Caloric restriction is the only non-genetic intervention proven to increase maximal lifespan in mammals. However it may well be that the magnitude of this effect in humans is considerably smaller than in lower mammals because the mechanisms that repair the damage that accumulates as a consequence of normal metabolism are already more optimal. I think the really interesting area is caloric restriction mimetics. These are alluded to in the article and are a class of small molecule compounds that aim to induce the life-extending effect of CR without the need for reducing calories. GSK recently made a 0.75 billion dollar investment in Sirtris pharmaceuticals <a href="http://www.sirtrispharma.com/pipeline-candidates.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.sirtrispharma.com/pipeline-candidates.html</a> who are developing a reversatrol derivative so this is far from science fiction.
Where are we, on digg.com?! The subject line of this post should have said "eat less" in it. I shouldn't have to go to the article to get those two words.
It's not how long you live that matters, it's whether you enjoy life.<p>I'd rather live to 50 and have a wonderful life, than life to 100 and be less happy.
Churchill lived for 90 years fat as a pig and smoking like a crack whore.<p>I call bullshit and a way to cut food production in half by persuading everybody to eat less.<p>Stress kills, food doesn't.