If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#211
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
In article ,
DRS wrote: Bill Lumberg wrote in message I think the japanese have the highest longevity now. Perhaps we need to sit down next to one of those 114 year old guys and write down everything he does. Been tried, doesn't work. For every one who says their longevity is due to moderation and clean living there's another who'll swear it's due to a bottle of gin a day. All other things being equal, genetics is clearly very important here. Mostly it's due to lying about their age, often taking their grandfather's identity in order to avoid the draft. Seth -- Of course, common logic fails to hold up here on mfw, as a general rule of thumb. -- Lyle McDonald |
#212
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
In article ,
William Sakovich wrote: I described one of the exercises in the book to a doctor, and he said, "If you do that, you're going to lose weight." Really? What's this magic exercise that guarantees weight loss? Seth -- Sometimes we have to forget studies and theories and just lift like a ****er! -- George UK |
#213
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
In article et,
David Cohen wrote: "Mxsmanic" wrote Ignoramus20526 writes: Does anyone have any comments or book suggestions? Moderation in all things. Really? Moderately happy? Moderately healthy? Moderately wealthy? Moderately intelligent? Moderately attractive? No, that's too much moderation. You should have only a moderate amount of moderation. Seth -- This is mfw, nobody wants to raise the quality of the discourse. -- Lyle McDonald |
#214
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 19:18:10 -0400, Seth Breidbart wrote:
In article , William Sakovich wrote: I described one of the exercises in the book to a doctor, and he said, "If you do that, you're going to lose weight." Really? What's this magic exercise that guarantees weight loss? Seth Table push-aways. Anna -- Bottom line: ignore your body, it's most likely doing you harm. Lyle McDonald, mfw |
#215
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
DRS wrote:
John M. Williams wrote in message "DRS" wrote: Religious liars like you just make me hate religion more than ever. They're no worse than dogmatic atheists. I prefer agnostics, who are intellectually honest enough to admit that they don't know any universal truths. Yeah, yeah, yeah. In the entire history of our species we have found exactly zero credible evidence of any supernatural being who created the universe. Moreover, the more we learn about the universe the less necessary we find any such creator. We're like ants exploring the kitchen. At this point in our unsupervised brain evolution we know ZERO about what it is we're exploring, and worse, unable to understand the picture even after collecting the facts. Appealing to looking and not finding is quite naive. DZ Why then should I or anyone else give theism so much as the time of day? The only dogmatic thing about my position is an absolute insistence on credible, reliable evidence. If you've got a problem with that we've got nothing to talk about. -- Wheel discovery department |
#216
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
Julianne wrote:
"DRS" wrote... Since larger animals tend to live longer than tiny animals anyway I want to see the research done on elephants. This is not true of dogs. Irritating little chihahuas and poodles live for like 20 years and really good dogs like great danes only live for 6 or 8. There are very good reasons for this. For one, Danes have been bred for size, and their hearts aren't commensurately larger. For another (speaking of hearts), hearts below a threshold size basically can't fibrillate, eliminating one source of sudden death. Large dogs (and humans) are on one side of this threshold, and small dogs on the other. Really, there are so many differences between humans and other mammals that I'm leary of extrapolating CR research on small mammals to humans. For example, many mammals are strongly predisposed to gain/retain muscle mass compared to humans, and few mammals develop the problems with mobility that elderly humans do. -- -Wayne |
#217
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
"John M. Williams" wrote in
: Well, according to the reference which Chung cites, God IS The Word. And The Word has been around since the beginning. But that invites the question, "What is The Word?" Chung would probably say that The Word is the reference from which he cites. However, that reference, particularly that part which describes God as The Word and The Word being around in the beginning, was written a few centuries after the death of Jesus of Nazareth. Coupla quibbles: Latest research has John being written towards the end of the first century. So within living memory of Jesus' death (barely). And Jesus lived, even according to The Word, at least a couple of millennia after The Beginning. And the exact parameters of The Word weren't determined until the Council of Rome, about 350 years after Jesus died, and even then, The Word didn't become immutable until the Council of Trent, less than 500 years ago. So how is it that The Word been around since The Beginning, in a form that is "expressed in apt words and with infallible truth"? (Pope Leo XIII, 1893) The circularity of that reasoning is almost staggering. Of course, none if this precludes a belief in God; it just makes it nearly impossible to believe in the infallible accuracy of The Book, which seems to be the standard definition for The Word. Not even the fundamentalists would agree with that. The Word's the Word; the Book is the history of the Word's action in time. Infallable if you're into that; but not the same as the Word. dogsbody |
#219
|
|||
|
|||
Sleep/muscle pain, was: Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
Andi B. wrote ...
Luna wrote: One rule of thumb I read for determining if you are getting enough sleep is if can you wake up on time without an alarm clock. I guess it doesn't count if you have a wakeful night and are awake well before the alarm goes off ... That is easily archiveable for some friends of mine with 200-400mg SAMe plus a B complex late in the evening. Not too much B, though, as this will get you quite vivid dreams otherwise. I've been taking extra magnesium for muscle cramps, but it also seems to help me to sleep - I have no idea why. But I wonder if a person can have too much magnesium, and if so what would the effect be - I've had a squishy tummy all week and I've been taking two magnesium pills at night for bad lower leg cramps. I'd still rather have the squishy tummy than the cramps though. Easier to take an imodium than to be up and down every half hour throughout the night walking off cramp. Rachel (New Zealand) |
#220
|
|||
|
|||
Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment
"DRS" wrote in
: Yeah, yeah, yeah. In the entire history of our species we have found exactly zero credible evidence of any supernatural being who created the universe. Moreover, the more we learn about the universe the less necessary we find any such creator. Why then should I or anyone else give theism so much as the time of day? The only dogmatic thing about my position is an absolute insistence on credible, reliable evidence. If you've got a problem with that we've got nothing to talk about. Actually, various people nowadays are willing to argue from evidence. The precision with which the fundamental constants of the universe are tuned to support life--analysis of near-death experiences--the study showing that sick people who were prayed for did better than a control group, even though they didn't know they were being prayed for. I view all this with deep suspicion, because I think having no proof for God's existance is the whole point of our existance. If you don't *know* he exists, you have to be responsible for your own behavior. And yes, I realize that an argument that says by its own terms it cannot be proved is unfalsifiable, and therefore scientific reasoning cannot be used to examine it. Which means that if that's the only grounds you'll base the discussion on we do indeed have nothing to talk about. But there are other grounds for rational beings to have a discussion. dogsbody |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Study: Even mid-life diet change can extend life | Steve Chaney, aka Papa Gunnykins ® | General Discussion | 7 | October 3rd, 2003 11:12 PM |
Body For Life Week 4 | Wendy | General Discussion | 8 | September 28th, 2003 04:01 AM |
Hi - anyone else tried "no dieting" approach to finally getting weight under control? | Jennifer Austin | General Discussion | 9 | September 26th, 2003 04:41 PM |
Study: Low-Calorie Diet Can Extend Life | bicker 2003 | General Discussion | 3 | September 23rd, 2003 02:02 PM |