1. Cocoa Butter - Organic & Fair Trade Certified
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. **NEW** BL11 - Orange, Red & Infrared Therapy Body Light
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Charcoal Soap - For Deep Cleansing
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Orange & Red Light Therapy Device - LGS1
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Organic Cocoa Powder
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Metabasoap - Handcrafted Soap
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice
  7. Cascara Sagrada Powder From Farmalabor In Italy
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice
  8. **NEW Mini Body Light** MBL1 - Orange & Red Light Therapy Mini Body Light
    CLICK HERE!
    Dismiss Notice

"Higher Metabolism, Temperature And Pulse And Lower TSH Associated With Higher Mortality"

Discussion in 'Ray Peat Topics' started by Jarman, Sep 21, 2016.

  1. Jarman

    Jarman Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2016
    Messages:
    64
    Gender:
    Male
  2. OP
    Jarman

    Jarman Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2016
    Messages:
    64
    Gender:
    Male
  3. raypeatclips

    raypeatclips Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2016
    Messages:
    2,532
    Initial thoughts are that stress hormones can produce high heart rate and temperatures, while the person examined on paper would seem to have very good pulse and temps.

    One study mentions how rats fed identical diets, the ones with the lower temperatures lived longer. If the rats had higher temperatures they would be burning food faster, and would of course run into problems if they weren't meeting calorific requirements. If the higher temperature rats were not restricted in their food, would they have lived longer? From what and the people I believe, I think they would.

    Another study the article uses is this:
    Mortality in a complete 4-year follow up of 85-year-old residents of Leiden, classified by serum level of thyrotropin and thyroxine. - PubMed - NCBI

    Where 85 year olds were recruited to analyse their bloods and then derive a mortality rate in groupings based on their TSH level.

    They managed to recruit 67 subjects with abnormally high TSH and recruited 491 subjects with normal to low TSH. They recruited over seven times more alive people with normal TSH, than high. But then deduct from the study that high TSH equal longer life? The obvious question is, are all the other high TSH subjects not in the study, not there because they are dead?

    There are many studies talking about the relationship between TSH and mortality. However on the functionalps website there are links to studies showing the opposite, low TSH coinciding with less cancers, longer lifespans etc. So it can be difficult to decide who to believe.

    Ray Peat, PhD on Thyroid, Temperature, Pulse, and TSH – Functional Performance Systems (FPS)
     
  4. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
    The study was published in the Journal for Insurance Medicine, this is all about determining insurance risks and evaluatiing life and disability claims.

    They took TSH and T4 as markers. You find lots of studies that link higher T4 levels with increased mortality; Instead of questioning the practice of T4-only treatment, they conclude that the patients are overtreated.
     
  5. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
  6. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
    Thyroid function declines with age. To include these studies was lame...
     
  7. raypeatclips

    raypeatclips Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2016
    Messages:
    2,532
    Reviews of "Peatarian reviews" anyone?
     
  8. Peater Piper

    Peater Piper Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2016
    Messages:
    523
    Gender:
    Male
    'Tis true, but there is this study that showed younger relatives of some old Jews also had higher TSH levels than the general population. Even if the raised TSH is playing a direct role in their longevity, I don't know that a person without the genetic predisposition for it would gain the same benefit by raising their TSH through diet.

    http://press.endocrine.org/doi/pdf/10.1210/jc.2009-0808
     
  9. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
    The main idea in the first study was that low thyroid function is associated with longevity, and that it is inherited. The study is quite creative. :ss

    Nonagenarien siblings (= age between 90 and 99) were recruited, lab test were done, the age at which the parents had died was enquired. (By the way we talk about Dutch people that were born before or during WW I).

    Adjustments:
    • They "computed the sex and birth cohort cumulative hazards using the life tables of the Dutch population" for each parent, the result was a "family mortality history score".
    • In (what they call) model 2 they excluded hypo- and hyperthyroid participants. In model 3 they adjusted the data for ADLs, IADLs and serum high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels.
    The results are printed in bar graphs.

    three bars.GIF

    No hard data. No mention what the cut-off values were or why, and only three bars. Adjusted labs.


    This video is in German. Just fast forward to 5:04. You see how data have been massaged by pooling groups in a bar graphs.

    The data show the mortality vs. energy expenditure through exercising. The first group (< 500 kcal per week) should have been excluded: This are bedridden people with obvious(!) high mortality rate. With that group excluded the result would have been the opposite.
    .....

    The other study is just a bag on non-evidence. No data at all (neither hard data nor massaged ones) to support their theory.
     
