tomh@proxftl.UUCP (Tom Holroyd) (09/28/88)
I just got a pamphlet in the mail saying that I could become biologically
younger by changing my diet to adjust the amount of Calcium that is in
solution in and around my cells. The pamphlet says that calcification
of mitochondria is a major factor in aging. It also says that every
tissue in the body is subject to calcification, and that normally,
there are calcium pumps in the cells to regulate the amount of Ca.
I know there are Ca channels in neurons, so they might exist in other
cells, but are they a factor in aging (like, do they stop working after
a while)?
Further, assuming all this is correct, what sort of diet would be a
good way to keep the Ca levels at an optimum?
I'm inclined to think this pamphlet is trash, since it contains
statements suggesting that medical science has been keeping the
calcification principle secret for political reasons (and I can't
imagine what reasons there could possibly be).
The pamphlet also suggests that I send money to obtain the secret diet plan.
It goes on to cite examples of people who have switched to the diet, and
who have become healthier, lost weight, improved their sex life, and
even one woman over 60 who started menstruating again!
Thanks,
Tom Holroyd
UUCP: {uflorida,uunet}!novavax!proxftl!tomh
The white knight is talking backwards.chiaravi@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Lucius Chiaraviglio) (09/28/88)
In article <820@proxftl.UUCP> tomh@proxftl.UUCP (Tom Holroyd) writes: >I just got a pamphlet in the mail saying that I could become biologically >younger by changing my diet to adjust the amount of Calcium that is in >solution in and around my cells. Adjustment of soluble calcium can do other things, but does not alter your age. > The pamphlet says that calcification >of mitochondria is a major factor in aging. Extreme calcification of mitochondria (as deposition of calcium phosphate crystals) will kill them (and thus the cell that they are in). However, limited calcification of mitochondria, a completely reversible process, is routinely used by certain cell types (such as muscle cells) for the purpose of rapid removal of unbound calcium from the cytosol after firing of the cell by a calcium signal. This is necessary so that the cell does not keep firing for extended periods. During recovery periods, once the cytosol calcium level is down to what it should be, calcium can be transported out of the mitochondria and thence out of the cell (and to the sarcoplasmic reticulum in the case of muscle cells) a little at a time to completely reset the cell to its pre-firing condition. A similar mechanism might work in neurons, but I'm not at all sure about that. > It also says that every >tissue in the body is subject to calcification, and that normally, >there are calcium pumps in the cells to regulate the amount of Ca. This is true, and the calcium pumps prevent calcification of mitochondria (or the rest of the cell) from proceeding too far. >I know there are Ca channels in neurons, so they might exist in other >cells, but are they a factor in aging (like, do they stop working after >a while)? Failure of calcium pumps would almost assuredly kill a cell. Also, note that even if partial calcium pump failure could serve to age a cell (which I have not heard any evidence for, but consider it for hypothetical purposes), then the calcium pump failure and not the soluble calcium level would be to blame. >Further, assuming all this is correct, what sort of diet would be a >good way to keep the Ca levels at an optimum? It isn't, but even if it were, the only way to prevent calcification would be to reduce calcium intake to the extent that the bones decalcify (which is definitely very bad), and bone decalcification would maintain soluble calcium levels until the bones were nearly devoid of calcium (if you managed to survive that long). >I'm inclined to think this pamphlet is trash, since it contains >statements suggesting that medical science has been keeping the >calcification principle secret for political reasons (and I can't >imagine what reasons there could possibly be). I wouldn't put it beyond the government, the American medical establishment, or pharmaceutical companies to keep something like this secret for political/profit/ego reasons; that is not by itself a valid reason to declare the pamphlet trash (although it is reason for suspicion, since it is a common tool of snake-oil sellers). However, the reasons listed above show the pamphlet to be trash. >The pamphlet also suggests that I send money to obtain the secret diet plan. Now that's a sure sign of trash. . . . >It goes on to cite examples of people who have switched to the diet, and >who have become healthier, lost weight, improved their sex life, and >even one woman over 60 who started menstruating again! Pamphlets like this always do. Note: this should in no way be taken as a flame at the original poster. This is just to warn you and other people about yet another pamphlet from people seeking to culture us like mushrooms. -- Lucius Chiaraviglio ARPAnet: chiaravi@silver.bacs.indiana.edu BITNET: chiaravi@IUBACS.BITNET (hoses From: fields; INCLUDE RETURN ADDRESS) USENET: iuvax!silver!chiaravi -- -- Lucius Chiaraviglio ARPAnet: chiaravi@silver.bacs.indiana.edu BITNET: chiaravi@IUBACS.BITNET (hoses From: fields; INCLUDE RETURN ADDRESS) USENET: iuvax!silver!chiaravi
werner@aecom.YU.EDU (Craig Werner) (10/03/88)
In article <820@proxftl.UUCP>, tomh@proxftl.UUCP (Tom Holroyd) writes: > I just got a pamphlet in the mail saying that I could become biologically > younger by changing my diet to adjust the amount of Calcium that is in > solution in and around my cells. Throw the pamphlet out. -- Craig Werner (future MD/PhD, 4 years down, 3 to go) werner@aecom.YU.EDU -- Albert Einstein College of Medicine (1935-14E Eastchester Rd., Bronx NY 10461, 212-931-2517) "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity."