Calorie restriction can help you live longer

[Chanakya]

I've been doing 18/6 intermittent fasting where you eat during a 6 hour window and then fast for 18 hours. Along with weightlifting and reduced carbs / increased protein I have seen a noticeable improvement in my physique.

Whether I'm actually healthier or increasing my lifespan I can't say.

But the idea with intermittent fasting is that having a reduced window of eating provides a couple benefits.
One is that you're likely to eat less total calories. Another is that your body is spending less time, energy, and resources digesting food that can instead be utilized towards other bodily processes.

There are purportedly several other benefits depending on how long you fast. For example I believe 48+ hour fasts trigger autophagy. I have not attempted anything more than a 24 hour fast though.

From what I understand this is backed by science, but to what extent I can't say I truly know.

The autophagy, as well as the fact (or at least, a high likelihood) that you’re genetically increasing your lifespan, (arguably) seem to be bona fide science. See the posts and links right here on this thread.


I think there are some excellent reasons why one might want to give this a shot:

1. The sheer convenience of not always having to be in seek-food-eat mode!
   
2. Might be of help to some, to keep trim, to reduce weight, that kind of thing.
   
3. The autophagy thing.
   
4. It does seem to be bona fide science, that this kind of diet, if properly guided, might actually increase lifespan at a genetic level. That’s, like, really awesome.

However, there are at least two reasons that might give one pause:

1. Like The Great Zaganza says, this may not be something some/many might WANT to do. A life sans day-long treats, food treats that is, is not really worth living, is his take on this, and it’s a valid enough POV I guess, if that’s how it happens to be for you.
   
   (Not how I myself see it, though. In my experience, when you’re eating less times, and eating mindfully at those times, then arguably your appreciation of good food actually increases. At least that’s my personal experience. But, as they say, YMMV.)
   
   
2. My main concern is what I’d voiced in an earlier post. Our body seems to be pretty much primed to secrete out bile and enzymes and what-have-you to deal with the usual three square meals a day; and, if suddenly that food is no longer available at those times, might those secretions end up doing some long-term harm to the body? Not in terms of nutrition, nor starvation, but in terms of, I don’t know, stomach ulcers some years down the line, something like that?
   
   (Like I’d said earlier, normally one wouldn’t ask for proof/evidence of a negative, especially the negation of amateurish and perhaps fanciful objections; but when it’s your long-term health on the line, it might be wiser to be somewhat paranoid! I don’t know if there’s research specifically on this aspect: if there isn’t, then, while short-term trials over a few months are fine, I for one am not comfortable to committing to this lifestyle on a long-term basis, far less as a life-long practice, despite all its other advantages. Again, YMMV.)
   
   (Sure, if my particular -- and possibly kind of paranoid! -- objection is something that the science has actually addressed, then that’s a different matter altogether, for me. Then this would be something well worth trying out, as far as I am concerned.)

 

[Chanakya]

Don't eat and live in your hyperbaric oxygen chamber and you can live forever! ScienceAlert: In a First, Scientists Say They've Partially Reversed a Cellular Aging Process in Humans.
https://www.sciencealert.com/oxygen...k-the-sands-of-time-on-our-body-s-aging-cells

Don’t forget the alcohol! That’s science too.

Having a glass to keep you company may keep you in better spirits as you contemplate your next 14-hour food-less ordeal, while sitting in your O2 chamber!

 

[JoeMorgue]

that's a weird definition of 'living'.

I'll have to go see if I can find the exact quote and context, but I read something once to the effect of:

"People don't care about living longer, not matter how much they pretend to. How do I know this? Because as early as the mid-1800s it was determined that there were two simple, easy things one could to significantly and consistently increase your lifespace. Problem was those two things where extremely low calorie diets and voluntary castration."

