RE: moderate CR (wasRe: Question from a new member)

[Guest guest]

Not so. In our files are references that discuss that as little as 10% CR

is of benefit. You are a newcomer and I gather from your post below that

you have not read the files. Your introductory message instructs you to

please do so, so that we don't have to go over the same ground every time a

newbie joins the group.

This group urges MODERATE CR. Read the group description as well as the

files.

on 5/30/2005 6:06 PM, paizisn at npaizis@... wrote:

> Thanks Tony for your response. I am aware that nothing has been shown

> to be better than CR (or as good!) but it doesn't have to be better

> to

> still be of value. An experiment with rodents of only 4-5 years

> duration would give a pretty good idea wouldn't it? While I am

> persuaded that CR works, it requires a discipline that few have.

[Guest guest]

I am only speaking for myself. CR as in " caloric restriction " is the only

thing that seems to work across several species. Even it remains unproven

in humans but it appears very promising (studies are in process). In just

a few years we have seen proposed mimetics come and go.

If something really looks promising it will be studied and well tested.

Taking a bunch of pills because they might work doesn't sound to me like

a high probability way to even square the curve let alone delay the inevitable.

We would all love to be able to consume unlimited amounts of food. Since the

true mechanisms behind CR is still a subject of debate a magic pill would

answer a lot of questions. Many of us have been pursuing this for years.

I haven't heard the fat lady sing yet, but I'm patient.

JR

-----Original Message-----

From:

[mailto: ]On Behalf Of paizisn

Sent: Monday, May 30, 2005 8:25 PM

Subject: [ ] moderate CR (wasRe: Question from a new

member)

> Not so. In our files are references that discuss that as little as

10% CR

> is of benefit. You are a newcomer and I gather from your post

below that

> you have not read the files. Your introductory message instructs

you to

> please do so, so that we don't have to go over the same ground

every time a

> newbie joins the group.

>

> This group urges MODERATE CR. Read the group description as well

as the

> files.

>

>

I understand that. Nevertheless, 10% CR still requires more dicpline

than simply taking a pill. Is the purpose of this forum to promote

health and longevity by means of CR, or simply CR, even if aging can

be slowed by other means? If the same results can be achieved without

CR doesn't the alternative still have merit and isn't it still worthy

of discussion? I'm happy to examine the evidence, aren't you?