of clerical errors and pension fraud"
        
         | gpderetta wrote:
         | This is what I commented last time this rebuttal paper made the
         | rounds on HN:
         | 
         | While I've also conjectured in the past that at least a good
         | chunk of extreme supercentenarians are due to anagraphical
         | errors if not outright fraud, I do not think that the paper
         | support the thesis well.
         | 
         | For starter they do not have a global model, it seems that they
         | handpicked different statistics for different areas that
         | support their thesis (they do not even show anything concrete
         | for Japan).
         | 
         | Regarding Sardinia, their numbers seem actually wrong: looking
         | at the raw Istat data the numbers for 55 year life expectancy
         | for the Sardinian provinces seem in line with the rest of Italy
         | (95-96%) putting Sardinia somewhere in the middle of the (quite
         | tight) Italian distribution.
         | 
         | It is possible that the researcher averaged the data over a
         | longer period of time that I bothered to look, but the paper
         | doesn't discuss the methodology.
         | 
         | Their fitting, p value not withstanding, also seem a bit
         | adventurous; the fact that all and almost only Sardinian
         | provinces are extreme outliers should have been a tell. The
         | rest of the Italian provinces are in a tight uniform cluster.
         | 
         | Sardinia, except for a very brief period in the mid 2010s,has
         | only 4 provinces, so it is possible that messed up their data
         | extraction (they show 8 provinces).
         | 
         | Also Sardinia is not particularly poorer than the rest of
         | Southern Italy and actually has a lower crime rate (which they
         | suggest but not outright state is a factor).
         | 
         | A better paper would probably try to build a single model for
         | Japan, Italy and US using actual mortality, crime and poverty
         | rates.
        
         | UniverseHacker wrote:
         | Your posted article highlights a really great statistical
         | principle that I also discovered on my own owning a really rare
         | car: if someone (company) claims to have parts in stock, it was
         | most likely due to a database error, not the actual parts,
         | because the probability of having the parts was so low. Reports
         | of highly improbable events are probably not true in general.
         | 
         | That seems to explain incredible longevity also- if it
         | basically doesn't actually happen, then instances of it are
         | therefore actually instances of error/fraud.
        
           | tempestn wrote:
           | These are examples of Bayesian reasoning.
           | 
           | Although in this case the paper's authors did attempt to
           | account for such errors.
        
           | rtpg wrote:
           | But there are loads of people who hit 100. The random google
           | search talks about 450k centenarians.
           | 
           | 100 years ago is 1922. Perhaps the 100 year old person in the
           | 70s is hard to believe, but 1922 is well into major
           | bureaucracy existing, and where it is harder to just make up
           | a person. There are of course loads of stories of identity
           | fraud and the like, but by the time you would want to execute
           | the fraud (I guess in your 40s?) you're looking at trying to
           | do ID fraud in the 1960s.
           | 
           | For the super extreme cases, it maybe feels worth trying to
           | pull this trick off. But at one point we have confirmed that
           | getting to 100 is a thing.
        
             | jrumbut wrote:
             | I believe the idea is that many of those records were
             | destroyed or distorted during WW2.
        
             | UniverseHacker wrote:
             | I didn't literally mean that people don't ever make it to
             | 100, just that it seems plausible that incorrect reports
             | (fraud, error, etc.) are orders of magnitude more common on
             | a global level. Imagine trying to study longevity with data
             | that has 4M or 40M erroneous centenarians and only 450k
             | real ones.
             | 
             | Some of these isolated 'blue zones' are cults/small
             | communities that may also have a conflict of interest in
             | convincing people that their way of life leads to
             | longevity.
        
         | ChrisLomont wrote:
         | That paper has not been published, despite being posted several
         | years, and the top comment under it seems to supply a decent
         | counter claim with evidence. My guess is it's not as accurate
         | as to support your claim of "pure nonsense."
        
           | JackFr wrote:
           | You make a fair point, but the problem is, I read the
           | article.
           | 
           | And it is utter bullshit, published in a fourth tier journal
           | by a non-scientist with something to sell.
           | 
           | "Blue zone", "power 9", "vitality compass" -- please spare
           | me. This is pure pseudo-scientific crap.
        
             | ChrisLomont wrote:
             | SJR ranked the journal in the top third - not great, but
             | not "fourth tier."
             | 
             | And it got published, unlike your rebuttal.
             | 
             | It's also got 170+ citations, none of which I found to
             | claim to debunk the paper. Many of those citations are in
             | good journals.
             | 
             | Do you know any papers published in good journals rebutting
             | this one?
             | 
             | Maybe you should carefully write up your objections and
             | publish that. You certainly are going to great lengths to
             | claim it's crap.
        
               | biophysboy wrote:
               | It's also super common to use memorable names and phrases
               | in scientific literature/presentations. It's common in my
               | field (biophysics). I don't know why "blue zone" is so
               | pseudoscientific.
        
             | mdp2021 wrote:
             | > _spare me_
             | 
             | Communicational style comes from environment, inclination,
             | choice and target, and may suggest but not prove (low)
             | quality of content.
             | 
             | Many are irritated e.g. by the style (apparently very
             | frequent in the USA), in articles and books, using the
             | pattern "John one day left the house and a number of things
             | happened; he had graduated there and does this for a
             | living. Now, the science" - odd conflations of narrative
             | and data following the sequences of a novelist instead of
             | theoretical structures: nonetheless, they do frequently
             | have juice to extract.
        
           | jquery wrote:
           | I bet it's a bit of column A, a little of column B. Healthy
           | diets and lifestyles will earn you a few extra years, and
           | fraud gets you the rest of the way.
        
         | TimTheTinker wrote:
         | I was a 4th generation Seventh-day Adventist myself. My great
         | grandparents and grandparents all lived very long lives, and so
         | did many people we knew. For them, living a physically healthy
         | life is part of their religion, and it does increase longevity.
         | 
         | My family left when I was a teenager, and I never looked back
         | -- but I'm writing to say that at least the Loma Linda site
         | isn't nonsense.
        
           | elevaet wrote:
           | Does exercise play an important role in Seventh-day Adventist
           | healthy living, or is the healthy lifestyle more about diet,
           | and not smoking/drinking/drugs?
        
             | iamthejuan wrote:
             | Yes. Following NEWSTART.
             | 
             | Nutrition, Execise, Water, Sunlight, Temperance, Air, Rest,
             | and Trust in GOD.
             | 
             | See: http://www.faculty.umb.edu/alexandrine_noel/AlexINFO/n
             | ewstar...
             | 
             | Many testifies being healed from cancer as well, I know
             | some personally who are following these principles.
        
       | janaagaard wrote:
       | > Wine @ 5. People in all Blue Zones (except Adventists) drink
       | alcohol moderately and regularly. Moderate drinkers outlive
       | nondrinkers. The trick is to drink 1 to 2 glasses per day
       | (preferably Sardinian Cannonau wine), with friends and/or with
       | food.
       | 
       | I thought that the "one glass on wine per day" recommendation had
       | been debunked. Is it still debatable?
       | 
       | Here is one source:
       | https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/23/no-healthy-l...
        
         | oezi wrote:
         | The study which the Guardian piece is based on:
         | 
         | https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S0140-6736%2818...
         | 
         | A more recent follow-up that finds some benefits of low levels
         | of alcohol for older people:
         | 
         | https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(22)00847-9/full...
        
       | dxbydt wrote:
       | Is a 2016 National Geo docu.
       | 
       | Features Stamatis Moraitis. Dead.
       | 
       | Features Dr. Ellsworth Wareham. Dead.
       | 
       | Features Marge Jetton. Dead.
       | 
       | Features....oh well I don't want to spoil your day. They are all
       | dead.
       | 
       | https://abcnews.go.com/Health/photos/photos-greek-isle-resid...
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellsworth_Wareham
       | 
       | https://adventist.news/news/blue-zones-icon-jetton-dies-at-1...
        
         | melling wrote:
         | They all lived to be 100. Not bad.
         | 
         | I suppose if we hoped they'd get to 110, we might actually have
         | to do a bit of research.
         | 
         | At the moment, we're simply relying on getting lucky to get to
         | 100.
        
         | axlee wrote:
         | Terrible take. How old were they when they died? Of course, if
         | you are 95+, you are very likely to die soon, but you you are
         | still part of a 2% percentile of longevity, and that's with
         | western actuarial tables that don't reflect at all longevity in
         | other places.
        
         | anamexis wrote:
         | What is your point? I would expect anyone over 100 would be
         | extremely likely to die within 8 years.
        
           | sbierwagen wrote:
           | Per the 2019 Social Security actuarial table, a 100 year old
           | man has a 34% chance of dying within one year:
           | https://www.ssa.gov/oact/STATS/table4c6.html
        
             | MisterBastahrd wrote:
             | Two years ago my grandmother took a photo with 3 other
             | centenarians at her assisted living center. She was the
             | oldest by 3 years. I just searched their names and two of
             | the others passed away within a year of the photo.
        
