Hate to throw a “spanner in one of the work’s of a current hypothesis in nutrition, but . . !

My understanding of the rationale underpinning the use of the term anti-oxidants, is that the creation of oxides and super-oxides, called “oxidative stress” is one of the bases of ageing, as succinctly stated by you above.
Here is a link to the BBC Health Website concerning an engineered nematode worm, which on first reading is a study which falsifies the hypothesis that “reducing oxidative stress prolongs life”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7754644.stm
I was quite impressed by your post on the engineered C57BL/6 mouse and its role in falsifying the hypothesis that “metabolic advantage cannot exist as it is forbidden by 2nd law of thermodynamics”.

Does this study do the same for “oxidative stress” hypothesis of ageing?

Note the comments of Dr David Gems “The free radical theory has filled a knowledge vacuum for over 50 years now, but it doesn’t stand up to the evidence”.

It seems that some other hypothesis needs to conceptualize any benefits that various supplements may have on prolonging a the high proportion of working cells needed for longer life. Are there any others around, I wonder?

Desmondo

The use of antioxidants has been a huge disappointment. If the free-radical theory of aging is true, then antioxidants should prolong life, but they don’t. Which indicates the theory as stated isn’t quit ready for prime time yet, i.e., it needs to be tweaked, or it isn’t valid. Read Aubrey de Grey.

From what I’ve read on it, the R-lipoic acid appears to be a better product. But, having said that, I can tell you that I haven’t read a lot on the subject.

“I take krill oil, fish oil, and curcumin daily without fail. I also take a vitamin E daily to stabilize the fats in the fish and krill oil. I take CoQ10 and lipoic acid several times per week. I take a multivitamin every now and then. And I take vitamin D3 in large doses throughout the winter.”

I want overall a healthy weight, good overall health and as one who had a stent placed for blockage, I want to beat heart disease! It’s so confusing what to take and how much! Doing better on sticking to PP anyway.

Nope, I haven’t changed. That’s pretty much my supplement regimen. I guess I forgot to mention that I always take a magnesium supplement as well. At least 300 mg of chelated magnesium per day.

MRE

I will add the blog on factors determining membrane fluidity to my growing list.

For now, you can go to PubMed or a scientific search engine such as Scirus and enter phospholipid methylation membrane fluidity (or rigidity) and probably get enough hits to keep you busy for a while.

Good luck.

MRE 

Is this also a source for methylation? The reason I ask is that I’m very particular in the multivitamin I take, and it has 500 mg of MSM. I would like to know if it’s also helpful for methylation AND the hair-skin-nails thing. It would be nice to be getting more bang for my buck!

Hi LC–

I do remember MSM.  I don’t think it is involved in methylation although it does contain sulfur and can be a source of that element.  As I recall, it works primarily to ease joint pain, but no one is really sure of its mechanism of action.  I do remember that it is prone to heavy metal contamination if not manufactured properly.

Cheers–

MRE 

I don’t know about you but I really enjoyed Robin Henig’s piece in the New York Times … apart from the last bit! David Barrett’s suggestion that we are hard wired to believe in the supernatural … by design, is of course a logical possibility, but not the most likely based on all the evidence and discussion she has gathered (but no doubt provides great comfort for those that dismiss evolutionary processes of any kind in favour of so called “intelligent design”) Likewise, her rather depressing conclusion seems at odds with the comprehensive analysis (for which she deserves credit) that precedes it.

Personally I see at least some merit in the adaptionist point of view, because as I see it, there is evolutionary advantage and value to both the individual and the group in the ‘crowd control’ aspect of religion and the natural progression of all societies to adopt the supernatural to provide simple unanswerable solutions to otherwise difficult questions are most easily seen in (again, the almost universal) parental devices to control and protect children (eg Santa Claus,Tooth Fairy, Sandman etc.

I’m not sure if you want to start a deabte on these issues though!

BTW, I’m half way through Richard Dawkins latest and the most striking thing so far is what an enlightened man Jefferson was! (surely not news to anyone in your country) – but sadly, anyone similarly endowed these days would not have a chance at election should they be as honest about their views as he was – and even more sadly, the same is increasingly true here.

Cheers,

Malcolm

Hi Malcolm–

I, too, thought it was a good article. I don’t mind starting a debate on it as long as I don’t have to participate (I’m way behind on a thousand projects). I’ll be happy to simply post any and all comments (as long as they’re civil), so comment away anyone who wants. Here is the link to the article.

Yes, Thomas Jefferson was quite a guy. And would probably be unelectable today. If you’re ever in Virginia you should stop by and see Monticello. It’s a spectacular place with many of Jefferson’s inventions on display. Too bad he wasn’t as smart financially as he was in most other ways–apparently he was pretty much a failure as a plantation owner.

Cheers–

MRE

Anyway…good luck with the spam and thanks for another great article.

Hi hap–

Thanks.  I’m working on it.

Cheers–

MRE 

” This week, however, the study will say……”

Hi Neil–

Yep, it’s coming out tomorrow.

MRE 

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2007/1861068.htm

Val

Hi Val–

When I get the chance, I’ll have a listen.

Thanks for the link.  (BTW, the link got you caught up in my spam filter.)

Cheers–

MRE