Is Calorie Restriction the Key to a Longer Life?
I distinctly remember speaking with an unknown elderly couple many years ago while seated next to them at a restaurant. I don't recall what started the conversation, but I do know that it had something to do with food. At any rate, the husband and wife -- both of whom looked rather healthy, despite the fact that they were in their late 80s -- proudly stated that the key to their longevity was not eating. "Huh?," I muttered through a mouthful of pasta primavera, only to be told once again by these fine people -- who dined only on small bowls of soup -- that they attributed their long lives to eating very, very little food.
Fast forward several years and millions of calories later, and I found myself thumbing through a copy of Men's Health magazine at Border's while I chomped on a protein bar. Amazingly, I came across a small article on how many people in Okinawa, Japan consume 700 calories less per day than the average Westerner. Apparently, this low-calorie diet is based on the eating principle known as hara hachi bu -- only eating until eight-tenths full. Researchers posit that this may be part of the reason why Okinawans have among the lowest rate of heart disease, osteoporosis, and hormone-dependent cancers.
And then, just when I thought I couldn't possibly find any more information to support the claims made years prior by the elderly couple I met, I came across a study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Said study validated their assertion, showing that eating fewer calories extended the average lifespan.
And THEN, about a week ago, I stumbled upon a Barbara Walters interview with people who associated their good health to what would seem like a dangerously low amount of daily calories. No, they weren't starving themselves, they were simply following the old adage of eating like a king at breakfast, a prince at lunch, and a pauper at dinner. But, in doing so, they were eating far less total calories than the average person does.
Needless to say, I was a bit shocked to learn that the quaint and pleasant elderly couple I encountered years ago may have actually been onto something. I suppose I should have realized this at the time, for their sunny disposition and easily observed good health was evidence that at least some credence should be lent to their claim. It's not to say that eating less calories to be healthy is a new concept; rather, it's the idea of eating even less than what is considered to be eating less that struck me as somewhat surprising, if entirely confounding. How could we possibly be nourished if we are constantly malnourished? Unless -- and this is when the old folk's advice, the article in Men's Health, the peer-reviewed journal article, and the Barbara Walters interview suddenly culminated into a novel thought --our Western standards for proper nourishment are overinflated. Would we do just fine -- if not better -- if we consumed, as many Okinawans do, 700 calories less per day?
I'd be very interested to hear any of your opinions on this matter, particularly those of you from the medical community. I wish I could somehow track down that elderly couple and ask them if they could elucidate further on their theory on how to live a long, healthy life, but I never did get their names, let alone any contact information. That's a shame, really, since I'd be willing to bet that they're both still very much alive and continuing to enjoy pleasant dinner conversation with strangers.
If I recall correctly, the claim is that eating less is associated with less oxidative damage to our cells, which lowers the chances of acquiring many diseases and prolongs cell life. It has been some time since I read the literature on calorie restriction, so there may be some other discoveries recently about its method of action.
ReplyReactive Oxygen Species (ROS) are the main causes of aging and many health problems. Exercise also contributes to a lot of them since the body is utilizing so much oxygen during a workout. So drink a lot of green tea and eat a lot of berries. Also get your sleep. Melatonin the hormone our body secretes during the night is great at reacting with the ROS and preventing them from interacting with our cells which ultimately leads to all the cancers, aging, and other negative health effects. Also do not have any type of light present when you sleep. Alarm clocks tvs, etc. They prevent melatonin formation! Unless they are red lights!
Sorry way off topic but I am doing a lot of research in this field
ReplyI'd rather live until 50 eating a regular amount of (healthy) food than live until 90 starving and living off of soup.
ReplyI would love to see your reaction to this when you actually are 50! Everything you do now impacts you later on in life. Everyone knows it but no one really cares. I am big on gerontology and work with a lot of elders. A lot of health problems could have been prevented with a better lifestyle whether it be eating less or more healthy, exercising more, not smoking, not doing drugs etc. I am not saying all... genetics is huge too!!! However a lot of what you eat can impact your genes and which type of proteins your body will and or can make. Therefore I believe nutrition is gunna be HUGE within the next few years. But go ahead and eat what you want now. I hope that when you turn 50 you wont be overweight, have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, or colon cancer! Good luck!
