Starving to live
October 24, 2006 12:19 PM Subscribe
Julian Dibbell, the same journalist that lived off virtual cash for a year, gives Calorie Restriction a 9-week test drive and tells all about it in this long New York Mag piece. Sure preliminary evidence says you could lengthen your life by 50 years, but is 150 years of starving yourself worth it?
Not to me, but the idea is interesting. If nothing else I'd like to find out what the actual mechanism of calorie restriction is that extends life so far.
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:38 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:38 PM on October 24, 2006
it's a great story. I just don't understand how a diet like that doesn't completely fuck up your blood-sugar levels -- to significantly reduce hunger you must stabilize those levels. otherwise a usually well-fed, industrialized-country person would just go insane with hunger
scary, really
posted by matteo at 12:39 PM on October 24, 2006
scary, really
posted by matteo at 12:39 PM on October 24, 2006
So, cut your calories in half and quadruple the amount of time you spend thinking about food.
posted by Bookhouse at 12:43 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by Bookhouse at 12:43 PM on October 24, 2006
Because:
"Some have suggested that the threat of starvation triggers certain self-preservative responses in animal physiologies; others have pursued a sort of “fuel efficiency” hypothesis, proposing that lightening the body’s load of food-energy processing reduces wear and tear on cellular machinery. But no one theory has ever settled the question firmly enough to prove that humans would benefit from CR as much as other animals have."
Both of these reasons seem a little thin - especially the "self-preservation response" - for a lot of reasons, given this:
"In lab studies going back to the thirties, mice on severely limited diets have consistently lived as much as 50 percent longer than the oldest of their well-fed peers—the rodent equivalent of a human life stretched past the age of 160. And it isn’t just a mouse thing: Yeast cells, spiders, vinegar worms, rhesus monkeys—by now a veritable menagerie of species has been shown to benefit from CR’s life-extending effects."
Is such a large increase in lifespan, I could understand 10 to 20% increases if it was something to do with slowing down the metabolism and reducing "wear and tear" on cellular machinery, but 50%?
I NEED MORE SCIENCE!
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:43 PM on October 24, 2006
"Some have suggested that the threat of starvation triggers certain self-preservative responses in animal physiologies; others have pursued a sort of “fuel efficiency” hypothesis, proposing that lightening the body’s load of food-energy processing reduces wear and tear on cellular machinery. But no one theory has ever settled the question firmly enough to prove that humans would benefit from CR as much as other animals have."
Both of these reasons seem a little thin - especially the "self-preservation response" - for a lot of reasons, given this:
"In lab studies going back to the thirties, mice on severely limited diets have consistently lived as much as 50 percent longer than the oldest of their well-fed peers—the rodent equivalent of a human life stretched past the age of 160. And it isn’t just a mouse thing: Yeast cells, spiders, vinegar worms, rhesus monkeys—by now a veritable menagerie of species has been shown to benefit from CR’s life-extending effects."
Is such a large increase in lifespan, I could understand 10 to 20% increases if it was something to do with slowing down the metabolism and reducing "wear and tear" on cellular machinery, but 50%?
I NEED MORE SCIENCE!
posted by Divine_Wino at 12:43 PM on October 24, 2006
Ultimately this sort of quest is born not in love of life, but in fear of death.
posted by hermitosis at 12:44 PM on October 24, 2006 [6 favorites]
posted by hermitosis at 12:44 PM on October 24, 2006 [6 favorites]
(anecdotical evidence -- a friend followed his then-Vegan wife down a similar path, near-starvation by a drastic, DRASTIC cut in caloric intake. his weight dropped dramatically in just a few weeks -- we all thought he had terminal cancer, seriously -- just like his energy levels. very low blood sugar made him either weak or angry/aggressive. he finally came back to his senses, his wife shortly afterwards. recently I came back from a trip to the Alps and brought back to him some delicious local country sausages -- he is a bit of a gourmet. later that day, his not-so-strictly-anymore Vegan wife was discovered in the kitchen munching on a juicy smoked sausage)
posted by matteo at 12:44 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by matteo at 12:44 PM on October 24, 2006
I'm with hermitosis. Why bother extending a life propbably not worth living?
posted by craven_morhead at 12:46 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by craven_morhead at 12:46 PM on October 24, 2006
I think the calorie restriction people are probably deluded. There isnt really much evidence that calorie restriction increases lifespan in humans. It has been demonstrated in some other species but this doesn mean it translates into humans, and I question wether the effect 'stacks' with the other life extending effects of modern medicine.
The fact that nobody has actually ever manage to get past 122 given the billions of people who ever lived indicates that there probably isnt a simplistic solution to the problem. I think telomerase fuse times (the limit on cell reproduction) cannot be effected by calorie restriction.
I know a person who has been on this diet for about 15 years now. He is totally sickly and weak and I think hes getting dumber because his brain is shrinking. I dunno, but living like that couldnt be worth it.
posted by Osmanthus at 12:46 PM on October 24, 2006
The fact that nobody has actually ever manage to get past 122 given the billions of people who ever lived indicates that there probably isnt a simplistic solution to the problem. I think telomerase fuse times (the limit on cell reproduction) cannot be effected by calorie restriction.
I know a person who has been on this diet for about 15 years now. He is totally sickly and weak and I think hes getting dumber because his brain is shrinking. I dunno, but living like that couldnt be worth it.
posted by Osmanthus at 12:46 PM on October 24, 2006
Do these calorie restricted people get any exercise or do they just lie around on fainting couches talking about their crazy starvation euphoria and how it's all going to be worth it when they spend the next 40 years thinking about how much they miss hamburgers?
posted by mckenney at 12:47 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by mckenney at 12:47 PM on October 24, 2006
I thought we put people in eating disorder recovery centres for following diets like this.
posted by arcticwoman at 12:53 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by arcticwoman at 12:53 PM on October 24, 2006
And yet..."Man lives to 112, despite Junk food Diet"
I agree with Osmanthus. Given all the people who have unintentionally gone on CR diets and given that the supposed factor is a whopping 50% - then why havent we seen one documented case of someone who was destined to live until say 90, living to 135.
Genetic luck seems to play the biggest role assuming you avoid non-genetic diseases and accidents.
posted by vacapinta at 12:55 PM on October 24, 2006
I agree with Osmanthus. Given all the people who have unintentionally gone on CR diets and given that the supposed factor is a whopping 50% - then why havent we seen one documented case of someone who was destined to live until say 90, living to 135.
Genetic luck seems to play the biggest role assuming you avoid non-genetic diseases and accidents.
posted by vacapinta at 12:55 PM on October 24, 2006
Very good article. I too am with osmanthus, reserving judgment till more science comes in.
It seems to me that the writer's "in-retrospect-they-kinda-seem-like-a-cult" take on leaving CR behind is a terrible reason to let it go. If you get a bang out of it, if you are really convinced that it's going to help you, go for it. Everything new is initially done by a small number of people. Except naming your kind "Neveah," I guess, which actually is cultish.
posted by ibmcginty at 1:00 PM on October 24, 2006
It seems to me that the writer's "in-retrospect-they-kinda-seem-like-a-cult" take on leaving CR behind is a terrible reason to let it go. If you get a bang out of it, if you are really convinced that it's going to help you, go for it. Everything new is initially done by a small number of people. Except naming your kind "Neveah," I guess, which actually is cultish.
posted by ibmcginty at 1:00 PM on October 24, 2006
If this is true, I will stop eating entirely and LIVE FOREVER.
posted by Gamblor at 1:02 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by Gamblor at 1:02 PM on October 24, 2006
Weird, but I've been somewhat doing this since I was a kid in elementary school. I estimate my daily intake is normally under 2000 calories. I don't feel hunger pains in my stomach or I don't notice.
No breakfast for me. A late lunch around 2pm and a quick dinner around 8pm.
I was always in the very low percentiles for weight as a kid and basically never ate much. Not because I couldn't but because I stopped feeling hungry. As a kid, a doctor suggested putting me on a 3500 calorie diet. In college, I never gained the freshman 15 and really didn't gain the 15 lbs until grad. school. I think it was because I drank like a grad. student though.
I'm 31 but people always assume that I'm in my early 20s. Other relevant stats: I'm 5'3" and 125lbs, male. So my lack of height might be confusing people who try to determine my age.
posted by Cog at 1:05 PM on October 24, 2006
No breakfast for me. A late lunch around 2pm and a quick dinner around 8pm.
I was always in the very low percentiles for weight as a kid and basically never ate much. Not because I couldn't but because I stopped feeling hungry. As a kid, a doctor suggested putting me on a 3500 calorie diet. In college, I never gained the freshman 15 and really didn't gain the 15 lbs until grad. school. I think it was because I drank like a grad. student though.
I'm 31 but people always assume that I'm in my early 20s. Other relevant stats: I'm 5'3" and 125lbs, male. So my lack of height might be confusing people who try to determine my age.
posted by Cog at 1:05 PM on October 24, 2006
Grown in fermentation tanks from a cultured strain of the soil mold Fusarium venenatum, Quorn...
Ahmmm...I don't care if I live to 500, I am not spending all those extra years eating soil mold.
posted by spicynuts at 1:13 PM on October 24, 2006
Ahmmm...I don't care if I live to 500, I am not spending all those extra years eating soil mold.
posted by spicynuts at 1:13 PM on October 24, 2006
Yeah, I don't think I get 2500 calories a day, either. Probably something like 2000, 2100. I'm tall and feel like I could lose some weight. I don't know.
The best thing I can see coming out of this CR stuff is a careful examination of the nutrients you need to get through the day as healthily as possible, but it really seems like you could do it without getting all cult-freakish. Eat less, eat healthier, exercise more. Making a group ritual out of doing so seems pointless, contrived, and weird -- just do it.
My personal, totally unfounded theory on CR is that it works by generally reducing the amount of metabolism that occurs throughout your body. Telomeres, etc, as mentioned by Osmanthus would actually be affected if cells just split less. But then you heal less quickly, you generate new neurons much less quickly, you probably do everything less quickly, or at least, with lower ... fidelity, for lack of a better term. Eat a steak, drink a bottle of wine, have amazing sex, write a novel. Or, you know, have a tiny little bit of salad and a half-glass of wine and have little libido and get weird and cultish.
I don't know about you guys -- and, I know, it's not that simple, I just like to knock out comments like this on Mefi to spur conversation, really, it's not a medical journal -- but I'm going to go have lunch now.
posted by blacklite at 1:14 PM on October 24, 2006
The best thing I can see coming out of this CR stuff is a careful examination of the nutrients you need to get through the day as healthily as possible, but it really seems like you could do it without getting all cult-freakish. Eat less, eat healthier, exercise more. Making a group ritual out of doing so seems pointless, contrived, and weird -- just do it.
