I've asked this question a few times on the CR Society mailing lists but failed to get a response. Whether it was because I posted it on the community list rather than the main list may have something to do with it... I would assume that not many have time to read the comm lists too.
Earlier in 2006 the rhesus monkeys in the NIA study apparently had some problems. The Calorie Restricted monkeys had a higher mortality rate. But then the data and articles coming from the University of Wisconsin on CR monkeys and its a different picture. So what if we end up with two different results? What if the NIA studies fail to show any significant longevity gain and the UW do show it? -- I what we can say is that there are certainly other factors that are involved and CR has to be done right. You can look at the food they were given, and the conditions they were kept it. Apparently in the NIA study the rhesus monkeys were being given candy! Who knows how this will all end up, but i'm most interested in how it will affect those of us who do CR. If the results came back not so good would you carry on doing moderate to severe CR?
This was April and Michael CNN video a while back. Also shows the Rhesus monkeys and stuff
See the video here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment