4.5 Article

Maintaining physiological state for exceptional survival: What is the normal level of blood glucose and does it change with age?

Journal

MECHANISMS OF AGEING AND DEVELOPMENT
Volume 130, Issue 9, Pages 611-618

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.mad.2009.07.004

Keywords

Physiological norm; Aging; Allostasis; Mortality risk; Stress resistance; Longitudinal data

Funding

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING [P01AG008761, R01AG027019, R01AG028259] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NIA NIH HHS [R01 AG028259, R01 AG028259-05, R01AG027019, R01AG028259, 5P01AG008761, R01 AG027019, P01 AG008761, P01 AG008761-190005, R01 AG027019-04] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The levels of blood glucose (BG) in humans tend to increase with age deviating from the norm specified for the young adults. Such elevation is often considered as a factor contributing to an increase in risks of disease and death. The proper use of intervention strategies coping with or preventing consequences of BG elevation requires understanding the roles of external forces and intrinsic senescence in this process. To address these issues, we performed analyses of longitudinal data on BG collected in the Framingham Heart Study using methods of descriptive statistics and statistical modeling. The approach allows us to separate effects of persistent external disturbances from normal aging-related changes due to the senescence process. We found that the BG level corresponding to the lowest mortality risk tends to increase with age. The changes in the shape of the mortality risk with age indicate the aging-related decline in resistance to stresses affecting the BG level. The results show that analyzing longitudinal data using advanced methods may substantially increase our knowledge on factors and mechanisms responsible for aging-related changes in humans. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available