CR Conference and the CR Society Future

[Dean Pomerleau]

Todd,

 

Glad you figured it out. Tim does his best given his limited (volunteered) time, but the CRS website is a bit of a mess, and pretty dated.

 

For anyone who doesn't want to try to figure out how to navigate the menu system to get to the archives, here is a direct link to the CR email list archives and the CR-community email list archives. Of course you'll need to have registered for the email lists to be able to access them, which you can do by following the two links on this page. Unfortunately neither set of archives is searchable at this time, so it makes them rather hard to use...

 

--Dean

[Gordo]

 

Well, it wouldn't make sense for you to say you do CR, because you don't ;) .

 

I think you are underscoring my point.  The term "CR" is apparently so amorphous that nobody seems to know what it even means.  I would love to see your definition and why I apparently do not fit into it.  From the crsociety.org home page link to getting started:

 

 

 

What is Calorie Restriction (CR)?

 

The goal of Calorie Restriction is to achieve a longer and healthier life by

• eating fewer calories
• # consuming adequate vitamins, minerals, and other essential nutrients

 

I'm going with that definition, otherwise I'd assume someone would have corrected it by now.

Note there is nothing about "optimal nutrition" just "adequate". Note there is nothing to explain what fewer calories means (fewer than what??).  Nothing about ideal BMI, or foods to eat, or supplements, or intermittent fasting, or fasting in general, or cold exposure, drugs, glucose control, glycation, technology, etc.  Maybe because those things have nothing to do with "calorie restriction"?  If the focus was exclusively CR here, it would be misdirected and I wouldn't be here.

 

Also, why would you accuse someone here of not "doing CR"?  I laugh at this.  Before CR I was at a 25 BMI, now I'm at a 20 BMI, must have been eating fewer calories dontcha think?  I tracked every calorie for a year to the point where my wife was ready to throw my phone out the window, now I don't feel the need -- my weight has been flatlined for a very long time (if it goes up a pound, I eat less, if it goes down a pound, I eat more, doesn't take a computer to figure that one out!).  

 

 

 

We focus/focused on CR because at the time it was the only intervention known to retard the biological aging of mammals, period, and it's still the only means of doing so that is practicable by humans 

 

I guess it depends on your so far missing definition of CR, but from my perspective, you are clearly wrong about the above.  There are numerous things a human can to do extend their healthy lifespan besides eating fewer calories alone (and eating fewer calories alone may not do very much in and of itself anyway beyond obesity avoidance, it doesn't even extend life in the majority of mouse subtypes!).  Even the books recommended under "resources" on this site describe many non-CR methods of life extension.  There are foods that activate so called "longevity cell signaling" as well as promote DNA repair, counteract undesirable microbes, fuel desirable microbes, keep IGF-1 low, lower LDL (mine last tested at 50 by the way), stabilize and keep blood sugar low, reduce glycation, etc.  Cold exposure has been shown to activate "longevity genetics" , lengthen telomeres, and lower/stabilize blood sugar and triglyceride levels in humans and is probably going to end up being far more important than CR alone in my opinion but only time will tell. 

 

Why don't we all stop beating around the bush, what we really want is immortality, so why not be the immortality society?  (probably already taken by a group of vampire fanatics, haha).  Regardless of the specific name, I think a more appropriate name might attract more visitors and active participants (which could end up being good OR bad).  Few people even know what "CR" is (apparently even this group's leaders can't agree on what it is), yet everyone knows what immortality is, and it's something humans have been pursuing since we've existed.  At some point we will stop caring about marginal gains and focus on the real gains yet to materialize, things like regenerative tissue technology, gene manipulation, replacement organs, replacement bodies, etc.  At that time CR will be even more irrelevant than it is today, and yet people will still be keenly interested in immortality, maybe even more so than they are today.

[Dean Pomerleau]

Gordo,

 

I agree that the definition of CR has always been ambiguous. As you say - fewer calories relative to what? I'll be curious to see how/if Michael responds.

 

But as for your suggestion:

 

 I think a more appropriate name might attract more visitors and active participants (which could end up being good OR bad).  Few people even know what "CR" is (apparently even this group's leaders can't agree on what it is), yet everyone knows what immortality is, and it's something humans have been pursuing since we've existed.

 

I'm much less hopeful. First off, there is (at least) one on-line community devoted to discussing longevity (and immortality) per se - it's Longecity.org. Their organization is a heck of a lot bigger (is appears) and their forums are a lot more active than ours, although they are a bit too focused for my tastes on supplements and pharmacological agents for life extension. Is anyone here also active on Longecity.org, and able to comment more insightfully on the difference between us and them (besides size and level of user activity)?

