(re-post fixing 1 mistake & including 3 additional
clarifying comments)
The article actually studies a 25% reduction in
calories but doesn't specifically address how
much you *should* cut.
The following study, small in size, studying only
36 individuals who had BMI 25 to 29.9, what I
refer to as "Ample" in the following graphic:
https://prohuman.net/pix2/BMI-WaistCircumference-Cellosis&Hypertension&CardiovascularDisease-Risk.jpg
The study involved reducing calorie intake by
25% per day. Note that studies show that the
longest average lifespan occurs in those with
an "Ample" BMI, though a disclaimer regarding
that is many sick people lose weight, causing
their weight to be less than BMI 25.
Unclear what the percentages are of healthy
people & sick people with BMI less than 25,
but I suspect most with BMI less than 25 are
in fact healthy, as are most with BMI 25 to 29.9.
- - -
September 11 2021
https://en.brinkwire.com/health/cutting-calories-can-help-you-live-longer-but-how-much-should-you-cut-study/
- - -
According to Pennington Biomedical Research
Centre, research has shown that a calorie-re-
stricted diet in non-obese adults leads to less
muscle cell damage. It demonstrated how oxi-
dative damage contributes to aging and possibly
explain why calorie restriction without hunger
increases life expectancy.
- - - - - - - - -
Insert
Calorie restriction *without hunger*? Hmm, all the
calorie restriction I've ever been involved with *in-
cluded hunger*, so I'm not sure how they suppos-
edly managed to do *without hunger* - I suspect
they didn't actually do so.
End Insert
- - - - - - - - -
Calorie consumption recommendations vary with
age, metabolism, & level of physical activity, among
other factors. According to the NHS, the recommen-
ded daily calorie intake for women is 2,000 calories
& for males is 2,500 calories.
One of the study’s authors stated, “A calorie-restric-
ted diet delivers all the elements necessary for a
healthy life while minimizing the energy (calories)
supplied in the diet.”
The study’s key findings revealed that a calorie-re-
stricted diet extends the lifespan of mice & delays
the onset of age-related chronic diseases in rodents
such as cancer, heart disease, and stroke.
- - - - - - - - -
Insert
As always, mice & rodent data is interesting, but typ-
ically is of little relevance when it comes to humans,
as evidenced by the innumerable mice 'cures' for var-
ious Disparate High Glucose Conditions which don't
do anything for humans.
End Insert
- - - - - - - - -
There is additional evidence that those who follow a
calorie-restricted diet live longer than those who over-
eat. Furthermore, calorie-restricted diets have a posi-
tive impact on a number of age-related variables, in-
cluding decreasing insulin sensitivity, which can lead
to (see insert)
- - - - - - - - -
Insert
They used the word "diabetes", but actually, only Pre-
ventable Cellosis has insulin resistance as the core
cause of HbA1c 6.5 or >, & 20 unpreventable specific
types of Cellosis & 6 Non-Cellosis Disparate High Glu-
cose Conditions are *not* caused by insulin resistance
issues.
End Insert
- - - - - - - - -
The accumulation of “oxidative damage” – an imbalance
of antioxidants – in the body’s proteins, lipids, and DNA,
which could accelerate ageing, is a major element in the
age-related deterioration of biological functions.
In their study, 36 healthy "Ample" weight (BMI 25 to 29.9)
young people were enrolled. A third of them got all energy
from food; the caloric restriction group got 25% less calor-
ies; and the control group got 12.5 percent more calories.
- - - - - - - - -
Insert
I have no idea what "1/3rd got all their energy from food"
means, as where else would one get their energy from
unless they are saying they didn't get any energy from
any liquids, I find their statement strange. Their 25% cal-
orie restriction group & 12.5% more calories group, un-
clear how many of the 36 were in each group.
Also unclear why only 1/3rd got all their energy from
food, and what the parameters were for the 2/3rds
claimed to *not* get all their energy from food, & how
many were in the 12.5% more calories group. Also,
the article said nothing about the weight or other
health impacts in the 12.5% more calories group.
End Insert
- - - - - - - - -
The researchers discovered that a 25% caloric deficit for
six months, accomplished either through diet or activity,
reduced the number of calories burned during the day.
A reduction in calories boosted the amount of mitochondria
in muscles, according to the study’s examination of genes
involved in cell development. Calorie restriction significantly
lowered DNA damage in the muscles of the subjects, open-
ing the way for longer life.
The first barrier ... was locating patients ready to participate.
After all, they’d have to reduce the size of their regular dish
by 25% for each of the three meals.
- - - - - - - - -
Insert
Why do folks presume people only eat 3 meals per day, &
ignore snacking, something I suspect almost everyone does
frequently?
End Insert
- - - - - - - - -
“I’m not sure if you realize how difficult it is to perform calorie restriction every day,” she admits ... .
- - - - - - - - -
Insert
I didn't understand the 'but “Brinkwire News in Condensed
Form.” ' part of that last sentence, but in any case, I assure
you, most are fully aware how difficult it is to perform calorie
restriction every day. I know how difficult it is for me to do so,
though I've been succeeding on well over 90% of days since
I've been on my diet in which I've lost over 47 pounds in ...
... the last 7 months, going from BMI 29.8 down to BMI 22.2,
weight 186 pounds down to 138.8 pounds currently. If any-
thing less than 2,500 calories is considered calorie restric-
tion, I'd guess than I've only been at 2,500 calories or more
for maybe 2 days out of the last 221 days (the diet starting
on February 2 2021), so that = 99.09% of the days.
End Insert
- - - - - - - - -
Sidenote:
I looked up the following study by researchers at the Penning-
ton Biomedical Research Centre in Baton Rouge, it appears
similar to the study referenced above - it may be the same
study although the following article published March 29 2018
says it's “the biggest-ever human study of calorie restriction.”
