Re: Re: Aging Research Article & Low Insulin IGF-1 Extends Life?

[Guest guest]

This is consistent with Mattson study: Meal time and

frequency **have** impact on lifespan of mice.

GI also have impact in lifespan, but I'm not sure

if combining the two things could improve the things

more dramatically e.g. low GI foods in one day,

folowed by fasting the other day, etc...

I'm not even sure if combining metformin (a drug

that improves insulin sensistivity)

and CR would lead somebody to

a lifenspan beyond 120. Perhaps no, for two reasons:

" too high insulin sensitivity " could short live

(one hipothesis) because

you in such case you are below the red line of CR and

body tissues are being consumed OR

" too high insulin sensitivity " could have no effect,

because it do not have influences on other

aging process (mithocondrial damage, ROS

formation etc...) this is the second hipothesis.

Anyway aging is

a tricky thing, with *no* definitive explanation and

no way to retard (not in an significative way!)

and we all are going to age and die and this:

IS AN MATHEMATICAL CERTAINTY.

PS: When I say " retard in a significative way " I mean:

multiply the life time by 10 or more, what CR is UNABLE

to do (!). RELAX PEOPLE...

-- GAndhi.

> I am definitely considering reducing my meal frequency,

> fasting " x " amount of time, & eliminating foods or

> combinations, when possible, that might boost Insulin

> response & loads. I know GI/GL can be important clues,

even

> correlated, to how Insulin can or usually responds, but

> there's evidence this is NOT always the case. There mi

ght

> even be rather dramatic differences between the two.

__________________________________________________________________________

Acabe com aquelas janelinhas que pulam na sua tela.

AntiPop-up UOL - É grátis!

http://antipopup.uol.com.br/

[Guest guest]

The glycation or glycolysation seems to me correct as to aging, but I think also it's a necessary thing for our system. Regardless of diet we need glucose and our body will make it to provide the fuel. Cells use glucose and fatty acids to produce energy and the req't to work puts more stress on the system. Using more glucose ages manual laborers faster. So if we exercise not to extreme, and not use excess glucose we should live longer. That seems congruent with CR.

But I also think the human body is a great deal more complex than a worm, with many more corrective mechanisms in place.

Regards.

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

From: crON Lite

Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 5:53 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Aging Research Article & Low Insulin IGF-1 Extends Life?

Hi Andy & ALL:

I suppose this is a long-term research issue for me meaning many days to months or more before I might track down good data about Insulin response & "load" compared to GI/GL. Walford notes such POSSIBLE valid ageing theories in his B120 book. Check Index for insulin/IGF-1.

I'm certainly interested in anyone's further commentary or thoughts on such issues.

[Guest guest]

Hi Andy,

I don't accept or not accept that piece of verboseness (no offense intended), as being proof of anything related to CR or the human's ability to recover from a life of bad diet or bad environment. I think we are far more adaptable to our environment - that was my point. CR may be a mechanism to extend life and allow repair, maybe even reverse "aging". In any event, I still have to deal with glucose because that's what my body uses. I can limit it, I can plan a diet that makes efficient use of protein without overconsumption, the use of essential fatty acids and not too much. Do the math and I find I will be eating some carbos for energy. And I'm sure that the individual's needs should be found out by the individual if they are to do such a plan. Individual protein req'ts can be from 36 gms to 220 gms (based on IOM data).

Regards.

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

From: Andy

Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 10:23 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: Aging Research Article & Low Insulin IGF-1 Extends Life?

The glycation or glycolysation seems to me correct as to aging, but I think also it's a necessary thing for our system. Regardless of diet we need glucose and our body will make it to provide the fuel. Cells use glucose and fatty acids to produce energy and the req't to work puts more stress on the system. Using more glucose ages manual laborers faster. So if we exercise not to extreme, and not use excess glucose we should live longer. That seems congruent with CR.But I also think the human body is a great deal more complex than a worm, with many more corrective mechanisms in place.*****Yes, that is certainly true: the human body IS more complex than a worm's. However, in the "big" picture, the differences in complexity may in fact be irrelevant. What seems to work for a worm has, over the course of numerous experiments, "translated" into larger species as well, and according to Walford:"We are dealing with the question of 'translatability.' What is the probability that a phenomenon observed in animals can be translated to humans? Well, it depends on the phenomenon. Fertilization, growth, development, and aging are basically much the same across large species differences. There may be an occasional uniqueness in the mechanims of aging. Salmon and octopuses, for example, age almost overnight as the result of a programmed hormonal outpuring. And a few animals, lobsters for example, don't show any features of aging; they simply outgrow their ecological niche. But these are easily recognized exceptions. Nobody doubts that most animals -- for example, mice, rats, horses, chimpanzees, and humans -- age by similar mechanisms. Any general process that retards aging in one such species ought to do so in another. The CRON-dietary regime is such a process. The fact that it induces the same physiologic changes in all mammalian species so far tested further reinforces the likelihood of life extension for humans."~ andy