ReplyI agree with the reader above - I'll sacrifice some years of my (much later life) in order to enjoy what I eat. Then again, most of my enjoyment is derived from beef bone soup with chili peppers, and there's not too many calories there, I reckon.....
ReplyFive years ago, when I had become overweight, I decided to go on a diet. To figure out what diet, I went to a data base of scientific journals (my wife is an academic reference librarian and showed me how). I found 1,000's of scientific articles on diets, calories, weight loss, etc. I read 100's of abstracts and many articles.
One thing quickly stood out. Article after article would begin with something like: "Calorie restriction [or energy restriction] has been shown to xxxx. This study investigates yyyyy about that." The xxxx was wide ranging: "significantly decrease the incidence of breast cancer"; or heart disease; or pancreatic cancer; or neurodegenerative diseases; or diabetic diseases; or other cancers; or, the one the media keeps focusing on: CR is the only known intervention that significantly increases the maximal life span of several species. (I posted excerpts and links from several scientific articles on my personal website http://www.nbrhd.net/CR/CR.htm)
No other diet came even close to the amount of research on CR/ER.
And I had never heard of it. So I looked further.
In 1937 CR was shown to increase the maximal (not just the average) life span of rats. This gives an incredible model for studying aging and age related diseases. But then the subject was pretty much dropped until the late 20th century. Apparently, microbiology/molecular biology were not advanced enough to take advantage of this new model for studying aging.
That all changed in the late 20th century and particularly in the last 10 years. Government, industry, and academia are now pouring $100s of millions into figuring out how CR works and how it can be applied to humans. For example, a small company was started about 5 years ago to pursue CR related science. It was just bought this summer by the pharmaceutical giant Smith Glaxo Kline for over $700 million. The government recently extended their CALERIE study on the subject into phase 2 for $50 million. I get automatic alerts every week from the science journal data base on newly published articles on Calorie Restriction. Each week new research is published.
So I adopted a CR diet. It has only 2 rules: make sure you get 100% of your nutritional needs; cut your calories significantly. Tracking you nutrition is the hard part. There is free software to help, but you cannot really meet rule 1 without recording/measuring what you eat and entering the results into software to find out your nutritional intake.
I would not necessarily recommend this diet. It is a lot of work. On the other hand, I would strongly recommend that anyone for at least a day or preferably a week, actually record/measure everything he/she eats and look at what nutrition you got. Just about everyone I know who has done that is amazed at how malnourished they are. Typically, people are incredibly low in nutrient after nutrient - zinc, B5, selenium, etc. It seems clear to me, and very ironic, that most of us in the developed world are both overweight and malnourished.
Studies seem to indicate that taking supplements does not solve the problem. They do not provide what a healthy diet provides. You might find you will want to change your eating habits after you see how poor your nutrition really is.
One final word. The media likes to focus on the sensational. All too often CR related pieces focus on people on CR who have, frankly, weird eating habits - peel the apple and eat only the peel; lick you plate clean to get every last calorie; eat the same thing every day; don't exercise. This is nothing like the typical CR diet. You can eat any food you want, just go for balanced nutrition and lower calories. Any cuisine works. It is compatible with other diets like Atkins, Mediterranean, low fat, high protein, Ornish, etc. And exercise is a good thing.
And finally, the one trite phrase I hear most often is a version of "Well, you might not live longer, but it will feel like. You will always be hungry." The statement is both trite and false. As with any diet at first you will feel hungrier. Once you have adjusted and your weight is no longer falling because you have reached the point you want, you will feel no hungrier than before. That has been my experience. Also, people seem to feel more energetic, not less, after being on this diet.
I have been on it, with lapses, for about 5 years. No other diet makes as much sense.
ReplyHello Bob,
Thank you for your information. I am a graduate student in a Public Health program and I was very pleased to see the thorough knowledge that you possess on the area.
Good luck with everything and congratulations on your weight loss,
Tramaine
ReplyI vaguely remembered watching an episode of Scientific American Frontiers in my 11th grade chemistry class and there was a bit about how eating less can help you live longer. I looked it up online just now - I couldn' t even think of the name of the show, I only figured it out because I remembered that Alan Alda was the host, haha. Anyway, I found a copy of the show's transcript. Here's a link:
http://www.pbs.org/saf/transcripts/transcript1003.htm
Interesting!
ReplyI was on Jenny Craig diet for about 3 months. It is a calorie restricted diet as they sell you small portions of food. As delicious as Jenny Craig food was, it was too little. Even though I did lose a large amount of weight, I was hungry all the time and it was kind of a miserable way to live. Before I knew it, I was eating normally again and I gained back alot of weight.
I think I'd be miserable on any calorie restricted diet. I don't think I'd be able to make it through the Okinawa's diet. It would probably just make me hungrier and heavier than ever.
ReplyI talk to the couple you are refering to (paul and meredith) and can get you in contact with them if you'd like. I'm sure Paul would be more than happy to answer any questions you might have on CR.
I've been doing CR for many years also but from a much younger age. Check out my blog if you have spare time, I have plenty of media on there for you to look at.
Contact me by email.
Matthew
Replyhttp://www.matts-cr.blogspot.com
Calorie restriction is LAME. Why would you want to trigger your body's starvation response? It will only work that much harder to hang on to it's fat stores. You need to make it clear that you live in a world where there is plenty of food available and there is no need to "store" it in fat cells.
How do you do that? By eating Small & balanced meals VERY frequently. The human body is smarter than most people think... you just have to find a way to outsmart it. ;)
Cheers
ReplyCalorie restriction might prolong human lifespan, but there's no proof yet. It's much easier to prove in lab animals. It would be a mistake to assume that studies in worms, rats, and monkeys necessarily apply to humans.
We do know that several other methods prolong human lifespan: Don't Smoke. Get regular exercise. Avoid obesity. Pick the right parents (genes). Don't drink excessive alcohol. Eat a traditional Mediterranean diet rather than the Standard American Diet. I'd focus on those.
-Steve
ReplyIt's always useful to distinguish between maximal life span and median life span. We won't know if maximal life span is increased for humans for decades, or maybe ever, on the CR diet. A diet that provides full nutrition while cutting calories significantly is being shown to improve all sorts of biomarkers (blood lipid readings, CRP, etc) that indicate good health in humans. So I would add following such a diet to your list of other healthy actions to take. It's very likely to move a person from the current median of 78 years to a longer life just from being healthier.
ReplySorry I might have misread what you said there. The elderly couple who I was refering to are the not the first two you mention but those on the BW show.
Calorie Restriction will 'likely' increase average lifespan simply because it eliminates the risk of diabetes, heart disease, stroke, autoimmune diseases and neurodegenerative diseases. Whether it will extend the human maximum of 110-120 years is up for debate but it will get you closer to that maximum for sure.
Although okinawans are some sort of example for CR working, they aren't the best example because they still have deficiencies and were only CR'd for half their lives. So if anything it underestimates CR's anti aging effect.
ReplyWhat I've read about calorie restriction is that they aren't that restrictive-say 1800 calories per day (which is a lot more than you get on a lot of diet plans!) but they pay inordinate attention to the nutrient profile of what they are eating, to ensure they aren't malnourished in any way on such a plan.
ReplyOf course, the elderly couple that you sat next to were only 35 and 33 years old respectively. LOL
Seriously, I believe the same contention was made by Gary Taubes in Good Calories, Bad Calories -- at least I think that was the book.
Reply"Amazingly, I came across a small article on how many people in Okinawa, Japan consume 700 calories less per day than the average Westerner."
...which comes out to how many? Just how many calories are we talking about here?
ReplyPlease google intermittent fasting. It provides many of the same health benefits as calorie restriction and is much easier to accomplish!
ReplyI have been experimenting with it for about a month and have found it to be the most "fun" way to eat less calories while still eating all the foods I enjoy. It is NOT about starving. You will not go into starvation mode.
My routine is to fast from 7pm-11am Monday-Friday. During 11-7 every day, I eat as much as I want and I eat way more fat than I did previously. I am totally in love with how this has increased my enjoyment of my food, encouraged me to cook, eliminated mindless night-time snacking, and reduced my body fat!
Please look into it. It goes against all conventional wisdom about meal-timing, but it becoming more and more popular as it WORKS and feels right to many people!
having tried both let me just say that intermittent fasting always leaves me anxious, cranky, hungry, and with a feeling of vague annoyance...
ReplyThe science is still out on this one. See for example:
http://www.livescience.com/health/090127-bad-calorie-restriction.html
Replycalorie restriction actually doesn't necessarily mean being hungry. It just means skipping the calorie dense, fat dense, foods - which is not a bad thing actually...
