Protein activates genes, accelerates aging.
 

Valter Longo, Ph.D. » USC Davis School of Gerontology

Dr. Longo is the director of the University of Southern California's Longevity Institute. In this week's Parade Magazine he was quoted as follows: "Protein, especially from animal sources, activates two sets of genes that accelerate aging."

This is what I was referring to in a recent thread when I said that genes can be turned on and off by lifestyle activity. Eating animal protein is one example of turning on or "activating" genes.

This article went on to say: Those with the highest protein intake have the highest risk for cancer and mortality, as compared with those who consume the least.

Very interesting.

And unless someone has a pretty extensive education into mitosis and biochemistry, all this is fairly confusing. Here is another article from another credible source.

Protein shown to be natural inhibitor of aging in fruit fly model -- ScienceDaily

Is the protein only "red meat" or does it include fish?

Sentences can be taken out of context - please link us to the complete article.
[/QUOTE]

All I know is I'm having chicken for dinner !! :D

VPL you are missing so many incredibly interesting scientific presentations because you won't have a television set. Not a week goes by that I will be seeing something on TV and think to myself that VPL would so enjoy this or that.

Recently you missed a 60 Minutes presentation where the Polio Virus was used to inflame the wall of a brain tumor so that the body's natural defenses could destroy it.

You can read things, but to see the actual tumor and how it went away is something I will not forget.

So many things are right on the brink of being discovered and used in man's fight against disease. I am so glad that I am living to see it.

Do U folks know how to use Google took me 5 seconds

see page 6 or 7

Flame on>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


http://findlaypublishing.info/tabs/p...ine-weekly.pdf

:mmmm:

That's right and you never can trust stuff on the Internet to start with according to some posters.

Thank you for the link. I read it but I can't say I gained any information of scientific value from it. In my opinion it was a sensationalized article about aging that really wasn't even good journalism, let alone good science.

Ooh! ScienceDaily vs Parade! Which to believe? Which to believe? Ooh! One link works, the other doesn't. The intrigue is killing me.

With all your degrees and stated research capabilities U can figure it out!

You betcha I can. And did after the first post. How bout you?

It is the same ole, same ole, Jimbo. The same ole, same ole. To each his own.

Overselling doesn't change anyone's mind.

It is entirely possible that you and the missus and VPL will be sitting and rocking on the porch of the old folks home chewing on carrots at 135 years of age and we will all be pushing up daisies.

Entirely possible.

I think the most important skill both young and old people need to learn is how to filter out all the crap available on internet and color advertising tabloid-size pullouts like Parade Magazine, which sure ain't what it was in the 1960s.

The Cheater's Guide to Living to 100

Gracie, I didn't like the whole article either. There were statements I disagreed with.

But the quote was from a reputable doctor: Valter Longo, Ph.D., director of the University of Southern California's Longevity Institute, whose studies have shown that people with the highest protein intake have the highest risk of cancer and mortality compared with those who eat the least.

Here's the doctor in his own words: "Protein, especially from animal sources, activates two sets of genes that accelerate aging,"......

No need already know this info.

Please stop the comments about selling or changing anyone's mind, as U know U can only lead a horse to water:read:

No old folks home I hope, rather be up and about.

Having said that-----

That my dear is simply a matter of choice. :22yikes:

Science Daily is a good source but I didn't see anything that would contradict what Dr. Longo stated. Protein is an important nutrient and no one has said otherwise. It's all about putting things in proper perspective, it's not all or nothing. We obviously need protein, but the question is how much and what kind is best?

If you will scroll down to the fourth paragraph of your link it says, "AMPK is activated in response to caloric restriction, a condition that slows down aging, whereas TOR is activated in response to over nutrition, a condition that accelerates aging."

That's brilliant! I agree with that 100%. It's what I have been trying to tell people ever since I read, "Beyond The 120 Year Diet", a book I read many years ago. Calorie restriction activates a gene(s) to slow down aging.

It all fits together. Protein is essential but needs to be kept in proper perspective.

In my opinion, based on many years of study, veganism is the ideal. And it's backed up by large long-term studies showing that those who eat the least amount of animal protein live the longest healthiest lives. Then put that together with calorie restriction as was stated above, but don't confused it with anorexia or orthorexia.

Such an important sentence. I basically will eat anything and everything ( well, most everything) ....but all in moderation. Someday, I know I will be a 90% vegan.

Just a reminder...please address the topic and do not direct comments at other members.

Moderator

Amen. Moderation in everything.

Even if we get it JUST right, we can't live forever. The pleasures of the table are a lovely part of living.


Yesterday we had roast beef, with sour cream horse radish sauce, mashed potatoes, peas, corn, baked apples, tossed green salad and yeast rolls. And for dessert fresh fruit and whipped cream.

It was a major feast day and we feasted.

Actually, we all have identical risks of mortality.

How do U reach that conclusion?

"further evidence that a higher consumption of fruit and vegetables is associated with a lower risk of all cause mortality, particularly cardiovascular mortality."

link

Do you think someone being for example obese or a smoker has the same mortality rate?

I think that he meant that death is inevitable for all of us.

