Re: obsessive/extreme CRON

[Guest guest]

I agree with everything Mike has said. There's also another issue here and

that is " quality " of life. Most of those at the extreme end have given up

sex, suffer from feeling cold, hurt when they sit on their tushes for too

long, and so on. Their lives are a compromise of living a bit abnormally to

gain what they think will be more years. I also wonder if the brain is not

getting enough nutrients leading to obsessive/compulsiveness. A while back

posted an excellent post on moderation which I thought was

excellent and am repeating below:

wrote:

I applaud the discussion on moderation. Walford cautions about keeping body

fat up above a minimum level - 5% for men, 10% for women. Several CRONies

are below this. The rats that lived longer eating 30-40% less calories

started CRON at an earlier age than we are. They were essentially stunted -

smaller than normal. When someone who reached full size tries to cut back to

a very low number of calories, they are more like the rats that started CRON

at a later age - and did not live longer. Everyone in my family is small or

slight - we seem to be able to eat less and maintain a reasonable % of body

fat. I think I ate less than normal during my teen years. The bigger CRONies

that are starting at middle age and cutting back very far on calories may

not be extending their life at all - they may be shortening it. They are

like the older full-size rats. I am also concerned that there may be a

nerve-damage risk for very low body fat. The recent finding that statins

cause nerve damage seems related to this to me. The nervous system is

primarily constructed from fat - fat is the insulator. CRON can be overdone.

Some people are probably overdoing it already. The " prize " for overdoing it

is not the longest life span. I hate to say it, but if you are a

middle-aged person that's eaten heartily all your life and have a large

frame, it is too late for you to be like the optimal rats. You need to

settle for a moderate CRON and significant life extension and improved

health. You just may not be in the Guiness Book of Records.

on 11/12/2002 11:41 AM, Mike Harkreader at titanmeister@... wrote:

> My comments are in regard to those individuals on the

> extreme end of CRon, who sometimes become totally obssessed and get

> into some really dangerous behaviors from both a physical and

> psychological nature....at least in my opinion.

[Guest guest]

The extremist’s response would be

something like:

- “giving up sex”. Not really.

Just want it less. If you don’t want it (or want it less), then you don’t

miss it at all. Think smoking. Are smoke-quitters to start smoking again

because it gives them a better quality of life (they enjoy it more than sex)? Health

or smoking? Long-life or sex? Everyone makes hir own priorities.

- “feeling cold”. Besides

having an easy fix for this, some might have suffered from feeling hot, and now

feel quite pleasant. Think desert J

- “compromise in order to possibly

gain a few more years”. You bet!

- “obsessive/compulsiveness”. I’ve told you a *million*

times: don’t exaggerate! J

- extreme life extension can bring you to

times in which CR is not needed anymore due to advances in anti-aging

technologies, effectively making you immortal. Mild life extension might get

you a notch too short of that. I guess it also depends on how much you like

your life. Again, everyone makes hir own priorities.

As for me… I haven’t found my

groove yet. I want to be extreme (like in: extreme life extension), but I do

not like the reduced libido, the cold hands, the social implications, the

hunger and the loss of lots of beautiful muscles. And I’m as far from

extreme as one can be at 5’10” 169lb, though I’m pretty close

to 5% bodyfat; Walford’s limit.

Micky.

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

From: Francesca Skelton

[mailto:fskelton@...]

Sent: Tuesday,

November 12, 2002 10:55 AM

Subject: Re: [ ]

obsessive/extreme CRON

I agree with everything Mike has said.

There's also another issue here and

that is " quality " of life. Most of

those at the extreme end have given up

sex, suffer from feeling cold, hurt when they sit

on their tushes for too

long, and so on. Their lives are a

compromise of living a bit abnormally to

gain what they think will be more years. I also

wonder if the brain is not

getting enough nutrients leading to

obsessive/compulsiveness. A while back

posted an excellent post on moderation

which I thought was

excellent and am repeating below:

[Micky Snir] <snip>

[Guest guest]

> The extremist's response would be something like:

>

> - " giving up sex " . Not really. Just want it less. If you don't want

it

> (or want it less), then you don't miss it at all. Think smoking. Are

> smoke-quitters to start smoking again because it gives them a better

> quality of life (they enjoy it more than sex)? Health or smoking?

