Quantcast

Author Topic: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?  (Read 11868 times)

Blade78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
    • View Profile
Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« on: July 01, 2012, 02:17:53 pm »
I ate Cheese Whiz by the pound when I was a kid:

http://junkfoodscience.blogspot.com/2007/06/processed-foods-arent-real-food.html

I was joking about the cheese whiz, but I'm not sure why exactly?
why isnt food, food?
from the article you linked to:
For example, lecithin is the name for the natural emulsifier (phospholipid) in egg yolks; acetic acid is vinegar; sodium chloride is salt (from rocks); ascorbic acid is vitamin C; agar and carrageenan are natural gums from seaweed; pectin is the fiber in plants like apples; sodium bicarbonate is baking soda (which comes from an ore mine); sucrose is sugar from beets or corn; etc. They’re all also technically food additives, but whether they’re natural or artificial doesn’t make them more or less safe. Our bodies can’t tell the difference, either, as they don’t read labels. The identical chemical is the same to our bodies, regardless of where it came from.

As Im  using my Vitmix, I know to core apples, not that the vitamix can't handle  chopping up the cores, but Apple seeds contain a cyanide compound, so even organic/fresh apples are gonna kill me.

Im still not seeing any science that says a man who is 18% bodyfat who eats filtered water, a vegan diet lives a better quality(less disease) longer life, than someone who is also at 18% bodyfat, who eats a fast food diet

we all remember the dude with the twinkie diet, yes?
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.htmlFor 10 weeks, Mark Haub, a professor of human nutrition at Kansas State University, ate one of these sugary cakelets every three hours, instead of meals. To add variety in his steady stream of Hostess and Little Debbie snacks, Haub munched on Doritos chips, sugary cereals and Oreos, too.
he also lost 27lbs in 2 months
Haub's "bad" cholesterol, or LDL, dropped 20 percent and his "good" cholesterol, or HDL, increased by 20 percent. He reduced the level of triglycerides, which are a form of fat, by 39 percent

yes, he lost 27lbs in 2 months, I lost 67.5lbs in 10 weeks, eating eggwhites, lifting weights, doing cardio and taking a handful of drugs PRN.

so Im thinking the components of a diet is what is causing Low T/ED, etc.
while total calories determine whether you gain or lose fat,  which is what determines your cholesterol levels.

so what if you found a food that was made up of non-natural components, but overall,it was still low in fat,  no saturated and no transfats, wouldnt that be ok?
« Last Edit: July 01, 2012, 09:23:07 pm by PeakT »
“Don’t you feel good when you go to the gym?’ Not at all. There’s too many people in-shape there. When I go to McDonald’s I feel great. At McDonald’s I’m Matthew McConaughey.” --Jim Gaffigan - Mr. Universe

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints
« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2012, 09:22:53 pm »
I understand the question and we've all had thoughts like, "My Uncle George smoked like a chimney and lived to be 85."  In fact, Uncle George Burns is a great example of that.  Some people have the genetics and one of the key genes involved is called "FOXO3".  This is a subject that will make health geeks like me gurgle with pleasure:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17900900
"An AMPK-FOXO pathway mediates longevity induced by a novel method of dietary restriction in C. elegans"

Yes, coming someday soon to a hospital near you is the ability to alter the genes of your little Johnny or Suzy to this favorable version.

Now I do have to take exception with something you wrote, with all due respect of course, and that is:

"Im still not seeing any science that says a man who is 18% bodyfat who eats filtered water, a vegan diet lives a better quality(less disease) longer life, than someone who is also at 18% bodyfat, who eats a fast food diet."

Well, check out the studies on this page and notice that #13 specifically covers vegetarians:

http://www.peaktestosterone.com/mortality

Now one comment:  we are still missing (as far as I know) a good study that shows a Low Fat Diet leads to improved mortality. 

But I still get your point and, again, we've all noticed friends and neighbors who have lived into their 70's and 80's in spite of poor lifestyle.  To that I can only talk about one older woman that I knew - very nice woman - who smoked all her life and developed COPD in her late 60's.  The doctors were miraculously able to keep her alive through medications and oxygen treatments for another 7 or 8 years, but her life was essentially over once she got the COPD.  She could not leave her house easily and she had no energy or vitality left.  Yet, technically, she was still alive. 

Now contrast that with most people who live a solid whole foods natural lifestyle with abundant exercise and activity.  Most of these people - there's no guarantee of course - will live like someone thirty years younger and have ample energy and productivity well into their senior years.  We just had a poster who was doing smoothies and still making love to his wife until he was 80:

https://www.peaktestosterone.com/forum/index.php?topic=339.0

This is who I want to be like (or at least die trying)...
« Last Edit: July 01, 2012, 09:35:36 pm by PeakT »
THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

Peak Testosterone Forum

Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints
« Reply #1 on: July 01, 2012, 09:22:53 pm »


Blade78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
    • View Profile
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints
« Reply #2 on: July 01, 2012, 09:59:26 pm »
I understand the question and we've all had thoughts like, "My Uncle George smoked like a chimney and lived to be 85."  In fact, Uncle George Burns is a great example of that.  Some people have the genetics and one of the key genes involved is called "FOXO3".  This is a subject that will make health geeks like me gurgle with pleasure:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17900900
"An AMPK-FOXO pathway mediates longevity induced by a novel method of dietary restriction in C. elegans"

Yes, coming someday soon to a hospital near you is the ability to alter the genes of your little Johnny or Suzy to this favorable version.

Now I do have to take exception with something you wrote, with all due respect of course, and that is:

"Im still not seeing any science that says a man who is 18% bodyfat who eats filtered water, a vegan diet lives a better quality(less disease) longer life, than someone who is also at 18% bodyfat, who eats a fast food diet."

Well, check out the studies on this page and notice that #13 specifically covers vegetarians:

http://www.peaktestosterone.com/mortality

Now one comment:  we are still missing (as far as I know) a good study that shows a Low Fat Diet leads to improved mortality. 

But I still get your point and, again, we've all noticed friends and neighbors who have lived into their 70's and 80's in spite of poor lifestyle.  To that I can only talk about one older woman that I knew - very nice woman - who smoked all her life and developed COPD in her late 60's.  The doctors were miraculously able to keep her alive through medications and oxygen treatments for another 7 or 8 years, but her life was essentially over once she got the COPD.  She could not leave her house easily and she had no energy or vitality left.  Yet, technically, she was still alive. 

Now contrast that with most people who live a solid whole foods natural lifestyle with abundant exercise and activity.  Most of these people - there's no guarantee of course - will live like someone thirty years younger and have ample energy and productivity well into their senior years.  We just had a poster who was doing smoothies and still making love to his wife until he was 80:

https://www.peaktestosterone.com/forum/index.php?topic=339.0

This is who I want to be like or die trying...
dang, it
I shoulda said twins, instead of 2 men who held their bodyfat at the same levels
then you'd tell me about how epigenietics(*reading frame of DNA) explain how/why identical twins end up aging differently/dying differently, one gets cancer, one gets hit by a car, etc...

Dietary restriction (DR) is that the same as CR?
which duh makes sense, you have less Advanced Glycation End Products (AGEs) going on in the body
the best treatment for fatness isnt exercise and dieting, it's simply dieting
person 1
eats 40protein-30carbohydrates-30fat diet of about 2000 calories
then exercises daily doing weightlifting 3x a week and cardio 3x a week
person1 eats a lot of sugar and has AGEs going on

person2
eats 200grams of protein/day of eggwhites
some non-starchy veggies for fiber
then lifts weights 3x a week to not lose muscle, as a Protein Sparing modified fast is shown to not lose muscle if you eat enough protein and dont do a lot of cardio
person 2 has very little AGES going on and  spends less than half the time in the gym that person 1 does

person 2's dieting has activated Sirtuins.
The Sirtuins a family of genes found in everything from yeast to humans, may tell us why we age and how we can live longer, healthier lives. When food runs scarce, these genes, particularly SIR2 in yeast and SIRT1 in mammals, act as our bodies' guardians, beefing up DNA repair and delaying cell death. Recent studies show that mice with activated SIRT1 can even evade (for a while) the diseases associated with aging, including cancer and diabetes, while yeast given a few extra copies of the SIR2 gene will live up to 50 percent longer. Find out how this works in yeast, and what the implications for us might be.

http://www.theiflife.com/the-longevity-gene-sirt1-part-i-cr-fasting-and-aging-diseases/

when I dropped 67lbs in 10 weeks, I was a person 2, but I also used the CR-helper, DNP(2,4, dinitrophenol)
http://www.jbc.org/content/279/48/49883.full

From a life extension standpoint, DNP would reduce mitochondrial reactive oxygen species, lower insulin levels, and reduce proinflammatory cytokines.

