Health
Cell phone shocker as 97% of kids use their device during school hours and beyond, says study

Mobile phones just might be young people’s best friend, whether their parents like it or not.
A new study from Common Sense Media, a nonprofit group in San Francisco, California, researched phone usage among a diverse group of 203 kids aged 11 to 17 — and the results were startling, experts say.
The researchers found that smartphones have become a “constant companion” for young people, according to a news release, although results varied.
Kids spent a median of 4.5 hours per day on their phones, with the maximum amount of time reaching 16 hours, according to the study.
PHONE CALL ETIQUETTE FOR TODAY: BEST TO ‘OPT FOR A TEXT MESSAGE,’ EXPERT ADVISES
Most teens check their phones frequently, ranging from two to 498 times per day.
Adolescents were more likely to check their phones over 100 times a day, the study found.
Smartphones have become a “constant companion” for kids and teens, a new study indicated. (Cyberguy.com)
A whopping 97% of kids used their phones during school hours, while nearly 60% used them overnight — between the hours of midnight and 5 a.m. — on school nights.
Social media such as Instagram and Snapchat took up most screen time, at 32% during the school day, followed by YouTube and gaming, the study found.
KEEPING KIDS SAFE: ‘WAIT UNTIL 8TH’ PLEDGE AIMS TO EMPOWER PARENTS TO RESIST SMARTPHONES FOR CHILDREN
Overnight phone use was primarily spent engaging with the same media, although YouTube appeared to be the longest-running app because videos were often left playing during the night.
Teens spent an average of 20 minutes per night on their phones, while some spent up to five hours.
Sixty-seven percent of participants picked up their phones on school nights, but the median number of pickups per night was only once.

Younger participants tended to pick up their phones less frequently each day, the new study found. (iStock)
More than 50% of kids get 237 notifications per day — while some receive as many as 4,500 every day, according to Common Sense Media’s findings.
About 23% of these notifications occurred during school hours.
The largest share of notifications came from apps including Snapchat and TikTok.
YOUNG PEOPLE ARE MORE LIKELY TO FALL WHILE TEXTING AND WALKING AT THE SAME TIME, STUDY SAYS
In particular, TikTok was used by half of the study participants, for nearly two hours per day on average.
Compared to other social media apps, teens were more likely to spend several hours daily on TikTok, with some scrolling on the app for up to seven hours.
Comparatively, the longest amount of time spent on Snapchat and Instagram was about three hours daily, the study found.
Of the 85 participants under age 13, 68% used social media and had at least one app rated “teen” or higher – allowing access to “age-inappropriate experiences,” the study suggested.

More than 50% of kids get 237 notifications per day, while some receive as many as 4,500 every day, according to Common Sense Media’s findings. (iStock)
TikTok was the most popular app used by kids aged 11 and 12, while nearly half (45%) of participants used apps with mature or adult-only ratings, such as porn sites, fantasy sports and betting apps, according to the study findings.
UNDERAGE DRINKING DANGERS: THESE ARE THE STATES WITH THE HIGHEST RATES OF TEEN ALCOHOL USE, STUDY FINDS
More than two-thirds of all participants admitted they sometimes or often find managing their use of technology difficult — or that they use it to escape “sorrow” or “negative feelings.”
They also said they’ve missed sleep due to being on their phones at night.
“People feel good and are enhanced by interactions with others … Those feelings cannot be replicated by connecting through a phone.”
Licensed clinical social worker Jennifer Kelman in Boca Raton, Florida — who provides expert advice on the Justanswer platform and was not involved in the study — shared some of the negative repercussions of kids spending large amounts of time on their phones.
“They lose the ability to have face-to-face interactions, and to converse and connect with others,” she said in an interview with Fox News Digital.

