From: Reason (reason@exratio.com)
Date: Sat Apr 19 2003 - 16:25:26 MDT
Yes, sorry to quote all and add just a few lines, but I endorse what RJB
said there. If you aren't comfortable with dying and you aren't practicing
calorie restriction, then there's something wrong with your logic circuits.
Similarly, if you aren't comfortable with dying and aren't devoting at least
some of your resources towards ensuring that the medical technology of the
future actually happens in time...
Reason
http://www.exratio.com/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-extropians@extropy.org
> [mailto:owner-extropians@extropy.org]On Behalf Of Robert J. Bradbury
> Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2003 2:39 PM
> To: extropians@extropy.org
> Subject: RE: specific amino acid restriction does the same thing as
> calorie restriction?
>
>
>
> 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 - 16:34:02 MDT