I think a healthy diet can extend our lives, maybe not as much as frequent sustained activity that raises the heart rate, but somewhat. But no one can make me believe that giving up meat and milk in moderation will make anyone live longer. Smaller portions of protein and bigger percentages of fruit and vegetables with less fat to ME is a healthy diet.

And enjoying the company of others and laughing a lot doesn't hurt either

But picking ancestors who are free of nasty genetic links is even more important in living a long healthy life.

Some of our trump cards have already been played at the age that most of us are. It goes without saying that smoking and drinking heavily aren't really good for you, but my dad lived to be ninety and drank a goodly amount.

Jim Morrison quote "No one here gets out alive.”


https://p.gr-assets.com/200x200/scal...5/10339861.jpg

For sure, it just how and when

What a wonderful table. Perfect for family, guests, and Easter!

Based on the article, it would appear that living in isolation and spending an inordinate amount of time arguing on TOTV might negate the benefits of a healthy diet.

VPL, I'm not commenting on the diet issue here, but I have to agree with Gracie that you should consider getting a television set. If you had one you might have seen the wonderful 6-hour documentary on PBS last week, "Cancer: The Emperor of All Maladies." In the Ken Burns' style it examined in great depth the history of man's struggle to understand this disease, the missteps and small victories against cancer.

I like the comment a previous poster made about the genetic cards you have been dealt and when I hear about protein aging you I have to look at Suzanne Sommers who is high on protein, fresh fruits and vegetables and is doing really, really well. She is not just a dumb blonde from a TV show or just another pretty face, but does lots of research and it seems to working well for her. Take everything with a grain of salt and do what works for you. I try to live a healthy life style, but I'll be damned if I will not have a delicious steak or a piece of chocolate so I can live a few more years to look back at all that I feel I missed. Just one person's opinion.

Many opinions mirror your's.

Was it from a medical perspective or lifestyle/prevention perspective? I don't think I would be all that interested in the medical perspective, like what new treatments they're working on etc.. A cure is always just around the corner.

They often claim that getting tested for cancer = prevention. No, it's not prevention, it's detection. Many people live unhealthy lifestyles and wait for cancer to be detected. Living a healthy lifestyle lowers one's risk and that = prevention. That's my goal.

I have a 2014 book I will start reading tonight: "P53: The Gene That Cracked The Cancer Code". I hope it's interesting.

Anyway, what's the point of watching all those science shows on TV if the conclusion is that nothing matters, concerning one's liestyle? Maybe that's why so many people like those shows, they're told that science is going to develop a cure so they won't have to make any lifestyle changes. No effort required, just continue eating whatever pleases your taste.

You know, a person has to be alive and kicking' and not dying of cancer right now to be able to "make any lifestyle changes".

If afflicted people and their family caregivers having high probability genetically of getting it, AND the patient want to watch science develop new findings and breakthroughs so that others around them don't have to go thru the same thing, more power to them! Knowledge is power, regardless of whether you avoid getting cancer…..or whether you get it!

Either way, knowledge of the sciences and research is essential.

So if Science did develop a cure so that one's lifestyle was not part of the equation, you would consider it a failure? I would absolutely change my diet to your extreme one if I thought it would guarantee me not getting cancer...... AND I would absolutely take a pill or get a shot if it would keep me from dying of something.

To me that proves an obsession with a certain diet. If something works, if a medicine makes it easier to stay healthy, if your blood pressure is controlled with a chemical, then you are helping yourself. The narrow path that you have chosen is not the only path to health in my opinion

I ask you again, if Science did develop a cure or a prevention for cancer, using chemicals or gene therapy that did NOT involve a change of life style, you would not be interested???????.

If I were still smoking and needed an excuse to continue smoking, I would look for elderly people who smoked until they were in their mid to late 90s. The woman who lived to be the oldest in the world (122+ years) smoked until she was 100. Does that mean it's not a lifestyle risk?

Science never goes by what happens to one or two or a handful of lucky people. They would compare tens of thousands of smokers with tens of thousands of non smokers.

First, 5% of the population does not make it extreme.

Secondly, it's really not per se a diet change it's a lifestyle change


What if you could be assured never to get a heart attack, would you?

Question what aliments to be safeguarded against would you consider a change in diet?

.

No, I just wouldn't waste my time waiting and getting my hopes up for something that may never come. I have better things to do with my time rather than become obsessed with that perspective.

The guarantee is that you would lower your risk. In my opinion, when people eat the same diet that promoted cancer in the first place, then it's likely to return. People in remission should be the most interested in doing something different.


But what if there's no guarantee? I thought you would need a guarantee. My aunt took a lot of pills and got kidney failure.

Right, I'm obsessed with a diet that I love. I love healthy food.

Can any of you techies get this to link directly to the National Geographic article about the "Evolution of Diet"?

Here is the best I can do to link to that article.. I found it interesting since our friends here would only consider a diet to be the panacea for cancer and heart disease, as opposed to me who would do the Hokey Pokey to stay healthy if that is what it's about.

The Evolution of Diet - National Geographic

Interesting article from Johns Hopkins: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/...er_study_shows