marysue@hpfclp.UUCP (marysue) (07/14/84)
Getting back to the original question, that of reviewing the Life Extension Book... I have not read it cover-to-cover, but have skimmed certain chapters. I was not very impressed with what I saw. The best way to extend your life is by eating properly, getting exercise, and trying to enjoy life (i.e. stress management). I'm not an expert, but these authors are telling you that it's ok to smoke, drink, and not exercise, as long as you take the right drugs to counteract the effects. I can't believe that taking certain hormones (or whatever the biological activity of the drugs they were advocating) will be a substitute for exercise. I believe strongly in supplements to an already-balanced diet, but NEVER in supplements to substitute what we know to be a goot diet. I could be oversimplifying (it's hard not to in 100 words or less), but my impression of the book was that they were promising you cake and eating it too, which never seems to work in practice. Mary Sue Rowan hpfcla!marysue
dsaker@iuvax.UUCP (07/20/84)
[] I recently read "Life Extension" by Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw. I am now in the process os checking out some of their claims. Surely some of you out there have read this book and know more about the matter than I do. Does anyone have any confirmations or criticisms of the claims in the book to offer? What about a general discussion of Life Extension and the search for Optimal Nutrition? I for one want to be healthy and fit and able to think clearly, etc. for as long as possible. Daryel Akerlind ...ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!dsaker
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (07/20/84)
blank Don't put too much credence in what these two are promoting. They were both on PBS recently and were both ready for the funny farm as far as I could see. They both look a good deal older than they did 10 years ago when they were the darlings of the talk show circuit. One look at their kitchen was enough to make me barf. The place was better stocked (though not neatly) than the local Health Food Emporium. There were bottles of pills everywhere. The scene showed them making breakfast which consisted of nearly filling a blender with all sorts of pills and liquids, turning it on, then drinking the resulting mush. The next item of business was to retire to poolside to rest. Honest. They spend their time around the pool drinking vitamin cocktails all day. I suppose if I didn't have to travel 60 miles a day on freeways, had an independent source of income, didn't have to work, and could sit around the pool all day, I could claim I was going to live to be 500 too.:-) T. C. Wheeler
darragh@calgary.UUCP (John Darragh) (07/23/84)
"The search for nutrients is an excellent way of wasting time and money."
(source unknown--I've forgotten)
I can't comment on the ideas presented in the Life Extension book as
I haven't read it (yet), though I strongly support any movement
that encourages people to take responsibility for their own health and
eating habits.
The concept of searching for *optimal* nutrition worries me a bit.
It assumes that there is such a thing as "*optimal* nutrition"
and that it is possible to discover it. In my (admitted unresearched)
opinion it is a very complex problem and not worth the effort
for the average person. For those who insist, it's useful to know
about the seven Index Nutrients: vitamin B6, vitamin A, folacin,
pantothenic acid, iron, calcium and magnesium. If you eat a variety
of *foods* containing these you should get the other 38 or so other
nutrients as well ("Gardeners: the crucial 7", Gardens For All News,
pp 13, July, 1983.)
It is conceivable that a person could spend considerable time
searching for unproven--or worse, useless or even detrimental--putative
life extending "optimal nutrition" with a net effect of reducing their
*effective* life span even if they *do* live a little longer. Of
course if they enjoy the search (say, as a hobby), and had nothing they
thought was better to do with their time then more power to them.
*Good* nutrition on the other hand can be achieved by concentrating
on food--NOT nutrients. A well balanced diet, based on one of the
many food guides, is all the average healthy person needs. I have
found it useful to break my weekly grocery list template down by
Canada Food Guide headings. Together with dayly serving recommendations
(also on my list template) it it easy to buy a good balance of
foods each week.
NEW(?) TOPIC: Does anyone know anything about the neuropsychological or
psychobiological effects of different foods and what the active ingredients
are? There have been several articles on these effects in the popular
press over the last few years, but precious few references.
John J. Darraghdsaker@iuvax (07/23/84)
Reply to J. Darragh > The concept of searching for *optimal* nutrition worries me a bit. >It assumes that there is such a thing as "*optimal* nutrition" >and that it is possible to discover it. Well, to avoid the question of "optimal nutrition", let's try "better nutrition". What I am trying to get at here is how to be healthy, and how to stay that way for as long as possible. > *Good* nutrition on the other hand can be achieved by concentrating >on food--NOT nutrients. A well balanced diet, based on one of the >many food guides, is all the average healthy person needs. How did you arrive at this conclusion? What research is backing you up? Why are you so sure that supplementation of nutrients beyond the levels to be found in a "well-balanced diet" cannot improve health and resistance to disease? I have actually read some of the research journal articles concerning vitamins C and E, and the case for supplementation looks pretty good to me. Daryel Akerlind ...ihnp4!inuxc!iuvax!dsaker