 

Personally I think any attempt to broaden our appeal and our membership base by explicitly refocusing on longevity in general would likely result in us simply getting more diluted and lost in a very crowded space. If we would contemplate refocusing like that, we might as well abandon these CR forums altogether, disband the CRS, and all join Longecity.org, perhaps creating our own subforum with a focus on CR, healthy eating and other non-pharmacological means of healthy lifespan extension (e.g. optimal exercise, cold exposure, vibration therapy, etc). In fact, a new Longecity subforum might not even be necessary, since they already have a subforum devoted to lifestyle interventions for life extension which explicitly includes CR, nutrition and exercise as subcategories.

 

Sadly, except for preserving our history and the small amount of momentum we've got going, I think a case could be made that such a strategy might not be such a bad idea, given how tiny, diverse and disengaged our members (and our leadership) appear to have become...

 

Ironically, even Michael, the veritable poster-child for a narrowly-defined version of CR, says at the end of his massive SENS blog post on the CR primate study, that even if CR works in humans, it will ultimately buy as little, and that it's time to look beyond CR and CR mimetics to other strategies for defeating aging:

 

Whether CR can retard aging in nonhuman primates or not; whether it can retard aging in humans or not; whether even effective CR mimetics can somehow be shepherded through clinical trials — even the most optimistic projection for retarding aging through such approaches is inadequate to the needs and suffering of aging world. A revolutionary new class of therapies to prevent and reverse the disabilities and diseases of aging is within reach — therapies that not only go beyond what has heretofore been accomplished by medical research, but beyond most of what has heretofore been contemplated in biomedicine. Degenerative aging processes must not merely be modulated: they must be undone, by repairing the damage that drives them. The time has come for biomedical startups, academic labs, NIA, and the biomedical research institutes of the world's governments to embrace the transition into a new heuristic, and unleash the the world's scientists to race for the promise of rejuvenation biotechnology.

 

Unlike in the heyday of CR enthusiasm, in the late 90's early 00's when it was hoped CR could enable people to live 120+ years, CR is now seen more realistically as a means to modestly (at best) slow the inevitable aging process, to serve as a temporary lifeboat, or a (rickety) bridge to better solutions to the problem of aging. Perhaps it is time for all of us (not just Michael) to focus our time and energy less on the bridge, and more on building what might await on the other side...

 

--Dean

[gracezw]

Dean, are you already with Longecity.org? I am interested in joining it too.

[Dean Pomerleau]

Grace,

 

Yes I'm a member of Longecity.org, but I'm not sure I'm ever posted, and I go to the site only rarely. In fact I've got it on my todo list for today to check it out more thorough. I'll report back once I do, perhaps starting a new thread. Maybe we can learn something from them. I'm still interested to hear if anyone else engages in discussions on Longecity.org regularly.

 

--Dean

[Saul]

Hi ALL!

 

One way that I believe might greatly improve turnout at the next Conference:

 

Hold it at a well-chosen Yoga Resort.

Yoga is very popular -- many CR Society members who might be only marginally inclined to attend a conference, I think, might be much more favorably disposed to attend in such an environment.

 

The good ones have 3 buffets a day (breakfast, lunch and dinner); the food at every one I've ever seen is excellent, CR-friendly; mostly vegan; some totally vegan.

 

The best known -- and my favorite -- is Kripalu, in the Berkshires, in Stockbrige, Mass.  It is accessible by cab from Albany airport -- or by shuttle from NYC (I think Penn station).  It is also avialble by AmTrack to Pittsfield, MA, followed by a short cab drive.  (I live 4 hours away by car; so I usuallly drive).

 

I think that we'd get a much larger attendance.

 

  --  Saul

[gracezw]

I look forward to your new thread. I hope that you will hear someone talk about his Longecity.org discussion experience soon.

 

Grace,

Yes I'm a member of Longecity.org, but I'm not sure I'm ever posted, and I go to the site only rarely. In fact I've got it on my todo list for today to check it out more thorough. I'll report back once I do, perhaps starting a new thread. Maybe we can learn something from them. I'm still interested to hear if anyone else engages in discussions on Longecity.org regularly.

--Dean

[Dean Pomerleau]

[Admin note: I thought this post was relevant (and amusing) enough to this thread to repost it here - Dean]

 

Sthira,

 

Dean do you have a blog? Because I feel like if this site goes belly up you'd need to fill an unmet vacuum.