DNP has been shown to increase the lifespan of drosophila and saccharomyces cerevisiae. Here's a quote from the paper on the later:
Quote:
A leading hypothesis on the mechanism through which CR prevents aging is that this process decreases reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation and, hence, the oxidation of cellular components (5–8). Indeed, aging is usually accompanied by oxidative damage of DNA, proteins, and lipids (9, 10). CR promotes a metabolic shift resulting in more efficient electron transport in the mitochondrial respiratory chain (1, 5). Faster and more efficient electron transport may lead to lower production of ROS by mitochondria, one of the major intracellular ROS sources. This occurs because of reduced leakage of electrons from the respiratory chain and/or lower oxygen concentrations in the mitochondrial microenvironment (11, 12). Indeed, artificially increasing mitochondrial respiration using uncouplers such as 2,4-dinitrophenol (DNP) strongly prevents mitochondrial ROS release (11). Furthermore, CR decreases ROS release/O2 consumed in isolated mammalian mitochondria (13), possibly because of enhanced expression of mitochondrial uncoupling proteins (14, 15). Despite this evidence supporting a correlation between ROS-induced damage and aging, a clear cause-effect relationship has been hard to establish, and conflicting results are often presented in the literature (see Ref. 4 for a critical review).
..
In fact, H2O2 release/O2 consumption ratios in yeasts grown in 2% glucose were significantly higher than those of CR mitochondria (panel C), indicating that CR alters the quantity of H2O2 generated per O2 consumed. As a result, despite the fact that yeasts grown in 0.5% glucose display O2 consumption rates larger than those observed in 2% glucose (23), their total mitochondrial ROS release may be lower. Indeed, the uncoupler carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenylhydrazone, which artificially enhances respiration, decreased H2O2 production in S. cerevisiae mitochondria by 27% (panel D), as observed previously in animal tissues (11, 12). DNP (5 µM), a structurally unrelated uncoupler, also lowered H2O2 release by 25–30% (results not shown), whereas antimycin A, a respiratory inhibitor, strongly enhanced H2O2 release (panel D).
...
We observed that cells cultured under CR conditions (0.5% glucose) in stationary phase present a larger proportion of live cells than yeast grown in 2% glucose (Fig. 2A), indicating that CR also increases chronological life span. To verify the effects of respiration and ROS release on chronological life span, we used DNP as a mild uncoupler (to avoid cell death due to excessive H+ transport) and antimycin A to block respiration (Fig. 2B). We found that low doses of DNP (1–10 nM) significantly increase 2% glucose live cell contents, a result indicative of enhanced survival. This effect was not observed in cells grown in 0.5% glucose (results not shown). Higher DNP doses (100 nM, not shown, to 1 mM, Fig. 2B) did not affect or slightly decreased stationary phase viability relative to control cells, probably because of perturbed energy metabolism. On the other hand, the respiratory inhibitor antimycin A consistently and strongly increased dead cell contents at every concentration tested (Fig. 2B and results not shown). These results are in agreement with the hypothesis that ROS affect yeast viability during the stationary phase (20).
...
To verify whether mild uncoupling was the cause of the beneficial effects of CR, we measured the effects of low concentrations of the uncoupler DNP on life span in S. cerevisiae. We initially studied chronological life span, which has been the focus of fewer studies in the area. We found that CR increases chronological life span in two yeast strains (W303–1A and BTY4741), indicating that chronological and replicative life spans share some common pathways (Fig. 2). Furthermore, the effects of CR could be mimicked by low doses of DNP, whereas respiratory inhibition decreased cell viability under these conditions, suggesting the CR effect is related to changes in respiration and ROS release promoted by this treatment. Because the deletion of mitochondrial superoxide dismutase also decreased cell viability, it seems chronological life span is limited by mitochondrial ROS production, as suggested previously (17, 20).
...
Because mild uncoupling with DNP promoted the same respiratory, ROS, and chronological life span effects as [caloric restriction], we tested its effects on replicative life span. The finding that DNP leads to an 15% increase in replicative life span indicates that mild uncoupling efficiently mimics CR (which increases replicative life span by 24% (21)) and improves life span in both dividing cells and those in stationary phase."



I agree with what you said about quality of life as you get older
It seems in America, at least, if you dont go fast, you slowly fade out, and as you do the quality of life you have diminishes and you become a burden on everyone around you.
I will look at the Mortality page, thanks
but here's an article about Shielding The Brain From Too Much Insulin Can Prolong Life
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070719141139.htm
« Last Edit: July 01, 2012, 10:06:13 pm by watchntv »
“Don’t you feel good when you go to the gym?’ Not at all. There’s too many people in-shape there. When I go to McDonald’s I feel great. At McDonald’s I’m Matthew McConaughey.” --Jim Gaffigan - Mr. Universe

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2012, 10:30:44 pm »
Wait - so are you going to practice CR or just reading up on it?

You'll probably be interested in this article that discusses why caloric restriction does not seem to do as well in humans as animals (and also discusses why veganism sans lots of protein may do just as well):

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2008/09/24/researchers.note.differences.between.people.and.animals.calorie.restriction

Great article on insulin btw - thx...
« Last Edit: July 01, 2012, 10:34:59 pm by PeakT »
THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

Peak Testosterone Forum

Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #3 on: July 01, 2012, 10:30:44 pm »


Blade78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
    • View Profile
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #4 on: July 02, 2012, 02:22:11 am »
Wait - so are you going to practice CR or just reading up on it?

You'll probably be interested in this article that discusses why caloric restriction does not seem to do as well in humans as animals (and also discusses why veganism sans lots of protein may do just as well):

http://esciencenews.com/articles/2008/09/24/researchers.note.differences.between.people.and.animals.calorie.restriction

Great article on insulin btw - thx...
Wait - so are you going to practice CR or just reading up on it?
I'm no sure what you mean by practing CR without reading up on it?
the point of me posting that article was about the dual  use of dnp, both in it's role in fat loss(increases BMR by 11%/100mg dnp powder and eliciting a similar response in the body as CR.

You'll probably be interested in this article that discusses why caloric restriction does not seem to do as well in humans as animals (and also discusses why veganism sans lots of protein may do just as well):

Yes, I'm aware that CR doesnt benefit humans the same way it does with, seemingly, everything else.
but Im also aware of "protein power" which talked about the egyptians having a high carb lifestyle and because of that, poor health.
As I've made a change to only have carbs about a day a week, to coincide with family/holidays/cause Im a junkie
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JS-tTaCQAio&feature=fvw
people don't think of food being a drug
but it sucks to be fat, be judged on your fatness
but you just someone when they are obviously a junkie and look like a junkie, missing teeth.
but then there are other junkies

I am a junkie and no one knows. No one cares. People look at me differently than they used to, they stare, they talk. I ignore it. I don’t care.

People that use drugs are considered “junkies” if they are addicted and do not want to stop. I used everyday; I look forward to using tomorrow. I can’t wait! I look forward to reloading because I “jones” if I am out. When I am down to my last my little bit, all I can think about is getting more and when I do, it’s euphoric! The brain is an amazing tool; I let it control my body. The body does what the mind tells it to, my brain says, “get more” and I do. But, my mind isn’t always talking about drugs when it says, “get more!”

I go to the gym everyday. I eat the same things at the same time everyday. I take my drugs at the same time everyday. I love my routine. I am a junkie. I am not a crack addict, a meth user, a cokehead. I am a testosterone junkie. I love loading the dart, feeling the pin pierce the skin as it goes an inch into the muscle. I aspirate the syringe, no blood, and I push with a smile on my face. 1ml, 2 ml, 3ml, I love it all.  I do not do concentration curls after the shot is done. I lay back and imagine what I will look like because of the sacrifices I have made. No holidays, no late nights at the bar, no eating McDonalds because it’s convenient. If bodybuilding was easy, everyone would do it, but everyone doesn’t. I will never forget where I started and I will never forget where I want to be.
http://www.articlesbase.com/bodybuil...ie-781246.html

__________________

Wait - so are you going to practice CR or just reading up on it?

Great article on insulin btw - thx...

this is what I was talking about when I mentioned protein power(by drs Eades, MD)  and why I attempt to not have more than 50carbs a day, cept on weekends/PRN
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/obesity/obesity-in-ancient-egypt/
Ten or twelve years ago we wrote in Protein Power about the data contained in the vast amount of ancient Egyptian mummies. We pointed out that several thousand years ago when the future mummies roamed the earth their diet was a nutritionist’s nirvana. At least a nirvana for all the so-called nutritional experts of today who are recommending a diet filled with whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, and little meat, especially red meat. Follow such a diet, we’re told, and we will enjoy abundant health.

Unfortunately, it didn’t work that way for the Egyptians. They followed such a diet simply because that’s all there was. There was no sugar – it wouldn’t be produced for another thousand or more years. The only sweet was honey, which was consumed in limited amounts. The primary staple was a coarse bread made of stone-ground, whole wheat. Animals were used as beasts of burden and were valued much more for the work they could do than for the meat they could provide. The banks of the Nile provided fertile soil for growing all kinds of fruits and vegetables, all of which were a part the low-fat, high-carbohydrate Egyptian diet. And there were no artificial sweeteners, artificial coloring, artificial flavors, preservatives, or any of the other substances that are part of all the manufactured foods we eat today.

You'll probably be interested in this article that discusses why caloric restriction does not seem to do as well in humans as animals (and also discusses why veganism sans lots of protein may do just as well):

vegans who dont eat a lot of protien have long/healthy lives?
IF you want to spend 50 years cold hungry and miserable just in case it gives you a few more months of life, go for it.

what follows is what  that guy, who isnt very nice, said about CR

***
Speakman JR and Hambly C. Starving for Life: What Animal Studies Can and Cannot Tell Us about the Use of Caloric Restriction to Prolong Human Lifespan. J Nutr. 2007 Apr;137(4):1078-86. Links

Caloric restriction (CR) is the only experimental nongenetic paradigm known to increase lifespan. It has broad applicability and extends the life of most species through a retardation of aging. There is considerable interest in the use of CR in humans, and animal studies can potentially tell us about the impacts. In this article we highlight some of the things that animal studies can tell us about CR in humans. Rodent studies indicate that the benefits of CR on lifespan extension are related to the extent of restriction. The benefits of CR, however, decline as the age of onset of treatment is delayed. Modeling these impacts suggests that if a 48-y-old man engaged in 30% CR until his normal life expectancy of 78, he might increase his life expectancy by 2.8 y. Exercise and cold exposure induce similar energy deficits, but animals respond to these energy deficits in different ways that have a minor impact on lifespan. Measurements of animal responses when they cease restriction indicate that prolonged CR does not diminish hunger, even though the animals may have been in long-term energy balance. Neuroendocrine profiles support the idea that animals under CR are continuously hungry. The feasibility of restricting intake in humans for many decades without long-term support is questionable. However, what is unclear from animal studies is whether taking drugs that suppress appetite will generate the same impact on longevity or whether the neuroendocrine correlates of hunger play an integral role in mediating CRs effects.

hiscomments:
For literally centuries, man has looked for ways to extend life or achieve immortality. From drugs to anti-oxidants to various other approaches, escaping the breaths of death has been a common human goal. In recent years, one approach has come to the forefront as not only having the potential to increase lifespan but actually having been shown to do so in most models studied (apparently houseflies are an odd exception).

That approach is called caloric restriction (CR) and is sometimes differentiated from your basic calorie restricted diet by adding the rider of caloric restriction with optimal nutrition (CRON) with the idea of CRON being a reduction in total food intake while still ensuring sufficient/optimal intake of required nutrients.

Of course, by needs, most of the research on CR has been done in animal models since it's not feasible to track humans over their lifespan to see what effect CR will have. However, CR has been studied in humans under more short-term conditions, looking primarily at various health parameters as an end result. For example, the Biosphere II experiment ended up being a 2 year CR model when the food supply failed and this allowed researchers to examine a number of effects of CR on human metabolism.

