this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2026
138 points (96.0% liked)

science

25389 readers
840 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

dart board;; science bs

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This is where the data meets an uncomfortable impasse. Hispanics in the U.S. live a lot longer than whites. It's not because of socio-economics. Hispanics eat a lot of meat, too. It is theorised that their legume heavy diet might be responsible. Meaning that, despite eating a lot of carbs, they still live longer. I suspect longevity effects are primarily related to the fibre. This might be true in the study linked. Perhaps it isn't the low carb/low fat part which gave heart benefits, but the higher fibre intake.

As for the mechanisms:

  1. Fibre binds bile acids, which increases bile acid secretion. The liver uses LDL to make more bile acid, reducing LDL.

  2. Fibre acts as a glucose release modulator. Glucose spikes are responsible for a range of immediate and systemic issues. Reducing overall glucose consumption and especially spikes results in lower risk of type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and atherosclerosis progression.

  3. Lower blood pressure (we're not really sure why yet).

  4. Fermentable fibres are metabolized by gut bacteria into short-chain fatty acids. These reduce systemic inflammation, improve gut barrier integrity, improve insulin sensitivity, and regulate immune function. The inflammation one in particular could explain a great deal of the health benefits.

  5. The cancer risk specifically decreases because of dilution and faster transit of carcinogens, SCFA production (especially butyrate, which has anti-tumor properties), and reduced insulin and IGF-1 signalling.

  6. Fibre keeps you full for longer, reducing the risk of obesity.

[–] angrystego@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There can be many more factors influencing lifespan than just diet, though.

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

Quite right, and this is the problem with correlational studies like that linked: they're observational. We can't do controlled studies on humans, so we try very hard to control for confounds.

[–] Lemmyoutofhere@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Or they just don’t eat processed crap.

[–] JasSmith@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

I would be surprised if that were true but I haven't seen any data either way on that.