Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

[Guest guest]

My recent WBC test result was 6.1from a quick google 3-5  is considered mild or marginal low normal.There is speculation this is a harmless side effect of reduced inflammation, generally a good thing, from CR diet. It's not unusual with low BF and no active infection, for CR'd individuals to visit 2-3 range. If you are really worried about it you could eat some more, but I'm not sure normal range is good, or just reflecting inflammation caused by stored BF from SAD.Unless you experience symptoms of poor immune response (lingering colds, etc). I'd be tempted to just monitor this, and relax.They have adjusted down the "normal" range for cholesterol after learning the average levels were unhealthy, who knows whether low WBC is cause (bad) or effect (good), very possibly the latter. YMMVJROn Aug 17, 2007, at 11:26 AM, workoutncron wrote:I would like to hear about other people's experiences in dealing with a low white blood cell count, as far how much testing people have done to discover the cause. I have read about the 31% WBC decrease found in the Biosphere 2 participants (page 44 of Dr. Walford's Beyond the 120 Year Diet and http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/6/B211). I am inclined to believe that my low count is due to the calorie restriction diet I have followed consistantly for the last 2 years, and inconsistantly since 1989 (after reading Dr. Walford's original 120 Year Diet). However, my most recent annual blood result for WBC was 2.4 (I also had one other really low reading from March, 2002 - 2.6), and my general practitioner sent me to a hematologist. The 2 visits there have produced readings of 3.0 and 2.9, with B12 deficiency and folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of the blood ruled out. The hematologist says the next step is a bone marrow biopsy. I am postponing that for now. I would appreciate hearing about anyone who has encountered the dilemma of whether to agree to a bone marrow biopsy (or other testing) or just let it drop. If anyone could share their WBC results, that would also be appreciated.

[Guest guest]

My WBC hovers around 4-5. The only time it dropped into the 2's was

when I was doing chemotherapy. I think had a good point about

considering whether or not you have additional symptoms. I have a

friend who experienced nonspecific leukopenia, who did go through the

bone marrow test. Her results were inconclusive, so the test doesn't

necessarily elucidate the problem. There are other, less invasive

tests, for specific diseases associated with leukopenia that you could

also consider.

Diane

--- In , " workoutncron " <nancystack@...>

wrote:

>

> I would like to hear about other people's experiences in dealing with a

> low white blood cell count, as far how much testing people have done to

> discover the cause. I have read about the 31% WBC decrease found in

> the Biosphere 2 participants (page 44 of Dr. Walford's Beyond the 120

> Year Diet and

> http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/6/B211).

> I am inclined to believe that my low count is due to the calorie

> restriction diet I have followed consistantly for the last 2 years, and

> inconsistantly since 1989 (after reading Dr. Walford's original 120

> Year Diet). However, my most recent annual blood result for WBC was

> 2.4 (I also had one other really low reading from March, 2002 - 2.6),

> and my general practitioner sent me to a hematologist. The 2 visits

> there have produced readings of 3.0 and 2.9, with B12 deficiency and

> folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of the

> blood ruled out. The hematologist says the next step is a bone marrow

> biopsy. I am postponing that for now.

>

> I would appreciate hearing about anyone who has encountered the dilemma

> of whether to agree to a bone marrow biopsy (or other testing) or just

> let it drop. If anyone could share their WBC results, that would also

> be appreciated.

>

[Guest guest]

Hi !

LOL. Well since you ask .................

If you had a 'normal' WBC before CRON and it is now between 2 and 3

after a couple of years on CRON, then almost certainly you can assume

it is now as low as it is *because* you are on CRON. Low WBC with

CRON is " normal " (!)

First I can say there has been some disagreement here on this topic

previously. But, fwiw, here is MY opinion on this. (But those here

with medical qualifications who disagree with anything I say below

should speak up and straighten me out.)

As someone has already noted, about twenty years ago people who had

total cholesterol of 250 and above were told " nothing to worry about,

your cholesterol is normal. " Of course it took a few decades for

someone in the medical profession to wise up to the connection

between a population average TC of 250 on the one hand, and 55% of

the population dying from heart disease on the other. What was then

called " normal " did not mean healthy. It meant very thoroughly

unhealthy.

