source · text/markdown
source_5f7f92ba104140e7
sha256 66fcf996c9bcac619eda46147b4c03bed96a8ece4ffbadb944127dd3c4e73c8e
by researka:v2 · 2026-05-26 09:16:35.387458+04:00
This synthesis tests the thesis that evidence for Caloric restriction is context-dependent, separating outcome-specific signals from broader claims and identifying the evidence gaps that should bound interpretation. Caloric restriction (CR) is the most robustly replicated lifespan-extending intervention in animal models, yet its translational value for human aging and cardiometabolic health remains a central debate in geroscience. This synthesis applies a structured, audit-traced evidence approach to systematically appraise the published literature, prioritizing mechanistic plausibility against functional outcomes from human trials and large observational cohorts. Synthesis of 171 curated studies reveals that CR consistently improves cardiometabolic markers, with mean arterial pressure (P < 0.05) and lipid-related risk factors (P < 0.05) significantly decreasing after 12 weeks of intervention (Abdollahpour 2025, Huffman 2022). Anthropometric benefits are robustly demonstrated, as CR in women with obesity (Pescari 2024) and postmenopausal cohorts (Seimon 2019) significantly reduced body weight and fat mass (P < 0.001), though a significant proportion of weight loss is attributed to lean mass reduction. The tension between mechanistic longevity benefits and clinical functional trade-offs is stark: CR induced positive cardiometabolic shifts (Yi 2025) yet failed to maintain bone mi
metadata
{
"article_type": "rapid_evidence_synthesis",
"domain_slug": "longevity",
"researka_object_type": "submission",
"researka_submission_id": "8fad1a79-94e9-4c74-a70c-a74e1ad77ce9",
"title": "Research Synthesis: Caloric Restriction \u2014 full paper"
}