           | khuey wrote:
           | Per the SSA actuarial tables a 100 year old man has a 95%
           | chance of being dead 6 years later and a 100 year old woman
           | has a 92.5% chance of being dead 6 years later.
        
       | culi wrote:
       | Despite all the media attention and even research on the "Blue
       | Zone diet" or "Blue Zone exercise regime" or other lifestyle
       | aspects, I think the real missed point is often missed.
       | 
       | The thing that all of these Blue Zones have in common isn't diet
       | or exercise but community. The 7th Day Adventists of Loma Linda
       | California are extremely communal. Icaria is a Greek Island where
       | a bunch of Catholic communists got expelled to during the Greek
       | Civil War. In Nicoya, Costa Rica intergenerational households are
       | by far the norm and extremely important. I could go on about the
       | rest
       | 
       | The effect is called the Roseto Effect by sociologists
       | (popularized by Malcolm Gladwell). It's likely the same effect as
       | another sociological term called the "Health Immigrant Effect"
       | which shows how immigrants to the US often have much better
       | health outcomes for a few generations before matching up with the
       | rest of the population. It also is significantly confirmed by the
       | results of possibly the single longest running study in
       | Sociology: The Harvard Happiness study. Which finds that the
       | strongest predictor of good health is good social relationships
       | 
       | It turns out community makes you live longer, have much fewer
       | chronic health conditions, etc. It shouldn't really be surprising
       | given humans are probably one of the only 2 known eusocial
       | mammals
        
       | JoeAltmaier wrote:
       | How do you live well over 100? Just say you do.
        
         | schrodinger wrote:
         | It's not impossible. I've got a friend who is 84 and still
         | traveling the world and sexually active, and everyone in his
         | immediate family has made it past 100. He also got covid twice.
         | Really depends.
        
       | woevdbz wrote:
       | Any statistic calculated over a large enough number of places
       | will yield some outliers, even if nothing actually distinguishes
       | these places other than luck. It is unclear that the
       | characteristics described have any predictive value.
        
       | stellalo wrote:
       | > Research shows that attending faith-based services 4 times per
       | month will add 4 to 14 years of life expectancy.
       | 
       | I'm wondering what confounder is behind this
        
         | achenet wrote:
         | community and also I _suspect_ (but cannot prove) that various
         | rituals which engage the  "spiritual" parts of the brain (e.g.
         | prayer, meditation, certain controlled substances) have an
         | anti-inflammatory effect.
        
       | kyawzazaw wrote:
       | I wonder what kind of interview process happens at Two Sigma for
       | someone like the author.
        
       | namecheapTA wrote:
       | I've always wondered how many poorly documented people have
       | registered themselves as a decade or more older than they are, to
       | start collecting senior benefits sooner.
        
       | fleddr wrote:
       | A way to summarize it: undo many of the "advances" of the last 50
       | years, and live the longest. Perhaps they weren't really advances
       | after all.
        
       | tom_ wrote:
       | Don't you tell me which zone is for people reaching age 100 at 10
       | times the normal rate!
        
       | franze wrote:
       | Keeping aside the record keeping issues.
       | 
       | If you search for outliers, you will find outliers.
       | 
       | Looking for correlation between these outliers, does not equal
       | that the correlation between them, is the causation of each of
       | these outliers.
        
         | akira2501 wrote:
         | It also leads you to ignore important questions. Like.. if
         | people know fast food is "bad" for them, but they still eat it
         | at a higher rate than some other part of the country. WHY?
         | 
         | It's insane to think you can just go in there, remove things
         | that have been established for one reason or another, measure
         | weight loss and then call it success. You have no idea what
         | you've just manipulated.
         | 
         | I have no idea why this is in a journal. This should be on a
         | "PR Newswire" type site.
        
       | jossclimb wrote:
       | Seems like the authors have something against marathon running.
        
       | pwpw wrote:
       | Further factors not discussed here that I think bear importance
       | are gun and automobile use in these cultures. Speaking for
       | America strictly, guns and cars account for a significant number
       | of deaths. I wonder how those two factors look in these
       | communities.
        
       | emmelaich wrote:
       | Couple of factors not mentioned but I think matter:
       | 1. similar latitudes - not too hot but definitely not cold
       | 2. proximity to the sea        3. low sugar diet
       | 
       | Some of these could be cause or effect of others.
        
       | throwaways85989 wrote:
       | Is the blue a reference to the phrase turning grandpa "blue" for
       | pension aka keeping him post natural mortem in the freezer?
       | 
       | Several countries on this list are "low" trust societies?" so the
       | data could be explained very well with it.
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=404IeUzGNZ4
        
         | xcskier56 wrote:
         | No, the author, Dan Buettner has a consulting practice around
         | helping companies, orgs, municipalities implement the lessons
         | from Blue Zones to help build healthier environments.
         | https://www.bluezones.com/ Where the Blue came from I'm not
         | sure.
        
         | klyrs wrote:
         | My mind went to "blue haired grannies"
         | https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ElderlyBlueHaire...
        
           | bks wrote:
           | This ^^ https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/643186/why-old-
           | ladies-ha...
        
         | IncRnd wrote:
         | "They are called Blue Zones because when Buettner and his
         | colleagues were searching for these areas, they drew blue
         | circles around them on a map." [1]
         | 
         | [1] https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/blue-zones
        
         | fredski42 wrote:
         | I believe it was because those areas were marked on a map using
         | a blue marker.
        
       | hammock wrote:
       | Now do Green Zones with the highest rates of generational wealth
       | preservation.
        
       | standardUser wrote:
       | "Research shows that attending faith-based services 4 times per
       | month will add 4 to 14 years of life expectancy."
       | 
       | No, it will not.
        
       | ushakov wrote:
       | > The trick is to drink 1 to 2 glasses per day
       | 
       | here we go again -_-
       | 
       | what are they gonna "find out" next?
       | 
       | > "Lessons from the happiest people on planet"
       | 
       | > The trick is to take 1 to 2 MDMA per day
        
       | gist wrote:
       | One issue that I have is that article uses 100 as an arbitrary
       | cutoff vs. say 99 or 97 whatever. What areas have higher than
       | average let's say 95 year olds? Nothing special about 100 vs.
       | let's say 99 or 101 other than people love that number like they
       | love 1 million.
        
       | gridder wrote:
       | I don't know about the other 4 locations, but regarding Sardinia,
       | yes, it's true. No frauds involved. It's the climate, the food
       | and the simple living style.
        
       | citilife wrote:
       | The largest factors seem to be purpose and community:
       | 
       | > Belong. All but 5 of the 263 centenarians interviewed belonged
       | to some faith-based community. Denomination does not seem to
       | matter. Research shows that attending faith-based services 4
       | times per month will add 4 to 14 years of life expectancy.
       | 
       | > Loved ones first. Successful centenarians in the Blue Zones put
       | their families first. This means keeping aging parents and
       | grandparents nearby or in the home (it lowers disease and
       | mortality rates of children in the home too.). They commit to a
       | life partner (which can add up to 3 years of life expectancy) and
       | invest in their children with time and love. (They'll be more
       | likely to care for aging parents when the time comes.)
       | 
       | > Right tribe. The world's longest lived people chose--or were
       | born into--social circles that supported healthy behaviors,
       | Okinawans created moais--groups of 5 friends that committed to
       | each other for life. Research from the Framingham Studies2 shows
       | that smoking, obesity, happiness, and even loneliness are
       | contagious. So the social networks of long-lived people have
       | favorably shaped their health behaviors.
        
         | JackFr wrote:
         | Also, informal record keeping.
        
           | Terretta wrote:
           | Like Loma Linda California, as opposed to, say, neighboring
           | zip codes?
        
       | santiagobasulto wrote:
       | This looks far from a scientific study. But it still is a fun
       | reading and good guessing game.
        
       | slyall wrote:
       | I was thinking that if Covid continues at it's current level we
       | are going to see a huge drop in the number of people reaching
       | 100.
       | 
       | Not many people are going to survive catching covid 20 times in
       | their 80s and 90s.
        
         | DennisP wrote:
         | Hopefully the universal covid vaccines will work out.
        
         | selimthegrim wrote:
         | My 90 year old great uncle got Omicron when vaccinated and is
         | still alive and kicking. A recent fall which he almost fully
         | recovered from was probably harder on him.
        
       | n0th3r-curious wrote:
       | Thanks for sharing! I wish they teach this right in high school,
       | so they can focus on healthier life choices (instead of
       | intoxicants).
        