My personal, totally unfounded theory on CR is that it works by generally reducing the amount of metabolism that occurs throughout your body. Telomeres, etc, as mentioned by Osmanthus would actually be affected if cells just split less. But then you heal less quickly, you generate new neurons much less quickly, you probably do everything less quickly, or at least, with lower ... fidelity, for lack of a better term. Eat a steak, drink a bottle of wine, have amazing sex, write a novel. Or, you know, have a tiny little bit of salad and a half-glass of wine and have little libido and get weird and cultish.
I don't know about you guys -- and, I know, it's not that simple, I just like to knock out comments like this on Mefi to spur conversation, really, it's not a medical journal -- but I'm going to go have lunch now.
posted by blacklite at 1:14 PM on October 24, 2006
I have no problem with people transforming their daily routines outside of social norms based on spiritual intent or sheer will-power. And I think that skinny people (and orange people) are hot. I even have a soft spot in my heart for cult members (and leaders). If you are into something wild, for wild reasons, go for it and be wild!
But if you're into something wild for boring reasons and strive to be validated and accepted as normal, then please pardon me as I back away verrrrrrry sloooooowly...
posted by hermitosis at 1:17 PM on October 24, 2006
But if you're into something wild for boring reasons and strive to be validated and accepted as normal, then please pardon me as I back away verrrrrrry sloooooowly...
posted by hermitosis at 1:17 PM on October 24, 2006
I thought it was a pretty good article, and an interesting topic. I have known people who lived on 1200-1500 cals a day for years (to lose/maintain weight) and they probably would have been much better nourished if they were into this instead of just not eating much.
As an aside, I wanted to scream when the author used the word "manorexia" on p6. Men (and boys) get anorexia just like women (and girls) do. Anorexia is not a girly problem and adding an "m" doesn't make it more strong and manly.
posted by arcticwoman at 1:18 PM on October 24, 2006
As an aside, I wanted to scream when the author used the word "manorexia" on p6. Men (and boys) get anorexia just like women (and girls) do. Anorexia is not a girly problem and adding an "m" doesn't make it more strong and manly.
posted by arcticwoman at 1:18 PM on October 24, 2006
Since the summer before last I've been counting calories, I usually only eat about 2000, and I try for 1,500. The idea is to lose weight, but that dosn't really happen :P. And I'm certanly not counting neutriants.
Oh well.
posted by delmoi at 1:26 PM on October 24, 2006
Oh well.
posted by delmoi at 1:26 PM on October 24, 2006
1200 - 1800 calories is not that restricted. I'm not skinny (I wear a size 12) and I doubt I eat more than that. I was really surprised when I saw that was how much they were eating. For me to lose weight at all I have to go below 1000. In my high school anorexic days I was doing 600.
My other reaction to the article was extreme annoyance, which is my usual reaction to articles in New York magazine.
posted by maggiemaggie at 1:28 PM on October 24, 2006
My other reaction to the article was extreme annoyance, which is my usual reaction to articles in New York magazine.
posted by maggiemaggie at 1:28 PM on October 24, 2006
I did an "editorial vomit" at the word "manorexia", that's crap writing, I hate when the magazines let that stuff through.
I also agree that the interesting and useful thing about this is more data on proper nutrition.
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:29 PM on October 24, 2006
I also agree that the interesting and useful thing about this is more data on proper nutrition.
posted by Divine_Wino at 1:29 PM on October 24, 2006
I believe Socrates said it best when he said "The unhamburgered life isn't worth living."
posted by drezdn at 1:30 PM on October 24, 2006 [3 favorites]
posted by drezdn at 1:30 PM on October 24, 2006 [3 favorites]
THe phrase "dietary soduku" on page 2 is so dead on.
posted by notsnot at 1:31 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by notsnot at 1:31 PM on October 24, 2006
I wanted to scream when the author used the word "manorexia"...adding an "m" doesn't make it more strong and manly.
I react the same way every time I hear the word "manwich".
posted by Gamblor at 1:36 PM on October 24, 2006
I react the same way every time I hear the word "manwich".
posted by Gamblor at 1:36 PM on October 24, 2006
“I'm 5'3" and 125lbs, male”
Short guys tend to be more efficient. Larger folks (like m’self) can lug heavier things on an absolute basis, but pound for pound the smaller guys are stronger and need less fuel.
I like exercising tho, so the starving thing is out for me. Still - eat less move more, seems to be the key to health. Weird extreme here though.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:41 PM on October 24, 2006
Short guys tend to be more efficient. Larger folks (like m’self) can lug heavier things on an absolute basis, but pound for pound the smaller guys are stronger and need less fuel.
I like exercising tho, so the starving thing is out for me. Still - eat less move more, seems to be the key to health. Weird extreme here though.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:41 PM on October 24, 2006
Hey, maybe it works. I hope I live long enough on my pizza, hot dogs, beer and assorted crap diet to find out if one of these cats lives real long AND thinks it is worth it. I have a 96 year old great aunt who is not particularly thrilled with her life at this point. She is not suicidal or anything like that, but all her friends are toast and she has more aches and pains and issues than she wants. She is alive, but she sure ain't living.
posted by JohnnyGunn at 1:42 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by JohnnyGunn at 1:42 PM on October 24, 2006
...but is 150 years of starving yourself worth it?
