76 replies to this topic

[JLL]

I just made a blog post listing the AGE contents of various foods. If you have other sources for adding to the list, I'd appreciate it.

I'm also thinking "AGEs / 100 kcal" might make more sense than "AGEs / serving" (which was used in the paper). Are serving sizes generally annoying or is it just me?

Edited by JLL, 01 September 2009 - 12:06 PM.

[FNC]

Thank you for posting this.

[hamishm00]

nice link

[kismet]

Are serving sizes generally annoying or is it just me?

Annoying like hell. Everything that is not in the metric system annoys me (it's called a *standard* for a reason I thought).

Edited by kismet, 01 September 2009 - 04:39 PM.

[Blue]

AGEs/g:
http://andersonclan...._alpha_list.htm

Also see:
http://andersonclan....n_top/ages.html
http://andersonclan....op/ages_faq.htm

Note that this is a personal webpage (like blogs), not a research paper.

Edited by Blue, 01 September 2009 - 06:03 PM.

[JLL]

AGEs/g:
http://andersonclan...._alpha_list.htm

Also see:
http://andersonclan....n_top/ages.html
http://andersonclan....op/ages_faq.htm

Note that this is a personal webpage (like blogs), not a research paper.

Damn, and there I was typing all that data in for three hours... I wonder why that page didn't show up in Google searches.

[TheFountain]

Both lists pretty much confirm that Meat is higher in AGEs than anything else, regardless of cooking methods. Awesome reason to stay away from it.

Edited by TheFountain, 03 September 2009 - 05:42 AM.

[JLL]

Both lists pretty much confirm that Meat is higher in AGEs than anything else, regardless of cooking methods. Awesome reason to stay away from it.

That's because both lists are from the same source...

Keep in mind that the list is about exogenous AGEs, not endogenous AGEs. 10-30% of the AGEs we eat are absorbed. It may well be that the AGEs produced inside the body are more damaging. Still, excessive cooking is probably a bad idea when eating meat and dairy products.

I'm sure you've seen that one study where vegetarians had higher levels of AGEs than meat eaters. Fructose is 10 times more prone to glycation than glucose. Plus, there are things like taurine in meat that probably protect from some of the effects of exogenous AGEs.

It's just not as simple as you make it out to be. But by all means, stay away from meat if it pleases you.

[maxwatt]

Both lists pretty much confirm that Meat is higher in AGEs than anything else, regardless of cooking methods. Awesome reason to stay away from it.

That's because both lists are from the same source...

Keep in mind that the list is about exogenous AGEs, not endogenous AGEs. 10-30% of the AGEs we eat are absorbed. It may well be that the AGEs produced inside the body are more damaging. Still, excessive cooking is probably a bad idea when eating meat and dairy products.

I'm sure you've seen that one study where vegetarians had higher levels of AGEs than meat eaters. Fructose is 10 times more prone to glycation than glucose. Plus, there are things like taurine in meat that probably protect from some of the effects of exogenous AGEs.

It's just not as simple as you make it out to be. But by all means, stay away from meat if it pleases you.

Not simple at all. 2 million or so years of cooking has changed our physiology. Humans' digestive system, jaws and teeth are only about 2/3 the size for an animal of comparable size. We have developed enzymes to deal with cooked foods, too, no doubt including AGEs. Rats fed exogenous AGEs show high serum levels, and subsequent damage if AGE feeding continued. Humans fed an equivalent amount of exogenous AGEs did not have AGEs in their blood. One might assume we might have some immunity to the effects. Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human by Richard-Wrangham.

Edited by maxwatt, 03 September 2009 - 03:52 PM.

[TheFountain]

Both lists pretty much confirm that Meat is higher in AGEs than anything else, regardless of cooking methods. Awesome reason to stay away from it.

That's because both lists are from the same source...

Keep in mind that the list is about exogenous AGEs, not endogenous AGEs. 10-30% of the AGEs we eat are absorbed. It may well be that the AGEs produced inside the body are more damaging. Still, excessive cooking is probably a bad idea when eating meat and dairy products.

I'm sure you've seen that one study where vegetarians had higher levels of AGEs than meat eaters. Fructose is 10 times more prone to glycation than glucose. Plus, there are things like taurine in meat that probably protect from some of the effects of exogenous AGEs.

It's just not as simple as you make it out to be. But by all means, stay away from meat if it pleases you.

Again smart vegetarians don't just eat anything that doesn't have meat in it, including whatever sweets, fruits and other high fructose or artificially sweetened foods may come their way. I am sure the control group ate lots and lots of high sugar foods in that study. Otherwise it is still clear that vegetarians have lower incidents than most diseases when compared to meat eaters. And you can supplement taurine.

Let's talk about designing the perfect diet instead of selecting merely from what is presented to us. To me well thought-out vegetarianism that is low in dairy or that cycles dairy (couple months here and there or just no dairy at all), coupled with optimal supplementation, is the best diet available for longevity and extended youthspan. Obviously there is something in meat that causes it to create more AGEs when cooked, just as lactose containing dairy, when highly processed, produces more AGEs. To say that because a mere 30% is reabsorbed we should still eat it is silly. That still leaves 60% wide opened and with the numbers of AGEs per serving on these sites, that is ample reason to stay away.

Edited by TheFountain, 03 September 2009 - 02:33 PM.

[JLL]

Again smart vegetarians don't just eat anything that doesn't have meat in it, including whatever sweets, fruits and other high fructose or artificially sweetened foods may come their way. I am sure the control group ate lots and lots of high sugar foods in that study. Otherwise it is still clear that vegetarians have lower incidents than most diseases when compared to meat eaters. And you can supplement taurine.

So you're basically saying that negative studies on vegetarians should be ignored because the vegetarians in those studies eat an unhealthy vegetarian diet, but that we shouldn't ignore studies on meat eaters, despite how much garbage they eat. Right.

I don't think their consumption of sweets and sweetened foods was any higher among the vegetarians. They didn't control for anything, they just took a bunch of people and measured their serum levels of AGEs. Generally, vegetarians tend to be more careful with their health than meat eaters (which is why in association studies, things like smoking, total calorie intake, exercise etc. are controlled for), so if anything, I expect them to have consumed less sweets.

They did eat more high-fructose foods such as apples, however, which would explain their higher AGE levels.

The point here is that even though meat is very high in AGEs and fruit is very low in AGEs, the meat eaters had lower levels of AGEs than the fruit eaters.

Let's talk about designing the perfect diet instead of selecting merely from what is presented to us. To me well thought-out vegetarianism that is low in dairy or that cycles dairy (couple months here and there or just no dairy at all), coupled with optimal supplementation, is the best diet available for longevity and extended youthspan. Obviously there is something in meat that causes it to create more AGEs when cooked, just as lactose containing dairy, when highly processed, produces more AGEs. To say that because a mere 30% is reabsorbed we should still eat it is silly. That still leaves 60% wide opened and with the numbers of AGEs per serving on these sites, that is ample reason to stay away.

I don't know what you're referring to with the 60% figure, but I didn't say "we should eat meat". I'm saying that, if we look at AGEs, you can't make meaningful conclusions on the meat/vegetarian issue based on this food item list only, because there is much more to AGEs.

[JLL]

A few question to those with a better understanding of chemistry than mine:

Why is butter so high in AGEs (or ALEs)?

Butter is mostly saturated and monounsaturated, so it should not oxidise easily, right? Yet, since butter is almost entirely fat, isn't lipid peroxidation the only way butter would have AGEs/ALEs?

What about other highly saturated fats, like coconut oil or palm oil - would they be low in AGEs? A lot of the studies on AGEs warn against using saturated fat, but it seems that polyunsaturated fats would be a much bigger problem. Maybe I'm missing something.

[TheFountain]

Again smart vegetarians don't just eat anything that doesn't have meat in it, including whatever sweets, fruits and other high fructose or artificially sweetened foods may come their way. I am sure the control group ate lots and lots of high sugar foods in that study. Otherwise it is still clear that vegetarians have lower incidents than most diseases when compared to meat eaters. And you can supplement taurine.

So you're basically saying that negative studies on vegetarians should be ignored because the vegetarians in those studies eat an unhealthy vegetarian diet, but that we shouldn't ignore studies on meat eaters, despite how much garbage they eat. Right.

