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


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10652