Re: Naturally slender CRONIES/% restriction - genetics

[Guest guest]

> " I did not much agree with " Are you naturally thin? If so, you're

not

> supposed to lose as much. How many calories would you be eating ad

lib? If

> 1800 or so, then you're about 30% CR'd, nothing to sneeze at!! " from

>

/message/3990 " Subject:

Re:

> [ ] Re: Does CR Make You More Hungry? " . I thought the

idea

> that lighter ad libbers need less restriction needs serious

consideration.

> By what definition is 1800 calories ad lib 30% CR? "

>

> Hi Al: glad you questioned this. If you don't agree, we may need

some

> healthy debate. My figure of 1800 cal was an estimate; the writer

said she

> was now eating 1200 cal. 1200 subtracted from an estimate of 1800

ad lib=

> 600 cal less on CR. That would be 1/3 less cal. or about a 30%

restriction.

> Of course many of us have no idea what we were eating ad lib since

we never

> tracked our cal before CR

To actually get around to answering the original question: I have no

idea what my ad lib intake consisted of.

I realize that CR is about calories and not weight. And the only

true way to tell that one is in CR is by biomarkers. I have had some

though not full initial testing and have not had follow up biomarker

testing though I will have to in time. So in the absence of that

weight loss can be a good sign that one is on the right track. Is it

possible to cut calories without losing weight? Yes, it probably is

possible to cut calories at least somewhat without losing weight.

However, is it possible to lose weight without cutting calories *if*:

1) one hasn't increased their physical activity 2) one doesn't have a

wasting disease 3)one isn't taking metabolism stimulants etc. .....

It is probably not, which is why weight loss can be a good sign that

one is eating less. As can feelings of hunger/intense food

cravings. These are all easy to observe but very imprecise guess

work indicators.

Yes, I was on the thin side to start out with. " Naturally thin " is a

of course a very difficult concept. Are those who were heavier when

starting CR an example of *naturally* ob-ob mice with metabolisms

that cause them to store fat or did they just eat more and/or

exercise less than those who were thinner when starting CR? (many

were older of course which is a factor - the metabolism slows down).

Without this comparative data there is no way to know who is a

natural burner and who a natural storer.

Should a person who starts out thin before CR be on less CR than a

person who starts out weighing more? Yes, of course. Say you had

two people both of the same sex, age, and height whom ate 1800

calories a day before CR and exercised for a half hour a day. One

weighing 150 pounds and having more body fat and the other 110 with

less body fat. The person weighing 150 pounds can maybe do 30% CR

where the person weighing 110 should probably only do 10% CR. The ob-

ob person doing 30% CR will probably reap greater benefit but the

thinner person should still probably only do 10% CR in order to avoid

the *risks* of *extremely* low body fat such as the shut down in

female reproductive functionality. We play the genetic hand we are

dealt. Of course if you choose to chance those risks .....

Speaking of genetic hands I find the assumption that we will live to,

say, 90 eating ad lib because our grandparents made it to 90 to be

wishful thinking. Some anecdotal evidence: My grandparents made it

to their 90's. When I saw them eating they ate pretty much the SAD.

However, before they were Americans they were immigrants and I tend

to believe they were on mild CR growing up elsewhere. The reason I

have for believing this is the fact that when they came to America

they grew significantly in height in their 20's whereas most people

in their 20's are basically finished growing in height. This has

always been credited to " better " nutrition in America. Better

nutrition (probably) and a sudden influx of calories I'd

speculate . Whereas nowdays, every generation of young people

growing up seems to be eating more and more! And not just here

either - the whole world is starting to eat more and more (except

those without enough to eat of course).

--

" Time devours, man devours still more "

adapted from Ovid

[Guest guest]

Great post Joanne: Yes blood work and tests from a doctor tell the tale.

BUT there are some other things in addition to weight loss that you can

observe and do yourself too to verify CROnness. How's your blood pressure?

Are you getting sick less? How do you feel? Do you look any different?

I take my BP regularly (they even have the testing in supermarkets now) and

it continues to stay nice'n low in spite of a family history of very bad

high; I haven't had a cold since I started CRON; my hair is thick and

lustrous (as compared to during a very bad menopause - pre CR- when it was

so thin I thought I was going bald). These can be valuable signs and

wonders of CR.

Joanne wrote:

To actually get around to answering the original question: I have no

> idea what my ad lib intake consisted of.

>

> I realize that CR is about calories and not weight. And the only

> true way to tell that one is in CR is by biomarkers. I have had some

> though not full initial testing and have not had follow up biomarker

> testing though I will have to in time. So in the absence of that

> weight loss can be a good sign that one is on the right track. Is it

> possible to cut calories without losing weight? Yes, it probably is

> possible to cut calories at least somewhat without losing weight.

> However, is it possible to lose weight without cutting calories *if*:

> 1) one hasn't increased their physical activity 2) one doesn't have a

> wasting disease 3)one isn't taking metabolism stimulants etc. .....

> It is probably not, which is why weight loss can be a good sign that

> one is eating less. As can feelings of hunger/intense food

> cravings. These are all easy to observe but very imprecise guess

> work indicators.

>

> Yes, I was on the thin side to start out with. " Naturally thin " is a

> of course a very difficult concept. Are those who were heavier when

> starting CR an example of *naturally* ob-ob mice with metabolisms

> that cause them to store fat or did they just eat more and/or

> exercise less than those who were thinner when starting CR? (many

> were older of course which is a factor - the metabolism slows down).

> Without this comparative data there is no way to know who is a

> natural burner and who a natural storer.

>

> Should a person who starts out thin before CR be on less CR than a

> person who starts out weighing more? Yes, of course. Say you had

> two people both of the same sex, age, and height whom ate 1800

> calories a day before CR and exercised for a half hour a day. One

> weighing 150 pounds and having more body fat and the other 110 with

> less body fat. The person weighing 150 pounds can maybe do 30% CR

> where the person weighing 110 should probably only do 10% CR. The ob-

> ob person doing 30% CR will probably reap greater benefit but the

> thinner person should still probably only do 10% CR in order to avoid

> the *risks* of *extremely* low body fat such as the shut down in

> female reproductive functionality. We play the genetic hand we are

> dealt. Of course if you choose to chance those risks .....

>

> Speaking of genetic hands I find the assumption that we will live to,

> say, 90 eating ad lib because our grandparents made it to 90 to be

> wishful thinking. Some anecdotal evidence: My grandparents made it

> to their 90's. When I saw them eating they ate pretty much the SAD.

> However, before they were Americans they were immigrants and I tend

> to believe they were on mild CR growing up elsewhere. The reason I

> have for believing this is the fact that when they came to America

> they grew significantly in height in their 20's whereas most people

> in their 20's are basically finished growing in height. This has

> always been credited to " better " nutrition in America. Better

> nutrition (probably) and a sudden influx of calories I'd

> speculate . Whereas nowdays, every generation of young people

> growing up seems to be eating more and more! And not just here

> either - the whole world is starting to eat more and more (except

> those without enough to eat of course).

>

> --

>

> " Time devours, man devours still more "

> adapted from Ovid