Your article says that the study showed the okinawans consumed 700 calories less than the average western diet - what measure were they using for the western diet?
Thanks
Replyto 'blah'. Maybe you can read my message on that article. The study come to ridiculous conclusion.
hey used screwed up mice that live a short lifespan, they never get fat, they develop diseases really early in life. They don't respond to CR, in the way HUMANS DO respond to CR. We've known since the 1980's that CR didn't work in this strain... As for the older B6 mice, they put them on SHOCK CR and this totally goes against the rules of how to do adult onset CR.. a) You must lower calories slowly (they lowered them to 40% in 3 weeks!), b) and keep nutrients high. Otherwise it is no surprise it didn't work in the older mice. It has been shown many times now that it DOES WORK in older mice when done properly.
So back to the DAB/2. They never get fat (humans do) because to their super high metabolism. Humans don't have this kind of fast metabolism where they aboslutely never gain any weight at all. This study proves nothing and the headlines are comletely misleading.
As for the wild type mice they mention, there was a huge longevity increase in the study that was done, there were just much early deaths which might be a study design problem. But the LONGEST LIVED 6 animals were, surprise surprise... all from the CR group, and their maximum lifespan was extended.
Forget the DAB/2 mouse, the C57BL/6 respond to CR, and humans respond to CR like the BL/6 mouse. DAB/2 doesn't.
ReplyCR works in animals right up until the brink of starvation. Something like 70% reduction in calories. They are extremely thin and reproduction shuts off at around 20% CR in these rodents. It's nothign to do with weight at all, all to do with calories in.
Google "matts cr the evidence"
ReplyI've always been very interested in this concept. I don't consider my diet to be very low calorie, but I do try to get most of my calories from nutrient-rich, non-calorie-dense foods (lots of fruits and veggies and lean protein). I never really feel hungry, either. I came to the conclusion a long time ago that the guidelines for caloric intake (2000/day for women, 2500/day for men) are based on people that are a lot more active than the typical American. I believe that we can survive on a lot fewer calories than we think we can (Victoria Beckham's a good example of that. I believe that woman lives on a diet of air and seaweed) and not die of starvation. The key is to make sure you get all of your nutrients in the most concise way possible...eat foods like spinach that are vitamin/mineral rich and have barely any calories.
I do have a few questions about it though...I had read in some other studies that following a CR diet promotes infertility. The thinking behind that is that the body knows it cannot sustain another life, so it puts all it's energy into making the existing body last as long as possible (hence the extended life spans). It makes sense to me...if you have, say, a herd of deer that are stuck in an area of sparse food for an extended period of time, it would behoove them to live longer until they could get to a sustainable food source and reproduce. Kind of a built-in long-term survival mechanism for the species.
ReplyI do a lot to stay healthy, eat healthful foods, exercise, watch vitamins, make sure my body fat stays below a certain level, etc. But I'll be darned if I'll give up eating lots of yummy foods! Rather die a little sooner than sacrifice pleasure in life, in this regard.
Reply...Calorie restriction is not that hard. I eat like a bird (average 800 cal/day about) and since I've changed my eating habits I've never felt better. I am paying strict attention to my nutrition as well. Really, I was only hungry the first few days and then my body adjusted very quickly. Of course, I slip up once in awhile, but I can enjoy almost every food I used to eat...just on a much smaller scale.
Maybe I'm just weird?
ReplyHelloļ¼ I am a Japanese.
ReplyYour article is wonderfully written and very well presented. Always a pleasure to enjoy.
I enjoy my food on CR more than I ever did when eating a standard diet. In fact, the junk food now just taste incredibly bland. My choice of foods and how many different foods i eat now is much greater than before.
ReplyI think people are forgetting about vegetables! They are high in nutrients and very low calorie. I eat a huge spinach salad every day with red cabbage, tomatoes, onions, bell peppers, mushrooms, and/or other veggies on it. I then drizzle one tablespoon of a favorite dressing on top. This is a great snack or an addition to a small meal. It helps me feel full and satisfied since I measure out a large salad for myself.
ReplyWell I did so well eating few calories that I became anorexic.... so for my money, I like eating when I'm hungry and stopping when I've had enough. One thing I do know for sure is that very low calorie diets are the very best way for me to start obsessing about food. Definitely not a way I want to live. So I can't help thinking that along with eating very little MUST be some serious mental work as well.
ReplyThe ancient physician (and philosopher, pietist and codifier of Talmudic Law) Maimonides also recommended eating until 4/5ths full, stating that overeating gave you less nutrition, not more. (His other big rules: Work hard - which probably correlates with today's exercise - and empty your bowels regularly.)
I'd also read one of Mark Twain's stories from his reporter days, where he was astounded that some people stuck on a raft for over 100 days had no negative health effects. When he checked out other such stories of stranded people, he found the same pattern. He therefore posited that eating little was not harmful, perhaps helpful.
ReplyThe best way to limit food intake is to eat only when hunger strikes, and in doing so, by taking only small meals. If an individual is used to eating 3 slices of bread, cutting it down to 1, as a starter, would be a good idea.
ReplyI've been practing the Zone diet and life style for over 14 years, and it's been fantastic! It's calorie restricted and at the same time nutrient sufficient. The Zone Diet is about balancing your hormones within a specific range to control hunger on fewer calories while still getting the proper nutrients your body needs for long-term health.
ReplyBut I'll be darned if I'll give up eating lots of yummy foods! Rather die a little sooner than sacrifice pleasure in life, in this regard.
ReplyI think this DEFINITELY has merit. It is funny to read above where that 1 person said they'd rather live to 50 eating what they want then to 90 eating less. Ha... I mean that's almost double the lifespan. You might enjoy a shorter life doing crack too, so why not jump on that bandwagon? Hahaha...
Anyway... I actually read an article online that I can't find right now, but it was about this group of people that have an EXTREME non-caloric diet annnnd on top of that, they live in the mountains where the air is thinner. Most of them live into their hundreds according to the article. It's pretty interesting how food can effect you.
My brother is a pretty popular raw foodist, he's written a couple books so far. A lot of their concepts are based on avoiding things like processed starches and refined sugars. Raw foodists usually live a long time too. Makes you wonder why we eat so many things that are harmful to our bodies. I do it too. It's a will power thing, it's a education thing, and it's a motivation thing. I've made some changes to my diet, and I would like to start making some more. I avoid soda, most fried foods, and am going to kick in some new rules to help my diet. I think avoiding too much food will be part of the new plan. Especially at night.
Brian
ReplySome of them require Internet access, but you already have that. If you read me and don't surf the Web, you probably also live in Dobbins and like to read about city council meetings and it is a key to every individual person...
ReplyI eat a balanced 1650 calories 5 days a week.
Every Tuesday I eat nothing~ drink water and sometimes warm organic broth, or maybe 4 oz of organic juice diluted with filtered water.
On Sunday, I have a scrumptious breakfast; waffles, syrup, sausage or eggs and bacon, toast or biscuit w/butter and jam.. At lunch on Sunday, we normally eat out late (2PM ish) or at my mom's which is country cooking; turkey and dressing, pot roast type foods with loads of delicious sides and dessert, not gigantic portions but I eat some of everything; nothing on Sunday night.
I'm in my 4th yr of doing this without exception. I haven't eaten on any Tuesday in all of this time, and have had fattening, and oh so good, foods every Sunday.
I started out at 170 lbs, I'm 5'8", female, 45 yrs old. Within 6 months of the first year I was down to 145 lbs. I now weigh, and have for nearly 4 yrs, 131 lbs, fluctuating 1-2 lbs, here and there.
My 1650 calorie diet 5 days a week is the Mediterranean Diet. I spend the extra $$ on organic foods and take a multi-vitamin 6 days a week.
I drink 54-64 oz of filtered water everyday. I also walk 2 miles in 30 minutes; right after daylight in the summer, middle of the day in cooler weather. If it's raining the entire day, I do an aerobics tape for about 20 minutes. No planned exercise on Sunday but sometimes we end up hiking or playing tennis or biking around.
Replythis post above with my name is actually my little sister's post.. she's visiting me while her house is being remodeled and came in putting her name, cameron under 'name' but it defaulted back to my name since it is my registered email.. kinda confusing.. but she really does have more willpower than anyone I know, and she's actually why I started the metabolism miracle diet (which I LOVE)!! anyway, wanted to clarify:)
ReplyActually the key to longer life is chowing down bacon double cheeseburgers for breakfast, lunch and dinner! Don't forget the extra-large fries and 64oz Coke!
Reply