Losing just 6 kg in your 40s could lower your risk of disease and add years to your life: Study
You might think that once you hit your 40s, it's too late to lose weight and make a real difference but a massive Finnish study tracking over 23,000 people for up to 35 years says otherwise. The research found that adults who lost weight naturally during their 40s without surgery or weight-loss meds lived longer and enjoyed better health than those who stayed overweight. Even small amounts of weight loss had a positive impact, proving it's never too late to take control of your health. (Also read: What women should really eat: Nutritionist busts 16 common diet and weight loss myths every woman should know )
A recent study published in JAMA Network Open revealed that people who moved from being overweight to a healthy weight during midlife experienced a 48% lower risk of chronic diseases and a 19 percent lower risk of death in the following decades. The weight loss didn't have to be drastic either, on average, participants lost just 6.5 percent of their body weight, which is about 13 pounds for someone weighing 200 pounds.
This study tracked participants for 22 to 35 years, using data from British and Finnish workers. They were grouped by weight changes in their 40s: healthy weight, weight loss, weight gain, or staying overweight. Although small, the weight loss group showed significant health benefits. Over time, losing weight lowered risks of heart disease, cancer, strokes, asthma, and lung disease, even when diabetes was excluded, compared to those who stayed overweight.
The study's timing is key, conducted when surgical and drug-based weight-loss options were rare, participants relied on diet and exercise alone, proving these accessible methods work. Lead author Dr. Timo Strandberg noted the benefits of midlife weight loss may take decades to show, echoing similar long-term findings from Chinese research. Those who lost weight also saw lower blood pressure and cholesterol and kept up their physical activity, unlike other groups whose activity declined.
Maintaining weight loss over time is tough, in these studies, over 1,200 participants stayed overweight, while only a small fraction managed to lose weight and keep it off. Many research reports highlight how challenging long-term weight management really is for adults.
However, the findings mostly apply to white European populations, so their relevance to other ethnic groups might vary. The researchers also couldn't confirm whether the weight loss was intentional, though it likely was given the participants' age and health.
Many expect weight loss benefits to show up quickly and dramatically, but this study says otherwise. The biggest health gains from losing weight in midlife may take decades to appear. Knowing this can encourage those starting their journey now while helping set realistic expectations.
For those in their 40s carrying extra weight, the message is clear: it's never too late to make a change. Even modest, steady weight loss can bring lasting health benefits, adding years and vitality to life.
Instead of seeing midlife as too late for change, it could be the ideal time to invest in your future health. Though losing weight can become harder with age, the potential rewards in disease prevention and longevity make the effort well worth it.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
25 minutes ago
- Economic Times
As Trump attacks universities, U.S. researchers flock to Max Planck Society — here's all about EU's top institute
Many U.S. scientists are now applying to Germany's Max Planck Society because they feel unsure about the future of research in the U.S. under Trump. The society saw a big jump in U.S. job applications this year. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads FAQs Many U.S. researchers are applying for jobs in Europe because of uncertainty under President Donald Trump's rule. The Max Planck Society in Germany, one of Europe's best research groups, got 3 times more applications from the U.S. than last year. Trump's government made sudden changes in research funding and tried to ban international students from Harvard, as per Reuters reports.A judge has blocked that student ban for now, but the situation still looks risky. Some top U.S. professors, like historian Timothy Snyder, are already leaving. He quit Yale and moved to Canada. The Max Planck Society got 81 applications from U.S. scientists this spring, last year they only got 25, as per special call was for young women scientists who want to start their own labs. Applications from other parts of the world stayed the same, so the jump is clearly from the U.S. Almost half the U.S. applications came from just five places, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, the National Institutes of Health, and the University of California, as per Max Planck Society has 84 research centers, 25,000 staff, and a budget of over 2 billion euros. It has also won 39 Nobel Prizes, showing it's on par with top U.S. institutions. The Society planned to hire 12 scientists, but may increase it to 20 if the candidates are good enough. European research groups are also getting ready to welcome more U.S. researchers. Cramer just visited the U.S. and said scientists there are scared about the future of science. He said the big question is, 'How do we stop losing smart people because of all this chaos?'The goal now is to give them a safe place in Europe to continue their research. Trump's team removed Harvard's right to accept international students, and told current foreign students they must switch schools or leave the U.S. The U.S. government might also expand these rules to more universities soon, as per Reuters new leaders are planning a '1,000 brains' program to bring more researchers and grow science in Europe. But some universities in Europe may face budget problems because of the the effects of the U.S. education crisis are being felt everywhere. Olschowski said Harvard and top U.S. schools are the global standard, and now that standard is being damaged, as per they are worried about research cuts and new rules in the a top German research group with many Nobel Prizes and strong labs.
