Arto Y Strandberg1, Teemu Trygg1, Kaisu H Pitkälä2, Timo E Strandberg1,3. 1. University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland. 2. Department of General Practice andHelsinki University Central Hospital, University of Helsinki, Unit of Primary Health Care, Helsinki, Finland. 3. University of Oulu, Center for Life Course Health Research, Oulu, Finland.
Abstract
Background: alcohol consumption has many harmful health effects, but also benefits of moderate consumption on frailty have been reported. We examined this relationship longitudinally from midlife to old age. Methods: data of reported alcohol consumption in midlife (year 1974) and in old age (years 2000 and 2003) were available of a socioeconomically homogenous sample of 2360 men (born 1919-34, the Helsinki Businessmen Study). Alcohol consumption was divided into zero (N = 131 at baseline), light (1-98 g/week, N = 920), moderate (99-196, N = 593), and high consumption (>196, n = 716). Incidence of phenotypic frailty and prefrailty was assessed in 2000 and 2003. Alcohol consumption (reference 1-98 g/week, adjusted for age, body mass index and smoking) was related to frailty both longitudinally (from 1974 to 2000, and from 2000 to 2003) and cross-sectionally in 2000 and 2003. Results: during a 30-year follow-up, high consumption clearly decreased whereas lighter consumption remained stable. High consumption in midlife predicted both frailty (odds ratio = 1.61, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-2.56) and prefrailty (1.42; 1.06-1.92) in 2000, association with zero and moderate consumption was insignificant. Cross-sectionally in 2000, both zero (2.08; 1.17-3.68) and high consumption (1.83; 1.07-3.13) were associated with frailty, while in 2003 only zero consumption showed this association (2.47; 1.25-4.88). Conclusion: the relationship between alcohol and frailty is a paradox during the life course. High, not zero, consumption in midlife predicts old age frailty, while zero consumption in old age is associated with frailty, probably reflecting reverse causality.
Background: alcohol consumption has many harmful health effects, but also benefits of moderate consumption on frailty have been reported. We examined this relationship longitudinally from midlife to old age. Methods: data of reported alcohol consumption in midlife (year 1974) and in old age (years 2000 and 2003) were available of a socioeconomically homogenous sample of 2360 men (born 1919-34, the Helsinki Businessmen Study). Alcohol consumption was divided into zero (N = 131 at baseline), light (1-98 g/week, N = 920), moderate (99-196, N = 593), and high consumption (>196, n = 716). Incidence of phenotypic frailty and prefrailty was assessed in 2000 and 2003. Alcohol consumption (reference 1-98 g/week, adjusted for age, body mass index and smoking) was related to frailty both longitudinally (from 1974 to 2000, and from 2000 to 2003) and cross-sectionally in 2000 and 2003. Results: during a 30-year follow-up, high consumption clearly decreased whereas lighter consumption remained stable. High consumption in midlife predicted both frailty (odds ratio = 1.61, 95% confidence interval = 1.01-2.56) and prefrailty (1.42; 1.06-1.92) in 2000, association with zero and moderate consumption was insignificant. Cross-sectionally in 2000, both zero (2.08; 1.17-3.68) and high consumption (1.83; 1.07-3.13) were associated with frailty, while in 2003 only zero consumption showed this association (2.47; 1.25-4.88). Conclusion: the relationship between alcohol and frailty is a paradox during the life course. High, not zero, consumption in midlife predicts old age frailty, while zero consumption in old age is associated with frailty, probably reflecting reverse causality.
Authors: E Dent; J E Morley; A J Cruz-Jentoft; L Woodhouse; L Rodríguez-Mañas; L P Fried; J Woo; I Aprahamian; A Sanford; J Lundy; F Landi; J Beilby; F C Martin; J M Bauer; L Ferrucci; R A Merchant; B Dong; H Arai; E O Hoogendijk; C W Won; A Abbatecola; T Cederholm; T Strandberg; L M Gutiérrez Robledo; L Flicker; S Bhasin; M Aubertin-Leheudre; H A Bischoff-Ferrari; J M Guralnik; J Muscedere; M Pahor; J Ruiz; A M Negm; J Y Reginster; D L Waters; B Vellas Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Atiqul Haq Mazumder; Jennifer Barnett; Nina Lindberg; Minna Torniainen-Holm; Markku Lähteenvuo; Kaisla Lahdensuo; Martta Kerkelä; Jarmo Hietala; Erkki Tapio Isometsä; Olli Kampman; Tuula Kieseppä; Tuomas Jukuri; Katja Häkkinen; Erik Cederlöf; Willehard Haaki; Risto Kajanne; Asko Wegelius; Teemu Männynsalo; Jussi Niemi-Pynttäri; Kimmo Suokas; Jouko Lönnqvist; Solja Niemelä; Jari Tiihonen; Tiina Paunio; Aarno Palotie; Jaana Suvisaari; Juha Veijola Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2021-05-23
Authors: Vincent J Maffei; Tekeda F Ferguson; Meghan M Brashear; Donald E Mercante; Katherine P Theall; Robert W Siggins; Christopher M Taylor; Patricia Molina; David A Welsh Journal: AIDS Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 4.632
Authors: Emily W Paolillo; Rowan Saloner; Maulika Kohli; C Wei-Ming Watson; Raeanne C Moore; Robert K Heaton; David J Moore Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2021-07-26 Impact factor: 3.114
Authors: Stefanos Tyrovolas; Dimitris Panaretos; Christina Daskalopoulou; Iago Gine-Vazquez; Albert Sanchez Niubo; Beatriz Olaya; Martin Bobak; Martin Prince; Matthew Prina; Jose Luis Ayuso-Mateos; Francisco Felix Caballero; Esther Garcia-Esquinas; Arndt Holger; Sergei Scherbov; Warren Sanderson; Ilenia Gheno; Ilona Koupil; Jerome Bickenbach; Somnath Chatterji; Seppo Koskinen; Alberto Raggi; Andrzej Pajak; Beata Tobiasz-Adamczyk; Josep Maria Haro; Demosthenes Panagiotakos Journal: Nutrients Date: 2020-06-11 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Nina T Rogers; Joanna M Blodgett; Samuel D Searle; Rachel Cooper; Daniel H J Davis; Snehal M Pinto Pereira Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2021-08-01 Impact factor: 4.897