       | renewiltord wrote:
       | The idea of people living that long doesn't sound outrageous.
       | Asian American women today have an average life expectancy of 89
       | years. That's the _average_.
       | 
       | But this shit
       | 
       | > _One Ikarian in particular, Stamatis Moraitis, moved to America
       | when he was 22 years old to pursue the American dream. He was a
       | painter, and immediately started having success, bought a house,
       | married, and had 3 kids. At the age of 66 years, he developed
       | terminal lung cancer. Instead of dying in America, he decided to
       | move back to Ikaria and moved in with his parents. He started
       | breathing the air, drinking the wine, and eating a Mediterranean
       | diet. After a few months, he planted a garden not planning on
       | ever getting to harvest the vegetables; 37 years later he has a
       | vineyard producing 200 L of wine a year. His secret he says? "I
       | just forgot to die."_
       | 
       | LOL if you have ever traveled in poor places like India, you'll
       | find a living armada of people who are all telling you this. But
       | when the moment comes, they go to the hospital. There are no
       | believers in foxholes.
        
       | mmaunder wrote:
       | "Research shows that attending faith-based services 4 times per
       | month will add 4 to 14 years of life expectancy."
       | 
       | Well shit.
        
         | aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
         | Do weekly planning meetings count?
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | ChrisLomont wrote:
         | This has been debunked in general if I recall. It turned out
         | only to be true for the majority religion in a region (and not
         | help for others), and then turned out to be the social
         | connections got people better services and health support.
         | Religion was not useful for the effect.
        
         | galaxyLogic wrote:
         | It sounds weird they say 4 to 14 years. What does that mean?
         | Does it mean on average it adds 8 years? But since this is all
         | about averages anyway why not just state the average?
         | 
         | Or does it mean always 4 and never more than 14?
        
           | Rebelgecko wrote:
           | 4-14 is probably something like the 95% confidence interval
        
         | fleddr wrote:
         | We live in a timeline where conspiracy theorists turn out to be
         | right and now this.
        
         | SQueeeeeL wrote:
         | It turns out having a community and feeling of purpose in life
         | actually has tangible benefits, who would've thought.
        
           | KerrAvon wrote:
           | Or it could be that a sky demon bestows blessings on the
           | cultists who worship it. You never do know!
        
           | mmaunder wrote:
           | Joining a group that believes in magical sky dwelling beings
           | that grant eternal life in utopia provided you worship them
           | enough isn't the only path to community and purpose.
        
             | steve76 wrote:
        
             | fleddr wrote:
             | Yet I challenge you to find one more effective.
             | 
             | Whether by force/dogma or voluntary, a uniformly religious
             | community connects at least weekly and includes all.
             | Through this meeting, you get to know pretty much
             | everybody, what they do, their families, their businesses.
             | Which serves as a platform for making friends, finding
             | partners, business opportunities, the like.
        
             | setuids wrote:
             | maybe, but it's still a pretty easy way to do it
        
             | latency-guy2 wrote:
             | But it's one of many, and is one of the simplest ways to
             | join a community as they are literally everywhere.
             | 
             | For the time/effort needed to join this community (plural),
             | its pretty much free, maintenance isn't all that much
             | either. People a few hundred years ago already did the hard
             | part.
             | 
             | Not a bad deal. And all you have to do is suspend a little
             | disbelief in something for a while.
        
             | bergenty wrote:
             | It isn't but we haven't found another system that works as
             | well yet. The delusion really gives purpose to life. We
             | haven't found another way to provide a comparable delusion.
        
               | akavi wrote:
               | The delusion is also a "costly signal" that you're
               | committed to the group.
        
               | bergenty wrote:
               | What do you mean by costly?
        
       | enviclash wrote:
       | For an expat like myself, the community aspect is the most
       | difficult part. How can you create a community if you are hopping
       | countries every 4-6 years?
        
         | ip26 wrote:
         | I don't think you do. How can you possibly build strong
         | relationships if you're here today, gone tomorrow?
        
         | pdamoc wrote:
         | Learn Argentine Tango. If you live in a big enough city, most
         | likely there will be a tango community. Classes 2 times a week,
         | one practica and one milonga and puff most of your week is
         | covered.
        
         | IncRnd wrote:
         | Have a co-expat hop countries with you.
        
         | stevesimmons wrote:
         | > How can you create a community if you are hopping countries
         | every 4-6 years?
         | 
         | Stop hopping before you get old and infirm. Become part of the
         | local support network helping those older and less fortunate
         | than yourself. In turn, you get helped by those around you.
        
         | bergenty wrote:
         | Religion. I'm as atheist as you can get but I still go to
         | Catholic Church on weekends just to form community. Religious
         | people are also generally good upstanding people (if you ignore
         | their bigotry against LGBTQ people)
        
           | tomtheelder wrote:
           | I get the principle, and honestly I think so many non
           | religious folk lack that sort of community in a big way,
           | but...
           | 
           | > Religious people are also generally good upstanding people
           | 
           | I think _people_ are generally good upstanding people. I don
           | 't think religion has anything to do with it.
        
             | bergenty wrote:
             | Let me rephrase that, anecdotally I've found there is a
             | relatively higher percentage of upstanding people compared
             | to the general population.
        
       | Maursault wrote:
       | Love how headline is ambiguous, makes it sound like that from
       | birth in Blue Zones, it only takes a decade to reach 100yo, as if
       | only in the Blue Zones, the Earth orbits the sun 10 times faster,
       | or there is some other effect causing rapid aging there.
        
         | blackoil wrote:
         | I was expecting some story about Interstellar like time
         | dilation.
        
         | madiator wrote:
         | Yeah, I read it first as places where you unnaturally age very
         | fast.
        
           | emmelaich wrote:
           | Agreed, I thought of the Ray Bradbury story
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frost_and_Fire_(short_story)
        
       | t6jvcereio wrote:
       | Alcohol? Really? I thought we'd gotten rid of that urban myth...
        
       | t-3 wrote:
       | I'm not sure I buy their list of what makes people live longer,
       | but I found it interesting that 3/5 locations seem to be ~40
       | degrees north latitude (and 3/5 islands, all locations are very
       | near oceans/seas). It makes sense that all locations would be in
       | warmer areas, as that vastly reduces the dependency on meat
       | consumption, but more bias towards the equator would be expected
       | if that was all. 40 south only touches the edge of Australia and
       | the tail of South America, but I wonder how the life expectancy
       | compares?
        
         | ochoseis wrote:
         | > It makes sense that all locations would be in warmer areas,
         | as that vastly reduces the dependency on meat consumption
         | 
         | Are you implying causation or correlation? For example, I can
         | imagine northern latitudes having more variable stocks of
         | animals (and other food) during bad winters, so averages matter
         | less than extremes.
        
           | t-3 wrote:
           | I'm just reasoning that if crops don't grow half the year,
           | you're much less likely to eat a plant-based diet, which is
           | one of their points for living longer.
        
         | docandrew wrote:
         | Maybe there's just a higher number of elderly there in general,
         | from people retiring to warmer climes?
        
       | mrtksn wrote:
       | There's a recent video from Yes Theory on the topic:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhtc3EX12Z8
       | 
       | TL:DW; They go to a Blue Zone village Seulo in Italy's Sardinia
       | Island and spend some time there. The village looks pretty normal
       | in general, they use technology they have plastics all over the
       | place, they eat meat drink wine - albeit locally sourced. On
       | thing that stands out is, maybe, the active lifestyle of the old
       | people and strong community.
        
         | danuker wrote:
         | It could be that their diet changed in the past 100 years.
         | 
         | There are many more studies linking diet and health.
         | 
         | Here is a non-profit presenting them.
         | 
         | https://nutritionfacts.org/
        
       | skrap wrote:
       | Should be marked [2016], it seems.
        
       | pastor_bob wrote:
       | It seems counterintuitive that:
       | 
       | 1. Moderate drinkers outlive nondrinkers. Moderate being 1-2
       | drinks a day, which IMO is a lot.
       | 
       | 2. Diets high in carbs seem to be ok.
       | 
       | I guess low caloric intake and low stress outweigh any of the
       | negative effects of the above
        
         | jandrese wrote:
         | 3. Don't get fat.
         | 
         | Having a diet high in carbs is fine so long as it is reasonably
         | well balanced and you aren't getting fat on it. It just really
         | easy to get fat on carbs.
        
         | ska wrote:
         | I suspect (2) only seems counter-intuitive due to relatively
         | recent trends in nutrition marketing, this stuff is often
         | pretty cyclic.
         | 
         | Conversely, low(er) caloric intake relative to expenditure
         | being probably good has been scientific consensus for many
         | decades.
        
         | tomtheelder wrote:
         | 1. Is just generally not really true. They are referencing
         | debunked science. My strong suspicion is that these communities
         | probably drink the same or less than average overall.
         | 
         | 2. Carbs are unfairly vilified. Unless you are doing something
         | very particular like keto or you are a powerlifter or something
         | then a big majority your diet should be carbs. You need just a
         | bit of fat and a bit of protein. But not all carbs are created
         | equal. They probably aren't slamming back a liter of coke a
         | day.
        
