2006
DOI: 10.1196/annals.1354.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Free Radical Fantasy

Abstract: Overly exuberant and exaggerated past expectations and claims of the free radical theory have been quieted by extensive randomized, double-blind, controlled human studies. A half century of data demonstrates its lack of predictability and it has not been validated by the scientific method. Widespread use of antioxidants has failed to quell the current pandemic of cancer, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease or to stop or reverse the aging process. Electronically modified oxygen derivatives contribute to the mo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
52
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 87 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
52
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One kind of experiment that falls in this category is the dietary administration of compounds with antioxidant properties in order to extend maximum lifespan. An increase in maximum lifespan directly in response to an exogenously supplemented antioxidant would have been a major finding in favour of the theory, but, to date, despite numerous experiments and clinical trials with promising compounds there is no report of a successful study in mammals [18]. Worse, some undesirable effects including disease and even an increased risk of death have been shown to occur in clinical trials in humans and this has resulted in the trials being urgently stopped [19][20][21].…”
Section: Unexpected Results That Have Shaken Up the Mfrtamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One kind of experiment that falls in this category is the dietary administration of compounds with antioxidant properties in order to extend maximum lifespan. An increase in maximum lifespan directly in response to an exogenously supplemented antioxidant would have been a major finding in favour of the theory, but, to date, despite numerous experiments and clinical trials with promising compounds there is no report of a successful study in mammals [18]. Worse, some undesirable effects including disease and even an increased risk of death have been shown to occur in clinical trials in humans and this has resulted in the trials being urgently stopped [19][20][21].…”
Section: Unexpected Results That Have Shaken Up the Mfrtamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…17 The predictions of the ROS theory do not fit numerous observations: [18][19][20][21][22] animals can be cloned from adult nuclei, 23,24 the accumulation of mutations does not reach significant levels to cause aging 25 and antioxidants do not prolong lifespan in clinical trials. 26,27 Conflicting evidence disproves the theory. Importantly, the supporting evidence for ROS theory of aging has alternative explanations, albeit this is a topic for (Blagosklonny, "Aging: ROS or TOR", in preparation).…”
Section: Dilemma: Random or Programmedmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…Additionally, FRTA presents FR as the universal cause of damage without taking into account the differences in the wide range of FR-counteracting mechanisms in different species. Furthermore, a large body of data showing the contrary and/or lack of predictable and expected beneficial results of anti-oxidant and FR-scavenging therapies have restricted the FRTA to being only a partial explanation of some of the observed changes during aging [35][36][37].…”
Section: Free Radical Theory Of Aging (Frta)mentioning
confidence: 99%