Teens spent an average of 20 minutes per night on their phones, while others spent up to five hours, according to a new study. (iStock)
“The phones and all the apps aren’t real-life interactions, and there is beauty in connecting with others face-to-face that is lost,” Kelman went on.
Kids also lose out on developing problem-solving skills, since they aren’t typically tasked with negotiating “tough spaces” or navigating human challenges, the expert added.
BACK TO SCHOOL: TIPS FOR HOMESCHOOLING THE KIDS AS MORE PARENTS DITCH CLASSROOMS
“The more apps we use, the more likely it is that we lose parts of ourselves, our confidence and self-esteem,” said Kelman.
“People feel good and are enhanced by interactions with others, and those feelings cannot be replicated by connecting through a phone.”
“Kids’ brains aren’t fully developed, so they aren’t able to sniff out who is safe on the other end of the chat or the game.”
Kelman warned parents that smartphone usage triggers the same dopamine release as drugs, as apps are designed to “reel kids in and keep them hooked.”

Smartphones can put interpersonal relationships at risk, warned a therapist. (iStock)
“[Parents] are the ‘drug dealer’ in this analogy, so please think twice before free rein is given,” she said.
“Withdrawal is common as well, so be prepared for a lot of pushback when you try to limit the use of their phones and other tech devices,” Kelman warned.
The therapist’s biggest rule for cracking down on daily phone usage among kids is to delay phone access for as long as possible.

Parents should vet and monitor all content accessed by their kids, a Florida therapist advised. (iStock)
“Parents are giving their kids phones at young ages and kids are hooked quickly,” she said.
“Forget what friends are doing — and delay this as long as you can,” she advised.
If a cell phone is necessary due to schedules and after-school activities, a kid-safe starter phone like a Pinwheel could be a better alternative, Kelman suggested.
“It’s a phone that lets parents manage and monitor their usage, but there is no internet and only specific, parent-approved apps that can be turned on and off at will,” she said.

If a cell phone is necessary due to schedules and after-school activities, a kid-safe starter phone like a Pinwheel could be a better alternative, therapist Kelman suggested. (iStock)
“Better for your child to have a little FOMO [fear of missing out] than to have access to porn, become a victim of sextortion, or lose the ability to truly connect with other people.”
Kelman stressed that kids “can’t unsee what they have already seen,” and that many adult apps may put kids “in harm’s way.”
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
“Kids’ brains aren’t fully developed, so they aren’t able to sniff out who is safe on the other end of the chat or the game,” she said.
“Kids are coerced into sending photos of themselves, often finding themselves victims of sextortion after they share the photos,” the expert warned. “This leads to shame, despair and fear of telling their parents.”
Parents should vet and monitor all content accessed by their kids, Kelman advised.

Certain types of content are more harmful than others, noted Shelley Delayne, parent education director at Pinwheel in Austin, Texas. (iStock)
Certain types of content are more harmful than others, noted Shelley Delayne, parent education director at Pinwheel in Austin, Texas, who was also not involved in the study.
These include “attention-mining apps,” adult images and interactions, user-generated content and “invisible influences” that can impact children’s worldview, she said.
“Take it slow and give them only what they need,” Delayne recommended.
“Delay the introduction of adult online spaces and social media to [age] 16 or older, and stay involved in their digital lives just as much as you are in their physical life.”
“We interpreted this data with assistance from an advisory council of young people to understand the nuanced relationships that young people develop with their smartphones.”
She also said, “Remember that just because a kid can tap around on a device and make it do stuff doesn’t mean they have all the skills they need to be unharmed by it.”
In its report, Common Sense Media said it used “software to collect data from the smartphones of a diverse group of about 11- to 17-year-olds. We then interpreted this data with assistance from an advisory council of young people to understand the nuanced relationships that young people develop with their smartphones.”
It also provided additional context, noting the study was done with “Android phone users only, because Apple device tracking does not share with the research community the names of specific non-Apple apps that young people commonly use.”
Fox News Digital reached out to the group for further comment.
For more Health articles, visit www.foxnews.com/health.