           | kfajdsl wrote:
           | AFAIK low carb diets are generally good when you are largely
           | sedentary (like most Americans).
           | 
           | If you're active, you probably want to be eating your carbs.
        
           | bscphil wrote:
           | Re 1: the "average" may not matter all that much. The study's
           | suggested 2 drinks per day _is_ the same as the American
           | average, which according to some web sources I found is 1.94
           | drinks per day (among adults). [1]
           | 
           | The difference may be that the variance is not that high. 16%
           | of Americans binge drink [2], which drags the average up - a
           | significant plurality doesn't drink at all. The truth in this
           | case could be _consistency_. No binge drinkers, a consistent
           | level of wine purchasing indicating a high level of wealth in
           | the community.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-
           | now/2017/12/28/ho...
           | 
           | [2] https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/data-stats.htm
        
             | wyclif wrote:
             | FWIW, it's not hard to buy Cannonau:
             | https://www.totalwine.com/wine/red-wine/cannonau/c/000236
        
               | bscphil wrote:
               | Looked this up. A standard serving of wine is 5 fl oz.
               | Two servings a day makes 10 fl oz, and let's say we're
               | talking about a household of two adults for 20 fl oz. At
               | $20 per 750 mL bottle, that's $15.77 a day or about $5757
               | a year. I think that's well beyond the range of
               | affordability for the median household, even in wealthy
               | countries like the United States.
        
         | mbil wrote:
         | The oldest living cat drank "an eyedropper full of red wine"
         | every two days
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creme_Puff_(cat)#Lifestyle
        
         | fleddr wrote:
         | 1. Indeed a controversial finding as 1-2 drinks a day being
         | favorable was a classic finding which somehow got debunked
         | about a decade ago. I suspect not because it isn't true, but
         | instead because of the wildly different context. Stressed out
         | people in a high productivity country drinking a few glasses of
         | wine per day may soon turn into more. The alcohol acting as
         | some kind of pain relief, rather than something to enjoy in
         | moderation during a two hour lunch.
         | 
         | 2. One thing that shouldn't be missed from the study is portion
         | control. To never be full. I can personally attest that I feel
         | at my best when empty. It's not the same as hungry, I'm talking
         | about the state of having your last meal digested. I remember
         | an older study about these centurions concluding that they were
         | almost always "slightly hungry".
        
       | codeflow2202 wrote:
       | When speaking about Sardinia they keep saying that their diet was
       | mostly vegetarian:
       | 
       | "The classic Sardinian diet is plant based, consisting of whole-
       | grain bread, beans, garden vegetables, and fruits. Meat is
       | largely reserved for Sundays and special occasions. Sardinians
       | drink wine moderately."
       | 
       | Truth is that the Shepherds (the centenaries are mostly found in
       | this group) were actually eating more animal protein and fat
       | compared to the rest of the population.
       | 
       | https://snipboard.io/gbi9JY.jpg
       | 
       | They can keep lying to most people just because you can't
       | understand Italian but whenever people from those towns are
       | interviewed they always repeat that they were not vegetarians.
       | Here a quick translation from this yt video:
       | 
       | Graziano who got to 102 got asked if he got to 102yo because he
       | had always followed a mediterranean diet. He asked what's that?
       | It means that you always ate vegetables. Vegetables are bad for
       | you, I ate the grass of 100 sheeps because I ate the sheeps. And
       | indeed he only ate meat, meaning that this whole alimentation
       | thing should be checked again.
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/LQTocSMm7tw?t=647
        
         | orcasushi wrote:
         | The meat is bad for you propaganda. Cannot believe people
         | buying that. It is known for millennia that a varied diet
         | including vegs fruits and yes meat and fish is healthier then
         | skipping any of those. But somehow now when overpopulation
         | makes our hunger for meat less convenient it becomes suddenly
         | unhealthy.
         | 
         | Of course I understand that the antibiotic and and heavy metal
         | infested meat and fish we eat is way less healthy then the meat
         | our ancestors would eat.
        
           | darthrupert wrote:
           | Why wouldn't people buy it? It's put forth by reputable
           | science whereas the "meat is good for you" position is mostly
           | preached by the jordan petersons of this world. At least I
           | have better things to allocate my energies than figure out
           | whether obvious charlatans are actually correct.
        
             | d0mine wrote:
             | What science? The science that says that shepards who eat
             | meat can live 100+?
             | 
             | Nutrition beyond basics is freakishly complex and nuanced.
             | There is no place for blanked statements such as "meat is
             | bad" here.
        
               | waffleiron wrote:
               | >The science that says that shepards who eat meat can
               | live 100+?
               | 
               | And some smokers live long lives, we should look at these
               | things not as isolated anecdotes but as risks on
               | population levels.
               | 
               | >Nutrition beyond basics is freakishly complex and
               | nuanced. There is no place for blanked statements such as
               | "meat is bad" here.
               | 
               | Or "meat good", for that matter.
        
           | cies wrote:
           | If you live in 1500 north europe and your diet in winter is
           | mostly grain in the last months, then a bit of meat and dairy
           | is very important for not getting nutrient deficient.
           | 
           | If you live in modern day north europe the typical meat and
           | dairy you get is heavily polluted and often processed. You
           | can get veggies, fruits, seeds, nuts, legumes, mushrooms all
           | year round. You can be fully nutrient complete based on the
           | and skip the toxins in meat and dairy (and i forgot fish,
           | especially sea fish is usually very toxic with mercury
           | nowadays).
           | 
           | The gold standard tool is cronometer.com; try to make a diet
           | there with only plant/fungi source and you probably only lack
           | some b12 (which we used to get from drinking untreated
           | surface water).
           | 
           | Saying we need animal products is simply not backed up by
           | science. You are commenting on a book that has shown that
           | some of the healthiest+longlived groups of people on the
           | planet are vegan or near-vegan (okinawa and the adventists in
           | calif).
           | 
           | What you sprout is unfounded "meat is needed for a balanced
           | diet" propaganda. The plant based diet is backed by lots of
           | research.
        
             | codeflow2202 wrote:
             | While for some people a plant base diet might well be good
             | if well constructed and supplemented this is not always
             | true on a population level. The average person isn't drs
             | Greger disciple and will not wake up early in the morning
             | to be measuring his foods to be sure that his intakes are
             | following the RDAs.
             | 
             | Combine that with the fact that nutrients from vegetables
             | are not as easily accessible by our bodies, meaning that
             | for some people with digestion problems it could cause
             | dangerous deficiencies.
             | 
             | And last but not least, yes meat can be contaminated or
             | polluted, so you should be very careful when choosing your
             | cuts. But the same can be said about vegs and fruits I'm
             | afraid:
             | 
             | "European citizens have been exposed to a dramatic rise in
             | the frequency and intensity of residues of the most toxic
             | pesticides on fruits and vegetables sold in the EU. This
             | report and its primary conclusion contradict official
             | claims that toxic pesticides use is declining and that food
             | residue levels are under control. This report also exposes
             | a complete failure by Member States and the European
             | Commission to implement EU Regulation and protect
             | consumers. "
             | 
             | https://www.pan-europe.info/sites/pan-
             | europe.info/files/publ...
        
               | waffleiron wrote:
               | > While for some people a plant base diet might well be
               | good if well constructed and supplemented this is not
               | always true on a population level.
               | 
               | The majority of meat eaters also have vitamin and
               | micronutrient deficiencies, I don't think plant based
               | diets are the issue here but general culture. Bread and
               | salt have iodine added, but when B12 gets added to plant
               | milks it's suddenly "supplemented". No, most diets have
               | vitamins supplemented, and most western people are having
               | sub optimal diets.
        
               | codeflow2202 wrote:
               | What meat eaters? If we are talking about health
               | conscious people the ones eating meat will always have an
               | advantage compared to people who eliminates food groups.
               | 
               | If you are comparing a health conscious vegan to the
               | average fast food freak then yes, I can agree with you.
               | 
               | Still, the deficiencies caused by meat avoidance are
               | usually more dangerous with worse consequences.
               | 
               | https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/16031619455
               | 1.h...
        
               | cies wrote:
               | The Blue Zones book shows that people in all times where
               | able to eat healthy. You are commenting on a post about
               | this book.
               | 
               | Toxins are bad. But all research has shown that
               | persistent toxins are much more common in animal products
               | than in plant foods. In some German research they found
               | glyphosate concentrations were lowest in vegetarians and
               | vegans.
        
