Guest guest Posted June 9, 2004 Report Share Posted June 9, 2004 Hi folks: Probably the vast majority of us here can agree than a sizeable reduction in caloric intake is beneficial if the appropriate amount of essential nutrients are maintained. We have seen enough studies in animals of many types, including a few, not exhaustive, studies of very close relatives of ours and humans too (just a couple of studies). These in the aggregate are enough to convince me. So from my viewpoint it is time to stop using 10% restricted animals as the benchmark. If we want to learn more we now need to use 40% restriction as the benchmark and compare various variations in 'nutrition' to see if they are superior to simple 40% restriction. (Perhaps they have already been done. If so, I would love to get the citations for them.) One study that, IMO, needs to be done is animals restricted to various different degrees to try to determine the shape of the CR benefit curve. I.E. where is life extension maximized? At 40% restriction? Or 70%? Or 38%? Another study needs to provide data to show whether restriction of one type of macronutrient is more or less beneficial than the others. It does seem clear from at least one recent study that instituting restriction in the form of dramatically reduced starch intake in mice was highly beneficial ........... but is that something unique to starch restriction? Or would the restriction of any other kind of caloric source have been just as effective, or even more so, possibly? Another study that would, for me at least, resolve the fasting issue is a comparison of mice, all on 40% restriction, with some fed three times a day, others once daily, another group fed three times a week, and another fed three times a week normally, but with occasional much longer fasts. (All with an identical monthly caloric intake). We know that CR is highly beneficial. But we do not know whether fasting is beneficial, let alone whether fasting can add any additional benefits above and beyond the huge benefits of CR. It would be useful to know. There are all kinds of other possible combinations. But the above three, with the controls in each case on 40% restriction fed three times a week (as were Mattson's mice, I believe) would answer a lot of questions in the next three years. If it is shown that the mice on occasional long fasts have the longest lifespans, I will be doing it. Rodney. > Hopefully we're all fans of the evidence. And hopefully open to new > evidence and not " locked in " (or we wouldn't have much to discuss on this > list). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.