High Maternal BMI Correlated with Shortened Newborn Telomeres - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Researchers from Hasselt University in Belgium report a strong association between a mother’s body mass index (BMI) before pregnancy and the predicted lifespan of their child. A higher pre-pregnancy body mass index correlates with shorter telomere length – an indicator of a shorter overall life expectancy. Children born to mothers with a high BMI before pregnancy may be at risk of having a shorter lifespan. Telomere lengths were measured in 743 samples of cord blood and 702 samples of placental tissue from newborns of mothers involved in the ENVIRONAGE birth cohort study in Belgium. The 743 women included in the research were between the ages of 17-44, and the average pre-pregnancy BMI was 24.1. Previous research has indicated that people usually lose around 32.2-45.5 telomere base pairs per year during adulthood. This study showed that for every one-point increase in the mothers’ BMI, telomeres in the newborns were around 50 base pairs shorter. [B]The 50 base pair shortening of telomere length in newborns is equivalent to the length people typically lose in 1.1-1.6 years of adult life, which may put children with shorter telomeres at a greater risk of chronic diseases in adulthood, such as heart disease and type 2 diabetes.[/B][/QUOTE] [URL="http://guardian.ng/features/mothers-pre-pregnancy-body-weight-may-affect-newborns-lifespan/"]News article[/URL] and [URL="http://bmcmedicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12916-016-0689-0"]scientific paper here[/URL].

I had a feeling that having children while young is better than older, but never would have imagined mother's BMI actually affects child's lifespan.

[QUOTE=aurum481;51244193]I had a feeling that having children while young is better than older, but never would have imagined mother's BMI actually affects child's lifespan.[/QUOTE] They're kind of related. An obese woman in her 20's is on a molecular level older than a healthy woman in her 20's. Some of that aging can unfortunately be passed down to her children.

That's definitely one to throw around the old noggin'. I didn't know that we knew roughly how much time the shortening of 'x' amount of telomeres was though.

I wonder if the same is true for newborns with mothers who have an abnormally low BMI. If this paper is true, I wouldn't exactly expect children of super skinny mom's to live longer than those born from moms of average BMIs.

[QUOTE='Poesidan [GAG];51244353']I wonder if the same is true for newborns with mothers who have an abnormally low BMI. If this paper is true, I wouldn't exactly expect children of super skinny mom's to live longer than those born from moms of average BMIs.[/QUOTE] From the study: [QUOTE]Sensitivity analyses with exclusion of newborns from non-European origin, mothers with pre-pregnancy BMI less than 18.5, mothers that underwent cesarean sections, or experienced pregnancy complications did not materially alter our results [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;51244455]From the study:[/QUOTE] Huh that sentence is a bit wonky. Is it saying the conclusion excluded mothers with pre-pregnancy BMI less than 18.5 or is it saying that they didn't affect the results. Sorry if I can't read properly.

[QUOTE='Poesidan [GAG];51244478']Huh that sentence is a bit wonky. Is it saying the conclusion excluded mothers with pre-pregnancy BMI less than 18.5 or is it saying that they didn't affect the results. Sorry if I can't read properly.[/QUOTE] It's not wonky when you understand what sensitivity analysis is. They excluded different variables (4 here) to see if the results would still hold in their absence, and they found that doing so didn't affect the results. It gives a strong case that the correlation they found is real.

When you think about it, a factory in shoddy repair is more likely to make a product with issues Being human doesn't suddenly absolve this.

[QUOTE=Bradyns;51244266]That's definitely one to throw around the old noggin'. I didn't know that we knew roughly how much time the shortening of 'x' amount of telomeres was though.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Radical_ed;51246520]When you think about it, a factory in shoddy repair is more likely to make a product with issues Being human doesn't suddenly absolve this.[/QUOTE] The sooner we figure out how to staple more telomerase onto our chromosomes, the better. Though it'd probably be a case-by-case basis to see which cells actually need extending, and by how much.

[QUOTE=1legmidget;51244230]They're kind of related. An obese woman in her 20's is on a molecular level older than a healthy woman in her 20's. [B]Some of that aging can unfortunately be passed down to her children.[/B][/QUOTE] That's so fucking weird

[QUOTE=Kylel999;51246551]That's so fucking weird[/QUOTE] Growing up and maturing is a natural part of things. Growing old on the other hand is a matter of emergent errors in the code, a curse suffered by things that can't alter their own code. We merely accept it as a part of life because we've lived with and died it since time immemorial. But if we can alter our code accordingly, if we can constantly refresh and defragment our DNA every couple of years, maybe we could continue to live young and healthy, leaving "senescence" in the dust as haunting memories of a dark age. People would still die thanks to violence, accident, and voracious diseases, but the accustomed and accepted horror of slowly rotting away and hollowing would become a minority case, likely taken in the stride of those who grow weary of a world without end. Or begrudgingly abided by those who cannot afford the abhorrently overpriced treatments. Which is the more likely horror to befall us.