 

[Chanakya]

I'll have to go see if I can find the exact quote and context, but I read something once to the effect of:

"People don't care about living longer, not matter how much they pretend to. How do I know this? Because as early as the mid-1800s it was determined that there were two simple, easy things one could to significantly and consistently increase your lifespace. Problem was those two things where extremely low calorie diets and voluntary castration."

Wtf?! Are you serious, or is that some kind of joke?


eta: Okay, googled out two quick references, that I glanced through: One says that isn't the case at all, and the other says that it's inconclusive (in humans, although apparently that is indeed the case in [some] other animals).

 

[Darat]

Wtf?! Are you serious, or is that some kind of joke?


eta: Okay, googled out two quick references, that I glanced through: One says that isn't the case at all, and the other says that it's inconclusive (in humans, although apparently that is indeed the case in [some] other animals).

Hard to do a double blind study!

 

[Pixel42]

Don’t forget the alcohol! That’s science too.

Having a glass to keep you company may keep you in better spirits as you contemplate your next 14-hour food-less ordeal, while sitting in your O2 chamber!

I eat a small breakfast at about 7 a.m., a big lunch at about 12 noon and a small tea at about 4 pm, which means 15 hours a day are food-less. I've done that for years because I prefer it, it's certainly not an ordeal. The fact that it may actually be good for my health is an added bonus.

 

[Chanakya]

I eat a small breakfast at about 7 a.m., a big lunch at about 12 noon and a small tea at about 4 pm, which means 15 hours a day are food-less. I've done that for years because I prefer it, it's certainly not an ordeal. The fact that it may actually be good for my health is an added bonus.

Nor was it an ordeal for me, fasting 14 hours +, when I tried this for around a couple of months. On the contrary, I found the experience in every way rewarding. The "fast" was a pleasure -- weird though that sounds! -- as was the (usually more elaborate than usual, given the fast) dinner. I swear every bite tasted and felt better, back then, or so it seemed to me.

I was responding, jokingly, to Darat; and I was also referencing the POV expressed by, for instance, The Great Zaganza -- which, as far as they are concerned, is entirely valid too, for them that is.

My main reason for trying this diet, this regime, out was the convenience part. The fact that it felt so good was, for me, a bonus. The reason I stopped is because I wasn't sure how this might pan out long-term. (I still amn't entirely sure, as far as one particular aspect of these "fast" diets, like I detailed in a couple of posts in this thread. If the science has already studied, and cleared, that, or if it does going forward, then I for one am sold on this!)

 

[Modified]

I eat a small breakfast at about 7 a.m., a big lunch at about 12 noon and a small tea at about 4 pm, which means 15 hours a day are food-less. I've done that for years because I prefer it, it's certainly not an ordeal. The fact that it may actually be good for my health is an added bonus.

I have a similar schedule now but shifted forward three hours (breakfast at 10 AM, dinner at 7PM at the latest) partly because of health problems - I need to sleep on a completely empty stomach. Last-to-first bite of food would be 14 hours at least. I could have an earlier breakfast but my wife tutors our nephew each morning so I wait for her. It doesn't seem burdensome at all.

 

[casebro]

None of this has actually been shown to have any benefit. Except maybe the appetite suppression of some regimens.

 

[Chanakya]

None of this has actually been shown to have any benefit. Except maybe the appetite suppression of some regimens.

Actually it has. Whether the evidence is incontrovertible, or only provisional, is probably best debated by experts, but that there is evidence of intermittent fasting and, specifically, calorie restriction, (very likely) increasing longevity, seems to be clear. See the links presented in this short thread.

Plenty of ifs and buts to this still, IMV, but this isn't some crank dietary theory -- like I myself used to think it is. It's bona fide science.

 

[Planigale]

Actually it has. Whether the evidence is incontrovertible, or only provisional, is probably best debated by experts, but that there is evidence of intermittent fasting and, specifically, calorie restriction, (very likely) increasing longevity, seems to be clear. See the links presented in this short thread.

Plenty of ifs and buts to this still, IMV, but this isn't some crank dietary theory -- like I myself used to think it is. It's bona fide science.

