Antioxidants may not extend life span
By Kate Wilcox
Commercial companies began adding antioxidants, antioxidants, to various and diverse products from face cream to soft drinks, claiming that these substances clean the cells, prevent cancer and even delay death. The idea is to prevent unstable oxygen molecules, which are normally created as a byproduct of natural metabolism, from harming the cells. But a recent study suggests that when it comes to extending life, these antioxidants aren't the answer.
The theory regarding antioxidants states that some of the oxygen molecules that the body utilizes become active free radicals, charged with a negative electrical charge (superoxide radical ion, or superoxide). These free radicals damage health and age the body because they damage the structure of cells, proteins and DNA. Cells have a natural defense mechanism called superoxide dismutase (SOD). This is a special family of antioxidants that neutralize the active substances and prevent them from damaging the cells. According to the theory, proposed in 1956 by Dunham Herman, now a retired professor of medicine from the University of Nebraska, as the body ages, the SOD system becomes less effective in preventing harmful oxidation. For 50 years, this theory, accepted by many, stood the test of scientific research: when the SOD genes are damaged in mice, flies or yeast, the creatures develop cancer and their lives are shortened.
But in an article published in February 2009 in the US National Library of Science's online genetics journal, PLoS Genetics, Siegfried Hekimi and Jeremy M. van Ramsdonk of McGill University reported that removing the SOD mechanism from the tiny earthworm Caenorhabditis elegans had exactly the opposite effect: they lived longer time. In their experiments, the researchers disabled the five SOD genes, which work mainly in the mitochondria (the cell's energy producing organelles). In each experiment, a different combination of genes was disabled and this disrupted the ability of the cells to produce antioxidants. When the researchers turned off one particular gene (sod-2), the worms lived 30% longer than normal. Even when four genes were silenced in a further experiment, the life span of the worms was not affected.
Kimi believes that the findings cast doubt on the whole theory of free radicals causing aging. Instead he says that the damage to the cells is a result of aging rather than the cause of it. "It's like the sun that rises every morning - they can't prove that it will rise," he says of the proponents of the free radical theory. "And if I have to prove that she won't shine."
But the modified worms are unhealthy. They show signs of oxidative stress. Without the antioxidants, the cells are left without protection, and outside the laboratory they would die from diseases or cancer. But Kimi separates these phenomena from normal life expectancy. The creature may be sicker, he says, but it lives longer.
Other scientists doubt that the findings completely undermine the free radical theory. "You can't take one paper, which studied one gene, in one organism and draw blanket conclusions about a theory," says John Phillips of Golf University in Ontario, who examined the SOD mechanism in fruit flies. Moreover, earthworms have five SOD genes, while humans have only two. "I think it's worth knowing where the additional SOD genes work, that is, in which tissues or muscles, and in which cell components" to properly understand the oxygen metabolism in earthworms, Phillips says. Knowing the unique biological characteristics of the worms will make it possible to clarify the action of SOD in general.
Kimi suggests his findings could bolster an alternative theory of aging: the idea that a slower metabolism or lower temperature slows down the body and allows the organism to live longer. Some studies have undermined the theory that the fast pace of life causes aging, but Kimi believes that it is necessary to "look at the theory from a broader perspective, that the pace at which things happen affects life expectancy." The way he sees things, in worms where the SOD mechanism is impaired, the free radicals damage the mitochondria, the organelles produce less energy and therefore the organism slows down and lives longer.
Kimi's idea contradicts the findings of Bart Berkman of Ghent University in Belgium, who conducted his own experiments with the earthworm C. elegans in 2007. Berkman's experiments led him to reject the metabolic theory of aging. But he also believes that the theory of free radicals is not the only answer. He says Kimi's work joins other new studies that challenge the simplistic version of the theory. "The final conclusion in all these articles is one: there is a problem with the theory of free radicals," he says.
So what does this mean about the antioxidants everyone wants so much? Artificial antioxidants have not been able to bring about a clear extension of the life span of humans. And the matter has bothered Herman ever since he came up with his theory. Although antioxidants clearly prevent cell damage, there is still no consensus as to how much this delays aging. "I'm glad that the theory is being challenged," says Herman. "It's the only way we do things."
17 תגובות
Isaac and Raul
The semen contains a lot of essential substances that the body takes time and resources to produce
Here is another example of how to make an elephant fly, or in the language of the article, how to make a human worm.
What is serious in my view is that a respected newspaper such as Scientific American crowns a yellow and cheap headline that will tomorrow become a flashy headline in Yediot Ahronoth, which will quote the delusional title of the article and in the wake of which there will be a great uproar because 99% of readers of Yediot Ahronoth will not read its content at all and those who do are not sure that they will understand.