> Long-life or sex? Everyone makes hir own priorities.

I disagree. Again sex is never just sex. It's about closeness and

emotional intimacy and everything else. Ignore one of the

fundemental psychological needs of the species at your emotional

peril.

> - " feeling cold " . Besides having an easy fix for this, some might

have

> suffered from feeling hot, and now feel quite pleasant. Think

desert :-)

I've been slightly on the cold side all my life though and I don't

like it. But it's no biggie.

> - " compromise in order to possibly gain a few more years " . You bet!

>

> - " obsessive/compulsiveness " . I've told you a *million* times: don't

> exaggerate! :-)

>

> - extreme life extension can bring you to times in which CR is not

> needed anymore due to advances in anti-aging technologies,

effectively

> making you immortal.

I don't believe that will happen soon enough for any of us - not even

the extremist. Although if I could change that I would. And I'm

sceptical how much beyond 100 years even extremism can take one.

>Mild life extension might get you a notch too short

> of that. I guess it also depends on how much you like your life.

Again,

> everyone makes hir own priorities.

>

>

>

> As for me... I haven't found my groove yet. I want to be extreme

(like

> in: extreme life extension), but I do not like the reduced libido,

the

> cold hands, the social implications,

agreed

>the hunger and the loss of lots of

> beautiful muscles.

I don't even *like* the loss of any more beautiful fat. At least

not from where fat's supposed to be.

>And I'm as far from extreme as one can be at 5'10 "

> 169lb, though I'm pretty close to 5% bodyfat; Walford's limit.

>

For now I just experiment with how low I can go and still have a

decent quality of life by my defintion of one. I am not at all

extreme.

[Guest guest]

Of course people make their own priorities and that's their right. OTOH,

the most fanatical of any group speak up the loudest and most often, step

up and represent themselves to the media as the " example " for the group, and

in so doing such things, leads to the wrong type of example to follow - so

it affects others, not just them.

It becomes a fanatical " religion " with some people, even cult-like; not

mentally healthy IMHO and perhaps not physically healthy either -

on 11/12/2002 3:29 PM, Micky Snir at mickys@... wrote:

> Everyone makes hir own priorities.

[Guest guest]

Right, there are all frequencies of the spectrum.

Some people indeed seem to go over the edge, while others are not even on calorie-restriction;

in fact, on calorie enhancement.

For example, using the 2nd hit in

google searching for “recommended calorie height”, I got http://www.sugarfree-india.com/healthy_life.asp

(other sites seem to range between 1100 to 1500 Kcal/Day), which says that for

females of height 5’0” the “ideal” daily calorie intake

is 1300, and for 5’3” it’s 1400. And that’s ad-lib.

If I recall correctly, you consume 1500-1700

calories per day, though I do not remember your height.

Micky.

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

From: Francesca Skelton

[mailto:fskelton@...]

Sent: Tuesday,

November 12, 2002 1:28 PM

Subject: Re: [ ]

obsessive/extreme CRON

Of course people make their own priorities and that's

their right. OTOH,

the most fanatical of any group speak up the

loudest and most often, step

up and represent themselves to the media as the

" example " for the group, and

in so doing such things, leads to the wrong

type of example to follow - so

it affects others, not just them.

It becomes a fanatical " religion " with

some people, even cult-like; not

mentally healthy IMHO and perhaps not

physically healthy either -

on 11/12/2002 3:29 PM, Micky Snir at

mickys@... wrote:

> Everyone makes hir own priorities.

[Guest guest]

Micky: my ad lib was about 2000 cal a day . I've gone from a high of about

138 lbs to 110 and my blood work etc are all indicitive of being on CR.

