- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12234125
“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
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 meFruit has negative effects, I must listen to sad music. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZemYl9lWqk
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.
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?
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.
- The forum ‘Ask the Beauty Brains’ is closed to new topics and replies.