Why Do Lemurs Not Get Chronic Inflammation in Old Age?

A groundbreaking new study[39] from Duke University is challenging a long-held assumption in aging science: that chronic, low-grade inflammation—known as inflammaging—is an inevitable part of getting older. This research, led by biological anthropologist Elaine Guevara, reveals that two species of lemurs, our distant primate cousins, do not show the typical age-related increase in inflammation seen in modern humans. The findings open exciting new avenues for understanding human aging and developing strategies to combat age-related diseases.

What Is Inflammaging and Why Does It Matter?

Inflammaging refers to the persistent, low-level inflammation that tends to increase with age in humans. This chronic inflammation is linked to many common age-related health problems, including heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and osteoarthritis. It is often considered a biological inevitability—a slow-burning internal fire that contributes to physiological decline over time.

Inflammaging arises from lifelong antigenic exposure and immune system adaptation:
Chronic infections and continuous immune stimulation throughout life contribute to a persistent, low-grade inflammatory state that accelerates aging-related tissue damage and frailty. This is described as a natural, evolutionarily conserved process in humans and other mammals[17][18].

Microbiome and gut permeability changes are central to inflammaging:
Aging is associated with shifts in gut microbiota composition, decreased beneficial bacteria, and increased pathobionts, which promote systemic inflammation. These microbiome dynamics have been documented in diverse human populations[19][20][21].

Molecular and cellular mechanisms of inflammaging are well characterized:
Epigenetic changes, oxidative stress, immune cell senescence, and dysregulated inflammatory signaling pathways underlie inflammaging, as reviewed extensively in recent literature[22][23][24].

Understanding why inflammaging occurs—and how it might be prevented or reversed—is a critical goal in biomedicine, with the potential to improve healthspan and quality of life for the rapidly aging global population.

The Lemur Study: A Surprising Twist

Elaine Guevara, a biological anthropologist at Duke University, and her colleagues studied two lemur species with different life histories: the fast-paced ring-tailed lemur (Lemur catta) and the slower-living Coquerel’s sifaka (Propithecus coquereli). Both species are primates, sharing a common ancestor with humans millions of years ago, making them valuable models for evolutionary and biomedical research.

Using non-invasive urine sampling to measure biomarkers of oxidative stress and inflammation, the team expected to find increases in these markers with age, as seen in humans. Instead, the results were surprising:

– Neither species showed age-related increases in oxidative stress markers.
– Neither species exhibited the expected increase in inflammation with age.
– In fact, ring-tailed lemurs showed a marginal decline in inflammation markers as they aged.

These findings align with a few recent studies in other non-human primates, suggesting that inflammaging is not a universal feature of primate aging.

Insights from Evolutionary Anthropology

Christine Drea, professor of evolutionary anthropology at Duke University and a collaborator on the study, has emphasized the importance of these findings in understanding human aging. She notes that because lemurs and humans share a distant common ancestor, differences in their aging patterns can provide valuable evolutionary insights.

The study suggests that chronic inflammation with age may not be an intrinsic, unavoidable feature of aging in all primates. Instead, environmental and lifestyle factors could play a significant role in driving inflammaging in humans.

Could Modern Environmental Factors Like EMF Pollution Influence Human Inflammaging?

The Duke lemur study did not investigate EMF exposure. One notable difference between lemurs and humans is their exposure to environmental pollutants. Lemurs, especially those in natural or controlled captive environments, are not exposed to electromagnetic field (EMF) pollution generated by modern technologies such as cell phones, Wi-Fi, and power lines.

Wild lemurs are effectively unexposed to modern anthropogenic EMF pollution.
Captive lemurs may have variable, but generally low, EMF exposure compared to humans.
This difference in exposure is relevant when studying comparative biology, including inflammaging and other health effects potentially influenced by EMFs.

Scientific studies have found that EMF exposure contributes to oxidative stress and inflammation, both of which are implicated in aging-related tissue damage. Could the simple absence of EMF exposure in lemurs’ environments explain why these primates do not exhibit the same inflammatory aging patterns as humans? Did humans show “inflammaging” before widespread EMF pollution existed?

Multiple studies have shown that certain types of EMF exposure—particularly chronic or high-intensity exposures—can increase oxidative stress and activate inflammatory pathways in cells and animal models, processes that are implicated in aging-related tissue damage. Furthermore, some forms of EMF, such as pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF) used therapeutically, have been demonstrated to reduce inflammation and promote healing by modulating specific molecular pathways. Saying these are “conflicting results” is about as stupid as claiming that there is no evidence arsenic causes cancer, because it can be used to cure cancer in the right doses and formulations. Analogous to how arsenic is both a carcinogen and a chemotherapeutic agent depending on dose and formulation, EMF can have harmful or beneficial effects depending on exposure parameters and biological context.

