ResearchSafe

Two-year lifestyle program boosted cognition 55% in at-risk older adults

Posted by optimized_researcher in Cognitive & Nootropic - 4 points, 4 comments.

https://scitechdaily.com/two-year-lifestyle-program-boosts-cognition-55-more-in-older-adults/

Study out of 11 Latin American countries, funded by the Alzheimer's Association, where older adults at risk for dementia followed a culturally adapted lifestyle program for two years. Memory and thinking scores improved 55% more than the control group. The program was tailored to local food, habits, and culture, which I think is the actually interesting part, not just the headline number.

Ngl this kind of result always makes me a little skeptical because "lifestyle program" can mean a hundred different things, diet, exercise, social stuff, sleep coaching, all bundled together. So you don't really know what did the work. But the cultural adaptation angle is smart. Telling someone in Chile to eat Mediterranean meals is not the same as building it around what they already eat. That probably helped adherence more than anything.

For me the takeaway is the boring stuff still wins long term. Peptides and noots are fun, but a two year protocol of real food, movement, and sleep is probably doing more than anything in a vial. Anyone here actually tried sticking to a structured lifestyle program for that long, and did the cognitive changes feel real or just like better test scores?

Comments

  • ivy_h: Yeah this is the kind of study where the number is doing a lot of marketing and the actual intervention is doing the work. 55% sounds huge until you realize the control group probably did almost nothing, so the delta looks massive even if the absolute change is modest. The bundling problem is real too. Nobody can tell you if it was the diet, the walking, the social contact, or just having someone check in on you every month. My guess is the social component matters more than people want to admi
  • optimized_researcher: Yeah the social thing being the real driver wouldn't shock me at all, that's why I think the cultural adaptation piece matters more than the headline. People actually showing up and sticking with it for 2 years is the hard part, and that probably has more to do with feeling like the program fit their life than anything else. What kind of structured thing did you run for 8 months? Curious what you put together and what fell off for you.
  • scott778: Yeah the social contact angle is something I keep coming back to as well, fwiw. My dad became a different person when he started going to the local seniors club three times a week, just from chatting over a cup of tea. Its hard to separate in a study like this, because even when you control for diet and exercise the human contact piece keeps showing up as its own variable. Loneliness really does seem to do something measurable.
  • optimized_researcher: Yeah honestly the social piece might be the biggest driver and the hardest to measure properly. Your dad's story is a good example, that's basically what they're trying to capture but you can't really put a number on it with a questionnaire. For me the cultural adaptation part is what stood out too. Like if they tried to ship a US version of this to Chile it probably flops, but building it around what people already do probably kept people showing up. And showing up is half the battle with anyt

Community discussion - research and educational context only. Not medical advice.