This paper rehashes 2 studies. In the original Wisconsin one that showed a great benefit to CR ... were fed a semi-purified, nutritionally fortified, low-f

This paper rehashes 2 studies. In the original Wisconsin one that showed a great benefit to CR ... were fed a semi-purified, nutritionally fortified, low-fat diet containing 15% protein and 10% fat. The monkeys without CR ended up getting diabetes and they were giving them insulin. This study made a big splash, but as others point out it probably really only helps prove that eating less crap is good for you. This paper appears to include some of the same authors of the Wisconsin study and tries to explain why the NIH performed a study that did not replicate their results. This paper claims that the control group in the NIH study actually underwent CR by comparing them to a database of captive primates. If that is true, then the title still seems strange, because it doesn't mean the NIH study provides meaningful supporting evidence, it means it was an invalid test of the CR hypothesis and instead it provides some extremely weak supporting evidence of the CR hypothesis. As a side note, there is evidence that the CR benefit is from protein restriction and possibly just avoiding protein imbalances. https://chriskresser.com/do-high-protein-diets-cause-kidney-disease-and-cancer https://chriskresser.com/do-high-protein-diets-cause-kidney-... (scroll to Is protein to blame—or is methionine?)