The differing effects depend on the frequency, intensity, duration, and biological context of EMF exposure. The anti-inflammatory effects observed with controlled PEMF treatments reinforce the notion that other forms of EMF exposure, especially uncontrolled or chronic ones, may contribute to inflammaging by disrupting normal cellular signaling and promoting oxidative stress.

Industry Influence Shapes Science Results

ChatGPT will tell you that current human epidemiological data on the relationship between everyday environmental EMF exposure and inflammaging or age-related diseases remain limited and inconclusive. This pervasive statement is dangerously misleading. Yes, the “credible” (potentially industry captured) data does show limited and inconclusive evidnece, but this is only because it was paid to show limited and inconclusive? Is the evidence itself is limited and inconclusive? This does not seem to be true, if you look at the actual research.

See: EMFacts Independent Elektrosmog Report (2025)[27] offers an updated English-language compilation and critical analysis of EMF research, highlighting alternatives to industry-influenced standards and providing extensive bibliographies of biological effect studies. and Recent scientific reviews and meta-analyses[28] published in peer-reviewed journals (e.g., 2024 ScienceDirect overview on RF-EMF exposure limits) provide updated global assessments of EMF exposure and biological effects, supporting calls for stricter regulation.

The claim that “current human epidemiological data on everyday environmental EMF exposure and inflammaging or age-related diseases remain limited and inconclusive” is, for example, supported by recent comprehensive scientific reviews, including the 2025 report by the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM)[9]. This report, which systematically assesses studies published in 2023, concludes that no new established causal relationships between EMF exposure and health risks have been identified. No new ones, but the old ones are just fine. This kind of highly deceptive wording is propaganda unbefitting science.

That “no new established causal relationships” does not mean “no risk” or “all previous concerns are invalid.” The report maintains “a position of scientific prudence”, emphasizing unresolved questions and the complexity of EMF health effects. In other words, scientists know well that it unwise to bite the hand that feeds you, even if it is also damaging your body you daily and pushing you toward an early grave. Having an income to buy food and provide shelter and transporation is a more pressing priority than long term health effects. Scientific bodies tend to emphasize “prudence” and “inconclusive evidence” to avoid premature alarm, but this can sometimes downplay genuine risks. At the same time, many researchers depend on funding from government or industry sources, which may create subtle incentives to avoid “controversial” conclusions.

A Fact Checked Example of Industry Influence

The claim that Michael Repacholi, former head of the WHO EMF Project, received substantial funding indirectly from the cellphone industry—around $150,000 annually funneled through the Royal Adelaide Hospital—is supported by multiple credible sources, including investigative reports from Microwave News and analyses documented since the early 2000s. Repacholi admitted that a large portion of the WHO EMF Project’s funding came via donations sent to the Royal Adelaide Hospital, which he was seconded from, and these funds originated from industry groups such as the Mobile Manufacturers Forum and the GSM Association. This indirect funding arrangement allowed Repacholi to claim no direct industry payments, but critics have characterized this as a form of financial legerdemain or “money laundering.” Such arrangements raised questions about conflicts of interest and potential violations of WHO rules prohibiting employees and consultants from accepting gifts or remuneration incompatible with their duties. The funding structure was terminated after Repacholi’s departure in 2006–2007, with subsequent WHO EMF Project funding coming directly from governments and other agencies. These facts are well-documented in sources including [29] Mast Sanity (2006), [30] Environmental Health Trust (2022), and [31] Australian Parliamentary documents (2012), among others. Therefore, the assertion about industry-linked funding and conflict-of-interest concerns during Repacholi’s tenure is factually supported.

What Actual Research Shows

Decades of experimental and epidemiological research document extensive biological effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), especially anthropogenic extremely low frequency (ELF) and wireless communication (WC) EMFs. A comprehensive 2025 review by Panagopoulos et al. highlights that these man-made EMFs differ fundamentally from natural EMFs due to their polarization, coherence, and intense low-frequency variability, which together produce significant bioactivity. This bioactivity primarily arises from the irregular gating of voltage-gated ion channels (VGICs) in cell membranes, leading to overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and oxidative stress (OS). This oxidative stress is linked to DNA damage, cell senescence, infertility, cancer, and other pathologies. Importantly, over 90% of hundreds of peer-reviewed studies confirm statistically significant oxidative effects of RF/WC and ELF EMFs on various biological systems without thermal effects, establishing a robust mechanistic basis for EMF-induced biological damage [1].

