Re: Caloric Restriction Won't Dramatically Extend Life Of Humans

[Guest guest]

This comment has been repeated several times in the last 3 yrs, but it's pointless because CR is all we have.

It's what I call a Jane Fonda - don't tell me what doesn't work - tell me what does work.

And 7% is better than nothing.

Regards.

[ ] Caloric Restriction Won't Dramatically Extend Life Of Humans

------------CALORIC RESTRICTION WON'T DRAMATICALLY EXTEND LIFE SPAN IN HUMANSScience BlogAugust 29, 2005http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/8779"Humans, in contrast, will not have rodent-like results from dramaticallyrestricting calories," he said. "Caloric restriction is not a panacea. Their mathematical model shows that people who consume the most calorieshave a shorter life span, and that if people severely restrict theircalories over their lifetimes, their life span increases by between 3percent and 7 percent -- far less than the 20-plus years some have hopedcould be achieved by drastic caloric restriction. He considers the 3 percentfigure more likely than the 7 percent.

[Guest guest]

This comment has been repeated several times in the last 3 yrs, but it's pointless because CR is all we have.

It's what I call a Jane Fonda - don't tell me what doesn't work - tell me what does work.

And 7% is better than nothing.

Regards.

[ ] Caloric Restriction Won't Dramatically Extend Life Of Humans

------------CALORIC RESTRICTION WON'T DRAMATICALLY EXTEND LIFE SPAN IN HUMANSScience BlogAugust 29, 2005http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/8779"Humans, in contrast, will not have rodent-like results from dramaticallyrestricting calories," he said. "Caloric restriction is not a panacea. Their mathematical model shows that people who consume the most calorieshave a shorter life span, and that if people severely restrict theircalories over their lifetimes, their life span increases by between 3percent and 7 percent -- far less than the 20-plus years some have hopedcould be achieved by drastic caloric restriction. He considers the 3 percentfigure more likely than the 7 percent.

[Guest guest]

Hi :

Thanks for the article. But what a joke. If what is reported there

is accurate they have taken just ***three*** highly aberrant data

points - japanese, okinawan and sumo wrestlers (sumo wrestlers are

assumed to be comparable to all other humans in all respects apart

from caloric intake?), and then used that nanoscopically small data

sample to draw categorical conclusions about all humans everywhere.

[ " The human data factored into the mathematical model include the

caloric intake of people in Japan, and their longevity, compared with

sumo wrestlers, who consume more than twice the normal male diet, and

men in Okinawa, Japan, who consume less than the average Japanese

male. " ]

No one knows how much CRON will extend lifespan in humans. These

guys ESPECIALLY! They may turn out to be right, but if they are it

will not be because of the professionalism of their research! (IMO)

Rodney.

> CALORIC RESTRICTION WON'T DRAMATICALLY EXTEND LIFE SPAN IN

HUMANS ...............................

> The human data factored into the mathematical model include the

caloric

> intake of people in Japan, and their longevity, compared with sumo

> wrestlers, who consume more than twice the normal male diet, and

men in Okinawa, Japan, who consume less than the average Japanese

male.

[Guest guest]

Hi :

Thanks for the article. But what a joke. If what is reported there

is accurate they have taken just ***three*** highly aberrant data

points - japanese, okinawan and sumo wrestlers (sumo wrestlers are

assumed to be comparable to all other humans in all respects apart

from caloric intake?), and then used that nanoscopically small data

sample to draw categorical conclusions about all humans everywhere.

[ " The human data factored into the mathematical model include the

caloric intake of people in Japan, and their longevity, compared with

sumo wrestlers, who consume more than twice the normal male diet, and

men in Okinawa, Japan, who consume less than the average Japanese

male. " ]

No one knows how much CRON will extend lifespan in humans. These

guys ESPECIALLY! They may turn out to be right, but if they are it

will not be because of the professionalism of their research! (IMO)

Rodney.

> CALORIC RESTRICTION WON'T DRAMATICALLY EXTEND LIFE SPAN IN

HUMANS ...............................

> The human data factored into the mathematical model include the

caloric

> intake of people in Japan, and their longevity, compared with sumo

> wrestlers, who consume more than twice the normal male diet, and

men in Okinawa, Japan, who consume less than the average Japanese

male.

[Guest guest]

Haven't we already done this one to death?

(1) Their model is based on sumo wrestlers and Okinawans;

(2) five good years is nothing to sneeze at.

To imply that we're so much more complex than dogs is, well, a bit snooty,

methinks.

Maco

[ ] Caloric Restriction Won't Dramatically Extend Life Of

Humans

------------

CALORIC RESTRICTION WON'T DRAMATICALLY EXTEND LIFE SPAN IN HUMANS

Science Blog

August 29, 2005

http://www.scienceblog.com/cms/node/8779

Severely restricting calories over decades may add a few years to a human

life span, but will not enable humans to live to 125 and beyond, as many

have speculated, evolutionary biologists report.

" Our message is that suffering years of misery to remain super-skinny is not

going to have a big payoff in terms of a longer life, " said UCLA

evolutionary biologist Phelan. " I once heard someone say caloric

restriction may not make you live forever, but it sure would seem like it.

Try to maintain a healthy body weight, but don't deprive yourself of all

pleasure. Moderation appears to be a more sensible solution.

" With mice, if you restrict their caloric intake by 10 percent, they live

longer than if they have unlimited access to food, " Phelan said. " If you

restrict their intake by 20 percent, they live even longer, and restrict

them to 50 percent, they live longer still; but restrict their intake by 60

percent and they starve to death.

" Humans, in contrast, will not have rodent-like results from dramatically

restricting calories, " he said. " Caloric restriction is not a panacea. While

caloric restriction is likely to be almost universal in its beneficial

effects on longevity, the benefit to humans is going to be small, even if

humans restrict their caloric intake substantially and over long periods of

time. "

Phelan developed the first mathematical model demonstrating the relationship

between caloric intake and longevity, using representative data from

controlled experiments with rodents, as well as published studies on humans,

diet and longevity. He and Rose, professor of ecology and

evolutionary biology at the University of California, Irvine, published

their findings in a journal article titled, " Why dietary restriction

substantially increases longevity in animal models but won't in humans, "

published in the August issue of the peer-reviewed journal Ageing Research

Reviews.

Their mathematical model shows that people who consume the most calories

have a shorter life span, and that if people severely restrict their

calories over their lifetimes, their life span increases by between 3

percent and 7 percent -- far less than the 20-plus years some have hoped

could be achieved by drastic caloric restriction. He considers the 3 percent

figure more likely than the 7 percent.

" The trade-off between calories and longevity appears to be close to a

linear relationship, but the slope isn't very steep, " said Phelan, whose

model predicts the relationship between calories consumed and life span.

Phelan's conclusion is that the few extra years of life are not worth the

suffering necessary to achieve them.

" Do you want to spend decades severely limiting what you eat to live a few

more years? You will be unhappy and then your life will end shortly after

mine ends, " Phelan jokes.

Scientists have known for six decades that cutting the caloric intake of

rodents by 40 percent or 50 percent results in dramatically longer lives for

them.

" You can practically double their life span, " Phelan said. " The same result

has been found in fish, spiders and many other species. If it works for

them, some thought, it should work for us; I'm here to tell you it doesn't. "

Phelan, co-author of the book, " Mean Genes, " conducted his dissertation at

Harvard University 10 years ago on caloric restriction and on why it works

in extending the lives of rodents.

" When you restrict the caloric intake of rodents, the first thing they do is

shut off their reproductive system, " said Phelan, citing a finding from his

dissertation. A normal rodent reaches maturity at one month of age, and

begins reproducing its body weight in offspring every month and a half. If

humans shut off reproduction by severely limiting calories, " our reduction

in wear and tear on the body is minimal, " he said.

The rodents placed on severely restricted diets bit people who tried to hold

them, and had an unpleasant demeanor, unlike the more docile animals given

more " normal " amounts of food, Phelan said.

" I think about food all the time, " he said. " I'm not going to be so extreme

that I become the mouse that bites anyone who touches me. My advice about

food is be sensible, and don't be a fanatic about it because the payoffs are

not worth it. "

While the relationship between how much you eat and your life span is not so

dramatic, there are very real costs of being overweight -- including greater

risk for heart disease and other life threatening illnesses, Phelan said.

The human data factored into the mathematical model include the caloric

intake of people in Japan, and their longevity, compared with sumo

wrestlers, who consume more than twice the normal male diet, and men in

Okinawa, Japan, who consume less than the average Japanese male.

[Guest guest]

Folks: this was all discussed yesterday. Please let's not go over old info and let's not post needlessly!!

on 8/30/2005 11:55 AM, Rodney at perspect1111@... wrote:

Hi :

Thanks for the article. But what a joke. If what is reported there

is accurate they have taken just ***three*** highly aberrant data

points - japanese, okinawan and sumo wrestlers (sumo wrestlers are

assumed to be comparable to all other humans in all respects apart

from caloric intake?), and then used that nanoscopically small data

sample to draw categorical conclusions about all humans everywhere.

[ " The human data factored into the mathematical model include the

caloric intake of people in Japan, and their longevity, compared with

sumo wrestlers, who consume more than twice the normal male diet, and

men in Okinawa, Japan, who consume less than the average Japanese

male. " ]

No one knows how much CRON will extend lifespan in humans. These

guys ESPECIALLY! They may turn out to be right, but if they are it

will not be because of the professionalism of their research! (IMO)

Rodney.

> CALORIC RESTRICTION WON'T DRAMATICALLY EXTEND LIFE SPAN IN

HUMANS ...............................

> The human data factored into the mathematical model include the

caloric

> intake of people in Japan, and their longevity, compared with sumo

> wrestlers, who consume more than twice the normal male diet, and

men in Okinawa, Japan, who consume less than the average Japanese

male.