Category Archives: longevity

Intermittent fasting is a key strategy for anti-aging and longevity


by Dr. David Jockers 

(NaturalNews) Our ancient ancestors grew up in a world of stress and scarcity. Food was often not available and intermittent fasting was common. This form of life left a genetic blueprint with key information pertaining to our health and wellbeing. Intermittent fasting reduces oxidative stress, enhances cellular repair processes and appears to be a key strategy for anti-aging and longevity.

Thousands of years of food scarcity led our bodies to develop a protective mechanism to adapt to alternating phases of food abundance and scarcity. During times of food scarcity, our cell membranes become more sensitive to insulin. This is especially important when food is scarce because it ensures that every bit of food be efficiently used or stored.

During times of food abundance the body desensitizes the cells to insulin in an effort to avoid the stress of a heavy calorie intake. This results in elevated insulin levels, increased fat storage and increased oxidative stress and inflammatory conditions in the body. Insulin also enhances cellular division, which is a risk factor for cancer formation.

Today, we have a massive abundance of food sources. We can virtually eat anytime we would like. In fact, many health coaches recommend eating 5-6 small meals throughout the day. This process, however, sends the body the signal of surplus that inhibits key tissue repair hormones, which have powerful anti-aging effects.

Turning on Genetic Repair Mechanisms

Intermittent fasting acts to turn on certain genetic repair mechanisms that enhance cellular rejuvenation. This adaptation appears to allow certain cells to have a longer lifespan during times of famine. It is energetically less expensive to repair a cell than it is to divide and create new cells. This has a positive effect at shutting down cancer cell formation and proliferation.

These genetic repair mechanisms are turned on through the release of human growth hormone (HGH). HGH is known to create physiological changes in metabolism to favor fat burning and protein sparing. The proteins and amino acids are utilized to repair tissue collagen which improves the functionality and strength of muscles, tendons, ligaments, and bones. HGH also improves skin function, reduces wrinkles & heals cuts and burns faster.

HGH and insulin are opposites in function. HGH is focused on tissue repair, efficient fuel usage and anti-inflammatory immune activity. Insulin is designed for energy storage, cellular division and pro-inflammatory immune activity. Insulin is the dominant player in this game. When conditions demand an insulin release (carbohydrate intake), HGH is inhibited.

Fasting is a Powerful Healing Modality

Intermittent fasting is one of the most powerful modalities for reducing inflammation, boosting immunity and enhancing tissue healing. This is one of the reasons why many people feel nauseated when they have infections. This innate mechanism is the body’s way of influencing us to fast so it can produce the right environment to boost natural immunity.

Researchers at the Intermountain Medical Center Heart Institute found that men, who had fasted for 24 hours, had a 2000% increase in circulating HGH. Women who were tested had a 1300% increase in HGH. The researchers found that the fasting individuals had significantly reduced their triglycerides, boosted their HDL cholesterol and stabilized their blood sugar.

The best way to begin fasting is by giving your body 12 hours between dinner and breakfast every single day. This allows 4 hours to complete digestion and 8 hours for the liver to complete its detoxification cycle. After this is a standard part of lifestyle, try taking one day a week and extending the fast to 16-18 hours. Eventually, you may choose to do a full 24 hour fast each week.

Digestive enzymes enhance nutrient absorption, gut health and longevity

Digestive enzymes enhance nutrient absorption, gut health and longevity

by PF Louis 

(NaturalNews) A survey of holistic practitioners by Ed McCabe, author of Flood Your Body with Oxygen, for the order of nutrients’ importance consensus was: Oxygen, water, enzymes, minerals, and vitamins.

Jon Barron, author of Lessons from the Miracle Doctors, presented the essence of the late Dr. Edward Howell’s message: “A person’s life span is directly related to the exhaustion of their enzyme potential. The use of food enzymes decreases that rate of exhaustion, and thus results in a longer, healthier, and more vital life.”

That’s a clear and important concept. But it’s not widely appreciated. Enzymes are energized, active protein compounds that are involved with every aspect of digestion and all cellular metabolismthroughout our bodies. Without enzymes, food, minerals, and vitamins are useless.

In fact, every activity in our body from creating cellular energy to building bone and muscle to hormonal production and distribution, and even thinking are governed by enzymes.

How enzyme potential is exhausted

There are three basic types of enzymes: Metabolic, digestive, and food. Metabolic enzymes patrol the blood stream to perform all the processes of cellular metabolism needed for life. Some come in with raw food, while most are created in the pancreas.

Organic raw foods contain the enzymes necessary for their digestion. The more raw foods eaten, the less one overworks the pancreas, which produces enzymes that are injected into the small intestines to extract food nutrients.

Before that, chewing releases enzymes in our saliva that begin the digestive process. If our food is not cooked and its enzymes are intact, this process of pre-digestion accounts for more than half of breaking down consumed food into absorbable nutrients.

That process is interrupted when the acid digestive juices of our stomach are initiated, usually in around an hour, but picked up again in the small intestines where the pancreas comes into action.

The pancreas gets overworked if not enough enzymes come in with our food. Many enzymes are eliminated from cooking and processing foods. Not chewing food well minimizes saliva enzymatic production.

This forces the body to depend more on pancreatic proteolytic enzymes for digestion. The pancreas’ proteolytic enzymes are needed to break down waste products and inflammatory scar tissue from immune system activities in our bloodstream.

This increases the burden on the pancreas and depletes or inflames the pancreas, resulting in lower protease or proteolytic enzymes, triggering a cascade of disease and aging symptoms. This is what is meant by exhausting our enzyme potential.

How to recover maximum enzyme potential

Chew food more than usual. Increase your consumption of raw, unprocessed foods. Try to enjoy your meals without stressing.

Even if you eat organically produced meats, the complete proteins of cooked meat are harder to break down, forcing the pancreas to work harder producing proteolytic enzymes.

Supplement enzymes with each meal. Enzyme supplements should contain papain for breaking down complete proteins, amylase for starches and carbohydrates, lipase for fats, lactase for dairy, and cellulose for fibers.

But there are enzyme supplements that should be taken away from meals to go directly into the bloodstream and eat up normally resistive waste products, scar tissue, and even cancer cells.Bromelain and serrapeptase are two such easily purchased proteolytic enzymes.

Texas dentist William Donald Kelley cured his terminal pancreatic cancer with powerful, hybrid pancreatic juice protease, and then he proceeded to cure several other cancer patients before running into problems with the Medical Mafia. (http://www.naturalnews.com/030050_dentist_cancer.html)

Now MD Nicholas Gonzalez in NYC courageously continues refining Dr. Kelley’s pancreatic juice breakthrough. Karen DeFelice, author of three books on enzyme therapy, helped her autistic son with enzymes. She offers a pdf report (below) on treating neurological issues with enzymes.

Study links diet to longevity, but with confusing findings

By Jennifer LaRue Huget

(File photo)

What you eat might well determine how long you live.

But it’s not exactly clear what the optimal diet should be.
In a study published in the January 2011 edition of theJournal of the American Dietetic Association, researchers found that among 2,500 adults ages 70 to 79, those who maintained a diet consisting largely of foods deemed “healthy” were less likely to die and more likely to remain healthy than those whose diets included more of less-healthful foods during the 10-year period examined.
Researchers divvied the study subjects into six groups according to their predominant food choices among 108 food items tallied. Here’s how the clusters fell out:
  • “Healthy foods” (374 participants)
  • “High-fat dairy products” (332)
  • “Meat, fried foods, and alcohol” (693)
  • “Breakfast cereal” (386)
  • “Refined grains” (458)
  • “Sweets and desserts” (339)

That “healthy foods” category was defined by relatively higher consumption of low-fat dairy, fruit, whole grains, poultry, fish and vegetables and lower intake of meat, fried foods, sweets, high-calorie beverages and added fat.

After all kinds of controls were applied to rule out the effects of gender, age, physical activity, smoking, race, total calorie intake and other variables, the numbers showed that the “high-fat dairy products” group had a 40 percent higher risk of mortality than the “health foods” group and that the “sweets and desserts” group had a 37 percent higher risk than the “healthy foods” group.
The study concludes:

A dietary pattern consistent with current guidelines to consume relatively high amounts of vegetables, fruit, whole grains, poultry, fish and low-fat dairy products may be associated with superior nutritional status, quality of life and survival in older adults.

But what to make of that “meat, fried foods and alcohol” group — the one that you might notice is nearly twice the size of the “healthy foods” group? That group’s not even mentioned in the news release (the study is not yet posted online) — despite the fact that, when the numbers were crunched, that group’s mortality risk was about the same as that of the healthy-eating group.
The study notes:

Unexpectedly, in this and several other studies, a pattern higher in red meat was not significantly associated with increased risk of mortality when controlled for relevant confounding factors. One suggested explanation is that plant-based diets may lower health risk because plant foods are protective, whereas diets high in animal foods may be more likely to increase risk only if the animal foods displace protective plant foods in the diet.

