Pages

Saturday, 9 October 2010

Eat less, live longer? Or Just eat less protein or methionine (become a Vegan) and live longer?

reposted from: New Scientist


IN GREEK mythology, the tale of the Trojan prince Tithonus is a tragic one. His lover, the goddess Eos, asks Zeus to grant him eternal life, but forgets to specify eternal youth. Time passes, and while the goddess of dawn stays young and beautiful, Tithonus degenerates into bedridden senility. Eventually Eos shuts him in a chamber of her celestial palace, where his feeble voice can be heard begging for death.
Dreams of eternal youth feature in many cultures throughout history, but it was only in the 20th century that research into longevity really began. Much about ageing is still mysterious - we don't even know the underlying reasons why we journey into old age. There are many lines of enquiry into how to live longer, though, with one of the most intriguing being calorie restriction: in effect, going on a lifelong diet.
Calorie restriction dramatically extends not only the lifespan of laboratory animals, but also their "healthspan" - how long they live free of disease. On the assumption that it has the same effect in people, some individuals have already adopted a restricted diet. The latest evidence suggests that while calorie restriction is indeed beneficial for humans, when it comes to lifespan extension, it may not be the whole story.
The good news is that we might be able to delay ageing without cutting our food intake. "There's a definite possibility that if you balance the diet correctly, a longer lifespan can be achieved without full food restriction," says Matthew Piper, a researcher into ageing at University College London.
There is a definite possibility that if you balance the diet correctly, a longer lifespan can be achieved without full-on food restriction
Interest in calorie restriction began in 1935, when scientists made the surprising discovery that rats on a reduced-calorie diet lived longer, provided they were supplemented with sufficient vitamins and minerals. The idea sounds counter-intuitive; after all, a state of starvation is not usually conducive to health. But there seems to be a window of benefit. While lifespan is reduced if calories are cut too drastically, it can be extended by cutting them moderately (see graph).

Calorie restriction has since been shown to extend the lives of other organisms including yeast, nematode worms, fruit flies and mice. Mice, for example, live up to 50 per cent longer if their calorie intake is cut by 30 to 50 per cent. What's more, mammals are protected from a number of age-associated maladies such as cancer, heart disease, type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer's disease.
It is unclear why eating less should make animals live longer. While a restricted diet triggers numerous changes at the molecular and genetic levels, only some of these are common across all the species tested. 
However, there does seem to be a general principle that a dearth of nutrients causes organisms to divert resources away from growth and reproduction and towards basic survival functions. From an evolutionary perspective, these adaptations could help an organism survive famine.

Longevity pioneers

The million-dollar question is whether calorie restriction has a similar effect in people. Humans are longer-lived and clearly harder to study than flies or mice, but recently two sources of evidence have hinted that it does.
The first comes from a 20-year study of rhesus macaques, a species obviously closer to humans than worms and mice. When the macaques were about 10 years old, equivalent to young adulthood in humans, half the group were placed on a diet in which they received 30 per cent fewer calories than the others. While none has yet beaten the record for the longest-lived macaque in captivity (about 40 years), the latest results, reported last year, look promising. 
About 80 per cent of the calorie-restricted monkeys were still alive when the study was published, beating the control group's survival rate of 50 per cent. And the dieting animals were one-third less likely to have died from an age-related disease (Science, vol 325, p 201).

The second strand of evidence comes from studying people who are practising calorie restriction. The first enthusiasts banded together through an email forum in the early 1990s. The group has since evolved into the Calorie Restriction Society International, which now has over 3000 members who refer to themselves as "CRONies", short for Calorie Restriction with Optimal Nutrition.
Needless to say, this lifestyle is not for everyone. Some people report struggling with hunger pangs, and the society warns on its website that side effects can include feeling cold, poor wound-healing and temporary infertility. But many CRONies insist that hunger is not a big problem and that they actually feel happier and healthier on their frugal diet (see "A day in the life of a CRONie").
CRONies typically cut calories by 10 to 30 per cent of the recommended intake, and most hover around the lower limit of "normal" body mass index, at 18.5 kilograms per height-in-metres squared. 