People remove more than half of their lifespan by filling their lungs with smoke for cheap stimulation, reinforcing the very behaviour that will send them to the grave. "Worth it" is a very malleable premise in the context of American cultural values, take one glance at our "Health Care" system and that is quite obvious.
I'd call bullshit on the "preliminary" science, but if it's proven true I'd have to say you'd be wilfully ignorant to write this off based on some tenuous observation on quality versus quantity. This is the only counterpoint referenced thus far, and unless we're talking about the infinite lifespan of vampires or fucking elves I think that's a pretty lofty conceptual premise to entertain.
posted by prostyle at 1:53 PM on October 24, 2006
People remove more than half of their lifespan by filling their lungs with smoke for cheap stimulation, reinforcing the very behaviour that will send them to the grave. "Worth it" is a very malleable premise in the context of American cultural values, take one glance at our "Health Care" system and that is quite obvious.
I'd call bullshit on the "preliminary" science, but if it's proven true I'd have to say you'd be wilfully ignorant to write this off based on some tenuous observation on quality versus quantity. This is the only counterpoint referenced thus far, and unless we're talking about the infinite lifespan of vampires or fucking elves I think that's a pretty lofty conceptual premise to entertain.
posted by prostyle at 1:53 PM on October 24, 2006
I may be way off here, but is it possible the normal lab mice eat more than a wild mouse, and that the reduced intake mice are on more like a normal diet for wild mice? I imagine someone would have thought of that, but I can't figure out how you would measure a wild mouse's calory intake.
posted by MetaMonkey at 1:55 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by MetaMonkey at 1:55 PM on October 24, 2006
I did a calorie-restricted diet for about two years, not for longevity but to lose weight.
It worked great for that purpose, but during that time I have to say I would get weak and tired after any serious exertion.
If the science is correct (and the genetics look that way) that this is a way to extend one's life, there definitely seems to be a tradeoff in quality for quantity.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:04 PM on October 24, 2006
It worked great for that purpose, but during that time I have to say I would get weak and tired after any serious exertion.
If the science is correct (and the genetics look that way) that this is a way to extend one's life, there definitely seems to be a tradeoff in quality for quantity.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:04 PM on October 24, 2006
..but is 150 years of starving yourself worth it?
It is if those extra 50 years keep you alive until you can reap the benefits from more advanced life-extention technologies.
posted by grex at 2:21 PM on October 24, 2006
It is if those extra 50 years keep you alive until you can reap the benefits from more advanced life-extention technologies.
posted by grex at 2:21 PM on October 24, 2006
Longevity advocate Aubrey de Grey thinks that wild mice would not get life extension from calorie restriction. The calorie restriction life extension is only with laboratory mice who have acquired life restricting genetic deficiencies. The Technology Review material on Aubrey is great stuff. By great I mean interesting to read, not life extending for 2006 homo sapiens in our lifetimes.
posted by bukvich at 2:21 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by bukvich at 2:21 PM on October 24, 2006
There's something about this diet that strikes people not doing the diet as selfish and vain, for reasons I have never heard articulated and cannot articulate myself. "If you're trying to prolong your life, you value yourself too much," the prevailing opinion seems to be.
There's a thought-current in society that encourages us to cheerfully accept mortality and considers attempts to forstall death as somehow pathological. (See that old classic book, "The Denial of Death.")
I have a hard time holding it against these people that they are taking charge of their diet in an attempt to prolong life. I'm not persuaded by those who say, "But their quality of life will be severely diminished!" Many people's qualities of life are already severely diminished by diet --- except in the opposite direction. They eat too much, they're too sedentary, they don't exercise enough.
I don't believe that these people, with their gaunt physiques, have been shown to have a measurably decreased quality of life from the rest of us, whom, statistics show, tend to be overweight.
posted by jayder at 2:41 PM on October 24, 2006 [1 favorite]
There's a thought-current in society that encourages us to cheerfully accept mortality and considers attempts to forstall death as somehow pathological. (See that old classic book, "The Denial of Death.")
I have a hard time holding it against these people that they are taking charge of their diet in an attempt to prolong life. I'm not persuaded by those who say, "But their quality of life will be severely diminished!" Many people's qualities of life are already severely diminished by diet --- except in the opposite direction. They eat too much, they're too sedentary, they don't exercise enough.
I don't believe that these people, with their gaunt physiques, have been shown to have a measurably decreased quality of life from the rest of us, whom, statistics show, tend to be overweight.
posted by jayder at 2:41 PM on October 24, 2006 [1 favorite]
If I was forced to make a guess, I'd guess that when it comes to nutrition, availability of food, lifestyle and level of aquired genetic deficiencies, humans living in western societies have a lot more in common with laboratory mice than wild mice.
posted by spazzm at 2:45 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by spazzm at 2:45 PM on October 24, 2006
God, I'd rather just eat.