The study’s lead author, Amy Anderson of the University of Maryland department of nutrition and food science, was good enough to make herself available to talk on the phone over the holiday weekend and tried to help me sort things out. I couldn’t understand why the meat/fried food/alcohol group’s relative good health wasn’t singled out as helping keep folks alive longer, leaving all the credit to the “healthy foods” group.
Anderson followed up with an e-mail reviewing what she’d told me on the phone:

As mentioned on the phone, while we can’t give definite reasons for our results, Table 1 in the paper [which shows percentage of total energy intake from selected food groups each cluster’s diet] may provide some ideas for why the “meat, fried foods and alcohol” group didn’t have a statistically significantly higher risk of mortality than the “healthy foods” group after controlling for many variables including education, physical activity, and smoking — in other words, these other variables being equal. As Table 1 shows, the name of the “meat, fried foods and alcohol” group may be a bit misleading, because this group had a more similar diet to the “healthy foods” group than some of the others. We named the groups according to foods that people ate relatively more of in comparison to the other groups. The “meat, fried foods and alcohol” group ate on average about 4 percent of calories from meat, while the “healthy foods” group ate on average about 2.8 percent of calories from meat. The differences in fried food and alcohol intake between the “meat, fried foods and alcohol” group and the “healthy foods” group were also about 1 to 3 percent. In contrast, the “sweets and desserts” group ate on average about 25.8 percent of calories from sweets, while the “healthy foods” group ate on average about 6 percent of calories from sweets — a difference of almost 20 percent in this food group. The “high-fat dairy products” group ate about 17.1 percent of calories from high fat dairy products, while the “healthy foods” group ate about 3.4 percent of calories from high fat dairy products — a difference of almost 14 percent in this food group. In other words, it is not as though the “meat, fried foods and alcohol” group within this study population of 70-79 year-olds ate enormous quantities of these foods, just slightly more on average than the other groups. The “sweets and desserts” and “high-fat dairy products” groups, on the other hand, showed some more stark differences from the “healthy foods” group in their diets.

I appreciate Anderson’s taking pains to help me with this. But the cynic in me has to wonder whether the finding that people who eat a bit more meat, fried food and alcohol manage to do all right, mortality-wise, may have been too out of whack with current dietary recommendations for comfort. Especially as the new Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2010, which are likely to promote consumption of whole grains and other plant-based foods, are about to be issued, I hope researchers will keep at it and tease this confusing situation out further.
Because if it really is okay to eat meat and fried food and enjoy alcohol after all, people should know about it.

Comments


The Longevity diet: The missing link is blood sugar. Blood sugar is the cause of aging,Diabetes,Obesity,Alzheimers..etc
(you do not have to be a diabetic to have this problem)
A popular diabetes diet in Europe was shown to reverse aging markers as the diabetes drug caused faster ageing and heart trouble. See herehttp://spirithappy.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/the-first-drug-they-give-you-to-heal-type-2-diabetes-hurts-your-cells/
Unfortunately billions of dollars are invested into diabetes and obesity drug makers so the public will never get this information
Posted by: healing1 | December 28, 2010 10:46 AM | Report abuse

It sounds to me as if the “cynic” in this article’s author is looking for someone to give her the green light to consume as much meat, fried food and alcohol as she wants. I thought the study’s lead author explained the findings quite well. It’s basically “moderation in all things.” Many studies show moderate consumption of alcohol can be a good thing. Same goes for meat, especially moderate consumption of lean meat and fish, and fried foods, as long as they are fried in good oils. I’m not aware of any scientist who claims consuming REAL servings of any of these things, while making whole grains, vegetables and fruit the bulk of your diet ever hurt anyone. The problems start when people super-size such foods to the exclusion of whole grains, fruit and veggies.
Posted by: lolly312 | December 28, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

