Blue Zones, fact or fiction

Irrelevant

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2015
Messages
11,354
Location
Wenatchee
Fact:https://www.npr.org/sections/health...blue-zones-health-centenarians-healthy-habits (plus many MANY others)
Fiction: https://mindmatters.ai/2023/10/blue-zone-bs-the-longevity-cluster-myth/

The real issue is not that they exist but why they exist. A lot of "research" into blue zones concludes it's because of some health habits those areas have. The issue the second author brings up is that none of that is actually science, but just observations and logical assumptions. Does eating beans and mostly vegetables actually lead to a longer life? Maybe, but there's no control group in these populations. Yes we have other data to suggest that genetics alone play a limited role in our longevity, but that's still different than "this one thing" will make you live longer, which is what a lot of the literature on blue zones speaks to.

I also wonder how the lack of animal protein in their diets affects other aspects besides simply longevity. Are they long living idiots?

I don't know, but I heard it on the way to work and haven't been able to stop thinking about it.
 
I read a version of that article was a little while back. I think it's interesting to ponder. As you note, the "this one thing will change your life and be the fountain of youth" stuff that kinda naturally follows is mostly obnoxious noise and click bait.

I find most of the principles are generally sensible for happiness and health...be active, have meaningful relationships, eat foods not far removed from what grows or lives in nature, try to limit stress, take a nap if you can. Seems reasonable.

Many people aren't happy, or at least rarely so, and could use some ideas on how to feel more content in their physical and/or spiritual lives. I think this concept broadly addresses that ideal.
 
I read a version of that article was a little while back. I think it's interesting to ponder. As you note, the "this one thing will change your life and be the fountain of youth" stuff that kinda naturally follows is mostly obnoxious noise and click bait.

I find most of the principles are generally sensible for happiness and health...be active, have meaningful relationships, eat foods not far removed from what grows or lives in nature, try to limit stress, take a nap if you can. Seems reasonable.

Many people aren't happy, or at least rarely so, and could use some ideas on how to feel more content in their physical and/or spiritual lives. I think this concept broadly addresses that ideal.
100% and that's generally where I fall.

But does that actually amount to anything tangible? And what are the tradeoffs? How many revolutionary ideas, or technologies, or art come from these places? Solving problems, big complex problems, doesn't generally happen without stress, or a shunning of many of these principles. Many of the greatest thinkers and problem solvers where obsessive to the detriment of many other aspects of life. Yet we all benefit from their achievements.

Or is all of that irrelevant. Who cares if we cure cancer if we're happier?

There's just so many tangents I can spin off on wondering, "...but!"

It's hilarious how all seven of those "blue zone habits" are completely antithetical to American culture.
But so is much of the rest of the world, and honestly, as well as portions of America but many of those groups live a fraction as long (think rural Africa and the middle east, the artic).
 
It's hilarious how all seven of those "blue zone habits" are completely antithetical to American culture.
Red Zone Habits

1. Become a certified forklift operator
2. Mc'dees fo life
3. Red meat is the only food group you need
4. Argue with people on the internet, there is no such thing as caring too much about crossbow hunting
5. Every man is in fact an island, if they step one inch on your property let the lead fly
6. Nicotine
7. The rat race is what makes this country great, stop that liberal talk
 
a lot of reasons i feel like it's kinda silly to really focus in on the blue zones.

supposedly bad science, and supposedly some bad statistics


i often also hear that the blue zone theory either purposefully or accidentally fails to address that these blue zones actually do eat a fair amount of non-fish/red meat.

and really any theory that perpetuates what i believe with 100% of my being as the false notion that meat is bad for you get's the laugh and pass from me.

good whole real unprocessed food, community, activity. avoid drugs and wear seat belts. use zinc sunscreen and ease up on the alcohol. i just don't fully understand how we've had to complicate this health stuff so much.

oh yeah, politics mostly
 
Last edited:
100% and that's generally where I fall.

But does that actually amount to anything tangible? And what are the tradeoffs? How many revolutionary ideas, or technologies, or art come from these places? Solving problems, big complex problems, doesn't generally happen without stress, or a shunning of many of these principles. Many of the greatest thinkers and problem solvers where obsessive to the detriment of many other aspects of life. Yet we all benefit from their achievements.
Totally agree, which is why a place like the US can make up for some -- my opinion here -- "cultural shortfalls" when it comes to self-sufficiency and stress culture to have a pretty high standard of living and life expectancy.
 
Red Zone Habits

1. Become a certified forklift operator
2. Mc'dees fo life
3. Red meat is the only food group you need
4. Argue with people on the internet, there is no such thing as caring too much about crossbow hunting
5. Every man is in fact an island, if they step one inch on your property let the lead fly
6. Weed
7. The rat race is what makes this country great, stop that liberal talk
You were close but 6 has changed. Proof we can evolve.
 
