I am still puzzled about how to conclude anything for humans. Of course, one may have correlations. But a correlation is after all, a correlation ;)
I am still puzzled about how to conclude anything for humans. Of course, one may have correlations. But a correlation is after all, a correlation ;)
No, I don't conclude for humans. This was mainly about the case for C. elegans and mammalians like mice. In the 8th footnote, there's an article where you can see in depth the associations derived from this to humans but is not the main point of what I wrote.
A more in-depth review is the case for humans is the correlation between lipoproteins and extreme longevity that is also regulated by (IGF-1 - insulin)/FOXO https://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs11357-006-9020-x
I did mention a previous post I made on intermittent fasting, but not even in that post I conclude anything about humans, even linked to it.
If you think my writing is not clear or have suggestions in how to improve it, please do so.
Sorry, I misread you. I understood "how you conclude anything for humans".
Well, the first thing is that in biology most of the time we only have correlations and causality is less clear than say for instance in physics. An important thing is that the biggest studies on longevity and the consensus of doctors and biologists are that a hypocaloric diet has longevity benefits. Most of consistent with animal models, but is the current approximation to the subject that most of us agree on.
If you have any recommendation to improve my writing I would appreciate it dearly. Especially since today I had so many troubles with a glitch in a macro I made for the HTML and had to correct so many times. Thanks, again.
Hehe. Yeah I indeed know you did not conclude for humans but what more asking whether there would be any chance to extrapolate. Anyways, thanks for both answers. They help a little bit (biology is very very very very far from what I know :p )