Similarly with blood pressure. Only a couple of years ago 120/80 was

considered just wonderful. This despite the fact that people who in

middle age had BP of 120/80 became hypertensive as they got older and

needed to be prescribed drugs to reduce it, which was also considered

to be normal! Only slowly is the medical profession coming to

recognize that a 'wonderful' BP is 100/65 (or 95/60) not 120/80.

As for WBC, there will be exceptions of course, but generally a

person's WBC is low because they are healthy. People on CRON have

very low levels of inflammation. In consequence their CRP is more

than 80% lower than in the general, supposedly healthy, population.

Similarly, fasting insulin is also more than 70% lower in people on

CRON. I fail to see why WBC is any different. If people have high

levels of inflammation or infection the body generates all kind of

WBCs, and other stuff, to try to fix the problem. If the body has

startlingly low levels of inflammation we should not be surprised to

see startlingly low levels of WBCs.

We know for certain inflammation is way lower in people on CRON. I

suspect our susceptibility to infection is much lower also (although

I would like to see papers referenced here that demonstrate that. I

do not remember seeing any.) If so then a low level of WBCs simply

means the body doesn't need to create them because there aren't any

problems of the type for which white cells are needed to fix.

Twenty years from now, most likely, someone will wise up about

the " normal " levels and drop the low end of the range to 2. Perhaps

with a notation that if between 2 and 3 the patient had better be

slim, fit and apparently healthy. (An obese patient with a reading

of 2.5 probably should raise red flags).

So, my bet is that you are very healthy and that is what your WBC

number is reflecting. Nothing wrong with doing tests to find out if

there are any other possible reasons, but I would not myself choose

to have an invasive procedure done in your circumstances as I

understand them. (On CRON, slim, with no other indications, or

reasons to suspect, something weird going on.)

It is time they stopped using the term " normal " , which is thoroughly

ambiguous and misleading. 'Healthy' 'Average' 'Less Than Healthy'

and 'Thoroughly Sick' would be a better classification of biomarkers

like lipids, blood pressure, WBC etc. which would leave no one with

any doubt about their status. But in these insane days, as with

grade inflation and patients suing their doctor because he had the

temerity to describe them as fat, it seems as if some people feel

everyone has the right to be told they are healthy even if their

medical test results suggest they will likely drop dead tomorrow.

So, in my opinion, you can relax.

Of course it is always conceivable that your situation might be

different. We each have to make our own decisions, based on whatever

evidence we have to hand.

Rodney.

[it occurs to me to wonder if a comparatively harmless 'infection'

test could be devised for people with low WBCs. Perhaps a vaccine

might be used, to make sure that, for the kind of infections WBCs are

needed to confront, when infection occurs WBC count increases as it

should. It seems to me it is the ability to produce WBCs when they

are needed that is important.]

>

> I would like to hear about other people's experiences in dealing

with a

> low white blood cell count, as far how much testing people have

done to

> discover the cause. I have read about the 31% WBC decrease found

in

> the Biosphere 2 participants (page 44 of Dr. Walford's Beyond the

120

> Year Diet and

>

http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/6/B211).

> I am inclined to believe that my low count is due to the calorie

> restriction diet I have followed consistantly for the last 2 years,

and

> inconsistantly since 1989 (after reading Dr. Walford's original 120

> Year Diet). However, my most recent annual blood result for WBC

was

> 2.4 (I also had one other really low reading from March, 2002 -

2.6),

> and my general practitioner sent me to a hematologist. The 2

visits

> there have produced readings of 3.0 and 2.9, with B12 deficiency

and

> folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of

the

> blood ruled out. The hematologist says the next step is a bone

marrow

> biopsy. I am postponing that for now.

>

> I would appreciate hearing about anyone who has encountered the

dilemma

> of whether to agree to a bone marrow biopsy (or other testing) or

just

> let it drop. If anyone could share their WBC results, that would

also

> be appreciated.

>

[Guest guest]

Last time I had bloodwork done my WBC was very low too.

However my doc is aware that some figures (WBC, Thyroid) will be skewed due to my diet.

But what about the folic acid and B12 deficiencies? If you are eating veggies as any CRONIE worth his/her salt would be, you shouldn’t have a folic acid problem. Since you haven’t told us your weight, height, calorie level, or typical day’s food, we have no idea what’s up with that.

From: workoutncron <nancystack@...>

Reply-< >

Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:26:33 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] low WBC - how far to take medical testing

I would like to hear about other people's experiences in dealing with a

low white blood cell count, as far how much testing people have done to

discover the cause. I have read about the 31% WBC decrease found in

the Biosphere 2 participants (page 44 of Dr. Walford's Beyond the 120

Year Diet and

http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/6/B211).

I am inclined to believe that my low count is due to the calorie

restriction diet I have followed consistantly for the last 2 years, and

inconsistantly since 1989 (after reading Dr. Walford's original 120

Year Diet). However, my most recent annual blood result for WBC was

2.4 (I also had one other really low reading from March, 2002 - 2.6),

and my general practitioner sent me to a hematologist. The 2 visits

there have produced readings of 3.0 and 2.9, with B12 deficiency and

folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of the

blood ruled out. The hematologist says the next step is a bone marrow

biopsy. I am postponing that for now.

I would appreciate hearing about anyone who has encountered the dilemma

of whether to agree to a bone marrow biopsy (or other testing) or just

let it drop. If anyone could share their WBC results, that would also

be appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Yup, first time I read it I assumed deficiency but on second reading thought no. Grammar is not very clear.JROn Aug 17, 2007, at 6:42 PM, Francesca Skelton wrote:with B12 deficiency and folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of the blood ruled out.  

[Guest guest]

I'll restate:

I do not have a B12 deficiency. I do not have a folic acid

deficiency. The view of my blood cells through the microscope

revealed no abnormality. I meant that those 3 things were ruled out

as causes of my low WBC.

To add detail, my weight is 105, height 5'8 " , daily caloric intake

1600-1700. I have been maintaining this weight for > 2 years after

spending most of my adult life around 120 lbs. When I have tracked

my nutrition through software, I only have been low on zinc, folic

acid, and calcium, and consequently, I supplement those.

As far as inflammation, my CRP was .3 (considered low). I state that

result as it seems quite possible that inflammation is relevant to

the white blood cell count. I'm not sure what other info might be

relevant.

I took a hardcopy of the article (that I had referenced in my initial

posting) to the hematologist on my first visit to him. He didn't

disregard that info, but isn't actually factoring in calorie

restriction in his quest to find the cause of my low WBC.

I really do appreciate the responses from this group.

>

> Last time I had bloodwork done my WBC was very low too.

>

> However my doc is aware that some figures (WBC, Thyroid) will be

skewed due

> to my diet.

>

> But what about the folic acid and B12 deficiencies? If you are

eating

> veggies as any CRONIE worth his/her salt would be, you shouldn¹t

have a

> folic acid problem. Since you haven¹t told us your weight, height,

calorie

> level, or typical day¹s food, we have no idea what¹s up with that.

>

>

> From: workoutncron <nancystack@...>

> Reply-< >

> Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:26:33 -0000

> < >

> Subject: [ ] low WBC - how far to take medical testing

>

>

>

>

>

> I would like to hear about other people's experiences in dealing

with a

> low white blood cell count, as far how much testing people have

done to

> discover the cause. I have read about the 31% WBC decrease found in

> the Biosphere 2 participants (page 44 of Dr. Walford's Beyond the

120

> Year Diet and

>

http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/6/B211).

> I am inclined to believe that my low count is due to the calorie

> restriction diet I have followed consistantly for the last 2 years,

and

> inconsistantly since 1989 (after reading Dr. Walford's original 120

> Year Diet). However, my most recent annual blood result for WBC was

> 2.4 (I also had one other really low reading from March, 2002 -

2.6),

> and my general practitioner sent me to a hematologist. The 2 visits

> there have produced readings of 3.0 and 2.9, with B12 deficiency and

> folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of

the

> blood ruled out. The hematologist says the next step is a bone

marrow

> biopsy. I am postponing that for now.

>

> I would appreciate hearing about anyone who has encountered the

dilemma

> of whether to agree to a bone marrow biopsy (or other testing) or

just

> let it drop. If anyone could share their WBC results, that would

also

> be appreciated.

>

[Guest guest]

I calculate your current BMI at 16. At your original 120lbs you would have seemed to fit into the category of not needing to lose much (if any weight) according to Walford. You were already at a healthy BMI of 18. Especially if you were no longer young when you started CRON (and we don’t know since you did not give your age)

See our files for more data on moderate vs. extreme CRON.

Supplements are never as good as getting nutrients through their natural sources.

But then, as Rodney likes to say, to each his own.

From: workoutncron <nancystack@...>

Reply-< >

Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 00:31:23 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

I'll restate:

I do not have a B12 deficiency. I do not have a folic acid

deficiency. The view of my blood cells through the microscope

revealed no abnormality. I meant that those 3 things were ruled out

as causes of my low WBC.

To add detail, my weight is 105, height 5'8 " , daily caloric intake

1600-1700. I have been maintaining this weight for > 2 years after

spending most of my adult life around 120 lbs. When I have tracked

my nutrition through software, I only have been low on zinc, folic

acid, and calcium, and consequently, I supplement those.

[Guest guest]

If you take a gander at the CR Society website and postings, you'll find low WBC counts to be a characteristic effect of CRON. My own WBC count has been below 3K/mcl for at least 18 years.

On 8/17/07, Francesca Skelton <fskelton@...> wrote:

I calculate your current BMI at 16. At your original 120lbs you would have seemed to fit into the category of not needing to lose much (if any weight) according to Walford. You were already at a healthy BMI of 18. Especially if you were no longer young when you started CRON (and we don't know since you did not give your age)

See our files for more data on moderate vs. extreme CRON.

Supplements are never as good as getting nutrients through their natural sources.

But then, as Rodney likes to say, to each his own.

From: workoutncron <nancystacksbcglobal (DOT) net>

Reply-< >

Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 00:31:23 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

I'll restate:

I do not have a B12 deficiency. I do not have a folic acid

deficiency. The view of my blood cells through the microscope

revealed no abnormality. I meant that those 3 things were ruled out

as causes of my low WBC.

To add detail, my weight is 105, height 5'8 " , daily caloric intake

1600-1700. I have been maintaining this weight for > 2 years after

spending most of my adult life around 120 lbs. When I have tracked

my nutrition through software, I only have been low on zinc, folic

acid, and calcium, and consequently, I supplement those.

[Guest guest]

Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

Posted by: " Dowling " christopher.a.dowling@...

If you take a gander at the CR Society website and postings, you'll find low WBC

counts to be a characteristic effect of CRON. My own WBC count has been below

3K/mcl for at least 18 years.

-----------

Hi

My WBC was 3.19 in 2005, 3.1 in 2006. I haven't gotten it tested for this year.

Cheers,

Arturo

[Guest guest]

Hi folks:

From:

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/eto/content/eto_1_2x_infections_in_indiv

iduals_with_cancer.asp

http://snipurl.com/1pop3

" Normally 90% of neutrophils remain in the bone marrow until needed. "

I suggest the last two words of that quote may be highly

significant. I suggest that healthy people with a low neutrophil

count, have a low neutrophil count because they do not need more

neutrophils in the blood. I suggest a higher neutrophil count is

likely a symptom of underlying infection and/or inflammation.

I would like someone to show evidence that people on CRON with low

WBC counts are unable to quickly muster a good neutrophil response

when infection occurs. I very much doubt you will find it. But if

someone does then I will take a serious look at it.

Just my take.

Rodney.

>

> Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

> Posted by: " Dowling " christopher.a.dowling@...

>

> If you take a gander at the CR Society website and postings, you'll

find low WBC counts to be a characteristic effect of CRON. My own WBC

count has been below 3K/mcl for at least 18 years.

> -----------

> Hi

> My WBC was 3.19 in 2005, 3.1 in 2006. I haven't gotten it tested

for this year.