I’m going to use this study the next time I teach an advanced statistics course, as an example of 1) how to do things right, and 2) when you do things right, people who are not statistically literate (such as the writer here) will have a hard time, even when it is clearly explained (as it was — to someone who knew statistics).
The basic methodology of the study was a clustering algorithm. That’s a procedure which produces groupings based on minimizing differences within each group, and maximizing differences between groups. Clustering does not produce evenly spaced groups, because the world isn’t evenly spaced; if you pulled a sample from Manhattan, Brooklyn, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Tokyo, and grouped by physical location, two of the groups would be very close together, and a third one would not be far away from the two close ones. If you then tried to study weather with respect to physical location, you would discover that the close-together groupings didn’t show much difference. That is what happened here. The meat/fried/alcohol group generally ate a healthy diet; they happened to indulge in some probably-not-healthy other stuff, but not very much of it. Differences were in the range of 1-3% (as differences between the location of Manhattan and Brooklyn are quite small plotted on the scale of the continent). Unsurprisingly, results in longevity were somewhere within the margin of error. (Just as the number of days it snows in Manhattan but not in Brooklyn are few and insignificant).
What the study says in terms of action is: eat a mostly healthy diet. There’s not much difference between mostly healthy and perfectly healthy.
The writer was pushing for “so these other foods are okay.” The study shows only that they don’t seem to make a statistical difference in result, if the difference isn’t very great in consumption. Apparently steak-and-eggs-with-a-beer consumers don’t have that very often, and mostly eat like the healthy people, so it’s not surprising they differ very little. Just as apparently, people who live on milkshakes really live on milkshakes, and pay the arterial consequences.
“Study shows two patterns of healthy eating and two patterns of unhealthy eating are common in general population” isn’t much of a headline, but it’s what this study shows. Period. Have a pork chop with your salad, and a glass of wine, now and then, if you like. This doesn’t mean you can live on pork chops and wine.
And never talk to a reporter who has not, at least at one point in life, derived the Gaussian distribution from the limit of the binomial distribution.
Posted by: PasserThru | December 28, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Kind of hard to draw any conclusions from the study if the ‘groupings’ were not significantly different in their diets. To her credit, the scientist did explain that.
Unfortunately, these types of poorly constructed studies are often used by people and companies to push positions that the preponderance of science finds false. Confusion is the enemy of good advice, the friend of those who seek to deceive (or be deceived)
Posted by: mgferrebee | December 28, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

The study author’s explanation for the lack of a deleterious effect of eating meat is clearly and convincingly stated. It is very interesting that the meat group got only four percent of their calories from meat. I have contended for a long time that even meat eaters eat far more vegetables than even they realize. Now if they could just cut it all out . . .
Posted by: aspenhallinn | December 28, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Doesn’t anyone ask about the quantities eaten? Not calories–quantity.
Posted by: joan10 | December 28, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps it’s the writer’s interpretation of this finding’…people who eat a bit more meat, fried food and alcohol manage to do all right, mortality-wise…’
that needs enlightenment.
A healthy lifestyle, with or without red meat, et al, means that you don’t abuse any one food group.
If balance is the key to good living, surely a good steak, few glasses of wine and yummy desert every now and then won’t hurt one’s health as long as one has his/her health in sight at all times.
So have that juicy steak and enjoy
your workout the next day, too!
Posted by: writersMAMA | December 28, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

Let me assure all readers, there is no confusion in this study!
My credits: Discoverer of the cause of obesity, the disease which leaves a trail of others in its wake. I condemned the pyramid food guide after one glance in 1992. Not a studied reaction but an instinctive,immediate revulsion predicting the epidemic obesity future.
I had survived 7 years, 1939-1946 (WWII)deprived of food, starvation, but escaped with a food regimen which has left me—I will be 86 on Jan. 7th— in superior health.
I will not divulge the obesity code, I am waiting to sign a large organization to handle the recovery campaign.
That said—I will leave a hint; you are a misguided lot, greens and grains have promoted obesity ( I call it carbohydritis),you will be requested to abandon food guides and diets! You will become reacquainted with your inner ego, the gut. Needless to say, I have promoted red meat and saturated fat for ages. Why? It allows me to be well fed in small portions!
Send a BD card the address in hartsmartliving.com
Why am I so well? I have an attitude! Does it show?
————Hart———
Posted by: hart0007 | December 28, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

The main problem I see is that the researchers went into the study with a deeply ingrained hypothesis on what “healthy” eating meant. They even named of one of the categories they were supposedly studying “healthy foods”! Then, when they found another category that showed similar results in health and longevity, they did not adjust their reporting accordingly.
The fact that one of their categories was named qualitatively (e.g. healthy) rather than descriptively (e.g. high-fat dairy) shows their pre-experimental bias, and they continued to report their findings within these preconceived expectations. They highlighted that the “healthy foods” consumers lived longer, but chose not to highlight that the “meat, fried foods, and alchohol” group ALSO lived longer, This displays the pre-analysis bias they began the study with and could not fully shake when publishing their findings.
Kudos to Jennifer LaRue Huget for calling them on this. Science is all about re-evaluating preconceived ideas when experimental data does not match the hypothesis. Without this, there would be no advance in scientific understanding. 
Posted by: kcastro22 | December 28, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