Additional reviews corroborate these findings, showing that non-ionizing EMFs can induce apoptosis, DNA strand breaks, and reproductive system effects in vitro and in vivo, while also noting potential therapeutic applications of EMFs in medicine [2][4]. The International Commission on the Biological Effects of EMF (ICBE-EMF) and journals like Bioelectromagnetics publish ongoing research dedicated to understanding and mitigating these biological impacts [3][8]. Collectively, thousands of independent studies provide consistent evidence that everyday environmental EMFs can disrupt cellular function and promote oxidative stress, which are key contributors to inflammaging and age-related diseases, underscoring the need for further research and regulatory consideration.

For access to hundreds of studies on the biological non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), the following resources are highly recommended:

BioInitiative Report (available at [bioinitiative.org]) – This comprehensive report compiles thousands of peer-reviewed studies documenting biological effects of low-intensity EMF exposure, including oxidative stress, DNA damage, inflammation, neurological effects, and more. It argues for precautionary exposure limits based on observed non-thermal bioeffects[10].

International Commission on the Biological Effects of EMF (ICBE-EMF) ([icbe-emf.org]) – An organization dedicated to reviewing and disseminating research on EMF biological effects, including non-thermal mechanisms and health risks[13].

PubMed and PMC databases – Search for reviews and studies on EMF biological effects, such as this 2008 review summarizing non-thermal effects and health endpoints:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18242044/ [10]
and a 2022 report on biological effects of electric and magnetic fields:
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9722389/ [12]

Handbook of Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (CRC Press, 3rd edition, 2018) – This two-volume set provides an authoritative, up-to-date overview of EMF bioeffects, mechanisms, and medical applications[11].

Bioelectromagnetics Journal ([Wiley Online Library]) – A leading peer-reviewed journal publishing original research on EMF biological effects and applications[8].

These sources collectively cover thousands of experimental and epidemiological studies demonstrating that EMFs, even at non-thermal levels, can induce oxidative stress, DNA damage, inflammatory responses, and other biological effects relevant to health and aging.

Lemurs Do Not Use Cell Phones

Consequently, lemurs’ lack of exposure to modern EMF pollution may partly contribute to their differing inflammatory aging patterns. Further well-funded, independent research is needed to clarify the role that EMF exposure may play in human inflammaging and how it interacts with other biological and environmental factors. However, some scientists have expressed concerns that investigating potential harmful effects of EMF can be challenging due to the influence of powerful telecommunications industry interests, which may affect research funding priorities and create professional risks for researchers pursuing this line of inquiry. Ensuring transparent, unbiased funding and protecting scientific freedom are essential to advancing understanding in this important area.

Why Don’t Lemurs Show Inflammaging?

Inflammaging is a process driven by lifelong immune activation from chronic infections, leading to persistent low-grade inflammation that accelerates aging and frailty. Changes in gut microbiota and increased gut permeability promote systemic inflammation. At the molecular level, epigenetic changes, oxidative stress, immune cell aging, and dysregulated inflammatory signaling underpin inflammaging.

Several factors may contribute to lemurs’ resistance to inflammaging:

Natural environments and diets: Lemurs consume diets rich in fruits, nectar, insects, and plant gums—nutrient profiles low in processed sugars and unhealthy fats common in modern human diets. These natural diets support healthier metabolism and reduce systemic inflammation. Additionally, compounds like resveratrol, naturally present in their diet, may further promote metabolic health and anti-inflammatory effects.

Balanced gut microbiome and gut health: Lemurs maintain diverse, well-adapted gut microbiomes with fast gut transit times, which help prevent chronic gut inflammation despite some metabolic similarities to human inflammatory conditions. Their evolved gut ecosystems support immune tolerance and reduce systemic inflammatory triggers.

Evolutionary life history strategies: Lemurs allocate energy differently between reproduction, maintenance, and repair compared to humans, which may contribute to their resilience against age-related inflammation and frailty.

Low exposure to chronic stressors and pollutants: Wild lemurs live in relatively low-stress environments free from many modern human stressors such as pollution, sedentary lifestyles, and EMF pollution. This absence of chronic environmental stress likely limits immune overactivation and systemic inflammation.

Physiological adaptations like hibernation: Some lemur species undergo seasonal hibernation or torpor, involving metabolic downregulation that can reduce oxidative stress and inflammation over time. Particularly, dwarf lemurs (genus Cheirogaleus), undergo seasonal hibernation or torpor involving metabolic downregulation. Dwarf lemurs are obligate hibernators in the wild, hibernating between 3 and 7 months annually during Madagascar’s dry season. During hibernation, their metabolism, heart rate, and body temperature drop significantly, with intermittent arousals every 6–12 days where normal physiological functions temporarily resume. Most research comparing inflammaging patterns involves species like gray mouse lemurs, which are facultative torpor users rather than obligate hibernators. The dwarf lemurs’ hibernation capability is recognized but less frequently studied in the context of inflammaging.

Comparison to Other Primates

Among primates with minimal exposure to modern EMFs, apes and Old World monkeys such as rhesus macaques and chimpanzees DO exhibit inflammaging. Wild lemurs in Madagascar live in remote forests with very limited or no exposure to EMFs from cell towers, Wi-Fi, or power lines. What about Rhesus macaques? Do they live in remote forests with very limited or no exposure to EMFs?

Rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) show classic signs of inflammaging, including increased circulating pro-inflammatory cytokines (IL-6, TNF-α, IL-1β), loss of gut mucosal barrier integrity (“leaky gut”), and impaired immune cell functions with age. These features closely parallel human inflammaging and contribute to age-related immune dysfunction and disease susceptibility.

Wild lemurs in Madagascar live in remote forests with very limited or no exposure to EMFs from cell towers, Wi-Fi, or power lines. In contrast, rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) naturally inhabit a wide range of environments, including urban and rural areas, where EMF exposure can vary. While some wild populations may live in relatively low-EMF areas, rhesus macaques are often found near human settlements and research facilities where exposure to EMFs from power lines, wireless devices, and other sources is more common. Experimental studies have also deliberately exposed rhesus macaques to controlled EMF levels, demonstrating biological and behavioral effects. Unlike lemurs in remote forests, rhesus macaques frequently experience higher and more variable EMF exposure in their natural and captive habitats. Therefore, this possible cause (EMF) needs to be teased out with direct research or better explanations of EMF exposure levels for lemurs without inflammaging.

Old World monkeys, such as baboons, macaques, and African green monkeys, inhabit diverse environments across Africa and Asia, ranging from remote forests to areas increasingly influenced by human activity. While some populations live in relatively natural habitats with low levels of anthropogenic EMF exposure, many Old World monkeys are found near human settlements, research centers, or urbanized regions where exposure to EMFs from power lines, telecommunications, and wireless devices is more common. Experimental studies have also used Old World monkeys like rhesus macaques to investigate biological effects of EMF exposure under controlled conditions. Therefore, similar to rhesus macaques, Old World monkeys experience a variable range of EMF exposure depending on their habitat, with some populations living in low-EMF environments comparable to lemurs, but many others exposed to modern anthropogenic EMFs. Again, more specific research is needed.

Implications for Human Health and Aging

This research suggests that chronic inflammation with aging might not be an unavoidable biological fate but could be modifiable. Understanding why lemurs avoid inflammaging could inspire novel interventions to reduce age-related inflammation in humans, potentially preventing or delaying diseases linked to chronic inflammation.

Potential avenues to reduce inflammaging include:

– Diet and lifestyle changes: Anti-inflammatory diets, regular exercise, and stress management.
– Reducing environmental exposures: Minimizing contact with pollutants, including ongoing research into EMF’s effects[25].
– Emerging therapies: Targeting cellular senescence to remove cells that promote inflammation.

Next Steps: From Lemurs to Humans

The Duke Lemur Center team plans to extend their research to wild lemur populations to better understand how intrinsic aging processes interact with environmental factors. These insights are vital for developing strategies to improve healthspan and reduce disability in aging human populations.

Conclusion

The discovery that lemurs age without the chronic inflammation typical of humans challenges the idea that inflammaging is a universal hallmark of aging. It opens a hopeful path toward healthier aging by learning from our primate relatives and reconsidering how environment, lifestyle, and evolution shape inflammation and longevity. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of investigating modern environmental influences—such as EMF pollution—on human aging.

References:

[1] Panagopoulos DJ, et al. A comprehensive mechanism of biological and health effects of anthropogenic extremely low frequency and wireless communication electromagnetic fields. Front Public Health, 2025.

[2] Saliev T, et al. Biological effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. Life Sci, 2019.

[3] International Commission on the Biological Effects of EMF (ICBE-EMF).

[4] Recent reviews on biological effects and medical applications of EMFs, J-STAGE, 2023.

[8] Bioelectromagnetics journal homepage and publications.

NASA Pushes Forward with Lunar Ambitions Despite Staffing Challenges

How AI-Driven Protein Design Will Change Everything: New Cures Ahead!

Creatine: Should You Supplement with It?

Early 1938 Fusion Experiment Repeated Gives Insight