So what does this mean for the antioxidants everyone clamors for? Synthetic antioxidants have failed to show any clear longevity benefit to humans, and that has been a problem for Harman ever since he conceived his theory. Although antioxidants definitely prevent damage, there is still no consensus on how much they forestall aging. “I’m glad there are challenges to the theory,” Harman says. “It’s the only way we get anything done.”

This article was originally published with the title Free Radical Shift.

9 Comments

1. 1. candide 09:53 AM 5/7/09

   Great title:
   "Antioxidants may not.. "
   
   The syntax implies that "Antioxidants may ..."
   
   So what exactly is trying to be said here?
   My guess is: hey, we can't prove or disprove anything, and we've spent a lot of money studying this, so we are going to tell you what we know (NOTHING) in a lot of words.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. jbairddo 10:03 AM 5/7/09

   d

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. jbairddo 10:11 AM 5/7/09

   SOD is a defense mechanism for infection mostly. Antioxidants help quell the fire from things such as SOD, there has to be a balance for health. Without antioxidants, we would most likely die sooner, but with them, we won't necessarily live longer. Without SOD, many types of infections would kill us much earlier than a lack of antioxidants will. The key statement is synthetic antioxidants. Those don't work, many studies have shown that, but main stream researchers like to use those to prove antioxidants don't have health benefits. The body wears out to age, if you don't make hormones anymore (e.g. testosterone, estrogen, growth hormone, and others), it can't repair, build muscle and a function at its peak. The question is why do our hormone levels drop. That is the key to aging. Obviously genetically we our designed to die, otherwise there would be too many people, so it must be encoded in our genes. Someone will find out which genes turn off our protein building stuff, the you will have your answers.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. tommytrainer 10:58 AM 5/9/09

   Hurry-up! .. I don't have much time left!

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. tommytrainer 10:59 AM 5/9/09

   Hurry Up, I don't have much time left!!!!

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. KILEYBMICHA 12:38 PM 5/12/09

   JBAIRDDO- THAT IS A HELL OF A GOOD ANSWER

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

7. 7. KILEYBMICHA 12:39 PM 5/12/09

   AH YEH I DONT HAVE MUCH TIME EITHER. LOL BE GOOOD FOLKS

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

8. 8. Kikuchiyo? 06:38 PM 6/15/09

   Not a scientist here -- but I want to know why people think that by smearing "antioxidant" cream on ones face, the antioxidants can get into the nucleus of cells where they could (in theory) neutralize free radicals. Has this been demonstrated? Same with eating foods with antioxidants. Will the get from the digestive tract to cells that need them?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

9. 9. mklakken 08:35 PM 5/27/10

   To heck with living longer, strive to live better. "I would much rather live until the day I am dead than to die until the day I am dead." You have no doubt seen a family member spend the last years of their life hooked up to machines, taking prescriptions, and having operation after operation all due to chronic degenerative disease. Significant lifestyle modifications that follow 5 simple pillars of optimal health in the name of prevention may be more beneficial than depending upon medical expertise to manage chronic degenerative disease once it manifests itself. Chronic degenerative diseases are created (some of it due to genetics, most likely), not caught!

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this