Should we be worried about glycation of the skin?

What is the Beauty Brain's take on this issue?


  • The thing that irritates me is there doesn't seem to be much to be done to treat it and not everyone can eat a diet that would prevent this if they are poor.
  • " a lesser extent excess sugar will also age skin."  The question is how great is that extent compared to other key factors like sun exposure. When time permits I'll see if I can dig up something definitive on this. 
  • Thank you! I definitely don't think it is as much of a worry as sun exposure but hopefully if glycation is a threat to skin health drug companies will develop something to treat it instead of telling people to avoid sugar and simple carbs which is unrealistic for a lot of people.
  • Maybe I missed something. What I got out of the video is that you should eat properly, avoid eating sweets, eat more fruits and vegetables. Your nutrition levels will be greatly improved if you cook things from scratch instead of eating a lot of processed foods. No matter how poor you are, at least in the US, you can get your food with an eye towards the nutrition levels contained therein.

    The most difficult part of the entire thing for me is sweets. At least I am eating smaller portions and better for you when I do add something sweet now. Dark chocolate! 

    To me the bottom line is what you put into your mouth has an effect on your overall health and well-being. It is up to you to do your best to stay healthy by taking care of yourself.
  • I'm talking about working poor and welfare class people not middle class.
  • Rozy: I think I see where you're coming from on this but if the "skin health drug companies will develop something to treat it" will the working poor and welfare class people be able to afford that any better than they can afford to eat healthy?  
  • @ Randy - while you are checking into this can you also clarify a couple of points for me? 

    1. " a lesser extent excess sugar will also age skin." So, how much is considered "excess"? 

    2. does this also apply to naturally occurring sugars in fruits?

  • Both very good questions!
  • edited February 2014
    Possibly if they live in a more socialist country, depending on how it is marketed. I have vitamin A covered by my parents health plans so it costs nothing up front also Accutane. Surely glycation has an effect on skin health too? If it marketed as cosmetic like chemical peels even though peels do have positive effects on skin health too it will be out of reach for poor people. The possibility is nice if one does climb out of poverty.
  • edited February 2014
    And I am not good at math but it may be easier and cheaper in the long run to just buy a pill for glycation then trying to cut out sugar.
  • The sad thing for the working poor is that glycation has many negative health effects besides just premature aging, including heart health. If it comes down to it, we all know that our hearts are more important than our face looking like a baby's bottom.
  • edited February 2014
    Maybe those treehuggers making sugar out to be satan weren't so out of it after all. ;)

  • It must be the work of satan, because it's devilishly delicious. Especially combined with its sister drug, chocolate.
  • Looking up glycation 2 pubmed studies come up I wonder if Left and Right brain (I'm still going to call them that) can sum them up. Also, how does PubMed work? Can the studies be read for free and how?
  • brainy I feel like your comment needs to be a meme.

    "higher intake of fructose in alternative nutrition of healthy subjects may cause an increase of AGE levels" sounds like fruit is bad too. I say don't stop eating it unless you like veggies enough to eat 5-10 servings a day. It is kind of ironic and annoying that phytochemicals in fruits are good for you and apparently prevent a bunch of health problems and aging and are found in fruit but the fruit sugar itself is bad in high amounts. I wonder how high is too high. If someone eats 5-10 fruit servings a day bc they are a big baby and won't eat their veggies is that going to cause extra AGEs?
  • You are more than welcome to make it a meme :D

    Considering that fruit sugars are still able to harm your teeth and contribute to diabetic symptoms, it stands to reason that they behave like any other sugar in the body and would contribute to A.G.E.S. just like chocolate cake.

    So I say c'est la vie, chocolate cake for me  
  • @ brainybimbo - ditto what you said
  • Fruit has negative effects, I must listen to sad music.
  • edited February 2014
    About 10 to 30% of AGEs ingested get into circulation. Aging and sun damage reduces the body's defenses against AGEs.

    AGEs are most studied in diabetic patients. Of course, since those with diabetes can't produce enough insulin or has insulin resistance, it's a no-brainier to how they could accumulate.

    In short: Don't get diabetic if you can help it and protect yourself from sun damage. AGEs will accumulate no matter what you do, but you can always minimize them/the risk.
  • Thanks for the summary. I read on cosmetic design they are testing creams against it.
  • In diabetic people doesn't the medication they take help against the AGEs too?
  • You're welcome!

    If I remember correctly, the company that tested that product didn't include a placebo.

    There's some data that diabetes patients with controlled glucose levels decreased AGEs, but I haven't seen anything yet about specific medications. It's plausible, though.
  • Oh dang. Pretty useless without a placebo. Why do companies even bother to buy for a study that is not even decent and objective? Why not invest making a good placebo controlled study?
  • Will diabetics always have more AGEs than non diabetics?
  • Companies fund crappy studies because 1) vast majority of the consumers are not scientifically literate*, so when the company claims "Look! We did a scientific study on our products! They work!" people will believe it, 2) It worked in a pilot trial, but when they tested it in a larger trial it didn't work so the company leaves it at that and sells the product anyway, 3) Large, double blind placebo-controlled trials are expensive and they don't have the funds for it, or 4) combination of the above.

    *See the abuse of "statistically significant" claims.

    But large companies like Johnson & Johnson have funded some very good trials lately. Source of funding can mean a potential conflict of interest.


    Yes, possibly, especially if they can't control spikes very well. Diabetic skin will definitely have more collagen damage of the AGEs have stayed in the skin long enough to have oxidized/turned brown (paraphrasing, here).

  • Just wondering does eating a bad diet give you type 2 diabetes? Most things I read just its CORRELATED but none say that is CAUSES it.
  • Scientists can't say for sure if bad diets alone cause type 2 diabetes because genetics and medications are also heavily involved. A bad diet will very likely--but not always--cause/set off type 2 diabetes if you have predisposing genetics.
  • Also Rozy, look into the "claim substantiation" industry and a lot of things will make a lot of sense.
    Good studies are expensive and if you conduct them well the results aren't always what you WANT to see.
    For a cosmetics company, the bottom line is spending as little as possible to see the results you want to see.
  • Do you have any good articles on that Brainy?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!