Guest guest Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 I recently mentioned this on the board to someone who asked the group about what to do when people say she's too thin. I mentioned that too low stores of body fat might be dangerous in the case of illness or accident (for example a car accident in which you lose a lot of blood). Tony and I have mentioned this on the board before. See the file on: Extreme vs Moderate CRON. However most people in this group (assuming they are moderate in their program) are probably within the " safe " range where they don't risk flirting with death should they get sick. For example I range from 110 to 115 pounds at 5'4 " . Even if I lost say, 20 pounds (about 20% of my body weight) during an illness, that wouldn't do me in and I can recover. We have usually mentioned this in the cases of those who go to extremes. In your case you needn't worry - at least not yet (especially since you often tell us you have a way to go to your target ). on 12/17/2004 11:47 PM, Rodney at perspect1111@... wrote: > > Hi folks: > > Here is a second request for input: A couple of people lately, > including my dentist, have made a point the validity of which I have > no clue, and input would be appreciated. > > When they note that I am losing weight they have said that people who > become seriously ill need sufficient fat stores to draw on to enable > the body to fuel a prompt recovery. > > I have no idea whether this makes any sense or not. I do know that > on the two occasions in my life when I was fairly seriously sick in > hospital, each time in the first week I lost fifteen pounds of > weight, presumably from fat stores. > > I realize that people on CRON tend to get sick a lot less than > others. I also realize that if one is sick enough to be an in- > patient in hospital one is likely to be infused with nutrients > through an IV, so is there really any danger of running short of > fuel, or of any other problems, because your body fat is at CRON > levels? > > Again, any input will be most welcome. Thanks. > > Rodney. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 At the risk of being a little contrarian I doubt you would starve to death in the hospital, so while illness may be a risk for the severely restricted in the wild I am more concerned about how our body acts on a daily basis. Fats are essential for several body systems, too little in storage " may " be problematic. I am just under 10% per Tanita and have little desire to go lower. I find sometimes while walking past a mirror with my shirt off that I am borderline on the " if you are healthy, you should look healthy scale " . Of course this is very subjective but I don't like to waste energy arguing with myself.... :-) CR appears to be a hormetic or a healthy reaction (upegulation of protective systems) to an unhealthy stressor (literally being starved). At some point being too underfed will result in compromises to important function. CR is still not well proven in humans and poorly understood with regard to what severity may be useful, as well as how to quantify that degree, and " How to get from here to there " . So IN MY OPINION, one is taking a huge leap of faith to practice extreme CR without clear guidelines. I applaud those among us who climb so far out on the thin ice and for their sake hope they leave behind more than just a legacy of how not to do CR. I sure don't know. First do no harm.... Be well.. JR -----Original Message----- From: Rodney [mailto:perspect1111@...] Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 10:48 PM Subject: [ ] Risks of Low Body Fat Hi folks: Here is a second request for input: A couple of people lately, including my dentist, have made a point the validity of which I have no clue, and input would be appreciated. When they note that I am losing weight they have said that people who become seriously ill need sufficient fat stores to draw on to enable the body to fuel a prompt recovery. I have no idea whether this makes any sense or not. I do know that on the two occasions in my life when I was fairly seriously sick in hospital, each time in the first week I lost fifteen pounds of weight, presumably from fat stores. I realize that people on CRON tend to get sick a lot less than others. I also realize that if one is sick enough to be an in- patient in hospital one is likely to be infused with nutrients through an IV, so is there really any danger of running short of fuel, or of any other problems, because your body fat is at CRON levels? Again, any input will be most welcome. Thanks. Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 Thanks Francesca: Your post has prompted me to do the following calculations: ASSUMPTIONS: 1. Five percent body fat is the minimum a male would not want to go below when 'sick'. (That number would be MUCH higher for females). 2. For me 5% body fat is associated with a total weight of 140 pounds. 3. (Tony will likely disagree with this but anyone wanting to replicate the data for themselves can use whatever assumptions they want - these are only intended to be back-of-the-envelope calculations anyway) That fat will account for 50% of total weight gained/lost in the circumstance we are considering - i.e. moderately serious sickness. 4. That in a case of such sickness a 'cushion' (lol) of fifteen pounds of weight is desirable. (This number is based on personal experience of two occasions of sickness). CALCULATIONS: So, ............... at the postulated minimum permissible 5% body fat at 140 pounds I would have 7 pounds of fat; 133 pounds of lean body mass. Then, the weight at which one might wish to 'start out' before illness strikes would be 155 pounds - fifteen pounds higher than the assumed 140 minimum. And, of that extra fifteen pounds about half would be fat, half lean body mass - 7.5 pounds of each. So at that weight - 155 pounds - total fat weight would be 14.5 pounds (the seven pounds at minimum threshold plus the 7.5 additional) So ............ 