Reduced Calories = Average Life Span of 107

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:41:53 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
wrote:
:: Sounds weird, I know. But here's how it _might_ work (and there are
:: a couple study to support this).
::
:: 2 groups of rats.
:: Group A eats a 'normal' amount of calories per day, every day
:: (ie. Monday 1000 calories, Tue 1000c, Wed 1000c, Thur 1000c...)
::
:: Group B alternates between eating 40% less calories one day, and
:: eating 40% more calories the next day.
:: (ie. Monday 600 calories, Tue 1400c, Wed 600c, Thur 1400c...)
::
:: The total number of calories consumed over in the long run are the
:: same, but 'Group B' has improved health and longevity...

I'd love to see those studies!

Hmmm... will have to see if I can remember more about those ones in
particular... but in the mean time, here's some very interesting
reading:

http://chetday.com/warriordietantiaging.htm

P.S. I'm not really a 'fan' of this type of eating (because of the
effect it would have on blood sugar and insulin, which I believe are
key health determenants) but it makes reference to some curious and
interesting findings...

Modern folklore.
Anorexic people have a shorter life expectancy than normal weight people.

Anyone normal weight who deprives himself of food is anorexic.



"PJ" wrote in message
...
|
| PBS today had a spot today on reduced calorie diets for several
| animal species. Using the ratio of average life expectancy of one of
| the mammal groups tested, white rats, that benefitted LESS than others
| species, indicate that human males on average on such a restricted
| calorie diet will live to be 107 instead of 74.5.
|
| Of course, that says to me that these extra years will be extremely
| trouble free, active and healthy too.
|
| What are you waiting for?
|
| The first step for you, is to absolutely forget any advice you've
| ever heard indicating that starvation mode is bad or slowed metabolism
| is bad. Not so. It's only bad if you want to kill yourself by
| stuffing your fat face.
|
| Good Luck.
| PJ
|
|
|
|

Renegade5 wrote:
:: On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 17:41:53 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: wrote:
::::: Sounds weird, I know. But here's how it _might_ work (and there
::::: are a couple study to support this).
:::::
::::: 2 groups of rats.
::::: Group A eats a 'normal' amount of calories per day, every day
::::: (ie. Monday 1000 calories, Tue 1000c, Wed 1000c, Thur 1000c...)
:::::
::::: Group B alternates between eating 40% less calories one day, and
::::: eating 40% more calories the next day.
::::: (ie. Monday 600 calories, Tue 1400c, Wed 600c, Thur 1400c...)
:::::
::::: The total number of calories consumed over in the long run are the
::::: same, but 'Group B' has improved health and longevity...
:::
::: I'd love to see those studies!
::
:: Hmmm... will have to see if I can remember more about those ones in
:: particular... but in the mean time, here's some very interesting
:: reading:
::
:: http://chetday.com/warriordietantiaging.htm

Interesting.

::
:: P.S. I'm not really a 'fan' of this type of eating (because of the
:: effect it would have on blood sugar and insulin, which I believe are
:: key health determenants) but it makes reference to some curious and
:: interesting findings...

I'm not convinced that the overeating part necessarily has to result in high
insulin levels. For example, if hte WD is done while following a LC woe, the
BG impact should be minimized, compared to overeating on a HC diet.

Around 20 years ago, Dr. Roy Walford (of Biosphere fame, etc.) wrote several
books on CR diet plans. The one I remember best is, "The 120 Year Diet".
Revised in 2000 (http://www.walford.com/index.html)

I also remember a month or so after that came out, there were television
ads, (public announcements), to not restrict calories in children under age
7 (10?), because it might stunt their growth.

Walford conducted several studies on mice, and the diet was a projection to
human use. I really haven't looked at any of this in a very long time, but
I think 1500 calories was the goal then. I'd like to know more about the
900 calorie number. (Considering the several liquid diets over the
years,like OptiFast or MediFast that went down to 500. And there's another
one around today, I think it's called HMS1200?? I was going to compare
their nutrition data to Atkins shake mix and others. Oh well) Each
individual may have an ideal number in that range, but getting all the right
nutrients and supplements is necessary too.

Also notable, in the way the Atkins has home delivery of some LC meals (as
do some others), there was a company in Los Angeles, CA, that would do the
same for meals in the Walford books. (No, I never tried that, but had a
friend that thought about going into the same business.) :-)

Steve



"PJ" wrote in message
...

PBS today had a spot today on reduced calorie diets for several
animal species. Using the ratio of average life expectancy of one of
the mammal groups tested, white rats, that benefitted LESS than others
species, indicate that human males on average on such a restricted
calorie diet will live to be 107 instead of 74.5.

Of course, that says to me that these extra years will be extremely
trouble free, active and healthy too.

What are you waiting for?

The first step for you, is to absolutely forget any advice you've
ever heard indicating that starvation mode is bad or slowed metabolism
is bad. Not so. It's only bad if you want to kill yourself by
stuffing your fat face.

Good Luck.
PJ

Ignoramus24456 wrote:
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:32:03 -0500, marengo wrote:
Modern folklore.
Anorexic people have a shorter life expectancy than normal weight
people.

cites please.

Anyone normal weight who deprives himself of food is anorexic.

Anyone who is at normal weight is not an anorexic by definition.

So anyone on CR is undersweight and may be anorexic.



http://www.clevelandclinicmeded.com/...ing/table1.htm

i



"PJ" wrote in message
...
|
| PBS today had a spot today on reduced calorie diets for several
| animal species. Using the ratio of average life expectancy of one
| of
| the mammal groups tested, white rats, that benefitted LESS than
| others species, indicate that human males on average on such a
| restricted
| calorie diet will live to be 107 instead of 74.5.
|
| Of course, that says to me that these extra years will be extremely
| trouble free, active and healthy too.
|
| What are you waiting for?
|
| The first step for you, is to absolutely forget any advice you've
| ever heard indicating that starvation mode is bad or slowed
| metabolism
| is bad. Not so. It's only bad if you want to kill yourself by
| stuffing your fat face.
|
| Good Luck.
| PJ

On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:46:07 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
wrote:
:: http://chetday.com/warriordietantiaging.htm

Interesting.

::
:: P.S. I'm not really a 'fan' of this type of eating (because of the
:: effect it would have on blood sugar and insulin, which I believe are
:: key health determenants) but it makes reference to some curious and
:: interesting findings...

I'm not convinced that the overeating part necessarily has to result in high
insulin levels. For example, if hte WD is done while following a LC woe, the
BG impact should be minimized, compared to overeating on a HC diet.

Yes... I'm actually thinking of giving it a try... or maybe a modified
version. My only real concerns a
1) I'd feel better if it was endorsed by some kind of medical
professional

2) not eating anything during the day, blood sugar would get low (is
this a real threat?? maybe not) and there would be a lack of
essential amino acids

3) by eating nothing during the day, and grainy carbs as the last item
of the meal at night, it would be tough for me to get the 30g of
recommended fiber per day (though I imagine that's something that the
LCers here also face)

I'm thinking of maybe some light protien (shake) for breakfast, fruit
and veggies during the day, and a small amount of egg whites at lunch.
I think this will be allowed on the WD, and should keep blood sugar
up, and provide enough amino acids. Now... if only I could figure a
way to squeeze in the fiber (I'd really prefer natural food source,
other than psyhillium husk)...

Renegade5 wrote:
:: On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 09:46:07 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: wrote:
::::: http://chetday.com/warriordietantiaging.htm
:::
::: Interesting.
:::
:::::
::::: P.S. I'm not really a 'fan' of this type of eating (because of the
::::: effect it would have on blood sugar and insulin, which I believe
::::: are key health determenants) but it makes reference to some
::::: curious and interesting findings...
:::
::: I'm not convinced that the overeating part necessarily has to
::: result in high insulin levels. For example, if hte WD is done while
::: following a LC woe, the BG impact should be minimized, compared to
::: overeating on a HC diet.
::
:: Yes... I'm actually thinking of giving it a try... or maybe a
:: modified version. My only real concerns a
:: 1) I'd feel better if it was endorsed by some kind of medical
:: professional

Oh my.....there are lots of things endorsed by medical professionals. It's
downright scary....

::
:: 2) not eating anything during the day, blood sugar would get low (is
:: this a real threat?? maybe not) and there would be a lack of
:: essential amino acids

Do you have some reason to have this fear? Unless you have known problems
hypoglycemia, this is unlikely, imo. People tell me that as a type 2
diabetic I should not fast. But as soon as I ask why, I get some random
comments about blood sugar dropping too low. However, that's never happened
to me. And if you have no metabolic issues, you likely have no reason to
fear. And if you have some unknown issues, it may be a good idea to find
out about them. Finally, you can do as I do, get a meter and test
throughout the day to remove or confirm any concerns.

::
:: 3) by eating nothing during the day, and grainy carbs as the last
:: item of the meal at night, it would be tough for me to get the 30g of
:: recommended fiber per day (though I imagine that's something that the
:: LCers here also face)

I bet you can't find hard proof for that recommendation. I know many who
don't nearly that much. Also, others in the medical professional are
starting to question if it is even important. Finally, LCers in weight loss
mode typical produce less elimination, so it is like you can get by with
less anyhow.

::
:: I'm thinking of maybe some light protien (shake) for breakfast, fruit
:: and veggies during the day, and a small amount of egg whites at
:: lunch. I think this will be allowed on the WD, and should keep blood
:: sugar up, and provide enough amino acids. Now... if only I could
:: figure a way to squeeze in the fiber (I'd really prefer natural food
:: source, other than psyhillium husk)...

Eat a little broccoli. Not many calories there.

Ignoramus17955 wrote:
:: On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 01:21:40 -0500, Roger Zoul
:: wrote:
::: Ignoramus24456 wrote:
:::: On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 22:32:03 -0500, marengo
:::: wrote:
::::: Modern folklore.
::::: Anorexic people have a shorter life expectancy than normal weight
::::: people.
::::
:::: cites please.
::::
::::: Anyone normal weight who deprives himself of food is anorexic.
::::
:::: Anyone who is at normal weight is not an anorexic by definition.
:::
::: So anyone on CR is undersweight and may be anorexic.
::
:: I am not sure how you arrived at this conclusion, but most people on
:: CR are not underweight.

Interesting. So, either those people have not been on CR for long or they
are not on CR at all. You can't have it both ways.

Roger Zoul wrote:
Do you have some reason to have this fear? Unless you have known problems
hypoglycemia, this is unlikely, imo. People tell me that as a type 2
diabetic I should not fast. But as soon as I ask why, I get some random
comments about blood sugar dropping too low. However, that's never happened
to me.

I have always found this interesting. Why would blood sugar drop any
lower than any other person who fasts?

"Roger Zoul" wrote in message
...
Do you have some reason to have this fear? Unless you have known problems
hypoglycemia, this is unlikely, imo. People tell me that as a type 2
diabetic I should not fast. But as soon as I ask why, I get some random
comments about blood sugar dropping too low. However, that's never
happened
to me.


I find if I don't eat often enough, especially if I'm walking around a lot,
I get a liver dump, even with the Metformin.

--
No Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes