longevity

Science and longevity experts are clear about what time you should wake up

by

For years, the culture of effort and extreme productivity has sold us the “five o’clock club“like him Holy Grail of successtaking as examples to CEOs, influencers or personal development gurus who point out the need to wake up at five in the morning. However, science focused on aging has a very different message: waking up too early is not only not productive, but it can shave years off our life. The experts. Sebastian La Rosaa doctor specializing in longevity, already pointed out that the optimal time to wake up is in a very specific window: between 6:45 and 7:00 in the morning. And the reality is that the scientific literature supports its claims based on clinical experience quite well. Without going any further, an analysis that lasted for 20 years in large groups of people revealed that the lowest point of mortality risk is exactly around seven in the morning. From this point on, extremes (as often happens in biology) are quite expensive. The extremes. Get up constantly after 8 in the morning raises the risk of mortality from all causes by a staggering 39%. But being a night owl and waking up super early every day isn’t good for your health either. This is what they saw from the data extracted from the UK Biobankwith a sample of more than 433,000 people, showing that the evening chronotype (going to bed late and getting up late) has a 10% higher risk of mortality total compared to early risers, impacting more harshly on people over 63 years of age. More tests. On the other hand, a massive study from the University of Exeter found that people who wake up naturally between five and seven in the morning reduce their risk of premature mortality by between 20 and 25%. This fits perfectly with the recommendation to go to sleep between 10:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. to achieve 7 or 8 hours of restful sleep and protect, in the process, cardiovascular health. The golden rule. While 7:00 a.m. seems like the evolutionary magic hour, researchers at Harvard and other pioneering institutions have reached an even more important conclusion: consistency is the most important factor. In this way, having irregular sleep schedules, such as going to bed and getting up at very different times each day, increases the risk of mortality between 20 and 48%. In fact, the regularity of the sleep-wake cycle has been shown to be a stronger predictor of mortality than the total number of hours slept. This forces the scientific consensus to establish that sleeping between 6 and 8 hours is ideal, with exactly 7 hours being the figure linked to greater survival in large population cohorts. But if we choose to sleep less than seven hours or more than eight hours, the body can become unbalanced and increase the risk of death. Hacking the internal clock. Behind all these statistics there are pure cellular mechanics. In animal models, it has been proven that having “high amplitude” circadian rhythms, with very marked differences between daytime alertness and nighttime rest, directly correlates with greater longevity. When this biological clock is altered by living behind sunlight, we alter metabolic pathways critical for aging such as via mTOR, sirtuins or IGF-1. Exposing yourself to natural light as soon as you wake up around seven in the morning is the signal that the brain needs to set this complex hormonal mechanism in motion, mitigating oxidative damage and preventing cardiovascular diseases and cancer. Images | muntazar mansory In Xataka | If you fall asleep in less than five minutes, you don’t have a “superpower”: it’s a warning signal from your brain

We believed that a vegetarian diet guaranteed longevity. In extreme old age, the data says just the opposite

