Lifespan Report Excerpts
50-100+ Years Added To Your Life - Now -
With Present Technology
Update: now there may be something that does actually slow aging. (Essentially not marketed, virtually secret from the public, but still available.) Treated animals including rats / mice have repeatedly lived 2-4 times longer than untreated. (Almost no cost [yet], easy to use. See Master Protocol.)
This involves far more than diet alone, but first it is necessary to explain diet.
1. Only Two Worthwhile Diets
2. So-Called "Lifespan Extension" / "Anti-aging" Context Drops
3. Necessary Basis of Evidence and Testing
Important Context and Purpose of This Report [entire remainder of #3]
- Lack of Things To "Justify", and Who These Reports Are For:
- Over-Popularized "Sound-Good" Rationalizations Used To Ignore the Individual's Own Responsibility For Use of This Method:
- Use of These Reports
- What You Must Do - Understand the Nature of Gambling / Physical & Business Death & Suicide
- Basis of Doctors' Prescriptions
- Find A Doctor Who Will Live As Long As You
- Self-Responsibility Needed Before Significant Damage Is Done
- Your Doctor's Dilemma (And Yours): Shielded From Reality & Progress "For Your Own Good"
- Millions, Billions Dead Due To Failure To Grasp the Nature of Progress
- Those Who Choose To Integrate These Reports Will Come To Understand & Accept The Following "Research Opinions"
- Unpracticed "Focusing", Continuing To Avoid The Issue, & Steadfast Refusal To See The Point:
- Even Atkins Accuses
- Oxygen Wars / Objective Healing and Reporting Now As Political Crimes
- Why 99% of the Populous Has Not Heard of This Before (One Reason) / Undeniable Proof
- "Why Doesn't Rife Technology Work"?
- No Valid Need Or Reason For New, Yet To Appear "Super-Advanced" Technology
- Basis of Reading / Treatment
Other Subtitles of Section 3 No Longer Available (now superseded by the Master Protocol):
- Save Your Life By Identifying: Rampant Neocheating Beyond Most Peoples' / FIH "Practitioners'" Abilities To Comprehend: Perpetuated By Insufficient Development of Tools Necessary To Identify Neocheating, In Turn Caused By Insufficient Direct Integration With Reality (lack of practice / testing of things "outside the head" or outside other rationalizations / biases / "imaginations" / "visions")
- How To Verify These Statements and Determine Which Therapy Is Actually Best For Your Condition:
- The Reality of Your Treatment - Cutting Through More Context-Drops At Every Turn
Better Evidence Than Accepted Mainstream Medical "Spoutings", Misdirections, "Magic Tricks", & "Silent Treatment"
- The Favorite "Magic Trick" / How To Tell If Someone Is Objective
- Value of Marketed Books / Materials In Themselves
- The Major Killer Diseases Have Not Killed A Single Person In The Last 5 to 20+ Years (Possibly Up To the Last 60 or More Years) In 95% to 100% of All Cases:
- Lifespan Shortening Error # 26: Failure to Grasp Context of Individual Writings & Failure to Focus
- Artificially Shortened Lifespan / Unnecessary Death & Suffering Due To Failure To Grasp the Context & of Mass-Marketed Materials & Basis of Opinions Expressed Therein Including the Depth of This Fundamental Nature In Even the Best of Them
- Role of Pills and Diet
- Mass-"Marketed" Illusions: Drug Agency Control Versus Real Control, How Things Are Done Right, & Waiting For Futuristic "Savior-Technology" Before Acting Responsibly Now
- Invalidity / Non-Fundamental Nature of Chemical "Attacks" In General
- Heart Disease Not a Killer - The Creation of Problems / Industries Where None Need Exist Is
- Why FIH Practitioners Are Dying - Why Everyone Is Dying
- Erroneous & Well-Rationalized Use of Statistics
- It Does Not Matter How Genuinely Stupid The Misdirection Is
- Summary of The Value Of Published Studies
- The Proof of Something Is Totally Independent of Its Publishing or Its Socialization
- All It Takes Is One Person
- What Science Is and What Science Isn't
- Death Due To Failure To Grasp the Nature of Statistics: The Usual Course
- Summary: The Key To Avoiding a "Natural" Death & Being Labeled a "Statistic"
Other Sections of This Report Were (now superseded by the Master Protocol):
- Applicability To Humans
- Valid Use Of Current Methods & Diet
- Purpose of Food, Drink, and Measurement of Diets Effects
- Release Of Brain Morphine-Like Substances and Correction Of Objectively Bad Eating Habits
- Pills As Value-Added Maneuvers
- Needed Avoidance Of Neocheating / Mysticism Injections
- Out Of Context "Unchanging Biological Nature Of Man" Fallacy
- Actual Carnivorous Nature of Man
- Known Nature of Essential Nutrients
- Mechanism Which Affects Aging
- Fallacy Of Exercise
- Take This Test
- Removing The Major Limitations That Previously Made The Diet (And The Genuine Retardation of Aging) Unworkable
- Best Only Known Applicable & Tested Work In the Field
- Profiteering Via Deprenyl Delusions
Lifespan Report Excerpts
Click to continue Lifespan Report excerpts and medical report background
- Only Two Worthwhile Diets
Successful diets can be placed under two major categories according to their originator: Walford-like and Atkins-like (see Wallach explanation below) (references at end). The rest can be viewed as lesser integrated subsets of these two or as mere principles / pills or supplements turned into their own "diets" & books for marketing purposes. The latter category (Wallach's principles / supplements) can really be applied to any diet including either of these two and fundamentally does not constitute a "diet" in itself.