To ensure they get all the nutrients they need without busting their calorie quota, their diet is mainly vegetable-based and must be carefully planned, often with the help of a computer program. "People think calorie restriction involves tiny portions, but these people are eating huge amounts of low-calorie, nutrient-dense food," says Luigi Fontana, a professor of medicine at Washington University in St Louis and head of the Division of Nutrition and Aging at the Italian National Institute of Health, who has studied CRONies for the past eight years.
As with the macaques, it is too soon to tell if calorie restriction extends lifespan. The oldest people in Fontana's studies are only in their 70s - the average life expectancy for Americans. But there is evidence suggesting that it extends healthspan. In 2007, Fontana showed that CRONies have optimal metabolic profiles, and low blood pressure and cholesterol levels (Experimental Gerontology, vol 42, p 709). "They have hearts that are 15 years younger than those of typical Americans their age," he says.
So far, so good. But Fontana has found a notable difference in the way people and animals respond to calorie restriction, and it is not great news. It involves a hormone made by the liver called insulin-like growth factor 1.
IGF-1 (wikipedia) has emerged as an important promoter of ageing. IGF-1 levels are lower than normal in worms, flies and mice on a restricted diet, and this is thought to be at least partly responsible for their longer lifespan. When it comes to people, however, CRONies have the same IGF-1 levels as the rest of us.
The explanation for this anomaly may lie in a new theory about how diet affects ageing. This says that it may not only be the drop in calories that is responsible for lifespan extension - in some species at least, perhaps it is also the accompanying drop in dietary protein.
One piece of evidence for this idea comes from studies in fruit flies and rodents. If these animals are fed special diets with less amino acids - the building blocks of proteins - they can eat as many calories as they want and still live longer. "These results clearly show that you don't need to restrict calories as a whole to get lifespan extension," says Piper, an author of the study on flies (Nature, vol 462, p 1061).
Further support for this idea comes from studying the molecular pathways inside cells that affect lifespan. A molecule called TOR (TOR in wikipedia) has been found to set off a chain of reactions that boost cell growth at the expense of longevity. Blocking TOR increases lifespan in all organisms studied to date, including yeast and mice (Aging Cell, vol 9, p 105). Crucially, the most potent activators of TOR are amino acids.
Where does the protein theory leave the CRONies? Fontana noticed that the people in his study group were eating high levels of protein, about 1.7 grams per kilogram of body weight per day. This is more than the US government-recommended intake of 0.8 g/kg/day, and higher than that in a typical American's diet, about 1.2 g/kg/day.

