Re: Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

[Guest guest]

Yes, unless you're a mouse.

Non TV people often look terrible in the lighting they are not used to.

You may be 65# by the time you reach 120 yo.

In terms of what I think are most important is:

1) don't get macular degeneration.

2) don't get dementia.

3) don't run out of money.

4) hang on to your life partner.

5) drive as long as you can - it's easier to escape the old folks home.

Other possible niceties:

have a doctor son and gsons.

have a gdaughter in a drug company

have a gdaughter lawyer

have a gdaughter in the IRS, just in case the lawyer can't get things done.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: citpeks

Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 1:26 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

When I looked at the picture in the link, my first reaction was agasp. (Sorry , I don't mean to offend you.).My second reaction was to think of other 50-year olds that I know andcompare them with Walford to try to determine who looked younger.My third reaction was to look in the mirror and breathe a sigh ofrelief to see that, although thin, I am virtually plump compared to. I also thought about my family members telling me not to loseany more weight because I am now too thin (BMI 22.4).I have never seen a 40% CRed mouse, but my impression was that theylooked fluffy and active when ad lib mice were already scruffy andlethargic.I want to look good and live long. Is that a contradiction?Tony

[Guest guest]

Speaking of fur, how many remember the canine study with CR'd dogs.

They looked great, younger and more vital than their unrestricted

siblings.

While I see little merit in arguing about the personal choices of

others. I guess this has some utility as we try to make similar

decisions of our own. I am not a big fan of purely subjective

choices and a common eating disorder specifically relates to a

distorted self image but I believe the mirror should be our friend.

I have had numerous people suggest that I gain weight but not one

of them was close to a healthy BMI. At 21.5 BMI I am not " CR skinny "

but when I dipped down below 21 BMI I didn't like what I saw.

We all must choose our own personal path, and this is mostly uncharted

territory. As promising as severe restriction sounds take care to

first do no harm.

Good luck.

JR

-----Original Message-----

From:

[mailto: ]On Behalf Of Rodney

Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 8:55 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your

Life?

Hi Tony:

There is an easy solution to the 'appearance' problem. All we need

do is grow fur. Then no one would notice our weight loss, just as no

one notices how slim the mice are.

A bit like my long-haired cat. Looks huge until she has a bath.

Then she appears to shrink to half the size.

But on a more serious note, I have noticed that slimness is not liked

in this civilization. I have been urged by a number of people

(including one medical professional, whose BMI is probably around 30)

to not lose any more weight. Their excuse is that it cannot be good

for my health. But I wonder if the real reason may be different. My

BMI today is closer to 23 than 22.

Rodney.

> > > You have received this ABCNEWS.com mail from:

> > >

> > > heitcanna@y...

> > >

> > > Walford was on Good Morning America June 20, 2005. Here is

> the

> > email link to the discussion with her this morning.

> > >

> > > Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

> > > http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/MedicalMinute/story?id=864296 & page=1

[Guest guest]

Let me get this straight:

Does this chart show all cause deaths 18<20 almost as safe as 28+?(ha)

The data is biased I think because they chose a cohort of skinny people - they were just evaluating that class."The characteristics of participants with a BMI below 18 kg/m2 were favourable to a lower risk of cardiovascular disease. Nevertheless, these participants had an increased all cause death rate ratio (2.07, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.70) in comparison with participants who had a BMI between 20 and 22 kg/m2. "

So my question is - what did the BMI change to during the 18yrs?

Table 2 Number of deaths and death rate ratios (95% CI) by BMI category among all subjects

Cause of death

<18

18<20

20<22 (ref)

22<24

24<26

26<28

28+

All causes

2.07

1.24

1

1.12

1.29

1.15

1.28

Circulatory diseases

2.48

1.12

1

1.16

1.39

1.56

2.12

Ischaemic heart disease

2.49

0.99

1

1.36

1.28

1.84

2.29

All other causes

2.63

1.87

1

1.38

1.1

1.57

0.66

All malignant neoplasms

1

1.11

1

0.97

1.23

0.66

0.81

Respiratory diseases

3.69

1.22

1

1.13

1.47

0.66

0.43

Cerebrovascular disease

3.47

1.66

1

1.52

1.5

1.41

1.93

USA:

http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/341/15/1097?ijkey=7675ea21ba89b60efafb3ab723a4c23bff195fe4

"The optimal body-mass index for longevity fell between 20.5 and 24.9 for men and women of all ages. These data offer support for the use of a single recommended range of body weight throughout life. "

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Diane Walter

Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 10:57 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

> So what if you may see her musculature? What has this got to do with> true markers of health? Her health lies in her biometrics not her pics!Not necessarily...http://jech.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/57/2/130

[Guest guest]

The BMI was at the start, right? I doubt the BMI was controlled by the individuals for 18 yrs.

