Calorie Restriction Boosts Stem Cell Function
It is known that calorie restriction increases stem cell capacity in aging, thereby helping to maintain tissues for longer. From Extreme Longevity, a recent commentary on the mechanisms involved: "Like it or not food lovers, the single most effective known means of extending animal lifespan is through reducing daily caloric intake. Though not definitively proven in humans, the success of this intervention has been demonstrated in myriad species in more than 50 years of research. ... A protein called mTOR is responsible for this effect. mTOR combines with two other proteins to mediate several important cellular processes. These include translation of mRNA into protein, mitochondrial activity, and autophagy. Caloric restriction inhibits mTOR activity which leads to longer lifespan. The new studies [convincingly] demonstrate that reduction of mTOR activity causes preservation of stem cell health. They increase in abundance and proliferative potential. One study shows this occurs in intestinal cells, and the other in muscle cells. In the instestinal cell study, the authors showed that it was actually supporter cells called Paneth cells that aided the health of stem cells when they were taken from calorie restricted animals. They further showed this effect was mediated by mTOR inhibition and that it was achieved by increasing the activity of another protein called Bst1, important in cell proliferation. In the muscle study, calorie restricted animals had greater muscle stem cell proliferative capacity too. And this effect was also seen when the stem cells were transplanted into non calorically restricted animals, suggesting the microenvironment or niche around the stem cells was key. ... taken together, the two studies indicate that preserving and enhancing stem-cell function in multiple tissues is one of the ways in which calorie restriction slows the ravages of aging."
Care to guess the minimum average life extension under different caloric restriction protocols (% calories restricted, age of onset of diet) in humans?
If it's just 5 years, maybe it is not worth it. Maybe.
@Matthew: the health benefits are legion and well demonstrated in human studies. Even if there is no life extension, dramatically reduced risk of age-related disease and disability should be worth it.
I want to be alive when escape velocity is reached but it would be hard for me to afford the early treatments, if and when they come around. A psychology degree isn't worth much nowadays (and really wasn't even 5 years ago when I started).
It's the small chance of improving the odds of reaching escape velocity that makes me worth it, or the chance of improved health leading to lower healthcare costs, and this being able to afford the future treatments.
It's hard to calculate the value of desires, especially against a future self I won't really know until I get there. Caloric restriction is a lot like saving money, but I know the future value of money (probably).
Matthew, your degree is worth what you make of it. If you get a first from a good uni then you will make a success of yourself.
Thanks for that vote of confidence and encouragement leon. Sorry my reply is a bit late.
Unfortunately you hit the nail on the head. What makes a psychology degree good if you do not do research is where you get it from, which is exactly how I feel. This is true for many degrees nowadays but that does not mean that a degree is not worth the cost. It's just worth less than it used to be.
Once these rejuvenation therapies are developed the cost would fall quickly because of global competition.