Accelerated ageing

So Fontana asked six CRONies to cut their protein intake to 0.95 g/kg/day while maintaining their usual calorie intake. After only three weeks on the low-protein diet, the CRONies showed a 25 per cent drop in their levels of IGF-1 (Aging Cell, vol 7, p 681). "Even if the CRONies are restricting their calories severely, if they're eating a high-protein diet, they're probably negating some of the most important beneficial effects," says Fontana.
If the new theory is right, then the whole concept of calorie restriction needs to be rethought. The very term would be misleading; Fontana and others have started referring to dietary restriction instead. As news of the study has spread, some CRONies have already reduced their protein intake.
The protein theory is bad news for people on low-carbohydrate weight-loss plans like the Atkins diet. "I'd be wary of diets that put a heavy emphasis on protein," says Piper. "It's hard to see how that could be healthy." Fontana goes one step further, saying that high-protein diets could risk accelerated ageing and cancer.
It's good news, however, for people already on low-protein diets, like vegans, who avoid eating meat, eggs and dairy products. In 2007, Fontana showed that vegans have lower levels of IGF-1 than meat-eaters (Rejuvenation Research, vol 10, p 225).
There may be another reason for vegans to celebrate. Studies on flies and rodents suggest that cutting intake of one particular amino acid, called methionine, lengthens life to a similar degree as calorie restriction. Proteins in meat and other animal products have high levels of methionine, so a vegan diet would score well by that measure, too (Medical Hypotheses, vol 72, p 125).
If calorie restriction would be hard for most people, calorie and protein restriction would be doubly so. Those determined to live to 130 may want to give it a shot, but for the rest of us, simply sticking to recommended dietary protein levels could have benefits for both lifespan and healthspan. "Protein restriction is much less difficult to maintain than [calorie] restriction and may be more powerful in reducing IGF-1 in humans," Fontana said in a recent review (Science, vol 328, p 321).
For those who don't fancy changing their diet, a more tempting prospect is a pill that replicates the effects without the hard work. Drug firms have taken a keen interest in trying to find such calorie-restriction mimetics, as they are sometimes called.
A decade ago the main focus was on signalling molecules called sirtuins (wikipedia) that reduce the expression of several ageing-related genes. Reports that resveratrol (wikipedia), a compound found in red wine, extended lifespan in some species by activating sirtuins boosted sales of red wine and resveratrol supplements. Resveratrol still has supporters, but inconsistent animal data have since dampened much of the enthusiasm.
The focus has lately switched to finding compounds that block TOR. One such agent is a drug called rapamycin (wikipedia), an immunosuppressant given to recipients of organ transplants. Last year rapamycin was found to extend the lifespan of mice, even in those started on the drug in later life, equivalent to 60-year-old humans (Nature, vol 460, p 392). However, because people don't live in a sanitised lab environment, rapamycin's strong immunosuppressive effects make it an unlikely candidate for a practical anti-ageing drug. Similar compounds that are less toxic would be more promising.
Another candidate is a drug called metformin (wikipedia), already used to treat type 2 diabetes. Metformin also blocks TOR, and lengthens lifespan in worms and mice (Cell Metabolism, vol 11, p 390). Does metformin slow ageing in people too? Studies published earlier this year suggest that diabetics taking metformin do get less cancer (Diabetes Care, vol 33, p 322). "The major risk factor for cancer, above all others, is ageing," says David Gems at University College London. He calls the studies a "smoking gun of a more generalised effect of metformin on ageing, rather than just strictly diabetes".
While metformin is less toxic than rapamycin, it, too, can have side effects, such as nausea and diarrhoea. So researchers may have a way to go before they find the perfect longevity pill.
And it would be premature to consider the case proven for the protein theory of lifespan extension. Even Fontana acknowledges there may be other nutrients that play a role, such as fatty acids or cholesterol. Others have speculated that it may be the ratio of calories to protein that is key.
In the meantime, the best bet for warding off ageing and disease could still be the time-honoured advice to eat your greens. Perhaps if vegetables had been the food of the gods, Tithonus could have enjoyed a few more quality years with Eos.

A day in the life of a CRONie

Paige Collins-Rideout, a 39-year-old medical transcriptionist in Blue Ridge, Georgia, does not look like she needs to diet, but that is exactly what she is doing. Collins-Rideout is a CRONie (which stands for Calorie Restriction with Optimal Nutrition), a member of a group who believe that eating a carefully controlled diet with 10 to 30 per cent fewer calories than recommended is key to a longer, healthier life.
For the past year-and-a-half, Collins-Rideout has been limiting her food intake to 1500 calories per day. At 1.7 metres (5 feet, 6 inches) tall, she weighs only 50 kilograms (110 pounds = 7st 12 pounds).
Vitamin-rich foods such as sweet potatoes, broccoli, spinach, eggs and whole grains are staples of Collins-Rideout's diet. Perhaps surprisingly, she says she is rarely hungry, although she admits to occasionally succumbing to unhealthy snacks like fried jalapeƱos. "Once in a great while I'll have something like that," she says. "Then I'm ready to go back to healthy eating."
There are downsides. Because it is hard to get the recommended levels of vitamins and minerals without supplements, which CRONies generally avoid, calorie restrictors often invest a great deal of time in planning and tracking their diet. To avoid becoming too underweight, Collins-Rideout has also cut back on her running - she used to jog 5 kilometres per day. She also says that social eating can be difficult.
But she says benefits of her diet include improved mood, sleep, mental clarity and memory. She has no desire to live to be 100, though. "My goal is to slow the ageing process so that when I get to retirement, I'll have the energy and vitality to actually live," she says. "I can't imagine going back to any other way of life."
Laura Cassiday is a science journalist based in Denver, Colorado

