Home   |   Contact   |   Help

Get Our Newsletter
Sign up for our free newsletter to get training tips and stay up to date on Catalyst Athletics, and get a FREE issue of the Performance Menu journal.

Go Back   Catalyst Athletics Forums > Training > Fitness, Strength & CrossFit

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-22-2009, 05:46 AM   #141
Darryl Shaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 708
Default

This article on calorie restriction makes some interesting points about various dietary strategies for achieving longevity.

http://spot.colorado.edu/~gravesp/Di...Longevity.html
Darryl Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2009, 08:53 AM   #142
Gary Ohm
Member
 
Gary Ohm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Paso Robles, Kaliforniastan
Posts: 120
Default

Thanks for the link Darryl. I had looked towards CR a while ago. I am very intrigued by it. But then I read an article by a CR devotee. He lost 25% of is bodyweight and is feeling "great". However, he said he used to surf 19 to 20 hours a week, and now he can only go 4 hours a week due to energy constraints from the lack of food. Well forget that!!! I don't surf 20 hours a week or anything like that, but I am an active guy and I like to do stuff. I will curb my diet and eat more cleanly and keep exercising and work on flexibility, but I just don't think that CR is in my future.
Gary Ohm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2009, 09:11 AM   #143
Garrett Smith
Senior Member
 
Garrett Smith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,368
Default

From the CR article:
Quote:
"To me the whole calorie restriction thing is like the idea that you shouldn't drive your car, because people sometimes have accidents and crash into each other. So you can make your car live longer by not driving it, but where's the fun in that?" But, as someone responded on that same newsgroup, "The fun is that someday - perhaps within 30-50 years - science will be able to "roll back the aging clock" and make us all young again. And keep us that way. So we try to make our cars last until that day comes. Because then we can drive them forever."
Personally, I'd like to have some fun now (ie. exercise, "driving the car") and try to make life last longer while doing IF (which IMO, doesn't really interfere with a relatively "normal" lifestyle).

To me, while CR may have its benefits, it also sounds like a great way for certain people to justify their anorexia.

That being said, I did think that was a well thought article, even though hardly any thought/space was dedicated to fasting (and IF wasn't even mentioned). The author may not feel qualified to speak on that topic, which I understand.
__________________
Garrett Smith NMD CSCS BS, aka "Dr. G"
RepairRecoverRestore.com - Blood, Saliva, and Stool Testing
My radio show - The Path to Strength and Health
Garrett Smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2009, 11:50 AM   #144
Mike ODonnell
Senior Member
 
Mike ODonnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,596
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Ohm View Post
Thanks for the link Darryl. I had looked towards CR a while ago. I am very intrigued by it. But then I read an article by a CR devotee. He lost 25% of is bodyweight and is feeling "great". However, he said he used to surf 19 to 20 hours a week, and now he can only go 4 hours a week due to energy constraints from the lack of food. Well forget that!!! I don't surf 20 hours a week or anything like that, but I am an active guy and I like to do stuff. I will curb my diet and eat more cleanly and keep exercising and work on flexibility, but I just don't think that CR is in my future.
I agree....what's the point of living 80 years if you sit around and don't experience life.....not that the James Dean hard and fast die young lifestyle is better. Moral of the story, eat less and you can live longer....but IF has better promise since it can have most all the benefits of CR + you don't lose muscle or energy. But then again....this is all speculation as they have yet to run a 100yr human trial on CR vs IF.
__________________
Fitness Spotlight
The IF Life
Mike ODonnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2009, 01:10 PM   #145
Mike ODonnell
Senior Member
 
Mike ODonnell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,596
Default

another interesting quote

Quote:
identical twins who were separated at birth and reared apart. If genes were most important, you would expect the twins to die at about the same age. In fact, they don't, and the average difference convinced the scientists that only about 20% to 30% of how long we live is genetically determined. The dominant factor is lifestyle.


you can't change your genes, but you can change what you eat and how much you exercise. "The lesson is pretty clear from my point of view in terms of what the average person should be doing," says Perls. "I strongly believe that with some changes in health-related behavior, each of us can earn the right to have at least 25 years beyond the age of 60--years of healthy life at good function. The disappointing news is that it requires work and willpower."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...4967-2,00.html

and the real take home messages
Quote:
the traditional way of life seems tailor-made for living forever--one day at a time.