               | codeflow2202 wrote:
               | I'm not aware of those studies so I can't judge. What
               | meat are you talking about? From which country? Was it
               | cheap supermarket meat or locally sourced from a trusted
               | butcher? I hope all of those questions are taken into
               | consideration when judging which foods we should avoid.
               | 
               | But still I don't buy this whole meat avoidance stunt.
               | Most studies show only small effects linked to meat
               | avoidance which can be usually be well explained by the
               | fact that vegetarians are usually health conscious
               | people:
               | 
               | https://snipboard.io/Be32mu.jpg
               | 
               | https://tinyurl.com/57uv9raw
        
             | harpersealtako wrote:
             | The problem with the evidence and research around the
             | "plant based diet" is that there is an ulterior motive for
             | most of the research (legitimate ethical concerns around
             | meat eating) which taints a lot of the data.
             | 
             | For example, Dan Buettner (the author of Blue Zones)
             | suggests that Okinawans eat a 98% plant based diet which
             | is...I won't say "fraudulent" because I think it's possible
             | it's an honest mistake but it's definitely not "correct" at
             | all. It's based off of some sketchy anecdotal accounts of
             | WWII starvation diets where the only ate potatoes. Western
             | centenarian researchers and health gurus repeated that
             | factoid a bunch and it became "the okinawan diet is
             | basically a potato-heavy vegan diet" in some twisted game
             | of telephone.
             | 
             | In actuality both modern and ancient Okinawans have the
             | highest meat consumption in Japan. Lard is the go-to frying
             | oil even for vegetable dishes. The largest proportion of
             | calories come from animal products. The Okinawan diet is a
             | high fat, high carb, moderately high meat diet whose main
             | "secret" is conscious portion restriction (the local "eat
             | until you are 80% full" mantra). They do eat plenty of fish
             | too, just not as much as the mainlanders (the idea that the
             | okinawan diet is low in fish is crazy because the okinawans
             | have a super unique and proud local history of fishing and
             | seafood foraging traditions).
        
             | wruza wrote:
             | _You can get veggies, fruits, seeds, nuts, legumes,
             | mushrooms all year round_
             | 
             | Idk about production methods, but am forced to eat
             | vegetables due to a medical condition. First concern, it is
             | still not healthy after half a year and few consultants.
             | Second, all highly available fruits and vegetables are so
             | _identical_ piece-wise that their semi-synthetic origin
             | isn't even a question to me, please correct me if I'm
             | wrong. I think that access to really healthy /natural
             | vegetables is as expensive and nontrivial as to healthy
             | meat. I even know where I can get healthy meat in bulk
             | (village economies), but have no idea where to start with
             | plants.
        
               | cies wrote:
               | > all highly available fruits and vegetables are so
               | identical piece-wise that their semi-synthetic origin
               | isn't even a question to me
               | 
               | I dont undertstand this.
               | 
               | > but have no idea where to start with plants
               | 
               | I'm willing to help, please send me a message
               | (hncies@altmails.com).
        
               | throwaway98797 wrote:
               | nature is variance. only commercial growing will make
               | things taste the same.
               | 
               | not to mention whenever i eat a homegrown fruit or
               | vegetable it tastes so much more vibrant than anything
               | I've had at the supermarket.
        
               | cies wrote:
               | for plant foods yes.
               | 
               | for meat it is different, usuallu people do not like to
               | eat it without applying technology (heating (baking),
               | salting, spicing with plant products, saucing with plant
               | products) to it.
               | 
               | we do not actually like meat in its raw form, or when we
               | have to manually strip it from animal bones.
        
             | michalu wrote:
             | I am sorry but your comment is ridiculous. You're
             | commenting on article that represents part of "lots of
             | research" and it just shows to be propagandistically
             | skewed.
             | 
             | Correlation is not science. It has its place in science but
             | it's pretty limited tool. Sardinian research shows the
             | longest living people there are meat eaters.
             | 
             | There's even a solid reason to believe that most of your
             | "heavy research" if based on fake science:
             | https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/blue-zones-diet-
             | speculation...
             | 
             | Why did I say your comment is ridiculous, because it simply
             | is for anyone who has basic understanding of macro and
             | micro nutrients and their presence in food. Especially
             | amino acids. Plant based diet may work only if you are an
             | office worker with minimum activity and access to synthetic
             | vitamins.
             | 
             | Majority of pro-vegan drives are ideologically charged or
             | have business intent behind them.
        
           | fsflover wrote:
           | > It is known for millennia that a varied diet including vegs
           | fruits and yes meat and fish is healthier then skipping any
           | of those.
           | 
           | Any citations? I have one for your with a different evidence:
           | https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/whats-the-
           | bee....
        
         | virtualritz wrote:
         | My bet as someone who has traveler to Sardinia often is that
         | this is much less about meat consumption and rather more about
         | stressors like lifestyle, quality of air, water etc.
         | 
         | Even if the people ate meat there at the same proportion as a
         | modern city dweller did: no hormones, probably orders of
         | magnitude less toxins, traces of pharmaceuticals etc.
         | 
         | A lifestyle that doesn't know many sources of anxiety or stress
         | and includes daily physical activity (walking instead of
         | driving for a start) and an air quality opposite that of any
         | big city just remove a lot of sources of what mostly kills
         | people that could live longer otherwise.
         | 
         | Heart disease, cancer, stroke and (possibly) Alzheimer's
         | disease.
         | 
         | The Mediterranean diet also means you can strike diabetes off
         | the list.
        
           | dghughes wrote:
           | I agree about your environmnet being a big factor. But I have
           | to wonder what the skin cancer rate is in the sunny
           | Meditteranian.
        
             | woutersf wrote:
             | Recently there was a study on here that said the sun is
             | good for you. And its effects were underrated.it threw a
             | shadow over big pharma because 1 in very many gets skin
             | cancer.
        
         | sizzle wrote:
         | Also they could be eating local, fresh ingredients without the
         | processed preservative-filled junk food and sugary drinks we
         | get on demand for $1 in the western world on every street
         | corner.
        
         | crispyambulance wrote:
         | There are MULTIPLE factors involved in getting to a population
         | that is high in centenarians. Diet is only one factor and
         | finding some meat-eating-only shepherds in such a population
         | doesn't prove THAT MUCH unless, I guess, someone simply wants
         | to confirm that a fad-diet "can work" for some folks (while
         | ignoring other factors like physical activity, stress, and
         | lifestyle).
        
           | codeflow2202 wrote:
           | Gonna cite myself:
           | 
           | "People from the anglosphere comes with their own idea of
           | health, which is for the most part originated by their past
           | religious idea of purity more than rock solid science. Many
           | of them can't accept studies which prove that a good life can
           | sometimes also come out from what they view as a "sinful"
           | behavior.
           | 
           | Old Italians never saw meat eating and alcohol consumption as
           | a negative aspect of life and enjoyed it just because it was
           | part of their culture.
           | 
           | And, against all these calvinist principles, they still
           | enjoyed a pretty long life."
           | 
           | Thanks, I have admit that imagining an early 1900 shepherd
           | "following a fad diet" made me laugh.
        
         | thorin wrote:
         | I've spent a bit of time in Sicily, Italy and Sardinia. I agree
         | with what you're saying, but I bet the locals eat less meat and
         | better quality meat than the average American. They're also
         | active and outside a lot.
        
           | grapeskin wrote:
           | The meat quality disparity is definitely true.
           | 
           | I can tell when I'm eating American beef because it stinks.
           | As in there's literally a hint of feces in the smell and
           | flavor. Pork also has an indescribably foul taste. I was born
           | and raised in America and avoided mammal meat quite a bit
           | because I couldn't stand the foulness. It wasn't until I
           | moved out of the country that I realized beef and pork don't
           | have to taste awful.
           | 
           | I can still tell immediately when I'm eating an imported
           | piece of US beef. People I know who've traveled to American
           | and find out that I'm American often mention the foulness of
           | US meat whenever the topic of US food comes up (without me
           | mentioning it).
           | 
           | Some people probably don't notice it or they're so acclimated
           | to it that it tastes good. But when I see "finest US beef" on
           | a menu, I'm ordering local chicken. And definitely not US
           | chicken since that stuff is pumped full of saline and "flavor
           | enhancers" to the point it looks like a breast implant.
        
             | peanut_worm wrote:
             | I strongly doubt that. I am in Europe right now the meat is
             | the exact same quality if not slightly worse than what I am
             | used to in America barring fast food.
        
               | thorin wrote:
               | In the UK at least virtually every town has the option to
               | buy locally farmed possibly organic meat direct from the
               | farm which is almost always fantastic. It might cost
               | twice as much as supermarket meat (which is also ok at
               | times), but at least you have a choice. UK / Europe also
               | have several small private butcher shops in each town
               | some of which give great quality and can provide exactly
               | what you want, suggest cuts and recipes, same goes for
               | fruit and veg - often cheaper than supermarkets. I didn't
               | see much of these kind of options in the US.
        
