This study definitely has more to it than simply caloric restriction does not extend lifespan. First it enhances the distinction between
lifespan, the total time alive, and
healthspan, the number years living in peak functional capacity. I think this study supports the notion that caloric restricting increases healthspan and not lifespan. Another way of saying this is caloric restriction helps stave off healthspan decline in the form of obesity, cardiovascular disease, perhaps even cancer and thus giving the appearance that the lifespan has increased, when in fact it just prevented something that would have killed the organism before its time.
When realizing the importance of the findings from this study (
De Cabo et al - 2012) it is be compared against the the findings from a similar university of Wisconsin study (
Weindruch et al - 2009) that found that caloric restriction does indeed increase lifespan. The major difference between these two studies was the food given to the monkeys. The 2009 study fed the monkeys a diet of refined foods with about 30% sucrose content while the 2012 study opted for more natural whole foods.
To put it in simple terms, this leads to the conclusion that when you feed animals poison and they eat less of it they live longer, whereas if you feed them regular healthy food eating less of it doesn't affect them.
Another conclusion from this study is the possibility that our maximal lifespan is set by genetics and we can't change through diet. This notion is a little premature as experiments specifically designed to find maximal lifespan have not been carried out and this particular experiment isn't quite designed for that.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