Obviously, < 18 is not the best but those are average numbers. Look at the span for each item. I could choose to think I was the healthier low number in each category which would yield about 1 for each BMI except <18. And I don't really know if the <18 includes a lot of say, 13's. Let's see, I'm 26.3 today so I'll take the 0.90 of 1.15 (0.90 to 1.47) - it's a dirty job but someone has to do it. (0.98 USA study).

These studies are to get a handle on the subject, but in this case, if you don't look at all the numbers for all people, you don't get a good representation, IMO. The bmj is ~11000 people, the US study is 1.1 million. Then there's the case for unknown long term disease or environment which actually causes the lower BMI to begin with.

Too many possible sources of error to compare against an intellectual doing a controlled CR experiment on herself.

When people tell me I'm too heavy, I say "I can pick you up and you can't pick me up", ie, there's a case for thinking strength is a health criteria.

Think about it, how can we judge a 250#er that can pick up 2 CRONies? He has to have a heart muscle that can do that and it's not necessarily in poorer condition than the low BMI person.

And I'm VERY sure they didn't run an angiogram on all those low BMI's in either study.

I'd like to weigh less, but I will get there slowly - maybe next year.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Diane Walter

Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 11:35 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

They mention in the text of the article that their data for 28+ waslikely not valid because they had a small sample size in that group. Their purpose was to look at a large sample of people with very lowBMIs. This group is often undersampled in most studies because thereare so few in this range.I don't understand your question about what the BMI changed to. Couldyou elaborate?DW> Let me get this straight:> Does this chart show all cause deaths 18<20 almost as safe as 28+?(ha)> The data is biased I think because they chose a cohort of skinnypeople - they were just evaluating that class."The characteristics ofparticipants with a BMI below 18 kg/m2 were favourable to a lower riskof cardiovascular disease. Nevertheless, these participants had anincreased all cause death rate ratio (2.07, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.70) incomparison with participants who had a BMI between 20 and 22 kg/m2. "> So my question is - what did the BMI change to during the 18yrs?> > Table 2 Number of deaths and death rate ratios (95% CI) by BMIcategory among all subjects> > > USA:>http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/341/15/1097?ijkey=7675ea21ba89b60efafb3ab723a4c23bff195fe4> "The optimal body-mass index for longevity fell between 20.5 and24.9 for men and women of all ages. These data offer support for theuse of a single recommended range of body weight throughout life. "> > Regards.> >

[Guest guest]

Hi All,

Since CRers represent a trivial percentage of those with slim builds and the

vast

majority are lean due to pathology, there may be no contradiction. Being lean

confers better CVD risk factor profiles in both cases. It associates with long

and

healthy life only in the CRers.

It is of note, maybe, that the animal models that show successful CR-associated

longevity are those having few CVDs.

--- Rodney <perspect1111@...> wrote:

> Hi folks:

>

> On re-reading my post below I am not sure the point I was trying to

> make came through very clearly. So here it is more concisely:

>

> " If 48% of the slimmest study subjects who died, died of circulatory

> diseases despite having excellent CVD risk factor profiles, then

> there appears to be reason to doubt whether CR imparts great benefit

> for cardiovascular health " .

>

> This comes as a surprise to me.

>

> Please, someone, prove the above wrong.

Al Pater, PhD; email: old542000@...

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

> Please, someone, prove the above wrong.

ahem -- CVD risks... Anorexia? Typically death by heart failure, I

believe... Also associated with low BMI. Amphetamine addictions? et

cetera. Are these studies controlling for all of these factors?

While I think we ought to be mindful of these studies, they're not looking

at controlling all the factors involved in order to isolate BMI within the

context of a nutritionally sound diet. I'm very much in the moderate group

myself, especially at this stage in my life, but nonetheless, I don't think

that we're looking at these studies in the context of their intended

argument.

Cheers,

-----Original Message-----

From:

[mailto: ]On Behalf Of Rodney

Sent: June 21, 2005 5:23 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your

Life?

Hi folks:

On re-reading my post below I am not sure the point I was trying to

make came through very clearly. So here it is more concisely:

" If 48% of the slimmest study subjects who died, died of circulatory

diseases despite having excellent CVD risk factor profiles, then

there appears to be reason to doubt whether CR imparts great benefit

for cardiovascular health " .

