Too much of a good thing? More than a glass of milk increases chance of death

At the moment, after giving up smoking a healthy diet is one of the main factors in increasing your chances of living forever – so knowing what you should and shouldn’t be eating is critical. But it’s not easy keeping up with the guidelines as this research study shows.

This peer reviewed study in the BMJ (formerly the British Medical Journal) shows often it’s not black and white between what foodstuffs are good for you and which ones aren’t. It has long been believed that milk was good for your bones primarily due to its calcium, phosphorus and vitamin D. However, it also contains D-galactose which even at low doses produces damage similar to that of natural aging.

The results show that women drinking 3 or more glasses of milk a day had an adjusted mortality hazard ratio of 1.93 compared to those drinking less than one glass a day. Although this falls to 1.10 for men, I’ll still be reducing my milk in take, just to be safe, especially as the main cause of excessive deaths was cardiovascular – the big killer for middle aged men.

How to live forever diet advice: Include one glass, but no more, of fresh milk in your daily diet.

 

Source: http://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g6015

 

NICE will have to approve all one-off interventions as life expectancy increases

According to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) it would not usually recommend a treatment that costs more than £20,000-30,000 per QALY (quality-adjusted life year). See this link for more details on NICE’s cost effectiveness formula:
https://www.nice.org.uk/proxy/?sourceurl=http://www.nice.org.uk/newsroom/features/measuringeffectivenessandcosteffectivenesstheqaly.jsp

So any drugs you have to continue taking to benefit from them won’t be affected if we start living longer as it’s a “per year” threshold – if it’s cost effective for 1 year then it’s cost effective for 100 years.

But what about one off interventions – for example surgery or short term pharmaceuticals? If a treatment could guarantee 20 years extra of full quality life then even at an eye watering half a million pounds it would still be considered cost effective.

As well as (or maybe as part of) trying to figure out how to handle an ever increasing population the UK government will have to change their guidelines for what treatments its citizens can expect to receive on the NHS.