Re: CR and Exercise or No?

Paul Wakfer (
Wed, 29 Oct 1997 23:17:55 -0500

On 29 Oct 1997 10:31:59, Anders Sandberg wrote:

>Overall, it seems that the best way of living longer is CR combined
>with a suitable level of exercise. The body can handle free radicals
>quite well, and the small increase due to the exercise is offset by
>the improvements in health.

That was the essense of my arguement.

>>Paul Wakfer <> writes:

>> Most foods and vitamins/nutrients, etc. must go throught the
>> digestive system and the liver to be assimulated properly. You
>> cannot get a complete enough diet by parenteral feeding. It is
>> a dangerous and impossible long term practice and would be
>> extremely foolish to initiate voluntarily.

>That an ordinary healthy human should not try a parenteral diet is
>fairly obvious (what is the point, really?), but as far I know there
>are a few people who have survived on a parenteral diet for years
>after massive intestinal failure.

This is true, but I make two observations:

1) This is not for a major portion of a life time (and certainly not for
an extended life-span). It is only done to extend what is clearly the
terminal portion of their life.
2) In line with 1), these people continue to deteriorate at a rate higher
than others of their age.

>> >Keep high oxygen saturation to reduce work by heart and diaphram.
>> Your oxygen saturation is already as high as you can possibly use.
>> On the contrary, if anything you may want to *reduce* the amount
>> of oxygen intake (as long as all areas of the tissues are equally
>> supplied) and the subsequent amount of free radicals generated.
>> I have often wondered if people who live their lives at moderately
>> high altitudes may have increase longevity.

>But doesn't the lung capacity and red blood cell count increase,
>leading to a similar oxygen saturation?

Yes, it does, at least at high altitudes. (Red cell count always,
lung capacity only if born at high altitudes, I believe.) However,
these things may well not increase proportionately to the amount of
oxygen deprivation. Thus, the cells may also learn to live with less
oxygen and as a consequence have less free radical damage. I simply
don't know if this is true or not.

One person on the CRSociety list is proposing water restriction instead
of food calorie restriction. If the above idea is true maybe if we all
practiced a little bit of oxygen restriction by breathing less, we might
train our cells to need less oxygen, and consequently produce less harmful
free radicals and make us live longer.

Though it's an interesting thought, I am the first one to agree that it
make be quite wrong and impractical.

-- Paul --