From: Robert J. Bradbury (bradbury@aeiveos.com)
Date: Sat Apr 19 2003 - 15:38:53 MDT
On Sat, 19 Apr 2003, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
[big snip]
> Calorie restriction may be the healthiest diet until you
> cut back too far. Instead of radical elimination of a single
> macro-nutrient, I prefer moderate levels of carbs, fats and proteins,
> choosing the healthiest versions of each and avoiding the unhealthy versions
> of each. This seems more reasonable in all areas and less radical or
> experimental in any one particular area.
I agree with almost everything Harvey said [esp. that which I snipped]
but would comment on the above segment.
The problem with this is that you end up dead, dead, dead.
We are facing a cascade of technological developments,
including whole genome engineering to allow genome augmentation,
followed by whole genome replacement (using robust molecular
nanotechnology) followed perhaps by uploading. The question
we face is "How do we get ourselves to the time when we can
surf each of these transitions?"
So, I agree with the "moderate" perspective. *But* if there are
"masked" genetic programs that can be invoked to significantly
expand "healthspan" then I think one should seriously look at
them. CR is one such program that seems to be relatively intact
(in terms of improving health & aging measures) in the primate
studies currently being done. Selective protein restriction
may be another such program.
It may be the case that selective PR is an easier diet to adhere
to than CR -- in which case it might help many more people extend
their healthspans allowing them to "surf the waves" (cited above).
To the best of my knowledge there have only been limited studies
done with PR. And it may also be very difficult to separate the
effects of CR from PR. But aging is a complex process it makes
complete sense (to me) that one might extend longevity by:
(a) reducing calories and therefore oxidative damage to DNA;
and
(b) increasing protein recycling and lowering the abundance of
inefficient/malproductive proteins damaged by oxidation,
carbonylation, thiolation, nitrosylation, deamidation, etc.
Trying to separate these effects at the experimental level
(if they both result in extended healthspan) may be *very*
difficult.
So -- one needs to make decisions as to whether one wants to
believe the "theories" and act on them. If one waits for the
"proof" it may arrive too late.
Robert
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 19 2003 - 15:48:52 MDT