In article <VJt2h.37$5e5.17[at]newsfe08.lga> ,
"Proctologically Violated©®" <entropic3.14decay[at]optonline2.718.net>
wrote:

- quote -

temperature of mice .5 celcius resulted in a 15% increase in life span.
The suggestion was the mechanism for calorie restriction working was
lowered core temperature. If so it would be interesting to see if people
(who live in more regulated environments) have a corresponding core
temperature reduction.

--
Keith

Oh yeah, I seem to remember reading sumpn bout BW 20-30% below Met Life
tables, BMI, or whatever std is in vogue, as "CR".
--
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.
entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs
"Proctologically Violated©®" <entropic3.14decay[at]optonline2.718.net> wrote in
message news:iWs2h.187$Rj2.76[at]newsfe10.lga...
- quote -

people lived hundreds of years before the flood
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...er=5&version=9 and
120 was the age limit set in Genesis 6:3
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...er=6&version=9
TP wrote:
- quote -

CR *prevents* loss of muscle mass?? How so?

From the little I've read/heard, one claim stuck in my mind:

That CR works across *all* species, in every specie tested, including
spiders! wow....

The question then is, how restricted is restricted?

It's not, as one poster stated, cal in < cal out-- that's the condition for
weight *loss*, which is not a long-term steady-state condition.
CR *is* steady state, corresonding to a weight less than "normal".
But again, how much less?

Beyond life extension, the best rationale for CR is that it, well, saves
money!

And the other point raised is a good one:
Finding research that's not total bullshit.
Partial bullshit, ok, but not total.
------
Mr. P.V.'d (formerly Droll Troll), Yonkers, NY
Stop Corruption in Congress & Send the Ultimate Message:
Absolutely Vote, but NOT for a Democrat or a Republican.
Ending Corruption in Congress is the *Single Best Way*
to Materially Improve Your Family's Life.

entropic3.14decay at optonline2.718 dot net; remove pi and e to reply--ie,
all d'numbuhs

"DZ" <30481[at]343325979.92405325.10060.15365.26347> wrote in message
news:21820[at]3128528116.2931814979.14574.2704.13479...
- quote -

DZ wrote:
- quote -

CR studies are not a subset of "nutrition science", it is "nutrition
science", whether you want it to be or not.

YV

TC <tunderbar[at]hotmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

CR studies are not a subset of "nutrition science". Here is a good
recent review:

http://www.sciam.com/print_version.c...8083414B7F0000

JT[at]nowhere.com wrote:
- quote -

It isn't rocket science. Trust me, it isn't rocket science. Rocket
science has actually succeeded and has actually placed a man on the
moon and probes on Mars. Food science has only succeeded in giving us
the highest rates of obesity and diet related chronic disease in world
history, which is diametrically opposite to their stated goals.

I suggest you start reading these nutrition studies closely and with
an, at least, mildly critical eye. You will get an education on what
garbage science really is.

TC

On 1 Nov 2006 19:09:26 -0800, "TC" <tunderbar[at]hotmail.com> wrote:

- quote -

Reading and understanding are two different things.

"Doug Freyburger" <dfreybur[at]yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1162421230.360001.303800[at]k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

Now you've done it. You've gone and trampled upon a religion called CRON whose god is the late Roy Walford, M.D. Walford wrote the CRON bible The 120 Year Diet. He didn't make it past 79. But dying of ALS doesn't count. He would have lived to 120 if he hadn't died.

When you're an athiest there is no afterlife except if you have faith in getting frozen and later revivified, so you've got to believe CRON will enable you to live forever. It's not nice to trample on other people's religion.

Doug Freese wrote:
- quote -

Have you read any of the studies discussed? I have.

TC

Doug Freyburger <dfreybur[at]yahoo.com> wrote:
- quote -

Whether they map convincingly inversely depends on the degree a person
who's looking at the evidence enjoys food. It's just the rule, like
Newton laws. But here go the monkeys -

http://www.technologyreview.com/read...572&ch=biotech

Interestingly, in monkeys, CR is preventing the loss of muscle mass,
just like it does in aging rats and mice.

Oh, to be a monkey!

"TC" <tunderbar[at]hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1162407122.321227.207990[at]f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
- quote -


How can anyone have an intelligent dissussion with TC when he see's
ghosts and goblins 252 days of year.

-DF

NYC XYZ wrote:
- quote -

And how do you map rat results to human results? If they even DO map.

Note that rats are fed a high carb grain based diet. Reduce their feed
30% and they live longer. The calorie people will point at the reduced
calorie count and say eat less. The carb people will point at the
reduced carb count and say eat low carb. The grain intolerance
people will look at rats and ask "mooo?" figuring rats eat grain and
are therefore related to cattle. The vegans will point out that the
rats
aren't getting meat are the ones that are healthy.