36 people doesn't seem big to me, so it may not be the same
study as the following article doesn't mention how many were
in the study. However, the above study mentioned 6 months,
unclear if it lasted longer, but the following study mentioned
2 years.
Will cutting calories actually make you live longer?
https://www.gqindia.com/content/will-cutting-calories-actually-make-live-longer
Two interesting excerpts:
... Studies going back to the mid-1930s have shown over and
over that cutting calories by 25-50 per cent lets yeast, worms,
mice, rats, and monkeys live longer, healthier lives, free from
age-related disease.
... “Restricting calories can slow your basal metabolic rate
--the energy you need to sustain all normal daily functions. ...
When the body uses less oxygen to generate all its required
energy, it produces fewer byproducts of metabolism, things
like free radicals that can damage DNA and other cellular
machinery. After two years, the lower rate of metabolism ...
... and level of calorie restriction was linked to a reduction
in oxidative damage to cells and tissues.”
~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~
The old confusing way which all-too-often
involves folks using the diabetes / diabetic
words without a clarifier:
diabetes / diabetic without a clarifier,
diabetes / diabetic guessing required
https://prohuman.net/pix2/diabetesdiabeticguessinggame.jpg
- - -
Pro-Humanist FREELOVER, promoting
since May 17 2010 putting an end to all
outdated confusing misleading diabetes/
diabetic ways of referring to each and all
of Disparate High Glucose Conditions
(DHGCs) and one mostly non-glucose ...
... anomaly and one low glucose anomaly
which uses an outdated confusing reactive
hypoglycemia term, ...
https://prohuman.net/pix2/diabetesdiabeticconfusion.jpg https://prohuman.net/pix2/diabetesdiabeticendingthemisunderstanding.jpg
... replacing all of that with new superior
clarifying medical terms which hopefully
will end diabetes/diabetic/reactive hypo-
glycemia confusion & misleading, putting
an end to the use of those terms, totally:
https://prohuman.net/pix2/diabetesbubblediabetesbubblebursttitle.jpg https://prohuman.net/pix2/diabetesreactivehypoglycemiaoldnamesnewnames.jpg https://prohuman.net/pix2/oldnamesnewimprovednames.jpg
o There are 15 specific types of rapid onset
Insulinitis (Islit). I've had Insulitis Islit (the pre-
dominate type) since March 1961, age 5.
https://prohuman.net/pix2/new_superior_clarifying_name_is_INSULINITIS.jpg
o There is 1 slow onset type of Islit, Latent
Autoimmune Islit.
o There are 21 specific types of the most
widespread DHGC which is present in up to
95% of those with any DHGC, Cellosis, new
superior clarifying name for type 2 diabetes,
its precondition is called PreCellosis.
The only preventable/reversible DHGC is
Preventable Cellosis, new clarifying specific
type of the preventable type 2 diabetes, esti-
mated to be the type that at least 85% of
Americans with Cellosis have.
Risk for Preventable Cellosis, Hypertension,
& Cardiovascular Disease increases as one's
weight increases but BMI risk increases at
lower BMI levels in non-white individuals:
https://prohuman.net/pix2/BMI-WaistCircumference-Cellosis&Hypertension&CardiovascularDisease-Risk.jpg
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-05-bmi-offs-obesity-diabetes-non-white.html
o There is 1 specific type of DHGC that
happens in < 10% of pregnancies called
Gestational Cellosis.
o There are 11 specific types of diminished
insulin production, monogenic conditions
called Diminosis.
o There are 12 specific type of diminished
insulin production that occurs up to 6 months
after birth, monogenic conditions called Neo-
natal Diminosis.
o There are 25 specific types of continued but
problematic DHGCs called Ohiglucons (Other
High Glucose Conditions).
o There are 6 specific types of a mostly non-
glucose anomaly called Insipidus.
o There are 21 specific types of Hypoglycemia
Uncaused by Treatments for High Glucose (Hut).
Details on all of those DHGCs / a mostly non-
glucose anomaly / a low glucose anomaly:
Diabetes Bubble / Diabetes Bubble Burst
Wonderful!
https://prohuman.net/diabetesbubblediabetesbubbleburst.htm
C.ure I.nsulinitis A.ssociation
Ideal!
https://prohuman.net/cureinsulinitisassociation.htm
Glucose Anomalies Research regarding
Potential Cures / Improvements in Treatments
Hopefully!
https://prohuman.net/glucoseanomaliesresearch.htm
- - -
Those who favor new terms, the following
is inspirational:
I Do Not Like Diabetes Here or There,
I Do Not Like Diabetes Anywhere
https://smile.amazon.com/Not-Like-Diabetes-Anywhere-shirt/dp/B01N25FMMI/ref=pd_d0_recs_v2_cwb_193_3?_encoding=UTF8&refRID=WJHV2S8X0YG21Z9WVQD5&th=1
See No
Speak No
Hear No
DIABETES
Faith Will Make It So
https://smile.amazon.com/CafePress-Speak-Diabetes-Unique-Coffee/dp/B014JS6QDI/ref=sr_1_2_sspa?s=home-garden&ie=UTF8&qid=1513534468&sr=1-2-spons&keywords=diabetes+cup&psc=1
Syllables - Comparison of old
diabetes terms / new terms
https://prohuman.net/diabetesoldtermsnewtermssyllables.htm
Stop Diabetes/Diabetic Confusion
with New Superior Clarifying Terms
https://www.change.org/stopdiabetesdiabeticconfusionwithNewSuperiorClarifyingTerms
~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~ ~!~
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)