Posted on 04/25/2024 6:48:53 AM PDT by Cronos
If you put a lab mouse on a diet, cutting the animal’s caloric intake by 30 to 40 percent, it will live, on average, about 30 percent longer. The calorie restriction, as the intervention is technically called, can’t be so extreme that the animal is malnourished, but it should be aggressive enough to trigger some key biological changes....
Scientists first discovered this phenomenon in the 1930s, The subsequent studies also found that many of the calorie-restricted animals were less likely to develop cancer and other chronic diseases related to aging.
... In the wild, animals experience periods of feast and famine, as did our human ancestors. Therefore, their (and conceivably our) biology evolved to survive and thrive not only during seasons of abundance, but also seasons of deprivation.
One theory is that, on a cellular level, calorie restriction makes animals more resilient to physical stressors. For example, calorie-restricted mice have greater resistance to toxins and recover faster from injury,
Another explanation involves the fact that, in both humans and animals, eating fewer calories slows down metabolism. It’s possible that “the less you have to get your body to metabolize, the longer it can live,” said Dr. Kim Huffman, an associate professor of medicine at Duke University School of Medicine who has studied calorie restriction in people. “You know, just slow the wheels down and the tires will last longer.”
Calorie restriction also forces the body to rely on fuel sources other than glucose, which aging experts think is beneficial for metabolic health and, ultimately, longevity. Several researchers pointed to a process known as autophagy, where the body eats up malfunctioning parts of cells and uses them for energy. This helps cells function better and lowers the risk of several age-related diseases.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Of the ten plus years I have stuck to it the results were great and I did not pay for a program nor did i drink juice or supplements—the goal is to not put ANY calories in my body and trigger an insulin response.
100%, when you really get adapted to ketosis you don’t really even notice you haven’t eaten for a day or more.
I do similar but between 14/10 and 20/4 and it works well for me
Too high maintenance to be sustainable.
It has to work with my work and lifestyle.
So, how is your fast eventually ended? doesn’t an insulin response eventually result when you start eating again?
And I remember watching a documentary about people who severely restricted calories in order to improve longevity. They fully expected to live to 120 or 130. But they were spindly and miserable-looking. They spoke constantly about food and eating. The women all had a layer of very fine fuzz on their faces, one of the body’s responses to starvation.
This.
Living in ketosis is fine if you live a moderately active to sedentary lifestyle. But I’ve read from credible sources that it isn’t suitable for athletes and those who have to occasionally do power exertion or require bursts of energy. Keytones just can’t react as quickly as glucose in the blood.
That’s why distance runners almost always eat a meal of pasta or other starch before an event. It’s short term but effective energy. Ketosis is more on the slow-burn scale.
certainly but it is not a constant state of being spiked.
I don’t try to force things on people, low carb/high fat and fasting works for me and the other people I know who do it very well
fwiw- in my mid 50’s, stronger with more lean muscle and the ability to lift more and work more than most men half my age and if not for thinning gray hair, wrinkles and scars could easily pass for a fit 25-30 years old without that much work
I actually find it to be less maintenance, I don't have to schedule things around eating. I generally don't eat breakfast and lunch.
True, but this general phenomenon has been well documented and known for decades. Looks like this article only refines the details a bit.
Good question, because actually you have to be really careful when you break an extended fast and not overload on carbs, because this is called "Refeeding Syndrome", which can actually be fatal. (This actually happened in the liberated death camps, when they fed the victims too much, too quickly). You have to eat small, easily digestable portions, I usually break a fast with an avocado, and wait a few hours before eating another small meal.
That's about 99.9% of the population.
I'm really not sure. My prior medical issues (before diet changes) keep me in a doctor's office for routine follow-up checks at least once every couple of months. Those visits almost always include blood tests and full lab reports. Other than the issues related to my prior medical condition, my other levels are always in the normal range -- including cholesterol and glucose levels.
While my overall average is about 1000 calories a day, and I avoid meat and processed foods (especially processed foods), I will go "off diet" once or twice in a two-week period. Otherwise, I stay primarily on target.
It makes sense. The old people I know who are healthy tend to be lean and light eaters who often skip meals.
I really appreciate all the information. I’m no expert on this particular diet, but I know that for me it’s not realistic and I could not remain true to it, which would completely defeat the purpose. I’m often faced with expedience in a working life, and more than occasionally have to eat whatever is available, which is almost always carbs and unhealthy fats of the “fast food” variety.
“Here’s what that means.”
If it means totalitarians like the New York Times and other Democrats get to decide what I can eat, then F them.
Just a few weeks ago, the Mainstream Media was saying that extended fasting led to heart attacks.
If so then I should live to 210 or so- only have eaten 2 times a day- a “breakfast/lunch” meal (sandwich, soda and Frappuccino), then a dinner (about 4-6 ounce of some kind of meat, chicken, pork or beef, and a veggie if available), then later a soda, maybe a snack of a few candies or pretzels.)
Have eaten this way for many decades now, even when I was working, but admittedly, the 2 meals were a little larger, but not by much. I can’t recall having eaten 3 .meals in a day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.