Caloric Restriction Extends Life in Monkeys, Study Finds

Another study suggests an immune-suppressing drug helps elderly mice live longer

July 9, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (10)

By Tina Hesman Saey, Science News

People who believed calorie restriction wouldn’t extend life in primates might now have to declare themselves a monkey’s uncle.

A 20-year study found that Rhesus monkeys fed a nutritious, low-calorie diet have fewer age-related diseases than counterparts on a normal diet, researchers report July 10 in Science. Also, MRIs reveal less shrinking with age in areas important for decision-making and controlling movement in the brains of calorie-restricted animals, report Ricki Colman and Richard Weindruch, both of the Wisconsin National Primate Research Center at the University of Wisconsin–Madison, and colleagues.

These results show that calorie restriction helps preserve primates’ bodies and brains, says Luigi Fontana, of Washington University in St. Louis and the Italian National Health Service in Rome. Calorie restriction has already been shown to extend the lifespan of mice and dogs, as well as yeast, fruit flies and worms.

The findings may have ramifications for fighting aging and disease in humans, Fontana says. “I’m confident that everything that happens in [non-human] primates will happen in humans.” Since both groups of monkeys are on a very healthy diet, people who go from a high-fat Western diet to a healthy, restricted diet may experience even greater health benefits than seen in this study.

The study began in 1989 with 30 adult male monkeys. In 1994, 30 female and 16 more male monkeys were added to boost statistical power. The monkeys were 7 to 14 years old when they entered the study. Since Rhesus monkeys live, on average, 27 years in captivity, it has taken this long to determine whether cutting calories by 30 percent would fend off aging and death.

Over the course of the study, monkeys on the full-calorie diet were three times more likely to die from an aging-related disease than monkeys that ate 30 percent fewer calories, the researchers found.

Since the study began, 21 of 38 control monkeys and 14 of 38 calorie-restricted monkeys have died. Of the control monkeys, 14 died of age-related causes, such as cancer, heart disease or diabetes. In the calorie-restricted group, only five died from aging-associated diseases, and none have developed symptoms of diabetes. The remaining deaths — seven control and nine calorie-restricted monkeys — were from complications of anesthesia, gastric bloat, endometriosis or injury.

“We were frankly blown away by these findings,” Weindruch says.

Maximal lifespan for Rhesus monkeys is about 40 years old, so researchers won’t know for another decade or two if — or for how long — calorie restriction can prolong life in primates.

Another study, published online July 8 in Nature, may provide hope for people who want to live longer but don’t want to tightly control calories. Researchers in the National Institute on Aging’s Interventions Testing Program prolonged the lifespan of elderly mice by feeding the mice high doses of rapamycin, a drug commonly used to suppress the immune system of organ transplant recipients. The drug is the first molecular mimic of caloric restriction proven to extend lifespan in mammals. A highly touted compound called resveratrol is still in testing, but in other studies has failed to prolong lifespan of mice on a normal diet.

Rapamycin targets an energy-sensing protein called TOR, perhaps tricking cells into thinking their calorie intake has been cut.

Team members at the Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine, the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor and the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio each fed rapamycin to mice starting when the animals were 600 days old, about 60 years old in human terms.

Female mice fed rapamycin lived about 14 percent longer than female mice that didn’t get the drug. Male mice on rapamycin lived, on average, 9 percent longer than male mice in the control group. The increase might seem minimal, says David Harrison, a physiological geneticist at the Jackson Lab and a lead author of the new mouse study, but the researchers were surprised to see any effect at all in the older animals. Calorie restriction has generally not been effective for prolonging lifespan in mice when started after 18 months of age. Eliminating all deaths from cancer and cardiovascular disease would increase human lifespan less than 9 percent, he says.

But living longer doesn’t mean much if the intervention doesn’t also improve health, says Matt Kaeberlein, a molecular biologist at the University of Washington in Seattle.