by

There are many positions in nutrition about what food It is the one that will give us a better old age. One of the positions that you have surely heard is the need to reduce meat consumption to prioritize vegetables for everyone the benefits that they contribute. But now science is pointing out that what works at age 40 may not be ideal at age 90. The change of course. A published study this same year in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition has shaken the hornet’s nest of gerontology after analyzing thousands of elderly people. The conclusion they have drawn is that among those over 80 years of age, those who consume meat are more likely to become centenarians than strict vegetarians. But before you rush to cancel your salad order, read the fine print: the key is not the meat per sebut weight, fragility and the fight against muscle loss. The data. In order to reach this conclusion, the study analyzed data from a longevity survey in the Chinese population carried out between 1998 and 2018. In total, the researchers followed 5,203 participants who were over 80 years old, classifying them based on omnivores or vegetariansincluding vegans and ovolactovegetarians. The results. Adjusting for age, gender, and baseline health, the study yielded a surprising finding: vegetarian diets were associated with a 25% lower chance of reaching age 100 compared to omnivorous diets. A correlation that was statistically significant mainly in the elderly who were already thin. Thinness. This is a really important point to present one of the nuances of this research. And the advantage of carnivores disappears in people who have a weight within the established normality. Thus, the negative association between being vegetarian and extreme longevity was observed almost exclusively in participants with a BMI lower than 18.5. That is, extreme thinness. This reinforces what is sometimes known in medicine as the “paradox of obesity in old age“. While in youth overweight is a risk factor for almost everything, in extreme old age, having energy reserves and muscle mass is life insurance. This is why the authors of the study emphasize that the consumption of foods of animal origin seems to act as a protective factor against malnutrition and frailty in these vulnerable individuals. Because. The biological explanation that suggests that meat is good in old age is based on the constant fight against degradation. One of these events is the dreaded sarcopeniawhich occurs when the natural loss of muscle mass accelerates over time. One of the objectives here, as we have repeated many times, is to maintain muscle with highly bioavailable proteins that are in meat, eggs and milk. In addition to this, the study suggests that strict vegetarians, especially thin ones, may not be ingesting enough total calories to maintain their physiology in stressful situations. And it is not crazy now, but previous studies have already pointed out that, although restricting meat reduces mortality in young people and middle adults, this effect was reversed in old age. They don’t cast a shadow. Logically, this study does not negate the many benefits of a plant-based diet for the general population. In fact, there are studies that suggest that for the vast majority of the population the priority continues to be preventing serious chronic diseases such as diabetes. However, this work suggests that nutrition must be dynamic, since the requirement in middle age is not the same as in the last years of life. Images | Simon Godfrey Kile Mickey In Xataka | Being bored is psychologically positive but it has an undesirable consequence on your body: it makes you gain weight.

It turns out that a longevity expert has said something that makes sense. And the reason is the juices

by

Peter Diamandis has returned. The famous doctor and engineer specializing in longevity has once again made simple dietary advice viral: “if you like oranges, eat them whole and not in juice.” And, to the surprise of all of us who closely follow the worldit’s a good idea. Beyond the joke, longevity is becoming serious. Very serious indeed. Since an open microphone confirmed to us in September that longevity is becoming a crucial issue for oligarchs of the present, it is impossible not to look at this community of researchers, influencers and entrepreneurs in a “different way”. However, the reality is obvious: most advice on how to live longer is a mix of cherry picking, scientific sensationalism and common sense. Ultimately, to the extent that society is increasingly obsessed with living longerthe ‘market’ for these types of ideas is growing (for better and worse). And Diamandis is a good example. As They explained in El Confidencialthis entrepreneur and researcher has a very long list of dietary ideas: from withdrawing dairy products due to the body’s inflammatory response to casein to avoiding red meat due to its saturated fats (basing his diet almost exclusively on vegetables and whole foods). As we saw a few days ago with other well-meaning advicethese kinds of ideas make some sense, yes. However, every heuristic has two sides: it illuminates a certain part of reality and helps us manage it more easily. But it hides other parts and makes it seriously difficult to be aware of them. But, let’s get to the juices. Because that is the latest advice that has been vitalized is precisely that: that the debate has never been “yes fruit” or “no fruit.” ¡Of course you have to consume fruit! The debate is how we consume it and in juice it is, possibly, the worst way. By squeezing the pieces of fruit, we not only reduce the fiber but we end up consuming something completely different: satiety is worse and sugar absorption is improved. When we talk about fruit being good, what we are saying is that we need the fiber it contains for its metabolic and satiety effects. Oh really? So much so that organizations like the AESAN they insist repeatedly that juice does not replace whole fruit. And yes, I know that for many it is a commonplace (and something very well known), but it never hurts to repeat it: the consumption of rooting fruit has fallen 14% in recent years. We already know that it is good advice, but also worse for longevity. Here, the truth is that the evidence is less clear. Above all, because it is never enough to ‘stop recommending something’, we must go further and put better options on the table. And yes, water is always an option. But unfortunately, it is not always a substitute for the social consumption of juices. Image | Zlatko Duric In Xataka | One of the leading experts on aging has just explained what he himself does to live longer. It makes sense

