From: "Jeffrey E." <[email protected]> To: Peter Attia Subject: Re: JASON Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 04:15:35 +0000 fair. .. as you think like a scientist. , I, trying to move you away from curing a disease ( obeisity, fatty liver ) . and move more into longevity, . unless you think it is merely the absence of as many disesases as you can catalogue. Im unclear if ancestors , and genes , have longevity in mind.for the individival I dont think so.. nature prefers replication and survival of offspring. Im not sure why women live past reproductive age at all. separatpe from transmission of culture, ( not in the genes). diseases are also the most natural of things, I want not to look to them as to my genes, I want to fight against both. On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 8:49 PM, Peter Attia c > wrote: Agree that the data of the 50s mean little. I'm talking about a different problem, which is more sociaUbehavioral than scientific. Understanding the nuances of WWI, II probably add little to understanding ISIL, but that's the "wrong" history. If ISIL is the focus, at least IMO, understanding FDR's relationship with Abdulaziz Ibn Saud does help, even though it took place 80 years ago. Our work in cancer and AD will be different, but in obesity there is likely no addressing the problem without some appreciation for how this mess was created. From: Jeffrey E. [mailtoleevacationegmail.com Sent: Sunday, June 21, 2015 3:14 PM To: Peter Attia Subject: Re: JASON not at all, reading about world war one or two, or vietnam , gives me no insight into isil.. boko harem .etc. I listen to you becuse the science says x using tools of today any work using tools of yesterday, seems a little odd. germs before a microscope. etc. no data in the 50s worth noting. On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Peter Attia c wrote: This isn't a diet book, in which case that info would be irrelevant. It's a book making the most provocative case ever in nutrition: our fundamental understandin