*goes to snarf potato salad, something these folks probably pass out just thinking about*
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:51 PM on October 24, 2006
*goes to snarf potato salad, something these folks probably pass out just thinking about*
posted by jenfullmoon at 2:51 PM on October 24, 2006
so i have no idea if this CR diet will actually extend your life, but i think everyone here that just dismisses the idea out of hand with "F that, i'm going to enjoy my life" are just being glib.
i lost about 50 pounds on a diet something like this, and it was not difficult to still enjoy my food. i simply ate less and stopped snacking. when i ate, i still ate the things i like.
at first i was hungry, but then my body got used to it, and i felt fine. i was probably taking in about 1200 calories per day, the balance coming from fat. now, i cant say what would happen when i had no body fat left, but then again these people are not really "starving" themselves, they are just trying to eat exactly as many calories as they require to stay alive.
also when you're 20 and feeling invincible its easy to say "i hope i die before i get old" but get back to me when you're in your late 30s as i am and you may not feel the same.
posted by joeblough at 2:54 PM on October 24, 2006
i lost about 50 pounds on a diet something like this, and it was not difficult to still enjoy my food. i simply ate less and stopped snacking. when i ate, i still ate the things i like.
at first i was hungry, but then my body got used to it, and i felt fine. i was probably taking in about 1200 calories per day, the balance coming from fat. now, i cant say what would happen when i had no body fat left, but then again these people are not really "starving" themselves, they are just trying to eat exactly as many calories as they require to stay alive.
also when you're 20 and feeling invincible its easy to say "i hope i die before i get old" but get back to me when you're in your late 30s as i am and you may not feel the same.
posted by joeblough at 2:54 PM on October 24, 2006
Swirling in the midst of it all is the key concept of “actuarial escape velocity,” a transhumanist term for that moment in the acceleration of biomedical progress when, for every year you live, technology adds another year or more to your maximum life span.
Does this happen before or after the "yugo escape velocity," a term I've made up to describe the time when imported car science progresses to the point where, for every year added to our lifespan, the maximum speed and range of inexpensive cars doubles, ensuring that I'll be able to avoid unpleasant self-obsessed husks?
Perhaps it will run on the tears the poor would cry if they only they had a source of water.
posted by cytherea at 3:09 PM on October 24, 2006
Does this happen before or after the "yugo escape velocity," a term I've made up to describe the time when imported car science progresses to the point where, for every year added to our lifespan, the maximum speed and range of inexpensive cars doubles, ensuring that I'll be able to avoid unpleasant self-obsessed husks?
Perhaps it will run on the tears the poor would cry if they only they had a source of water.
posted by cytherea at 3:09 PM on October 24, 2006
I spent a few months eating around 1400 calories a day, to lose weight. I paid attention to nutrients (and had a tough time getting zinc, like the author. Where does it hide?!). I felt better than I had in years, mentally and physically. It was definitely a different way of approaching food, though, and I kind of had to stop really LOVING food, while paying obsessive attention to it. It got boring, but I think about doing it again just for the happiness.
posted by ruby.aftermath at 3:10 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by ruby.aftermath at 3:10 PM on October 24, 2006
I've been hearing about this for years now. Doesnt sound very, umm, appetizing - or universally factual. I'm a longtime vegetarian and very healthy eater and my caloric intake (not counting beer) is probably lower than most folks since I typically only eat twice a day if that; and I'm packing at least 20 extra pounds that's been a bear to reduce. Then again, I am a 40-something geek with a desk job... and I do like my brews.
Didnt I hear something about some folks in Russia or Finland or some place living to ripe old ages, attributing it all to a bottle of vodka a day? Hmmmmm.
posted by elendil71 at 3:14 PM on October 24, 2006
Didnt I hear something about some folks in Russia or Finland or some place living to ripe old ages, attributing it all to a bottle of vodka a day? Hmmmmm.
posted by elendil71 at 3:14 PM on October 24, 2006
Oh you're all just jealous that you won't be around to see the rapture singularity.
posted by revgeorge at 3:26 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by revgeorge at 3:26 PM on October 24, 2006
Althought I detest faddy diets and the people who do them, I do personally believe there is some truth in the life-extending benefits of calorie restriction.
Pretty much all life on this planet over the past billion or so years has evolved to exist (and thrive) on near-starvation levels of food intake. The majority of wild animals are hungry all the time.
Compare this with modern Western eating habits; all of us are saturated with food all the time. At the first sign of a hunger pang we stuff our faces again! Compare this with Western rates of colon/bowel cancers, heart disease, diabetes etc and you see my point...
posted by derbs at 4:30 PM on October 24, 2006
Pretty much all life on this planet over the past billion or so years has evolved to exist (and thrive) on near-starvation levels of food intake. The majority of wild animals are hungry all the time.
Compare this with modern Western eating habits; all of us are saturated with food all the time. At the first sign of a hunger pang we stuff our faces again! Compare this with Western rates of colon/bowel cancers, heart disease, diabetes etc and you see my point...
posted by derbs at 4:30 PM on October 24, 2006
Do these calorie restricted people get any exercise or do they just lie around on fainting couches talking about their crazy starvation euphoria
According to the article, at least one of the guys runs 20 miles a week.
Interesting stuff, though not a diet would have the willpower to follow. Some of the stuff they eat isn't far off from what I normally eat--I love Quorn, I don't care what it's made from, that stuff's good--except that I stir-fry my veggies and there's often cheese involved, and I finish with some chocolate. It doesn't seem like it's all that different, but I bet that cheese and chocolate adds several hundred more calories to my daily intake.
I have no idea how many calories I take in a day, but I'm guessing it's more than I need to sustain an active lifestyle. Like a large percentage of the American public, I could probably cut a few hundred calories AND add some more exercise without actually dipping below that number.
posted by statolith at 4:59 PM on October 24, 2006
According to the article, at least one of the guys runs 20 miles a week.