But so is much of the rest of the world, and honestly, as well as portions of America but many of those groups live a fraction as long (think rural Africa and the middle east, the artic).

i also don't entirely think longevity should be the sole focus of a discussion on nutrition and lifestyle factors that lead to better health.

the focus should be health - remaining free of preventable and chronic disease.

doesn't the blue zone theory just focus on like where there are bunch of old people? and how many centenarians there are? like that article points out, when you look at average lifespans instead it's not as remarkable in some of these places.

the focus should be on health, and how much or little of the population is dealing with preventable or chronic disease. longevity is only a component of what i believe should be a bigger equation on the population in question.

you could probably just look at the top 10% of earners in the US and be like "damn! that's a blue "zone" these people generally live a long time!"
 
i also don't entirely think longevity should be the sole focus of a discussion on nutrition and lifestyle factors that lead to better health.

the focus should be health - remaining free of preventable and chronic disease.

doesn't the blue zone theory just focus on like where there are bunch of old people? and how many centenarians there are? like that article points out, when you look at average lifespans instead it's not as remarkable in some of these places.

the focus should be on health, and how much or little of the population is dealing with preventable or chronic disease. longevity is only a component of what i believe should be a bigger equation on the population in question.

you could probably just look at the top 10% of earners in the US and be like "damn! that's a blue "zone" these people generally live a long time!"
1704401015418.png
 
I listened to a podcast, I think Peter Attia's, about this very topic not long ago. His position was more on the nuanced side and in line with your second article posted, but something he did mention was that generally it pays to live an active lifestyle and not be fat - two characteristics of the "Blue Zones".

I wish I could find which podcast it was but a couple other things I remember him talking about was average life expectancy - the mean, not the outliers - and how we are talking about a shorter amount of time compared to other places than we may think. Lastly, something else they spoke about was genetics. There's a lot of evidence out there that genetics is a very large driver of life expectancy, as unpleasant (or pleasant) as that may be to some.

As I eat some 3 day old corned beef hash for lunch, it's fun to think about.
 

and holy shit you could correlate all that with any damn thing you want to i'd think. though, interesting to point out how some of colorado's MAGA counties fall in the right side of the scale. it really damn near looks like a map of income lol

i think the below quote from my article really sums up the issue with the whole blue zone thing, it's just so much more nuanced and you can't really distill any one piece of advice as some sort of new bona fide nutrition rule from the blue zone theory IMO:

Loma Linda with a population of about 23,000 is a US district with a Seventh Day Adventist Church community that has the factors believed to be required to be deemed a “Blue Zone”.

“Yes, they have an average lifespan of 86 and 83. But so do all 125 million citizens of Japan, all of the citizens of Hong Kong, all of the citizens of Singapore. Now, nobody has gone around and said that those places have some sort of special zone that makes people live long in these regions,” Dr Newman says.
 
That map made me think of access to and quality of health care, which I believe must include mental health care. Health vices like smoking, obesity, diabetes, alcohol abuse show up heavily in the yellow/orange/red counties. Meat consumption is in no way comparable to those vices in health impacts. How healthy are the customers at Colon Corral? Eating meat is not their biggest health threat.
 
How healthy are the customers at Colon Corral? Eating meat is not their biggest health threat.

yeah it ain't the meat at the colon corral killin em. except maybe that a lot of the meat is filled with unnatural preservatives and fried in unnatural oils

it's really the 7,000 calories of highly processed carbs and refined sugars they had in addition to to their fried chicken that's killing em

gawdamn i do like an occasional glutton fest at golden corral tho.

that might be my next post packout visit.
 
I wonder if it is related to eating meat, as they imply, or just not eating processed foods (including processed meats).
 
good whole real unprocessed food, community, activity. avoid drugs and wear seat belts. use zinc sunscreen and ease up on the alcohol. i just don't fully understand how we've had to complicate this health stuff so much.
That was an interesting takeaway, none of these areas try to be healthy, none exercise for the sake of exercise, they just live.
 
Red Zone Habits

1. Become a certified forklift operator
2. Mc'dees fo life
3. Red meat is the only food group you need
4. Argue with people on the internet, there is no such thing as caring too much about crossbow hunting
5. Every man is in fact an island, if they step one inch on your property let the lead fly
6. Nicotine
7. The rat race is what makes this country great, stop that liberal talk
Let me know how that works out for you.
 
SITKA Gear

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,668
Messages
2,028,988
Members
36,275
Latest member
johnw3474
Back
Top