how much science believes our longevity will actually increase

by

Society is increasingly obsessed with living longer and longer and have an aesthetic that corresponds to a younger age. Right now there are many really eloquent projects to achieve practically immortalitybut this makes us wonder if our body has some kind of limit that cannot be exceeded. This is what science tries to elucidate. Nowadays, people who live more than one hundred years are something extraordinary, and we even see their centenary birthdays appear on the pages of the newspaper or on local television programs. But the question in this case is whether the new normal will be being able to live more than a century as something normal, and above all in good conditions. But the truth is that we are far from achieving this. Two concepts. The first thing to understand here is the difference that exists between the average life expectancy and maximum longevity. The first of these is growing spectacularly in the last century thanks to vaccines, hygiene, medications and better access to healthcare (although this reaches an older population, with its problems). But when we talk about maximum longevity we cannot say the same, since it is a much harder ceiling to crack. The obligatory question in this case is clear: where is our ceiling that we cannot break? Less than expected. There is now solid scientific evidence that suggests that human beings have a “factory” biological limit. Different studies, such as those published in Nature, they placed the natural human limit around 115 years. Although more recent and optimistic reviews, based on statistical modeling of the “supercentenarians” (people over 110 years old), extend that range up to 125 years. Therefore, we are not facing a scenario of immortality, but rather the age progression curve begins to stabilize at a specific point. And this is clearly a brake that biology itself is imposing on us, because our body has a very clear limit in its functioning. Prioritize well-being. Reaching the age of 120, but with very poor health, with many illnesses behind you or without being able to move, is not something at all attractive. That is why demographic projections for Europe They suggest that, by the year 2065, life expectancy will be between 87 and 93 years. This doesn’t sound like science fiction, and that’s precisely why it’s relevant. It is not about making quantum leaps through unproven gene therapies, but about the accumulation of medical and social improvements. The goal of modern longevity medicine is not for you to live 150 years connected to a machine, but to extend the “healthspan“, that is, the period of healthy life. We already know the ‘secret’. While we wait for drugs that reverse old age, science tells us that we already have the “technology” to maximize our lives and it has been used for decades in the so-called ‘Blue Zones’ of Okinawa as a standard. And it is precisely in this area that people It is capable of easily reaching 100 years without much problemand the question was obligatory: why here? We found the answer in studies carried out in this areait can be seen that the factors that influence being able to reach 100 years of life have nothing to do with transfusions of young plasma, blood cleansing or super-expensive therapies that promise miraculous results. Among the habits that follow we can find the following: Natural calorie restriction: They consume 10-15% fewer calories than an average Western adult. And we already know that this influences above all the generation of oxidative stress which is a great ‘poison’ for our body. The good carbohydrate diet: their diet is based on vegetables and complex carbohydrates such as sweet potatoes, with a very low animal protein intake. Youth biomarkers: the combination of diet and constant physical activity results in a lower incidence of chronic diseases. Less stress: another great poison for the body due to its involvement in cortisol levels. In Okinawa, community cohesion acts as a buffer for stress. The importance of habits. In this way, the scientific horizon for the next century does not promise immortality. It is likely that we will continue to see a trickle of individual records and exceptional cases of genetics that cause us to see people who far exceed the century of life. But for most humans, This is not something we get. (or at least with a good quality of life). The true longevity revolution in the 21st century will be to make reaching age 90 the norm and not the exception, applying what we already know works: moving, eating less (and better) and maintaining strong social ties. And above all, do not wait for a magic pill, as has been demonstrated by the habits of Japanese people who have achieved an effect that no gene therapy has achieved so far. Images | Ravi Patel In Xataka | Not all brain cells age at the same time: we have found a “hot spot” of aging

We have been intrigued by the “blue areas” in which longevity shoots. His secret may be in Finland