There's a poetry of common sense in their scheme for immortality. Eat sensibly. Keep walking. Keep knitting. If you can't keep friends, make new ones. Plan so much invigorating work that there's just no time to die. And no regret when you do.
__________________
Fitness Spotlight
The IF Life
Mike ODonnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2009, 02:00 PM   #146
Kevin Perry
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,670
Default

The bottom part is so true
Kevin Perry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 10:27 PM   #147
Craig Loizides
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 120
Default

I'm not an expert on CR, but it seems like most studies start by letting a rat in captivity eat as much rat chow as it wants (what's paleo for a rat anyway?). Then they decrease the amount of calories and the animals live longer. Well, I have no doubt that the average person working at a desk and eating 3500 calories of fast food everyday would live longer if they significantly reduced calories. Is it necessarily true for a lean individual eating 2000 paleo calories a day as well? It seems more like evidence that overeating on low nutrient foods is bad for you than reducing calories is good for you. Ad libitum eating is going to be highly dependent on the types of foods you're eating. I thought it was funny that the CR society is recommending basically a zone / paleo diet with 1800-2200 calories.

It seems like body fat is bad, lean mass is good (to an extent), and less calories is good (to an extent). So maybe it makes sense to try to maximize lean mass to calories consumed. Any thoughts?
Craig Loizides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2009, 10:51 PM   #148
Craig Loizides
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 120
Default

Clarence Bass has written a lot of articles on aging, diet, and exercise.
http://www.cbass.com/index.html

The comment in the CR article about exercise not helping CR rats made me think of a couple articles.

Weight training reverses aging in skeletal muscle.
http://www.cbass.com/Mitochondria.htm


Subjects who spent more than 3 hours each week in vigorous physical activity (such as running, cycling, and lifting weights) had longer telomeres than subjects 10 years younger, who exercised less than 16 minutes a week.

The researchers suggest that exercise may inoculate the body against oxidative stress and “up-regulate anti-inflammatory processes,”
http://www.cbass.com/Strengthtrainin...0telomeres.htm

They weren't studying CR practitioners, but it would be interesting to see a study of CR rats on some sort of sprint intervals routine.
Craig Loizides is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2009, 05:46 AM   #149
Darryl Shaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 708
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craig Loizides View Post
I'm not an expert on CR, but it seems like most studies start by letting a rat in captivity eat as much rat chow as it wants (what's paleo for a rat anyway?). Then they decrease the amount of calories and the animals live longer. Well, I have no doubt that the average person working at a desk and eating 3500 calories of fast food everyday would live longer if they significantly reduced calories. Is it necessarily true for a lean individual eating 2000 paleo calories a day as well? It seems more like evidence that overeating on low nutrient foods is bad for you than reducing calories is good for you. Ad libitum eating is going to be highly dependent on the types of foods you're eating. I thought it was funny that the CR society is recommending basically a zone / paleo diet with 1800-2200 calories.

It seems like body fat is bad, lean mass is good (to an extent), and less calories is good (to an extent). So maybe it makes sense to try to maximize lean mass to calories consumed. Any thoughts?
I think you're probably right about it being a good idea to maximize lean mass to calories consumed if longevity is your goal because if the Okinawans are anything to go by the secret to their longevity seems to be eating a nutrient dense plant based, but not vegetarian, diet that provides just enough calories to get them through their days work farming, fishing or whatever. That way they start out lean from an early age and stay that way throughout their lives without any major fluctuations in weight post puberty. I also suspect that unlike the average scrawny anorexic CR enthusiast the Okinawans must have enough physical activity built into their daily lives to enable them to maintain their lean body mass throughout most of their lives.
Darryl Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2009, 06:46 AM   #150
Darryl Shaw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 708
Default

Quote:
Calorie Restriction Increases Muscle Mitochondrial Biogenesis in Healthy Humans

Editors' Summary

Background.
Life expectancy (the average life span) greatly increased during the 20th century in most countries, largely due to improved hygiene, nutrition, and health care. One possible approach to further increase human life span is “caloric restriction.” A calorie-restricted diet provides all the nutrients necessary for a healthy life but minimizes the energy (calories) supplied in the diet. This type of diet increases the life span of mice and delays the onset of age-related chronic diseases such as heart disease and stroke. There are also hints that people who eat a calorie-restricted diet might live longer than those who overeat. People living in Okinawa, Japan, have a lower energy intake than the rest of the Japanese population and an extremely long life span. In addition, calorie-restricted diets beneficially affect several biomarkers of aging, including decreased insulin sensitivity (a precursor to diabetes). But how might caloric restriction slow aging? A major factor in the age-related decline of bodily functions is the accumulation of “oxidative damage” in the body's proteins, fats, and DNA. Oxidants—in particular, chemicals called “free radicals”—are produced when food is converted to energy by cellular structures called mitochondria. One theory for how caloric restriction slows aging is that it lowers free-radical production by inducing the formation of efficient mitochondria.

Why Was This Study Done?
Despite hints that caloric restriction might have similar effects in people as in rodents, there have been few well-controlled studies on the effect of good quality calorie-reduced diets in healthy people. It is also unknown whether an energy deficit produced by increasing physical activity while eating the same amount of food has the same effects as caloric restriction. Finally, it is unclear how caloric restriction alters mitochondrial function. The Comprehensive Assessment of Long-term Effects of Reducing Intake of Energy (CALERIE) organization is investigating the effect of caloric restriction interventions on physiology, body composition, and risk factors for age-related diseases. In this study, the researchers have tested the hypothesis that short-term caloric deficit (with or without exercise) increases the efficiency of mitochondria in human muscle.

What Did the Researchers Do and Find?
The researchers enrolled 36 healthy overweight but non-obese young people into their study. One-third of them received 100% of their energy requirements in their diet; the caloric restriction (CR) group had their calorie intake reduced by 25%; and the caloric restriction plus exercise (CREX) group had their calorie intake reduced by 12.5% and their energy expenditure increased by 12.5%. The researchers found that a 25% caloric deficit for six months, achieved by diet alone or by diet plus exercise, decreased 24-hour whole body energy expenditure (i.e., overall calories burned for body function), which suggests improved mitochondrial function. Their analysis of genes involved in mitochondria formation indicated that CR and CREX both increased the number of mitochondria in skeletal muscle. Both interventions also reduced the amount of DNA damage—a marker of oxidative stress—in the participants' muscles.

What Do These Findings Mean?
These results indicate that a short-term caloric deficit, whether achieved by diet or by diet plus exercise, induces the formation of “efficient mitochondria” in people just as in rodents. The induction of these efficient mitochondria in turn reduces oxidative damage in skeletal muscles. Consequently, this adaptive response to caloric restriction might have the potential to slow aging and increase longevity in humans as in other animals. However, this six-month study obviously provides no direct evidence for this, and, by analogy with studies in rodents, an increase in longevity might require lifelong caloric restriction. The results here suggest that even short-term caloric restriction can produce beneficial physiological changes, but more research is necessary before it becomes clear whether caloric restriction should be recommended to healthy individuals.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/art...?artid=1808482
Darryl Shaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Subscribe to our Newsletter


Receive emails with training tips, news updates, events info, sale notifications and more.
ASK GREG

Submit your question to be answered by Greg Everett in the Performance Menu or on the website

Submit Your Question
WEIGHTLIFTING TEAM

Catalyst Athletics is a USA Weightlifting team of competitive Olympic-style weightlifters with multiple national team medals.

Read More
Olympic Weightlifting Book
Catalyst Athletics
Contact Us
About
Help
Newsletter
Products & Services
Gym
Store
Seminars
Weightlifting Team
Performance Menu
Magazine Home
Subscriber Login
Issues
Articles
Workouts
About the Program
Workout Archives
Exercise Demos
Text Only
Instructional Content
Exercise Demos
Video Gallery
Free Articles
Free Recipes
Resources
Recommended Books & DVDs
Olympic Weightlifting Guide
Discussion Forum
Weight Conversion Calculator