Oncologist claims one '30% dinner table rule' may help you live a longer life
Silvio Garattini, 96, is the founder and director of Italy's Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research, an institute dedicated to biomedical research
Abiding by a lesser-known '30% rule' could help extend your lifespan, a prominent expert has claimed. Silvio Garattini, 96, is the founder and director of Italy's Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research, a non-profit dedicated to biomedical research.
While the average life expectancy in the UK is around 80 years, Professor Garattini believes that following specific guidelines may indeed boost one's life expectancy. You may be unsurprised to hear this involves eating healthily wherever possible, but how we consume food may matter more than you think.
"As our elders used to say, you should leave the table a little hungry," Professor Garattini said, according to Men's Health. "Research has shown that if you eat 30% less, you live 20% longer. Eating little is a factor for longevity."
Professor Garattini certainly isn't alone in his views on food restriction. Various studies have drawn attention to its potential benefits, including pioneering Cell Metabolism research from 2018.
The first phase of the study, dubbed CALERIE, was the first 'randomised controlled trial to test the metabolic effects of calorie restriction in non-obese humans'. It was followed by a second phase in which 53 healthy men and women cut calories by 15% over two years, before undergoing further tests for metabolism and oxidative stress.
Interestingly, results indicated that cutting caloric intake by 15% for two years slowed ageing and metabolism while protecting against age-related disease. Calorie restriction was also reported to cut 'systemic oxidative stress', a factor tied to Alzheimer's disease, cancer, Parkinson's, diabetes and other health issues.
At the time, its lead author, Associate Professor Leanne Redman of Pennington Biomedical Research, said: "Restricting calories can slow your basal metabolism, and if by-products of metabolism accelerate ageing processes, calorie restriction sustained over several years may help to decrease risk for chronic disease and prolong life.
"The CALERIE trial rejuvenates support for two of the longest-standing theories of human ageing: the slow metabolism 'rate of living' theory and the oxidative damage theory."
Similar beliefs are echoed by residents of the 'Blue Zone', Okinawa, Japan, where residents are known to live exceptionally long lives. Dubbed the '80% trick' or 'Hara Hachi Bu', this generally involves eating only until 80% full.
In a past conversation with the Mirror, Dr Deborah Lee, a GP at Dr Fox Pharmacy, explained: "Imagine what 80% of your meal would look like, and aim to leave 20% behind.
"Calorie restriction is believed to slow the ageing process. Eating less lowers the metabolic rate. With fewer metabolic processes under way, less oxidation is taking place. Oxidative stress probably underpins the development of many of the chronic diseases we see today – heart disease, cancer, type-2 diabetes and dementia."
However, it is important to note that research is certainly ongoing on the subject of calorie restriction. Besides this, Professor Garattini emphasised that what you eat matters too, with a Mediterranean diet preferred.
These views come amidst a wave of research lauding the benefits of European staples, including garlic, saffron, olives, rosemary, and grapes. Meanwhile, the so-called 'Western diet', characterised by high-sugar and high-fat products, has faced increasing criticism.
