When records began in 1963 there were only 153 centenarians in Japan - now there are 107,677
= = =
Food science, lifestyle and life expectancy at their best
It's amazing: authorities in Japan are worried because life expectancy has increased and birth rates are lower than deaths.
In stand of cherishing the fact that more and more people become centenarians, the government calls this an existential crisis.
Mad?
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of nutrition and health claims on willingness to try and perceived healthiness of multiple cheese product concepts. Consumers (n = 603) from Ireland and the UK completed an online survey on cheese attitudes and usage. Factor analysis was used to generate constructs related to innovativeness, habits and health. These constructs were used in cluster analysis. Two clusters were identified: the “healthy and curious” (n = 363, health-interested, innovative and externally influenced) and the “traditional users” (n = 240, cost and convenience). Data analysis was conducted using SPSS v29 (IBM, USA). Consumers were most willing to try full-fat cheese, despite being perceived as less healthy (P < 0.001). Low-fat cheese was regarded as a healthier (P < 0.0001) option but had a lower willingness to try (P < 0.005). The addition of nutritional claims relating to protein, vitamins and health claims for muscle and bone health increased the perceived healthiness (P < 0.001) but decreased willingness to try relative to full-fat cheese (P < 0.05). The “healthy and curious” were more willing to try cheeses with nutrition and health claims (P < 0.01) than “traditional users” (P < 0.001). A moderate to strong positive correlation was observed between perceived healthiness and willingness to try (r = 0.504 to r = 0.626, P < 0.001). This study offers original insights into how consumers balance health perceptions and preferences, particularly within segmented consumer groups. Unlike previous research, it specifically examines the differential impact of nutritional claims across consumer segments for cheese. The findings highlight the importance of targeted and segment-specific population health strategies.
The postprandial effects of a novel food-grade extracted salmon polar lipids (SPL) supplement against platelet-activating factor (PAF) and thrombin-induced platelet aggregation in a human pilot study was evaluated. This study was double-blinded, crossover, and placebo controlled in design. Five healthy volunteers completed 4 h time-course trials on 5 separate days. Blood was drawn at baseline before subjects consumed a standardized breakfast with one of the following treatments: a low-dose (0.25 g) or a high-dose (0.5 g) of SPL encapsulated within a stomach resistant capsule (LDSR and HDSR respectively) or a non-resistant capsule (LDSNR and HDSNR, respectively), or placebo capsules containing food-grade glycerin (0.5 g; Placebo). Blood was analyzed at 1 h intervals for 4 h. Among the treatments tested, the high-dose non-resistant capsule (HDSNR) produced the clearest postprandial effects, inducing significant increases in EC50 (reduced platelet sensitivity) for PAF at 2–3 h and for thrombin at 3–4 h post-ingestion. Smaller or delayed effects were observed with the high-dose resistant capsule (HDSR), while low-dose formulations produced minimal changes. Postprandial plasma glucose, lipid profile (TC, HDL-C, LDL-C, TG), fibrinogen, prothrombin time, and activated partial thromboplastin time remained unaffected across all trials. This pilot study provides the first in vivo indication that SPL supplementation may modestly attenuate platelet responsiveness to both PAF and thrombin without altering standard haemostatic or metabolic biomarkers. Larger controlled studies are warranted to confirm these preliminary findings and define optimal dosing and formulation strategies.
What happened to 'statins save lives'? In this 31,000 person RCT over 7 years, CVD screening put 44.33% of people on statins (compared to 30.25% in non screening) but prevented neither deaths nor CV events (HR 0.96). Funny how I don't see this trial EVER being discussed by cardiologists. One major difference with this trial compared to so many other statin trials is that it is not funded by a statin maker.
The paper:
Outcomes of cardiovascular screening in men aged 60–64 years: the DANCAVAS II trial
Invitation to a comprehensive CT-based screening for subclinical CVD did not decrease death over 7 years among men aged 60–64 years but did increase severe bleeding. Because the trial was powered for events over 10 years, further follow-up is needed.
Anyone who has ever woken up with a hangover will recognise its physical and psychological effects: headache, nausea, self-loathing, regret, and perhaps even some shame at the uninhibited behaviour that accompanied the intoxication.
In these days of smartphones, any shame experienced by the foggy memory of drunken behaviour the night before is invariably worse when there is photographic evidence online forever for all to see and judge.
====
it's true, isn't it?
Full article is here.
Forget your phone, guys!
Let your brain breath!
Worth a read:
Bioengineer, PhD in applied biological sciences and professor of food science at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Frédéric Leroy kindly agreed to give us some of his precious time to answer our questions. In this interview, he sets out his view of the nutritional and cultural role of animal-sourced foods and of fermented food traditions, and offers some criticisms of the EAT-Lancet report and of Nutri-Score. Faced with obesity and metabolic disease, he defends a “Nourishment Table” based on nutrient density and the degree of processing, rather than simplistic scores or a single dietary model.
TES.: You do not hesitate to take a public stance, including criticism of certain NGOs and of initiatives such as the EAT-Lancet report. What are the main points of disagreement you want to highlight?
FL: The EAT-Lancet report and related agendas — pushed by some agri-food giants, lobbyists from the “vegan-tech” world, activist NGOs, prestigious research centres, and bodies at the epicentre of transnational power such as the WEF and the United Nations — rest on fragile scientific premises and a technocratic approach. They propose a near-vegetarian global diet, with a drastic cut in red meat and animal products, presented as the unique solution for health and the planet (what has been called the “Great Food Transformation”). Yet this model underestimates the complexity of food systems, cultural diversity, agronomic realities and differentiated nutritional needs.
Claims of health benefits are overstated, while risks of deficiency (especially in vulnerable groups) are minimised. The environmental approach often suffers from tunnel vision that neglects the co-benefits of livestock systems (biodiversity, soils, use of non-arable land, and so on). The proposed alternatives (ultra-processed “plant-based” products, cultivated meat, precision fermentation) remain unproven at scale, are often rejected by markets, and may be problematic for public health and wellbeing.
Some influential NGOs and coalitions use these frameworks to push interventionist policies that risk harming farmers, creating nutritional deficits and imposing an elitist vision disconnected from local realities. The Dublin Declaration and the Denver Call for Action recall that livestock systems are too precious to be sacrificed to simplification or ideological zeal. We need flexible, regional solutions grounded in robust data — not unique, virtual, heavily prescriptive models.
= = =
My view : I follow the work of Frederic for a number of years. What I admire to him, is his public stance based on strong data, not political views. Good science has (or should have) a societal approach and it is scientists us to communicate the Science to colleagues, NGOs and bodies who formulate food policies.
