50 replies to this topic

[pycnogenol]

"Many people" dead before age 25?!? Care to give us a number?

1 died of leukemia, another had a brain tumor, throat cancer or something, and there have been about 2 more other deaths. This is all within my own year group in school. I know others who have developed MS before age 25 as well.

So that's 5 people that died, correct? Was your graduating class small? How many people were in your graduating high school class anyway?

Edited by pycnogenol, 30 January 2009 - 11:38 PM.

[Forever21]

This is one of those draw back I talked about...

http://www.cnn.com/v...n.explosion.cnn

[Dmitri]

In the 120 year diet book, walford estimated that 50% Rodent CR would correlate to somewhere between 1200-1500 k/cal per day for average male

Isn't another draw back low white blood cell count?

Low white blood count is associated with less risk of heart disease, cancer, and all cause mortality. People on CR report improved immune systems.

Well, Low WBC seems to prevent chronic illnesses but what about infectious diseases? We're in constant contact with other people, and infectious diseases seem to be bigger problem as you age is it not?

Edited by Michael, 02 February 2009 - 04:38 PM.

[Dmitri]

I love life so much, and is the reason why I do cr... I know many people from my high school that are dead before the age of 25 from things like cancer... I'm not taking a chance, Calorie Restriction is probably the best life insurance I have.

I don't know the stats in Britain, but according to Encarta more than 75% of all cancers are detected in people over age 55 and another portion mentions that most of the cases occur in adults middle-aged or older in the U.S. I wouldn't be too worried about it at your age especially if you have a healthy lifestyle and diet.

[thefirstimmortal]

I love life so much, and is the reason why I do cr... I know many people from my high school that are dead before the age of 25 from things like cancer... I'm not taking a chance, Calorie Restriction is probably the best life insurance I have.

I don't know the stats in Britain, but according to Encarta more than 75% of all cancers are detected in people over age 55 and another portion mentions that most of the cases occur in adults middle-aged or older in the U.S. I wouldn't be too worried about it at your age especially if you have a healthy lifestyle and diet.

The average age a person gets lung cancer is 70.2 years old.

[Matt]

It seems like people are still missing the point. Lets just say CR merely 'delays' a cancer for 1-5 yearrs. Now back in the middle of the 20th century this might not given much hope because the rate of technological and medical improvements were still pretty slow, cancer treatments were not so good, and the chances of a 'cure' or major breakthrough was less likely to happen in a 5 year time frame in the 1950's, than what could happen from 2009-2014. Or any other time frame beyond this.

So doing CR is the most important thing you can do right now to ensure that if you are genetically unlucky, you might be able to at least delay death from most causes. Thus if you were to survive another year than you would have if you weren't on CR, and you were at age 50, this could buy you another few years or decades of life to achieve dramatically extended lifespan via real rejuvenation therapies. And not to mention you want to be in the best possible health and shape for when the first round of therapies become available. Being your typical 80 year old might not be well, but if you're 80 and function like a 50 year old... then this is far better and probably be more easily tolerated.

The fact there was a cluster of deaths from my school alone is not the point I was trying to make. I was making the point to all age groups here. Don't think it will never happen to you just because you eat healthy or pop your pills. I never dreamed I would have developed an apparently rare side effect with damage to my peripheral nervous system, CNS, and tendons from cipro. But it happened. CR might have gave me a false sense of security because it's so damn effective at preventing neurotoxicity and oxidative stress. Well no, it still happened and it could have been much worse. I was lucky the whole mess resolved mostly.

It's clear that most people here are pretty healthy, they typically improve their chances by eaitng a healthy diet and taking various supplements. This could buy them a few years, and I have no doubt that the avoidance of risky behaviours such as smoking and excessive alcohol drinking among other things also play a role in helping to ensure you live to see the day when we can rejuvenate the body. But CR and not anything else (excluding genetic interventions) has been shown to dramatically increase in maximum lifespan of almost all organisms tested. Supplement fail to work, time after time.

I think for any life extensionist, if you're serious about wanting to live longer, using the best tool we have right now is the best bet you can make.

I hope my points are clear now.

Edited by Matt, 01 February 2009 - 04:56 AM.

[niner]

Which brings us back to my interpretation of Matt's argument as "too many young people die from cancer", but I think I'm kinda repeating myself.

I would agree but amplify: Too many older people also die of cancer. I have always found it regrettable that in the wider culture (though I think by definition not in these forums, and I am not accusing you of it), a young death is valued differently than an older death.

Since we have not yet provably achieved robust life extension, a young death means the loss of more years of life on average than an old death. Thus the attitude in the wider culture places a high value on life, which most of us do as well. The only way that an older death is worse than a younger death is in the loss of knowledge, experience, and capability that it might represent. But at present, the older person will die soon anyway, while the younger person has many years left. Since most of us value life, I, and I suspect most of us, see a young death as worse than an older death. Am I wrong for many of you? If so, why? I'll flesh out the counter argument: An extra five years for a person like John Updike (author who just died at age 75, I think it was) may well be more valuable to society than an extra 50 years for some random bozo. But Updike's a rare case, and it's a value judgment at any rate.

[pycnogenol]

The fact there was a cluster of deaths from my school alone is not the point I was trying to make.
I was making the point to all age groups here.

Point taken. Anyway, back to my question from a few days ago: how many people were in your high school graduating class?

[kismet]

Which brings us back to my interpretation of Matt's argument as "too many young people die from cancer", but I think I'm kinda repeating myself.

I would agree but amplify: Too many older people also die of cancer. I have always found it regrettable that in the wider culture (though I think by definition not in these forums, and I am not accusing you of it), a young death is valued differently than an older death.

Since we have not yet provably achieved robust life extension, a young death means the loss of more years of life on average than an old death. Thus the attitude in the wider culture places a high value on life, which most of us do as well. The only way that an older death is worse than a younger death is in the loss of knowledge, experience, and capability that it might represent. But at present, the older person will die soon anyway, while the younger person has many years left. Since most of us value life, I, and I suspect most of us, see a young death as worse than an older death. Am I wrong for many of you? If so, why? I'll flesh out the counter argument: An extra five years for a person like John Updike (author who just died at age 75, I think it was) may well be more valuable to society than an extra 50 years for some random bozo. But Updike's a rare case, and it's a value judgment at any rate.

Although, I'd like to note that I did not meant to imply a young life is worth more than an old. I couldn't care less, life is life (even though you have a point niner). My point is too many young people die from this disease even though it is associated with and known as a disease of old age, which tells us quite a lot about the nature of cancer: it is an incredible and difficult threat to any life extension efforts, which can hit at any time, there's no guarantee whatsoever.

"Simple Test Predicts Heart Attack Risk: White Blood Cells Sound A New Alarm"
I am not sure what this means? Causation or correlation? Chronic infection (be it CMV, Chl. Pn, Borrelia, etc) increasing white blood cell counts? Or are there idiopathic reasons for high white blood cell counts? Do the pathogens damage the cardiovascular systems directly, or does the high white blood cell count lead to inflammation, adhesion and infilitration of macrophages (atherogenesis?), or something entirely different?

Edited by kismet, 01 February 2009 - 02:13 PM.

[Ghostrider]

And you'd be surprised at the scope of the sub-culture that actually value the features you're putting down.

Where do you find that sub-culture? Most girls I know want taller, more muscular guys than myself...unfortunately, and from my experience, other features such as intelligence, ambition, education, etc are apparently not enough to compensate. I have NEVER met a girl who desired a guy with similar or lower BMI than herself -- I am taking about girls with average to slightly below average BMI in this case. (I don't actually practice strict CR although I have been getting more careful with my diet and I naturally don't crave a lot of food and I have always had difficulty gaining weight. Now I personally consider this an advantage, but it kinda bothered me in high school. I am still the same weight that I was in high school, 8 years later.) Anyway, I think one will have a hard time meeting girls who find CR in guys attractive.

[TheFountain]

And you'd be surprised at the scope of the sub-culture that actually value the features you're putting down.

Where do you find that sub-culture? Most girls I know want taller, more muscular guys than myself...unfortunately, and from my experience, other features such as intelligence, ambition, education, etc are apparently not enough to compensate. I have NEVER met a girl who desired a guy with similar or lower BMI than herself -- I am taking about girls with average to slightly below average BMI in this case. (I don't actually practice strict CR although I have been getting more careful with my diet and I naturally don't crave a lot of food and I have always had difficulty gaining weight. Now I personally consider this an advantage, but it kinda bothered me in high school. I am still the same weight that I was in high school, 8 years later.) Anyway, I think one will have a hard time meeting girls who find CR in guys attractive.

You can have the best of both worlds on a moderate calorie diet (2000-2500 calories daily). You can reap some of the benefits associated with calorie restriction as well as the benefits of working out, gaining lean body mass and keeping the metabolism in a constant fat burn phase (as having even slightly greater muscle mass burns fat at a constant rate). And you don't have to be a body builder to achieve the latter. There is a happy medium between body building and staying lean. And that is a moderately muscular but lean and toned physique. In this way you reap the benefits of moderate CR in addition to hopefully living a quality life in this moment.

Edited by TheFountain, 02 February 2009 - 02:37 PM.

[Bodhi]

"Many people" dead before age 25?!? Care to give us a number?

1 died of leukemia, another had a brain tumor, throat cancer or something, and there have been about 2 more other deaths. This is all within my own year group in school. I know others who have developed MS before age 25 as well.

That is an unusual cluster. You might extend your life more by getting the hell away from wherever you grew up, as well as by getting some sun (which appears to prevent or delay MS according to epidemiological data).

You should make it a point to get 15 minutes of sun every day, especially in the UK where sun is scarce, you get thousands of times more vitamin d through the skin than through the gut.....are you willing to bet your life that your supplement and absorbtion are optimum.....well with 15 minutes in the sun you don't have to worry about it, much less expensive as well...

Cheers~!

[kikai93]

I love life so much, and is the reason why I do cr... I know many people from my high school that are dead before the age of 25 from things like cancer... I'm not taking a chance, Calorie Restriction is probably the best life insurance I have.

