Yes, much hoo-ha over a “new” study which shows that calorie restriction in monkeys gives them that something extra. They age more slowly, look like young babes even though they’re senior citizens, and seem to have escaped the so-called age related diseases. An article in the LA Times is gushing over this discovery like it was the discovery of the proverbial fountain of youth.

But really, this is nothing new. Calorie restriction has been discussed and studies for decades.  The article even says that:

Evidence has been mounting for years that the practice of caloric restriction — essentially, going on a permanent diet — greatly reduces the risk of age-related diseases and even postpones death. It has been shown to significantly extend the lives of yeast, worms, flies, spiders, fish, mice and rats.

A lot of people have also practiced calorie restriction, with varying results, although it is safe to say that the vast majority of healthy centurians are not overweight.

But what makes this study so special? Beats me as to why it is even news.  The article goes on to say that the “study comes as some validation to the cadre of several hundred true-believing Americans who profess to practice caloric restriction in their daily lives.” Well, it may add more evidence, but again, this isn’t exactly a news-breaker. It’s just a repeat of what’s already been studied. This time it was done in primates.

Now, if it was a study with human subjects, and they had some profound results, that would be a different story.  But all this study is doing is confirming findings of other research in non-human subjects, and still unable to answer a multitude of questions about calorie restriction. Should I or shouldn’t I?

The Nurse Advocacy Center has a notice on its website that “The Board of Directors of the Center for Nursing Advocacy has decided to close the Center in the near future.” If you click on the link, it gives you a little bit more information about the decision.

The Board of Directors of the Center voted in December 2008 to close the Center. We have posted this information on our Web site. This decision was made after careful consideration of the mission and values of the Center and the ability of the Center to achieve them under its existing operating structure.

It is important for you to know that this decision was a difficult one and was the result of thoughtful deliberation on the part of every Board member. The Center’s records were in disarray, the Center’s taxes had not been paid for years, serious matters had been hidden from the Board of Directors, and the Center was in legal crisis. Indeed, after considering all the options, we felt that we were legally required to dissolve the Center as a corporation.

This is a very strange note to say the least. The Nurse Advocacy Center is a small organization that was started several years ago to serve as a “media watchdog.” Their goal was to try to having nursing shown in a more realistic and positive light in the mass media. While I think their mission was worthwhile, their execution of it was frequently overdone and they didn’t seem to know how to pick their battles.

At any rate, the reasons given here are quite bizarre, considering the size and nature of the organization. Basically, it was run by Sandy Summers and her husband, with a small board of directors. But the language used here is quite provocative–records in disarray, taxes not paid for years, legal crisis, secrets kept from the board. It’s not like this was a huge multinational non-profit, where millions in donations and grants were passing through, and an army of workers was needed to keep track of the paperwork.

However, a short article in the American Journal of Nursing may shed more light on it.

Founder Sandy Summers told AJN by e-mail, “I believe this was the result of my differences with a small faction of the board whose concerns were misplaced or fairly minor, since our records were in order and nonprofit charities like the Center don’t generally pay taxes (I regret that we owed $17 in sales tax).”

It sounds like there may have been some disagreements between Sandy and her board members, and perhaps a little more heated and volatile than she lets on. At any rate, the doors to the Advocacy Center are padlocked, although the website is still up and running.