Interesting stuff, though not a diet would have the willpower to follow. Some of the stuff they eat isn't far off from what I normally eat--I love Quorn, I don't care what it's made from, that stuff's good--except that I stir-fry my veggies and there's often cheese involved, and I finish with some chocolate. It doesn't seem like it's all that different, but I bet that cheese and chocolate adds several hundred more calories to my daily intake.
I have no idea how many calories I take in a day, but I'm guessing it's more than I need to sustain an active lifestyle. Like a large percentage of the American public, I could probably cut a few hundred calories AND add some more exercise without actually dipping below that number.
posted by statolith at 4:59 PM on October 24, 2006
I was kind of surprised he ended with the idea that this will catch on ("the future is hungry,") which is supremely unlikely even amongst the very rich amongst whom one cannot be too thin.
eating is too social a human activity-- and in fact, strong social connections are *demonstrably* linked with longer life in humans, unlike caloric restriction. Few social X-ray types are going to give up all the dinner parties and cocktail parties and just being able to relax about food and drink for this that would be required in the long run.
Plus, being freezing all the time, slow, weak, spacy and non-reproductive isn't likely to be tolerable in the long run. Women certainly couldn't have kids on this diet.
I was also surprised that he didn't seem to get that what is far more likely to happen is that there will be a pill to deliver the benefits while allowing you to continue to stuff your face. I've seen reporting on the fact that the gene linked with the positive effects of caloric restriction has already been identified and cloned and shown to work in extending life span in flies.
So, when we get gene therapy working in humans, you'll just take the pill or the shots or whatever.
It must've been hard for him to resist the line I've seen used in every other story on this-- you may or may not live to 120, but it will *seem* like you do, which I think pretty well sums it up.
posted by Maias at 5:01 PM on October 24, 2006
It's really odd, actually- I'm related to Don, who he mentions, and have seen him a fair amount. He's a really nice guy, not cultish at all, and is in amazing health- that certainly isn't hyperbole. Seeing Don, and his level of activity at his age (he runs 8 miles a day, I believe) actually makes me want to, at the very least, keep better control over what I eat, if not go over to his side eventually. Don really enjoys life, and feels that CR is the best way to extend it; at the very least, I envy his discipline.
posted by 235w103 at 5:27 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by 235w103 at 5:27 PM on October 24, 2006
then why havent we seen one documented case of someone who was destined to live until say 90, living to 135.
I thought Methusaleh lived past 900? It's documented in the Bible.
I keed!
I NEED MORE SCIENCE!
I read a rehash of a scientific study about this somewhere (probably the Economist), and the hypothesis was that when a cell divides, it loses some critical resources. After some number of iterations, the descendants of the original cell have degraded to the point that they're more prone to cancer and other disease. But the less you eat, the less often your cells divide and in the meantime you're less prone to health issues.
I can't quit pizza though.
posted by A dead Quaker at 5:33 PM on October 24, 2006
I thought Methusaleh lived past 900? It's documented in the Bible.
I keed!
I NEED MORE SCIENCE!
I read a rehash of a scientific study about this somewhere (probably the Economist), and the hypothesis was that when a cell divides, it loses some critical resources. After some number of iterations, the descendants of the original cell have degraded to the point that they're more prone to cancer and other disease. But the less you eat, the less often your cells divide and in the meantime you're less prone to health issues.
I can't quit pizza though.
posted by A dead Quaker at 5:33 PM on October 24, 2006
There are two things going on with this diet – minimizing calories and maximizing nutrients. I would think the nutrition is as much, if not more important than the calorie restriction. I’d like to see the results of this diet compared to one that had the same nutrients, but where people were allowed to eat as much as they wanted.
For example, for lunch today I had a vegetable sandwich on whole wheat. It was as big as my face. I feel pretty good about it, too.
posted by found dog one eye at 6:55 PM on October 24, 2006
For example, for lunch today I had a vegetable sandwich on whole wheat. It was as big as my face. I feel pretty good about it, too.
posted by found dog one eye at 6:55 PM on October 24, 2006
I'm happy these folks are as using themselves as human scientific experiements the others of us may gain from, but I don't want the spend the time they do by worrying about food. Then again, I'm just waiting for my sack of organs growing in the closet for replacements... I think they may gain us some useful info about what we really need to eat eventually, since diet is seems to be a really complicated subject, one where experimenting is best morally done by the self-experimenters. FDA- 2,500 calories a day & the food pyramid can certainly use some work and this should actually help with some experimental (and non-industry sponsored) data. So, I especially don't mind their OCD (“Michael’s dinner is always 639 calories,”?????) aspects of it.
I'd question the short vs long term benefits of this. It seems like one theory is that this is using the ability of the body call on facets of the body to deal with short term starvation, but I would assume this would mess with long terms needs like procreation/lifespan. Seems more like something the bodies does to help you sprint, rather than run a marathon, in an analogy. The body certainly adjusts to what we put in it. See long term vegitarians eating meat and getting sick, for one. Or the percent of nutrients/calories held on to the body when hungry or not. Finding the perfect forumulation seems really complicated and also needs to take into account the different genetics of us all. I doubt the dude with the huge metabolism and fast heart is all controlled by diet.