And before addressing this week's study, I want to make that very clear distinction: there are two possible effects of CR. The first, and the one that the paper this week addresses is an actual increase in lifespan. As the paper points out, in some studies, an increase in 50% of average lifespan has been observed in some animal models. Applied to humans, CR might be expected to increase lifespan from an average of 78 to 116 years in men and 83 to 124.5 years in women.

However, an additional potential impact of CR is on overall health and even if CR fails to increase human lifespan, it could still have potential benefits on various health parameters (such as insulin levels and cancer risk). That second aspect of CR is not discussed in this paper but may be of as much importance.

One of the questions, and the one this paper addresses is what animal studies can and cannot tell us about the impact of CR on human metabolism.

The first issue addressed is what level of restriction is needed with 50% of normal intake generating the largest impact on lifespan. Because of the intakes of the control animals, this actually ends up being a 65% reduction from normal food intake. This level of restriction is required to get the maximum 50% increase in lifespan. Smaller reductions, such as 30% below normal, generate only a 20% increase in lifespan. Think about those numbers for a second. A male with a predicted maintenance of 2700 calories/day would be expected to consume 1350 cal/day for extended periods, a female with an 1800 cal/day maintenance would have to subsist on 900 calories per day for extended periods to gain benefits of CR.

The next topic discussed had to do with when restriction should begin for optimal results. The paper points out that almost all studies of CR in rodents and mammals occur very early in life, essentially after they are weaned (basically, child mice and rats). Basically, they are CR for their entire lives. Studies where CR is instituted later in life typically show much lesser impact with mortality rate frequently being identical to non CR animals.

Clearly, early onset CR has little relevance to humans who are unlikely to restrict their caloric intake for their entire lives. Rather, individuals (typically as they get older) become more interested in CR. An important question is then what benefits might occur if CR is started later.

Tangentially, and interestingly, the paper notes that elderly often begin eating less (often due to the onset of disease) and a loss of weight tends to be associated with higher mortality; nutritionists often focus on trying to keep bodyweight from dropping in these individuals.

In any case, plotting the relationship between the impact of CR on lifespan and when it is started, the researchers show a linear decline in impact as age goes up. putting this into table form, assuming that the animal research applies to humans, they show the following

Age at onset Time on restriction 15% restriction 30% restriction

15.6 years 62.4 years 5.6 years 11.2 years

23.4 years 54.6 years 4.7 years 9.4 years

31.2 years 46.8 years 3.3 years 6.5 years

39 years 39 years 2.4 years 4.8 years

46.8 years 31.2 years 1.4 years 2.8 years

54.6 years 23.4 years .25 years .3 years

62.4 years 15.6 years 0 years 0 years

Age of onset is when CR is begun, time on restriction refers to how many years the subject would have to restrict calories. The last two columns show the potential impact on lifespan of either 15% or 30% caloric restriction. For example, if someone began CR at 39 years old, and restricted their food intake by 15% for the next 39 years, they could expect an increase in lifespan of 2.4 years. If they could handle a 30% reduction in food intake, they might get 4.8 years extra lifespan. By the time folks are in their 50's, CR has essentially zero impact on predicted lifespan. Again, assuming that the animal research holds. It's possible that CR will be more effective in humans, just as its possible that it won't even be as effective as in animals.

Another important question regarding CR has to do with hunger and whether or not it ever goes away with chronic CR (tangentially: this is also a question of importance to anyone trying to maintain an extremely reduced bodyfat level). To test this, the researchers placed mice on 20% CR for 50 days (equivalent to roughly 2.5 years in humans) and then allowed them to eat ad libitum to see if appetite had decreased. Quite simply, it hadn't and the animals ate like crazy when given access to food. Unpublished data on their neuroendocrine profiles indicated that the animals remain physiologically hungry throughout the CR period.

The next point addressed by the researchers had to do with the mechanisms by which CR work which I'm not going to go into in detail. However, the researchers make an important note regarding the impact of CR on energy levels and exercise along with differences in the most common causes of death between rodents and humans. In rodents, the major cause of death is cancer whereas in humans it is cardiovascular disease. Additionally, while exercise regularly is shown to have benefits for humans (in terms of health), this is not the case for animals.

They mention that the reductions in activity that typically occur with CR (they anecdotal reports of humans involved in CR of low-energy, along with chronic cold) could be detrimental to humans (but not to rodents); reducing exercise due to low energy levels might predispose humans to higher risk for cardiovascular disease. At the same time, primate studies of CR suggest improvements in markers of cardiovascular function. Additionally, one study of CR groups suggest a much improved cardiovascular risk profile; however that group was also engaged in regular exercise and were much leaner. Whether the impact on risk was due to exercise/low bodyfat or CR per se is impossible to determine.

Finally, the paper addresses what the animal studies can't tell us about CR. The first issue is whether or not the extent and duration of CR required to generate effects in humans is even feasible in humans. That is, in animal models it's simple to institute CR, the animals eat what you give them. Outside of small groups, it seems unlikely for the average human to voluntarily reduce food intake by 20% or more for upwards of 40 years, especially if the benefit is a mere 4-5 years increase lifespan.

Another issue is whether drugs that generate weight loss (usually through blunting appetite) have the same impact as CR per se. Given that some of the effects of CR seem to be mediated through the same neuroendocrine effects that make the animals hungry, drugs that alter normal neuroendocrinology may not generate the same effects. Interestingly, the researchers mention surgical intervention as being a potential way of ensuring lifetime adherence to CR protocols.

