X-Message-Number: 13468 Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 09:36:03 -0400 From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: CryoNet #13435 - #13436 To Mike Darwin: What I have to say on the question of atheroschlerosis does not at all contradict what you have said. I am looking at the problem from a statistical standpoint, in which we find that early or relatively early deaths (say) 200 years ago were much more frequent than now. Researchers into aging have noticed this phenomenon; one good source is papers in HANDBOOK OF AGING (BIOLOGICAL). Sure, someone who is wealthy and has control both over where he lives and what he eats would be likely to live longer even if he was born 3000 years ago. The real issue here is what happens to all the OTHER people of his time who were NOT wealthy and lacked the control that a member of the royal family might have over just how and where they lived. The change in average lifespans in which many more people live past the age of 50 came with industrialization, which even 200 years ago was just beginning. The drugs you mention are interesting. One thing that has happened with some drugs, unfortunately, is that they do a fine job in preventing (say) death from one form of heart disease but when the statistics of those who take them are compared to that of those who do not, surprize! the overall death rate remains close. Maybe a little bit better, by 1% or 2%, but hardly more. And those who (again, as an example) would have died of a heart attack instead die of a stroke. One thing I have NOT looked into is the question of whether or not statins have shown a better effect on statistical death rate than their effect on heart disease might predict --- in short, have any healthy mammals lived significantly longer than normal when taking them. I will try to find the time to look into this, but if you know of any lifespan experiments I'd like to know of them. I am happy to provide further references to anyone on Cryonet who asks for them. Best and long long life, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=13468