I don't think their consumption of sweets and sweetened foods was any higher among the vegetarians. They didn't control for anything, they just took a bunch of people and measured their serum levels of AGEs. Generally, vegetarians tend to be more careful with their health than meat eaters (which is why in association studies, things like smoking, total calorie intake, exercise etc. are controlled for), so if anything, I expect them to have consumed less sweets.

They did eat more high-fructose foods such as apples, however, which would explain their higher AGE levels.

The point here is that even though meat is very high in AGEs and fruit is very low in AGEs, the meat eaters had lower levels of AGEs than the fruit eaters.

Let's talk about designing the perfect diet instead of selecting merely from what is presented to us. To me well thought-out vegetarianism that is low in dairy or that cycles dairy (couple months here and there or just no dairy at all), coupled with optimal supplementation, is the best diet available for longevity and extended youthspan. Obviously there is something in meat that causes it to create more AGEs when cooked, just as lactose containing dairy, when highly processed, produces more AGEs. To say that because a mere 30% is reabsorbed we should still eat it is silly. That still leaves 60% wide opened and with the numbers of AGEs per serving on these sites, that is ample reason to stay away.

I don't know what you're referring to with the 60% figure, but I didn't say "we should eat meat". I'm saying that, if we look at AGEs, you can't make meaningful conclusions on the meat/vegetarian issue based on this food item list only, because there is much more to AGEs.

Actually what I am saying is this. We should take two control groups, put them on a very similar diet, lots of vegetables, nuts, seeds, berries, nut butters etc but with one exception. One group will eat meat the other will not. Then this group should be watched for about a two year period very closely to determine the AGEs cross-link variation if there are any associated with changes in the general dietary schematic. For example the meat eaters 'cheat' by eating bananas or the vegan group 'cheats' by eating hard cheeses. etc

Ultimately those conducting the study shoulds try their best to make sure the study groups remain within the confines of the program and never deviate and if they do any and all deviations should be accounted for and factored in to the general end schematic when looking at the data. Yes I am aware of the AGEs producing effect of fructose. But what I am saying is that if you took the fructose out of a vegetarian diet and basically micromanaged it and added supplemental taurine, supplemental carnosine and whatever else, I can tell you the vegetarian group would more than likely come out on top.

Edited by TheFountain, 03 September 2009 - 08:56 PM.

[HaloTeK]

Even raw butter has high AGEs. Normal butter has AGEs off the chart-- even when compared with meat-- and the serving size is 5 grams--

What happens when someone eats lots of butter for years? WAP people dont seem to be showing the ill effects from butter-- if anything, butter shows benefits

We need to understand more about the diff in exo vs endo AGEs.

[Skötkonung]

But what I am saying is that if you took the fructose out of a vegetarian diet and basically micromanaged it and added supplemental taurine, supplemental carnosine and whatever else, I can tell you the vegetarian group would more than likely come out on top.

You can't tell anyone that because you don't have any evidence to support your claim -- what you're saying is completely specious. That said, your hypothesis would make for an interesting study, but it still remains just a hypothesis and no definitive conclusion can be drawn from it.

To the OP: There have been some AGE food contents lists posted on this forum not long ago. Perhaps we should create a "sticky" thread with a running list of values. I would also like to see a similar list for the PRAL scores of common foods. Balancing PRAL values seem just as important to longevity and health span as AGE cross links.

[Skötkonung]

A few question to those with a better understanding of chemistry than mine:

Why is butter so high in AGEs (or ALEs)?

Butter is mostly saturated and monounsaturated, so it should not oxidise easily, right? Yet, since butter is almost entirely fat, isn't lipid peroxidation the only way butter would have AGEs/ALEs?

What about other highly saturated fats, like coconut oil or palm oil - would they be low in AGEs? A lot of the studies on AGEs warn against using saturated fat, but it seems that polyunsaturated fats would be a much bigger problem. Maybe I'm missing something.

AGEs are commonly linked to mallard chain reactions - where fats / proteins are cooked with sugars in the absence of water. However, this process does not actually create AGEs, it creates a intermediate products.

There are three primary intermediary products that lead to the formation of AGEs in the body: mallard, amadori, and schiff base. Amadori and schiff base deal specifically with carbohydrate. Lactose is a sugar and my guess is that during either the fermentation process or the butter manufacturing process, either the amadori and schiff base products are created. These are then counted as AGEs.

