Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment

Once upon a time, our fellow Wayne S. Hill
rambled on about " Maximizing life expectancy/enjoyment."
Our champion De-Medicalizing in sci.med.nutrition retorts, thusly ...

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

When there is disuse atrophy. This does not occur with
modest reduction of food intake.

Are you really a physician?

No!

Just thought that you might want to know.

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 20:49:26 -0400, Full Mu_n
wrote:

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 20:15:50 -0400, Chupacabra
wrote:

He like we *are* animals. To be more precise, we like mice are mammals.

You're ignoring the fact that there's a bunch of **** that works great
in mice (like every bodybuilding supplement ever) that's totally
ineffective in humans.

Welcome, Andrew, to the nitwits of misc.fitness.weights.

Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

Do you have anything interesting to say? Nope?

Okay, then I'm gonna call you a fag, you fag.

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 02:37:32 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Ignoramus20526 writes:

Does anyone have any comments or book suggestions?

Moderation in all things.

Moderation in moderation.

Proton Soup

"Wayne S. Hill" wrote:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote:

"Wayne S. Hill" wrote:
Tim Tyler wrote:

In sci.med.nutrition Ignoramus wrote or quoted:

I am aware that there is some scant evidence that living
on calorie restricted diet (1500 or so calories per day
all the time) also can help one live longer.

There's better evidence for that than for practically any
other intervention. Maybe more evidence for it than all
other interventions combined!

I think this conclusion will be reversed when researchers
realize that sarcopenia and osteopenia are much greater

When there is disuse atrophy. This does not occur with
modest reduction of food intake.

Are you really a physician? Elderly people atrophy WITHOUT
REDUCTION IN FOOD INTAKE. It's called sarcopenia.

Keep in mind that Chung is the "Two-Pound Diet" guy.

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 09:09:18 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"
wrote:

Since when is the British Journal of Urology International not a
reputable, peer-reviewed source?


It actually isn't.

So what are you saying, that it isn't peer-reviewed, isn't reputable,
or both?

Proton Soup

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 00:55:22 GMT, "OmegaZero2003"
wrote:


"John HUDSON" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 19:12:39 GMT, "OmegaZero2003"
wrote:


"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
...
DRS wrote:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in message

DRS wrote:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
message
rosie read and post wrote:

[...]

i like your christ, I do not like your christians, your
christians
are so unlike your christ.
.............................................gandh i

Ghandhi's dead.

Christ lives.

Prove it.

Why should I?

Because you claimed it to be so. Put up or shut up.

It is not my claim but the Word of God. If He choses to prove it to
you,
He will.

He is not a He ; it is consciousness without an object or subject.

Greater minds than ours have grappled with this vexing concept since
man's earliest comprehension of his own mortality.

The simple answer is that it is all way beyond our futile aspirations
to make some meaning to what is meaningless. As I always told my
children, there are no answers so don't ask the questions.

No it is not; even Christ (as have all the great/enlightened ones across
culture and the ages) said "I am in you" and "Ye also are Gods".

"The opiate of the masses"!


It is a state of consciousness that has been reached by these people; one
that has been called: God Consciousness, Christ Consciosness, enlightenment,
Nirvana/Paranirvana, Consciousness Without and Object/Subject etc. etc.

It is emminently reachable although most always ineffable to normal waking
consciousness.



Make the most of what there is and what we think we know. Beyond that
anything is possible, but sadly not very likely!

That may be true as ther are many who are more concerned with getting
something to eat, avoiding a bullet or other wordly activirties - all of
which interfere with the descipline necessary to even attempt to reach such
a SOC.



As John Williams can confirm, I have dwelt on this problem probably
more than most; it doesn't help one little bit.

Then think not; meditate (no thought).

On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 01:06:27 GMT, "OmegaZero2003"
wrote:


"John HUDSON" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 21:17:03 GMT, "David"
wrote:


"John HUDSON" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 19:12:39 GMT, "OmegaZero2003"
wrote:


"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote in message
...
DRS wrote:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote in
message

DRS wrote:

Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD wrote
in
message
rosie read and post wrote:

[...]

i like your christ, I do not like your christians, your
christians
are so unlike your christ.
.............................................gandh i

Ghandhi's dead.

Christ lives.

Prove it.

Why should I?

Because you claimed it to be so. Put up or shut up.

It is not my claim but the Word of God. If He choses to prove it to
you,
He will.

He is not a He ; it is consciousness without an object or subject.

Greater minds than ours have grappled with this vexing concept since
man's earliest comprehension of his own mortality.

The simple answer is that it is all way beyond our futile aspirations
to make some meaning to what is meaningless.




I think you mean it is pointless to try to conceive of the inconceivable
("meaningless" would be the wrong word, right?)

It is probably semantics David, as either way would indicate that we
are all in deep ****! ;o)

It is all either a finite or infinite game (James P Carse). One POV.

And there is only one way to find out, which to me always sounds just
a little too drastic! ;o)

Blue Mu_n wrote:

On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 01:10:14 -0400, John M. Williams
wrote:


Physicians should read the literature rather than speculating:


Idiot Bodybuilders should keep to looking in mirrors, shaving and
adoring themselves, and leave science to scientists.

Irony, thy name is Mu...

Pastorio

Wayne S. Hill writes:

Elderly people atrophy WITHOUT REDUCTION IN FOOD INTAKE.

Mostly because they are inactive. Jack LaLanne doesn't show too much
atrophy even at the age of nearly 90.

--
Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

In sci.med.nutrition Chupacabra wrote or quoted:
"Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD" wrote:
roger wrote:
On Tue, 07 Oct 2003 20:38:32 -0400, "Dr. Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD"

Mice live *twice* as long in captivity if they are given only half as much
as they would eat ad libitum.

Not only do they live longer but they a physically more active in their
older age. Imagine humans doubling their lifespan to 150 years and
playing tennis when they are 120 years old.

You certainly have an active imagination. There is no objective
evidence that caloric restriction in humans would have the same
effect as in mice.

There is no objective evidence that it won't.

He like we *are* animals. To be more precise, we like mice are mammals.

You're ignoring the fact that there's a bunch of **** that works great
in mice (like every bodybuilding supplement ever) that's totally
ineffective in humans.

CR extends life in more than just mice. It does so in practically every
animal that has been tested - including some much larger animals such as dogs.

http://web.archive.org/web/200208162...bliography.htm

....has a list of primate and human studies on CR - while its too early for
much longevity data from these it is possible to look at mortality and
disease susceptability in the primate studies - and these are
substantially reduced by CR.

Here's a 25-year DR (Dietary Restriction) study on Rhesus Monkeys:

``Mortality and morbidity in laboratory-maintained Rhesus monkeys and
effects of long-term dietary restriction. [...]

Compared with the DR monkeys, the AL monkeys had a 2.6-fold increased
risk of death. [...]

The age at median survival in the AL was approximately 25 years compared
with 32 years in the DR.''

- http://timtyler.org/pmid/?n=12634286

Most doubt human lifespan will be extended proportionally to the extension
seen in mice. Nobody really knows how much more humans will get - but
it *does* seem likely that it will result in additional lifespan.
--
__________
|im |yler http://timtyler.org/ Remove lock to reply.