Evolution in health and medicine Sackler colloquium: Evolution of the human lifespan and diseases of aging: roles of infection, inflammation, and nutrition
Finch CE.. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2009-12-04
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Humans have evolved much longer lifespans than the great apes, which rarely exceed 50 years. Since 1800, lifespans have doubled again, largely due to improvements in environment, food, and medicine that minimized mortality at earlier ages. Infections cause most mortality in wild chimpanzees and in traditional forager-farmers with limited access to modern medicine. Although we know little of the diseases of aging under premodern conditions, in captivity, chimpanzees present a lower incidence of cancer, ischemic heart disease, and neurodegeneration than current human populations. These major differences in pathology of aging are discussed in terms of genes that mediate infection, inflammation, and nutrition. Apolipoprotein E alleles are proposed as a prototype of pleiotropic genes, which influence immune responses, arterial and Alzheimer's disease, and brain development.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Finch, C. E. (2010). Evolution in health and medicine Sackler colloquium: Evolution of the human lifespan and diseases of aging: roles of infection, inflammation, and nutrition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0909606106
Vancouver
Finch CE. Evolution in health and medicine Sackler colloquium: Evolution of the human lifespan and diseases of aging: roles of infection, inflammation, and nutrition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2010. doi:10.1073/pnas.0909606106. PMID: 19966301.
BibTeX
@article{finch2010-19966301,
author = {Finch, C. E.},
title = {{Evolution in health and medicine Sackler colloquium: Evolution of the human lifespan and diseases of aging: roles of infection, inflammation, and nutrition}},
journal = {Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America},
year = {2010},
doi = {10.1073/pnas.0909606106},
pmid = {19966301},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0909606106}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Since 1800, lifespans have doubled again, largely due to improvements in environment, food, and medicine that minimized mortality at earlier ages.
- Infections cause most mortality in wild chimpanzees and in traditional forager-farmers with limited access to modern medicine.
- Although we know little of the diseases of aging under premodern conditions, in captivity, chimpanzees present a lower incidence of cancer, ischemic heart disease, and neurodegeneration than current human populations.
- These major differences in pathology of aging are discussed in terms of genes that mediate infection, inflammation, and nutrition.
- Apolipoprotein E alleles are proposed as a prototype of pleiotropic genes, which influence immune responses, arterial and Alzheimer's disease, and brain development.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Genetics →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2010 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multicenter collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 19966301) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Related studies in Genetics
Also tagged “nutrition”
2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “nutrition”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.