Health
Here Are the Nearly 2,500 Medical Research Grants Canceled or Delayed by Trump

In his first months in office, President Trump has slashed funding for medical research, threatening a longstanding alliance between the federal government and universities that helped make the United States the world leader in medical science.
Some changes have been starkly visible, but the country’s medical grant-making machinery has also radically transformed outside the public eye, a New York Times analysis found. To understand the cuts, The Times trawled through detailed grant data from the National Institutes of Health, interviewed dozens of affected researchers and spoke to agency insiders who said that their government jobs have become unrecognizable.
In all, the N.I.H., the world’s premier public funder of medical research, has ended 1,389 awards and delayed sending funding to more than 1,000 additional projects, The Times found. From the day Mr. Trump was inaugurated through April, the agency awarded $1.6 billion less compared with the same period last year, a reduction of one-fifth. (N.I.H. records for May are not yet comparable.)
The impacts extend far beyond studies on politically disfavored topics and Ivy League universities like Columbia or Harvard. The disruptions are affecting research on Alzheimer’s, cancer and substance use, to name just a few, and studies at public institutions across the country, including in red states that backed Mr. Trump.
Use dropdown or start typing to search institutions
“I think people should know that research that they probably would support is being canceled,” said Eden Tanner, a chemist at the University of Mississippi, who had been working with a colleague at Ohio State University to develop a novel approach for treating glioblastoma, an aggressive form of brain cancer. Their grant had been awarded through a program designed to diversify the biomedical workforce; in April, they were notified that it was being terminated.
“I would like to cure brain cancer,” Dr. Tanner said. “I think that’s not particularly controversial.”
Mr. Trump’s campaign against medical research has been carried out without congressional approval, and the legality is unclear. Lawsuits have challenged the slashing or delaying of funding.
Federal officials, who have accused the N.I.H. of wasteful spending, have attributed the cuts to changing scientific priorities.
The N.I.H. “regularly examines its research portfolio” to determine which projects are “the most meritorious,” Andrew Nixon, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said in an email. “Regular reviews of ongoing activities will help us determine the most strategic balance of projects to support and the best way to manage them going forward, especially as we need to be responsive to the often-changing nature of biomedical scientific progress.”
Scientists fear that the sweeping cuts could do long-term damage to U.S. scientific research, which has long driven medical and financial progress for the nation. “The country is going to be mourning the loss of this enterprise for decades,” said Dr. Harold Varmus, a Nobel Prize-winning cancer biologist who served as the director of the N.I.H. during the Clinton administration and the director of the National Cancer Institute under President Barack Obama.
Publicly announced cancellations
The federal government has announced the termination of 1,389 awards, with more than $820 million in recent funding.
N.I.H. grants, awarded in a competitive process, are typically paid out in installments. A researcher with a $1 million four-year grant, for instance, will get about $250,000 a year. Scientists can use this money to buy equipment and supplies and to pay the salaries of the researchers who work in their labs, among other things.
From 2015 to 2024, there have been fewer than 20 terminations a year, on average, according to Jeremy M. Berg, former director of the National Institute of General Medical Sciences at the N.I.H. from 2003 to 2011. They were generally for extenuating circumstances, such as illness or research misconduct.
But since late February, the government has publicly announced the cancellation of 1,389 N.I.H. awards. The agency scoured grants for key words and phrases like “transgender,” “misinformation,” “vaccine hesitancy” and “equity,” ending those focused on certain topics or populations, according to a current N.I.H. program officer, who asked not to be identified for fear of retribution.
Studies focused on sexual and gender minority groups were among the first on the chopping block.
Katherine Bogen, a doctoral student at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, had been studying post-traumatic stress, alcohol use and intimate partner violence against bisexual women. The termination notice she received assailed studies “based primarily on artificial and nonscientific categories,” calling such research “antithetical to the scientific inquiry” and alleging that it was “often used to support unlawful discrimination on the basis of race and other protected characteristics, which harms the health of Americans.”
The language was “very insulting,” she said. “I get this letter that tells me, ‘Your research is not science. Not only is it ascientific, it’s a useless drain on resources, and, in fact, your research could be used to discriminate against ‘actual’ Americans or ‘regular’ Americans,’ or whatever they mean.”
The cuts spread to grants on health equity and racial and ethnic groups. Affected projects sought to improve access to mental health care for Latino, low-income and rural communities; to reduce maternal mortality among Black women; and to prevent gun violence in Asian American communities.