I agree. Not definitive but some suggestive data. There is fairly robust animal data, but any sort of human study is difficult since it requires maintaining low calorie intake over a prolonged period. ONTOH there is no doubt that the commonest form of malnutrition in the developed world is obesity and that kills. Worringly it is becoming common in very young children.

 

[casebro]

I agree. Not definitive but some suggestive data. There is fairly robust animal data, but any sort of human study is difficult since it requires maintaining low calorie intake over a prolonged period. ONTOH there is no doubt that the commonest form of malnutrition in the developed world is obesity and that kills. Worringly it is becoming common in very young children.

Actually it has. Whether the evidence is incontrovertible, or only provisional, is probably best debated by experts, but that there is evidence of intermittent fasting and, specifically, calorie restriction, (very likely) increasing longevity, seems to be clear. See the links presented in this short thread.

Plenty of ifs and buts to this still, IMV, but this isn't some crank dietary theory -- like I myself used to think it is. It's bona fide science.

You both agree with me:

None of this has actually been shown to have any benefit.

Which does make it "some crank dietary theory".

 

[Chanakya]

You both agree with me:

How on earth do you figure that, casebro?

It seems to me that both Planigale and I were disagreeing emphatically with you. I know I was. You only have to read the three posts you've yourself quoted there to see that.

And in any case, what does it matter, ultimately, whether I personally agree with you or Planigale personally agrees with you? Like I said, you can just go through the links and the substantive posts within this thread yourself, and see for yourself: there are few enough of those in this short one-pager thread.

Which does make it "some crank dietary theory".

What makes you think that? By all means, if you've good reason for thinking this, then present those reasons. That's the whole point of this thread. I'm not in any way personally invested in these diets, and would welcome any evidence or reasoning that might "debunk" the idea behind these dietary regimens.

Like I said, I myself have one particular reservation about these diets (that I've detailed twice already). That apart, there's the fact that the evidence of necessity does not cover long-term human use (yet). Should that be a deal-breaker for you personally, well, fair enough. But I don't see how you can reasonably keep asserting that there's no evidence, when such is very clearly presented here in this thread.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Is this fasting supposed to be including the overnight fast?

I have my evening meal at 5 pm then I "fast" from 6 pm until breakfast, at 8 am. I don't call that intermittent fasting.

 

[casebro]

How on earth do you figure that, casebro?

It seems to me that both Planigale and I were disagreeing emphatically with you. I know I was. You only have to read the three posts you've yourself quoted there to see that.

And in any case, what does it matter, ultimately, whether I personally agree with you or Planigale personally agrees with you? Like I said, you can just go through the links and the substantive posts within this thread yourself, and see for yourself: there are few enough of those in this short one-pager thread.





What makes you think that? By all means, if you've good reason for thinking this, then present those reasons. That's the whole point of this thread. I'm not in any way personally invested in these diets, and would welcome any evidence or reasoning that might "debunk" the idea behind these dietary regimens.

Like I said, I myself have one particular reservation about these diets (that I've detailed twice already). That apart, there's the fact that the evidence of necessity does not cover long-term human use (yet). Should that be a deal-breaker for you personally, well, fair enough. But I don't see how you can reasonably keep asserting that there's no evidence, when such is very clearly presented here in this thread.

Here is what you guys said:


Planigale- "I agree. Not definitive but some suggestive data. "

Chakarya- " Whether the evidence.... or only provisional, is "

THERE IS NO-NONE-NULL,NIX, NADA- STUDY IN HUMANS THAT SHOW BENEFIT.

 

[Chanakya]

Is this fasting supposed to be including the overnight fast?

I have my evening meal at 5 pm then I "fast" from 6 pm until breakfast, at 8 am. I don't call that intermittent fasting.

Yep, it is, and you are indeed doing 14 hours here, even if unknowingly thus far.