Friday, 8 October 2010

Sleep hours 'linked to death'

reposted from: NHS Choices



NHS Choices Mon Oct 04 2010 17:50:00 GMT+0100 (GMT Daylight Time) 
“Women who get between five and six-and-a-half hours sleep a night could live longer,” reports the Daily Express. The news is based on the results of a long-running study of 459 women aged 50 to 81.
This research initially assessed the women’s sleep patterns over one week, using wrist-mounted activity monitor worn at night. Researchers then followed the women for up to 14 years to see how their sleep patterns might have influenced their chances of survival. The scientists found that those women who had slept longer or shorter hours were more likely to have died compared to women who had slept a moderate length. However, as with all studies of this type, it is difficult to say for certain whether sleep directly caused differences in survival rates. Also, the study’s findings may not apply to men or to people under 50 years old.
Although this and other studies seem to suggest that sleeping too much or too little is associated with an increased risk of death, it is not possible to say why this might be, nor whether changing your sleep patterns could influence your longevity.

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from the University of California and the Jackson Hole Center for Preventive Medicine in Wyoming. It was funded by the US National Institutes of Health, and it was published in the peer-reviewed journal Sleep Medicine.
The Daily Express and Daily Mail reported this study. Both summarised the results accurately.

What kind of research was this?

This was an analysis of data from a long-running cohort study called the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI). It aimed to assess the relationship between length of sleep and the risk of death during the follow-up period.
Several previous studies have suggested that sleeping for a long time (e.g. more than 7.5 hours) or for a short time (e.g. less than 6.5 hours) are associated with an increased risk of death compared with an intermediate amount of sleep. However, these studies mainly used subjective reports of sleep, where a person reports their own sleep patterns. The current study wanted to assess whether objectively measured sleep length was also related to risk of death. A previous study looking at objectively measured sleep did not find any evidence of a link.
This type of study design is appropriate for addressing the question asked, as it would not be feasible to use a study design that would randomly assign people to differing amounts of sleep over a long period of time.
As with all observational studies, the main danger is that factors other than the one being studied may be influencing the results. For example, if people who slept for only short periods or long periods also had unhealthier lifestyles, this could be influencing their risk of death rather than their sleep patterns. It is important that this type of study takes this possibility into account.

What did the research involve?

Between October 1995 and June 1999, the researchers asked 451 women taking part in the WHI study to attach to their wrists an activity monitor called an ‘actigraph’. They used the data from these actigraphs to identify the periods when the women were asleep. They then followed the women for up to 14 years to see who died and, if so, when. The researchers then carried out analyses to see if there was a relationship between death and sleep duration.
The researchers selected a sample of women to take part. It included a high proportion of older women, and of women reporting six hours sleep or less, or eight hours sleep or more. This was intended to increase the likelihood that they could detect an effect of sleep length on risk of death if there was one. The women’s average age at the start of the study was 67.6 years (range 50 to 81 years).
The women filled in sleep questionnaires and had psychiatric interviews. The researchers also had access to the questionnaires the women had filled at the start of the original WHI study about their health and lifestyles. All participants wore the actigraph on their wrist for seven days and nights. They also completed a sleep diary and estimated their sleep duration over these seven days. Most participants had urine samples collected over 24 hours, and they wore an oxygen saturation monitor for three nights to identify any sleep apnoea.
The women were mailed annual questionnaires and contacted by telephone until 2005. Any deaths were indentified in this way. In 2009, any additional deaths were identified using the Social Security Death Index. The final set of analyses used follow-up data available for 444 women, 98% of the study population.
The analyses compared the survival of women who slept for different lengths of time. For example, they compared women with 300–390 min of sleep against women who had less than 300 min or longer than 390 min. The researchers took into account factors that could affect results (potential confounders). This included age, history of high blood pressure, diabetes, heart attack, cancer and major depression.

