Size of Contributions to Lifespan (CR, Exercise, Weight Loss, Fat Loss)

[Guest guest]

From the three papers that I posted today, under the titles

" Low Body Weight and CR -- Both Help You " , the independent

contributions to lifespan are:

1) Exercise can contribute 9% to lifespan, independent of

lower body weight, and lower calories.

2) Lower body weight can contribute 11% to lifespan, independent

of exercise, and lower calories.

3) Lower calories (CR) can contribute 89% to lifespan, independent

of exercise, and lower body weight.

4) Lower body fat can contribute no more than 11% to lifespan,

independent of lower calories, and exercise -- since lower

body fat is a sub-component of lower body weight.

These numbers come from the 3 animal cohort studies in the papers

I referenced today, where CR and one other factor were varied

relative to a control group, with the other factors fixed, to make

estimates of lifespan gain.

The numbers of 9% + 11% + 89% + 11% do not all add up to 100%

because the numbers are not independently estimated, and a

full 4-way (2 X 2 X 2 X 2) experiment has never yet been done

to obtain the analysis of variance/covariance data.

Such a lab experiment would take too many animal cohorts

to get statistically significant results, especially when one effect,

the CR effect, is so dominant at 10-fold larger than all others.

The good news is that the approx size of these 4 effects is

roughly known from the animal cohort studies.

The bad news is that animal data is not human data. Additional

bad news is that the truly significant effect -- the CR effect --

requires reduced calorie consumption. Reduced calories requires

loss of metabolically active stuff, and that stuff is:

muscle mass, organ mass, and tissue mass (lean body mass).

-- Warren

===========================

On 08 Feb 2004, Dennis wrote:

>

> ... Why do calorie restricted mice live longer?

>

> The short answer is we do not know.

>

> I see three possibilities.

>

> 1. Lower body weight is causing the life extension.

>

> 2. Lower Body fat is causing the life extension.

>

> 3. Lower calories (independent of 1 and 2) are causing

> the life extension.

>

> What is the cause and what is the effect? ...

[Guest guest]

Hi Warren:

So, are you saying that the ultimate objective on CRON should be,

after reducing BF% to 5% - 10% (for males - much higher number for

females) to then reduce excess lean body mass as well? If so, that

is a perspective that is new to me.

If I am reading you right what form would the later lean body mass

reduction take? Is it muscle, or bone, or other tissue mass that

would be reduced at this later stage? Or perhaps some of all three?

This seems a bit radical. Since exercise will increase lean body

mass - bone and muscle and organ (heart at least) body mass, this

would seem to be advocating avoiding exercise.

Of course most of the population considers any form of CRON to be

radical!

Rodney.

> Additional

> bad news is that the truly significant effect -- the CR effect --

> requires reduced calorie consumption. Reduced calories requires

> loss of metabolically active stuff, and that stuff is:

> muscle mass, organ mass, and tissue mass (lean body mass).

[Guest guest]

Not Warren, here, but I think this is true: depending upon one's starting

lean body mass, it would be expected and desired that one lose some of one's

lean body mass to acheive a lower caloric intake and expenditure for maximal

CR effectiveness. For instance, if one started as a body builder, one would

have almost nothing but lean body mass to lose. I would think muscle, as

well as some organ weight would be lost, over time, of course. Bone loss

would take alot longer.

>From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@...>

>Reply-

>

>Subject: [ ] Re: Size of Contributions to Lifespan (CR,

>Exercise, Weight Loss, Fat Loss)

>Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 15:29:04 -0000

>

>Hi Warren:

>

>So, are you saying that the ultimate objective on CRON should be,

>after reducing BF% to 5% - 10% (for males - much higher number for

>females) to then reduce excess lean body mass as well? If so, that

>is a perspective that is new to me.

>

>If I am reading you right what form would the later lean body mass

>reduction take? Is it muscle, or bone, or other tissue mass that

>would be reduced at this later stage? Or perhaps some of all three?

>This seems a bit radical. Since exercise will increase lean body

>mass - bone and muscle and organ (heart at least) body mass, this

>would seem to be advocating avoiding exercise.

>

>Of course most of the population considers any form of CRON to be

>radical!

>

>Rodney.

>

>

> > Additional

> > bad news is that the truly significant effect -- the CR effect --

> > requires reduced calorie consumption. Reduced calories requires

> > loss of metabolically active stuff, and that stuff is:

> > muscle mass, organ mass, and tissue mass (lean body mass).

>

>

[Guest guest]

The only way to cut back on caloric intake (significantly) to

achieve CR status is to reduce the body's metabolically active

redundant (non-essential) components:

*** Redundant tissue mass

*** Redundant muscle mass

*** Redundant organ mass

Redundant tissue mass is abundant in most people, even if they

are of normal weight. The body's largest organ, the skin, is

tissue that is oversize for many people, as it stretches and

increases in size and thickness to cover our oversize bodies.

Skin folds would represent excess tissue mass, and will

gradually disappear in a CR person.

Redundant non-essential muscle mass is abundant (even if it

looks fatty). The buttocks are a good example. A muscular

person who over-exercises can grow large amounts of non-essential

muscle mass. Professional athletes fall into this category,

along with amateur athlete enthusiasts who go overboard,

such as body builders, cyclists, and marathoners. Extra

muscle is required to support a heavier body size.

Extra body weight requires extra energy and extra muscle

to lift and transport it.

Redundant organ mass is abundant too. The organs are

engorged, enlarged, and oversize in an oversize person.

Organs are forced to grew extra large in an effort to handle

the excess food overload that is eaten. The digestive organ

overgrowth of intestinal tissue tries to absorb the extra

food we consume for example. A swollen and fatty liver is

found in many overweight people. Larger organs are needed

to support larger body size. Rapid growth and overgrowth

of organs is a protective and evolutionary response to

excess food. Oversize endocrine/exocrine organs also

secrete excess hormones which speed up metabolism, increase

growth rate, and stimulate sexual and nervous system tension.

-- Warren

=========================

On 02 Mar 2004, Rodney wrote:

>

> ... What form would the later lean body mass reduction take?

> Is it muscle, or bone, or other tissue mass that would be

> reduced at this later stage? Or perhaps some of all three?

> This seems a bit radical. Since exercise will increase lean body

> mass - bone and muscle and organ (heart at least) body mass, this

> would seem to be advocating avoiding exercise.

Moderate exercise stimulates essential body parts.

It also stimulates the mind and the spirit.

>

> Of course most of the population considers any form

> of CRON to be radical!

Moderate CRON is not radical, but simply says to avoid

growing excess body part size that is redundant and

non-essential.

Over-eating and over-exercising stimulate excess body part

overgrowth, excess hormonal secretion, and accelerated aging.

-- Warren