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
As Trump attacks universities, U.S. researchers flock to Max Planck Society — here's all about EU's top institute
Many U.S. researchers are applying for jobs in Europe because of uncertainty under President Donald Trump's rule. The Max Planck Society in Germany, one of Europe's best research groups, got 3 times more applications from the U.S. than last year. Trump's government made sudden changes in research funding and tried to ban international students from Harvard, as per Reuters reports. A judge has blocked that student ban for now, but the situation still looks risky. Some top U.S. professors, like historian Timothy Snyder, are already leaving. He quit Yale and moved to Canada. The Max Planck Society got 81 applications from U.S. scientists this spring, last year they only got 25, as per reports. The special call was for young women scientists who want to start their own labs. Applications from other parts of the world stayed the same, so the jump is clearly from the U.S. Almost half the U.S. applications came from just five places, Harvard, Stanford, MIT, the National Institutes of Health, and the University of California, as per reports. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The Max Planck Society has 84 research centers, 25,000 staff, and a budget of over 2 billion euros. It has also won 39 Nobel Prizes, showing it's on par with top U.S. institutions. The Society planned to hire 12 scientists, but may increase it to 20 if the candidates are good enough. European research groups are also getting ready to welcome more U.S. researchers. Cramer just visited the U.S. and said scientists there are scared about the future of science. He said the big question is, 'How do we stop losing smart people because of all this chaos?' Live Events The goal now is to give them a safe place in Europe to continue their research. Trump's team removed Harvard's right to accept international students, and told current foreign students they must switch schools or leave the U.S. The U.S. government might also expand these rules to more universities soon, as per Reuters report. Germany's new leaders are planning a '1,000 brains' program to bring more researchers and grow science in Europe. But some universities in Europe may face budget problems because of the economy. Still, the effects of the U.S. education crisis are being felt everywhere. Olschowski said Harvard and top U.S. schools are the global standard, and now that standard is being damaged, as per reports. FAQs Q1. Why are U.S. scientists applying to the Max Planck Society? Because they are worried about research cuts and new rules in the U.S. Q2. What is the Max Planck Society? It's a top German research group with many Nobel Prizes and strong labs.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Birth control increases stroke risk - here's what women need to know
London: For millions of women, combined hormonal contraceptives are a part of their daily life - providing a convenient and effective option for preventing pregnancy and managing their menstrual cycle. But new findings are sounding the alarm on a serious, and often overlooked, risk: stroke . According to recent findings presented at the European Stroke Organisation Conference , combined oral hormonal contraceptives (which contains both oestrogen and progestogen) may significantly increase the chance of women experiencing a cryptogenic stroke. This is a sudden and serious type of stroke that occurs with no obvious cause. Surprisingly, in younger adults - particularly women - cryptogenic strokes make up approximately 40 per cent of all strokes. This suggests there may be sex-specific factors which contribute to this risk - such as hormonal contraception use. These recently-presented findings lend themselves to this theory. At this year's conference, researchers presented findings from the Secreto study. This is an international investigation that has been conducted into the causes of unexplained strokes in young people aged 18 to 49. The study enrolled 608 patients with cryptogenic ischaemic stroke from 13 different European countries. One of their most striking discoveries was that women who used combined oral contraceptives were three times more likely to experience a cryptogenic stroke compared to non-users. These results stood, even after researchers adjusted for other factors which may have contributed to stroke risk (such as obesity and history of migraines). It's well-documented that hormonal contraceptives, which contain both oestrogen and progestin, come with a small, increased risk of experiencing serious health events, including stroke - particularly ischaemic stroke, which occurs when blood flow to part of the brain is blocked. But a study