> Cheers,

> Arturo

>

[Guest guest]

Yes. Some have speculated WBC # in the generally accepted " normal " range really reflect inefficient, over active, disorganized immune function.

On 8/19/07, Rodney <perspect1111@...> wrote:

Hi folks:

From:

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/eto/content/eto_1_2x_infections_in_indiv

iduals_with_cancer.asp

http://snipurl.com/1pop3

" Normally 90% of neutrophils remain in the bone marrow until needed. "

I suggest the last two words of that quote may be highly

significant. I suggest that healthy people with a low neutrophil

count, have a low neutrophil count because they do not need more

neutrophils in the blood. I suggest a higher neutrophil count is

likely a symptom of underlying infection and/or inflammation.

I would like someone to show evidence that people on CRON with low

WBC counts are unable to quickly muster a good neutrophil response

when infection occurs. I very much doubt you will find it. But if

someone does then I will take a serious look at it.

Just my take.

Rodney.

[Guest guest]

Do you have a name, sex, and age?

Maco

At 10:26 AM 8/17/2007, you wrote:

I would like to hear about other

people's experiences in dealing with a

low white blood cell count, as far how much testing people have done to

discover the cause. I have read about the 31% WBC decrease found in

the Biosphere 2 participants (page 44 of Dr. Walford's Beyond the 120

Year Diet and

http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/6/B211

).

I am inclined to believe that my low count is due to the calorie

restriction diet I have followed consistantly for the last 2 years, and

inconsistantly since 1989 (after reading Dr. Walford's original 120

Year Diet). However, my most recent annual blood result for WBC was

2.4 (I also had one other really low reading from March, 2002 - 2.6),

and my general practitioner sent me to a hematologist. The 2 visits

there have produced readings of 3.0 and 2.9, with B12 deficiency and

folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of the

blood ruled out. The hematologist says the next step is a bone marrow

biopsy. I am postponing that for now.

I would appreciate hearing about anyone who has encountered the dilemma

of whether to agree to a bone marrow biopsy (or other testing) or just

let it drop. If anyone could share their WBC results, that would also

be appreciated.

[Guest guest]

Maco wrote:

Do you have a name, sex, and age?

My response:

, female, 57

[Guest guest]

At 10:00 AM 8/20/2007, you wrote:

>Maco wrote:

>Do you have a name, sex, and age?

>

>My response:

>, female, 57

Thanks. As the whole world has replied, although it's worrisome to

have stats that vary from the norm when such deviations haven't been

broadly blessed, the WBC issue per se seems more likely to be a good

than a bad thing.

Maco, male, 51

[Guest guest]

I think it quite depends upon your personal comfort level. CR is a step, to some degree, into the unknown. Although a bone marrow biopsy may not not hurt (entirely), it may help you feel more secure about your health. On the other hand, perhaps a thorough discussion of your CR practice and the experience of others who have practiced CR with your hematologist may change his/her plan.

On 8/20/07, Maco <mstewart@...> wrote:

At 10:00 AM 8/20/2007, you wrote:

>Maco wrote:

>Do you have a name, sex, and age?

>

>My response:

>, female, 57

Thanks. As the whole world has replied, although it's worrisome to

have stats that vary from the norm when such deviations haven't been

broadly blessed, the WBC issue per se seems more likely to be a good

than a bad thing.

Maco, male, 51

[Guest guest]

,

As far as CRON is concerned, you seem to be doing everything right.

You use software to identify and correct dietary deficiencies. This

is good. Your percent of CR is approximately 15% to 20% depending on

your activity level and your exact nutritional intake. This is not

overly excessive. Your low white cell counts seem typical of other CR

practitioners. However, your BMI of 16.0 is below the normal range

which is from 18.5 to 24.9.

CR is an experimental protocol. You should take care not to lose

additional weight, and make sure that your intake of protein, Vitamin

D, calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus is appropriate to prevent bone

loss.

You seem worried. Ask yourself some questions:

1) Am I happy?

2) Am I living the way that I want to Live?

3) Do I feel healthy and energetic?

If the answer to any of these questions is " no " , do something about

it. Otherwise, quit worrying and enjoy life!

Tony

CR Calculator:

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/health/cron1.html

> >

> > Last time I had bloodwork done my WBC was very low too.

> >

> > However my doc is aware that some figures (WBC, Thyroid) will be

> skewed due

> > to my diet.

> >

> > But what about the folic acid and B12 deficiencies? If you are

> eating

> > veggies as any CRONIE worth his/her salt would be, you shouldn¹t

> have a

> > folic acid problem. Since you haven¹t told us your weight, height,

> calorie

> > level, or typical day¹s food, we have no idea what¹s up with that.

> >

> >

> > From: workoutncron <nancystack@>

> > Reply-< >

> > Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:26:33 -0000

> > < >

> > Subject: [ ] low WBC - how far to take medical testing

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > I would like to hear about other people's experiences in dealing

> with a

> > low white blood cell count, as far how much testing people have

> done to

> > discover the cause. I have read about the 31% WBC decrease found in

> > the Biosphere 2 participants (page 44 of Dr. Walford's Beyond the

> 120

> > Year Diet and

> >

> http://biomed.gerontologyjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/57/6/B211).

> > I am inclined to believe that my low count is due to the calorie

> > restriction diet I have followed consistantly for the last 2 years,

> and

> > inconsistantly since 1989 (after reading Dr. Walford's original 120

> > Year Diet). However, my most recent annual blood result for WBC was

> > 2.4 (I also had one other really low reading from March, 2002 -

> 2.6),

> > and my general practitioner sent me to a hematologist. The 2 visits

> > there have produced readings of 3.0 and 2.9, with B12 deficiency and

> > folic acid deficiency and abnormalities in the microscopic view of

> the

> > blood ruled out. The hematologist says the next step is a bone

> marrow

> > biopsy. I am postponing that for now.

> >

> > I would appreciate hearing about anyone who has encountered the

> dilemma

> > of whether to agree to a bone marrow biopsy (or other testing) or

> just

> > let it drop. If anyone could share their WBC results, that would

> also

> > be appreciated.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Tony: On page 50 of “Beyond”: “The optimal restriction changes with age, and at greater ages should be less extreme” (on extreme regimens the older mice died at a YOUNGER age than their non-CR’d counterparts). Just a reminder for those of us who are in middle age when we start CRON. .

(And also imposing severe CR too rapidly not only did not lengthen life; it shortened life span.)

From: citpeks <citpeks@...>

Reply-< >

Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:42:34 -0000

< >

Subject: [ ] Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

,

As far as CRON is concerned, you seem to be doing everything right.

You use software to identify and correct dietary deficiencies. This

is good. Your percent of CR is approximately 15% to 20% depending on

your activity level and your exact nutritional intake. This is not

overly excessive. Your low white cell counts seem typical of other CR

practitioners. However, your BMI of 16.0 is below the normal range

which is from 18.5 to 24.9.

CR is an experimental protocol. You should take care not to lose

additional weight, and make sure that your intake of protein, Vitamin

D, calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus is appropriate to prevent bone

loss.

You seem worried. Ask yourself some questions:

1) Am I happy?

2) Am I living the way that I want to Live?

3) Do I feel healthy and energetic?

If the answer to any of these questions is " no " , do something about

it. Otherwise, quit worrying and enjoy life!

Tony

CR Calculator:

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/health/cron1.html

[Guest guest]

You are right about not restricting too much, Francesca.

Unfortunately, there is no widespread use of measurements of %CR to

know if 15%CR is OK, but 20%CR is too much, etc. We have to make

educated guesses because there is no quantitative data.

My approach to CR consists of a reality check based on the oldest

people that I know. How many 90-year olds do I know who are thin as

rails? Not many. Most of the 90-year olds that I know are somewhat

overweight and many of them take diabetes medications.

I basically want to eat nutritious meals, be thin enough to avoid

diabetes, but fat enough to survive an illness. In two months I will

qualify for Medicare. My only medical expenses are $20.00 per year as

co-pay for my yearly physical exam. Knock on wood! I plan to pay for

Medicare, but not use it.

