Re: How about the studies?

[Guest guest]

But nobody is saying they're against saturated fats -- just that the case is

still before the courts and to consider them outside at CR context has

nothing to do with maximal lifespan extension...

The issue of saturated fats has already been discussed quite a bit,

especially with regard to coconut oil, which I think most generally look at

as having some genuinely positive health benefits when consumed in

calorically limited quantities...

Cheers,

> -----Original Message-----

> From: paultheo2000 [mailto:paultheo2000@...]

> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 5:45 PM

>

> Subject: [ ] How about the studies?

>

>

> All that's seemingly being said is that I'm biased, listen only to

> fancy rhetoric, and don't keep an open mind. Fair enough, if that's

> what people think.

>

> But it seems to me that those who are so very adamant against

> saturated fats and so convinced of Calorie restriction should easily

> refute the studies I've presented. I'd certainly be open to hearing

> any thoughts on why they're flawed or irrelevant to the issue. Of all

> the recent posts...nobody has addressed it.

>

> -

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I was referring to the studies about CR not being the true factor

associated with a lengthened lifespan.

-

--- In , " Gifford " <gifford@u...>

wrote:

> But nobody is saying they're against saturated fats -- just that the

case is

> still before the courts and to consider them outside at CR context has

> nothing to do with maximal lifespan extension...

>

> The issue of saturated fats has already been discussed quite a bit,

> especially with regard to coconut oil, which I think most generally

look at

> as having some genuinely positive health benefits when consumed in

> calorically limited quantities...

>

> Cheers,

>

>

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: paultheo2000 [mailto:paultheo2000@y...]

> > Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 5:45 PM

> >

> > Subject: [ ] How about the studies?

> >

> >

> > All that's seemingly being said is that I'm biased, listen only to

> > fancy rhetoric, and don't keep an open mind. Fair enough, if that's

> > what people think.

> >

> > But it seems to me that those who are so very adamant against

> > saturated fats and so convinced of Calorie restriction should easily

> > refute the studies I've presented. I'd certainly be open to hearing

> > any thoughts on why they're flawed or irrelevant to the issue. Of all

> > the recent posts...nobody has addressed it.

> >

> > -

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

May I kindly ask you what was wrong with the studies I presented? Or

will you dismiss them offhand? If so: why? If the studies were

conducted properly do you have an explanation for them or not?

-

> You need a " body of evidence " to make such a case at least for extending

> maximum lifespan. Line-up your supporting research, cause if all

you can

> count is on one hand & five fingers... well, that won't count for

much to

> draw such conclusions you state above. But let's see what you got.

>

> Hi ,

>

> Do you have some pub med or science articles (not pop-press) about this?

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> .

[Guest guest]

Wrote:

I was referring to the studies about CR not being the true factor associated

with a lengthened lifespan.

numi wrote:

You need a " body of evidence " to make such a case at least for extending

maximum lifespan. Line-up your supporting research, cause if all you can

count is on one hand & five fingers... well, that won't count for much to

draw such conclusions you state above. But let's see what you got.

Hi ,

Do you have some pub med or science articles (not pop-press) about this?

..

[Guest guest]

Wrote:

May I kindly ask you what was wrong with the studies I presented? Or will

you dismiss them offhand? If so: why? If the studies were conducted properly

do you have an explanation for them or not?

I can't find what you're referring to. If it's just a pop-press article

without detail, then I can't make serious judgment or comment. Can you post

links to your messages which presented the evidence?

This thread has burned rubber with a lot of back & forth, so what evidence

did you post? Send links to science articles or pub med or ? You can just

post again in one place your links to your previous post(s) which gave the

evidence. Sorry, I can't find it.

..

[Guest guest]

I've heard it before - I'm ignoring it. It's the calories that count.

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

From: paultheo2000

Sent: Friday, August 15, 2003 6:44 PM

Subject: [ ] How about the studies?

All that's seemingly being said is that I'm biased, listen only tofancy rhetoric, and don't keep an open mind. Fair enough, if that'swhat people think. But it seems to me that those who are so very adamant againstsaturated fats and so convinced of Calorie restriction should easilyrefute the studies I've presented. I'd certainly be open to hearingany thoughts on why they're flawed or irrelevant to the issue. Of allthe recent posts...nobody has addressed it. -

[Guest guest]

" I've heard it before - I'm ignoring it. It's the calories that count. "

WOW. That's all I'm going to say. :-(

-

[Guest guest]

LIFE EXTENSION STUDIES REFERENCED BY PAUL

1. The studies you reference do NOT use the long-lived C3B10RF

strain of mouse (the mouse used by Walford et al).

