Re: distribution of daily calories

[Guest guest]

There is a great deal of debate about this on the "other" list. Despite much discussion the dominant mechanism for benefit from CR appears to be total calories (not) consumed.

A more important factor for you may be which approach is easier for you to meet caloric goals. Some individuals find one approach easier, others the other.

If you are pursuing CRAN I wouldn't worry about it, if CRON do a search.

JR

-----Original Message-----From: howardehorton [mailto:howardehorton@...]Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 12:37 PM Subject: [ ] distribution of daily caloriesI was wondering if there is any research that supports the benefits of eating smaller meals (the "grazing" approach) throughout the day, rather than just having one larger meal, in caloric restriction.I seem to recall reading about some legendary cases (Cornaro (sp?)Zor Aghor (sp?) where these long lived gentlemen sat down to eat but once a day. Not a "zone" approach, because the larger meal might provoke a larger insulin response, but one that seems to have worked.Just curious if anyone has looked at this. Thanks.

[Guest guest]

It is still very much up in the air as to the effect of the

distribution of calories on the " CR effect " .

For the most part, the lower numerical total of calories is the

safest bet.

However, some researchers believe that there are ways around the

sheer number of calories. The research I post below definitely needs

to be confirmed. That said, it *is* research from the National

Insitutes of Health in Bethesda, land, so it is nothing to sneeze

at either.

The Protective Effects of Dietary Restriction Can be Dissociated From

Calorie Intake

R. Anson*, Zhihong Guo, de Cabo, Titilola Iyun,

Rios, Adrienne Hagepanos, K. Ingram, Mark P. Mattson,

Mark A. Lane

Laboratory of Neurosciences, NIA, NIH, 5600 Shock Drive,

Baltimore, MD 21224

*current affiliation: Windward Islands Research Institute & St.

's University, St. 's, Grenada

Restriction of caloric intake slows the rate of aging in many

species, including C57Bl/6 mice. Other protective effects, such as

resistance to kainic acid (KA) neurotoxicity, have also been

established. Two feeding paradigms are commonly used to restrict

caloric intake: limited daily feeding (LDF), in which animals are

given access to a pre-measured and limited amount of food; and every

other day feeding (EOD), in which animals are fed ad libitum and

fasted on alternate days. Both paradigms are known to produce

dramatic increases in lifespan in comparison to animals fed ad

libitum (AL). Animals fed using the LDF paradigm weigh less than

animals fed AL. The body weight of LD-fed relative to AL-fed animals

is consistently reported to be roughly proportional to the relative

food intakes. However, we noticed an anomaly in C57Bl/6J mice fed

using the EOD paradigm: bodyweight in these mice was only reduced by

19%. This indicated that despite the similar effects on aging rate,

the two paradigms differed in at least some physiological outcomes.

This provides an opportunity to separate variables that are critical

to the modulation of aging rate from those that are incidental to the

feeding paradigm. In the present study, mice were assigned to one of

three groups at eight weeks of age: AL, LDF, or EOD. To control for

caloric intake versus periodic food deprivation a fourth group was

added: these mice were provided daily with an amount of food equal to

the average daily intake of mice in the EOD group (pair fed, " PF " ).

After 14 weeks of restriction, total serum IGF-1 was lowest in the

LDF group, and highest in the EOD and PF groups. Fasting insulin and

glucose were lower in the restricted groups than in either the AL or

PF groups. In contrast, fasting serum beta-hydroxybutyrate was

highest in the EOD group, intermediate in the AL and PF groups, and

lowest in the LDF group. Behavioral tests intended to measure hunger

suggested that the LDF mice were most motivated to seek food, but

great inter-individual variability was noted. Preliminary counts

indicate that KA-induced damage to the hippocampus was reduced by

both restriction paradigms but did not differ between the AL and PF

groups. The most startling finding was that the EOD mice were able to

gorge on the " fed " days, so that their weekly intake was only 9%

below that of the AL mice. The striking differences between the EOD

group and the PF group whose caloric intake was identical lead us to

conclude that the protection provided by caloric restriction is

mediated not by the caloric intake per se, but rather by periodic

food deprivation. This could be due to a neuroendocrine response (a

hypothesis supported by the lowered fasting insulin), to removal of

oxidative or other damage during periods of catabolism, or

conceivably to a stress response induced by periodic hunger.

> There is a great deal of debate about this on the " other " list.

Despite much

> discussion the dominant mechanism for benefit from CR appears to be

total

> calories (not) consumed.

>

> A more important factor for you may be which approach is easier for

you to

> meet caloric goals. Some individuals find one approach easier,

others the

> other.

>

> If you are pursuing CRAN I wouldn't worry about it, if CRON do a

search.

>

> JR

> -----Original Message-----

> From: howardehorton [mailto:howardehorton@a...]

> Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2002 12:37 PM

> @y...

> Subject: [ ] distribution of daily calories

>

>

> I was wondering if there is any research that supports the

benefits

> of eating smaller meals (the " grazing " approach) throughout the

day,

> rather than just having one larger meal, in caloric restriction.

>

> I seem to recall reading about some legendary cases (Cornaro (sp?)

> Zor Aghor (sp?) where these long lived gentlemen sat down to eat

but

> once a day. Not a " zone " approach, because the larger meal might

> provoke a larger insulin response, but one that seems to have

worked.

>

> Just curious if anyone has looked at this. Thanks.

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Fascinating study — the NIH-funded one posted by crdude. What’s the date on it?

[Guest guest]

--- In @y..., " howardehorton " <howardehorton@a...>

wrote:

> I was wondering if there is any research that supports the

benefits

> of eating smaller meals (the " grazing " approach) throughout the

day,

> rather than just having one larger meal, in caloric restriction.

>

> I seem to recall reading about some legendary cases (Cornaro (sp?)

> Zor Aghor (sp?) where these long lived gentlemen sat down to eat

but

> once a day. Not a " zone " approach, because the larger meal might

> provoke a larger insulin response, but one that seems to have

worked.

>

> Just curious if anyone has looked at this. Thanks.

Hello howard,

The link below should take you to the CRSociety archive search page.

Type in graze and gorging and it should throw up a list of

messages for you to read. (Hope it works)

Bob

http://lists.calorierestriction.org/cgi-bin/wa?S1=crsociety & X=-