Tony

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/fitness/index.html

>

> Tony: On page 50 of ³Beyond²: ³The optimal restriction changes with

> age, and at greater ages should be less extreme² (on extreme

> regimens the older mice died at a YOUNGER age than their non-CR¹d

> counterparts). Just a reminder for those of us who are in middle

> age when we start CRON.

> (And also imposing severe CR too rapidly not only did not lengthen

> life; it shortened life span.)

>

> ===

>

> From: citpeks <citpeks@...>

> Reply-< >

> Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 19:42:34 -0000

> < >

> Subject: [ ] Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

>

> ,

>

> As far as CRON is concerned, you seem to be doing everything right.

> You use software to identify and correct dietary deficiencies. This

> is good. Your percent of CR is approximately 15% to 20% depending on

> your activity level and your exact nutritional intake. This is not

> overly excessive. Your low white cell counts seem typical of other CR

> practitioners. However, your BMI of 16.0 is below the normal range

> which is from 18.5 to 24.9.

>

> CR is an experimental protocol. You should take care not to lose

> additional weight, and make sure that your intake of protein, Vitamin

> D, calcium, magnesium, and phosphorus is appropriate to prevent bone

> loss.

>

> You seem worried. Ask yourself some questions:

> 1) Am I happy?

> 2) Am I living the way that I want to Live?

> 3) Do I feel healthy and energetic?

> If the answer to any of these questions is " no " , do something about

> it. Otherwise, quit worrying and enjoy life!

>

> Tony

> CR Calculator:

> http://www.scientificpsychic.com/health/cron1.html

>

[Guest guest]

>

> Tony: On page 50 of ³Beyond²: ³The optimal restriction changes

with age,

> and at greater ages should be less extreme² (on extreme regimens

the older

> mice died at a YOUNGER age than their non-CR¹d counterparts). Just

a

> reminder for those of us who are in middle age when we start CRON. .

>

> (And also imposing severe CR too rapidly not only did not lengthen

life; it

> shortened life span.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Unlike many people who practice CRON and can point to a " start " date,

I cannot say when I started (whether middle age or earlier), or even

for sure if I ever did start.

I read Dr. Walford's original 120 Year Diet in 1989 when I was 39 1/2

years old. I did not have a PC for loading nutritional software. I

didn't need to lose weight according to most standards. But, I was

enthralled with the idea that I could have some control over my

health and longevity. So, I bought a food scale and tracked my

nutrition with pen and paper. This didn't last long. I did continue

to improve my nutrition during my 40's and early 50's and never

deviated substantially from a weight of 120. This allowed me to

continue eating some junk food along with healthy food. I retired

the same month Dr. Walford died (April 2004), and resolved to " do

better " . I restricted to about 1400 calories/day (initially) and

dropped down to 105, where I am today (and intend to stay). I still

don't know for sure if I'm really " on " a CRON diet. Maybe no: 1) at

daily calories of 1600-1700, that doesn't really seem very restricted

and 2) I track calories but not other nutrients. Maybe yes:

1) I aim for at least 9 fruits and vegetables every day, enough

protein, virtually no junk food, 2) my CRP was .3, my total

cholesterol was 166, HDL 84, LDL 67, 3) hopefully, the low WBC is an

indicator of low inflammation (my assumption at this point). My low

weight seems to be troublesome to some people, but it seems quite

comfortable to me. OK, sorry for the length of this post.

[Guest guest]

: If you’re comfortable, good for you. Your introduction into CRON (or whatever) is long past.

However there are over 2500 members here. If someone is just getting started or is contemplating CRON we would advise following the best advice/knowledge that we have up to the present AFA how to implement it for maximum health and longevity.

BTW reading “Beyond the 120 Year Diet’ is a requirement here. So for anyone who hasn’t done so, the book is available in most public libraries.

----------------------------------------------------------

Unlike many people who practice CRON and can point to a " start " date,

I cannot say when I started (whether middle age or earlier), or even

for sure if I ever did start.