Tsu-Yin Wu, a researcher at Eastern Michigan University who led the gun violence project, said that community leaders and study participants were “greatly disappointed” by the grant cancellation. “Some felt betrayed that their voices and engagement no longer matter.”
The agency cut grants for research on vaccine hesitancy, disinformation and misinformation, including a Northeastern University study on cancer misinformation on social media.
It also axed research on Covid-19, including studies that could have helped the nation respond to many infectious disease threats. Among them: a grant to Emory University and Georgia State University, where researchers had developed three potential drugs that showed promise against many RNA-based viruses, including coronaviruses, Ebola, avian influenza and measles, said George Painter, a pharmacologist at Emory who was co-leading the research.
In April, the agency terminated, in part or in whole, more than 350 grants meant to support students, early-career scientists or researchers from groups underrepresented in science. Among these terminations were F31 diversity grants, awarded to Ph.D. students who were members of certain racial or ethnic groups, disabled or from disadvantaged backgrounds.
At the University of Pittsburgh, Luzmariel Medina-Sanchez, who was born and raised in Puerto Rico, and Sierra Wilson, a first-generation college student from Utah, both had their grants canceled. “It’s not even about the work I’m doing,” said Ms. Wilson, who studies how liver cells respond to drug overdoses. “It feels like it’s about me.”
Ms. Medina-Sanchez, who studies how a microbe can help treat celiac disease, said she may leave science altogether. “I feel racially targeted,” she said. “I feel like I’m not going to be a professional in the field of science in America, because obviously my name is Luzmariel.”
(Ms. Wilson and Ms. Medina-Sanchez stressed that they spoke only for themselves and not for the university.)
Delayed funding
In addition to publicly announced cancellations, these are the nearly 1,100 grants that have been delayed, with nearly $740 million in funding.
Besides outright canceling projects, N.I.H. failed to distribute annual payments to more than 1,000 grants, The Times found.
The delays have stifled research on drug discovery, blood vessel health and injury response. In some cases, scientists have cut staff, paused hiring, trimmed back supplies or delayed experiments. Health officials have not explained which projects have been held up, why or for how long.
The Times compiled a list of the delayed grants by searching N.I.H. databases as of June 2 for ones that were funded in 2024 and expected to last beyond 2025, but have not gotten disbursements on schedule.
In the past, annual renewals were routine. Scientists submitted progress reports; the N.I.H. reviewed them and usually continued funding them, occasionally with a week or two of delays. But longer delays have become much more common since Mr. Trump took office.
Joshua Kritzer, a professor of chemistry at Tufts University, investigates the basic science behind potential drug candidates, laying the groundwork for future medications. Most of his lab work is supported by a five-year N.I.H. grant that received $1.4 million over the past two years. But since February, he had been waiting for the third year of expected funding to come in. He slashed purchases of essential supplies and contemplated laying off crucial researchers on his team.
On Tuesday, Kritzer finally received word that his funding had been released, several days after The Times asked federal officials about his and other delayed awards.
“Every week that’s delayed, it’s easily probably three to four weeks to get that research back to where it was,” said Dr. Kritzer, who noted that he was speaking for himself and not for his institution.
Mr. Nixon, the Department of Health spokesman, said that the agency would not discuss deliberations about specific awards but encouraged grant recipients to “speak with the designated N.I.H. officials on their award notice when questions arise.”
In some cases, delays have lasted so long that scientists wondered whether their grants were subject to a “shadow termination.”
The delays stem in part from additional screening for whether the grants align with Trump administration priorities, N.I.H. officials said. Other renewals have been delayed as overstretched N.I.H. staff members work through backlogs in funding. And political appointees are now vetting some projects, too, slowing the process further.
N.I.H. officials said they feared being fired if they processed a grant renewal that the administration disfavored.
In early May, Jon Lorsch, a longtime N.I.H. institute director who was recently promoted to acting deputy director of the agency’s external funding arm, emailed staff members denouncing the renewal of grants “that focused on topics that are not supported under N.I.H./H.H.S.’s priorities,” according to a copy of the email seen by The Times.
“The consequences of approving an award that should not have been approved could be very serious,” he wrote.
But Courtney Griffin, who leads a lab at the Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation and studies blood vessel development and disease, including complications due to diabetes, expressed confusion as to why her expected funding is not coming through. She and her colleagues were making contingency plans and looking for other sources of funding.
“It’s, ironically, a really inefficient use of people’s time to be in this guessing game,” she said, adding that the time could be better spent on biomedical research.
