X-Message-Number: 10652 Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 11:33:09 -0800 From: Brian Manning Delaney <> Subject: Calorie Restriction's Mode of Action (was Re: CryoNet #10647 - #10649) References: <> [Thomas Donaldson wrote:] > "I repeat that the real problem CR presents to > us is that of looking under the hood and finding > out why it works. Maybe some of these drugs will > tell us that, maybe not, but too many people are > spending time repeating modified versions of CR > experiments in umpteen different ways." I still don't get it. Which experiments do you mean? Virtually all CR experiments done (by good researchers) after the late 1980's have been aimed precisely at the determination of CR's mode of action. What would be the point of doing anything else? It certainly won't help anyone's career, nor will it generate any money. "For the 739th time, CR slowed aging." Yawn. Why would anyone simply try to repeat a finding that's already been demonstrated hundreds of times? (And the "modified versions" of CR are needed to help tease out its mode of action.) Perhaps the best way for me to understand what you're driving at would be to ask this: What, precisely, would you do differently if you were investigating CR? Jan Coetzee wrote: > I don't think it is a mystery. It is a case of development delay. No: we know CR initiated well into adulthood slows aging. Even if it WERE a case of developmental delay -- and this may indeed be one way of describing one aspect of its effect -- it still wouldn't remove the mystery; it would rather re-describe it: CR's delaying development is a mystery. In any event, we do have many good theories about CR, at least one of which is probably partly correct. (My guess: improved glucose-regulation plays a big role, but it can't be the whole picture.) Brian. Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10652