BB Lifestyle and Long Life

[quote]IRoNStaLLion wrote:
reactive oxidative species, produced as a byproduct of cellular respiration.[/quote]

Free radicals are a product of age as well as mitochondrial metabolism. Studies are still being run in order to find ways to combat it with most leaning towards the use of antioxidants. What does this have to do directly with bodybuilding? Bodybuilding in and of itself doesn’t cause free radicals. Nearly everything around you and that you ingest causes them. If you are worried, take antioxidants. Either way, you will get older and, if you don’t die by unnatural causes, the aging of cells and the destruction of DNA will eventually lead to your death.

Info on free radicals and the use of antioxidants.

You made your earlier statement as if 4,000cals a day causes you to die of cancer. What has caused you to jump to conclusions like that?

From what I understand, nearly everything causes cancer. You can either choose to avoid “everything” or go on and live your life with the realization that eventually, you ARE going to die.

I’m pretty sure that you just need to send in 007 to eliminate all free radicals. That’ll take care of the ROS problem.

People don’t try out for the NFL, or the SAS or Jackie Chan’s stuntman team because it’ll extend their life. They join these organizations because it will fill their years with something to be proud of and look back on.

You can diet yourself down to 140 lbs. and live till you’re 100, or you can build yourself up to the point where someone will remember you for looking so powerful, and want to be like you.

i have seen these programs on discovery/nat. geo. and as i recall similar studies were done on primates too with good results. low cals did enhance longevity but was it solely due to low cals? i think they spoke about leanness too. lower body fat esp. visceral fat.

If a mouse eats 4000 calories a day I reckon it would live about half a day.

So what are you a man or a mouse?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
IRoNStaLLion wrote:
reactive oxidative species, produced as a byproduct of cellular respiration.

Free radicals are a product of age as well as mitochondrial metabolism. Studies are still being run in order to find ways to combat it with most leaning towards the use of antioxidants. What does this have to do directly with bodybuilding? Bodybuilding in and of itself doesn’t cause free radicals. Nearly everything around you and that you ingest causes them. If you are worried, take antioxidants. Either way, you will get older and, if you don’t die by unnatural causes, the aging of cells and the destruction of DNA will eventually lead to your death.

Info on free radicals and the use of antioxidants.

You made your earlier statement as if 4,000cals a day causes you to die of cancer. What has caused you to jump to conclusions like that?

From what I understand, nearly everything causes cancer. You can either choose to avoid “everything” or go on and live your life with the realization that eventually, you ARE going to die.[/quote]

I was merely stating that excessive calorie intake increasing the production of free radicals which are bad… That being said i’m not saying you ahve to go ona 1000 cal diet, just that you don’t have to gorge yourself on a “bulking” diet, because quite frankly it’s not good for you.

[quote]IRoNStaLLion wrote:

I was merely stating that excessive calorie intake increasing the production of free radicals which are bad… That being said i’m not saying you ahve to go ona 1000 cal diet, just that you don’t have to gorge yourself on a “bulking” diet, because quite frankly it’s not good for you.
[/quote]

You can’t make conclusive statements like that. There is NOTHING that suggests “bulking up” is dangerous for you or that it is more harmful than eating 2,500cals a day. That is a jump to conclusions you have made based on poorly related info.

Beyond that, this explains why you are having problems reaching your own goals. You are so caught up in random science you have read that you avoid doing what you need to do in the kitchen. There is no reason to believe you will somehow live longer than the guy next to you simply because you take in 500-1,000cals less a day than he does. Why do you think this way?

[quote]IRoNStaLLion wrote:
you don’t have to gorge yourself on a “bulking” diet, because quite frankly it’s not good for you.
[/quote]

If you want to “bulk” you do.

[quote]IRoNStaLLion wrote:
Just dont eat “bulking diets” when you take in like 4000 + cals/day… 2000-3000 should be ok[/quote]

HA!

Typical caloric range for my cutting diet.

[quote]vroom wrote:
I’m not all that old, but I’m already thinking about how I want to go out.

I don’t think I went to spend several decades lying on my back in a bed watching reruns on TV while I wait for some cruel nurse to sponge my balls and change my bedpan.

It might be nice to find some type of cause worth dying for and to make one final stand.

Who knows, but I’ve got a lot of time to figure it out.[/quote]

Having a nurse sponge your balls cant be all bad…

There have been many studies done which would lead one to believe that restricting caloric intake does in fact prolong life.

And these studies are…(drum roll) SCIENTIFIC so…um they can’t be wrong…right?

I never even considered caloric restriction. It never made that much sense to me. In fact, it makes more sense that those who actually burn more calories would have a longer life span based on activity level. In order to burn more caloies you have to take in more calories, otherwise you are burning muscle tissue and wasting away…sort of like what happened to one very strong proponent of caloric restriction.

Dr. Roy Wolford from UCLA died recently at the age of 77. He was on a caloric restricted diet for about 25 years prior to his death. He authored the book “How to live to be 120, and beyond.” He claimed many, many scientific studies to back up his claims.

But…he’s dead.

I think the good doctor took in only 1,500 calories per day. Some might wonder if he took his own life. Let’s face it 1,500 calories per day had to be torture. Some say when he died (at the age of 77) that he looked like he was over 90!

On the other hand Jack LaLane will be 92 this year and looks more like 72. His method: natural foods, plenty of exercise and a good attitude on life!

Of course, Jack LaLane has no Scientific studies to back up his methodology. Then again he’s still alive…:slight_smile:

Judge for yourself, I know that I’m going to keep eating PLENTY OF CALORIES and enjoying life. And I’m older than you…

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
I’ve always liked the phrase “Intensity over longevity”.

I’d rather have thirty awesome ones then sixty boring ones. That’s just me though.[/quote]

Burn up, not fade away.

Live big, die young.

Good post, ZEB.

After all the replies someone open minded should probably come around…or at least give it a try.

I think the little douche-bag is yanking everyone’s chain. He’s pulling a similar scam on this other thread

http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=977839&pageNo=3#980743

I suggest we shut down both of his threads because he’s obviously deliberately being an idiot.

Holy shit, I just found out that there is pollution in the very air we breath that can be bad for you. It might even contribute to cancer.

I have decided to only breath half as much as I usually do. That way I should live a lot longer. Yeh, I wont be able to function properly or do anything that makes life worth living, but at least I might be able to squeeze a few more years of life out of me. Shitty years, but at least I will be older.

I would encourage all of you to make sure that you dont breathe too much.

First of all, most of the positive results have been with small animals. Stuff like vitamin C can extend these animals’ lives 20-40%. So those numbers don’t mean much with bigger organisms.

Then the actual diets they use on humans with some success are extremely low calorie diets (under 1500 cal/day for men, much less for women). You won’t even be able to workout with that little energy. Also eating somewhat less doesn’t work. You need to be in starvation mode constantly for the body to have some “protective effects”.

Also you look and feel like shit. You have very little energy and you actually look considerably older than you look. Yet you only have this slight “protective effect” while you’re eating that way. So if you starved yourself from age 20-50, you’d look like 80 when you were 50 and then if you followed a normal diet, you’d now have ZERO protection.

What a joke.

ZEB has the right idea.

IRoNStaLLion,

eat some food dont be a pussy you wont die

[quote]redsox348984 wrote:
IRoNStaLLion,

eat some food dont be a pussy you wont die[/quote]

Oh, but he will.