What were the basic results?

Among the 444 women with follow-up data, 86 women had died over an average of 10.5 years of follow-up. According to actigraph readings, the women slept an average of about six hours, which was shorter than the average length of sleep according to the women’s estimates in their sleep diaries, which was 6.88 hours.
The researchers estimated that women who slept less than five hours a night had a 61% chance of survival at the end of follow-up, compared with 78% among those who slept longer than 6.5 hours, and 90% for those who slept between five and 6.5 hours a night. When taking into account all potential confounders, there was a significant link between sleep duration and risk of death. However, the link was only just statistically significant when looking at sleep duration as a continuous outcome, i.e. the relationship seen across all sleep durations.
Medical factors such as high blood pressure, diabetes, having previous heart attack or cancer, or having major depression at the start of the study appeared to have a greater influence on risk of death.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers concluded that their study confirmed the “U-shaped” relationship between sleep duration and risk of death. Short and long sleep durations were both associated with an increased chance of death compared with intermediate durations. They say that more research is needed to identify approaches that might prevent this increased risk of death.

Conclusion

This study’s strengths include the use of an objective measure of sleep, and the long period of follow-up. It supports the findings of other studies with subjective sleep measures, which suggest that very long or very short sleep duration is linked to an increased risk of an earlier death. There are some important points to note:
  • The data is for women aged 50-and-over only, and may not apply to men or to younger age groups.
  • The actigraph measures movement, so it would not be able to tell the difference between someone lying still while awake and someone lying still while asleep. This may have caused some inaccuracy in the estimation of how long people were asleep, although possibly less than if a subjective measure of sleep was used. The researchers acknowledge that using actigraphs may over- or under-estimate sleep compared to the gold standard way of measuring sleep (called polysomnography).
  • The study only measured sleep using the actigraph for one week at the start of the study. Women’s sleep in this period may not have been representative of their sleep patterns over a lifetime.
  • It is not possible to say whether duration of sleep is itself affecting the risk of death, or whether another unknown factor is behind both the different sleep patterns and risk of death. Although researchers took into account a number of factors that could affect risk of death, these or other unmeasured factors could still be having an effect.
  • Although studies subjectively measuring sleep duration have found a link, a study objectively measuring sleep using the gold standard objective (called polysomnography) did not find a link between short sleep and increased risk of death.
How long we sleep may be affected by many factors, including our internal body clock, our jobs and families, lifestyles, the environment in which we sleep, and stress levels.
Although this and other studies have suggested that sleep duration is linked to risk of death, it is not yet possible to say whether you can improve your longevity by simply modifying how long you sleep, without changing any other factors.

Links To The Headlines

Sleep less...and live longer. Daily Express, October 2 2010

Links To Science

Kripke DF, Langer RD, Elliott JA et al. Mortality related to actigraphic long and short sleep. Sleep Medicine 2010

Thighs and abs have a different take on fat

reposted from New Scientist


17:58 05 October 2010 by Debora MacKenzie Magazine issue 2781.

As many women will no doubt attest, not all fat accrues equally. That may be because cells in your thighs and abdomen store fat in different ways.

Michael Jensen and colleagues at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, put volunteers on a fattening diet for eight weeks and then measured what happened to their fat cells, or adipocytes. While abdominal cells got larger, thigh cells multiplied, by recruiting more adipocytes from pre-fat cells. The more new thigh fat cells recruited, the less abdominal fat people gained.

