Can severely restricted diet lead to a longer life?

[Chris_Peters]

Interesting read looking at what we know and what we don't know about how effective diets are in reducing the dangers of Alzheimer's and cancer.

telegraph.co.uk/health/diet...

[Deepraj_Das]

Yes, diet of our daily life effects our health and a restricted diet always help you to live long and stay healthy. I had gone through the article, written by Tom Chivers.

But as the article says that the Alzheimer can be controlled by restricted diet, so I want to say about another #genetic #psychiatric disorder, Autism.

Autism is now spread all over the world and is an incurable disease because of its strong genetic issue.

But besides GF/CF (Gluten free/ Casein free) diet,

#Broccoli deeprajdas.hubpages.com/hub...

and

#Cannabis deeprajdas.hubpages.com/hub...

are found more effective diet to reduce the autistic disabilities. If you want to know how, may go through these articles.

People, mainly the parents of autistic children need to be aware of these things to give a better future to their offspring.

[Penel]

The first law of thermodynamics has controlled the concept of weight loss for over a century. Calorie reduction has been seen as the only way to lose weight, independent of the nutrients involved. This has resulted in difficulty in accepting other ways of thinking, for example the vilification of the Atkins diet, despite its success rate.

It will be interesting to see the long term effects of something like the 5:2 diet. One of the possible reasons for its success is that it lowers the amount of insulin that the body has to cope with.

Longevity without good health would be pointless. The quality and type of food is vital.

Many studies suggest that a diet low in carbohydrates, with an increase in protein and fat, can have very positive health outcomes, along with loss of weight.

This review from The European Journal of Clinical Nutrition describes the effects of a very low carb diet on several health problems. The Ketogenic diet is not new, but it's premise does not tie in with the idea that only calories count.

nature.com/ejcn/journal/v67...

A Ketogenic diet may not be necessary for all, but a general reduction in carbohydrates, particularly processed/refined carbs, may be a good idea for many.

This research equates a high carb diet with Alzheimer's disease.

lizscript.co.uk/Glyn/EJIM01...

[LeilaBrickell]

Human calorie restriction doesn't have the same impact on life span, it does provide numerous benefits,

such as a greatly lowered risk for most degenerative conditions of aging, and improved measures of health.

In recent years, human studies of long-term and short-term calorie restriction have comprehensively demonstrated these benefits. Many researchers believe that the evidence to date shows the practice of CR will in fact extend the healthy human life span, but there simply isn't enough data yet to pin down the effects on life expectancy. It is plausible that they are at least as good as those resulting from exercise. If so, it could mean a difference of 5-10 years of life.

[Penel in reply to LeilaBrickell]

Do you have any links to the research? It would be interesting to read the original studies.

[Morphix]

In theory, yes. There is some science to support this in animal studies carried out on rats. It has been shown with rats kept on a calorie restricted diet had a significantly longer lifespan and slower ageing, with a lifespan 50% longer (equivalent of 150 human years) on a calorie restricted diet. The 5:2 diet has been cited as a possible way to improve health, slow the ageing process and improve health, as calorie intake is closely linked to health and diseases. However as far as I know, no empirical evidence, and certainly no clinical trials in humans have explored this topic to suggest the same effect would occurr in humans as in rats.

Some scientists and nutritionalists however are advocates of the 5:2 diet (fasting by calorie restricting), particularly as a way of controlling weight and avoiding free radicals in the body which are linked to cell damage and some cancers.

One Dr in particular in US, Dr Roy Lee Walford actually practised a calorie restricted himself for an extended period and was a firm advocate after experimenting with rats. An experiment with him and several others was made into a 'big brother' type TV show in US. It showed how people could adapt or cope in a 'biosphere pods' ie a controlled environment, kept on a calorie restricted diet and what effects it might have.

Another experiment in the UK shown on TV I recall, kept a group of people on a primate/ape-style vegetarian diet - similar to what our earlier ancestors would have eaten before they became hunters. Large amounts of fresh fruit and vegetables were consumed daily (calorie instake was low than usual I believe). The effects on health were noticeable and measurable in several of the subjects with some subjects reporting much improved health and well-being. Although closely supervised by professionalists and Dr's this was not a proper scientific study and only a small group of individuals with various health states were involved.

I have studied nutrition at university level as part of my BSc. From all the scientific studies and evidence I've seen, the governments current advice is sound. That is, try to eat the recommended daily amount of calories appropriate for a man/woman/child to support a healthy BMI body mass appropriate for you. Try to get those calories from a balanced and varied diet including your 5-a-day of fresh vegetables and fruits. Calorie and food group restriction fad diets can be bad for health and in some cases dangerous. Sudden weight loss in individuals with a low body mass or who are underweight already is not healthy. So a calorie restricting diet has to be considered carefully in the context of your body weight on the BMI scale, your own calorific needs, your level of physical activity etc. The best way to manage weight and to keep as healthy and well , is by keeping to a healthy calorie instake, and exercising regularly.

As a footnote: People who have the mediterranean style diet have shown to live much longer and have fewer health problems in advanced years, the same is true in some Asian cultures. Looking at these diets closely, they adhere to what the government recommends as an ideal healthy and balanced diet with non of the high-calorie junk foods or snacking we regularly indulge here in the UK and US.

[Morphix]

I forgot to mention a piece of scientific info concerning the link between calorie intake and ageing.

There is a definite scientific link and its radical cells. In simple terms, the more calories you consume, the more potential free radicals you create in your body. These are linked to cell damage, diseases and ageing, and limiting them in the body does extend cell life. There have been some lab studies on animals which have demonstrated the above.

So, the thinking goes, limit calorie intake, and your free radical count will be lower, and thus damage to cells and ageing much reduced.