Edited by Skotkonung, 04 September 2009 - 12:23 AM.

[kismet]

You can't tell anyone that because you don't have any evidence to support your claim -- what you're saying is completely specious.

No, it's not, in fact it sounds like a very good hypothesis and has been (and is) practised and endorsed by many very knowledgable CRONies and researchers alike. It's not like there is no evidence in the literature suggesting that this may be a great solution. But I don't think you should retort with a kind of tautology - as basically all approaches to diet are highly speculative at this point in time; that is already implicated by our lack of knowledge about human biochemistry.

Edited by kismet, 04 September 2009 - 12:26 AM.

[Skötkonung]

You can't tell anyone that because you don't have any evidence to support your claim -- what you're saying is completely specious.

No, it's not, in fact it sounds like a very good hypothesis and has been (and is) practised and endorsed by many very knowledgable CRONies and researchers alike. It's not like there is no evidence in the literature suggesting that this may be a great solution. But I don't think you should retort with a kind of tautology - basically all approaches to diet are highly speclative at this point in time...

And how do you know that CRONies are specifically benefiting from a lack of AGEs because they consume a vegetarian diet? Or is it their lack of methionine? Or maybe some other mechanism triggered by caloric restriction? We don't know. We do know that the longest living CR population (Okinawans) are omnivores.

We also know that vegetarians report a higher percentage of intracellular AGEs than omnivores. Maybe that has few implications for their longevity...but no studies have demonstrated it. Lets wait for the studies before making baseless claims. Anyone who wants to self experiment with diet is certainly welcome to do so.

[TheFountain]

But what I am saying is that if you took the fructose out of a vegetarian diet and basically micromanaged it and added supplemental taurine, supplemental carnosine and whatever else, I can tell you the vegetarian group would more than likely come out on top.

You can't tell anyone that because you don't have any evidence to support your claim -- what you're saying is completely specious. That said, your hypothesis would make for an interesting study, but it still remains just a hypothesis and no definitive conclusion can be drawn from it.

No definitive conclusion about smart vegetarianism can be drawn from a study citing the dietary habits of not so smart vegetarians. Or should I say sugartarians?

Edited by TheFountain, 04 September 2009 - 12:39 AM.

[TheFountain]

We do know that the longest living CR population (Okinawans) are omnivores.

Actually Okinawans eat very very little meat, most of the meat they consume is in the form of fish, and fish is relatively low in AGEs (compared to red meat and chicken) so they are less omnivorous than paleo dieters by a long shot and very close to vegetarianism. There is no way they are getting as much of a dose of Exogenous AGEs as your average paleo dieter. Remember also that they are getting a dose of isoflavones from legumes and soy that has AGEs combating effects.

Edited by TheFountain, 04 September 2009 - 12:48 AM.

[Skötkonung]

But what I am saying is that if you took the fructose out of a vegetarian diet and basically micromanaged it and added supplemental taurine, supplemental carnosine and whatever else, I can tell you the vegetarian group would more than likely come out on top.

You can't tell anyone that because you don't have any evidence to support your claim -- what you're saying is completely specious. That said, your hypothesis would make for an interesting study, but it still remains just a hypothesis and no definitive conclusion can be drawn from it.

No definitive conclusion about smart vegetarianism can be drawn from a study citing the dietary habits of not so smart vegetarians. Or should I say sugartarians?

I agree. Nutrition is still a comparatively young medical discipline, we need to learn more!

What we do know is that individuals practicing a typical western vegetarian diet have higher intracellular AGE levels than your typical western omnivore. Now whether a strict low-sugar vegetarian has more less intracellular AGEs than a low-sugar consuming omnivore is uncertain. Like I said before, it would make for an interesting study.

I think you can design a perfectly healthy vegetarian diet. In fact, having done some recent research on PRAL scores of foods, I am thinking that having a good portion of protein coming from plant sources might be best for longevity.

[Skötkonung]

We do know that the longest living CR population (Okinawans) are omnivores.