  10. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
    The figures are a bit confusing: 652 Pima Indians were admitted to an impatient unit. Twenty-four-hour energy expenditure was measured in 508 individuals (group SG-1), resting metabolic rate was measured in 384 individuals (group SG-2). 240 underwent both measurements: these are counted in both groups. So we don't know how many survived or died in total. They count people twice when they say, in each group 27 died of natural causes, 43 (SG-1) and 53 (SG-2) died of external causes. The follow up-period is a mixed bag, too.

    Looking only at the people who have died in the follow-up period, the average age of those "healthy" participants at the time of measurement was 30.9 and 27.8 years, BMI was 33.2 and 36.8 kg/m2. Liver disease accounts for half of the natural deaths. "Death due to alcohol-related causes predominated in both groups."

    In my books young (morbidly) obese alcoholics are not healthy people. Whatever the result and how it was calculated, I would be wary of making predictions for the general population based on that data.
     
  11. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
    This is a meta-analysis that compared mortality in "euthyroid" (TSH reference range was 0.45 - 4.5 mIU/l) vs. "subclinical hyperthyroid" people.

    I personally don't see much usefulness in meta-analyses. While reviews compare study designs, discuss why the studies came to different conclusions and make suggestions for further research; meta-analyses do not add content.

    HUNT study
    Is this Norwegian study people with certain diseases were excluded. Euthyroid was defined as a TSH 0.5 - 3.5 mIU/l. Everyone with a TSH above 3.5 was advised to see their doctor. TSH levels within reference range were positively associated with CHD mortality in women.

    SHIP study
    In this German study, subclinical hyperthyroid was considered who had a TSH below 0.25 mIU/l and FT3 and FT4 below upper range. They found that people with that low a TSH were in average 13 years older. After adjusting for age they found no difference in mortality.
    ....

    Edit: I removed a confusing (not age/sex adjusted) table.
     
  12. Such_Saturation

    Such_Saturation Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2013
    Messages:
    7,364
  13. Queequeg

    Queequeg Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,191
    Gender:
    Male
    [ moderator edit: posts moved from Thyroid Function And Longevity ]

    From the other thread, https://raypeatforum.com/community/...ated-with-higher-mortality.12727/#post-173535
    here is the main source of low-thyroid pro longevity studies
    Peatarian Reviews: Higher metabolism, temperature and pulse and lower TSH associated with higher mortality

    Now after carefully reading through giraffes critique of the several papers on the other thread, I still find it very hard to believe that not only all are of these studies somehow rigged or flawed but also how can it be that there are so few studies showing the opposite, that euthyroidism and higher metabolisms and temperatures leads to longer lifespan.
     
  14. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
    You need to look for studies that actually measured T3, but since it is medical practice to only measure TSH or TSH and T4, and there is this dogma that thyroxine supplementation is enough to correct hypothyroidism, those studies are few and far between.

    I posted a study that measured T3 here. In that study they referenced another one with similar findings.

    .....

    Also see the more general part of my reply posted here.
     
  15. Queequeg

    Queequeg Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,191
    Gender:
    Male
    The study above measure T3. I know you found some potentials flaws in it from the groupings but what I don't get is how there could be so many studies that are making the same mistakes. Do you think its a deliberate hit on thyroid. Nothing would surprise me anymore however the metabolic studies say the same thing.

    Many studies link lower metabolism and body temperature to longevity. I don't get how all these could be wrong as well.

    From the peatarian review page here are the studies that just focus on body temp and metabolism. In looking through PubMed and online I haven't found any studies that show different. A google search only shows articles claiming slow metabolisms increase life. As the OP in the other thread said WTF?
    • In a prospective study in men with around 40 years of follow-up, a higher basal metabolic rate was independently associated with a higher mortality compared to average metabolic rates. Low metabolic rates were not significantly associated with higher mortality (Figure: Mortality plotted according to quartiles of metabolic rate). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18693224[​IMG]
    • In the same study, a higher temperature was associated with increased mortality compared to people with a lower temperature over 25-years of follow-up (Figure: X-axis: Survival time (yrs), Y-axis: Cumulative survival; plotted for higher or lower body temperature). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12161648 [​IMG]
    • Mice that have been genetically engineered to have a 0.3 to 0.5°C lower body temperature have an increased life span compared to normal mice despite having the same caloric intake. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17082459
    • In a prospective study in male and females with average 11 years of follow-up, a higher 24 hour energy expenditure was associated with higher mortality from diseases. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21450984
    • In a 16-year follow-up study, an elevated resting heart rate in men without cardiovascular disease is associated with an increased all-cause mortality, even when adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors. A lower resting heart rate wasnt associated with higher mortality (Figure: All-cause mortality according to groups of resting heart rate). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23595657
     
  16. Queequeg

    Queequeg Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,191
    Gender:
    Male
    From this paper RP Salt, energy, metabolic rate, and longevity, RP uses the following studies to support his claim that high metabolism leads to longer lifespans.