I read Dr. Walford's original 120 Year Diet in 1989 when I was 39 1/2

years old. I did not have a PC for loading nutritional software. I

didn't need to lose weight according to most standards. But, I was

enthralled with the idea that I could have some control over my

health and longevity. So, I bought a food scale and tracked my

nutrition with pen and paper. This didn't last long. I did continue

to improve my nutrition during my 40's and early 50's and never

deviated substantially from a weight of 120. This allowed me to

continue eating some junk food along with healthy food. I retired

the same month Dr. Walford died (April 2004), and resolved to " do

better " . I restricted to about 1400 calories/day (initially) and

dropped down to 105, where I am today (and intend to stay). I still

don't know for sure if I'm really " on " a CRON diet. Maybe no: 1) at

daily calories of 1600-1700, that doesn't really seem very restricted

and 2) I track calories but not other nutrients. Maybe yes:

1) I aim for at least 9 fruits and vegetables every day, enough

protein, virtually no junk food, 2) my CRP was .3, my total

cholesterol was 166, HDL 84, LDL 67, 3) hopefully, the low WBC is an

indicator of low inflammation (my assumption at this point). My low

weight seems to be troublesome to some people, but it seems quite

comfortable to me. OK, sorry for the length of this post.

[Guest guest]

Also the book is available on Amazon.  I got mine today and it is worth reading and makes all of this more understandable.MJOn Aug 20, 2007, at 4:54 PM, Francesca Skelton wrote::    If you’re comfortable, good for you.  Your introduction into CRON (or whatever) is long past.However there are over 2500 members here.  If someone is just getting started or is contemplating CRON we would advise following the best advice/knowledge that we have up to the present AFA how to implement it for maximum health and longevity. BTW reading “Beyond the 120 Year Diet’ is a requirement here.  So for anyone who hasn’t done so, the book is available in most public libraries.----------------------------------------------------------Unlike many people who practice CRON and can point to a "start" date,I cannot say when I started (whether middle age or earlier), or even for sure if I ever did start. I read Dr. Walford's original 120 Year Diet in 1989 when I was 39 1/2 years old.  I did not have a PC for loading nutritional software.  I didn't need to lose weight according to most standards.  But, I was enthralled with the idea that I could have some control over my health and longevity.  So, I bought a food scale and tracked my nutrition with pen and paper.  This didn't last long.  I did continue to improve my nutrition during my 40's and early 50's and never deviated substantially from a weight of 120.  This allowed me to continue eating some junk food along with healthy food.  I retired the same month Dr. Walford died (April 2004), and resolved to "do better".  I restricted to about 1400 calories/day (initially) and dropped down to 105, where I am today (and intend to stay).  I still don't know for sure if I'm really "on" a CRON diet.  Maybe no: 1) at daily calories of 1600-1700, that doesn't really seem very restricted and 2) I track calories but not other nutrients.  Maybe yes:  1) I aim for at least 9 fruits and vegetables every day, enough protein, virtually no junk food, 2) my CRP was .3, my totalcholesterol was 166, HDL 84, LDL 67, 3) hopefully, the low WBC is an indicator of low inflammation (my assumption at this point).  My low weight seems to be troublesome to some people, but it seems quite comfortable to me.  OK, sorry for the length of this post.      

[Guest guest]

The book is also available at any of the cut rate sites such as half.com. Or go to any of the book comparison sites to get the book at the cheapest price (or to get a used copy). I strongly advise getting a book to keep as a reference. I have referred to mine on many occasions since I bought it many years ago. It is an invaluable resource.

Also be sure read all our files and links.

From: M J Mannino <mjm1@...>

Reply-< >

Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 17:02:21 -0700

< >

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: low WBC - how far to take medical testing

Also the book is available on Amazon.  I got mine today and it is worth reading and makes all of this more understandable.

MJ

[Guest guest]

Tony stated: How many 90-year olds do I know who are thin as rails? Not many. Most of the 90-year olds that I know are somewhat overweight.

I read up on Jack LaLanne, who will be 93 next month. He said he was 5'6" and 170# in his bodybuilding days, but now he is 5'4" and 150#. He still exercises two hours every single morning, but I did a BMI check and it puts him at 25, which makes him "overweight". He has no health problems.

My favorite "Jack Quote": "Most people my age are dead."

Lela

Get a sneak peek of the all-new AOL.com.