Months-long delays are also affecting new grants that were being vetted when the Trump administration cracked down on grant reviews.
A number of major Alzheimer’s Disease Research Centers, some of which have operated for decades, have waited months for the Trump administration to decide whether to award them fresh five-year grants. The funding gaps have set back ongoing studies and curtailed efforts to take images of patients’ brains, though the N.I.H. has recently told some centers that they would soon receive funding.
“These centers have become a safety valve for people who can’t get a neurology appointment at a private center,” said Dr. Ann Cohen, a co-director of the University of Pittsburgh Alzheimer’s center. Now, she said, things have changed. “There are fewer clinic appointments, fewer opportunities for these individuals to get brain imaging.”
The N.I.H. has also said that it will no longer fund projects in which U.S. researchers distribute some of their money to international partners, throwing the future of many global health projects into question and creating funding delays for ongoing research.
Beyond the disruption of individual projects, other proposed changes could undermine scientific research across the board, experts said. One would sharply curb funding for indirect research costs, such as building maintenance and administrative staff. And then there is Mr. Trump’s proposal to slash the N.I.H.’s total budget by about $18 billion, a cut of almost 40 percent.
A budget cut of that scale would be “truly draconian,” said Dr. Varmus, the former N.I.H. director, who said he hoped Congress would not approve such a sharp reduction. It could leave the agency without enough money to fund promising new work, drive some scientists overseas and prompt some up-and-coming researchers to leave science altogether, he said. “You can completely destroy the system in just a couple of years,” Dr. Varmus said.
Methodology
The Times’s analysis of cancellations is based on the list of terminated grant awards published by the Department of Health and Human Services as of May 30, 2025, and on records from RePORT, the National Institutes of Health’s registry of grants and projects, as of June 2, 2025.
Each circle in the graphics represents a grant award. The circles are sized by the total funding that N.I.H. authorized for each award. H.H.S.’s list of terminations includes a mix of main grant awards, supplements and amendments. The list also indicates a “total amount obligated,” but that figure generally is the total amount awarded to a grant over its lifetime, including any supplements and amendments, rather than the amount for the specific award terminated. The Times’s analysis above uses only the amount authorized for the specific award listed. In some cases, scientists had already spent much of the money they had been awarded before their grants were cancelled, but in others, they lost out on their entire awards. Award amounts and totals — including the year-to-year funding shortfall calculated by The Times — do not include N.I.H. grants administered by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, because their funding amounts are not available in RePORT.
The Times examined cancellations of grants intended to train and support research by groups underrepresented in science. These include the R25 education program; the T32 and T34 training programs; F31 diversity grants; R01 research grants under funding opportunity number PAR-22-241 and research supplements under funding opportunity number PA-23-189, both of which are specifically intended to promote diversity among grant recipients.
To identify grants with delayed funding, Times journalists used information about each grant’s planned duration and prior awards, focusing on those that were eligible for continuation or noncompeting renewal. To account for reporting lags in the RePORTER database, The Times limited this analysis to a time period from Jan. 20 to April 30. The Times excluded grants that appear on H.H.S.’s public list of terminations and grants that have been marked in RePORTER as terminated. Based on interviews and an analysis of historical renewal data, The Times found such grants typically receive a notice of award at roughly the same time each year. Each circle representing a delayed grant is sized by the amount its main award received in fiscal year 2024. This list may include a small number of grants whose renewals are not yet recorded in N.I.H. databases, and others whose renewals are expected to be delayed, because of conversion of grant status for an investigator changing roles or institutions.
To classify each grant’s area of research, The Times extracted the title, the public health relevance statement and the abstract from the N.I.H.’s RePORTER database and ExPORTER files. These fields were used as input for a series of automated prompts to a large language model.
The model generated a brief description of the grant’s research objective. The model also determined if grants were related to research in areas like chronic diseases, vaccines, pandemic preparedness, misinformation, sexual and gender identity, health disparities and certain ethnic and racial groups, and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives, and then assigned categories.
Times journalists read the projects’ public health relevance statements and abstracts, and they checked the assigned categories for accuracy. They also checked hundreds of grant descriptions and edited them for accuracy and clarity. Only the project descriptions that have been edited by Times journalists are displayed in the article.
Health
Carbohydrates and fiber linked to healthier aging in some groups, study finds

