Re: CR in human 36-year follow-up works

[Guest guest]

It is interesting that 15% CR was highly effective for humans. On the

basis of mathematical analysis, I had speculated in Message 14018 that

the real rate of restriction of mice raised on a 40% CR diet was 14%

because of their smaller size and that CR started in adulthood should

probably not exceed 14%.

Tony

>>>

From: " old542000 " <apater@m...>

Date: Sat Sep 4, 2004 8:40 am

Subject: CR in human 36-year follow-up works

Hi All,

CR in a study of subjects in a follow-up 36 years works, it

seems.

Now, this is exciting information. 15% CR was highly effective,

whereas 50% CR was a thumbs-down.

>>>

[Guest guest]

LOL. Should I up my calories? :-)))). Wouldn't it be interesting if

something as easy to do as 15% turns out to be the best course?

In the meantime please pardon me if you've heard this before:

moderation X 3 or " first do no harm " .

on 9/4/2004 12:02 PM, citpeks at citpeks@... wrote:

> It is interesting that 15% CR was highly effective for humans. On the

> basis of mathematical analysis, I had speculated in Message 14018 that

> the real rate of restriction of mice raised on a 40% CR diet was 14%

> because of their smaller size and that CR started in adulthood should

> probably not exceed 14%.

>

> Tony

>