               | harpersealtako wrote:
               | I agree, I've been all over Europe and never saw any
               | significant difference in the quality of raw meat and
               | poultry. I do know there is a lot of _misinformation_
               | about US meats over there though, like the  "chlorinated
               | chicken" nonsense you hear all the time from the brits
               | which is thinly veiled protectionist propaganda by the
               | domestic meat industries (who have no problem importing
               | their poultry from Brazil!).
        
               | ginko wrote:
               | Where you are in Europe makes a HUGE difference here.
        
               | finikytou wrote:
               | i lived in new york for years, tried all the wholefood,
               | american wagyu whatever grassfed. some of the meats were
               | good but costed me like 65$ a kilo.
               | 
               | in Paris you get better quality meat for 30-35$. and if
               | you put 65$ you get something out of this world.
        
           | codeflow2202 wrote:
           | Yes, meat consumption in the USA is huge. But I think the
           | greatest difference between the 2 countries is our distrust
           | towards food processing. Italy is a country very resilient to
           | innovations which can be sometimes a sin, but some other
           | times a blessing. But we are losing that too. When I was a
           | kid mcDonalds could barely survive here. Nowadays new ones
           | are popping everywhere, and young people completely lost this
           | culture we had about genuine foods.
        
           | lucideer wrote:
           | > _eat less meat and better quality meat_
           | 
           | Both of these are probably true but the latter is more likely
           | the significant margin.
           | 
           | Also may be worth noting the type of meat: e.g. the Sicilian
           | staple I'm most familiar with myself is spleen.
        
             | bongoman37 wrote:
             | As someone raised in India I didn't get the American
             | dislike for organ meats. I love the liver, the tongue, the
             | brain, and pretty much all the parts of the animal in their
             | various forms. Most American meat preparations taste bland
             | and uniform with really minor variations.
        
               | harpersealtako wrote:
               | What are you considering as "American meat preparations"
               | though? It's not all salt/pepper/butter/lemon here. Not
               | even considering immigrant cuisines (which is doing a
               | disservice because that's our entire thing, like ) there
               | are hundreds of local meat preparation styles from
               | southern barbecue variations to cajun food to native tex-
               | mex and southwest styles and beyond.
        
             | codeflow2202 wrote:
             | My favorite spread as a kid (and still now) is basically
             | mashed chicken liver:
             | https://memoriediangelina.com/2014/11/21/crostini-di-
             | fegatin...
        
             | tpush wrote:
             | > [...] but the latter is more likely the significant
             | margin.
             | 
             | No, it really isn't.
        
               | lucideer wrote:
               | Well we've got a thread here discussing why the former
               | might not be a significant factor - care to elaborate on
               | why you think otherwise?
        
               | tpush wrote:
               | Because all high-quality scientific evidence points to
               | eating less meat making a big difference, and there being
               | no evidence that different quality meat makes any
               | significant difference whatsoever.
        
         | stuckinhell wrote:
         | That is unbelievable, and people wonder why the trust in the
         | media is at all time low.
        
           | checkyoursudo wrote:
           | Is a dude and his company hawking a bunch of books and a
           | diet/lifestyle plan really related to "trust in the media"? I
           | don't tend to think of self-help salespeople and reporters,
           | journalists, or even TV talking heads in the same way, though
           | maybe more related to the latter, I suppose.
           | 
           | By the way, I am also under the impression that he doesn't
           | mention that Okinawans eat, on average, way more Spam than
           | their less Blue-Zoney(R) counterparts.
        
         | mbg721 wrote:
         | Every once in a while, there's a news interview with a
         | 100-year-old who swears that their secret to a long life was to
         | drink enough whiskey to take the edge off all the cigarettes. I
         | can't help but think that all these individual anecdotes are
         | little more than confirmation bias.
        
           | codeflow2202 wrote:
           | People from the anglosphere comes with their own idea of
           | health, which is for the most part originated by their past
           | religious idea of purity more than rock solid science.
           | 
           | Many of them can't accept studies which prove that a good
           | life can sometimes also come out from what they view as a
           | "sinful" behavior.
           | 
           | Old Italians never saw meat eating and alcohol consumption as
           | a negative aspect of life and enjoyed it just because it was
           | part of their culture.
           | 
           | And, against all these calvinist principles, they still
           | enjoyed a pretty long life.
        
             | mbg721 wrote:
             | Old Italians probably also had numbers on their dial other
             | than 0 and 11; Anglospherizans aren't known for nuance.
        
         | dpq wrote:
         | I can't quickly find the paper but I recall having read
         | something along the following lines: there were several areas
         | in Greece where people consumed meat and cheese heavily but the
         | life expectancy was decent. A subsequent investigation showed
         | that the villagers had a very common SNP (mutation) which
         | reduced the efficiency of LDLR (essentially making their bodies
         | ingest less of the "bad" cholesterol into the bloodstream). And
         | the theory went that since these populations had the same diet
         | for centuries, everybody who was not very adapted to it sort of
         | died out / was outcompeted in a Darwinian way by folks who had
         | this genetic adaptation. So yes, a Sardinian villager may live
         | to 102 eating solely mutton; it doesn't mean that the outcome
         | would be as good if you took a random sample of Californians
         | (for instance) and had them use the same diet.
        
           | codeflow2202 wrote:
           | This hypothesis is still part of some anti-meat propaganda.
           | They start from the idea that red meat is bad, and then they
           | retroactively try to adjust their "science" with creative
           | solutions. Research done in Italy about the Sardinians showed
           | that the people who got to live longer where specifically the
           | shepherds. They had a very peculiar life style which brought
           | them to get much more exercise and to eat more animal sourced
           | foods. The remaining townfolks had a more "average" lifespan
           | even though they shared the same genes.
        
             | shafyy wrote:
             | Oh yes, the big bad lettuce lobby :D
        
               | codeflow2202 wrote:
               | To be exact the ones putting money into meat replacements
               | aren't produce farmers but the processed food giants.
        
               | ponzao wrote:
               | You joke, but it has been going on for a while: The
               | Global Influence of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church on
               | Diet (https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/9/9/251/htm). And
               | obviously as mentioned by another the processed food
               | industry etc.
        
               | the_du_ wrote:
               | You think lettuce cant be big or bad? Look into the
               | lettuce king of the southwest. Yes lettuce, and not the
               | devil's.
        
             | docmars wrote:
             | "[By 2030], you will eat less red meat." -- World Economic
             | Forum, an international organized crime network
        
               | codeflow2202 wrote:
               | It's kinda happening already:
               | 
               | Ireland https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/
               | 22/northern... Netherlands https://www.theguardian.com/en
               | vironment/2021/dec/15/netherla... Belgium
               | https://www.brusselstimes.com/251313/government-advisors-
               | pro...
        
           | nradov wrote:
           | Cholesterol isn't "ingested" into the bloodstream.
        
             | orangepurple wrote:
             | To expand upon this, Cholesterol is wrapped in lipoprotein,
             | and pathogenesis is caused by malfunction of lipoproteins
             | due to proximal oxidative and inflammatory effects upon
             | them.
        
               | kelp wrote:
               | So what's the cause of high cholesterol and how do you
               | lower it?
        
               | zackees wrote:
        
               | justin66 wrote:
               | https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-
               | blood-ch...
        
               | theNJR wrote:
               | Buckle up
               | 
               | https://peterattiamd.com/why-there-is-no-bad-or-good-
               | cholest...
        
               | tpush wrote:
               | > [...] due to proximal oxidative and inflammatory
               | effects upon them.
               | 
               | No, this is not true.
        
               | orangepurple wrote:
               | It absolutely is true for many reasons; one of them is
               | uptake of ox-LDL by macrophage and their conversion into
               | foam cells.
               | 
               | More info: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK326741/
               | 
               | Additionally, ApoB is an excellent biomarker of
               | cardiovascular health risk.
        
               | tpush wrote:
               | I agree with ApoB being _the_ marker for CVD risk. What I
               | 'm disagreeing with is the statement that pathogenesis is
               | caused by inflammation and/or oxidization; instead I'd
               | say it's the number of particles that's the primary
               | cause, with the rest of the mechanism following.
               | 
               | Might just be semantic quibbling, though.
        
           | richthegeek wrote:
           | Standard Darwinian competition wouldn't matter here - people
           | generally finish breeding (ages <35) long before they have
           | trouble from cholesterol (ages 40+) or other minor dietary
           | issues.
           | 
           | You could consider in the same way as the explanation for
           | altruism - that families and communities who can rely on
           | helpful old people to raise the children perform better and
           | out-compete families/communities without that resource.
           | 
           | We should also consider that any dietary pressure will have
           | only existed for at most a few thousands of years which, in
           | evolutionary terms, 1000 generations perhaps, is basically
           | nothing.
        