I'm not sure if this line of thinking though is scientifically sound as evidence applicable to humans and particularly in the context of signifiantly extended human life-span. It's one thing to do an experiment on animals in lab, it's another entirely for humans. There's very practical limitations with humans and other considerations over looked here.

Reducing calorie intake (well-below) that recommended and required for a healthy functioning body comes with its own set of problems and risks. A normal active person, needs a certain amount of energy to function optimally. The governments (and international) benchmarks on those energy levels are given as a guideline. Of course, you could require less calories or more, depending on your body's own metabolic rate, your diet and lifestyle, height/size, desired weight, level of physical activity etc. So you see, there's a lot of factors come into play, when it comes to energy and calorie intake.

What is clear, from a scientific point of view, is that if you regularly deprive the body of energy past a minimum threshold, it definitely has negative effects on health and consequences. The body requires a level of energy so that begins breaking down muscle tissue and body fat and a person becomes physically weak and more likely to get diseases, perhaps those related to the ageing process ironically, such as joint disease.

I guess the question here is.. how do you find out the optimal level of energy/calorie intake for you personally, and stick to that level with a strict diet? Is that even practically possible?

Taking this discussion further and assuming there is a link in humans to calories, free radicals and ageing and assuming eating only the minimum level of calories could make you healthier and live longer... you could measure your calorie burn each day by recording your activities using readily available technology and allowing for calorie intake for the normal body functions and your ideal target weight etc. That way, you would have the minimum intake you need for you personally. However, that figure is likely to change day by day, even for someone who has a fairly similar daily pattern. If you look at how calories are used you will understand better. Even simple activities like walking an extra 20 minutes, or cleaning a room, could alter your calorie needs for that day. And if you're tied to a minimum intake, that could result in a 'calorie deficit' and starving your body of energy, then the negative effects kick in. To avoid that, means monitoring all your calorie needs and planning every meal. Every days calorie intake would need to be measured and tailored. Alternatively you would have to follow a fairly routined lifestyle and plan what activities you do, to fit around your diet and a fixed calorie intake. Both these options sounds a bit boring and time consuming. People just aren't like that, we're impulsive. Variety is the spice of life. We're not machines. Life becomes boring when you start to plan every day's activities or everything you eat.

Maybe some would disagree here?

I think though, if you did want to follow a tightly regulated calorie restricted diet (to your own minimum and ever-changing daily level), you benefit from technology to achieve it, else you would be spending a lot of time on this each day (an hour or more), which most of us don't have.

There is however a free site called NutritionData which makes the task much easier for anyone attempting this or wanting to experiment with a calorie restricted or optimised diet.

Create a personal profile on the ND website then you can enter in all the foods you eat, and/or search for common food items to add to your meals. The site will then analyse your meal precisely with a few clicks of the mouse. If you entered in your personal data (weight, age, sex, height, level of fitness and activity etc), it will also provide specific info for you. Even showing whether your diet is nutritionally adequate for your own basic health and to support your own body weight (based on the accepted RDI of US fed gov) which of course, includes calories.

Many people use the site to control calorie intake and lose excess weight, as you can enter a target weight and then the site analyses your diet and activities etc and tells you if you're keeping on or off target.

This site could also potentially act as the technology then needed to follow a daily calorie restricted diet for those wanting to do it for health-enhancing and life-extension objectives. It would save a lot of time and you can probably get an app now so it could be used constantly anywhere in public places. ND would also give you a red flag or warning if you went too low on your calorie intake I think which is useful.

The site also allows you to build an historic picture and see charts, so you can see what effect reducing calories has on your weight and health etc if you keep a health journal.

[Penel]

This study from 2012 found that a restricted calorie diet did not have a long term beneficial effect on Rhesus monkeys. The conclusion was that genetics and the type of food eaten has more of an effect on aging than calorie restriction.

nature.com/news/calorie-res...

This critique from 2014 discusses the current knowledge on calorie restriction and its effects on various subjects. There may be a beneficial effect in certain circumstances, but this is not universal.

sciencedirect.com/science/a...

[Morphix in reply to Penel]

This supports the notion that lab experiments on animals like rats, and some findings which may support this notion that calorie restriction promotes good health and extends life expectancy dramatically, shouldn't be used to make general conclusions, assumptions as being applicable to humans with so many variables at play.

I think the 2012 study makes a lot of sense. Since primates are very close to humans genetically, it's a useful study. The governments guidelines would seem to hold true then, that a healthy diet, regular exercise and hydration, and having good genes from healthy parents are more likely to result in a longer lifespan.

The evidence and data to suport this is clear to see in studies carried out into human societies and health around the world. The Mediterranean and Asian cultures for example, often have very healthy diets which tick all the boxes our government recommends, and a higher % of people in those societies seem to live much longer with far fewer health problems, particularly in advanced age.

I'm sure there's a strong link between quality of diet, getting adequate nutrients from a varied and balanced diet of natural wholesome foods, maintaining a healthy body weight, keeping physically active, and people living longer and healthy lives.

Here in the West and UK in particular, its the reverse, with a much higher % of diseases and age-related diseases. There's evidence that not having healthy diets, not maintaining healthy body weight and not exercising or keeping physically active, leads to more cases of illnesses, and premature ageing. Diseases like osteoarthritis, heart disease, cancer, and senile dementia are commonplace even in people in their 50's, 60's, and people in their 70's and 80's often are very fragile and require a lot of care. Yet other people can be 80 or 90 and still very active, going to work, with a health-age 20 years younger than their physical age. It happens in the West too, as well as Mediterranean/Far East, but it seems more common over there than here, with people in their advanced ages here having no health problems and excellent health being the exception, rather than the norm.