Calorie Restriction: Life Extension or Self-Starvation?
Cutting calories isn't just for dieters anymore. A growing number of people are embracing extreme, calorie-restricted diets in the hopes that it will drastically extend their lifespan...to 120 or beyond. (See also "Extreme Calorie Restriction for Long Life" on MSNBC.com).
Proponents of Calorie Restriction (or CR) typically eat 30-40% fewer calories than it would take to maintain what is generally considered to be a "healthy" weight. They generally lose quite a bit of weight before stabilizing at a much lower body weight. The motivation for such extreme deprivation? Animal studies in everything from fruit flies to primates indicate that CR can extend the maximum lifespan of the animal in question as much as 20 or 25%. There are no human studies verifying that CR will have the same effect on humans, but short-term studies show that CR does reduce biomarkers for aging along with lowering the risk of chronic diseases like heart disease and diabetes. For many, that's evidence enough.
CR is a difficult lifestyle. Many who practice it admit to dealing with constant hunger and obsession with food. In a society where every social situation and celebration seems to focus on food, the CR lifestyle can be isolating. It's also time-consuming. When you are eating very few calories, it becomes difficult to ensure adequate intake of protein, essential fatty acids, and vitamins and minerals. There is literally no room for empty calories and meticulous meal planning and tracking becomes a necessity. (Nutrition Data has a big following in the CR community because our dietary analysis tools make it easier to practice Calorie Restriction with Optimal Nutrition, or CRON.)
Whatever its potential benefits, CR is obviously too austere for the vast majority of the (mostly overweight) population. And, predictably, the biotech companies are racing to develop drugs that will mimic the beneficial effects of CR without the deprivation. But in the meantime, CR is attracting more and more baby-boomers determined to forestall the march of time.
What's your personal view on calorie restriction? Would you be willing to put up with daily hunger in exchange for 10, 20, or even 30 extra healthy years?
Please add any additional comments below.
Posted by: CarolG | Oct 10, 2007 6:53:14 PM
sometimes have no problems to stay at 2000 cals a day with raw fruits and vegetables some dark bread joghurt and fish, especially when making sports.
But I do not force it. I think 20-30 years is not a lifespan to struggle for. maybe for 100 years? :-)
Posted by: Marcus Koestler | Oct 11, 2007 2:58:11 AM
This sounds an awfully lot like justification for anorexia.
Posted by: Heather | Oct 11, 2007 10:04:50 AM
I agree, it sounds like borderline eating disorder. The body still needs nutrients. I've lost a lot of weight on Weight Watchers and have been more or less maintaining for three years now eating less than I did PRE-WW...it's a lifestyle change that involves, yes, cutting out calories and burning more through exercise... but it's by no means an issue of self-starvation. I think that is dangerous....
Posted by: Melissa | Oct 11, 2007 1:10:39 PM
If CR is maintained at a healthy level, I think it is perfectly fine, especailly for a more short-term goal: weight loss. Obviously eating only 1000 cals or less a day can be unhealthy, but how do you explain the religious rituals that promote fasting and the cleansing that it brings. Trust your body signs and make sure you get proper nutrients - but CR at a reasonable rate probably does extent life spans.
Posted by: Tylerq | Oct 11, 2007 9:03:52 PM
CR isn't a form of dieting, starvation or eating disorder. It's simply not partaking in the indulgence that surrounds today's society.
I believe people on healthy CR shouldn't feel hungry all the time, or obsess over food. It's quite easy for find meals you know the approx. calorie count and work your eating patterns around these foods.
It's a very healthy way to live, you'd be amazed by the amount of issues that can be overcome by simply eating less. Even if you're not gaining weight you can still be eating too much which leaves undigested food entering the large intestine to be digested by bacteria which release all sorts of toxins.
Jon
Posted by: Jonathan Benson | Oct 12, 2007 5:24:15 AM
CR sounds a lot like an eating disorder - I doubt you would be able to get all the carbs, protein, fat, calcium, fiber and vitamins/minerals you need for a healthy body by eating in such a low-cal way. Even if it is proven to extend your lifespan wouldn't you rather enjoy the occasional treat than always be obsessing about what you eat? Life is for living, not starving yourself!
Posted by: Jo Dee | Oct 12, 2007 3:13:26 PM
We are so twisted as a nation of people. Everthing is extremist form food to views on sex. I saw that NY coupole profiled on telvision who follow this lifestyle. The woman and man both looked 10 years older than I thought they were. The woman had no figure and looked like a sack of bones. The man looked exhausted ands gaunt. They were dancing (for their daily exericse!) and it made me sick, lifeless and slack and painfully dragging.
The notion of never eating a slice of apple pie or a french fry even if I only do it once a year is not worth extra years. Face it people those extra years dont come bewteen 230-40. They come at 80. Oh joy!
Posted by: Brian Brown Fleming | Oct 13, 2007 6:54:50 AM
Check out this new research, reported by Life Extension Foundation:
http://www.lef.org/newsletter/2007/2007_10_26.htm?source=eNewsLetter2007Wk43-2&key=archive
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Oct 29, 2007 11:38:03 AM
Calorie restriction within limits may be good for older people leading a sedantary life.But I do not subscribe to a life of starvation in order to increase my life span (If it is true!).I will rather adjust my calorie intake to match my activities and body requirements.
Posted by: Prof. TKG Namboodhiri | Nov 5, 2007 6:45:07 AM
Wow. Nearly 50% of respondents say that "life is long enough" that they don't want to live longer?
Well I do CR (male, ~1800 calories) and enjoy life so much I want as much of it as possible! If you enjoy life enough to want more of it CR is the only practical method currently known to science to extend maximun lifespan.
Check out the cardiovascular health biomarkers of people on CR (Fontana and Holloszy - study on effects of CR on the risk factors for atherosclerosis in humans). If you have known people in their final years with long lingering heart problems then, imo, you would want to do CR just to avoid that.
Posted by: Rodney | Nov 5, 2007 7:01:44 AM
It's quite possible to get in enough nutrients on a calorically restricted
diet - not only are there known diet plans for this, but we and
mice/etcetera are not very different, and caloric restriction has been
proven to work on them since the 30s. Current research on primates is
likewise looking promising.
In regard to the amount by which CR could extend life, I would say that CR
is more promising not as much as a means to do it in and of itself to a
degree justifying the trouble, but as a means of getting one (with less
damage) to when scientists (like me) can do other, less troublesome means of
lifespan extension.
In regard to the claims of "caloric restriction is only good for weight
loss"... I would personally say that any diet that one cannot follow for
many, many _years_ is not going to be a sustainable means of weight loss -
one will gain it back. Permanent reduction in caloric intake (and/or
increase in exercise expenditure of calories, but that doesn't help with
extending maximum lifespan) is the only means of doing it.
And in regard to the poster who was bemoaning the extra years of life being
at the end - as well as what I wrote above about extending one's life to
where other treatments have developed further, CR actually has been shown to
delay a lot of the diseases of aging also. CR mice don't typically die of
anything very obvious, nor painful (not of cancer) - they die in their
sleep, most frequently.
Finally, I note several people thinking that CR is an eating disorder. I
suggest that this reaction may be due to being defensive about one's eating
habits and/or the prevalence of various eating disorders in our culture (the
most notable one being _overeating_, of course, as witness the rising rates
of obesity...). Put simply, anorexia is quite unhealthy; people doing CR are
interested in being healthy.
Posted by: Allen Smith | Nov 5, 2007 7:40:23 AM
Monica's statement that "Proponents of Calorie Restriction (or CR) typically eat 30-40% fewer calories than it would take to maintain what is generally considered to be a 'healthy' weight" is not correct.
People practicing calorie restriction try to stay in the lower half of the normal BMI range as defined by the Institute of Medicine (normal: 18.5 to 25). Cutting calories below those needed to maintain a BMI of at least 18.5 is NEVER advised.
Posted by: Tony | Nov 5, 2007 7:45:46 AM
Also worth noting is that of the people who have voted in your poll, 16% are doing CR and 2.7% tried it and gave up.
In other words, of those voting who have tried CR, about 85% are still doing it. This appears to contradict the statements that it is just about impossible for anyone to continue doing it, does it not?
Posted by: Rodney | Nov 5, 2007 9:49:41 AM
I didn't care for the choices in the voting questions. I practice a form of CR with the ON (optimal nutrition). There is no point in talking about CR without Optimal Nutrition. That is the only way in my opinion, and when talking about CR to anyone who asks, it comes down to my friends not wanting to give up "goodies" or take the trouble to even try it. It can be an obsession if you are not willing to let go of being rigid about it. Don't guess about what you are eating. Weigh and measure using the software to track nutrients, something that must be done in the beginning. After that you can ease up, and above all, enjoy your food, or what is the point? You could call it sensible feeding. I will eat a cookie at a meeting, and double up on greens at my next meal, it doesn't have to be hard.
Posted by: Margo | Nov 6, 2007 7:22:01 AM
I also practice CR. At age 52, I have more energy than 90% of men my age. Mostly I only avoid bread and other (nutritionally deficient) starches, and gluttony in general. I almost never feel hungry. Life is good.
Posted by: Otto Hunt | Nov 6, 2007 9:52:01 AM
We practice it CRON. We have foods we like to eat. We like the fruits and veggies. It changed our blood biomarkers all for the better. That in and of itself speaks volumes to what it can do in the fight against obesity in our society and others. It gives a way for people to overcome troubling diseases. We enjoy our life and seek to live on this beautiful blue orb as long as possible to enjoy our families and those who love us. The optimum nutrition part gives us the opportunity to really evaluate what we eat. We love pie and doughnuts. Do we eat them all the time, nope. Do we have treats once in a while? Yes. Life is for living!
Posted by: Bob | Nov 6, 2007 10:25:52 AM
would anyone currently practicing CRON like to post a typical meal plan so that people can get a sense of what it's like? If you would, enter your mealplan as if it were a recipe in your pantry and click analyze. Then, post the URL of the anlysis here. Users can load that URL to see your meal plan and the ND analysis (no-one will have access to your pantry).
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Nov 6, 2007 10:39:22 AM
I'm over weight and working toward losing my extra weight. I was 275 pounds now I'm 200. I'm off my dibetic meds.I have OA and Fibromyalgia been sick for twenty years with it.The weight watcher wants women to eat 1200 a day that is close to. And men are to eat 1800 a day that is close to Cr.All the dietican that I went to told me 1200-1400 and day, close to CR. Cr is around the same for men and women.I feel sicker than my thin mother-inlaw who was size 4-5 she is 91 and she just has a few problems. She has normal blood normal blood pressure. She is in better health than me. I'm a good example of what over eating dose. My mother inlaw is a good example of CR. By the way she still grows her own food. All of her friends died years ago they went has thin. I hoping to get down to 1100 a day.And I know it will help me with my problems in life and I know it will help me live longer. Yvonne
Posted by: Yvonne Murray | Nov 9, 2007 4:15:01 AM
Monica: The best and most comprehensive answer to your question would be to read: 'Beyond the 120-Year Diet' - Dr Roy Walford, a gerontologist at UCLA for 30 years and the foremost authority on CR.
And/or read 'Longevity Diet' - Lisa Walford.
Posted by: rodney | Nov 14, 2007 8:15:28 AM
I have just started researching CR for my health (quad bypass, Type II diabetes, not particularly overweight or out-of-shape or poor diet). I have not yet discussed with my doctor but initially the justifications and benefits seem sound and well documented. In response to the eating-disorder comments, anorexia is for body image, CR is for health.
Posted by: Bill Merritt | Nov 27, 2007 10:49:27 AM
Has anyone out there on a CRON diet tried the Paleo diet? I would like some feed back on anyone who has tried this protein intense regimen. Could it possibly be healthy? I am not promoting any one diet. Just looking for more information. I am convinced that a CRON diet is the way to go.
Posted by: John Kerr | Nov 27, 2007 11:01:14 PM
I was slightly overweight in high school and slowly drifted towards obese during my uni days. I eventually managed to stick to a CRAN eating plan during my mid thirties and reduced my weight from around 100kg (BMI approx 32) to 70 kg (BMI approx 22) over a two year period. I switched from eating around 3,000-3,500 kcals a day (with junk food snacking and dessert after dinner) to sticking with a standard menu than I ate almost every day. It had a healthy balance of protein, carbs and fat and adequate dietary fibre (much more fruit and veg that I'd eating before). The total kcals was around 1,8000 so it wasn't an extreme form of CRAN, and didn't leave me constantly hungry once I adapted to the new menu. At that time I was doing aerobic and weight training at the gym three times a week, and got quite fit. Unfortunately I then changed jobs and stopped going to the gym after work. After getting married and having kids I also stopped eating according to my CRAN menu, and slowly put on weight again. I've now been back up around 95-105kg for several years and need to lose weight and exeercise. This year I've restarted eating according to my CRAN plan and should be able to lose about 0.5-1.0 kg per week until I stabilise around 65-70 kg by year's end. Coupled with a 30 min walk each lunchtime this should improve my health and be a sustainable lifestyle over the long term. Whether or not it extends my lifespan doesn't really matter (and starting CRAN again at 46 it's unlikely to have much effect), it should improve the quality of whatever my lifespan turns out to be.
Regards
http://enoughwealth.com
Posted by: Enough Wealth | Jan 1, 2008 1:20:59 AM
Six years ago in an attempt to lose weight, I restricted my diet and would not eat after 2pm except for sipping tea. I ate fruit thru the morning, drank tea and had a salad with lots of veggies for lunch with some protein. I lost weight and felt the best I ever had in my life. More energy, happier etc.I exercised and generally had more energy for everything. I maintained that for three years and then the eating and weight increased for another 3 years. I am now sluggish and stuck in a rut however I am going to restrict my calorie intake again. It worked the best for me as most diets are a pain to follow and I have not been as successful as I was before. I can;t wait to feel better!
Posted by: Quinn | Mar 10, 2008 6:06:35 AM
I have lots of energy for everything I do. I eat raw fruit and vegetables, absolutely raw fresh caught sea fish,raw egg yolks(2, two or three times a week)raw soups and that's it. No grains.Sometimes some absolutely raw yoghurt too. I feel a million dollars, cycle up to 50 kms most days, walk, garden and swim. I go to bed about 8.30pm and get up when I wake up..usually about 4.30 to 5am. I am 69 years chronologically speaking but in fact my 'age' is indeterminate.I have just finished my annual long fast. This year it was forty days and forty nights long..a total water fast. I am in reecovery mode following that now. I feel healthy and very very well.
Posted by: Jackie V olkov | Mar 23, 2008 7:45:31 PM
I actually eat around 1400 to 1500 at max everyday. For me it is very easy for the reason that I get satisfied with very small amounts of food. Is this bad or good? I also spend hours exercising everyday, a minimum of 1 hour. I have never tried restricting my food intakes, i just eat amounts that satisfy me and using the pantry and calculator tools of ND i have discovered that my daily food intake does not go over 1500.
Posted by: Andres | Apr 2, 2008 2:40:57 PM
I disagree
Posted by: me | Apr 14, 2008 7:01:01 AM
I am pretty sure that humans can experience some benefits from temporary fasting, but extended periods of calorie restriction will lead to starvation.
Most animals that I am aware of go through periods of bounty, where they eat as much as possible, and starvation, where times are tough and they live of reserves. I believe humans may benefit from similar experiences but we would need to be careful to mimic the patterns of the past or else we would just be setting ourselves up for more diseases.
Posted by: Kat | Apr 29, 2008 3:27:57 PM
Maybe some practitioners of CRON enjoy the structure. But I would fear that it is a form of anorexia nervosa for some or could be a path to OCD.
Is there a clear cut way for a person to know that their patient/friend/loved one is safely practicing CRON and not falling into unhealthy behaviors?