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Carbohydrates may have gotten a bad rap, but a new study from Tufts University finds that some are better than others — and that older women in particular could reap the benefits.
The research, which was recently published in the journal JAMA Network Open, found that daily consumption of fiber and “high-quality” carbs in midlife can contribute to healthier aging and overall better wellness among older females.
The researchers defined “healthy aging” as “the absence of 11 major chronic diseases, lack of cognitive and physical function impairments, and having good mental health.”
EXPERTS REVEAL HIDDEN WAYS SUGAR ACCELERATES AGING BEYOND JUST WEIGHT GAIN
The study was led by researchers from the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging (HNRCA) at Tufts University and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
“The main takeaway of the study is that consuming dietary fiber and high-quality carbohydrates — those from fruits, vegetables, whole grains and legumes — is associated with positive health status in older adulthood,” lead author Andres Ardisson Korat, a scientist at HNRCA, told Fox News Digital.
Daily consumption of fiber and high-quality carbs in midlife can contribute to healthier aging and overall better wellness among older females. (iStock)
“This includes the absence of chronic diseases and good physical and cognitive function.”
The researchers collected data from the Nurses’ Health Study, in which 47,000 women reported their dietary habits and health outcomes between 1984 and 2016, according to a Tufts press release.
The women ranged in age from 70 to 93 by the end of the study period.
EATING THIS BREAKFAST FOOD COULD HELP YOU LIVE LONGER, STUDY SUGGESTS
The researchers looked at the women’s consumption of dietary fiber, total carbohydrates, refined carbohydrates, high-quality (unrefined) carbohydrates, and carbohydrates from whole grains, fruits, vegetables and legumes.
They also analyzed glycemic index (each food’s score indicating how much it raises blood sugar) and glycemic load, which also takes into account portion size to provide a more accurate measure of each food’s impact on blood sugar.
“It’s not just about ‘carbs versus fats versus protein’ — it’s about what kind of carbs you’re eating.”
Women who consumed higher amounts of total carbohydrates; high-quality carbohydrates from whole grains, fruits, vegetables and legumes; and total dietary fiber in midlife were 6% to 37% more likely to have healthy aging and to score higher in several areas of mental and physical wellness, the study found.
Conversely, consuming refined carbohydrates — which come from added sugars, refined grains and potatoes — and starchy vegetables resulted in a 13% reduced chance of healthy aging.
Quality over quantity
“This study reinforces something many of us intuitively feel: quality matters,” noted Melanie Avalon, a health influencer, entrepreneur and biohacker based in Atlanta, Georgia.
“It’s not just about ‘carbs versus fats versus protein’ — it’s about the kind of carbs you’re eating.”