Actually Okinawans eat very very little meat, most of the meat they consume is in the form of fish, and fish is relatively low in AGEs (compared to red meat and chicken) so they are less omnivorous than paleo dieters by a long shot. There is no way they are getting as much of a dose of Exogenous AGEs as your average paleo dieter.

You are assuming exogenous AGEs are equal, when we know they are not. There are different types of intermediary products and various compounds and process that mediate AGE clearance.

Perhaps that little bit of meat alters the Okinawan nutritional environment sufficiently to reduce their intracellular AGE levels. We don't know.

Anyways, I was not making a comparison between your recommended diet and the paleo diet.

[TheFountain]

What we do know is that individuals practicing a typical western vegetarian diet have higher intracellular AGE levels than your typical western omnivore. Now whether a strict low-sugar vegetarian has more less intracellular AGEs than a low-sugar consuming omnivore is uncertain.

When it comes down strictly to lifestyle the americanized intra-metropolitan version of vegetarianism basically involves eating a lot of pizza, mexican food, other assorted 'vegetarian' fast foods like falafels (generally deep fried in vegetable oil) and the like. Most of these 'vegetarians' seem to be doing it because it is trendy in their particular social circuit. I wouldn't be surprised of those in the AGEs control group were of this sort. Or those who did not study their diets.

Edited by Michael, 17 December 2009 - 08:46 PM.
Trim quotes

[Skötkonung]

When it comes down strictly to lifestyle the americanized intra-metropolitan version of vegetarianism basically involves eating a lot of pizza, mexican food, other assorted 'vegetarian' fast foods like falafels (generally deep fried in vegetable oil) and the like. Most of these 'vegetarians' seem to be doing it because it is trendy in their particular social circuit. I wouldn't be surprised of those in the AGEs control group were of this sort. Or those who did not study their diets.

One of the studies on vegetarians and AGEs takes place in Europe and they provide a few food logs. Check it out:

http://www.springerl...hb24hyajh4qkk1/

[TheFountain]

You are assuming exogenous AGEs are equal, when we know they are not. There are different types of intermediary products and various compounds and process that mediate AGE clearance.

No I am not. What I am saying is if you begin at the observation that 30% of exogenous AGEs from meat based diets are removed from your system that still leaves a wopping 60% left for your biophysical processes to figure out what to do with. As we are both aware, not enough studies are forthcoming showing a need not to be concerned with such an outcome. On this premise I think it is a good idea to limit such sources of exogenous AGEs seeing as how there is that major question mark presented.

[TheFountain]

When it comes down strictly to lifestyle the americanized intra-metropolitan version of vegetarianism basically involves eating a lot of pizza, mexican food, other assorted 'vegetarian' fast foods like falafels (generally deep fried in vegetable oil) and the like. Most of these 'vegetarians' seem to be doing it because it is trendy in their particular social circuit. I wouldn't be surprised of those in the AGEs control group were of this sort. Or those who did not study their diets.

One of the studies on vegetarians and AGEs takes place in Europe and they provide a few food logs. Check it out:

http://www.springerl...hb24hyajh4qkk1/

What strikes me from this is the following sentence.

'Neither decline of kidney function nor inflammatory processes contributed to rise in plasma AGEs'.

This could mean that AGEs cross-links were observed as a temporary effect of a rise in blood glucose, which a diet high in fruits would lead to, temporarily. This in no way indicates a long term condition or even a long-term presence or effect of AGEs in the blood stream. It is kind of like checking a diabetics insulin response right after they've eaten a big bowl of wheat pasta. But these are not diabetics. That said, I still think that eating too many high sugar foods can lead to insulin sensitivity which itself can be a harbinger of something else. So smart vegetarianism is something that needs to be explored in relation to keeping this in mind.

[Skötkonung]

You are assuming exogenous AGEs are equal, when we know they are not. There are different types of intermediary products and various compounds and process that mediate AGE clearance.

No I am not. What I am saying is if you begin at the observation that 30% of exogenous AGEs from meat based diets are removed from your system that still leaves a wopping 60% left for your biophysical processes to figure out what to do with. As we are both aware, not enough studies are forthcoming showing a need not to be concerned with such an outcome. On this premise I think it is a good idea to limit such sources of exogenous AGEs seeing as how there is that major question mark presented.