One note- the dieters' bodies in this thread aren't only aren't using the X calories they consume. One big point of dieting is consuming what's already in the body (fat), so it's not a good comparison. These folks are stable at their weights, not losing it.
posted by superchris at 7:18 PM on October 24, 2006
I'd question the short vs long term benefits of this. It seems like one theory is that this is using the ability of the body call on facets of the body to deal with short term starvation, but I would assume this would mess with long terms needs like procreation/lifespan. Seems more like something the bodies does to help you sprint, rather than run a marathon, in an analogy. The body certainly adjusts to what we put in it. See long term vegitarians eating meat and getting sick, for one. Or the percent of nutrients/calories held on to the body when hungry or not. Finding the perfect forumulation seems really complicated and also needs to take into account the different genetics of us all. I doubt the dude with the huge metabolism and fast heart is all controlled by diet.
One note- the dieters' bodies in this thread aren't only aren't using the X calories they consume. One big point of dieting is consuming what's already in the body (fat), so it's not a good comparison. These folks are stable at their weights, not losing it.
posted by superchris at 7:18 PM on October 24, 2006
Regardless of whether or not extended calorie restriction prolongs human life, the people profiled in the article exhibit all of the classic psychological markers for having an eating disorder- such as the idea that there is a perfect diet and their overall quest for perfection. Counting calories and nutrients to the single digit strikes me as extremely obsessive/compulsive behavior.
The rationalization of the behavior is typical denial:
“The focus is health. The constant thought is, ‘How can I pack more nutrition into my calories?’— that’s not something an anorexic is doing. Anorexia is slow suicide.”
Most people with anorexia (at least until/if they realize how deeply in trouble and out of control they are) also believe that they are following a more perfect way of eating. They see over-indulging as unhealthy and perhaps also morally or ethically wrong. Fat, to them, is like a disease which they must cure their body of. Just because the CR adherents may be able to prolong their obsessive and food-starved mental states because their physical states may be maintained for far longer than the average anorectic doesn't truly differentiate them from the clinically diagnosed people they are trying to distance themselves from.
posted by stagewhisper at 7:24 PM on October 24, 2006
The rationalization of the behavior is typical denial:
“The focus is health. The constant thought is, ‘How can I pack more nutrition into my calories?’— that’s not something an anorexic is doing. Anorexia is slow suicide.”
Most people with anorexia (at least until/if they realize how deeply in trouble and out of control they are) also believe that they are following a more perfect way of eating. They see over-indulging as unhealthy and perhaps also morally or ethically wrong. Fat, to them, is like a disease which they must cure their body of. Just because the CR adherents may be able to prolong their obsessive and food-starved mental states because their physical states may be maintained for far longer than the average anorectic doesn't truly differentiate them from the clinically diagnosed people they are trying to distance themselves from.
posted by stagewhisper at 7:24 PM on October 24, 2006
Regarding the life extension
We know time is relative, as in, a boring class or the last hour at work can seem like an eternity, but 5 hours doing what you love passes in a wink.
So these people might live forever: imagine how slow the clock moves when you're FUCKING STARVING AND WAITING FOR A "NUGGET" OF SOIL MOLD!
Man, I'm gonna go eat a few scoops of Butter-Flavored Crisco (tm) out of sheer indignation.
posted by Joseph Gurl at 7:55 PM on October 24, 2006
We know time is relative, as in, a boring class or the last hour at work can seem like an eternity, but 5 hours doing what you love passes in a wink.
So these people might live forever: imagine how slow the clock moves when you're FUCKING STARVING AND WAITING FOR A "NUGGET" OF SOIL MOLD!
Man, I'm gonna go eat a few scoops of Butter-Flavored Crisco (tm) out of sheer indignation.
posted by Joseph Gurl at 7:55 PM on October 24, 2006
Cool post.
I find the idea really interesting. The implications are deep.
People could live longer and NOT consume the planet.
I'm hoping that CR will yield another way of achieving the same ends. Preferably one I can take in pill form with my steak and mash potato’s.
According to the article, at least one of the guys runs 20 miles a week.
20 miles per week is ok. To stay healthy it's great. However, you could not follow a CR diet and be a serious athlete or extremely active. No way. You'd have to eat "space food" all the time.
posted by tkchrist at 8:18 PM on October 24, 2006
I find the idea really interesting. The implications are deep.
People could live longer and NOT consume the planet.
I'm hoping that CR will yield another way of achieving the same ends. Preferably one I can take in pill form with my steak and mash potato’s.
According to the article, at least one of the guys runs 20 miles a week.
20 miles per week is ok. To stay healthy it's great. However, you could not follow a CR diet and be a serious athlete or extremely active. No way. You'd have to eat "space food" all the time.
posted by tkchrist at 8:18 PM on October 24, 2006
There seems to be little appreciation here of just how subjective enjoyment is. You can get used to almost everything, and when you rarely have something (like, say, steak) then a single bite of it can be heaven. Deprivation doesn’t breed unhappiness (except at first, or if it is not by choice). Affluence does. Moderation is nice, too, but if this works, there’s no reason to think you have to be miserable in the process. But then it’s a MeFi sport to assert that you’re leading a better life than whomever else – this doesn’t look healthy, and if it is healthy, well… I’m having more fun!