True that i'm on moderate CR but I'm no spring chicken and any more

restriction might be unhealthy.

on 11/13/2002 1:54 PM, Micky Snir at mickys@... wrote:

> Right, there are all frequencies of the spectrum. Some people indeed seem to

> go over the edge, while others are not even on calorie-restriction; in fact,

> on calorie enhancement.

>

> For example, using the 2nd hit in google searching for ³recommended calorie

> height², I got http://www.sugarfree-india.com/healthy_life.asp (other sites

> seem to range between 1100 to 1500 Kcal/Day), which says that for females of

> height 5¹0² the ³ideal² daily calorie intake is 1300, and for 5¹3² it¹s 1400.

> And that¹s ad-lib.

>

> If I recall correctly, you consume 1500-1700 calories per day, though I do not

> remember your height.

>

>

>

> Micky.

[Guest guest]

My ad-lib was 3500Kcals/Day J

Determining the level of calorie restriction

is indeed tricky. Walford suggests the set-point theory (which is mostly debunked

on the CrSociety list) which does not apply to me being an ever weight-gaining

person, and I would guess does not apply to many others (I would dare say most

Americans). Interestingly, the more modern calorie-restriction experiments are

performed this way: there’s the ad-lib group eating whatever they like. There’s

the control group eating 85-90% of the ad-lib group and there’s the

calorie-restricted group, which is restricted relative to the control group. This

is because they realized that the ad-lib group is actually an over-eating group

and not really an ad-lib, where ad-lib is defined as eating to satiety while

maintaining “normal” body weight. This does not happen in real

ad-libbers. We eat and gain weight constantly. The control group, which eats 85-90%

of what the over-eater eat, are the real ad-lib group.

I agree with you that it is very difficult

to know what level of restriction is optimal for humans, and more so for individuals,

given different sex, age, health history, personal priorities etc.

The reason I gave you “stats”

was because I wanted to give context to your claim about extremists. And the

context is that your are on the other end of the CR spectrum from those extremists,

IMO. I did not try to make any judgment; just give context.

Micky.

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

From: Francesca Skelton

[mailto:fskelton@...]

Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002

11:12 AM

Subject: Re: [ ]

obsessive/extreme CRON

Micky: my ad lib was about 2000 cal a day

.. I've gone from a high of about

138 lbs to 110 and my blood work etc are all

indicitive of being on CR.

True that i'm on moderate CR but I'm no spring

chicken and any more

restriction might be unhealthy.

on 11/13/2002 1:54 PM, Micky Snir at

mickys@... wrote:

> Right, there are all frequencies of the

spectrum. Some people indeed seem to

> go over the edge, while others are not even

on calorie-restriction; in fact,

> on calorie enhancement.

>

> For example, using the 2nd hit in google

searching for ³recommended calorie

> height², I got http://www.sugarfree-india.com/healthy_life.asp

(other sites

> seem to range between 1100 to 1500 Kcal/Day),

which says that for females of

> height 5¹0² the ³ideal² daily calorie intake

is 1300, and for 5¹3² it¹s 1400.

> And that¹s ad-lib.

>

> If I recall correctly, you consume 1500-1700

calories per day, though I do not

> remember your height.

>

>

>

> Micky.

 

[Guest guest]

Hi.

Note that Walford recognizes the difficulty of determining set point for many people. His specific suggestion is to start out at about 2000 calories per day. If you lose weight too fast, eat some more. If you lose weight too slowly, or gain weight, eat less. Use your scales for feedback. We all know that it's calories that count...but it's hard to know how many calories to count.

He also suggests that if you are lean to begin with that you only lose about 10% of your beginning bodyweight. If you are overweight, that you think in terms of losing 25% of your beginning weight. As an alternative, for those who are able to measure bodyfat, that aiming for about a 50% reduction in bodyfat percentage would make sense.

