Cutting Edge Reply II

Ronald N. Kostoff1 and Henry I. Miller2 don't really disagree on the topic of caloric restriction; they merely disagree on the available means. Dr. Kostoff is probably correct that caloric restriction is "nature's design." Then again, Dr. Miller is correct when he notes that "like the rest of us, these test subjects couldn't eat just one." Ah, there's the rub. "Nature's design" is a bit more complicated than Dr. Kostoff wants to admit. The schoolmarmish, finger wagging tone of "the whole idea

Apr 30, 2001
Kimball Atwood
Ronald N. Kostoff1 and Henry I. Miller2 don't really disagree on the topic of caloric restriction; they merely disagree on the available means. Dr. Kostoff is probably correct that caloric restriction is "nature's design." Then again, Dr. Miller is correct when he notes that "like the rest of us, these test subjects couldn't eat just one." Ah, there's the rub.

"Nature's design" is a bit more complicated than Dr. Kostoff wants to admit. The schoolmarmish, finger wagging tone of "the whole idea of 'tasty' food needs to be modified" strikes a most dissonant chord with another of "nature's designs." This is precisely why it makes sense to look for ways to "fool" nature. If olestra is one such way, let it be a choice for some people.

Kimball Atwood, M.D.
30 Plainfield St.
Waban, MA 02468
1. R.N. Kostoff, "A cutting edge reply," The Scientist, 15[8]:6, April 16, 2001.

2. H.I. Miller, "The cutting edge of calories," The Scientist, 15[4]:39, Feb. 19, 2001.