Ditto others’ observation in the thread: those I know who were rail thin in high school still pretty much look like they do; those who were mid-weight have aged, and those who were heavier not only developed more quickly, but have aged the most over the years. The only real mystery here is the extent of the effect. 50% is quite a whopper.
posted by dreamsign at 8:46 PM on October 24, 2006
Ditto others’ observation in the thread: those I know who were rail thin in high school still pretty much look like they do; those who were mid-weight have aged, and those who were heavier not only developed more quickly, but have aged the most over the years. The only real mystery here is the extent of the effect. 50% is quite a whopper.
posted by dreamsign at 8:46 PM on October 24, 2006
I think you are right, stagewhisper. Also, many people with anorexia are obsessed with getting as many nutrients as they can in whatever they do consume. Check almost any pro-ana/mia website and there will always be tips to take vitamins, drink vitamin water, drink electrolyte-balancing water, etc.
posted by arcticwoman at 8:49 PM on October 24, 2006
posted by arcticwoman at 8:49 PM on October 24, 2006
Regardless of whether or not extended calorie restriction prolongs human life, the people profiled in the article exhibit all of the classic psychological markers for having an eating disorder- such as the idea that there is a perfect diet and their overall quest for perfection.
I was just waiting for somebody to insist the CR people have a disease. This is the essence of the 21st century modus: instead of "they're evil people" we get "they're sick people."
Frankly, I want my money back.
The CR people are useful if only to be a critique. Deprivation in the interest of comfort; it's all goodness.
posted by nixerman at 9:06 PM on October 24, 2006
When I diet, I have more energy. Maybe my stored fat somehow is utilized more easily than the food I'd otherwise eat, but I doubt it. I think I have more energy because my gut isn't full of stuff in process.
I have starved for want of money, even to hallucinations. Not fun. I have starved deliberately, and enjoyed it. Mostly I prefer eating.
posted by Goofyy at 11:48 PM on October 24, 2006
I have starved for want of money, even to hallucinations. Not fun. I have starved deliberately, and enjoyed it. Mostly I prefer eating.
posted by Goofyy at 11:48 PM on October 24, 2006
I agree with stagewhisper and arcticwoman - these behaviours are the typically compulsive behaviours of anorexics. It all seems rather recursive to me - you spend so much time focussing on calores to extend your life to spend more time focussing on calories. Regardless of the health benefits, how boring.
posted by goo at 8:23 AM on October 25, 2006
posted by goo at 8:23 AM on October 25, 2006
nixerman, I am so glad I didn't disappoint you and leave you with unfulfilled expectations and nothing to bolster your theory of moralizing in the 21st century!
For clarification, I am not condemning the people who adhere to this regimen, I am simply pointing out how much in common their mental state (at least what is presented in the article) has in common with people who have actual, clinically diagnosed, eating disorders.
I pass no moral judgment on anyone suffering from an eating disorder. Trust me on this, I was hospitalized (in the intensive care unit, then in a psych ward ) due to anorexia when I was a college student. I have been fully recovered since 1989, but all of the beliefs and feelings chronicled in this article sounded like the exact same types of things that I felt and thought when I was in a very bad place.
The way the brain processes information in a state of constant starvation is actually an interesting phenomenon- and one that people who study eating disorders have tried to understand, since the changes (such as euphoria, a sensation of boundless energy despite physical weakness, etc. ) perpetuate the disorder in the afflicted. The changes go a long way to explaining the question that has come up on the blue before when tackling the issue of how people who realize they have anorexia and that they are perilously close to dying still can't simply choose to no longer starve themselves.
That is all.
posted by stagewhisper at 10:14 AM on October 25, 2006
For clarification, I am not condemning the people who adhere to this regimen, I am simply pointing out how much in common their mental state (at least what is presented in the article) has in common with people who have actual, clinically diagnosed, eating disorders.
I pass no moral judgment on anyone suffering from an eating disorder. Trust me on this, I was hospitalized (in the intensive care unit, then in a psych ward ) due to anorexia when I was a college student. I have been fully recovered since 1989, but all of the beliefs and feelings chronicled in this article sounded like the exact same types of things that I felt and thought when I was in a very bad place.
The way the brain processes information in a state of constant starvation is actually an interesting phenomenon- and one that people who study eating disorders have tried to understand, since the changes (such as euphoria, a sensation of boundless energy despite physical weakness, etc. ) perpetuate the disorder in the afflicted. The changes go a long way to explaining the question that has come up on the blue before when tackling the issue of how people who realize they have anorexia and that they are perilously close to dying still can't simply choose to no longer starve themselves.
That is all.
posted by stagewhisper at 10:14 AM on October 25, 2006
As a 6-foot, 135 pound male who would like very much to gain 20 pounds, I find it kind of ironic that these people have to work so hard to get to where I'm at, while I can stuff my face with cheeseburgers to essentially no effect.
Suckers!
posted by myeviltwin at 5:51 AM on October 26, 2006
Suckers!
posted by myeviltwin at 5:51 AM on October 26, 2006
fyi, the science of the BDNF stuff in the story was not quite correct:
http://www.stats.org/stories/nymag_fact_rest_oct26_06.htm
posted by Maias at 9:27 AM on October 26, 2006
http://www.stats.org/stories/nymag_fact_rest_oct26_06.htm
posted by Maias at 9:27 AM on October 26, 2006
Will low calorie diet dramatically extend your life span? It does not look like it
posted by MetaMonkey at 12:40 PM on October 26, 2006
posted by MetaMonkey at 12:40 PM on October 26, 2006
« Older BNP bomb-makers: not newsworthy? | Vote for, er, Jim? Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by blucevalo at 12:34 PM on October 24, 2006