The few formal studies of human calorie restriction continue to produce interesting data on the biochemistry of participants, and the degree to which the human response to lowered calorie intake lines up with the outcomes observed in mice. One of the puzzles to be solved is the way in which short-term effects that look very similar between humans and mice nonetheless lead to a radically different degree of enhanced life span. Mice can live up to 40% longer than normal when calorie restricted, which is certainly not the case for humans – it would be very surprising to find an effect much larger than five years for human life expectancy.
The authors of this paper choose to interpret the results as supportive of rate of living and oxidative theories of aging, which I have to think is a mistaken direction. There is so much evidence against those views of aging at this point that it is probably better to try to fit observations into newer and more robust views on how aging progresses at the detailed level of cellular biochemistry. In particular, the animal studies of longevity of the past twenty years include any number
Article originally posted at