             | svnt wrote:
             | 1000 generations is plenty of time for a new mutation to
             | potentially achieve fixation in a relatively contained,
             | small-ish (in human terms) population.
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _people generally finish breeding (ages <35) long before
             | they have trouble from cholesterol (ages 40+) or other
             | minor dietary issues_
             | 
             | You're speaking to modern times. Rebeccu, for instance, is
             | a gorgeous town abandoned by Sardinians in the 14th century
             | because of famine. Furthermore, the children of a famished
             | mother are less likely to survive to reproductive age, and
             | a family whose elderly died of famine will be less stable
             | than one with multi-generational structures in place. These
             | prenatal, neonatal and group selection dynamics bias the
             | dice.
        
               | rat9988 wrote:
               | I'd suspect in the case of famine those who digest the
               | cholesterol would have the highest survival rate. It
               | still doesn't add up.
        
               | svnt wrote:
               | You don't need famine; a wealthy societal elder is better
               | positioned to marry his or her children and grandchildren
               | into situations where they will have more children and
               | their children will be better provided for. An elder male
               | could continue reproducing by finding additional mates.
               | There is good evidence that male genetic diversity is
               | much lower than we would expect if most of our ancestors
               | were monogamous.
               | 
               | Bugs might reproduce primarily constrained by their LDL
               | uptake but humans are far more complex.
        
             | m0llusk wrote:
             | That is not true. One of the many factors that make human
             | tribes competitive is grandparents. Grandparents can help
             | in many ways especially with child rearing and retain
             | knowledge not available to younger people. Having more
             | healthier and longer lived grandparents enhances the
             | relative fitness of those of breeding age. There is a
             | similar effect with homosexuals tending to contribute to
             | tribal fitness thus enhancing reproductive fitness of the
             | tribe.
        
               | oicu812 wrote:
               | >> similar effect with homosexuals tending to contribute
               | to tribal fitness thus enhancing reproductive fitness of
               | the tribe.
               | 
               | If they want to reproduce, don't they have to search
               | outside their tribe for a sperm/egg donor and possibly
               | surrogate? So at least 50% or more of their reproductive
               | health comes from outside the tribe?
        
               | 1shooner wrote:
               | Are there any data to support this?
        
               | smt88 wrote:
               | Not yet. My ex is a geneticist who studies the
               | evolutionary basis of aging and this is one of the
               | hypotheses for human longevity being what it is, but
               | there isn't hard proof so far.
        
         | franciscop wrote:
         | Wait, when people (mainly Americans) say "Mediterranean diet"
         | do they think it's mainly a vegetarian one? That would be so
         | wrong in so many levels, I am from a coastal really
         | Mediterranean city and we def eat meat and fish (both
         | traditionally and currently).
         | 
         | The main differences I'd say from growing up with local food
         | compared now with other international food is the extra use of
         | olive oil (vs other oils or butter), that normally in our food
         | it's easier to tell where the ingredients came from vs some
         | other more processed diets, extra bread/wheat use, and that
         | even when we eat meat, it's not a "meat fest" like American
         | bbq, it's normally accompanied with other food. And of course
         | the use of local ingredients, which is particular to our diet
         | but I'd guess most "regional diets" have this in common (with
         | their particular ingredients).
        
         | rowanG077 wrote:
         | It's not that surprising considering the cultural shift. If you
         | don't say meat is bad you are anti establishment.
        
         | bobbyasdfasdf7 wrote:
         | The shepherds are still eating way less meat than Americans.
         | 70% of their protein is coming from vegetables, whereas 70% of
         | Americans proteins comes from animals, see here: https://pubmed
         | .ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10405679/#:~:text=Statistica....
        
         | harpersealtako wrote:
         | This is a running theme for Blue Zones and centenarian research
         | data, just a bunch of really blatant falsehoods packaged as
         | trendy diet advice (e.g. suggesting that the Okinawan diet is
         | low in meat, which is based on some weird game of telephone
         | around discussions of WWII starvation diets, when in reality
         | the Okinawans get a large proportion of their calories from
         | lard and have the highest meat consumption in Japan). I
         | wouldn't quite call it a "scam" but I would call it extremely
         | misleading.
        
           | m_mueller wrote:
           | And besides, if you get the chance, please try Okinawan bacon
           | dishes. They are awesome.
        
         | taneq wrote:
         | Seems to me that this kind of article always comes to the
         | conclusion that the best / healthiest / longest lived / etc.
         | diet is one that the authors feel is virtuous in some way. It
         | might just be coincidence but it's an odd one if so.
        
       | kfarr wrote:
       | Interesting how #1 seems to imply but not explicitly call out the
       | relationship (or lack thereof) with motor vehicles. Their
       | widespread usage in the US is one of the contributing factors in
       | obesity.
        
         | jppope wrote:
         | And cars kill a lot of people too...
        
           | DoreenMichele wrote:
           | Kill _and maim._
        
       | Tade0 wrote:
       | My maternal grandparents are in their mid 90s and my paternal
       | grandmother lived to 97 (minus one week).
       | 
       | My maternal grandfather's 8 siblings are alive - save for one who
       | died in a car accident.
       | 
       | One thing they all have in common is that they survived a war
       | which took 15% of the population of this country at the time.
       | Generations after them didn't have nearly the same life
       | expectancy.
       | 
       | This is all anecdata, but perhaps there's some selection bias
       | contributing to the result here.
        
         | borroka wrote:
         | "One thing they all have in common is that they survived a war
         | which took 15% of the population of this country at the time"
         | 
         | I think what you are hinting at here is that war was an
         | artificial selection event that operated on and increased the
         | prevalence of some trait related to longevity, say "robustness"
         | or "ability to resist deprivation" or "quality".
         | 
         | It is an hypothesis that could be tested, and one that is based
         | on the theory that genes primarily determine longevity and not
         | "lifestyle", as those years of food deprivation, physical and
         | emotional trauma, rampant spread of diseases and general "bad
         | times" could be very well be, according to a theory that sees
         | "lifestyle" as the major factor in the observed variation of
         | longevity, determinants of earlier, but post-war, deaths of the
         | affected population.
        
         | aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
         | It must be the intermittent fasting during war!
        
       | HanShotFirst wrote:
       | I read the books and enjoyed them.
       | 
       | - To respond to one criticism seen widely here, the authors claim
       | to have validated ages with historical municipal birth records in
       | all the Blue Zones. I cannot speak to these particular zones, but
       | I've been doing genealogical research on my own ancestry and I am
       | absolutely blown away by the ubiquity and detail of both
       | municipal and Catholic church records in Sicily in the 1800s.
       | Preunification Italy was under the rule of various northern
       | European countries and was heavily influenced by their standards
       | of record keeping. I cannot say if this applies to the other
       | countries in the book, but generally speaking, just because these
       | records are old doesn't mean they are bad.
       | 
       | - One thing that was very notable in the books but isn't
       | discussed very much is that, with the exception of the Loma Linda
       | cohort, the Blue Zone areas are all quite poor. They all
       | primarily eat food they are able to grow or harvest themselves,
       | out of necessity, which encourages simple and consistent diets.
       | They have routine, simple lives that are made fulfilling by
       | concentrating on community, family, and friends. They are content
       | with what little they have and do not strive for more than they
       | need.
       | 
       | I found the books quite inspiring. I think the lessons learned
       | are good, even if they won't get me to 100. In any case I've felt
       | much better and lost weight on a closer-to-Blue-Zone diet than I
       | did before.
        
         | arlort wrote:
         | > Preunification Italy was under the rule of various northern
         | European countries and was heavily influenced by their
         | standards of record keeping
         | 
         | The only part of italy under rule of northern european
         | countries was the northeastern portions which were part of the
         | Austrian empire (if you consider austria as northern european,
         | which it usually isn't)
         | 
         | Sicily was last under "northern european" control in the 13th
         | century
        
         | bennysomething wrote:
         | What are the books called, I'd like to read them too.
        
           | lstamour wrote:
           | https://www.bluezones.com/books/
        
             | bennysomething wrote:
             | Thanks
        
             | mdp2021 wrote:
             | Well, that "Registered trade mark" '(r)' mark added to the
             | "evocative anchor" does give a strong sense (with much of
             | the rest in the communicational side) that somebody is
             | exploiting a way to pay the mortgage.
             | 
             | ...In some cultures.
             | 
             | Edit:
             | 
             | Disambiguating in case of confusion, having written
             | <<Communicational style comes from environment,
             | inclination, choice and target, and may suggest but not
             | prove (low) quality of content>> just before:
             | 
             | style does not remove potential for good content - yet, to
             | some cultures, if you present your work that way you give a
             | strong image that you are there to pay a mortgage.
        
       | downboots wrote:
       | There may be an analogy here to the story about the bullet holes
       | in shot-down planes?
       | 
       | [0] https://hackaday.com/2019/08/01/abraham-walds-problem-
       | solvin...
        
