[pct-l] Benefits of Reduced Calorie Intake

[nstrauss@xxxxxxxxxxx (Nathaniel Strauss)]

This is just about the worst scientific reporting I have ever witnessed.
The article infers from a mouse study that dieting will increase
longetivity. This is a horrible misinterpretation. First off, this was a
study on a mouse longetivity gene and not about calorie consumption.
Second, it has been known for decades that mammals with lower lifetime
calorie consumptions lead longer lives, so there's nothing new here. And
finally and most importantly, there is no indication that if you go on a
low-calorie diet then you will live longer. There are simply way too many
confounding factors to make that statement. A statistical analysis along
those lines would require multiple regression along so many variables as
to be pretty much impossible.

"Dr. Mercola" should be ashamed of himself.

Nate "Fleischman" Strauss

CMountainDave@aol.com  CMountainDave@aol.com writes:
> In a message dated 1/28/03 12:32:22 PM, stillroaming@lycos.com writes:
>
> << http://www.mercola.com/2001/dec/5/cutting_calories.htm >>
>
> This may be why Bristlecone pines live to be 5000 years old only at
> timberline, where nutrient intake is at a minimum.
>   While I believe the concept is valid, I don't think it has a place
> while hiking the PCT. The more calories the better to get over those
> Sierra passes.
>  Buttered doughnuts, please.