A recent study suggests that a diet rich in antioxidants alone may not be enough. Apparently, other factors are at work too. The BBC article on the study is a little confusing. The researchers agree that oxidants damage cell DNA – and that cells die off when their DNA is damaged(which is a good thing: no one wants errant cells running amok and reproducing). The BBC article teaser contends that an aging theory has been proven wrong, but the body of the article – and comments by the researchers – do not seem to agree. Anyone have comments? What do you think?
The metabolism of aging is very complicated. It is an ongoing struggle in the body between damage and repair (catabolism vs. anabolism). How the body handles this battle depends on its resources of raw materials (basic construction needs), bioenergetics (substances that optimize mtichondrial function), and hormones/cell signals. It must also have limited inflammation (AKA “inflam-aging”). The oxidative problem is that as cells are blasted with free radicals from our environment and the byproducts of the mitochondria (powerhouses that produce biologic energy), the cells’ structures, including the DNA of the mitochondria and nucleus get damaged. Nuclear DNA is readily repaired by DNA polymerase. However, mitochondrial DNA has minimal repair systems. High-functioning cells, like the heart and brain cells have many mitochondria. As more and more of the mitochondria become damaged, the cell may try to compensate, or it sends out signals to commit a suicide, called apoptosis. Anti-oxidants can decrease the amount of damage, but the repair signals are necessary to rebuild the structures.Yes, anti-oxidants are not enough for the healthy aging process. We want the cancerous cells to die and we want the important thinking neurons to persist and become healthier. It is all about balance and repair.