We can't put a bunch of humans in cages for their entire lives and feed
each set a different number of calories and see how it comes out 120
years later.

i've noticed as people age past 60 there are less fat ones
NYC XYZ wrote:
- quote -

These "restricted calorie" studies are pure crap. The control groups
are usually fed un-natural pelletized manufactured crap for food. Then
when they feed the test group less of the crap food, they live longer
than the control group. Then they attribute it to restricted calories.
Hey, the less poison you eat the longer you will live. It is that
simple. It has nothing to do with calories.

TC

NYC XYZ wrote:
- quote -

NYC XYZ wrote:
- quote -

It's when CALORIES_EATEN < CALORIES_BURNED.

CALORIES_BURNED = (Basal Metabolic Rate * Activity Factor) + (Extra
Exercise)

- quote -

When I was in good shape, I often gulped down a protein drink before a
climb even when I wasn't hungry. Still, the above rules are in effect.

*** BMR ***

Harris-Benedict (normal):
BMR(men) = 66.473 + 5.003 x (length) + 13.752 x (weight) - 6.755 x
(age)
BMR(women) = 655.096 + 1.850 x (length) + 9.563 x (weight) - 4.676 x
(age)

Harris-Benedict/Rosa (obese):
BMR (men) = 88.362 + 4.799 x (length) + 13.397 x (weight) - 5.677 x
(age);
BMR (women) = 447.593 + 3.098 x (length) + 9.247 x (weight) - 4.330 x
(age)

There are plenty of online calculators that do this for you.

- quote -

*** Activity Factor ***
BMR x 1.1 (sedentary) is probably appropriate.

- quote -

*** Activity Factor ***
BMR x 1.4 (light-to-moderate exercise) is probably appropriate.

- quote -

Dieting works for some, and the only alternatives are drugs and surgery.

What makes a diet "calorie-restricted"??

They used to feed us 3K-calorie breakfasts during Army basic training.
Them MREs are supposed to be like 5K calories! I was in the best shape
of my life, despite having accrued problems like a bad back, etc.

How many calories does the body need if you're staying home all day
reading a book or watching one of them holiday season re-run marathons
(Honeymooners, Star Trek, Three's Company, Godzilla)?

How many calories if you go to the gym three times a week
weight-lifting for about an hour each session?

I must say, I'm impressed to learn that the Dalai Lama is, what, close
to seventy? He really looks forty-something!

Also, I wonder what effect sex and the sex drive have on all this...I
feel most alive when having sex, but in between girls I also feel
great, just in a different way...kinda like the strength you feel
before a workout, and the sense of strength you have after it....



http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/he...&ex=1162530000


EXCERPTS

"In mice, calorie restriction doesn't just extend life span,"
said Leonard P. Guarente, professor of biology at the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. "It mitigates many diseases of aging:
cancer, cardiovascular disease, neurodegenerative disease. The gain is
just enormous."

....

Despite widespread scientific enthusiasm, the evidence that calorie
restriction works in humans is indirect at best. The practice was
popularized in diet books by Dr. Roy Walford, a legendary pathologist
at the University of California, Los Angeles, who spent much of the
last 30 years of his life following a calorie-restricted regimen. He
died of Lou Gehrig's disease in 2004 at 79.

....

Animals on restricted diets seem particularly resistant to
environmental stresses like oxidation and heat, perhaps even radiation.
"It is a very deep, very important function," Dr. Miller said.
Experts theorize that limited access to energy alarms the body, so to
speak, activating a cascade of biochemical signals that tell each cell
to direct energy away from reproductive functions, toward repair and
maintenance. The calorie-restricted organism is stronger, according to
this hypothesis, because individual cells are more efficiently
repairing mutations, using energy, defending themselves and mopping up
harmful byproducts like free radicals.

....

"The stressed cell is really pulling out all the stops" to preserve
itself, said Dr. Cynthia Kenyon, a molecular biologist at the
University of California, San Francisco. "This system could have
evolved as a way of letting animals take a timeout from reproduction
when times are harsh."

....

Despite the initially promising results from studies of primates, some
scientists doubt that calorie restriction can ever work effectively in
humans. A mathematical model published last year by researchers at
University of California, Los Angeles, and University of California,
Irvine, predicted that the maximum life span gain from calorie
restriction for humans would be just 7 percent. A more likely figure,
the authors said, was 2 percent.

....

While an anti-aging pill may be the next big blockbuster, some
ethicists believe that the all-out determination to extend life span is
veined with arrogance. As appointments with death are postponed, says
Dr. Leon R. Kass, former chairman of the President's Council on
Bioethics, human lives may become less engaging, less meaningful, even
less beautiful.

"Mortality makes life matter," Dr. Kass recently wrote.
"Immortality is a kind of oblivion - like death itself."

That man's time on this planet is limited, and rightfully so, is a
cultural belief deeply held by many. But whether an increasing life
span affords greater opportunity to find meaning or distracts from the
pursuit, the prospect has become too great a temptation to ignore -
least of all, for scientists.

"It's a just big waste of talent and wisdom to have people die in
their 60s and 70s," said Dr. Sinclair of Harvard.