Sugar Negates Worm's Life-Extending Mutation

A study with roundworms in the journal Cell Metabolism found that a diet rich in sugar offset a mutation that ordinarily doubled the worms' life spans. Rachel Kremen reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

[The following is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

For worms fed a sugary diet, life is sweet. But short. According to a new study published in the journal Cell Metabolism, consistently adding a small amount of sugar to a worm's regular diet of bacteria shortened its lifespan by 20 percent. The research was performed on C. elegans, tiny roundworms that typically live an average of two weeks.

In previous work, Cynthia Kenyon of the University of California, San Francisco, found that a mutation to a gene called daf-2 changed insulin signaling and doubled the lifespan of the worms. And the worms didn’t get old at their usual pace and then hang on longer—they actually aged more slowly.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Now Kenyon’s new study shows that worms with the daf-2 mutation don’t get the life-extending benefits if they are routinely fed glucose. More research will be needed to see whether a similar situation holds true in humans. But Kenyon believes the findings might have significant implications for emerging diabetes therapies, as well as for diets that could extend lifespans. This much is certain: based on her research, Kenyon has stopped eating dessert.

—Rachel Kremen

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe