Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

arkteris13 t1_ivauuwp wrote

The main issue here is that very few humans have an ad libitum diet. It could just mean our animal housing practices are detrimental to their health.

28

DanOMight_801 t1_ivaxt6i wrote

I would describe many Americans as having an ad libitum diet. I agree with your rationale about drawing conclusions, there are always plenty of factors. In this case we have no reason to expect different housing practices for each population, so it’s reasonable to minimize that as a cause for observed differences. The study suggests this is a potential phenomenon that could apply to humans, but invites further investigations based on objective scientific observation.

18

kvotebloodless t1_ivboddv wrote

In the biology of aging course we talked about this too. You could assume by giving mice access to food 24h a day, they will eventually just be over fed. And by limiting the diet to a healthy amount, their life will be naturally elongated. So the calory restriction theory is not as proven as many say.

5

triffid_boy t1_ivceurb wrote

These aren't the only studies that suggest a benefit to CR, and the mechanism - via mTOR - is reasonable.

4

Elphya t1_ivdokya wrote

"You could assume by giving mice access to food 24h a day, they will eventually just be over fed."

Anyone that works with mice in animal facilities knows that's not true.

4

uninstallIE t1_ivdq1gn wrote

>very few humans have an ad libitum diet.

How do you mean this? Globally, inclusive of global poverty and food access?

0

arkteris13 t1_ivdq7i4 wrote

We typically eat to satiation, rather than consume constantly. In terms of lab animals, you see the former in rats, but mice will constantly nibble at their chow.

1

uninstallIE t1_ivdqvyd wrote

Most people do not stop eating at satiation. They eat beyond this, and often very much so. However, eating whenever you want and stopping when you are satiated is still ad libitum.

1