This comes as a surprise to me.

Please, someone, prove the above wrong.

Rodney.

> > > So what if you may see her musculature? What has this got to

do

> with

> > > true markers of health? Her health lies in her biometrics not

> her pics!

> >

> >

> > Not necessarily...

> > http://jech.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/57/2/130

[Guest guest]

Other than cats and dogs, do animals get CVD?

Regards.

inal Message -----

From: Al Pater

Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 6:53 PM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

Hi All,Since CRers represent a trivial percentage of those with slim builds and the vastmajority are lean due to pathology, there may be no contradiction. Being leanconfers better CVD risk factor profiles in both cases. It associates with long andhealthy life only in the CRers.It is of note, maybe, that the animal models that show successful CR-associatedlongevity are those having few CVDs.

[Guest guest]

Pigs do. They are frequently used in experiments to study CVD. It has been seen in rabbits fed atherogenic diets, also.

On 6/22/05, jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

Other than cats and dogs, do animals get CVD?

Regards.

inal Message -----

From: Al Pater

Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 6:53 PM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

Hi All,Since CRers represent a trivial percentage of those with slim builds and the vastmajority are lean due to pathology, there may be no contradiction. Being leanconfers better CVD risk factor profiles in both cases. It associates with long and

healthy life only in the CRers.It is of note, maybe, that the animal models that show successful CR-associatedlongevity are those having few CVDs.

[Guest guest]

Easy. The statement is silly. It's true we should doubt CR imparts great benefit, but I can insert any word in place of CR. But CR is the only thing we have to possibly extend life. That study proves nothing to me about CR. None of those people were CRer, right? Just because they have low BMIs does not equate to CR.

Does he expect the slimmest to live forever? All suffer oxidation of fat/athero build up in one place or another.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 6:23 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

Hi folks:On re-reading my post below I am not sure the point I was trying to make came through very clearly. So here it is more concisely:"If 48% of the slimmest study subjects who died, died of circulatory diseases despite having excellent CVD risk factor profiles, then there appears to be reason to doubt whether CR imparts great benefit for cardiovascular health".This comes as a surprise to me.Please, someone, prove the above wrong.Rodney.> Hi JW:> > One of the things I find especially interesting about that study is > that it pretty much destroys, unless it comes to be contradicted > later, one of my fundamental working assumptions about CR.> > I had thought (DUH?) that dramatically superior CVD risk factors > among those on CR would be associated with dramatically fewer cases > of CVD. (Sigh .............)> > Unfortunately, the study's data show otherwise. The study > participants with the lowest BMIs certainly did have the best CVD > risk factors, but not the smallest percentage dying of CVD.> > The data for those who died show that 67% of those with a BMI above > 28 died from circulatory diseases. 56% of those with BMIs between 26 > and 28. 42% of them with BMIs between 24 and 26. Then the > improvement begins to slow as BMIs drop further. 39% of the 22 to 24 > BMI deaths were from circulatory diseases. 36% of those with BMIs of > 20 to 22. Only a marginal drop to 35% for those with BMI between 18 > and 20. But then it jumps to 48% for those below a BMI of 18.> > So it seems that, beyond a certain point, improvement in CVD risk > factors provides no further improvement in risk. Indeed perhaps the > opposite. > > I have been known to say here that we should pay less attention to > CVD and more attention to cancer risk because our CVD risk factors > indicate we are NOT gonna die of heart disease. NOT TRUE apparently.> > This is rather weird. If one's arteries are not clogged (carotid > IMT, for example) with deposits how are we still gonna die from > ischemic heart disease? Plenty of the people in the two lowest BMI > categories in this study did die of cardiovascular disease and > stroke, including ischemic heart disease.> > Bear in mind, however, that the entire group as a whole was far > healthier than the UK population average. The SMR (I assume this > means standardized mortality rate, although they do not say) for the > group was 52 (I take it that this compares with 100 for the entire > population?). > > Rodney.

[Guest guest]

I guess actually the marbling in beef is athero, but those are fed deliberately to build fat and penned. Is a diet an atherogenic diet if the rabbit is CRed?

Does the rabbit develop athero if he's kept at low BMI?

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Dowling

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 7:44 AM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

Pigs do. They are frequently used in experiments to study CVD. It has been seen in rabbits fed atherogenic diets, also.

On 6/22/05, jwwright <jwwright@...> wrote:

Other than cats and dogs, do animals get CVD?