Finally, they address whether it's feasible (beyond issues of hunger) for humans to engage in CR when they have to live in the real world. That is, it's one thing to have rodents confined to a cage who eat what they are given engage in prolonged CR. Even there, studies in rodents suggest a loss of lean body mass. While this isn't detrimental to a caged animal, a loss of functional mass would be detrimental to humans who have to function to survive. An additional issue would be immune function as rodents are kept in a pathogen free environment; however studies of CR suggest an increase in immune function.

Summing up: assuming that the animal research can be applied to humans, it would appear that CR is unlikely to have a large impact on human lifespan per se (again, this is outside of potential health benefits) even if it is instituted quite early. Since this is unlikely, and most individuals engaging in CR are older in the first place, it's interesting to note that the predicted impact on total lifespan is small approaching negligible. Thirty years of chronic hunger, cold and low energy levels might net a 40 year old an extra couple of years of life at best. This seems rather unreasonable to me.

Once again, an issue not addressed in this review is the impact of CR on various health parameters. However, at least some research suggests that other approaches (such as intermittent fasting or every other day fasting, or exercise to generate the caloric deficit) may generate the same effects as CR per se and may be much more reasonable for long-term application.
“Don’t you feel good when you go to the gym?’ Not at all. There’s too many people in-shape there. When I go to McDonald’s I feel great. At McDonald’s I’m Matthew McConaughey.” --Jim Gaffigan - Mr. Universe

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #5 on: July 02, 2012, 01:54:46 pm »
Well, you brought up a lot of topics there, mate.  If a low carb diet works for you, then great.  I think that assuming that high carb diets don't work because of the Egyptians is a stretch though.  As you know, many of the super(deeduper)cultures are higher carb, so it can't be too bad for you.  But, again, I understand you're saying you feel that you were a low carb addict and that this is what works for you, etc.  So go forth and conquer.

Btw, I saw The Music Within last night - really makes one think...

THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

Blade78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
    • View Profile
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #6 on: July 02, 2012, 04:46:35 pm »
Well, you brought up a lot of topics there, mate.  If a low carb diet works for you, then great.  I think that assuming that high carb diets don't work because of the Egyptians is a stretch though.  As you know, many of the super(deeduper)cultures are higher carb, so it can't be too bad for you.  But, again, I understand you're saying you feel that you were a low carb addict and that this is what works for you, etc.  So go forth and conquer.

Btw, I saw The Music Within last night - really makes one think...
I know change in diet affects people differently, I'd much prefer eating candy all day PB.chocolate milk, and licking frosting out of cardboard cans..

Abstract feelings are not why I come to this site. I am trying to find/learn about the long term difference of high carbs vs low carb dieting, I know  that this site is all about processed foods being bad for humans, when in fact, humans did not evolve to eat stuff grown from the ground and then processed in the ways they are,  right?
I dont recall carbs being required for living, not like protein or fat since you can make carbs, aka ketones.
from what i talked about above(yes a long post) carbs are a drug, why people dont crave beef the same way they crave a donut or white bread. etc


I dont see why the Egyptians is a stretch, please extrapolate on that,

I sorta recall the civilizationsyou have mentioned who have high carbs as a predominate source of calories, I dont believe those relate to todays peoples, or processed carbs today at all.  I'd appreciate their names so I can look into thieir cultures. see their lifespan, quality of living and activity level etc.



I know in the book, Protein power, Eades talks about the  Hardin Village(farmers)  and the Knolls(hunter/gathers)
When I began to teach a course in Food and Culture, I ran across an interesting comparison of two cultures in our own country in southern Kentucky.  One was a hunter-gatherer population (HG)  called Indian Knolls (5000 years ago) and the other was a later culture of farmers (agriculturists) named Hardin Village (1500 AD to 1675 AD.)  Then I got interested in nutritional anthropology after reading articles on the Paleolithic Diet, and Jared Diamond’s “The Worst Mistake in the History of the World”.  Perhaps our carbohydrate problems emerged when we changed to farmers from hunter-gatherers.

The skeletal remains of the hunter-gatherers show the nutritional anthropologist a lot of how the health of these people differs.  In other words, when these two populations were compared, the HG’s turned out to be a lot healthier than the agriculturists.  According to Eades in his book, Protein Power, the HGs “had better bones, no signs of iron-deficiency, no signs of infection, few (if any) dental cavities, fewer signs of arthritis and in general were larger and more robust”.  These two groups probably shared some genetic characteristics; both were sedentary; lived in the same general area with the only differences between them being when they lived and their diet.

What did both of these groups eat?  The Hardin Village inhabitants were mainly dependent on corn, beans, and squash, mostly starchy vegetables. There is little evidence of much meat eating except for small animals.  Few deer remains were found in this area. They began to drink milk from domesticated goats and cattle.

The Indian Knolls group ate river mussels and snails.  They hunted more animals such as deer, wild turkey, turtle, and fish.  The bottom line was that they consumed more protein foods while the HGs ate more carbohydrate foods.  They had little to no dairy except from breast milk.

