Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Calorie restriction.
ryno1974
Posts: 10 Member
in Debate Club
Just going to drop this here news.wisc.edu/calorie-restriction-lets-monkeys-live-long-and-prosper/.
0
Replies
-
That makes sense for primates, whose bodies are close to ours but not ours. Is there a similar study with humans out there yet?0
-
no information on restriction as related to previous food consumption, no statistical data provided to support and yeah - human's aren't monkeys (although sometimes they can act like apes)2
-
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20234038
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17986602
Some people think that the diet normally followed by those living in Okinawa, Japan can increase longevity. It's lower cal, low meat/dairy, low saturated fat. Some researchers are looking into their diets and lifestyles to better understand why this population subset tends to live longer.1 -
-
I've heard that calorie restriction = longer lifespan for decades. It was so long ago when I first heard it that I can't remember if it was based on a specific study or on population statistics.1
-
I don't.....what? Lifespan is up to so many factors that isolating any one factor (diet) is moot. Genetic factors, environmental factors, behavioral factors all play such a crucial role and are all interconnected. Eating right may mitigate a likely variable to health problems, true, but let's not be myopic.
As to the study, if you are morbidly obese, I guarantee you calorie restriction will prolong your lifespan, in the absence of other non-diet related illnesses.
Lastly. Okinawa, like much of Japan has a huge work ethic, followed by a huge party culture. The Japanese take "work hard, play hard" to another level. Without being a researcher, I'd surmise that a culture that embraces social balance and does not struggle with obesity might live longer.
3 -
I don't.....what? Lifespan is up to so many factors that isolating any one factor (diet) is moot. Genetic factors, environmental factors, behavioral factors all play such a crucial role and are all interconnected. Eating right may mitigate a likely variable to health problems, true, but let's not be myopic.
?? I don't think the study or anyone in this thread has suggested that calories restriction is a guarantee of longer life.
0 -
Maybe it's just me but doesn't this study fall into the "well, no crap" category?6
-
-
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »I don't.....what? Lifespan is up to so many factors that isolating any one factor (diet) is moot. Genetic factors, environmental factors, behavioral factors all play such a crucial role and are all interconnected. Eating right may mitigate a likely variable to health problems, true, but let's not be myopic.
?? I don't think the study or anyone in this thread has suggested that calories restriction is a guarantee of longer life.
Yes..not a guarantee, granted, but I mean...The article suggests that calorie restriction can be a factor in longevity right? Some might read that to mean: restrict calories = live longer. Which is such an umbrella statement that I'm going to have to get all Resident Evil up in here.2 -
-
NorthCascades wrote: »
Obvious troll is obvious. Point taken.0 -
If bringing up a point of disagreement in a debate forum is your idea of "trolling" then you might not understand what discussion forums are all about.
7 -
@NorthCascades a troll? That's rich.
Refuting your point with a pretty damn good analogy does not equal troll in my opinion.6 -
NorthCascades wrote: »If bringing up a point of disagreement in a debate forum is your idea of "trolling" then you might not understand what discussion forums are all about.
I'm actually not sure if you brought up a point of disagreement through a clear thought out reply of what exactly you mean. Instead I'm sitting here trying to interpret a one-liner about seat belts. If you intend to bring up a point of disagreement, I'll entertain it. But if you're going to talk about the miraculous life saving properties of seat belts, I don't think you've found an adversary.1 -
I haven't seen any studies about restriction in humans leading to a longer life span....but...I also don't see any 90 year old's who need to lose 100+ lbs.
Pretty much every person I see over 70 is a somewhat healthy weight. And anyone over 70 who is still mobile looks like they are a healthy weight.
Food for thought....hmmmm
1 -
NorthCascades wrote: »If bringing up a point of disagreement in a debate forum is your idea of "trolling" then you might not understand what discussion forums are all about.
I'm actually not sure if you brought up a point of disagreement through a clear thought out reply of what exactly you mean. Instead I'm sitting here trying to interpret a one-liner about seat belts. If you intend to bring up a point of disagreement, I'll entertain it. But if you're going to talk about the miraculous life saving properties of seat belts, I don't think you've found an adversary.
Look at the post I replied to, for context. You said we should act like diet has nothing to do with lifespan, because it's just one factor. You even said it would be "myopic" to focus on diet.
Now, a person could make that exact same argument about seatbelts. In fact, I just did, and you weren't convinced, which means it's not a good argument.
It's true, you could eat "well," exercise regularly, and die early in a freak accident. But for every person that happens to, there are thousands more it doesn't happen to. So, for any of us, it's not likely that a shark attack is going to make our pizza irrelevant.