"In general, one should follow the Mediterranean diet, which promotes the consumption of fruits, vegetables, fish, and complex carbohydrates while limiting meat and fat intake," Professor Garattini added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
9 hours ago
- The Independent
Thousands of NHS patients ‘to be denied breakthrough Alzheimer's drugs'
Breakthrough drugs that slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease will reportedly be refused for use on the NHS this week in a blow to thousands of patients. The two drugs, Lecanemab and donanemab, slow down the decline in Alzheimer's patients' ability to carry out daily activities. The drugs' success in halting the progression of Alzheimer's was heralded as a 'new era' by campaigners and researchers. However, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (Nice) is expected to refuse to recommend them on the NHS, according to The Sunday Times. The regulator has already issued two decisions, one in October last year and another in March, saying they would not recommend the drugs for use on the NHS. A final decision will be published on Thursday. Both drugs already have UK drug licences, making them available privately. It is estimated that around 70,000 adults in England would have been eligible for treatment if the drugs had been approved. The regulator will reportedly turn down both drugs on the grounds of cost-effectiveness, with one insider telling The Sunday Times: 'It is the end of the road for these drugs on the NHS'. Lecanemab removes build-ups of the protein beta-amyloid from the brain. Trials showed that lecanemab can slow the progression of Alzheimer's by 27 per cent over 18 months if given to someone early on in the course of their decline. Donanemab, marketed as Kisunla in the UK, teaches the body's immune cells to recognise and remove the amyloid protein, which builds up in the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease. The protein build-ups are thought to be toxic to brain cells, leading to the symptoms of Alzheimer's, the Alzheimer's society has said. Lecanemab can, however, cause swelling and bleeding in the brain. In trials for Donanemab, a third of recipients experienced abnormalities in their brain scans caused by brain swelling and bleeding, NICE said. The drugs reportedly cost around £20,000 to £25,000, with the NHS being offered a lower price. Privately, the treatment costs between £60,000-80,000 per year, according to Alzheimer's Research UK. In a previous review by NICE in October 2024, director of medicines evaluation Helen Knight said: 'Donanemab could slow down cognitive decline by 4-7 months, but this is just not enough benefit to justify the additional cost to the NHS. The cost-effectiveness estimate for donanemab is five to six times above what NICE normally considers an acceptable use of NHS resources'. While the regulator said the decision would be disappointing for some, 'there are other treatments being developed'. Hilary Evans-Newton, chief executive of Alzheimer's Research UK, said the decision to turn down the drugs would be 'deeply disappointing'. She added: 'These treatments are not perfect, and we recognise the challenges they pose around cost, delivery and safety. But scientific progress is incremental, and these drugs represent a vital foundation to build on.' The regulator NICE is due to publish the final draft guidance about the two drugs on Thursday. This leaves space for the decision to be challenged and sent to a review panel before the final guidance is published.
Daily Mail
19 hours ago
- Daily Mail
NHS patients battling Alzheimer's WON'T be offered 'miracle' drugs as health watchdog rules they are 'too expensive to justify'
Two of the first drugs proven to slow down Alzheimer's disease will be denied to NHS patients from this week - unless they pay to go private. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has refused the 'miracle' drugs lecanemab and donanemab for use on the NHS as they are too expensive to justify. This means over 70,000 patients in England will be denied the 'game-changing' drugs, found to slow cognitive decline by an average of four to seven months, unless they can afford tens of thousands of pounds a year for private treatment. After a positive drug trial in 2022, lecanemab (brand name Leqembi) made by Eisai, and donanemab (marketed as Kisunla), made by Eli Lilly, were proven to clear toxic amyloid protein from the brain and thus slow the underlying cause of dementia. Campaigners hailed it as 'the beginning of the end' of Alzheimer's. Iain Hartnell, Research Communications Officer at Alzheimer's Society, said: 'The MHRA's approval of the first safe and effective Alzheimer's disease treatment, shown to slow progression, is a defining moment for people with early-stage Alzheimer's disease in the UK and a significant step towards a more hopeful future.' Last year, both drugs were given drug licences in the UK by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). But without NICE's recommendation, the groundbreaking medicine will only be available to those with private healthcare. 'It is the end of the road for these drugs on the NHS,' an insider told The Times. Hilary Evans-Newton, the chief executive of Alzheimer's Research UK described the decision as 'deeply disappointing'. She told the publication that it sends 'a damaging signal to the life sciences sector - undermining confidence in the UK as a leader of dementia research, clinical trials and innovation, with knock-on effects for patients and the wider economy'. She added: 'These treatments are not perfect, and we recognise the challenges they pose around cost, delivery and safety. But scientific progress is incremental, and these drugs represent a vital foundation to build on.' The drugs were shown in trials to slow the rate of decline for those with mild to moderate Alzheimer's by an average of four to seven months. Lecanemab, for example, can slow the decline in memory and mental agility by 27 per cent in those with mild Alzheimer's taking the drug compared to people on the dummy drug. The research team also found that the drug reduced loss of quality of life by up to 56 per cent, according to the Alzheimer's Society. Importantly, the drug reduced the amount of amyloid protein present in the brain. Amyloid protein levels were also reduced in the blood and spinal fluid. Experts have long believed donanemab could herald a new era of dementia treatment, after studies showed it slowed the memory-robbing illness in its early stages Lecanemab has already been given the green light in the EU, US, China, Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea and Israel. It is estimated around 70,000 adults in England could eligible for the treatment if approved for use on the health service. Alzheimer's is the most common cause of dementia in the UK. Around 982,000 are currently estimated to be living with dementia UK - although this figure is expected to skyrocket to 1.4million in 2040. Alzheimer's Research UK analysis found 74,261 people died from dementia in 2022, compared to 69,178 a year earlier, making it the country's biggest killer. Recent analysis by the Alzheimer's Society estimates the overall annual cost of the dementia to the UK is £42billion a year, with families bearing the brunt. An ageing population means these costs — which include lost earnings of unpaid carers — are set to soar to £90billion in the next 15 years.