14.5 pounds of fat at 155 pounds total weight is 9.4% body fat (14.5/155 x 100). CONCLUSION: Given the assumptions above, and supposing that warnings about possible dangers of inadequate fat stores in the case of serious illness are true (I am far from sure that they are) then 9.4% body fat would permit a full fifteen pound total weight drawdown in the unlikely event of serious sickness, without going below the hypothesized danger threshold for males of BF% = 5. Any further thoughts on this will be much appreciated. Thanks for those already offered. [We can each, of course, do these calculations for ourselves using whatever assumptions seem appropriate. What I was trying to do here was get some very approximate idea about what kind of starting body fat level would provide a substantial reserve for emergencies. Using the assumptions for me above, 9.5% body fat looks like plenty. Of course one also needs to be confident about the method for measuring body fat. When I get down to where I am aiming for I will get my body fat definitively measured. Then I will be able to compare that measurement with the other calculation methods, and know whether I need to use an adjustment factor when using other methods - such as the US Navy formula I am currently using - at low body fat percentages.] Rodney. > > > > > Hi folks: > > > > Here is a second request for input: A couple of people lately, > > including my dentist, have made a point the validity of which I have > > no clue, and input would be appreciated. > > > > When they note that I am losing weight they have said that people who > > become seriously ill need sufficient fat stores to draw on to enable > > the body to fuel a prompt recovery. > > > > I have no idea whether this makes any sense or not. I do know that > > on the two occasions in my life when I was fairly seriously sick in > > hospital, each time in the first week I lost fifteen pounds of > > weight, presumably from fat stores. > > > > I realize that people on CRON tend to get sick a lot less than > > others. I also realize that if one is sick enough to be an in- > > patient in hospital one is likely to be infused with nutrients > > through an IV, so is there really any danger of running short of > > fuel, or of any other problems, because your body fat is at CRON > > levels? > > > > Again, any input will be most welcome. Thanks. > > > > Rodney. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 Hi All, Rodney, I believe that your calculations are misguided. The % body fat depends not only on your weight or BMI. If you exercise, your muscle mass increases greatly and you tend to have less body fat. For me in the WUSTL study, I weighed 96 pounds, being about 155 pounds ad lib. I had more than 8% body fat, which was more than others with many more pounds and BMI. When I do not exercise or you when you are flat on your back in the hospital, we live off of our muscle reservoir, so to speak. I found that I had no hunger and lost much weight when I abstained from even aerobic exercise. Those who do isometric exercises carry even more " excess " weight. I do not have the disposition to be more " normal " appearing and feel that the excess body muscle mass is an energy drain. Rats live much longer under CR, but even their running-wheel aerobic exercise does not confer benefit for comparable weights of CRing rats. Well, the above is my opinion, at least. Cheers, Al. --- In , " Rodney " <perspect1111@y...> wrote: > > Thanks Francesca: > > Your post has prompted me to do the following calculations: > > ASSUMPTIONS: > > 1. Five percent body fat is the minimum a male would not want to go > below when 'sick'. (That number would be MUCH higher for females). > > 2. For me 5% body fat is associated with a total weight of 140 > pounds. > > 3. (Tony will likely disagree with this but anyone wanting to > replicate the data for themselves can use whatever assumptions they > want - these are only intended to be back-of-the-envelope > calculations anyway) That fat will account for 50% of total weight > gained/lost in the circumstance we are considering - i.e. moderately > serious sickness. > > 4. That in a case of such sickness a 'cushion' (lol) of fifteen > pounds of weight is desirable. (This number is based on personal > experience of two occasions of sickness). > > CALCULATIONS: > > So, ............... [snip} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 Hi Al: That is a good point. So you are saying that if one is in a hospital bed most of the weight lost is LBM? If so then a fat reserve doesn't have much relevance. I had not thought of that. Hmmmm. Thank you. Rodney. > > > > Thanks Francesca: > > > > Your post has prompted me to do the following calculations: > > > > ASSUMPTIONS: > > > > 1. Five percent body fat is the minimum a male would not want to > go > > below when 'sick'. (That number would be MUCH higher for females). > > > > 2. For me 5% body fat is associated with a total weight of 140 > > pounds. > > > > 3. (Tony will likely disagree with this but anyone wanting to > > replicate the data for themselves can use whatever assumptions they > > want - these are only intended to be back-of-the-envelope > > calculations anyway) That fat will account for 50% of total weight > > gained/lost in the circumstance we are considering - i.e. > moderately > > serious sickness. > > > > 4. That in a case of such sickness a 'cushion' (lol) of fifteen > > pounds of weight is desirable. (This number is based on personal > > experience of two occasions of sickness). > > > > CALCULATIONS: > > > > So, ............... > > [snip} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2004 Report Share Posted December 18, 2004 My understanding is that fat reserves can be important - they can be converted to water as well as to energy. Kayce From: " Rodney " <perspect1111@...> Hi Al: That is a good point. So you are saying that if one is in a hospital bed most of the weight lost is LBM? If so then a fat reserve doesn't have much relevance. I had not thought of that. Hmmmm. Thank you. Rodney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2004 Report Share Posted December 19, 2004 Hi Rodney, Fat is lost ad lib. With fat at a premium and muscle maintained but not used while in the hospital, muscle is burned for fuel, as I see it. Cheers, Al. > > > > > > Thanks Francesca: > > > > > > Your post has prompted me to do the following calculations: > > > > > > ASSUMPTIONS: > > > > > > 1. Five percent body fat is the minimum a male would not want to > > go > > > below when 'sick'. (That number would be MUCH higher for > females). > > > > > > 2. For me 5% body fat is associated with a total weight of 140 > > > pounds. > > > > > > 3. (Tony will likely disagree with this but anyone wanting to > > > replicate the data for themselves can use whatever assumptions > they > > > want - these are only intended to be back-of-the-envelope > > > calculations anyway) That fat will account for 50% of total > weight > > > gained/lost in the circumstance we are considering - i.e. > > moderately > > > serious sickness. > > > > > > 4. That in a case of such sickness a 'cushion' (lol) of fifteen > > > pounds of weight is desirable. (This number is based on personal > > > experience of two occasions of sickness). > > > > > > CALCULATIONS: > > > > > > So, ............... > > > > [snip} Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.