But of course -- and as I myself discovered -- there's more to this (and more kinds of "this" -- see #12) than just clocking 14 hours.

Back when I was doing this, briefly, what I'd do is ensure minimum 14 hours, and then pretty much eat what I liked. (I don't really "diet" at all, nothing structured, although generally I do eat sensibly and avoid junk food and too much alcohol.) Just going 14 was enough to do me a world good, in terms of how it felt. But I gave it up after around 2 months because I didn't think it safe to do this long term without knowing a great deal more about this than I did (plus the other reason, that I've mentioned already upthread).

 

[Chanakya]

Here is what you guys said:


Planigale- "I agree. Not definitive but some suggestive data. "

Chakarya- " Whether the evidence.... or only provisional, is "

THERE IS NO-NONE-NULL,NIX, NADA- STUDY IN HUMANS THAT SHOW BENEFIT.

Okay, this is getting just a bit weird. I don't know if you're deliberately, as a joke, parodying Trump's these-elections-were-rigged messages, but that's the effect being conveyed here.

By all means keep away from these diets, if that's what you wish -- hell, I don't do it either -- but if you'll read the links and substantive posts on this thread, you'll find that autophagy and lifespan enhancing at a genetic level are clearly evidenced. Injecting passion, and Caps, into your opinions won't change that!

True, direct long-term data on humans isn't available yet, to my knowledge, because you need to have a long enough term elapsed for that; but there are proxies (in human trials, I mean, and at the genetic level) that do serve as evidence. Two such proxies have been discussed in the links in this thread.

I'm no expert, nor particularly well-informed on this, and would welcome any information or (technical) arguments that go against these diets, but simply repeating that there's no evidence, even when such are clearly presented, seems ...a curious, and pointless, thing to do. (If on the other hand you wish to discuss or refute that evidence, then I'm all ears.)

 

[Orphia Nay]

Yep, it is, and you are indeed doing 14 hours here, even if unknowingly thus far.

But of course -- and as I myself discovered -- there's more to this (and more kinds of "this" -- see #12) than just clocking 14 hours.

Back when I was doing this, briefly, what I'd do is ensure minimum 14 hours, and then pretty much eat what I liked. (I don't really "diet" at all, nothing structured, although generally I do eat sensibly and avoid junk food and too much alcohol.) Just going 14 was enough to do me a world good, in terms of how it felt. But I gave it up after around 2 months because I didn't think it safe to do this long term without knowing a great deal more about this than I did (plus the other reason, that I've mentioned already upthread).

Thanks!

Are you referring to hormesis? I looked at Wikipedia, and it's a bit of a struggle to differentiate the woo of homeopathy from the science of vaccination. See below.

I'm assuming it may be slightly similar to the processes in fitness known as "progressive overload" and "periodic training".

Dieting is not just when you eat, but what you eat, and how much, and probably more.

In reference to my diet and health, I "fast" for 14 hours overnight, and during the day I eat a vegan diet and track my calorie intake, trying to make sure I eat foods that satisfy me for longer, rather than give me me bursts of sugar causing ups and downs. I take supplements to make up for deficiencies I had as a vegan, and have just had more blood tests as I have low energy and we're working on my low sodium. My low energy makes it hard to focus on new information at times.

I have a bad hip at the moment, but today I ran 1 km to the gym, then did 20 minutes on the leg and arm machines and 5 minutes on the exercise bike. I'm trying to strengthen the muscles around the hip so I don't favour the sore area.

(Threw that in there because I know diet can not be completely separate from fitness, as they both relate to energy.)

Thanks for the interesting topic!

 

[Bikewer]

I know there’s a couple of research projects about the longest-lived populations around the world, and naturally some pop-science type had to chip in with recommendations....

Essentially, live like a European peasant. Plant your own crops and eat the food your grow, do all food preparation and gardening/farming yourself, walk everywhere, no electronic “distractions”.... Etc, etc.
Such fun....

 

[casebro]

Nuff said.