Metabolism not affected by middle age!

Options
Interesting research into metabolism https://science.sciencemag.org/content/373/6556/808

In summary, metabolism does start to decline from c60 years old, but is stable from 20-60. Authors say that middle-age spread cannot be attributed to slowing metabolism. The study followed more than 6,600 people from 29 countries - worth a read of the summary!
«134

Replies

  • neanderthin
    neanderthin Posts: 9,925 Member
    Options
    I'm sure that is fairly accurate, I haven't read it but have seen other studies. Keep in mind that it can happen earlier or later depending on an individuals health and lifestyle. But yeah, it happens later than most people assume.
  • Lynatea
    Lynatea Posts: 311 Member
    Options
    Saw this article today in my news feed, quite interesting.
  • MsCzar
    MsCzar Posts: 1,042 Member
    Options
    I’m not entirely sure why someone disagreed with me posting a link to a scientific study - I didn’t write it!

    I'm not really sure why there even exists a 'Disagree' option here. Shy of someone posting 'Hey, I've found a great way to lose weight is to do a lot of meth and upchuck any food you eat,' I don't know why people click Disagree - especially on a suggestion or opinion query.

  • scarlett_k
    scarlett_k Posts: 812 Member
    Options
    MsCzar wrote: »
    I’m not entirely sure why someone disagreed with me posting a link to a scientific study - I didn’t write it!

    I'm not really sure why there even exists a 'Disagree' option here. Shy of someone posting 'Hey, I've found a great way to lose weight is to do a lot of meth and upchuck any food you eat,' I don't know why people click Disagree - especially on a suggestion or opinion query.

    Well one reason is that some of us enjoy an incredibly petty laugh 😂 or maybe that's just me 😉
  • I2k4
    I2k4 Posts: 180 Member
    edited August 2021
    Options
    NYT has an article on the same study, will have to look at this one. The NYT piece didn't indicate any analysis of the subject age cohorts by routine activity levels or exercise modalities. I'm inclined to think that makes a difference, probably including that over time consistent cardio/endurance training lowers the resting metabolic rate and resistance / muscle building increases it.
  • ljashley1952
    ljashley1952 Posts: 273 Member
    Options
    It might not have anything to do with metabolism, but people do slow down with age. Some of it is just being busy with your life and not making time to work out regularly. Some people get arthritis and other things that make working out painful. Back injuries, asthma...whatever. While these are not all good excuses, it is reality. It is up to us to maintain our health: eat properly, exercise regularly. We can do it!
  • MobiusRift
    MobiusRift Posts: 18 Member
    Options
    I’m not entirely sure why someone disagreed with me posting a link to a scientific study - I didn’t write it! 🤣

    Confirmation bias in action :smile:

  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,627 Member
    Options
    MsCzar wrote: »
    I’m not entirely sure why someone disagreed with me posting a link to a scientific study - I didn’t write it!

    I'm not really sure why there even exists a 'Disagree' option here. Shy of someone posting 'Hey, I've found a great way to lose weight is to do a lot of meth and upchuck any food you eat,' I don't know why people click Disagree - especially on a suggestion or opinion query.

    you know, sometimes i dont get it, either. i truly dont care when people disagree with me, but in some cases it boggles my mind as to WHY? especially if they don't respond with a comment as to... WHY they may disagree or think I'm 'wrong'. 189 pounds lost kind of says I know what I'm doing, so please educate me when I say something incorrect ;) and opinions are just that- opinions. I think kale is disgusting but plenty of people like the horrible weed so, whatever, they can eat the vile thing LOL
  • sijomial
    sijomial Posts: 19,811 Member
    Options
    I think in popular culture (and often on here) metabolism is confused with TDEE.

    Personal example:
    In my 30's my metabolism went up as I got heavier (fat!), my TDEE went down (injury, career, children....).
    In my 40's my metabolism stayed the same level (maintained weight, too heavy though). TDEE pretty static.
    In my 50's my metabolism went down (lost weight) but my TDEE went up (took up cycling, more "me time").
    In my 60's my metabolism seems to be the same, TDEE has gone up even more as I'm more active (retired allows me to be more active, higher exercise volume).
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,170 Member
    Options
    It might not have anything to do with metabolism, but people do slow down with age. Some of it is just being busy with your life and not making time to work out regularly. Some people get arthritis and other things that make working out painful. Back injuries, asthma...whatever. While these are not all good excuses, it is reality. It is up to us to maintain our health: eat properly, exercise regularly. We can do it!

    I think that's true, in a statistical sense, but none of us is a statistic.

    Of course, there are individuals who, for genetic or personal history reasons, experience disabilities that are severe enough to be true obstacles to movement. For that, there's no rational reaction (from others) but sympathy and understanding, plus efforts to help them with practical things if we're more fortunate.

    I believe there are a fair number of people, though, whose pain profile would benefit from sensibly-planned (and perhaps carefully, gradually increased) movement. (I've absolutely been one of those people, now at age 65.)

    There is good evidence of things like yoga improving functioning in people with osteoarthritis; of strengthening exercises improving back pain, knee pain, or other musculoskeletal pain, etc.

    I'm not making a "work through the pain no matter what" argument here, but rather suggesting that mild, gradual challenge, at manageable levels of discomfort, with attention to avoiding injury, can potentially yield quite significant improvements in functioning, and even reduction of pain, in the longer term. (That's also been true for me.) There are professionals who can help, if that's available & affordable (physical therapists, specialized trainers, massage therapists, osteopaths, etc.); there are even some very qualified physical therapists who've put up libraries of YouTube videos for free.

    At this point, I'd say I'm "in good shape", more or less, for my age, having started being active in my mid 40s. I was not in any kind of shape back then, long-term sedentary and having just completed cancer treatment (surgery-chemo-radiation-drugs), already had OA and significant knee pain (torn meniscus was later formally diagnosed, probably present earlier). I have more extensive OA now, osteoporosis, very early-stage COPD (they tell me), and I don't know what-all. As you say, things can happen as we age. Nonetheless, I have better physical functioning and less pain than I did at age 45.

    I'm not suggesting that's universally available to everyone and anyone, I'm sure it's not . . . but I suspect it's available to some people whose disbelief in the possibility, or unwillingness/inability to invest slow patient effort, are leaving them with lower functioning and more pain than the minimally unavoidable. Sometimes our own beliefs can create our own roadblocks.

    Sure, at some point, we all are going to experience age-related physical decline, because (so far) no one lives forever. It's seductively easy to bring that on earlier than necessary, by inattention or low self-expectations. (That's almost the default, in some subcultures, I fear.)

    I'm *not* saying improvement via activity is achievable for everyone, as a practical thing - some have more challenging lives than others, less time, fewer resources, other insurmountable problems. I'm simply saying I think many people could achieve more benefits, and bigger benefits, than they realize.