| Index | Recent Threads | Unanswered Threads | Who's Active | Guidelines | Search |
 |
World Community Grid Forums
Category: Community
Forum: Chat Room
Thread: Oxidative stress theory of aging now in doubt. |
| No member browsing this thread |
|
Thread Status: Active Total posts in this thread: 5
|
|
| Author |
|
|
twilyth
Master Cruncher US Joined: Mar 30, 2007 Post Count: 2130 Status: Offline Project Badges: 
|
An article recently published in PLoS Geneticsindicates that oxidative stress is more likely a result of normal aging rather than a cause.
----------------------------------------Excerpt: Hekimi and postdoctoral fellow Jeremy Van Raamsdonk studied mutant Caenorhabditis elegans worms. They progressively disabled five genes responsible for producing a group of proteins called superoxide dismutases (SODs), which detoxify one of the main ROS. Earlier studies seemed to show that decreased SOD production shortened an organism's lifespan, but Hekimi and Van Raamsdonk did not observe this. In fact, they found quite the opposite. None of their mutant worms showed decreased lifespan compared to wild-type worms, even though oxidative stress was clearly raised. In fact, one variety actually displayed increased lifespan, the researchers said. "The mutation that increases longevity affects the main SOD found in mitochondria inside the animals' cells," said Hekimi. "This is consistent with earlier findings that mitochondria are crucial to the aging process. It seems that reducing mitochondrial activity by damaging it with ROS will actually make worms live longer." The researchers hasten to point out that they are not suggesting that oxidative stress is good for you. "ROS undoubtedly cause damage to the body," Hekimi said. "However, they do not appear to be responsible for aging." Bleeding midichlorians. The mitochondria BTW come exclusively from your mother - just so you know who to blame.    |
||
|
|
twilyth
Master Cruncher US Joined: Mar 30, 2007 Post Count: 2130 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
I apologize for bumping my own thread, but nobody has anything to say about this? I know there are some supplement junkies here, so is this going to affect your regime any way?
----------------------------------------Personally, I've cut back on the antioxidants and am now focusing on things that enhance Sirtuin expression - like resveratrol. [Edit 1 times, last edit by twilyth at Feb 20, 2009 2:41:53 PM] |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
Hi twilyth,
This was a much more tightly focused research project, but for a decade or more there have been a whole slew of negative results in this field. Mostly they were statistical in nature, hence inherently suspect, but I can not really remember how long ago I intentionally added anti-oxidant supplements to my vitameatavegemins. I think it was a 3-year period in the 90's. Lawrence |
||
|
|
Former Member
Cruncher Joined: May 22, 2018 Post Count: 0 Status: Offline |
yes, sad news
agree with resveratrol supps other helpful factors may be staying thin and being female http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aging http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immortality |
||
|
|
twilyth
Master Cruncher US Joined: Mar 30, 2007 Post Count: 2130 Status: Offline Project Badges:
|
And the news just keeps getting worse. Antioxidants may increase cancer risk.
----------------------------------------Although this too has been suspected for at least the past 15 years, it was hard to believe. Abstract: High-dose beta-carotene supplementation in high-risk persons has been linked to increased lung cancer risk in clinical trials; whether effects are similar in the general population is unclear. The authors examined associations of supplemental beta-carotene, retinol, vitamin A, lutein, and lycopene with lung cancer risk among participants, aged 50-76 years, in the VITamins And Lifestyle (VITAL) cohort Study in Washington State. In 2000-2002, eligible persons (n = 77,126) completed a 24-page baseline questionnaire, including detailed questions about supplement use (duration, frequency, dose) during the previous 10 years from multivitamins and individual supplements/mixtures. Incident lung cancers (n = 521) through December 2005 were identified by linkage to the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry. Longer duration of use of individual beta-carotene, retinol, and lutein supplements (but not total 10-year average dose) was associated with statistically significantly elevated risk of total lung cancer and histologic cell types; for example, hazard ratio = 2.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.28, 3.17 for individual supplemental lutein with total lung cancer and hazard ratio = 3.22, 95% confidence interval: 1.29, 8.07 for individual beta-carotene with small-cell lung cancer for >4 years versus no use. There was little evidence for effect modification by gender or smoking status. Long-term use of individual beta-carotene, retinol, and lutein supplements should not be recommended for lung cancer prevention, particularly among smokers. |
||
|
|
|