In Hardin Village the researchers found 296 skeletons and in Indian Knolls site yielded 285.  From these skeletons, it was discovered that life expectancy was higher and infant mortality was lower in Indian Knolls as well as the generally more healthy characteristics stated above.
http://foodworksblog.wordpress.com/2010/11/
“Don’t you feel good when you go to the gym?’ Not at all. There’s too many people in-shape there. When I go to McDonald’s I feel great. At McDonald’s I’m Matthew McConaughey.” --Jim Gaffigan - Mr. Universe

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #7 on: July 02, 2012, 05:15:55 pm »
Well, maybe I don't understand what you mean by low carb.  There are some of the superhealthy cultures that are low-medium low carb which I have given exposure to here:

http://www.peaktestosterone.com/FatChance

And, yes, I have no doubt that humans can do well on low fat natural game.  But who eats that?  Not many people can afford 10$/lb meat from Whole Foods to satisfy their diet.  So I guess I'm not sure where you are headed with all of that.

As far as my opinion on Low Carb, I think I've made that pretty clear.  I try not to be obnoxious about it as I'm so countercultural right now.  Below are some of the links where I outline my position. 

Again, though, I'm not trying to be pushy about anything.  If it works for you, it works and what can I say?

http://www.peaktestosterone.com/Atkins_Low_Carb_Diet
http://www.peaktestosterone.com/Paleo_Diet_Myth
http://www.peaktestosterone.com/Saturated_Fat
http://www.peaktestosterone.com/Meat_Risks



THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #8 on: July 02, 2012, 05:22:04 pm »

I dont recall carbs being required for living, not like protein or fat since you can make carbs, aka ketones.
from what i talked about above(yes a long post) carbs are a drug, why people dont crave beef the same way they crave a donut or white bread. etc


You know I find this very interesting and your comment reflects the way a lot of people think.  One of the underlying issues with athletes is glycogen depletion:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9662687

If you are going to be very active, you've got to have those carbs.  Granted, some cultures, such as the Eskimo, ate very little carbs.  But, again, which of us have access non-toxic fish and walrus all day?
THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #9 on: July 02, 2012, 05:26:17 pm »
humans did not evolve to eat stuff grown from the ground and then processed in the ways they are,  right?

I would argue the opposite.  The reason that we do so well on (whole, non-GMO'd) grains is that they mimic how we ate during most of our evolutionary history.

Think of this:  why do humans do so poorly on modern livestock?  The answer is that it is not a low fat, high omega-3 food which is our foundation.  Again, I have no doubt that a diet with low fat, high omega-3 beef is not a bad alternative, but then how many of us have the budget for that (and won't tire of it)?

Your comparison of these differing villages has little to do with modern man who limited access to wild game imo.

And remember:  when your fat levels reach a certain point, you will induce insulin resistance as well...

But, look, the bottom line is that you've 67 pounds and are doing great.  You've earned the right to tell all of us what works and what doesn't for your situation!
« Last Edit: July 02, 2012, 05:52:05 pm by PeakT »
THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

Blade78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
    • View Profile
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #10 on: July 02, 2012, 08:33:27 pm »

I dont recall carbs being required for living, not like protein or fat since you can make carbs, aka ketones.
from what i talked about above(yes a long post) carbs are a drug, why people dont crave beef the same way they crave a donut or white bread. etc


You know I find this very interesting and your comment reflects the way a lot of people think.  One of the underlying issues with athletes is glycogen depletion:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9662687

If you are going to be very active, you've got to have those carbs.  Granted, some cultures, such as the Eskimo, ate very little carbs.  But, again, which of us have access non-toxic fish and walrus all day?

 
Wheb you say a "lot of people"..who are you talking about? 
really, Ive never met anyone who both eats close to zero carbs(not counting "tag-along carbs" AND is also an athlete.  wow, I barely see people nowadays who can see their toes.

those are some "not smart" athletes who  should be smart enough to read up on   glycogen depletion:---which is actually a tool to get the body to make more muscle on some diets programs(when the body  is trying to fight you because you have such low bodyfat/leptin levels....1st brought into the body buliding world via dan duchanie, et al
Depletion of liver glycogen (via carbohydrate restriction and exercise) will do this in the liver as well. As I mentioned previously,
glycogen depletion also sets us up for compensation (and an anabolic rebound)By transiently increasing insulin sensitivity
(with glycogen depletion and training),  you can direct incoming calories towards muscle, instead of
fat cells.


“Don’t you feel good when you go to the gym?’ Not at all. There’s too many people in-shape there. When I go to McDonald’s I feel great. At McDonald’s I’m Matthew McConaughey.” --Jim Gaffigan - Mr. Universe

Blade78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
    • View Profile
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #11 on: July 02, 2012, 09:01:53 pm »

I would argue the opposite.  The reason that we do so well on (whole, non-GMO'd) grains is that they mimic how we ate during most of our evolutionary history.
it depends
I am looking at the common person in america, who is not eating 100% whole grains, but getting grains from pasta at a fast food place/can. white bread from a restraunt or hamburger buns.....\who does well on whole, non-GMO'd  grains? the people who read labels and care about their health?