    So the key is that for higher metabolism to increase longevity, a meaningful amount of uncoupling must happens in the mitochondria.

    From the Speakman paper

    It seems that uncoupling happens more in animals with smaller body sizes because they are operating at below “lower critical temperature.” Uncoupling raises body temperature as well as beneficially lowering ROS production. This explains why small dogs with higher metabolism live longer than large ones. It also accounts for the observed results that RP is citing which used hamsters and mice.

    So the question is what evidence do we have that mitochondrial uncoupling is taking place in humans? My reading is that mitochodrial uncoupling happens mostly with smaller animals like rodents and small dogs. The studies posted that show an increased metabolism in humans leads to reduced longevity is consistent with less than meaningful mitochondrial uncoupling.

    I realize this is the opposite of RP fundamentals. Please someone explain to me what I am missing.
     
  17. Queequeg

    Queequeg Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,191
    Gender:
    Male
  18. Giraffe

    Giraffe Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2015
    Messages:
    2,464
    I don't know what the point is in posting the Peatarian's chief skeptic stuff here again. Why not just discuss it in the thread were it is posted already?
    .....

    Tell me, has any of the studies controlled the participants for adrenaline levels or thyroid status (including T3)? Which participants were excluded? Did they measure CO2 production? How much credit do you give a study in which two thirds of the deaths were of external causes?
    Regarding multihazard models: Which covariates were used in the models? In which direction do the covariates change the result? Do you think that the assumptions that are basis for using the covariates are legit?

    @Queequeg, please read those studies and come to your own conclusions.
     
  19. Queequeg

    Queequeg Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,191
    Gender:
    Male
    because it was a live thread under discussion and thought what I posted was relevant to what the OP had asked. I have no problem if you want to move it to the other thread.
    Are we to believe that every one of these studies, which all have a consistent conclusion, are so fundamentally flawed that we should ignore them. I am not so sure that many of your criticisms would support such a conclusion. For example, you asked “has any of the studies controlled the participants for adrenaline levels or thyroid status (including T3)?”

    That is creating an artificially high hurdle for these studies, a straw man of sorts, which you can then attack for not meeting an unnecessary requirement. Beyond removing outliers, I am sure that these studies do not control for adrenaline or Thyroid. Like most other scientific studies, I am also sure that they don’t control for a thousand other biological factors that affect health. The magic of a statistics makes this unnecessary. As you know, as long as the sample is large enough and representative of the population, whatever variations in T3, adrenaline, or any other measure, don’t matter because they are matched by the same variations in the population as a whole.

    I will let you present your concerns with incorrect covariate assumptions and covariate selections since you are making the charge. I am sure the scientists, peer reviewers, and publications would all like to know as well.
    I thought the whole point of this forum was to discuss our ideas openly and honestly and work together to get to the truth. But since you ask, I did make my own conclusions. As I wrote, Ray’s claim that higher metabolism and temperatures lead to better health and increased longevity directly contradicts the vast majority of scientists as well as scientific papers on the subject. For someone to make a claim like that, they should have some rock solid evidence for that.

    Ray cites only two papers that support his conclusions and points to the effect of mitochondrial uncoupling. One of the papers does say that mitochondrial uncoupling reverses the normal relationship of metabolism and longevity. But it says that this happens primarily in small animals like hamsters (the first study) and mice or small dogs (the second study). Nowhere does it say that uncoupling takes place in humans to such an extent that higher metabolism and higher temperatures would increase longevity.

    Now if I am missing something or got something wrong please let me know. If you have other studies that don’t involve rodents, but humans, please share them. However I don't believe that all of those studies are flawed when even one of the papers Ray cites agrees with their conclusions, just not for smaller animals. I realize that this is a major part of Ray’s teachings, but if it is not correct, or if it needs more support we should be able to discuss it.
     
  20. Ahanu

    Ahanu Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2015
    Messages:
    432
    Maybe the metabolic rate is not so important after all. Mathematician/biologist Lloyd Demetrius suggested that the most important factor involved in duration of life is not metabolic rate or oxidative stress, but metabolic stability.
    "Evolutionary biologist Lloyd Demetrius believes that life-span potential is related to an organism’s ability to maintain stable levels of critical cellular metabolites, not to its metabolic rate. The traditional theory that longevity and rate of aging are determined by metabolic rate and the rate of production of free radicals has had broad appeal as an explanation for why some animals live longer than others. But numerous exceptions to this rule (including the FIRKO mouse) have undermined the idea over time."
    The Aging Enigma
     
Loading...