published earlier this year, which tracked over two million women, found that combined hormonal contraceptives - including the pill, intrauterine devices (IUD), patches and vaginal rings, which all contain both synthetic oestrogen and progestogen - were linked to higher risks of both stroke and heart attack. The vaginal ring increased stroke risk by 2.4 times and 3.8 times for heart attack. The contraceptive patch was found to increase stroke risk by nearly 3.5 times. Interestingly, they also looked at a progestin-only contraceptive (the IUD) and found there was no increased risk for either heart attacks or strokes. Both of these recent findings suggest oestrogen may be the main driver of stroke risk. While absolute risk is still low - meaning fewer than 40 in every 100,000 women using a combined hormonal contraceptive will experience a stroke - the population-level impact is significant considering the number of women worldwide that use a combined hormonal contraceptive. Oestrogen and stroke risk Combined hormonal contraceptives contain synthetic versions of the sex hormones oestrogen (usually ethinylestradiol) and a progestin (the synthetic version of progestogen). Natural oestrogen in the body plays a role in promoting blood clotting, which is important for helping wounds heal and prevents excessive bleeding. But the synthetic oestrogen in contraceptives is more potent and delivered in higher, steady doses. It stimulates the liver to produce extra clotting proteins and reduces natural anticoagulants - tipping the balance toward easier clot formation. This effect, while helpful in stopping bleeding, can raise the risk of abnormal blood clots that can lead to conditions such as stroke. This risk may be even greater for people who smoke, experience migraines or have a genetic tendency to clot. If a clot forms in an artery that supplies the brain or breaks off and travels through the bloodstream to the brain, this can block blood flow - causing what's known as an ischaemic stroke. This is the most common type of stroke. Clots can also form in deep veins (such as those in the legs or around your organs). In addition to clotting, oestrogen may also slightly raise blood pressure and affect how blood vessels behave over time, which can further increase stroke risk. The effects of oestrogen on clotting may partly explain why the recent conference findings showed a link between combined contraceptive use and cryptogenic stroke risk. Cryptogenic stroke has no obvious cause, but is increasingly being linked to subtle, hidden risk factors - such as hormone-driven clotting. Understanding risk These numbers can sound alarming at first, but it's important to keep them in perspective. The absolute risk - meaning the actual number of people affected - is still low. For instance, researchers estimate that there may be one additional stroke per year for every 4,700 women using the combined pill. That sounds rare, and for most users, it is. But when you consider that millions of women use these contraceptives globally, even a small increase in risk can translate into a significant number of strokes at the population level. Which is relative to what is seen with the high number of cryptogenic strokes in young women. Despite the risks associated with combined hormonal contraceptives, many women continue to use them - either because they aren't fully informed of the risks or because the alternatives are either less effective, less accessible or come with their own burdens. Part of the reason this trade-off has become so normalised is the persistent under-funding and under-prioritisation of women's health research. Historically, medical research has focused disproportionately on men - with women either excluded from studies or treated as an afterthought. This has led to a limited understanding of how hormonal contraceptives affect female physiology beyond fertility control. As a result, the side-effects remain poorly understood, under-communicated and under-addressed. Women have a right to make informed decisions about their health and body. This starts with having access to accurate information about the real risks and benefits of every contraceptive option. It means understanding, for example, that while combined hormonal contraceptives do carry a small risk of blood clots and stroke, pregnancy and the weeks following childbirth come with an even higher risk of those same complications. This context is vital for making truly informed choices. No method of contraception is perfect. But when women are given the full picture, they can choose the method that best suits them. We also need more research that reflects the diversity and complexity of women's bodies - not just to improve safety, but to expand options and empower decisions. (The Conversation)