Fat on the abdomen increases the risk of diabetes and other disorders, while fat on hips and thighs has a protective effect. Jensen thinks thigh fat may soak up excess food energy to keep it away from the abdomen, where fat does more damage.

An individual's tendency to be pear or apple-shaped may in part be set by the ability of their thigh fat cells to recruit more adipocytes. Learning what controls this process may help fight fat's detrimental effects on our health.

Journal reference: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1005259107


Curvaceous claims go pear-shaped
reposted from: NHS Choices

NHS Choices Tue Oct 05 2010 17:35:00 GMT+0100 (GMT Daylight Time) 

“Curvy women will live longer,” the Daily Express today reported, saying that Jennifer Lopez, Nigella Lawson and Beyonce “are in great shape to live longer” because of their “well-rounded figures”. According to the news, a study has found that a big bottom and thighs could help to prevent metabolic disorders such as heart disease, stroke and diabetes.
The reports of this study and the newspapers' interpretations are misleading, as they suggest that the study measured health outcomes of people with different body shapes. This was not the case. The study actually assessed the different ways that fat cells in the thighs and abdomen respond to over-eating. In effect, it has illustrated the known phenomenon of people putting on weight in different places in different ways.
The findings of this interesting study – that people who gained more of the weight on their thighs were less likely to have large abdominal fat cells – does not mean that women with bigger hips and a ‘pear-shape’ will live longer.

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from The Mayo Clinic, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Yale University. It was funded by a number of US institutions, including the National Institutes of Health, the US Public Health Service, the Noaber Foundation, the Mayo Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health. The study was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).
The news reports of this study suggest that the research compared the health of participants with different distributions of body fat. It did not. Previous studies have found that fat distribution is important and that the waist-to-hip ratio may be a better predictor of cardiovascular disease risk than BMI values: a higher ratio (more upper body fat than lower body fat) is associated with poorer health. This study actually investigated how the fat cells at these two sites respond to over-feeding.

What kind of research was this?

Studies have shown that the distribution of body fat is an important predictor of the consequences of obesity. Upper-body fat gain is associated with negative consequences, and lower-body fat gain seems to have a protective effect. The researchers say that little is known about the mechanisms that regulate the way fat accumulates.
Other studies have also suggested that from the age of 20, fat gain is likely to be the result of individual fat cells growing in size rather than increases in the numbers of fat cells. However, these findings were based only on investigations of abdominal fat cells.
In this observational study, researchers gave closer investigation to the changes in fat cells at different sites on the body seen in a group of over-feeding adults. Specifically, they were interested in whether there was a difference in the way that the upper body and lower body deposited fat.

What did the research involve?

The researchers recruited 28 healthy adults (15 male, 13 female) with an average age of 29. None of the group were obese (BMI <26kg/m2) or had a history of obesity. None of them were taking medications (except oral contraceptives).
For 10 days, three specially prepared daily meals were provided to maintain current weight. During this time, body composition was assessed using imaging (X-rays, CT scans etc). Samples of fat tissue were obtained from two regions of the body: the abdomen and the thigh.
The participants then began the over-feeding for an eight-week period during which they were instructed to eat until they were more full than usual. They were also provided with supplemental food (ice-cream shakes, chocolate bars or high-calorie drinks). Weight gain was measured regularly. After the eight-week period, participants were admitted back to the unit to have further fat biopsies and other measurements taken. They then returned to a diet that stabilised their weight.
A comparison was made of the size and number of fat cells at the upper and lower-body sites before and after over-feeding. The researchers also measured the activity of the fat cells and responses in the precursor cells that develop into fat cells.

What were the basic results?

