T Nation

Eat More, Die Sooner?


#1

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/07/09/caloric.restriction.monkeys/index.html

guys, i think we are screwed. well, not me, but some of you guys might want to update your will


#2

In the next 50 years, I'm sure they will find ways to prolong life


#3

Anything that activates you dna's survival mechanism puts processes into action that can give you all the markers of a person that will live to a very old age. So yes, it's true. However, i wonder if intense training also elicits the survival mechanism? Or dies ti do it in a different way?

In a way, they are telling is that diet is everything. Certainly nothing new to the BB crowd, but this is an interesting twist. Instincts always told me that stuffing myself is not good.


#4

And about the guy who eats 2000 calorie. I doubt he looks like I want to look, and I would rather live 70-maybe 80 years like this, than a 110 like him.


#5

Life is about quality not quantity.


#6

/thread


#7

^couldn't agree more


#8

Let's see if you say that at 55 years old.


#9

jack lalanne's doing fine.


#10

What I dont understand is why people feel the need to live that long..


#11

If you're really interested in getting a glimpse into the lifestyle of calorie restriction, here's an article I read about 2 years ago detailing one reporters 2 month experience with it. These people have to have the discipline of basically dieting all the time. It's interesting to see some of the parallels between bodybuilding and calorie restriction. Both "lifestyles" require discipline in preparing and planning meals and selecting foods of high quality.

They're just taking their bodies, physically, in the opposite direction. Living a lot longer sounds good, but I think the lifestyle described in this article may turn off most people, especially here at T-Nation. I took some excerpts from the article and pasted them below. Photos of the couple are on page 2:

The Fast Supper
http://nymag.com/news/features/23169/

From the article:

Here's the calorie restricion society web site:

http://www.calorierestriction.org/


#12

"Delaney says he eats a hearty breakfast including a large bowl of low-fat granola and fruit, soy milk, nonfat yogurt, and a cup of coffee. Delaney admits his 900-or-so-calorie breakfast is more than most people consume in the morning, but he then skips lunch, works an eight- or nine-hour day, and eats a high-fiber, vegetarian dinner, keeping his total intake under 2,000 calories a day. (An average adult male consumes 2,618 calories a day, according to statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)"

----I can see why Delaney was one of the researchers...I'd want to know the effects of a restricted caloric diet of the rhesus monkeys too if I ate like one---

"In the study of 76 adult rhesus monkeys...only 13 percent of the calorie-restricted animals died during the 20-year period, compared with 37 percent of monkeys allowed to eat their usual diet. (The study began with 30 monkeys; an additional 46 were added in 1994.)"

---Why were the extra monkeys added? What was the results up to the point where the additional 46 were added?---

"Keri Gans, R.D., a nutritionist in private practice in New York City... "If you go too far, it can lead to a lot of problems such as dizziness and fatigue in the short term," she says. "In the long term, there can be nutritional deficiencies, decreases in bone mineral density that can lead to osteoporosis, and menstrual irregularities that can lead to infertility.

"Once you start to restrict calories, there is no guarantee of adequate nutrition unless you are following a plan monitored by a registered dietitian," she says. "The less calories you consume, the harder it may be to ensure that your diet includes foods that provide proper nutrition."

---This coming from a woman who's job is on the line...can I have an unbiased opinion please? Maybe some research actually involving a human from the developed world that doesn't have such a blatant political agenda? Thanks, next study please---


#13

The advantage seen is not due to eating less calories but instead having very low body fat. This conclusion that life can be prolonged with restricted calories has been debunked by peers many times.

It appears the science shows low body fat is responsible for longevity - not low calories.


#14

Are you serious? Most of us on this forum will be dead before 80 no matter what we do. Most will probably also die of either unnatural causes (like a car crash) or drastic illness that can not be predicted (like cancer).

If anyone on this planet is alive for longer than 10 years and is still under the delusion that they will live forever, then they probably don't deserve to live that long.

Your argument is sort of like those who claim, "you'll be sorry you got that tattoo when you turn 65!!". Well gee, there is a whole lot of living to be done before then so if you are living your life trying to save yourself for over 60, then you aren't really living.


#15

Interesting. I guess it's good to be lean. I didn't believe you so I googled and found this research paper that supports your statement:

http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/405872/calorie_restriction_increases_life_span_a_molecular_mechanism/index.html

Abstract:


#16

the correlation between restricted calorie diets and a longer life span is not exactly new news. there have been multiple studies on this.

though i will whole-heartedly agree with X7502's initial statement that quality of life > quantity of life.


#17

damn!!! that's a real eye opener. I was gonna eat a big hamburger right now but fuck that shit.

NOW I'M GONNA EAT TWO!!!!!!! cause I'm a fucking real man!


#18

It's interesting. Basically what i think would happen is that everything slows down - metabolism was noted in the article. If you eat under maintenance then the body simply has to find a new maintenance level and that means dropping in bodyweight and total energy output but at a level that does not leave the body stressed all the time (or starving) so there is a lower limit.

Slowing everything down does make sense as a means to lengthen lifetime in theory.

Low bodyfat and bodyweight is the other factor alongside healthy diets - together this minimizes wear and tear

Longevity is also genetic, some families simply produce more long lived individuals.

As someone pointed out - Lallane is doing well. Grimek made it his late 80's while other apparently healthy people die younger. There seem to be too many other factors to really bet everything on this.


#19

Quality of life, not quantity, is what really matters.


#20

Nix my previous post^^.

It's already been stated, however when I posted, that post wasn't visible.