Atkins is potentially "unlimited" caloric intake, zero to very low carbohydrates and low to moderate nutrient density, virtually all the proteins and fats desired.
Walford's is extremely high nutrient density, drastic caloric restriction and mostly carbohydrates, very little fat.
As far as diets go, both work well for weight loss and preventives for premature death from heart disease, hypertension, and diabetes.
One automatically burns fat (without exercise); the other burns carbohydrates (and essentially requires exercise to burn body or ingested fat). Either a diet burns carbohydrates or it burns fats. One requires willpower, the other doesn't (once used to eating the proper types of foods).
Atkins seems to reverse heart disease; Walford doesn't claim that, but his diet may do the same. (A very de-tuned version of Walford's diet is in the newer "Heart Disease Reversal Diet" book [unsure exact title] by Dr. Dean Ornish).
- So-Called "Lifespan Extension" / "Anti-aging" Context Drops
Cloning / molecular & genetic engineering aside, barring some new breakthrough which probably will not occur at least in usable form for the average person for many years, more likely decades, any way that advertises to extend-life or be "anti-aging" in mammals other than a properly restricted diet like Walford's is a complete drop of context and total disregard for the definition of "lifespan". This presumes the topic is the entire organism, not one cell or part thereof. (This is not to say some so-called "anti-aging" products don't have other valid beneficial uses).
"LIFESPAN", as pointed out by Walford in his book MAXIMUM LIFESPAN, 1983 and The 120-Year Diet, 1986 means maximum possible (not just average) lifespan of the species (not a short-lived segment of the species).
Some lifespan studies have been done on certain nutrients and drugs and NONE (no chemical)* have ever been found to affect the fundamental aging process. None* have repeatedly extended actual (species, maximum) lifespan in addition to average lifespan (life-expectancy) in warm-blooded mammals in any way known applicable to humans.
[* Update: Now there may be ONE that has - but it's essentially not marketed, and as of May 2000 it's a virtual certainty you haven't heard of it. No, it's not even an antioxidant, and it's certainly nothing to do with hormones. Safer than tap water. And you won't find anything about it in the M.D. newsletters, bookstores, medical web sites, on the radio or TV because they simply don't know. (They've neither done the repeated mammal experiments nor yet read about them.) But you can. And you can now repeat the easy experiments yourself at very low cost on pets / fish / rats / mice, etc. See the Master Protocol.
(The process is being kept an actual closely guarded trade secret and not subject to interference via publishing or mass-marketing. But you can legally benefit from them now if you agree you're being your own "researcher" and not looking for "instant" pre-packaged answers. Even though the ease of use and results may seem that way.)
Note the web/printed description is just that, a description. Due to continual testing and new developments, above breakthrough isn't even explained in detail yet in the web/printed description. At this rate, the descriptions will be updated perhaps months from now. Since this is the research/development business, by the time you see a printed / web description, it's already somewhat out of date by virtue of the fact there's new developments (& breakthroughs) being privately made - constantly (here). If I spent my time keeping even all the general descriptions up to date, I'd get nothing done but writing descriptions. The information in the actual reports as opposed to online descriptions is constantly updated because it's for my own use and because there's no such thing as biological immortality. (Just yet.)
Online portions on this site cover perhaps 1/2 to 1% of what you get when you actually order the reports / sign the Master Protocol agreement.
References (/ trade secrets) are not online other than a few general ones. The valuable ones that little to virtually no one is aware of are found only in the actual printed reports and especially Master Protocol. Click here for Master Protocol description. For important medical report background / introduction, continue reading below.]