As expected, the body weight of the group increased by an average of 4.6kg, due to an increase in fat tissue. These weight gains led to a BMI increase of 1.5kg/m2.
In general, the size of abdominal fat cells increased in response to weight gain, but their number did not. In women, those who had smaller abdominal fat cells to start with saw a greater increase in the size of the cells than those who had normal-sized cells to start with. This pattern was not seen in men.
For the thigh cells, weight gain was more linked to an increase in the number of fat cells rather than an increase in their size. The relative fat gain in the lower body was a ‘negative predictor’ of the change in the size of abdominal fat cells, i.e. people who gained more fat in the lower body were less likely to have large fat cells around their abdomen.
After further modelling, the researchers note that a gain of 1.6kg results in the creation of about 2.6 billion new fat cells within eight weeks. This response of fat cells depended on gender and the size of fat cells seen at the start of the study. For abdominal fat, weight gain seems to be due to an increase in the size of fat cells rather than in cell numbers.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers say that their results challenge the thinking that the total number of body fat cells remains constant in adults. They say that the ability of healthy adults to expand lower-body fat via hyperplasia (i.e. increasing cell numbers) may prevent or delay abdominal weight gain.

Conclusion

The newspapers have extrapolated the findings from this research to reach unsupported conclusions that “curves will make you live longer”. However, the two key findings of the research are:
  • Different mechanisms lie behind weight gain in the abdomen and in the thighs.
  • Adults who put on weight in their lower body are less likely to do so in their abdomen.
This illustrates, in an experimental situation, what is already known, i.e. that people gain weight in different places. Despite what newspaper interpretations may suggest, the study did not compare the health of those who gained weight in their thighs with those who gained more weight in their abdomen.
To note:
  • The study did not measure health outcomes
  • Weight gained (increased size of fat cells) on the abdomen appeared to occur by a different mechanism to that on the thighs
  • The greater the change in fat cells in the thigh, the smaller the fat cells in the abdomen. The researchers imply that this may help to explain why some people put on weight on their thighs more readily than around their abdomen.
This is interesting research that illustrates the underlying mechanisms of fat gain in two important regions of the body. It shows that the fat cells of the abdomen behave differently to those of the thigh in individuals who are over-eating. It also shows that people who gain weight in their lower body have smaller fat cells in their abdomen. Crucially, this study does not directly inform the debate about which body shape is healthier.

Links To The Headlines

Curvy women will live longer. Daily Express, October 5 2010

Links To Science

Tchoukalovaa YD, Votrubaa SB, Tchkonia T et al. Regional differences in cellular mechanisms of adipose tissue gain with overfeeding. PNAS [Published online before print] October 4, 2010

Protein grants long life (to mice)

branched chain amino acids (wikipedia) are Valine, IsoLeucine, Leucine.

reposted from: NHS Choices



NHS Choices Wed Oct 06 2010 18:45:00 GMT+0100 (GMT Daylight Time) 
A protein powder used by bodybuilders “could increase life expectancy by 10 years”, according to the Daily Mail. The newspaper reports that consuming the powder can build muscle, boost fitness, improve balance and “increase life expectancy by 12 per cent”.
What is not made clear until later in the news article is that the research behind these claims was in mice. Middle-aged mice were fed a diet supplemented with certain amino acids, the chemicals that the body uses to make proteins. 
Scientists observed how this diet affected the development of mitochondria (the energy generators) in the mice's heart and muscle cells.
They also observed whether feeding this diet to younger mice had any effect on their natural life expectancy. The researchers found a potential anti-ageing role of the amino acids in the mice, which occurred through altering the development of new mitochondria.
Animal and laboratory research such as this can provide new insight into how biological processes work. But mice are very different to humans: these findings may have some application to cellular processes in humans, but it is not possible to assume so at this stage. Overall, it is unlikely that this early experimental research has found the ‘elixir of life’.

Where did the story come from?

This study was conducted by researchers from a number of academic institutions in Italy. It was funded by various governmental and academic institutions in Italy: the Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Universita e della Ricerca, the Ministero della Salute, and the Comune di Milano Flagship Project. The study was published in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Cell Metabolism.
Not all news coverage clearly highlighted that this was early-stage research and that the ‘elixir of life’ is largely applicable to mice only. Notably, The Daily Telegraph clearly stated within its article and headline that this was mouse research. Also, although some papers relate the amino acid powder used in this research to currently marketed bodybuilding powders, these should not be considered directly comparable.

What kind of research was this?

Some of the recognised effects of cellular ageing include malfunctions of the mitochondria that convert nutrients into energy in the cells, plus oxidative (free radical) damage and decreases in the generation of new mitochondria. 
Recent evidence is said to have found a strong relationship between the generation of new mitochondria and increased survival of cells in animals, plants and fungi.
This animal and laboratory research aimed to further investigate how dietary intake of branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) affects lifespan. BCAAs have been demonstrated to extend the lifespan of yeast, but it is not known what effect they could have on the generation of new mitochondria and longevity in mammals. The research examined longevity in mice after they consumed a branched-chain amino acid powder, when sedentary and when exercising.

What did the research involve?

This research involved middle-aged (16-month-old) mice, which were given unrestricted access to a standard diet. These middle-aged mice were divided into those who received three months of BCAA supplementation (mixed into drinking water) and those who did not. These two groups were further subdivided into those who would remain sedentary and those who would exercise on a treadmill during the last month of supplementation (20 mice in each of the groups). After three months, the mice’s organs, fat and muscle tissue were examined.
To analyse the effect of the BCAA supplement on survival, the researchers also followed nine-month-old mice that were given either water containing the BCAA supplement, or normal water up to the time of their natural death. As an additional part to the experiment, the researchers looked at the effect produced by directly adding BCAA to heart muscle and skeletal muscle cells in the laboratory.

What were the basic results?

The researchers found that the BCAA-enriched mixture increased the average life span when given to mice from the age of nine months. The average (median) life span was 774 days for all of the untreated control mice, compared to 869 days for all of the supplemented mice (12% increase). However, supplementation did not alter their maximum life span: the oldest mice in each group lived to approximately the same age.
BCAA supplementation increased mitochondrial development in cardiac and skeletal muscle cells in the laboratory. Supplementation was also found to produce increased mitochondrial development in cardiac and skeletal muscle of middle-aged mice, but it did not have any effect on their fat or liver tissue. When the mice were exercised on a treadmill, those who had been given BCAA supplementation also had enhanced physical endurance. Free radical production was also reduced by BCAA supplementation.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers concluded that their findings reveal an important anti-ageing role of branched-chain amino acids in mammals, which occurs through increased mitochondrial development.

Conclusion

Animal and laboratory research such as this is valuable for furthering the understanding of how biological processes work. While these findings may be applicable to humans in some way, this research cannot say what effects branched chain amino acid supplementation would have on survival or any other outcomes in humans.
Aside from the obvious physical and biological differences between humans and mice, there might also be adverse effects of use, particularly given the high quantities of amino acids consumed (the equivalent of 1.5g of dry powder per 1kg of body weight each day, or a daily intake of 120g dry weight for an 80kg human). If the supplement were considered safe for use in humans, such trials would also take a long time, as participants would have to be followed up for their entire lifetimes before any life-extending effects could be detected.

Links To The Headlines

A genuine 'elixir of life' - at least for mice. The Daily Telegraph, October 6 2010
We've found elixir of life. Daily Mirror, October 6 2010
Elixir of life: past attempts to find eternal life. The Daily Telegraph, October 6 2010

Links To Science

D'Antona G, Ragni M, Cardile A et al. Branched-Chain Amino Acid Supplementation Promotes Survival and Supports Cardiac and Skeletal Muscle Mitochondrial Biogenesis in Middle-Aged Mice. Cell Metabolism, Volume 12, Issue 4, 362-372, 6 October 2010