2. One of the studies you reference uses a genetically altered

strain of mouse that has had its insulin fat receptors removed.

3. The other study uses a strain referred to as C57BL/6.

The trick is to get the longest-lived strain of mouse to live EVEN

LONGER! This has NOT been done, except with caloric restriction.

There are and will continue to be numerous promising dead-ends before

a better more functional understanding of how CRON works is

discovered. Those discoveries have NOT been made, yet. The studies

you reference do not offer an alternative to CRON for life

extension. They are interesting...perhaps promising...but not

ultimately alternatives at this stage.

SATURATED FATS

I will not comment on the saturated fats issue until I read Sally

Fallon's book. Quid pro quo, I HIGHLY suggest you read Beyond the

120 Year Diet by Walford. I'm sorry you keep referring to the Anti-

Aging Plan. The Anti-Aging Plan is more of a dumbed-down version of

CRON for the general public.

-cronmouse

> All that's seemingly being said is that I'm biased, listen only to

> fancy rhetoric, and don't keep an open mind. Fair enough, if

that's

> what people think.

>

> But it seems to me that those who are so very adamant against

> saturated fats and so convinced of Calorie restriction should

easily

> refute the studies I've presented. I'd certainly be open to

hearing

> any thoughts on why they're flawed or irrelevant to the issue. Of

all

> the recent posts...nobody has addressed it.

>

> -

[Guest guest]

Cronmouse, thank you very much for your thoughts, they are very

insightful. I didn't realize the mouses used were of a different

strain. That certainly seems like a good explanation of things.

But wouldn't the average mice be more similar to humans than the

longest living strain of mice?

In any case, thanks again--I had not considered that.

Cheers,

-

> LIFE EXTENSION STUDIES REFERENCED BY PAUL

>

> 1. The studies you reference do NOT use the long-lived C3B10RF

> strain of mouse (the mouse used by Walford et al).

>

> 2. One of the studies you reference uses a genetically altered

> strain of mouse that has had its insulin fat receptors removed.

>

> 3. The other study uses a strain referred to as C57BL/6.

>

> The trick is to get the longest-lived strain of mouse to live EVEN

> LONGER! This has NOT been done, except with caloric restriction.

>

> There are and will continue to be numerous promising dead-ends before

> a better more functional understanding of how CRON works is

> discovered. Those discoveries have NOT been made, yet. The studies

> you reference do not offer an alternative to CRON for life

> extension. They are interesting...perhaps promising...but not

> ultimately alternatives at this stage.

>

> SATURATED FATS

>

> I will not comment on the saturated fats issue until I read Sally

> Fallon's book. Quid pro quo, I HIGHLY suggest you read Beyond the

> 120 Year Diet by Walford. I'm sorry you keep referring to the Anti-

> Aging Plan. The Anti-Aging Plan is more of a dumbed-down version of

> CRON for the general public.

>

> -cronmouse

>

>

> > All that's seemingly being said is that I'm biased, listen only to

> > fancy rhetoric, and don't keep an open mind. Fair enough, if

> that's

> > what people think.

> >

> > But it seems to me that those who are so very adamant against

> > saturated fats and so convinced of Calorie restriction should

> easily

> > refute the studies I've presented. I'd certainly be open to

> hearing

> > any thoughts on why they're flawed or irrelevant to the issue. Of

> all

> > the recent posts...nobody has addressed it.

> >

> > -

[Guest guest]

The " elimination " of insulin fat receptors is purportedly why the mice

lived longer (vs. calories). Could it be that CR induces similar effect

and disuses or side-steps the effect those receptors?

cronmouse wrote:

>2. One of the studies you reference uses a genetically altered

>strain of mouse that has had its insulin fat receptors removed.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

If all you did was to extend the maximum life span of " average " mice,

you may not know if you are actually " extending " the life span or

increasing the life EXPECTANCY! The only way to ensure that you have

REALLY TRULY found a way to extend the life span is to take and

create the longest-lived version of a creature, calculate its life

span to find the known limit that you must surpass, and manipulate

that creature to live EVEN LONGER than it would under normal

circumstances. That way we can...

1. Rule out deviant long-lived versions of the creature by making

them all genetically VERY similar with regard to life span.

2. Create a minimum criterion as a goal to surmount.

3. Make an unambiguous discovery for extending life...not just

ensuring health.

-cronmouse

> Cronmouse, thank you very much for your thoughts, they are very

> insightful. I didn't realize the mouses used were of a different

> strain. That certainly seems like a good explanation of things.

>

> But wouldn't the average mice be more similar to humans than the

> longest living strain of mice?

>

> In any case, thanks again--I had not considered that.