People who are smarter than I am have done many years of work, not arguing on the web but setting up careful experiments and measuring results and doing boring math and science stuff. And the truth is our diets are a very important factor in our health and longevity. Unlike terrorist attacks and what genes you inherited, our diets are within our control.
We're not even talking about quality of life, just amount. The ways overeating can make life less enjoyable are obvious and myriad. Obesity-related illnesses cost the US healthcare system more to treat than smoking related ones, and for sure, requiring medical treatment is less fun than not needing it.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »If bringing up a point of disagreement in a debate forum is your idea of "trolling" then you might not understand what discussion forums are all about.
I'm actually not sure if you brought up a point of disagreement through a clear thought out reply of what exactly you mean. Instead I'm sitting here trying to interpret a one-liner about seat belts. If you intend to bring up a point of disagreement, I'll entertain it. But if you're going to talk about the miraculous life saving properties of seat belts, I don't think you've found an adversary.
Look at the post I replied to, for context. You said we should act like diet has nothing to do with lifespan, because it's just one factor. You even said it would be "myopic" to focus on diet.
Now, a person could make that exact same argument about seatbelts. In fact, I just did, and you weren't convinced, which means it's not a good argument.
It's true, you could eat "well," exercise regularly, and die early in a freak accident. But for every person that happens to, there are thousands more it doesn't happen to. So, for any of us, it's not likely that a shark attack is going to make our pizza irrelevant.
People who are smarter than I am have done many years of work, not arguing on the web but setting up careful experiments and measuring results and doing boring math and science stuff. And the truth is our diets are a very important factor in our health and longevity. Unlike terrorist attacks and what genes you inherited, our diets are within our control.
We're not even talking about quality of life, just amount. The ways overeating can make life less enjoyable are obvious and myriad. Obesity-related illnesses cost the US healthcare system more to treat than smoking related ones, and for sure, requiring medical treatment is less fun than not needing it.
1. I did not say diet has nothing to do with lifespan. I said considering ONLY diet as a determining factor of lifespan is moot, especially when we're talking about a non peer reviewed study about monkeys who have actually not even died for the sake of science.
2. And it certainly is myopic to focus on ONLY diet as a determinant of lifespan, without considering family medical history. (Risk aversion? Country of residence and its health policies, etc). It is exponentially more myopic to focus on seat belts, fyi.
3. Again. Genetic factors, cancer history, and behavioral factors are not "freak accidents". They are long term accumulative conditions responsible for a large portion of premature deaths in this country. Dropping dead from a heart attack is almost always correlated with a history of someone else in your family dropping dead from one as well, by the numbers.
4. I totally agree. Seriously, as a part of healthy debate, we're actually not at all arguing about this point. Diet's important. But is calorie restriction important to longer lives?
5. We are actually not even talking about any of this. We're talking about restricting calories having a correlative effect to increased lifespans in monkeys. No mention of quality of calories or quality of life. I happened to mention that the study is myopic, as it only focuses on subjects in a controlled study with an experimental diet variable (quantity, not quality). You brought in seat belts.
6. Your homeboy was all like....."yeah wassup, NorthCascades B crazy" So i honestly don't even know why we're here.4 -
LiveLoveFitFab wrote: »I haven't seen any studies about restriction in humans leading to a longer life span....but...I also don't see any 90 year old's who need to lose 100+ lbs.
Pretty much every person I see over 70 is a somewhat healthy weight. And anyone over 70 who is still mobile looks like they are a healthy weight.
Food for thought....hmmmm
Oh wow, we certainly do not live in the same area. LOTS of overweight and even obese elderly where I live and many are mobile.0 -
-
Well, this escalated quickly.
4 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »LiveLoveFitFab wrote: »I haven't seen any studies about restriction in humans leading to a longer life span....but...I also don't see any 90 year old's who need to lose 100+ lbs.
Pretty much every person I see over 70 is a somewhat healthy weight. And anyone over 70 who is still mobile looks like they are a healthy weight.
Food for thought....hmmmm
Oh wow, we certainly do not live in the same area. LOTS of overweight and even obese elderly where I live and many are mobile.
That is similar to where I live, though the obese elderly around here are often extremely slow and noticeably struggling to stand or walk. Many of them do not go very far before needing to stop, lean, and/or sit; and I know many of them have had surgery to replace knees, hips, etc.0 -
2
-
There is plenty of evidence that caloric restriction for life (presumably with proper nutrition) is beneficial to human, for a longer and better life. Nothing new, just more supporting studies.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.2K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 421 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.9K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.5K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions