Be high on your strength training and low on neuroses, doctor says

AARON DERFEL -The Gazette

Forget the fountain of youth. But if you lead a lifestyle that's high on strength training and low on neuroses, you can probably add an extra decade to your life.

That's the message to baby boomers from one of the world's foremost experts on centenarians, who spoke yesterday in Montreal at a national conference on aging.

"Most of us are actually born with a pretty remarkable set of genes," said Dr. Thomas Perls, a geriatrician and researcher at the Boston University School of Medicine.

"The problem is that instead of playing that hand very well, we play it very poorly.

"In the United States, and I would imagine in Canada as well, 70 per cent of the population is now overweight, way too many people smoke ... and way too few people exercise. It doesn't surprise me that we live, on average, eight years less than what our genes are capable of achieving for us."

Perls and his colleagues have studied dozens of centenarians - who now make up the fastest-growing segment of North America's population.

For the last eight years, Perls has directed the New England Centenarian Study, seeking to unlock the secrets of longevity. His research has dispelled the notion that getting older means getting sicker.

In fact, many centenarians manage to put off illness until the last few years of their lives.

Take Anna Morgan, for example. She lived an active life until she was 102, when she developed an irregular heart rhythm and died within a few weeks.

Centenarians are gifted with extraordinary genes, but genetics alone do not explain their longevity. Perls discovered that almost all centenarians are optimistic people who tend not to fret about life.

"We've done some personality testing, and they tend to score low on one test: neuroticism," he told the conference delegates.

"All that meant was that they didn't dwell on things. They weren't neurotic. They didn't internalize things. They kind of let go. So it correlates well with the ability to manage stress."

Centenarians, by and large, depend on their faith and find meaning or a cause in life, Perls also found.

In Canada, the average life expectancy for a man is 76 years and for a woman, it's 81.

But Perls's research suggests that most Canadians could live until their mid- to late 80s by following a low-carbohydrate diet, abstaining from smoking, and exercising regularly.

"One of the things that I push as a geriatrician is strength training," he said. "There's been a lot of evidence now to show that strength training, rather than aerobic exercise, gives you more bang for your buck in terms of quality of life and ability to get the fat down and become lean."

Perls also recommends that baby boomers pursue a variety of interests to stimulate the brain, like learning a new musical instrument or language. "When cognitive function starts to decline, that is our No. 1 indication of impending mortality," he explained.

Perls criticized the "anti-aging" industry, warning that products like human growth hormone, DHEA and melatonin can be harmful to your health.

"The anti-aging industry is very dangerous from a social point of view," he said. "I think these people are liars, cheats and snake-oil salesmen. And they sell the population on the idea that old people are bad."

Perls has devised a life-expectancy calculator based on 23 questions, ranging from whether you floss your teeth to whether you eat more than a couple of hot dogs each week. If you smoke, the calculator automatically subtracts 15 years from your life.

You can log on to the calculator at the following Web address: http://www.livingto100.com/sign_in.cfm


Full link

This is a really interesting article, especially if you do the questionnaire at the bottom that attempts to determine your age expectancy.

However I wondered about the following question

Do you avoid fatty foods, and emphasize fresh fruits and vegetables?

High protein diets, and the combination of a high fat and protein diet, have been associated with increased risk of cancer of the breast, uterus, prostate, colon, pancreas and kidney. An important mechanism is that these foods can be inefficient sources of energy and cause excess oxygen radical formation. Of course, saturated fats also lead to obesity and its risks. On the other hand, diets which emphasize fruits and vegetables have been associated with significantly lower heart disease risk and better quality of life. For more information go to:

NIH's Live Healthier and Longer

If we are to reduce carbohydrates, what is there left to eat if we also keep protein and fat in check. There is a lack of consistency here.

Is this statement true ? what studies was it based on.

Thanks, Angeline! It's certainly worth reading. I'm skeptical that there are studies indicting fat. Dr. Ravnskov I'm sure would take issue.

Sheldon

Indeed, the fat and heart disease link as been discussed to death, what made me wonder is the following :

High protein diets, and the combination of a high fat and protein diet, have been associated with increased risk of cancer of the breast, uterus, prostate, colon, pancreas and kidney. An important mechanism is that these foods can be inefficient sources of energy and cause excess oxygen radical formation.

I've never seen this before, so I was wondering where it was coming from.

In other words, he's saying Atkins is associated with all those problems.

I know of no solid studies linking cancer to fat. And what are the chances that any such study restricted carbs in order to isolate fat? I don't think that the cultures that consume high amounts of fat and protein (Eskimos, for example) suffer high incidences of cancer. But maybe someone here has more information.

By the way, the questionnaire is full of bad premises. Cream is grouped with sweets. Bacon is grouped with fried foods. Years are added for minimizing meat. The premise, as you point out, is low-fat all the way.

Sheldon

Reading your Dr. Ravnskov link, made me realize that all those correlations we tend to make ( i.e. Innuits used to have a low cancer rate and eat a diet mostly of meat ) could easily be fallacious. The ancient Eskimos led a life that was as far removed from our occidental modern way of life as you can get. I say ancient because things have changed drastically for them.

So it's impossible to state that the lack of carbohydrates in their diet was the determinant factor in their lack of modern diseases.

And yes I agree, the questionnaire seemed peppered with old ideas, but there does seem to be a couple of interesting points, complete with references so we can at least delve into them further. For example the recommendation to take selenium supplements as a help in preventing cancer