Women who consume higher-quality carbohydrates and dietary fiber in midlife may be more likely to age healthfully, according to new research from Tufts University and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. The study, published May 16 in JAMA Network Open, highlights the long-term health benefits of diets rich in unrefined carbohydrates.
Researchers from the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts and Harvard analyzed data from over 47,000 women enrolled in the Nurses’ Health Study. The participants, aged 70 to 93 in 2016, had provided dietary information through questionnaires every four years from 1984 to 2016.
The team assessed the intake of total and refined carbohydrates, unrefined carbohydrates from sources like whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and legumes, as well as dietary fiber and glycemic measures. Healthy aging was defined as being free of 11 major chronic diseases, having no major impairments in physical or cognitive function, and maintaining good mental health.
Results showed that higher intakes of total carbohydrates, high-quality carbohydrates, and dietary fiber in midlife were associated with a 6% to 37% greater chance of healthy aging. Conversely, diets high in refined carbs—such as those from added sugars, refined grains, and starchy vegetables like potatoes—were linked to a 13% lower likelihood of aging well.
“This study supports growing evidence that healthy eating in midlife can improve quality of life in older age,” said Qi Sun, senior author and associate professor at Harvard. “Whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and legumes appear to play a role not only in preventing chronic disease but also in supporting physical and mental function as we age.”
Co-author Ardisson Korat noted that more research is needed to understand how fiber and unrefined carbohydrates contribute to these outcomes. The study’s authors also acknowledged a limitation: most participants were white health professionals, suggesting a need to study more diverse groups in future research.
The study was funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Service and the National Institutes of Health. More details on methodology and funding sources are available in the full publication.
Related topics:
