Calorie Restriction MSNBC Story

News story on CR, includes update on rhesus monkey study and the results seen with long term CR

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Calorie
• restriction
• CR
• Healthy
• Anti
• aging
• Diet
• weight
• loss
• immortality

[lazur1]

"More years tacked on at the end.": Not good. More years tacked on a healthy active middle age: Good. Animals are forced to restrict, it's essentially "healthy" torture. To be obsessive enough to torture one's self for a theoretical few years of additional torture requires an obsessive personality w/anorexic aspects of body image & ego gratifiction.

[matthewlake182]

Calorie Restriction doesn't just tack on years at the end, it extends the period of youthful and middle age... so when the animals are old they tend to just drop dead one day without a long period of ill health. 40% of the longest surviving CR animals have no real organ pathology. There was one study which wasn't a true anti aging study but the monkeys were restricted by 30% and lived 30% longer. They gained a human equivalent of 21 extra years living to what would be 96 human years.

[matthewlake182]

The oldest Rhesus monkey ever recorded died at 43 years of age and he was CR'd. He would have been 129 years in human years. Name was C58

[andresayz4545]

@lazur1 I get that there is a difference, the dissonance here is in the examples given, the rhesus monkeys were fed as such; 1 group eating whatever it pleased, and 1 group eating 30% less than that which is about at metabolic requirment/weight/mass maintenence for them, the monkeys that were depicted in this clip are perfectly healthy, more healthy than their non restricted brethren, the people however seem to have taken it to an anorexic extreme yes and they are bad examples of this lifestyle.

[lazur1]

@andresayz4545 It's always about eating less than you're burning. Other methods, when they work, work because they enable compliance, either by satisfying the appetite w/less calories, or inspiring higher activity levels. Those who think this means they can eat like pigs, don't lose weight. CR isn't in reference to the literal premise: It's the extreme faction. Yes of course, you're a calorie restrictor, but they are Calorie Restrictors.There -is- a difference.

[lazur1]

@andresayz4545 You can eat enough gain weight or lose weight but if you keep eating the same amount, it becomes a maintenance diet.

[lazur1]

@andresayz4545 Your goal of 175 @ 5'9" is realistic and healthy. The typical 'successful' CR'er at your height would weight about 120.

[lazur1]

@andresayz4545 'Extreme' indeed: Also a matter subject to much variance. You are incorrect, this is not a mere fat loss diet, this is lower -total mass- diet.Those on it admit to being constantly hungry. It's only a maintenance diet if you are maintaining a very scrawy physique Those on are weaker than average, even with their their 'strength' training. In a very realistic sense, they -are- the 'extreme'.

[andresayz4545]

@vooooom that's actually what it's all about, insulin and growth hormone exist antagonistically in your body, that is when insulin is high GH is low, and having low insulin levels means having high GH levels which almost every study has indicated will make you healthier, more robust, look better and live longer, which is why rich people pay out the wazzoo to get the synthetic version injected into themselves.

[andresayz4545]

@lazur1 have gained quite a bit of weight since your teenage years which happens to a lot of people who just could've cut back a little bit and saved themselves to trouble of having to cut way down in order to lose body fat, trust me I'm a former fat person to had tried every protien, low carb hormone manipulating bs diet there was and nothing worked until i started eating less calories than I was burning.

[andresayz4545]

@lazur1 and of course you can take it to the extreme and lose to the point of anorexia or gain to the point of obesity but thats not what I'm talking about here and neither were the scientists when they did this experiment, rather this is about cutting out the extra calories in your diet that are being allocated and stored as body fat, not starving ust eating only what you need, the reality is the vast majority of americans are overeating slightly all the time and by the time you hit 30 you can

[andresayz4545]

@lazur1 I started out last christmas weighing 250 pounds, calculated my metabolic rate to be somwhere between 1700-2100 calories depending on activity level, I started eating 1200 calories a day and lifting weights, since christmas ive lost around 65 pounds gone from bench pressing 150 lbs for 1 rep to benching 210 lbs for 2 or 3 last I checked in that time so I'm definately not wasting away, currently I'm 5'9 185 lbs with 53 inch shoulders and 33 inch waist, I wish to reach and maintain 175 lbs

[andresayz4545]

@lazur1 I'm talking about the rhesus monkey on which the experiment was done, and I disagree with the comment on being able to maintain weight on any caloric load, you can eat differing amounts of food that will either cause you to gain, lose or maintain weight and it al revolves around how many calories you burn in a day, if you're burning 1800 calories a day and eating 2500 you wil not maintain your present weight and if you can I want you to do it and show me.