 

I do have a blog, it's called Thoughful Cog. I don't post to it very often - only when I have something original to share that I think might have broader appeal than, and not be exclusively relevant to, the CR Forums. And even then I don't usually post there.

 

If the CR Forums were to disappear or become a real ghost town, I'd probably seek out another forum community of like-minded individuals, perhaps like Longecity.org (under discussion here) or even LivingTheCRWay.com, rather than try to ramp up my blogging activity.

 

It is very difficult to build a vibrant community, but it is even harder to build a following for a blog, particularly if one isn't interested in selling oneself on social media. Plus, the linearity of blogs (even with comment sections enabled) makes it very difficult to have many open discussions you can post to / engage on whenever new information or questions comes along. That's what I really like about these forums - there is such a nice structure in place (with so many interesting and content-full threads) that it's easy to post new content, and have some context within which to place it, and a history of related discussions. That would be very hard to rebuild anywhere else.

 

Some days, when it's really quiet around here, I tend to think of the CR Forums as my own personal blog, without the limitations of linearity associated with a normal blog. This kind of forum-as-personal-blog strategy is not without precedence but I hope it doesn't come to this:

 

Back in 2010, a long time ago in internet years, a fan forum for Buffy the Vampire Slayer called “The Bloody Board” was thriving with nearly 40,000 posts.

 

Its creator, a 27-year-old Australian woman calling herself Jamie Marsters (a feminised tribute to James Marsters, the name of the actor who played Spike), presided over hundreds of threads hosting a stream of updates about Buffy cast appearances at conventions and on other shows (the final episode of Buffy had aired in 2003). The “General Discussion” section leaned heavily towards posts about Marsters’s namesake, the blonde vampire anti-hero. There were links to photo shoots, interviews, a poll asking “Which vampire hook-up is the hottest?” For Buffy fans, it was a hub of news and conversation.

 

The catch? These conversations were almost always one-sided, with Marsters only talking to herself. Essentially, it was a forum with only one member.

 

There are several ironic aspects to this Buff the Vampire Slayer forum story. First, it was a forum focused on entities that live forever (vampires). Second, the sole-proprietor of it persisted in (solo) discussions of the topic for many years after the show had gone belly up - in a way not dissimilar to the loss of faith that many folks have had relative to the miraculous potential of CR to extend lifespan. This whole idea of talking to oneself on a topic of personal interesting is not dissimilar to how I sometimes literally address questions to myself in some of my posts (like here and here - search for "But Dean") simply to have someone to talk to...

 

--Dean

[Dean Pomerleau]

Speaking of LivingTheCRWay™ as an alternative venue for the sorts of discussions we have around here and activities we like to promote.  I found the following interesting. Yesterday I received from TheCRWay founders Paul & Meredith (P&M), an official email newsletter which they send out every couple weeks to keep their members engaged and up-to-date. Imagine that. An organization actually sending official communications to it's members through a central communication channel that everyone is part of. What a concept...

 

But it wasn't just the existence of the newsletter I wanted to highlight but part of its content - in particular the following announcement. (Note anyone can sign up for their newsletter as a free "Healthy Start Member", so I don't feel I'm sharing anything confidential or proprietary):

 

The participants in the UPMC - CR Way Immunity Pilot Study of Successful Aging are almost packed. They will converge on the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center campus next week for a day's worth of testing. The point of the study is to identify the characteristics of living the CR Way - especially the effects on the immune system as it ages. Stay tuned for updates.

 

I admire and commend P&M for reaching out to the immunity researchers at the UPMC (University of Pittsburgh Medical Center) to initiate the study, for working hard to raise the funds (from LivingTheCRWay members and other private donors as I understand), and for having a large enough group to bring a subset of them to Pittsburgh (I believe paying for at least part of their travel, but I'm not sure of that) to make the study happen. It shows me that their model is working, at least to a certain extent, and working better than our's here at the CR Society, since we were unable to make a similar study happen, despite Michael's best efforts to set up an immunity study of CRS folks with researchers at the U. of Arizona, even with it being co-located with the CRS Conference...

