Calorie Restriction- Agree/Disagree?
kaylaCdewire1311
Posts: 110
I don't know alot about calorie restriction.. but yesterday I was watching OWN and Dr. Oz said that if we cut our calorie intake by 15%, along with other things, it can increase your chances of living to be 100.
This brings me to my next topic.
The oldest living man in the world, says that one thing that kept him alive for as long as he's been here, was calorie restriction. As long as you are getting all of the vitamins and minerals needed daily, there is no need to over-indulge in useless calories.
Agree? Disagree?
I believe I agree. As Americans, most of us have learned "bigger is better" Bigger houses... bigger cars... bigger wallets... even boiling down to bigger plates. This is why our country is so obese.
Whether you agree, or disagree.. I'm going to try it.
Starvation Mode doesn't occur immediately.. it takes time for your body to "starve". After all, your body has to use up all of the nutrients it has before it can technically starve, and if you are feeding it everything it needs... it won't.... right??
Comments? Opinions?
This brings me to my next topic.
The oldest living man in the world, says that one thing that kept him alive for as long as he's been here, was calorie restriction. As long as you are getting all of the vitamins and minerals needed daily, there is no need to over-indulge in useless calories.
Agree? Disagree?
I believe I agree. As Americans, most of us have learned "bigger is better" Bigger houses... bigger cars... bigger wallets... even boiling down to bigger plates. This is why our country is so obese.
Whether you agree, or disagree.. I'm going to try it.
Starvation Mode doesn't occur immediately.. it takes time for your body to "starve". After all, your body has to use up all of the nutrients it has before it can technically starve, and if you are feeding it everything it needs... it won't.... right??
Comments? Opinions?
0
Replies
-
I absolutely agree. Recent scientific reviews have shown that weight loss is 80% what you eat and only 20% exercise. Or as Jillian used to say on Biggest Loser, it's calories in vs. calories out. All I did was reduce my calories and I lost nearly 40 lbs in 5 months. I haven't done any exercise.
At the other end of the spectrum, one of my coworkers has lost about 40 lbs in the last year only exercising. She has said on more than one occasion that she refuses to change the way she eats. All the working out in the world won't do you a lick of good if you're still filling your body with garbage.
40 lbs in 5 months eating better or 40 lbs in one year exercising. You tell me which one works better.0 -
Serious calorie restriction might indeed make you live longer. And even id it doesn't, it will FEEL longer.0
-
I think the key words here are "getting all of the vitamins and minerals needed daily". So if you are only putting quality calories in, it makes sense. But is this too hard in todays world. Do we need to find all organic products? No alcohol. no processed foods etc to get the vitamins and minerals in a natural way, and not have the good we do undone by by a poor choice.
Thanks for this food for thought and motivation to eat clean and fresh.0 -
THANK YOU!! I completely agree! I am creating my own new personal goal to lose 20 pounds by Christmas, which is a little over 2 pounds per week.0
-
Serious calorie restriction might indeed make you live longer. And even id it doesn't, it will FEEL longer.
You are definitely right....0 -
Depends on the level of calorie restriction you're talking. But if you're talking about a healthy reduction in calories to a reasonable deficit, then sure, that's a healthy sensible way to lose weight and build health.
But aside from weightloss, regular exercise is also very important for a healthy body.
If you want to be healthy, I'd say you need both.
And I wouldn't be deriving too much of my health related wisdom from ascetics.0 -
There is a lot of scientific data that supports calorie restriction. There are people who embrace the lifestyle. Unfortunately, I love food and would prefer to just enjoy life rather than focusing singularly on longevity. You can't predict tomorrow, but you can plan to live it as fully as possible and make health a priority. So I'll keep enjoying everything in moderation, rather than starving to live a little longer.0
-
I think the key words here are "getting all of the vitamins and minerals needed daily". So if you are only putting quality calories in, it makes sense. But is this too hard in todays world. Do we need to find all organic products? No alcohol. no processed foods etc to get the vitamins and minerals in a natural way, and not have the good we do undone by by a poor choice.
Thanks for this food for thought and motivation to eat clean and fresh.
I definitely think we should be eating organic products, and no alcohol... which will be tough... and this society makes all of the above.. VERY difficult.0 -
I could care less about living to 100 years old.
I believe in eating what I want (but in moderation). If I want some Ben & Jerry's then I'll have some.
Even with the best eating habits and exercise people still die every day from cancer and other diseases.
I agree with cleaning up what someone eats, but never starve. Never go on the ABC diet to see results.
Obesity vs 100 year old people has a lot to do with genetics also.0 -
Depends on the level of calorie restriction you're talking. But if you're talking about a healthy reduction in calories to a reasonable deficit, then sure, that's a healthy sensible way to lose weight and build health.
But aside from weightloss, regular exercise is also very important for a healthy body.
If you want to be healthy, I'd say you need both.
And I wouldn't be deriving too much of my health related wisdom from ascetics.
What do you think is a "sensible" calorie restriction?0 -
You guys are all saying the same thing. There's no magic number to being healthier, or living longer (I mean 15%? 15% of what? That's a useless number). This site already gives you a reduction in calories, in order to maintain a weight loss it takes what your body normally burns just keeping you alive each day and reduces it by whatever you have it set to. Exercise is useful b/c it burns more calories, ie, allowing you to eat more, and it creates muscle, which burns more calories than fat does even when you're sleeping. Not to mention the cardiovascular benefits of exercise.
But when it comes down to it, you will lose weight either way. Jillian is right, it is calories out vs. calories in. Exercise will allow you to put more calories in because you have more calories out. Dieting just reduces the number of calories in. Ideally you would do both.0 -
I went and looked up calorie restriction, and it's basically a fancy new dressed up way of saying "Eat properly." The research says that people who are on calorie restricted diets live longer, but this isn't about the amount of calories you consume as much as it is about eating dark leafy greens, lean meats, complex carbs and proteins as opposed to simple ones. Don't eat simple sugars.
This obviously lowers your calorie intake. A Big Mac and a filet of salmon may have the same amount of protein, but the salmon is going to be a lot better for you.
None of this is news; this is what a healthy lifestyle is. This is a healthy lifestyle that physician's have been advising for years dressed up in a new and fancy package so that people will buy it. Sorry.0 -
In theory it makes sense, but how does one determine exactly what the body needs? RDA/DRI numbers are calculated for the “typical” person and the actual number varies from person to person. I think unless you see a doctor/specialist/nutritionist, it’s very dangerous to just assume you’re getting 100% of your requirements by using the general goals listed on various websites. It would be important to find out exactly what YOUR body needs if you plan on doing it for an extended period of time so you don’t get vitamin/mineral deficiencies.
Seems like it’s flirting with an eating disorder (well, depending on how much you’re actually restricting) and I wouldn’t do it, but it’s your body and you determine what you want to do. It would be a great experiment, though, and interesting to see where it takes you. I know I feel tons better if I only eat natural “clean” foods and stay away from the empty calories, but I still try to reach a minimum of 1200 calories.0 -
I could care less about living to 100 years old.
I believe in eating what I want (but in moderation). If I want some Ben & Jerry's then I'll have some.
Even with the best eating habits and exercise people still die every day from cancer and other diseases.
I agree with cleaning up what someone eats, but never starve. Never go on the ABC diet to see results.
Obesity vs 100 year old people has a lot to do with genetics also.
I'm not arguing the fact that other things kill people every day.. but obesity is one of the highest. That's why I said it increases the likelyhood of living until your 100.0 -
http://www.crsociety.org/Getting_started
There's the website I looked it up on. Again, any health professional will tell you to do these things. This isn't a diet so much as common sense.0 -
I was watching Own too, I agree lower calories, but not under 1200
0 -
There is a lot of scientific data that supports calorie restriction. There are people who embrace the lifestyle. Unfortunately, I love food and would prefer to just enjoy life rather than focusing singularly on longevity. You can't predict tomorrow, but you can plan to live it as fully as possible and make health a priority. So I'll keep enjoying everything in moderation, rather than starving to live a little longer.
Most of that evidence is based on flies and stuff, with maybe the odd lower mammal thrown in. Human based studies are few and far between, largely anecdotal and inconclusive. And the research doesn't really comment on the *quality* of life?
I agree with your final statement. What's the point of a longer life lived with a sense of long term deprivation?0 -
I guess I would say that you need to have a balanced diet with nutrient-rich food. I do believe that you can mess up your metabolism by not consuming enough calories. On this website you are restricting your calories to lose weight. How much are you planning to eat and can you maintain that level?? It has been my experience that if you can't maintain the program you usually can't maintain the weight loss. I would ask a doctor just to be safe. Good Luck
:flowerforyou:0 -
How much are you planning on restricting? How much are you planning on starving your body?
Sure it might take awhile for your body to go into "starvation mode" sure it might take a while for your body to use up it's nutrients or whatever.
But how long are you planning on doing this restricting and starving? Because, unless you're planning on eating small amounts for the rest of your life, you are going to get weight back when you go back to normal eating. When you really strict your calorie intake (a good amount under 1200) your metabolism will slow down. Then when you start eating 1200+ calories again at first your body will gain weight back before it starts to even out again.
So, it's a good idea I guess to starve yourself if you're cool with gaining weight back after Christmas.
Personally, I'd go for a lifestyle change. That way you are incorporating healthy eating habits and normal calorie intake levels so when you are no longer losing weight you will keep the weight off.
Also, not eating enough is just as unhealthy for your body as eating too much. Anorexics don't live longer than obese people.0 -
i typically don't take advice from dr. oz.
i agree w/ the previous post. eating healthier is what it's all about. you can have 100 calories of m&m's or 100 calories of a healthy fish. that's NOT the same thing, even though it's the same amount of calories.0 -
In theory it makes sense, but how does one determine exactly what the body needs? RDA/DRI numbers are calculated for the “typical” person and the actual number varies from person to person. I think unless you see a doctor/specialist/nutritionist, it’s very dangerous to just assume you’re getting 100% of your requirements by using the general goals listed on various websites. It would be important to find out exactly what YOUR body needs if you plan on doing it for an extended period of time so you don’t get vitamin/mineral deficiencies.
Seems like it’s flirting with an eating disorder (well, depending on how much you’re actually restricting) and I wouldn’t do it, but it’s your body and you determine what you want to do. It would be a great experiment, though, and interesting to see where it takes you. I know I feel tons better if I only eat natural “clean” foods and stay away from the empty calories, but I still try to reach a minimum of 1200 calories.
I wouldn't exactly call this experiment "flirting with an eating disorder".. I'm not talking about going without dr. supervision for months or years at a time. I'm talking about cleaning up my diet the safe, doctor approved way.
This is such a touchy subject, I thought it would be a good debate, and it's proved true!0 -
i typically don't take advice from dr. oz.
i agree w/ the previous post. eating healthier is what it's all about. you can have 100 calories of m&m's or 100 calories of a healthy fish. that's NOT the same thing, even though it's the same amount of calories.
I'm not "taking advice" from him. I simply quoted him. I completely agree with that comment.0 -
How much are you planning on restricting? How much are you planning on starving your body?
Sure it might take awhile for your body to go into "starvation mode" sure it might take a while for your body to use up it's nutrients or whatever.
But how long are you planning on doing this restricting and starving? Because, unless you're planning on eating small amounts for the rest of your life, you are going to get weight back when you go back to normal eating. When you really strict your calorie intake (a good amount under 1200) your metabolism will slow down. Then when you start eating 1200+ calories again at first your body will gain weight back before it starts to even out again.
So, it's a good idea I guess to starve yourself if you're cool with gaining weight back after Christmas.
Personally, I'd go for a lifestyle change. That way you are incorporating healthy eating habits and normal calorie intake levels so when you are no longer losing weight you will keep the weight off.
Also, not eating enough is just as unhealthy for your body as eating too much. Anorexics don't live longer than obese people.
hahaha you don't have to be smart.. that is completely uncalled for. Thank you for your thoughts, but you can take that sarcasm to another post. 0 -
Hmm, sorry. I was actually just trying to give my advice. I am not a sarcastic person, I HATE sarcasm for this very reason.0
-
Hmm, sorry. I was actually just trying to give my advice. I am not a sarcastic person, I HATE sarcasm for this very reason.
Well, I took some of your sentencing for sarcasm. Apologies.0 -
In theory it makes sense, but how does one determine exactly what the body needs? RDA/DRI numbers are calculated for the “typical” person and the actual number varies from person to person. I think unless you see a doctor/specialist/nutritionist, it’s very dangerous to just assume you’re getting 100% of your requirements by using the general goals listed on various websites. It would be important to find out exactly what YOUR body needs if you plan on doing it for an extended period of time so you don’t get vitamin/mineral deficiencies.
Seems like it’s flirting with an eating disorder (well, depending on how much you’re actually restricting) and I wouldn’t do it, but it’s your body and you determine what you want to do. It would be a great experiment, though, and interesting to see where it takes you. I know I feel tons better if I only eat natural “clean” foods and stay away from the empty calories, but I still try to reach a minimum of 1200 calories.
I wouldn't exactly call this experiment "flirting with an eating disorder".. I'm not talking about going without dr. supervision for months or years at a time. I'm talking about cleaning up my diet the safe, doctor approved way.
This is such a touchy subject, I thought it would be a good debate, and it's proved true!
Ah, after reading the comments I realize 'Calorie Restriction' is just another way of saying 'clean eating' and not really what I was assuming it is. I've heard of EDs where people will ONLY eat super nutritious things and eat a dangerously low amount of calories - much like anorexia, but they feel they're eating some healthy food so it's okay. I assumed this was the same type of thing, but sounds like I was wrong.
I would still be cautious with your calorie intake to make sure you're not eating too few calories, but cleaning up your diet is definitely a good thing. Processed foods are horrible for you and I know I feel better if I cut them out of my diet (but I still make sure I eat at least 1200 calories to make sure I'm getting enough calories for my body to burn through).0 -
Totally agree on calorie restriction.0
-
Well it's kinda true. While there are other factors (genetics and having no disease) the smaller a person is, the less the body has to "work". The less the body has to work, the less it breaks down. It also lessens the work on the heart which is basically the life force of our body. So yes I believe it.I don't know alot about calorie restriction.. but yesterday I was watching OWN and Dr. Oz said that if we cut our calorie intake by 15%, along with other things, it can increase your chances of living to be 100.
This brings me to my next topic.
The oldest living man in the world, says that one thing that kept him alive for as long as he's been here, was calorie restriction. As long as you are getting all of the vitamins and minerals needed daily, there is no need to over-indulge in useless calories.
Agree? Disagree?
I believe I agree. As Americans, most of us have learned "bigger is better" Bigger houses... bigger cars... bigger wallets... even boiling down to bigger plates. This is why our country is so obese.
Whether you agree, or disagree.. I'm going to try it.
Starvation Mode doesn't occur immediately.. it takes time for your body to "starve". After all, your body has to use up all of the nutrients it has before it can technically starve, and if you are feeding it everything it needs... it won't.... right??
Comments? Opinions?
I just don't see myself weighing 120lbs and being able to do much.0
This discussion has been closed.
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