Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Patent'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forums
    • CR Science & Theory
    • CR Practice
    • Chitchat
    • General Health and Longevity
    • CR Recipes
    • Members-Only Area
  • Community

Blogs

  • Paul McGlothin's Blog
  • News
  • Calorie Restriction News Update

Categories

  • Supporting Members Only
  • Recipes
  • Research

Product Groups

  • CR IX
  • CRSI Membership
  • Conference DVDs

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL

Found 1 result

  1. Dean Pomerleau

    Longo Patents Intermittent Fasting

    Sorry everyone. It appears Valter Longo has patented intermittent fasting. So you all gotta pay up. Seriously. Pretty crazy. Here is the abstract from the patent, which was just granted last month: Methods and diets for lowering glucose and/or IGF-1 levels US 9237761 B2 ABSTRACT A method of improving longevity and/or alleviating a symptom of aging or preventing age related diseases is provided. The method includes a step in which the subject's average and type of daily protein intake, IGF-I, and IGFBP1 levels, and risk factors for overall mortality, cancer and diabetes are determined. With respect to protein consumption, the relative amounts of protein calories from animal and plant sources are determined. A periodic normal calorie or low calorie but low protein fasting mimicking diet with frequencies of every 2 weeks to 2 months is provided to the subject if the subject's average daily protein intake level and type and/or IGF-I levels, and/or IGFBP1 levels is identified as being greater or lower than a predetermined cutoff intake/level and if the subject is younger than a predetermined age. The method is also shown to alleviate symptoms of chemotoxicity. I'm no patent attorney, but it would seem like there should be sufficient "prior art" to invalidate this patent. --Dean
×