 

Sadly, despite the study occurring in my own backyard, and despite offers to help them with local logistics, I appear not to have made the cut for inclusion in the study. It may have been a result of miscommunication (on my part or theirs). But I can't blame P&M, even if I was an intentional decision not to include me. Perhaps I wasn't CRed enough in the traditional sense of the word (or in Paul's sense of how CR should be practiced - his very particular "CR Way"). Perhaps it was something I said on these forums about their program that made them unhappy with me, although I try to express respect and even admiration in my characterization of their organization and their approach. But there was that media hatchet job disguised as a documentary which included P&M and the CRWay Longevity Center. Perhaps they were unhappy with my description of the documentary and how they were portrayed - although I was quite keen to point out that it was just their segment of the documentary where the participants were given a less-than-flattering portrayal, seemingly unfairly. Or most probably, it was simply the fact that I didn't keep up with my membership dues. A couple months ago, when LivingTheCRWay™ tried to charge my yearly membership fee to the credit card number they had on file, it was denied (my CC # was changed due to the Target hack). I neglected to respond to the email in which they told me about the failure, and not surprisingly, a short time later I stopped receiving regular communications from them except for the (free) Newsletter.

 

Whatever the reason, I wish P&M the best of luck, and I look forward to seeing the result of their CR & Immunity study. Hopefully they'll find interesting stuff and it will get published, in the same way Luigi Fontana was able to get so much mileage out of publishing stuff about a cohort of us CR Society folks. Speaking of on-going studies - recently in this post to the "Will CR Beat An Obesity Avoiding Diet & Lifestyle" Thread, Sthira suggested either a homegrown, citizen science project or an official collaboration with university researchers to track us CR Society members over time, based on what we eat, and our biomarkers of health and longevity. In this post, I said it was a good idea, but unlikely to be feasible because of the small number of CRS members who are actually practice CR these days, and the diversity of the practices of even those who do. 

 

But apparently P&M have had the same idea and run with it, in their 125-Year Plan Study (formerly known as the controversially named "DNA HACR Study"...). In it CRWay™ members track their own health markers and pay out of pocket (or via insurance) for blood tests, which P&M (and maybe independent researchers too!?) analyse for patterns and tends - hopefully signs that their program is slowing the aging process. I'm amused by the name of their Plan. I guess that means it's 5 years better than Roy's 120 Year Diet. It's all about marketing...

 

Once again, congratulations to P&M for getting it off the ground, and keeping the dream alive. More power too them!

 

--Dean

 

10-sec later - after trying to post this message...

 

OK - now that's not cool. Look at the cute little popup window I got when I tried to post this message:

 

 

Since when do we censor messages with links to particular websites, and especially websites that are entirely relevant to our discussions? Are we really that petty and paranoid? Tim - what gives? Pretty sad if you ask me. We've always been a beacon of open and honest communication, when other CR-related forums (like Francescas long-defunct CR Support Group where everyone had to be politically correct, and nice to everyone else) resorted to censorship of thoughts and ideas.

 

I've obfuscated the links to LivingTheCRWay™ by passing them through tinyurl.com. Let's see if that works....

 

Yup - that worked. Stupid censorship filter...

 

Shows how far we've sunk and how pitiful we've become. Disappointing, really disappointing. 

 

--Dean

[Mechanism]

Edited

[Dean Pomerleau]

Yes Saul - Thanks for the good suggestion. I agree with you and Mechanism, the Kripalu Yoga Center would be a great venue for a future CRS Conference, particularly in the fall when the leaves have turned.

 

Mechanism, Google Maps tells me the Kripalu Center is about 500 miles from my house just North of Pittsburgh. I pedal about 80-90 miles per day. So if I were biking on the road rather than pedaling in my basement, I could get there in about six days.

 

--Dean

[Sthira]

Great idea, Saul, about Kripalu as a CR venue. I'd attend this for selfish reasons since it would combine two passions: yoga and healthy longevity practices like calorie restriction.

 

And Dean I'm a well-travelled bicycle solo adventurer, and I'd take a few weeks off work to cycle the Pittsburgh to Kripalu roads there and back. It'd be a beautiful series of hilly rides!

[Dean Pomerleau]

Admin Note: I moved several posts discussing gardening to the CR Garden thread. --Dean

[Dean Pomerleau]

Earlier in this thread I mentioned (with some frustration) the fact that Paul and Meredith McGlothin were planning a study of CR Way™ folks, while we've been unable to pull off a similar (although less ambitious) study in association with our recent Conference.

 

Well, based on an announcement in their free public newsletter, they've succeeded in kicking off the study and are quite pleased with how it went, and what they hope to learn from it. Here is an excerpt:

 

-----------------

Pittsburgh Research will help you predict how your brain ages

 

In case you've wondered: Nine other CR Way members along with Meredith and me were in Pittsburgh last week. We worked with leading scientists at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) to evaluate how the CR Way lifestyle affects aging.

 

The success in Pittsburgh exceeded expectations. Already, we've taken significant steps to expand the study to an annual event, which will make it likely that any Contributing Member who wants to will be able to join in. And whether or not you choose to come to the live testing, you will benefit immeasurably by the knowledge gained from the research.

 

Three expert teleconferences will be generated from the research: Dr. Abbe de Vallejo will report his findings on the immune system. Dr. Joel Schuman will report on eye health. And Dr. Susan Greenspan, one of the foremost experts on osteoporosis, will introduce her research on bone density and how to prevent osteoporotic fracture as you age. Stay tuned for dates!

 

Good for them, and more power too them! As I said earlier, I admire their perseverance and their fundraising skills to pull it off. It will be interesting to see their results. Hopefully it will be published so all the world will benefit from what they learn.

 

I won't try to post a link to the livingthecrway.com website, for fear of being censored again... ☹

 

--Dean

[Saul]

Hi Dean!

 

I'm a "Healthy <whatshyoucallsit> member of the CR Way -- I (almost) never read Paul's posts, which go into a folder I've created in one of my gmail accounts.

 

However, I probably will hold my nose, and become a "great glucose control" member -- paying some $$ -- at some point.

 

BTW, notice that Paul's group that went to Philadelphia had only NINE members -- we had 13 at CR IX -- yet unfortunately Dr. J. (I believe correctly) deemed this too few people to conduct a meaningful study.

 

  --  Saul

[Dean Pomerleau]

Saul,

 

BTW, notice that Paul's group that went to Philadelphia Pittsburgh had only NINE ELEVEN members -- we had 13 at CR IX -- yet unfortunately Dr. J. (I believe correctly) deemed this too few people to conduct a meaningful study.

 

Do you actually read the posts before responding? The study occurred in Pittsburgh (not Philedelphia) and included eleven (not nine) CR Way members, when you include Paul and Meredith - as was clearly pointed out in Paul's announcement. I've edited your statement above accordingly. 

 

Michael would know, but I strongly suspect not everyone who attended the Conference and was a CR practitioner  (a tiny number to begin with) signed up to volunteer blood samples for Dr. J's study. The private email Michael sent out to folks who'd expressed an interest in participating in Dr. J's study included only 12 people (13 if you include Michael himself), but it appears to me the vast majority of them did not attend the conference, and so couldn't have participated. In short, we had only a small handful (many fewer than 11) people at the Conference willing to participate.

 

I think it's reasonably impressive that a) Paul was able to either raise the funds for travel, or convince his members to travel on their own nickle to Pittsburgh for the study, and b) that he was able to convince not one but three top UPMC researchers to engage with him and his group on the study. It seems like sour grapes to be dissing Paul for only having 11 participants to begin with.

 

--Dean

[Saul]

Hi Dean!

 

Sorry about the misquoted numbers -- but you basically misunderstood me.  I applaud Paul's success in getting some things done -- but hold my nose on his (successful) money-raising method.

 

  (too strong an image -- need a gentler one)

 

  --  Saul

[Sthira]

Fantastic! And why can't this group of 12 or 13 (CRS) join that group of 9 or 11 (P&M)?

[Saul]

Hi Sthira!

 

They've already gone and come back.

 

  --  Saul

[Dean Pomerleau]

Sthira,

 

Saul's answer ("They've already gone and come back") is true, but not very helpful. But hey, 1 for 2 is better than usual. ☺

 

The real answers to why CRS folks can/don't join P&M's CR Way study of human CR practitioners are:

• It costs money to join P&M's LivingTheCRWay Program. Some people like Saul resent that, or are cheap like me
• Similarly, It's not clear how much the participants in P&M's study may have had to pay for their travel to Pittsburgh to participate
• Most significantly, there was apparently a falling out between P&M and the CRS Board years ago, resulting in the split, and a significant amount of "bad blood" between the organizations, making friendly cooperation problematic.

The reason and circumstances surrounding the split between the CRS and TheCRWay organizations are shrouded in mystery, at least to me. It was during a time I wasn't active in the CRS, and regardless it was a Board-level dispute the details of which I've heard snippets about from several sources. All of the accounts I've heard conflict with each other.

 

Only P&M and the current CRS Board members (Brian, Bob, David, Robert, Michael, Tim) know the details of the story. It seems none of them actually pay attention to discussions here, or care enough to engage with us. And even if they did engage on other topics, I suspect this subject is one they won't be forthcoming about... Politics...

 

--Dean

[Sthira]

...shrouded in mystery...