Think of this:  why do humans do so poorly on modern livestock?  The answer is that it is not a low fat, high omega-3 food which is our foundation.  Again, I have no doubt that a diet with low fat, high omega-3 beef is not a bad alternative, but then how many of us have the budget for that (and won't tire of it)?
people do poorly on modern lifestock?
that's a vaue/broad generalization, you might as well say people do poorly cause of the air they breathe,
I see no evidence that people would do poorly on eating lean cuts of bow. a diet of steak. etc. factor in the HCAs, the lack of fiber, you will have some issues.
but if someone were to watch their calorie intake, as amercians do not do, then they'd have less problems.
going to a steak house(nicely prepared red meat) and you get a surplus of simple carbohydrates to go along with your meal, from peanuts to lots of bread.
add in the meat with all of its cons(as I mentioned a few) and you have yourself a surplus of calories(so you will gain weight)
but what if you did the same meal, only had a caloric deficit...would be bad? remember the Twinkie diet and the movie about the guy who ate mcdonalds everyday and lost weight?


Your comparison of these differing villages has little to do with modern man who limited access to wild game imo.

And remember:  when your fat levels reach a certain point, you will induce insulin resistance as well...

But, look, the bottom line is that you've 67 pounds and are doing great.  You've earned the right to tell all of us what works and what doesn't for your situation!
Im not trying to tell anyone anything, thats not why Im here. Im here to learn....
I dont say, DO X Y Z, I post questions and what I think are answers and I look to get facts back, but I've only been getting opinions/unreleated remarks.
Sugar metabolism causes aging, causes AGEs, causes disease, then shouldnt I stop eating as much sugar as I can/limit sugar to once or twice a week?

Im also trying to figure out with the body is so weird. 
I didnt do anything great, I went from 35% to 22%...a person can easily get to about 15% bodyfat without the body "freaking out"(technical term for hormones crashing, etc)
but if yuo are at 20% bodyfat and you eat sit on your ass and eat 2 meals a week of 5000 calories, and the other 5 days you eat right at maintence) you will gain weight
but at 10% bodyfat, do the same thing and you wont gain fat.,,, this has to do with leptin kinetics I dont understand, yet I know to be true as I've done it myself.
“Don’t you feel good when you go to the gym?’ Not at all. There’s too many people in-shape there. When I go to McDonald’s I feel great. At McDonald’s I’m Matthew McConaughey.” --Jim Gaffigan - Mr. Universe

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2012, 09:07:48 pm »

Wheb you say a "lot of people"..who are you talking about? 
really, Ive never met anyone who both eats close to zero carbs(not counting "tag-along carbs" AND is also an athlete.  wow, I barely see people nowadays who can see their toes.

those are some "not smart" athletes who  should be smart enough to read up on   glycogen depletion:---which is actually a tool to get the body to make more muscle on some diets programs(when the body  is trying to fight you because you have such low bodyfat/leptin levels....1st brought into the body buliding world via dan duchanie, et al
Depletion of liver glycogen (via carbohydrate restriction and exercise) will do this in the liver as well. As I mentioned previously,
glycogen depletion also sets us up for compensation (and an anabolic rebound)By transiently increasing insulin sensitivity
(with glycogen depletion and training),  you can direct incoming calories towards muscle, instead of
fat cells.

I think Anthony Colpo gives a nice discussion of the subject, even though, as you can imagine, I disagree with his conclusions about cholesterol:

http://anthonycolpo.com/?p=1498

Again, this is written by one of the apostle's of high cholesterol who explains what happens when  you do significant exercise with signficant carbs...
THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

PeakT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 38446
    • View Profile
    • Peak Testosterone
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #13 on: July 02, 2012, 09:13:12 pm »
Okay, I'm having a little trouble trying to understand what you're asking.  I think in your last q you are asking if a person is a carnivore and keep his body fat and calories down, will he be okay?  Is that what you are more or less asking?
THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE BOOK ON TRT/TESTOSTERONE:
https://www.amazon.com/Natural-Versus-Testosterone-Therapy-Myer/dp/1523210532/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1499116128&sr=8-1&keywords=natural+versus+testosterone+therapy
And check out my New Peak Testosterone Program: http://www.peaktestosterone.com/peak_testosterone_program
If you are on medications or have a medical condition, always check with your doctor first before making any lifestyle changes or taking new supplements.  And low testosterone is a medical condition.

Blade78

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
    • View Profile
Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #14 on: August 05, 2012, 12:51:32 am »
Okay, I'm having a little trouble trying to understand what you're asking.  I think in your last q you are asking if a person is a carnivore and keep his body fat and calories down, will he be okay?  Is that what you are more or less asking?
no, calories arent what I'm asking about, nothing about meat or herb/carnivore?

Im saying the body acts differently when it is lean compared to when it is fat
lean bein <10% bodyfat
fat being >15%

I know for a fact, as I've done it myself, when I get to sup10%, I can have 2 gorge meals a week, and eat at or below maintenance the rest of the time and I wont get fat
there is a whole field in bodybuildin about this. I just dont understand it well enough at all
“Don’t you feel good when you go to the gym?’ Not at all. There’s too many people in-shape there. When I go to McDonald’s I feel great. At McDonald’s I’m Matthew McConaughey.” --Jim Gaffigan - Mr. Universe

Peak Testosterone Forum

Re: Don't Sinners Do As Well As Saints?
« Reply #14 on: August 05, 2012, 12:51:32 am »