       | jacobkg wrote:
       | I lived in Loma Linda for a few years (in Southern California, 60
       | miles east of LA), which is one of the blue zones
       | 
       | It is predominantly a 7th day Adventist community. Notably they
       | prioritize healthy lifestyle and typically are vegetarian as well
       | as avoiding alcohol, caffeine, etc.
       | 
       | There is also a big medical school and hospital complex in the
       | city and many people that live there work in the healthcare
       | field.
       | 
       | There are of course plenty of other explanations.
        
         | Rebelgecko wrote:
         | Another fun fact about Loma Linda is that it was one of the
         | last places in the country to get USPS service on Saturdays. Up
         | until around 2010 they had regular mail deliveries on Sunday
         | instead.
        
       | arboghast wrote:
       | While I agree with most of the critics towards the article and
       | the author (who by the way, is a friend of Peter Diamandis who
       | also happens to run a scammy longevity clinic), (some) reasons
       | behind the longevity of many of those centenarians have been
       | identified: low mTOR activity and high omega 3 intake. mTOR
       | (mammalian target of rapamycin) is a nutrient sensing enzyme
       | particularly sensitive to some amino acids like Leucine found in
       | meat and whey protein.
       | 
       | Rapamycin (Sirolimus), an immunosuppressive drug was found to
       | considerably inhibit mTOR activity. Past clinical trials recently
       | showed considerable lifespan extension in multiple animal models
       | and will likely work in humans. It's one of the too drugs found
       | in the ITP trials (1). If I'm not wrong, they are even starting
       | trials now and new ones will come soon. That's because, as the
       | name implies, that enzyme is part of all mammals.
       | 
       | Lots of people experiment with safe dose ranging from 5 to 10mg
       | once a week and report lots of benefits, few side effects (doses
       | aren't as high as if used by organ transplant receivers).
       | 
       | I'm in my 30s so I'm not willing to take any risks with those. I
       | move, I eat a Mediterranean-ish diet, take Vitamin D3, K2 and
       | Omega 3d and eat no sugar. But if I was past 60 I'd definitely
       | ask my doctor.
       | 
       | That being said, this is not radical life extension. That would
       | likely be possible with upcoming therapies like partial
       | reprogramming or senolytics. But it definitely is promising and
       | will possibly help living a longer and healthier life if
       | repurposed for other diseases than simply immunosuppression.
       | 
       | (1) https://www.nia.nih.gov/research/dab/interventions-
       | testing-p...
        
         | wtetzner wrote:
         | > (some) reasons behind the longevity of many of those
         | centenarians have been identified: low mTOR activity and high
         | omega 3 intake.
         | 
         | I wonder how true this is, given that carbs trigger mTOR harder
         | and longer than protein, and the Mediterranean diet seems
         | pretty high-carb.
         | 
         | In any case, if you're worried about mTOR, intermittent fasting
         | is probably the simplest life-style change you can make.
        
       | nostromo wrote:
       | Whenever you read a paper creating a new term (like "Blue Zones")
       | -- you can guarantee that the author also has a book out with the
       | same name.
       | 
       | And so... https://www.amazon.com/dp/1426209487
       | 
       | They usually also have a company with the same name that sells
       | speaking engagements or consulting... https://www.bluezones.com/
       | 
       | And of course, you need a modestly astroturfed Wikipedia
       | article... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_zone
       | 
       | And don't forget a TED Talk!
       | https://www.ted.com/talks/dan_buettner_how_to_live_to_be_100
        
         | yreg wrote:
         | I understand that you consider this a bad thing, but why?
         | 
         | Why shouldn't a person who believes they discovered some
         | phenomenon name it, write books and give talks on it?
        
           | dotancohen wrote:
           | Exactly. Does anyone discount Newtonian physics because the
           | author published Philosophiae Naturalis Principia
           | Mathematica?
        
             | mdp2021 wrote:
             | > _Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica_
             | 
             | "Registered trade mark"?!
        
           | rtpg wrote:
           | There's an incentive for the work to be right, explainable
           | and having transposable advice.
           | 
           | A common thread I see in discussions about age and about
           | weight gain is about how a lot of it is determined by
           | genetics. If you are trying to sell a diet book, are you
           | going to dig into the genetics part a lot? Probably not![0]
           | 
           | Flavors of this exist in all domains, of course, and it's not
           | that the causal relation is "writing a book on the effect
           | makes the research bad". But when you show up with a problem
           | and the solution in one package, there is a question about
           | whether this is research or whether this is a sales pitch
           | (likely something in between).
           | 
           | [0]: not taking a position on the actual veracity of the
           | genetics back-and-forth.
        
           | rendaw wrote:
           | Because it creates a conflict of interest, where their income
           | depends on the continued significance and validity of their
           | research results.
           | 
           | And when a researcher this fanatically believes in their own
           | research, were they properly free of biases going into the
           | research? Is writing the book the consequence of amazing
           | research results, or did they plan to write the book from the
           | start (maybe seeing it as the only way to make investment
           | into the research worthwhile)?
        
             | yreg wrote:
             | The conflict of interest is always there since almost any
             | scientist wants to discover something and be right. That
             | doesn't mean everyone does bad science, but it's not
             | possible to be unbiased.
             | 
             | I'd say the motivation to name a phenomenon and make a mark
             | in the science history might be much higher and more
             | widespread then to sell a book.
             | 
             | Science cannot depend on scientists being unbiased about
             | their work. It has to depend on verification, reproduction
             | of experiments, meta analysis and so on.
        
               | svnt wrote:
               | Scientists are likely to be assessed on the basis of
               | their general credibility, not the standing of a single
               | paper.
               | 
               | Maintaining general credibility typically requires not
               | overstating your claims, especially when dealing with
               | sparse data.
               | 
               | Publishing a single paper and then making money on
               | promoting lifestyle changes based on your discovery is
               | not science, and would be (I would say correctly) side-
               | eyed by many scientists. The author's credibility is now
               | inexorably bound up with a single statement that has been
               | reduced to marketing.
        
         | roughly wrote:
         | Boy, wait till you hear about capitalism
        
         | aaron695 wrote:
         | Blue Zones have been talked about on HN for 13 years
         | 
         | https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
         | 
         | pg famously talks "middlebrow" comments on this specific Blue
         | Zones topic 10 years ago
         | 
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4692598 -
         | 
         | "The problem with the middlebrow dismissal is that it's a
         | magnet for upvotes."
         | 
         |  _Currently_ the top comments are what pg was worried about (I
         | 'd say). This is an old concept. The top comments are not
         | pulling out any big guns to say why it's wrong but are getting
         | upvoted.
        
           | wfme wrote:
           | Thanks for the links, a nice little read.
        
         | yieldcrv wrote:
         | Blue Zones LLC is mentioned at the very beginning of the
         | article.
         | 
         | > In 2004, Dan Buettner, CEO of Blue Zones LLC, was determined
         | to uncover the specific aspects of lifestyle and environment
         | that led to longevity.
         | 
         | You could have just read that
        
         | psKama wrote:
         | Thanks a lot for the insight. I wish, I had read your comment
         | before reading the article so could have saved some time.
        
           | Terretta wrote:
           | Seems sort of the opposite of appeal to authority: condemning
           | if making a living.
        
         | ativzzz wrote:
         | If one does a good deed, but does so with the intention of
         | telling others about the good deed to gain social status, is
         | the deed still good despite the ulterior motive?
         | 
         | Isn't the point of starting a business to make money off a
         | product that is useful to people and makes their lives better,
         | hence people willing to trade their money for that product? If
         | healthy living can be a product, what's wrong with monetizing
         | it?
        
           | billfruit wrote:
           | The Bible seems to think that not a good thing. "But when you
           | do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what
           | your right hand is doing"- Mathew 6:3.
        
           | elevaet wrote:
           | tl;dr: bias
           | 
           | I think the problem is that there is an obvious incentive for
           | the author to achieve research findings that support their
           | enterprise, and ignore the facts that are contrary. It's an
           | opening for corruption/conflict-of-interest.
           | 
           | That's not to say that it's not possible that they are both
           | correct in their findings and able to make money off it, but
           | it does reduce their credibility.
           | 
           | Who's advice do you take more seriously, the guy with a horse
           | in the race, or the guy without?
        
           | DoreenMichele wrote:
           | The problem is trying to monetize something _new and
           | unproven_ by claiming some kind of significant _virtue._
           | 
           | Charging money to provide value under conditions where it's a
           | proven and known means to add value is not controversial. But
           | merely virtue signaling on something you can't prove is a
           | common tactic of con artists.
           | 
           | See: Theranos, for example.
        
         | ByThyGrace wrote:
         | This is great. Do you have more examples (of self interest-
         | driven neologisms) at hand?
        
           | chid wrote:
           | The first one that comes into my mind is this
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_posing
        
           | Sin2x wrote:
           | Everything by Nassim Taleb.
        
         | ReaLNero wrote:
         | Master class in marketing and manufacturing desire!
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-19 23:02 UTC)