I would expect from a scientific newspaper that its headlines would shock its content and not be dragged into the jaundice that dominates the daily press.
Yitzchak You have now read the answer to your question on the Internet here
Arousal Level Nine
At level nine, you go into the mystery and can
experience extraordinarily profound altered states of
consciousness. These mystical states can include out of
body experiences, extra sensory perception, remote
viewing, time travel, flashes and insights of the past
(including past lives) or the future, communication with
spirits, guides, and the dead, experience channeling or
an in-pouring of creative genius or problem solving,
etc. Nothing could adequately prepare you for the
delightful surprises the mystery may offer to you if
your are completely surrendered, your heart is wide
open, your mind is clear of all thinking or judgment,
and you are completely free of egoism.
Arousal Level Ten
At level ten it is possible to have direct experience with
the divine, with God or Goddess. High levels of satori,
Samadhi, and enlightenment become available. You
may come face to face with your creator. You may
merge with the creator. You may become God or
Goddess with no separation remaining. This is home in
eternity—beyond time and space, without beginning or
end
This proves how much nonsense it is
It [antioxidants] doesn't even work in the placebo form
I mean sometimes the energies of the person play a role
Like rockers age slowly
Here it's not even that apparently placebo can't affect life expectancy
So isn't it true that happy people live longer?
So what?
Neurologists to work!
Haha Yitzhak I started and stopped too
You have no idea how ridiculous that sounds
But it seems to me that he was asking whether it is scientifically possible all the things they are talking about
can they know
After all it is Buddha for everything
Isaac, maybe there is no general answer and it depends on the physiology/psychology of each person. It seems to me that this is a topic that is not difficult to check. So keep us posted on the results 🙂
Stupid research. Simply underestimating the intelligence of the public.
Dear Isaac
Don't forget that we owe our existence to the rest of the emission, the one who understands will understand, one hour earlier is fine, and anyone who adds detracts.
By the way, the method includes achieving orgasm without ejaculation
But I don't think all the stories are about escape
And I would love to hear the opinion of those in the know
If life expectancy
I was asked by Zagi's daughter to learn Tantra and Tao
Now as a reminder, we explain to you that the emission of the man's semen
Takes all the good angriyas and it was also explicitly listed
"When the body feels that it is about to create a person, it brings out the good
the most that exists in it"
And many more confirmations against the emission
Now I stopped after a while
Because I don't believe in nonsense usually they probably didn't come
from hundreds of years ago from the east
Someone could tell me if it's clear that these are just nonsense
The whole point of the energies
Regarding the rate of metabolism in the body, in my opinion it is not the cause of the extension or shortening of the life span.
It's all about balance. If the metabolism in the living body over a certain period of time is such that the actions carried out on cells and between cells leave any negative effect on the body, only then indeed a faster metabolism will lead to a shortening of life, and a slower metabolism will postpone the end.
Therefore, as in car accidents, speed is often not the one that determines whether there will be an accident or not, but only determines its severity. The direct cause of the accident is different. And so with the life span of the organism. You need to understand the metabolic equation and find the factors that leave a net negative effect and deterioration of the organism. In an equation with such a negative net, as mentioned - the rate of metabolism = the rate of approaching the end.
Just an opinion.
Why are people looking for ways to extend life expectancy? They want to live more years
Assuming hypothetically [not entirely] that one day they will be able to extend life
I bet in our twisted society
This will also be for sale
Like everything, it's all for sale
As one of the field, most food companies add antioxidants in order to extend the shelf life of the food, because the free radicals damage the fatty acids in the food and the by-products of that breakdown of fatty acids are a bad taste and a bad smell of the product (mainly spread snacks and meat).
Therefore, in the field of food, I say with responsibility, they add and will continue to add antioxidants.
The research shows nothing.
They also tested the lowering of super oxidase in invertebrates whose environment is completely different from ours, what's more, breathing is very different.
I am constantly immobilizing similar bacteria in bacteria, I can say that under optimal laboratory conditions their lifespan is extended.
I think the main point of interest is knowledge, beyond the enrichment of knowledge. It is the flawed use of scientific theories by various parties for the purpose of obtaining such and such profits, while taking advantage of the public's ignorance and wide exposure to abstract and popular versions of these theories.
Very interesting and requires a lot of additional studies to draw more conclusions that are very important regarding the validity of the experiment
There is a study that shows that humans are the size of a worm.
They took a worm and measured it.