Dd74e6399ae697d8603dc9aa74fbafae
6

Do antioxidants reduce lifespan?

by (695)
Updated about 13 hours ago
Created May 26, 2013 at 8:26 PM

" Reduced glucose availability promotes formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), induces catalase activity, and increases oxidative stress resistance and survival rates, altogether providing direct evidence for a hitherto hypothetical concept named mitochondrial hormesis or ???mitohormesis.??? Accordingly, treatment of nematodes with different antioxidants and vitamins prevents extension of life span. In summary, these data indicate that glucose restriction promotes mitochondrial metabolism, causing increased ROS formation and cumulating in hormetic extension of life span, "

http://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/retrieve/pii/S1550413107002562

In this study, roundworms with increased endogenous free radical formation due to glucose restriction experienced a significant increase in life span compared to control. Those fed antioxidants did not experience an increase in lifespan.

Are we doing more bad than good by ingesting large amounts of antioxidants rather than letting our bodies own antioxidant system do the work? Does anyone have any studies that may shed some light on the subject? Now, I know this study was performed on roundworms and thus cannot be directly applied to humans, but is this relevant for our species as well?

Cf08ad26759fdd206a2c9f9385080a57
1005 · May 27, 2013 at 6:58 AM

This looks interesting, but, I don't have the credentials to read it. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691513002895 It seems as though it depends which antioxidants you're referring to and how much you're dosing, as humans can suffer from a deficiency.

Dd74e6399ae697d8603dc9aa74fbafae
695 · May 27, 2013 at 6:34 AM

As I stated in my post, I know there is a difference between humans and worms, however, I would assume that there is no difference in mitochondrial function, which this study was about. Or am I wrong?

24c27817ad9ac518946dda4a131737b5
1242 · May 27, 2013 at 1:44 AM

Yeah, but tell that to the 5 guys who downvoted my prison experiments post.

Cb9a270955e2c277a02c4a4b5dad10b5
10994 · May 26, 2013 at 9:57 PM

Too bad we're not worms eh?

1edb06ded9ccf098a4517ca4a7a34ebc
14877 · May 26, 2013 at 8:29 PM

roundworms ....

Total Views
1.1K

Recent Activity
3e83e511e401770207ffbb0d31b8ffb4

Last Activity
71D AGO

Followers
0

Get Free Paleo Recipes Instantly

1 Answers

3e83e511e401770207ffbb0d31b8ffb4
1
10 · June 06, 2013 at 10:26 PM

Thanks - interesting article.

It's to be noted that the worms for which the lifespan extension was suppressed were bathed in rather high levels of antioxidants - a 5 millimolar concentration - as opposed to the normal blood plasma concentration in the few dozen micromolar concentration, more than 100x lower. I doubt that the antioxidants in whole foods like fruit and vegetables will be significant; the glucose content in fruit would probably be a bigger concern.

It's also to be noted that unless you're doing caloric restriction, you're not going to get the lifespan benefit in the first place, so there will be no benefit to be suppressed by antioxidants. When unrestricted worms were compared with and without antioxidants in the paper, their lifespans were the same.

It does suggest that those practicing caloric restriction might want to avoid megadoses of antioxidants like itamin C, instead getting most or all of their antioxidants from fruit and vegetables.

Answer Question

Login to Your PaleoHacks Account

Get Free Paleo Recipes