RE: Coenzyme Q and Worms

From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Wed Jan 09 2002 - 16:08:28 MST

Next message: Damien Broderick: "Re: "Sound and Fury" over enhancements"
Previous message: Harvey Newstrom: "RE: META: Subject line profanity considered harmful"
In reply to: Mark Walker: "Coenzyme Q and Worms"
Next in thread: Robert J. Bradbury: "RE: Coenzyme Q and Worms"
Reply: Robert J. Bradbury: "RE: Coenzyme Q and Worms"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

One caveat here. Worms use coenzyme Q-9, while humans use coenzyme Q-10.
The study showed that coenzyme Q-9 might be bad for worms. They wonder if
coenzyme Q-10 is therefore bad for humans. A good question, but hardly
conclusive.

I sure want to see more about this. Coenzyme Q-10 is part of my personal
life-extension program to help fight heart disease.

--
Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
Principal Security Consultant, Newstaff Inc. <www.Newstaff.com>
Board of Directors, Extropy Institute <www.Extropy.org>
Cofounder, Pro-Act <www.ProgressAction.org>

Next message: Damien Broderick: "Re: "Sound and Fury" over enhancements"
Previous message: Harvey Newstrom: "RE: META: Subject line profanity considered harmful"
In reply to: Mark Walker: "Coenzyme Q and Worms"
Next in thread: Robert J. Bradbury: "RE: Coenzyme Q and Worms"
Reply: Robert J. Bradbury: "RE: Coenzyme Q and Worms"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:11:31 MST