New Statesman
2 days ago
- New Statesman
AI regulation does not stifle innovation
Photo credit: Claudenakagawa / Shutterstocl Ever since co-founding the All-Party Parliamentary Group on AI nine years ago, still ably administered by the Big Innovation Centre, I've been deeply involved in debating and advising on the implications of artificial intelligence. My optimism about AI's potential remains strong – from helping identify new Parkinson's treatments to DeepMind's protein structure predictions that could transform drug discovery and personalised medicine. Yet this technology is unlike anything we've seen before. It's potentially more autonomous, with greater impact on human creativity and employment, and more opaque in its decision-making processes. The conventional wisdom that regulation stifles innovation needs turning on its head. As AI becomes more powerful and pervasive, appropriate regulation isn't just about restricting harmful practices – it's key to driving widespread adoption and sustainable growth. Many potential AI adopters are hesitating not due to technological limitations but Tim Clement-Jones Liberal Democrat peer and spokesperson for the digital economy uncertainties about liability, ethical boundaries and public acceptance. Clear regulatory frameworks addressing algorithmic bias, data privacy and decision transparency can actually accelerate adoption by providing clarity and confidence. Different jurisdictions are adopting varied approaches. The European Union's AI Act, with its risk-based framework, started coming into effect this year. Singapore has established comprehensive AI governance through its model AI governance framework. Even China regulates public-facing generative AI models with fairly heavy inspection regimes. The UK's approach has been more cautious. The previous government held the AI Safety Summit at Bletchley Park and established the AI Safety Institute (now inexplicably renamed the AI Security Institute), but with no regulatory teeth. The current government has committed to binding regulation for companies developing the most powerful AI models, though progress remains slower than hoped. Notably, 60 countries – including Saudi Arabia and the UAE, but not Britain or the US – signed the Paris AI Action Summit declaration in February this year, committing to ensuring AI is 'open, inclusive, transparent, ethical, safe, secure and trustworthy'. Several critical issues demand urgent attention. Intellectual property: the use of copyrighted material for training large language models without licensing has sparked substantial litigation and, in the UK, unprecedented parliamentary debate. Governments need to act decisively to ensure creative works aren't ingested into generative AI models without return to rights-holders, with transparency duties on developers. Digital citizenship: we must equip citizens for the AI age, ensuring they understand how their data is used and AI's ethical implications. Beyond the UAE, Finland and Estonia, few governments are taking this seriously enough. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe International convergence: despite differing regulatory regimes, we need developers to collaborate and commercialise innovations globally while ensuring consumer trust in common international ethical and safety standards. Well-designed regulation can be a catalyst for AI adoption and innovation. Just as environmental regulations spurred cleaner technologies, AI regulations focusing on explainability and fairness could push developers toward more sophisticated, responsible systems. The goal isn't whether to regulate AI, but how to regulate it promoting both innovation and responsibility. We need principles-based rather than overly prescriptive regulation, assessing risk and emphasising transparency and accountability without stifling creativity. Achieving the balance between human potential and machine innovation isn't just possible – it's necessary as we step into an increasingly AI-driven world. That's what we must make a reality. This article first appeared in our Spotlight on Technology supplement, of 13 June 2025. Related