And what about people who just plain don’t tell the truth about what they “REALLY” eat anyway?? If some so called dietetic groupie stopped me and asked what I ate, I would be tempted to tell her only the healthy things eaten, and not mention the See’s Truffles I just consumed……….just like when men are asked how often they do stuff, lol. And so it goes, nothing really is new, is it?? Yet reams are written to support a group’s existance to get research grants.
Posted by: kuchen | December 28, 2010 9:26 PM | Report abuse

Wikio

Two-meal diet aids in oldest man’s longevity


GREAT FALLS, Mont. — So what does the world’s oldest man eat? The answer is not much, at least not too much.

Walter Breuning, who turned 113 on Monday, eats just two meals a day and has done so for the past 35 years.

“I think you should push back from the table when you’re still hungry,” Breuning said.

At 5 foot 8, (“I shrunk a little,” he admitted) and 125 pounds, Breuning limits himself to a big breakfast and lunch every day and no supper.

“I have weighed the same for about 35 years,” Breuning said. “Well, that’s the way it should be.”

“You get in the habit of not eating at night, and you realize how good you feel. If you could just tell people not to eat so darn much.”

His practice of skipping supper began when he first moved to Great Falls from Minneapolis in 1978. He lived in the Yellowstone Apartments at the time and would walk downtown to Schell’s in the Johnson Hotel or the Albon Club on the second floor for lunch.

In 1980, the Albon Club moved to the Rainbow Hotel, and the owners asked Breuning to be manager, which he did for 15 years.

“I never started eating supper again,” Breuning said.

He gets up at 6:15 a.m. and has a big breakfast every day at 7:30 a.m. Usually it’s eggs, toast or pancakes.

“You can order anything you want, just like a restaurant,” he said.

“I eat a lot of fruit every day.”

Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer sent Breuning a fruit basket after a recent visit.

“Boy, I tell you that was good fruit. I ate the whole darn thing,” Breuning said. “Peaches, pears, everything, it sure was good.”

In addition to eating fruit every day, Breuning also takes a baby aspirin.

“Just one baby aspirin,” he said, “but everybody gets that for their heart. That’s the only pill I ever take, no other medicine.”

And he drinks plenty of water.

“I drink water all the time,” he said, and just a bit of coffee. “I drink a cup and a half of coffee for breakfast and a cup with lunch.”

Breuning said he has been healthy all of his life and believes diet has a lot to do with it.

“If people could cut back on their normal weight, it wouldn’t be quite so bad,” he commented. “They just eat too much!”

Breuning remembers his family having a cow, pigs, chickens and a big garden when he was growing up, like most people did in those days.

“Everybody was poor years ago,” he said. “When we were kids, we ate what was on the table. Crusts of bread or whatever it was. You ate what they put on your plate, and that’s all you got,” Breuning said.

Breuning recalls his mother being a good cook, though she died when she was 46 after an operation in Minneapolis. His wife was a good cook, too. They met when they worked in Butte for the railroad.

“Everything she made was good,” Breuning said. “We used to have lots of card parties, and they would always say what a good cook she was.”

While diet has contributed to his longevity, Breuning also believes that working hard was good for him.

“Work doesn’t hurt anybody,” he said, mentioning that he had two jobs, one working for the Great Northern Railway until he was 66 and the other as manager/secretary for the local Shriner’s Club until he was 99.

These days, Breuning keeps busy talking with all of the people who visit the Rainbow Retirement Center interested in meeting the world’s oldest man.

Though his vision doesn’t allow him to read anymore, Breuning keeps his mind active by listening to the radio.

“My eyes are gone,” he said, “but I listen to the radio. I get all my news on KMON.”

Breuning started eating out 35 years ago, but said he doesn’t anymore.

“Once you get used to not eating in restaurants, you don’t want to anymore,” he said. Besides, he’d rather eat at home, at the Rainbow Retirement Center.

“They have a lot of good food right here,” he said, “and good cooks.”

Breuning celebrated his 113th birthday with not one, but two cakes, one chocolate and one vanilla. And for his birthday lunch he got his favorite: liver and onions.

Wikio

%d bloggers like this: