Feel Hungry Your Whole Life, Live Longer
Lisa Walford touts Calorie Restriction for life extension. I knew her dad, Roy, the UCLA gerontologist who came up with CR (and knew Lisa, a well-known yoga teacher, in passing through knowing Roy). How much longer you actually live, nobody's too clear. The problem is, you get the extra two weeks or two years, or whatever it is, when you're 90, not when you're 39. Here's more from an article by Joanna Glasner in Wired:
Aubrey de Grey, a Cambridge University gerontologist, recently wrote a paper (.pdf link at the Wired story link above) concluding that CR is unlikely to add more than two or three years to the mean or maximum life span. De Grey said he is skeptical of CR's potential for radical life extension in part because he sees no reason why it would be advantageous from an evolutionary perspective."Basically, there has been insufficient selective pressure for us to retain the ability to live 20 years longer than normal in response to nutrient deprivation," he wrote in an e-mail. De Grey added that he has no objection to moderate CR for health reasons, so long as practitioners don't expect to live a few decades longer as a result.
But moderate health benefits hardly seem to justify the effort of a CR diet, noted one contributor on the website Fight Aging, who wrote:
"What a trade-off: Feeling hungry your whole 80+3 years, or just enjoy your meals and die at 80."
Not even ardent CR supporters can accurately estimate how many years the diet might add to their lives, but most CR followers believe the diet offers potential for life extension much greater than two or three years.
Studies of mice, worms and other animals fed a restricted-calorie diet support the notion of radical life-extending benefits. A study of Labrador retrievers published in 2002 also found that a 25 percent restriction in food intake increased median life span and delayed the onset of signs of chronic disease in the dogs.
When I was friends with Roy, and went over there for dinner, my motto was always "eat beforehand." You'd get a piece of polenta and two spears of asparagus. Okay, you'd get more than that...but not much more. What I did learn from Roy was to eat a "high-nutrient" diet -- ie, the best, most nutrient-rich food available. I think I'll stick to the French diet: small portions of high-nutrient, high-fat food that makes you feel happy you're eating...as opposed to three lettuce leaves and two beans, which must make you feel like an anorexic bunny.
Man, you'd be miserable for most of the second half of your life with these types of diets. Just like when you're on a carb - restricted diet, you're bound to get cranky and nasty after awhile.
Dmac at August 26, 2005 6:56 AM
I'm with Amy on this one. I've spent several years of my life on "restricted calories" trying to lose weight, and it's no way to live (or lose weight). I've been much healthier (and lighter) since I gave up restricting fats and calories and started focusing on foods that are tasty, fresh, and nutrient-dense.
deja pseu at August 26, 2005 7:54 AM
MIserable for the second half of your life? I was miserable after the first half of "dinner"!
Amy Alkon at August 26, 2005 8:37 AM
Leave a comment