NO Lifespan studies have been attempted for the Atkins diet which contradicts everything known successful in lifespan studies since the 1920's. Walford explains this rationally in MAXIMUM LIFESPAN, pgs 109-113. Atkins may help life-expectancy and shorten (end) lifespan. NO ONE KNOWS, and the more you dig into the references below, it becomes clear Atkins would probably shorten lifespan at least relative to a Walford diet.
The easiest diet is NOT best. One can lose weight quickly with Atkins (which is a sign of and seems to lead to decreased end lifespan in all studies to date). Walford's is gradual weight loss. Atkins' is known to prevent just heart disease, diabetes, and hypertension of the major killer diseases. Walford prevents more major killer diseases in his estimate - 50% more than the average high calorie diet thus enhancing average lifespan but also very probably (90-99% probability) (end) lifespan thus slowing aging. Atkins is a horrible gamble to slow aging. If Atkins had positive lifespan studies it might be a different story.
When selecting something as important as a lifelong day-to-day diet that has one eating perhaps 2-4 times daily, it is of immediate first importance to examine lifelong studies of those on the diet (which can only mean shorter-lived warm-blooded mammals who suffer the same basic aging process).
The Atkins diet has no known effect against the second leading cause of death, cancer. It may even increase cancer risk if not in short term, later in life which might not even be statistically measurable for another 10-20 years of Atkins clinical practice. A diet's short-term health benefits are not necessarily - and only rarely are - related to the basic process of aging.
[Later update: aging aside, cancer cells feed on sugar, normal cells feed on oxygen: this would seem to give a no sugar, almost no carbohydrate diet like Atkins an advantage in the cancer area. (It already has one in the heart disease if not also diabetes area.) The Atkins diet is typically deficient in certain key nutrients which could easily depress the immune system in the absence of usable supplements.
(Supplements - not exercise - are necessary when on the strict Atkins diet.)
A depressed immune system from any cause, nutrient deficiency included, invites cancer among other major killer diseases. However, on later review, the Atkins diet when properly supplemented may not result in increased cancer risk later in life - then again it may: it just isn't known in the absence of lifespan studies and considerable "guesswork" is involved to even consider the Atkins diet in this regard. What this means is the Atkins diet is not safe - it is by definition a gamble - in this regard compared to the Walford diet. That is, in the context of aging & lifespan, it is a gamble for anyone who can tolerate the foods used in the Walford diet. A significant number of people however cannot tolerate Walford-type foods (answer for that is found later in report): for them, the Atkins diet is the diet of choice. For reasons explained below, the Atkins diet cannot be good for lifespan or the aging process however. Until lifespan studies are done on the Atkins diet and it shows similar effects as Walfords, Atkins, or any other diet, is not safe for this purpose since it ignores the only way known to actually intervene in the process of aging.]
Japan, despite atomic bomb blasts on its population, has the highest average lifespan of any developed country at 79 years (life expectancy, not to be confused with lifespan or the aging process). The U.S. is 17th at only 75 years. Of the English speaking countries, Canada is the best at 6th (76.5 yrs), Australia 2nd best at 9th (76.3 yrs), the UK is 14th (75.3 yrs), and New Zealand is last at 22nd (74.2 yrs). Some small countries like N.Z. (even Australia) may not have a sizable enough sample to be as meaningful but other much larger countries like the U.S. do have sufficient population to be statistically significant. This could be related to the natural amount & depletion of nutrients in the soil, and at least Wallach holds the same opinion. However, there is a catch explained in these reports. Supplementation is not as easily effective as promoted or as it seems - even for its effect on life-expectancy & the major killer diseases.
(Walford's new book, The Anti-Aging Plan, is objectively inferior to the previous 120 Year Diet, and excessively toned-down seemingly for marketing / popularization purposes. It may however be all that can be gotten currently outside of a library. The current / new book consists of mainly recipes (still what I cannot term "useable", nor what I can say makes the diet useable). Also note there are other ways to explain the "Biosperian Experience". Nevertheless, it should be read by all who go on the diet - after they find and read The 120 Year Diet, which has been "temporarily out of print" for some years. Some of the other books referenced below at end and in part II should also be read by those attempting Walford's diet.)
Click here for Master Protocol description.
Home Contact & Orders Income/Money Medicine/Life
Fully-Integrated Honesty: Context & Definition Full Disclaimer
Not affiliated with & no income derived from Neo-Tech Publishing Co., Frank Wallace, Mark Hamilton, Ayn Rand, any book writer, or any of their related publishing companies.
© Copyright 1998-2006 Alexander Moss, All Rights Reserved