中國(guó)網(wǎng)站品牌欄目（頻道）
這幾天不少明星將會(huì)從奧斯卡上空手而歸，留給他們的不僅僅是苦澀的失敗，還可能會(huì)減壽。
這個(gè)現(xiàn)象是在2001年首次被發(fā)現(xiàn)的。多倫多大學(xué)的研究人員對(duì)1649位獲得奧斯卡提名男女演員進(jìn)行研究，發(fā)現(xiàn)奧斯卡獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)叽蟾趴梢远嗨哪陦勖啻潍@獎(jiǎng)的演員會(huì)多六年的壽命，只是被提名和連提名都沒(méi)有的壽命是差不多的。
研究人員說(shuō)，這是因?yàn)楂@獎(jiǎng)明星會(huì)有強(qiáng)烈的自我監(jiān)督，會(huì)特別注意自己的外表和行為。因此，他們會(huì)避免那些危險(xiǎn)的行為，并且更加注意飲食和鍛煉。更不用說(shuō)他們有經(jīng)濟(jì)實(shí)力聘請(qǐng)那些保姆，教練和經(jīng)紀(jì)人了，因?yàn)檫@就意味著他們受到的壓力比一般人更少。
當(dāng)然也有例外，如奧斯卡影帝霍夫曼最近就因?yàn)榉盟幬镞^(guò)量而去世。
?This Sunday, a handful of stars will go home empty handed from the 2014 Academy Awards show. Not only will they be left with the bitter sting of defeat, but such loss may also lead to shorter lifespans than the winners.
Seriously. Social status has long been recognized as a predictor for poor health. Typically, research has focused on disparities between the rich and the poor. But science tells us that the effect may extend to quite literally the top of social ladder. In fact, Oscar winners may also have the perk of longevity.
The finding was first noticed in 2001. Researchers from the University of Toronto studied 1,649 Oscar-nominated actors and actresses. When they accounted for factors that could influence death rates, they found that among the participants, Oscar winners had a survival advantage of about four extra years of life, and actors who won multiple Oscars had an advantage of six years. Nominees who didn’t win had the same survival rates as their non-nominated peers.
Success could possibly account for the survival advantage, the researchers say. They speculate that since stars are subjected to intense personal scrutiny, they pay special attention to their looks and behaviors. Consequently, they may avoid risky behavior and focus more intensively on eating and exercise. Not to mention, many have the means to hire nannies, trainers, and managers, which could mean they are under less stress than the general population.
Of course, there are the exceptions, like Oscar winner Philip Seymour Hoffman who died recently after an overdose. Another study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine questioned the methods of the 2001 study. The original study was criticized for counting the years an actor was alive, instead of comparing years after a win. They also declared winners and losers at the onset, and didn’t factor in whether actors in the study won an award later on. When the new researchers re-calculated, they didn’t find the numbers significant.
If the findings do hold true, it could mean that there are other factors that impact survival, like a jump in social status. Looks like we will have to wait and see.
（來(lái)源：time.com 編輯：丹妮）
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