The researchers looked at the women’s consumption of dietary fiber, total carbohydrates, refined carbohydrates, high-quality (unrefined) carbohydrates, and carbohydrates from whole grains, fruits, vegetables and legumes. (iStock)
Avalon, who was not involved in the research, discussed some of the more notable findings with Fox News Digital.
“Perhaps most surprising was the finding that replacing just 5% of calories from carbohydrates with protein (from either plant or animal sources) was associated with lower odds of healthy aging by 7% to 37%,” she said.
HEALTHY EATING IN MIDDLE AGE HAS THIS KEY LONGEVITY BENEFIT
Avalon also noted that when carbohydrates were segmented by type — processed versus unprocessed — the associations with healthy aging were independent of BMI (body mass index), a metric typically closely linked to metabolic health.
“This suggests the effects of carbohydrate quality on healthy aging were not solely explained by weight-loss effects,” she said.

Based on the study findings, experts recommend focusing on whole, unprocessed foods, including fruits, vegetables, legumes and whole grains. (iStock)
The study also briefly touched on the controversial topic of seed oils.
“It found that higher intake of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) — which are commonly found in seed oils — was linked to decreased odds of healthy aging, adding nuance to the ongoing debate,” Avalon added.
Based on the study findings, the biohacker recommends favoring whole, unprocessed foods, including fruits, vegetables, legumes and whole grains.
“Shop the perimeter of the grocery store for produce and whole grains, as well as the freezer aisles for frozen fruit and vegetables,” she suggested. “Consider dipping into the aisles only for pantry staples like canned legumes.”
For those who tolerate grains, people can reap the benefits of foods like quinoa, brown rice, oats and whole wheat products, Avalon noted.

“Prioritize fiber-rich foods and minimize refined carbohydrates like white bread, sugary beverages and ultraprocessed snacks,” an expert advised. (iStock)
“Prioritize fiber-rich foods and minimize refined carbohydrates like white bread, sugary beverages and ultraprocessed snacks.”
“These shifts can meaningfully support healthy aging and reduce the risk of chronic disease.”
Limitations and future research
One chief limitation of the study is that the participants were mainly white female healthcare workers.
“Because of the observational nature of the study, we cannot rule out confounding by other variables,” Korat said. “We would have liked to have data on men to evaluate the associations in this group.”
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR HEALTH NEWSLETTER
The researchers called for more diverse studies that look closer at how dietary fiber and high-quality carbs contribute to healthy aging.
“We hope our findings help inform consumers about the importance of healthy diets in the promotion of healthy aging,” Korat added.
“Personalized nutrition, grounded in both science and self-awareness, may be key to thriving across the decades.”
“The more we can understand about healthy aging, the more science can help people live healthier for longer.”
Avalon added that while diet is “foundational,” it’s just one piece of the “healthy aging puzzle.”
For more Health articles, visit www.foxnews.com/health
“Exercise, sleep, stress management and social connection all play a role,” she said.
“Ultimately, personalized nutrition, grounded in both science and self-awareness, may be key to thriving across the decades.”
Health
5 Best High-Protein Breakfasts for Weight Loss—Cottage Cheese Included!

Use left and right arrow keys to navigate between menu items.
Use escape to exit the menu.
Sign Up
Create a free account to access exclusive content, play games, solve puzzles, test your pop-culture knowledge and receive special offers.
Already have an account? Login
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago
MOVIE REVIEW – Mission: Impossible 8 has Tom Cruise facing his final reckoning
-
Politics1 week ago
Trump honors fallen American heroes, praises God in Memorial Day address: 'Great, great warriors'
-
Politics1 week ago
Trump admin asking federal agencies to cancel remaining Harvard contracts
-
Culture1 week ago
Can You Match These Canadian Novels to Their Locations?
-
Politics1 week ago
Homeland Security chief Noem visits Netanyahu ahead of Jerusalem Day
-
News1 week ago
Harvard's president speaks out against Trump. And, an analysis of DEI job losses
-
News1 week ago
Read the Trump Administration Letter About Harvard Contracts
-
Technology1 week ago
The Browser Company explains why it stopped developing Arc