Do you live downstream from a nuclear power plant?

I mean, what is many? This makes it sound like your high school reunion will be short 20% due to cancer.

And that's kinda nuts.

[kikai93]

And you'd be surprised at the scope of the sub-culture that actually value the features you're putting down.

Where do you find that sub-culture? Most girls I know want taller, more muscular guys than myself...unfortunately, and from my experience, other features such as intelligence, ambition, education, etc are apparently not enough to compensate. I have NEVER met a girl who desired a guy with similar or lower BMI than herself -- I am taking about girls with average to slightly below average BMI in this case. (I don't actually practice strict CR although I have been getting more careful with my diet and I naturally don't crave a lot of food and I have always had difficulty gaining weight. Now I personally consider this an advantage, but it kinda bothered me in high school. I am still the same weight that I was in high school, 8 years later.) Anyway, I think one will have a hard time meeting girls who find CR in guys attractive.

Yeah, there are entire sub-cultures into the willowy appearance for both genders ("goth" comes to mind immediately, and some areas of the industrial scene). Also, lean muscular men (Bruce Lee, football players) are often found more attractive than big bulky guys (The Terminator, North American football players).

All of that said, it's not body that attracts women, it's confidence. If you know you're "The Man", they know you're "The Man." If you have doubts, they will too. Remember, David Koresh got laid... a lot.

[kikai93]

You can have the best of both worlds on a moderate calorie diet (2000-2500 calories daily). You can reap some of the benefits associated with calorie restriction as well as the benefits of working out, gaining lean body mass and keeping the metabolism in a constant fat burn phase (as having even slightly greater muscle mass burns fat at a constant rate). And you don't have to be a body builder to achieve the latter. There is a happy medium between body building and staying lean. And that is a moderately muscular but lean and toned physique. In this way you reap the benefits of moderate CR in addition to hopefully living a quality life in this moment.

This.

[Matt]

I love life so much, and is the reason why I do cr... I know many people from my high school that are dead before the age of 25 from things like cancer... I'm not taking a chance, Calorie Restriction is probably the best life insurance I have.

Do you live downstream from a nuclear power plant?

I mean, what is many? This makes it sound like your high school reunion will be short 20% due to cancer.

And that's kinda nuts.

The few people that I mentioned, out of 120+ students in my year group won't really result in 20% less people at a reunion, if there is ever one

Edited by Matt, 22 February 2009 - 08:48 PM.

[caston]

In the 120 year diet book, walford estimated that 50% Rodent CR would correlate to somewhere between 1200-1500 k/cal per day for average male

Isn't another draw back low white blood cell count?

Low white blood count is associated with less risk of heart disease, cancer, and all cause mortality. People on CR report improved immune systems.

http://atvb.ahajourn...stract/16/4/499

http://aje.oxfordjou...act/162/11/1062

Simple Test Predicts Heart Attack Risk: White Blood Cells Sound A New Alarm
http://www.scienceda...50323134019.htm
"Women with more than 6.7 billion white cells per liter of blood had more than double the risk of fatal heart disease than women with 4.7 billion cells per liter or lower. A count of 6.7 is considered to be in the upper range of normal, so what is "normal" may have to be redefined."

http://archinte.ama-...t/166/2/188.pdf
if you look at table two, 4th quartile, there is a much bigger increase with people that have wbc over 7.4. Table 3 looks at Q1 vs Q4.


you can find plenty, just use pubmed or google.

Hi, Sorry to just randomly jump into this conversation.

I'm not on CR but I consider supplementing with anti-bacterial, anti-viral, anti-fungal supplements and putting considerable effort into periodontal care to be the strategy that I pursue instead of CR.

I recently had some blood work done. I was tested for fasting glucose, cholesterol as well as liver and thyroid function and white blood cell count.

I forgot to ask him for a print out of the exact figures but he said everything was either fine or very good (the cholesterol was one I remember that was very good) but he was concerned that I had a very low white blood cell count. He said that low count could be caused by a virus so he wanted me to have the white blood cell count checked again and gave me another form to take to the pathology lab. He asked me how I felt and I said I felt fine.

So it could in fact be that the low blood cell count is for a good reason. e.g. less "troops" needed!

[Matt]

You haven't told us what your lab results actuall are? How can someone say anything about your wbc wtihout seeing the numbers?

[caston]

Good point Matt but I'm also not asking for that. I was just revising the topic of low white blood cell count. The doctor even said after I get the next test to only come in if he actually calls me.

So I could go get to test done assuming the low WBC is what he's worried about and my next blood test shows low WBC he may decide to ring me up and get me to come in again. If that happens I will ask him what the count is.

But I think the general consensus is that (as long as it's not because of a nasty virus or leukemia or something like that) low WBC as well as low CRP is a good thing.

[Matt]

Yes, many studies have shown that low WBC lowers all cause mortality. The 'normal' reference range for WBC is probably higher than it should be due to poor lifestyle factors. So falling between a WBC of around 3.0-4.5 or something could be actually normal, and even optimal in the absence of disease.

[Esoparagon]

I'd rather be healthy than look healthy. But I doubt highly that you can be healthy without also looking so.