by

Scientists have observed for year “Blue Areas” With a mixture of fascination, suspicion And a pressing question: are there places that people usually enjoy longer and healthier lives? Is it easier to meet centenary people in certain regions From the planet, like Okinawa (Japan), Ikara (Greece) or Sardinia? And if so, why? A group of Finnish researchers believe they have found A new candidate To “Blue Zone” to the west of your country, a finding that can help us better understand these mysterious areas. For now, they have already managed to generate expectation. What happened? Some time ago a group of researchers from the Åbo Akademia University based in Turku (Finland), a peculiar objective was proposed: finding out if a part of its country fits the characteristics of what is usually known as ‘blue areas’geographical areas that stand out for the high longevity and healthy life habits of its inhabitants, two realities that experts believe they are directly related. To be more precise Nordic scientists focused on a handful of territories of the old Western Finland: The Swedish majority region of Ostrobotnia, South Ostrobotnia and the Åland islands. As explained in The article In which they have reflected their conclusions, their idea was to analyze the longevity indicators and then find out if the best results corresponded to the cities in which people enjoy a healthier lifestyle. But … What is “blue zone”? Regions in which people (apparently) enjoy longer and more healthy lives than normal. It is not a new concept. Its origins can be traced At least until 2004when the magazine Experimental Gerontology public A broad study on the centenary population of Sardinia, Italy. In it the authors marked with that color (blue) the regions of the map in which the longevity data were higher. In addition to identifying them geographically, researchers speculated that these indicators could be explained by factors such as nutrition, lifestyle or the proliferation of genetic characteristics that favored the locals. The fact is that the ‘blue areas’ liked and shortly after, in 2005, a journalist from National Geographic He used it in Another article in which he talked about three regions of the planet where on average the population enjoyed longer and healthy lives: Okinawa, in Japan, Loma Linda, in California, and Sardinia. The text was affected in the same idea: the phenomenon connects with certain healthy habits in these territories, such as nutritional diets, physical activity, stress control and moderate alcohol consumption, among others. And what did they find out in Finland? Åbo researchers identified a series of curious phenomena who, in summary, have taken them to conclude That the Swedish region of Ostrobotnia “could be a blue zone”, with a population characterized by its high life expectancy, health and positive life habits. However, that’s just one of your conclusions. And maybe not the most interesting. To understand it it is necessary to know Your study and the figures on which it supports. What figures? The most interesting are longevity. According to The data collected in Journal of Aging Research In the åland islands life expectancy among babies who came to the world between 2020 and 2022 was 83.5 years, in ostrobotnia of 83.1 and in southern ostrobotnia of 81.8. Any of these data exceeds both the mean of Finland (81.6) and EU’swhich is around 81.5. Worldwide, life expectancy at birth in 2022 was 72.6 years and, According to statistathat global average will not approach that of Ostrobotnia until the end of the century. Of course, it is a global average. In Spain the data is already Very simulate. And what does that tell us? The Åbo team did not limit himself to studying longevity records. After all, the blue areas have not been analyzed only according to demographic data. Experts also take into account factors such as “lifestyle and health”, which includes social relationships, diet, physical activity or even vital purposes. By taking into account these parameters, experts reached a conclusion: the relationship between them (longevity and the characteristics of blue areas) are not as evident as one would expect. What does it mean? That the greatest longevity data are not necessarily in the regions that best fit the ideal characteristics of a “blue zone”. It sounds confusing, but it is better understood with an example. The longest study of the study was Åland, an area that effectively presents good health data, but is “diverted from several principles” of what could be considered the ideal lifestyle. In part of Ostrobotnia something different happens: the healthy lifestyle is well implanted and yet its life expectancy is less than in other areas. What is the conclusion? There are several. To begin the researchers concluded that, if the age, health and implementation of the lifestyle of the blue areas, the Swedish Obstrobotnia are taken into account It could be considered Perfectly one of those redoubts that stand out for their longevity. Just like Other regions of the planet, such as Okinawa, Ikara or Oglybasra. However, research throws another more interesting reading, especially in the face of future studies on blue areas: when analyzing them it is important to take into account the context. “The possible coherence between longevity, health and lifestyle I could vary in different cultural, political, social and economic contexts,” indicates the articlewhich acknowledges that their data shows that “the Nordic regions with greater longevity are not necessarily adhere to the lifestyle of blue areas.” In other words, they insist: “The important lifestyle principles for longevity can vary in different regions.” Why is it interesting? Because beyond the implications it may have for Western Finland, its authorities, doctors and demographers, research throws new data and keys to the study of blue areas, a concept that in recent years has aroused two feelings: fascination … and skepticism. Since National Geographic public Your article The concept has generated debate and suspicion of those who warn that their scientific base results Little solid. In 2019 Dr. Saul J. Newman launched An article in which … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.