4.6 Article

Food Inequality Negatively Impacts Cardiac Health in Rabbits

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 3, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003705

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Shahed University, Tehran, Iran

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Individuals with lower socioeconomic status experience higher rates of mortality and are more likely to suffer from numerous diseases. While some studies indicate that humans who suffer from social inequality suffer generally worse health, to our knowledge no controlled experiments of this nature have been done in any species. Lipofuscin is a highly oxidized cross-linked aggregate consisting of oxidized protein and lipid clusters. This eminent terminal oxidation outcome accumulates within cells during aging process. Methodology/Principal Findings: Thirty two rabbits were assigned into four groups randomly of eight each. The first group encountered food deprivation for eight weeks and was kept in an isolated situation. The second group was food deprived for eight weeks but encountered to other groups continuously. The third group suffered two weeks of deprivation and then received free access to food. The fourth group had free access to diet without any deprivation. All hearts were removed for histopathological evaluation. Cross-sections of hearts were examined by light microscopy for the presence of yellow-brown Lpofuscin pigment granules. Here we show that relative food deprivation can cause accumulation of Lipofuscin pigmentation. We find that cardiac Lipofuscin deposition increases the most in the inequitable condition in which food deprived individuals observe well-fed individuals. Conclusions/Significance: Our findings demonstrate that a sense of inequality in food intake can promote aging more than food deprivation alone. These findings should be considered as a basis for further studies on the physiological mechanisms by which inequality negatively impacts health and well-being.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available