Thanks, Dean. People, people, people -- we can all be so nice and so crappy toward each other, but in group settings, are people ever not playing chimpanzee politics? Nearly every group in my life is this way: people = high drama. Anyway, I just joined P&M's site (again), but you're right, it's high cost for those of us left struggling in the generational money race. But I feel like they (P&M) have more to offer than here. For example, I was thrilled to participate in their CR study down in San Francisco several years ago. But their website is difficult to use, and unless you're paying tall fees, it seems to flip the middle finger at the financially struggling CR practicing folks like me.

 

Speaking of money, a comment one of the research technicians said to me during the UCSF study was sharp and has stuck with me:

 

"My observation is CR people are very wealthy," he said.

 

And I thought wow how sad, and haven't forgotten. That's probably the future of increased lifespan: the rich will get it if the science ever emerges, and you'll keep it for yourselves. I like that Aubrey de Grey and Ray Kurzweil and even Liz Parrish address this wealth gap issue head on: I just don't believe them, though.

[timc]

Only P&M and the current CRS Board members (Brian, Bob, David, Robert, Michael, Tim) know the details of the story. It seems none of them actually pay attention to discussions here, or care enough to engage with us. And even if they did engage on other topics, I suspect this subject is one they won't be forthcoming about... Politics...

 

--Dean

Were you multi-tasking/posting during the conference? Not that I'm judging - it's a good thing. From my perspective, I'm 'maxed out' taking in one source of CR information (the conference), while you're adding to the body of CR information (while digesting what is presented). Even not working, I wouldn't keep up.

 

Anyway, a number of people on that list do post and follow the forum (I would guess Michael does the most but more focused on topics of interest and in spurts). Also, Michael was not a board member at the time of the split.

 

Consider that you've created an 'us versus them' scenario ("or care enough to engage with us"). People have been forthcoming, ("... snippets about from several sources. All of the accounts I've heard conflict with each other.") but an organization is not a person, of singular mind. If an organization (CRSI or the Living Way) issued a statement, I suspect the snippets would have more truth to them even if conflicting.

 

I won't try to post a link to the livingthecrway.com website, for fear of being censored again... ☹

 

--Dean

Can you expand on that offlist (private message?) or here? Was it censorsed or censured? For a number of reasons, I favor a more open/free approach to content.

[Dean Pomerleau]

Tim,

 

Were you multi-tasking/posting during the conference?

 

No I wasn't. I didn't post anything until I got back. But that question seems like a bit of a non-sequitur. I'm not sure why you ask. Ah - I think I get it. I'm always posting to the forums and I make it overwhelming. Sorry about that. 

 

Regarding censorship, I guess you missed my post about it earlier in this thread. Here it is. If you didn't implement the filter that bit me, I'm curious to know who did.

 

--Dean

[Dean Pomerleau]

Tim,

 

You wrote (quoting my "snippets... comment" as an example of people being forthcoming):

People have been forthcoming, ("... snippets about from several sources. All of the accounts I've heard conflict with each other.") 

 

Sthira asked why the CRS & CRWay don't cooperate / collaborate. I said I've heard rumors and innuendos privately from various sources, with much of it conflicting and inconsistent.

 

I've never been able to find out privately the answer to Sthira's question, and I don't think anyone from the Board has ever explained what happened. Certainly not in any public forum, as far as I can tell. That's what I mean about shrouded in mystery. Can you clear it up now, by sharing your perspective/understanding of the split, here on this members-only forum?

 

I know you are busy Tim, but this is the first time you've posted in almost a month. And from your not having seen my post about censorship, you seem not to have read (or been reading) the one thread that has content related to Board-level stuff. Any you are the only one on the Board remotely following any of this, as far as I can tell. That's what I mean by "...or care enough to engage with us".

 

While I've got your ear, there were several good ideas discussed as action items at the CR Conference, including putting together a list of all current and former CRS member email addresses for a mass mailing. The other was that Michael was going to check with the National Weight Control Registry about starting a collaboration with us. Can you share whether the Board has discussed either of these topics during its meetings since the Conference, and perhaps even confirm that it has had meetings, or at least email exchanges, on these topics?

 

--Dean

[Judy Reneau]

Hello, I'm a returning member. My name then was Judy Dunn but now it's Judy Reneau. I attended the 2004 conference and met many of you. It was a great conference. I'm back because I've been finally diagnosed celiac, phew, and now I can get down to business with calorie restriction without poisoning myself. Too bad I'm coming back in to such problems.