"Extreme" calorie restriction?

You're on Page 2 of 2
Go to
  •   #16  
    Misora's AvatarMisora , 07-12-2009 02:17 PM
    I saw a copy of the article but I questioned the way they displayed it. The article I was looking at showed 2 monkeys side by side but the younger looking monkey on the low calories diet was actualy a couple of years younger when they explained it in the aticle. If monkeys live 1/3 of our lifespans then even 2 years is going to be a fairly big difference Then they talked about the percentage of the monkeys who had died in both groups but again to me that brings up the question of age mix.
    Reply
  •   #17  
    AnnRue's AvatarAnnRue , 07-12-2009 03:31 PM
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by caryesings
    I had thought the same thing and always wondered how people could expect to live longer if they weren't getting enough nutrients to keep systems healthy (so you're living longer but in wheelchair due to osteoporosis for example). While on line trying to get specifics about the study, I ran into links to Calorie Restricting groups and looks like 1500-1800 is the range the CR people aim for.
    A few years back I got the answer to this.. the number one thing you need nutrients for is metabolism / digestion. If that gets cut by 30%, you need less nutrients.

    Just like if you are overweight and eating a lot you need more nutrients than average person.
    Reply
Reply