>

> Cheers,

>

> -

>

> --- In , " cronmouse " <earthpet@c...>

wrote:

> > LIFE EXTENSION STUDIES REFERENCED BY PAUL

> >

> > 1. The studies you reference do NOT use the long-lived C3B10RF

> > strain of mouse (the mouse used by Walford et al).

> >

> > 2. One of the studies you reference uses a genetically altered

> > strain of mouse that has had its insulin fat receptors removed.

> >

> > 3. The other study uses a strain referred to as C57BL/6.

> >

> > The trick is to get the longest-lived strain of mouse to live

EVEN

> > LONGER! This has NOT been done, except with caloric restriction.

> >

> > There are and will continue to be numerous promising dead-ends

before

> > a better more functional understanding of how CRON works is

> > discovered. Those discoveries have NOT been made, yet. The

studies

> > you reference do not offer an alternative to CRON for life

> > extension. They are interesting...perhaps promising...but not

> > ultimately alternatives at this stage.

> >

> > SATURATED FATS

> >

> > I will not comment on the saturated fats issue until I read Sally

> > Fallon's book. Quid pro quo, I HIGHLY suggest you read Beyond

the

> > 120 Year Diet by Walford. I'm sorry you keep referring to the

Anti-

> > Aging Plan. The Anti-Aging Plan is more of a dumbed-down version

of

> > CRON for the general public.

> >

> > -cronmouse

> >

> >

> > > All that's seemingly being said is that I'm biased, listen

only to

> > > fancy rhetoric, and don't keep an open mind. Fair enough, if

> > that's

> > > what people think.

> > >

> > > But it seems to me that those who are so very adamant against

> > > saturated fats and so convinced of Calorie restriction should

> > easily

> > > refute the studies I've presented. I'd certainly be open to

> > hearing

> > > any thoughts on why they're flawed or irrelevant to the

issue. Of

> > all

> > > the recent posts...nobody has addressed it.

> > >

> > > -

[Guest guest]

It is clearly too early to tell for certain. There are other

theories as to how CRON works. Here is one:

http://www.r-lipoic.com/lessons_from_the.htm

I don't know if you have seen the information on R(+)-Lipoic Acid,

but it looks interesting and could also be an lead to explaining

CRON.

-cronmouse

>

> >2. One of the studies you reference uses a genetically altered

> >strain of mouse that has had its insulin fat receptors removed.

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

> I was referring to the studies about CR not being

> the true factor associated with a lengthened lifespan.

>

> -

Citation? The Weill-posted fasting article you mentioned only referred to

CR-like effects for alternate day feeding and insulin manipulations. Where

did it claim that CR-like extension of maximum lifespan was observed and

repeated?

________________________

Gifford

3-5 Humanities Centre

Department of English

University of Alberta

www.ualberta.ca/~gifford

[Guest guest]

CR has been shown to have an influence on insulin levels. I'd guess it's

the same thing, but I've never heard of a comparative study (though I'd

guess that would be their follow-up).

Cheers,

> -----Original Message-----

> From: April [mailto:apricot855@...]

> Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 8:48 AM

>

> Subject: Re: [ ] Re: How about the studies?

>

>

> The " elimination " of insulin fat receptors is purportedly why the mice

> lived longer (vs. calories). Could it be that CR induces similar effect

> and disuses or side-steps the effect those receptors?

>

> cronmouse wrote:

>

> >2. One of the studies you reference uses a genetically altered

> >strain of mouse that has had its insulin fat receptors removed.

> >

> >

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

My recollection is that the mice with insulin/fat receptor knock out were

also slender despite normal feeding... one could draw a conclusion that

having low BF is the mechanism (I'm not).

Regarding which strains of mice are more like us, that's a very good

question.

Some of the strains used in testing were specially bred for a high

susceptibility to cancer or some other disease vector. Extending their life

may indicate value of DR against that disease but nothing more.

Trying to apply EOD feeding to humans is further complicated by how long is

a mouse day in human terms? While eating every other day might be tolerable,

eating every other week would be a stretch.

Take care when trying to draw conclusions from small numbers of cross

species studies. There is a large body of research that DR does extend

lifespan across multiple species. There is far less understanding of " how "

it works, and much debate over how to take advantage of the mechanism.

JR

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

From: April [mailto:apricot855@...]

Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2003 9:48 AM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: How about the studies?

The " elimination " of insulin fat receptors is purportedly why the mice

lived longer (vs. calories). Could it be that CR induces similar effect

and disuses or side-steps the effect those receptors?

cronmouse wrote:

>2. One of the studies you reference uses a genetically altered

>strain of mouse that has had its insulin fat receptors removed.

>

>

>