Regards.

inal Message -----

From: Al Pater

Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 6:53 PM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

Hi All,Since CRers represent a trivial percentage of those with slim builds and the vastmajority are lean due to pathology, there may be no contradiction. Being leanconfers better CVD risk factor profiles in both cases. It associates with long and healthy life only in the CRers.It is of note, maybe, that the animal models that show successful CR-associatedlongevity are those having few CVDs.

[Guest guest]

Well some folks can eat a lot more than I do and stay slim for some reason. Maybe they excrete more/absorb less. Don't know. To assume the low BMIer's are CR'ed is clearly an error, yet there has to be some reason that some folks live to 100+ while most do not.

I can believe the H-B defines the BMR without thinking the low BMIer's are using it to adjust intake. The H-B does not account for intake and losses due to diffs in absorption.

And I think a large part of those low BMIer's may have some long term illness like CVD, it just wasn't detected. Maybe a bad valve. They didn't do carotid tests or angiograms on all, maybe not any.

Healthy appearing athletes can die at 20 yo from 86% plugged arteries in their dorm. What happened to the college's exam technique? Easy - angiograms are too expensive.

Fitness or low BMI do not imply longevity or life extension, although they may be associated to a person doing CR.

I think I WILL die from CVD, or let's say vascular disease in heart, brain or peripherals, eventually. Athero/oxidation of fat is a well known, long studied thing.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 8:17 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

Hi JW:But if we believe the -Benedict equation, then the majority of slim people (excluding the sick ones) ARE on CR. Otherwise the equation would be irrelevant.And still, unless a large proportion of those slim people are ill, it does suggest that people who restrict calories are far from immune to CVD. (I had previously thought, because of the WUSTL CVD risk factor data, that we need not concern ourselves with CVD if we were on CR).Of course I acknowledge that we are likely to live longer. But when we die it looks to me that CVD may still be the most frequent cause of death, even though it may be a (hopefully considerable) number of years later than it would otherwise have been. Or, perhaps, the ones who died of CVD were eating too much myristic acid and hydrogenated vegetable oil, which we, presumably, are not?I am no longer convinced that we have clear evidence that much superior CVD risk factor data will be associated with much reduced death from CVD. Given more evidence perhaps I can become re-convinced.Rodney.> Easy. The statement is silly. It's true we should doubt CR imparts great benefit, but I can insert any word in place of CR. But CR is the only thing we have to possibly extend life. That study proves nothing to me about CR. None of those people were CRer, right? Just because they have low BMIs does not equate to CR.> > Does he expect the slimmest to live forever? All suffer oxidation of fat/athero build up in one place or another. > > Regards.

[Guest guest]

Here's another slant on analysis:

This adds the dimension of age to the BMI vs mortality equation.

Econ Hum Biol. 2005 May 24; [Epub ahead of print]

Toward generation XL: Anthropometrics of longevity in late 20th-century United States.Sunder M.Department of Economics, University of Munich, Ludwigstrasse 33/IV, 80539 Munich, Germany.All-cause and cause-specific mortality among white U.S. men and women are analyzed using the NHANES I data (1971-1975) and epidemiologic follow-up to 1992, to examine the effect of physical stature on mortality, controlling for other confounding variables within a discrete-time framework. We find an association between mortality and both body mass index (BMI) and height, but the height effect is sensitive with respect to the age range under consideration. Although the resulting minimum-mortality BMI is higher than the widely accepted healthy range, the recent increase in weight implies that further gains in life expectancy are unlikely to derive from the anthropometry-mortality relationship.PMID: 15921967

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 8:17 AM

Subject: [ ] Re: ABCNEWS.com: Can Eating Less Extend Your Life?

Hi JW:But if we believe the -Benedict equation, then the majority of slim people (excluding the sick ones) ARE on CR. Otherwise the equation would be irrelevant.And still, unless a large proportion of those slim people are ill, it does suggest that people who restrict calories are far from immune to CVD. (I had previously thought, because of the WUSTL CVD risk factor data, that we need not concern ourselves with CVD if we were on CR).Of course I acknowledge that we are likely to live longer. But when we die it looks to me that CVD may still be the most frequent cause of death, even though it may be a (hopefully considerable) number of years later than it would otherwise have been. Or, perhaps, the ones who died of CVD were eating too much myristic acid and hydrogenated vegetable oil, which we, presumably, are not?I am no longer convinced that we have clear evidence that much superior CVD risk factor data will be associated with much reduced death from CVD. Given more evidence perhaps I can become re-convinced.Rodney.