We Had Something to Tell You About Fast Food. What Was It Again?

1. We Had Something to Tell You About Fast Food. What Was It Again?

Granted, no one should be surprised by a study that suggests that McDonald’s is bad for your health, but occasionally a study (or a movie) comes along that shocks even us: in this case, a study suggesting that fast food purveyors are not only scrambling your eggs, but also potentially scrambling your brain.

A new study of rats from the University of North Carolina has found that consuming a fast-food like diet for just four days could make neurons in the hippocampus overactive and disrupt the ability of the brain to receive glucose, thereby interfering with memory functions as a result. The findings suggest that memory is more vulnerable to poor nutrition than previously thought, with changes appearing well before weight gain sets in.

We were a little startled by the speed of the impact, and so were the researchers. “We knew that diet and metabolism could affect brain health, but we didn't expect to find such a specific and vulnerable group of brain cells, CCK interneurons in the hippocampus, that were directly disrupted by short-term high-fat diet exposure," said Juan Song, a member of the UNC Neuroscience Center and lead researcher on the project. "What surprised us most was how quickly these cells changed their activity in response to reduced glucose availability, and how this shift alone was enough to impair memory."

The study did reveal a possible way to reverse the damage. When researchers restored glucose levels in the brain - or used intermittent fasting to regulate energy use - the neurons calmed down and memory performance improved. All in all, the study suggests that memory circuits are highly sensitive to diet - and a high-fat, saturated-fat–rich diet may increase the risk of neurodegenerative diseases like dementia and Alzheimer’s.

2. When Washington Stops, Seniors Pay the Price.

The standoff between Republicans and Democrats over a government funding bill has triggered a shutdown that could hit older adults, especially low income seniors who rely on federal funded support programs, especially hard.

The good news: Social Security and Medicare checks will continue. The less good news: Support staff, already reduced by Trump Administration cuts, have been furloughed, so it will become increasingly difficult to deal with payment or enrollment problems. The even worse news: key programs supported by federal funding may run out of money (Meals on Wheels is a good example). According to the organization, “9 out of 10 Meals on Wheels providers receive federal funding, and for more than 60%, that funding represents half or more of their total budget.” Most Meals on Wheels providers can run on current resources for a few weeks, but since many are thinly financed, a longer shutdown could lead to curtailment of services, or even an organizational closure. Payments to cover subsidized housing for low-income seniors could also be threatened. During the last shutdown, more than 1,000 housing contracts expired and could not be renewed until HUD reopened its doors. Ultimately, that resulted only in delayed payments, though it is not entirely possible to know how it could play out this time.  

The ultimate impact will largely depend upon how long the shutdown goes. Most shutdowns in recent history have been relatively brief – at eight days, this one is already on the longer side – but they have been getting longer. The last shutdown, during President Trump’s first term in 2018-19, lasted 35 days and this one could go as long, or even longer. 

Hurry, Ageism Awareness Day Sales End at Midnight.

We kid - there are no sales – but hopefully, we’re still thinking and talking about ageism, because ageism in the US has profound implications for everything from how we work to how long we live in good health. Ageism shows up in obvious ways – discrimination against older workers – and in more subtle ways - like assuming someone’s “too old” to learn something new or “too young” to lead - and it limits people of all ages. When we challenge those stereotypes, we open the door to a more connected, inclusive world where everyone’s experience matters.

Thursday, October 9th is Ageism Awareness Day, and our friends at the American Society on Aging are working hard to prioritize this issue through:

• Raising awareness about ageism’s impact and the importance of age-inclusion
• Encouraging and promoting member efforts to raise awareness and collaborate
• Flooding the internet and media with a realistic picture of aging and tools for change

They’ve gathered a number of helpful resources (which can be found here) and ideas on what you can do to raise awareness of the costs of ageism this Thursday and beyond. 

3. Men Are for the Birds, Women Are for the Mammals?

In the United States, life expectancy for women outstrips men by about 5.3 years, a huge gap by any measure - but that gap is hardly unique. The worldwide adult life expectancy difference is 5.4 years, and women are favored in virtually every country and region in the world. Some of that is surely behavioral: men smoke more, shoot each other with much greater frequency, and visit the doctor less. But those behaviors don’t fully explain the gap, leaving persistent questions about gender and life expectancy.

There have been a number of competing theories for the life expectancy disparity between men and women, ranging from chromosomal theories to caregiving theories to sexual reproduction competition theories. A new study of animals in both zoos and in the wild lends new support to several of the theories. The study found support for the heterogametic sex hypothesis: it is thought that females, who have two X chromosomes, have an advantage over males, who have one X chromosome and a Y chromosome, because if there are mutations in the X chromosome, males wouldn’t have a copy of that X chromosome to serve as a backup. Thus, mutations may eventually prove harmful and reduce longevity, 

The study also found evidence to support the sexual selection theory, that some male animals spend their energy developing traits and behavior to compete for and attract mates, such as changing their physical size or fighting to compete for a female. In doing so, they may be “sacrificing their survival.”

Here’s a twist though: researchers also studied the life expectancy of different bird species, and more than two thirds of them favored males. What does that mean? We have no idea, but until we sprout wings, we’re not going to worry about it.

Shameless Self Promotion #1.

It probably feels like it has been 100 years since I started promoting my book, Healthy to 100, but at long last, as of yesterday, it has hit the market. I couldn’t be more excited and I hope you will have the chance to read it and share your reactions with me. And if you want to see a preview, I had the chance to work with the great team at Next Avenue to publish an excerpt on how Japan is valuing older workers, and how that is contributing to healthy longevity. You can check it out here.