I believe you have your numbers reversed. 30% of exogenous AGEs are absorbed, the rest are lost during digestion.

"Food-borne AGEs are absorbed with about 30% efficiency when ingested."

http://www.fitnesssp...n-end-products/

Interesting discussion below. JLL asked the author of the article about the % source.

[niner]

'Neither decline of kidney function nor inflammatory processes contributed to rise in plasma AGEs'.

This could mean that AGEs cross-links were observed as a temporary effect of a rise in blood glucose, which a diet high in fruits would lead to, temporarily. This in no way indicates a long term condition or even a long-term presence or effect of AGEs in the blood stream. It is kind of like checking a diabetics insulin response right after they've eaten a big bowl of wheat pasta. But these are not diabetics. That said, I still think that eating too many high sugar foods can lead to insulin sensitivity which itself can be a harbinger of something else. So smart vegetarianism is something that needs to be explored in relation to keeping this in mind.

AGEs are measure in blood only because it's easy. The AGEs we are really worried about are the ones that tag long-lived biomolecules like extracellular matrix proteins. A high level of AGEs in blood is a marker that glycation has been happening, thus other tissues will be affected. Even if the AGE level in the blood goes down, the damage done elsewhere will remain a lot longer. One form of AGE measurement, glycohemoglobin A1C, is usually described as tracking the history of glucose control over the previous three months or so. This implies that the lifetime of those molecules is on the order of 3 months. However, other long-lived molecules in the body may last for decades. If they get crosslinked from some of that vegetarian fructose, it's game over for their functionality, even though the fructose was only there for a little while.

[kismet]

And how do you know that CRONies are specifically benefiting from a lack of AGEs because they consume a vegetarian diet? Or is it their lack of methionine? Or maybe some other mechanism triggered by caloric restriction? We don't know. We do know that the longest living CR population (Okinawans) are omnivores.

Yeah, and the Okinawans happen to have practised bona fide CR for two thirds of their lives or what you have. Don't you think that slightly weakens your argument? Any nutrient dense diet, would be better than baseline if you do CR. There is evidence suggesting vegetarian diets can be healthy, very healthy, if done right. Let's not play this game (at least not based on one extremely weak data point)...

Anyone who wants to self experiment with diet is certainly welcome to do so.

So are you, every step you take is an experiment (omnivor or not). Keep this in mind.

Edited by kismet, 04 September 2009 - 06:19 PM.

[Skötkonung]

Yeah, and the Okinawans happen to have practised bona fide CR for two thirds of their lives or what you have. Don't you think that slightly weakens your argument? Any nutrient dense diet, would be better than baseline if you do CR. There is evidence suggesting vegetarian diets can be healthy, very healthy, if done right. Let's not play this game (at least not based on one extremely weak data point)...

Its not just one data point, there are several studies indicating vegetarians have higher AGE levels:

Association of metabolic syndrome risk factors with selected markers of oxidative status and microinflammation in healthy omnivores and vegetarians.

Plasma levels of advanced glycation end products in healthy, long-term vegetarians and subjects on a western mixed diet.

Advanced glycation end products and nutrition.

Functional Hyperhomocysteinemia in Healthy Vegetarians: No Association with Advanced Glycation End Products, Markers of Protein Oxidation, or Lipid Peroxidation after Correction with Vitamin B12

[Glycotoxins and cellular dysfunction. A new mechanism for understanding the preventive effects of lifestyle modifications]

While there is still much to be understood about the role of AGEs and the typical western vegetarian and omnivore lifestyles, based on the current clinical data, I think it would be folly to conclude that the same AGE protective benefits that help the omnivores diet would not scale to healthier versions of that same diet.

If, as is probably the case, the vegetarian diet causes an increase in AGE levels because of a dietary deficiency, my guess is that you could supplement and achieve the same results as the omnivore group. As I have stated repeatedly in this thread, I am not contesting the over-all healthfulness of the vegetarian lifestyle. I am merely stating that it is not a bullet-proof lifestyle and it can be inconvenient or unhealthy if not properly designed (similar to an omnivore).

Carnosine, Taurine, L-Carnitine, Alpha-Liopic-Acid should all be staples of the vegetarian diet.

Edited by Skotkonung, 05 September 2009 - 12:04 AM.