“Most people don’t want to live an extra 10 years of frailty in old age, what we want is another 10 years of youth and vitality,” he says.

The researchers did not directly examine the health effects of rapamycin in the study, but the results suggest that rapamycin does extend the health-span as well as the lifespan of mice, Kaeberlein says. The researchers tested only one dose of the drug. Other doses may have even more beneficial effects on lifespan. Before such a drug could be used in humans, scientists need to separate the immune-suppressing properties of the drug from its life-extending potential, he says.

Tags:
research,
science

Reader Comments Read all comments (10)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

Dear Editor

An exceptional paper on human body size and its ramifications in terms

of human health and survival was just published by the Journal of World Public

Health Nutrition Association. The commentary, described by the journal

as an "epic vision" can be found in htm or PDF format at

http://www.wphna.org/2011_mar_wn3_comm_small.htm

The commentary discusses controversial but well documented

findings on how increasing body size affects human performance,

longevity, intelligence, resources, the environment, the economy

and survival.

A 7 page editorial on my work is also in the March issue of the

journal.

http://www.wphna.org/2011_mar_wn2_editorial_size/htm

The author has research the ramifications of human body size

for over 35 years and has published in dozens of medical and

scientific journals. He is also the editor of the book: Human Body

Size and the Laws of Scaling, 2007, Nova Science Publishers, NY.

A book reviewer described the work as a Herculean Accomplishment.

If you have any questions, please contact me at the above

email address or 858 735 5668 or 858 576-9283.

Best regards,

Thomas T. Samaras, Director,

Thomas Samaras of CA 7:32PM March 06, 2011

Dear Editor

An exceptional paper on human body size and its ramifications in terms

of human health and survival was just published by the Journal of World Public

Health Nutrition Association. The commentary, described by the journal

as an "epic vision" can be found in htm or PDF format at

http://www.wphna.org/2011_mar_wn3_comm_small.htm

The commentary discusses controversial but well documented

findings on how increasing body size affects human performance,

longevity, intelligence, resources, the environment, the economy

and survival.

A 7 page editorial on my work is also in the March issue of the

journal.

http://www.wphna.org/2011_mar_wn2_editorial_size/htm

The author has research the ramifications of human body size

for over 35 years and has published in dozens of medical and

scientific journals. He is also the editor of the book: Human Body

Size and the Laws of Scaling, 2007, Nova Science Publishers, NY.

A book reviewer described the work as a Herculean Accomplishment.

If you have any questions, please contact me at the above

email address or 858 735 5668 or 858 576-9283.

Best regards,

Thomas T. Samaras, Director,

Thomas Samaras of CA 7:28PM March 06, 2011

This cruelty to animals who would NEVER choose such a diet on their own and have NEVER had a nice day in their poor miserable confined lives HAS TO END!

This experiment has gone on long enough and little, if anything new (scientifically) will be learned. The only purpose to continue on with these types of "experiments" is to get more funding, more papers and possible break some kind of record for keeping an animal alive against their will. Indeed, these results are almost useless as applied to humans (as has been found with cancer research). Indeed the NIH strongly recommends AGAINST calorie restriction for humans! What kind of hypocrisy is this? It's OK to calorie restrict caged animals, against their will, who have no freedom and are miserable for their entire life, but it's DEFINITELY NOT OK for humans?

Let these poor creatures at least enjoy a small part of the life remaining to them! They have served they purpose and sacrificed enough. FREE THESE poor creatures NOW! Let's all work together to see to it that they get at least some shred of a normal life in the time remaining to them.

truth Seeker of MI 1:15PM March 18, 2010

National Science Foundation

NSF

Hydrogen Gas in the Universe

Researcher believes it is key ingredient to Universe.

Chemistry and Clouds

Researchers look at water droplets and chemical reactions.

Learning and Play

Researcher studies children's unstructured playtime.

advertisement

Science Discoveries

Science Discoveries

iTunes icon RSS icon

advertisement