| |
 |
 Appeared in Latimes.
A strict regimen that slashes calories has been shown to give animals
healthier and longer lives. The radical approach is now being tested on
humans for the first time.
It works with worms, rats, mice and monkeys. Reduce an animal's intake of
calories by 30% and it will live 30% longer than those on an ordinary
diet.
Now scientists want to know if the same severely restricted diet that has
produced dramatic results in laboratory experiments in animals will work
in humans. In September, the National Institute on Aging began scientific
trials involving about 200 people at three locations in Louisiana,
Massachusetts and Missouri. The volunteers are eating low-calorie diets to
see if a significant reduction in calorie consumption will improve their
health and enhance the likelihood of a longer life span. The institute's
trials are noteworthy because the latest government figures show that a
disturbing 61% of American adults are overweight, increasing their risk of
heart attacks, strokes, diabetes and arthritis. Finding a diet that
delivers maximum nutrition while sharply reducing calories -- and that
people will stick with -- is a key goal of the research project.
Moreover, the public's appetite for remedies to slow the aging process is
voracious. From memory pills to hormone shots and anti-wrinkle creams, the
business of anti-aging is booming, but these products often make claims
that are unsubstantiated by rigorous science. There is no pill or potion
that has been proved to extend the human life span. The only
scientifically demonstrated tool for increasing longevity is caloric
restriction -- and it remains unproved in humans.
"We cannot guarantee the fountain of youth," said Dr. Charles
Hollingsworth, the institute's chief of clinical trials in the geriatrics
and gerontology program. But the payoff should be better health and the
longer life that comes with a stronger immune system.
In the institute studies, some volunteers will try calorie restriction
alone, while others will combine fewer calories with an exercise regimen.
The scientists want to know if independent, impulsive human beings can get
the same results with a highly disciplined diet as do laboratory animals
who have no choice in the matter. The results of those on the special diet
will be compared to a control group of similar people who are not changing
their dining habits.
Because the human life span is so much longer than that of laboratory
rodents, researchers won't know for a generation or more whether the
calorie-restricted diet actually helps humans live significantly longer.
For now, the scientists hope that the result of the highly disciplined
diet will be better health into advanced old age.
"We're not going to stop heart attacks and strokes, but I would much
rather trade for a heart attack at age 85 than age 50," Hollingsworth
said.
Scientists and nutrition experts at Louisiana State University, Tufts
University in Massachusetts and Washington University in St. Louis will be
trying to get their human subjects to do something millions of Americans
have attempted and failed: finding a good diet and sticking to it. This
means a volunteer in the study must trim 25% of the usual consumption of
calories. Someone who has been consuming a daily diet of, say, 2,000
calories will be asked to cut back to 1,500, without veering off course.
It's a hard task: The recidivism rate for dieters is more than 90% --
that's the percentage of people who go on diets but gain all the weight
back within five years. Scientists have long known that the miracle cure
that works in animals doesn't always work in humans. It is relatively easy
to control the habits and extend the lives of caged lab rats, with food
doled out carefully each day by a researcher. It is much harder to imagine
controlling the caloric intake of human beings, bombarded as they are by
marketers' images of humongous hamburgers, super-size sodas and fatty
desserts.
Researchers in aging say that if calorie restriction worked in human
beings as it has in animals, people who now live into their 80s would
routinely live until age 110 or beyond. And those extra years would be
healthy ones. They would eventually succumb to cancers, strokes and heart
attacks just as people do now, but at a more advanced age. As the body
goes through normal aging, it must work harder, putting more strain on the
various organs and the immune system. When we take in a surplus of
calories, the body must cope with processing more nutrients than are
really needed. If you can reduce calorie intake, you keep the body in
better balance and it needn't work so hard, said Hollingsworth.
Nobody knows for sure why reducing caloric intake leads to increased
longevity. One theory is that it is part of the natural survival mechanism
of successful species. When the organism senses less food is available, it
slows down to conserve energy. Metabolism goes into low gear, reducing the
production of toxic waste materials. A slower rate of activity translates
into a longer life span. In simple worms, called nematodes, caloric
restriction results in dramatic changes. The worms become immune to heat
and chemicals that would otherwise kill worms on a more normal diet. In
higher animals, there are different reactions.
The monkeys on caloric restrictions, who have a diet fortified with extra
vitamins and nutrients, live a longer and healthier life than their lab
mates who get a fuller diet, said Donald K. Ingram, acting chief of the
laboratory of experimental gerontology at the institute.
The institute's studies on humans are looking at various methods of
reducing caloric consumption. One approach will be to reduce caloric
intake in the diet by 25%; another is a combination of partial caloric
reduction and exercise. Different age groups, ranging from 25 to 60, have
been enrolled in the studies. The approach that has the best results will
then be used in larger trials with thousands of people.
If scientists can figure out how caloric restriction slows down the aging
process, perhaps someday they can find a magic pill to increase human
longevity. But that's a dream for another day.

March 31, 2003.
|
|