Personally, I have noticed that the cr society goes off in different directions at different times. When all the dust is settled, Walford usually seems to be closest to the best path. Among Walford's contributions to the science of life extension was the discovery that lab animals introduced to cr at maturity could survive and experience extended life spans (instead of simply dying from the introduction of the restricted diet) by introducing a regimen that was less extreme, and introducing it gradually and so allowing for adaptation with less stress. His experience with Biosphere 2 led him to believe that the introductory period might not need to be as long as he had originally estimated for humans. However, note that this group of persons was composed of relatively young and very healthy people. They were not a cross section of humanity.

Walford's original thesis was that reducing the stress of initiating calorie restriction enabled his (and Weindruch's) lab experiments to succeed. (That is, beginning cr at maturity rather than earlier). Some of the cr society members are suggesting quite the reverse idea. Their approach is, essentially "no pain, no gain." Or, if you're not restricting calories to an extreme degree, it doesn't work. I believe this is completely wrong. I believe that Walford's original thesis was correct, that is, proceed slowly and minimize discomfort, as well as the resulting stress adapting mechanisms that harm the body when continued for long perioeds.. There is, of course, no proof that either approach is correct at this time.

Anyway, the set point issue is a non-problem. Let your body tell you what caloric level is right for you, using Walford's suggestion. Then follow the directions you get from your scales. In my program, I weigh daily, and average the weights weekly for a number that makes some sense to me. I pay attention to the weekly figure, not the daily figure. This works well for me. If my weight doesn't drop, since I have recordede daily calories and average them, also, I know what I "ve done and what the results were, and can adjust accordingly.

I wish I were one of those who needn't count calories. I don't enjoy the process, but when I stop, I regain weight. Each person is different and must devise a program that works for them. The bottom line is, if you eat healthfully, and reduce your caloric intake measured by whatever method works for you, you will be healthier and probably live longer. Both of these goals sound good to me. I won't really care whether or not I experience true life extension until I'm about 110. Then I'll care a lot.

Ed S.

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

From: Micky Snir

Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 8:25 AM

Subject: RE: [ ] obsessive/extreme CRON

My ad-lib was 3500Kcals/Day J

Determining the level of calorie restriction is indeed tricky. Walford suggests the set-point theory (which is mostly debunked on the CrSociety list) which does not apply to me being an ever weight-gaining person, and I would guess does not apply to many others (I would dare say most Americans). Interestingly, the more modern calorie-restriction experiments are performed this way: there’s the ad-lib group eating whatever they like. There’s the control group eating 85-90% of the ad-lib group and there’s the calorie-restricted group, which is restricted relative to the control group. This is because they realized that the ad-lib group is actually an over-eating group and not really an ad-lib, where ad-lib is defined as eating to satiety while maintaining “normal” body weight. This does not happen in real ad-libbers. We eat and gain weight constantly. The control group, which eats 85-90% of what the over-eater eat, are the real ad-lib group.

I agree with you that it is very difficult to know what level of restriction is optimal for humans, and more so for individuals, given different sex, age, health history, personal priorities etc.

The reason I gave you “stats” was because I wanted to give context to your claim about extremists. And the context is that your are on the other end of the CR spectrum from those extremists, IMO. I did not try to make any judgment; just give context.

Micky.

-----Original Message-----From: Francesca Skelton [mailto:fskelton@...] Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 11:12 AM Subject: Re: [ ] obsessive/extreme CRON

Micky: my ad lib was about 2000 cal a day . I've gone from a high of about138 lbs to 110 and my blood work etc are all indicitive of being on CR.True that i'm on moderate CR but I'm no spring chicken and any morerestriction might be unhealthy.on 11/13/2002 1:54 PM, Micky Snir at mickys@... wrote:> Right, there are all frequencies of the spectrum. Some people indeed seem to> go over the edge, while others are not even on calorie-restriction; in fact,> on calorie enhancement.> > For example, using the 2nd hit in google searching for ³recommended calorie> height², I got http://www.sugarfree-india.com/healthy_life.asp (other sites> seem to range between 1100 to 1500 Kcal/Day), which says that for females of> height 5¹0² the ³ideal² daily calorie intake is 1300, and for 5¹3² it¹s 1400.> And that¹s ad-lib.> > If I recall correctly, you consume 1500-1700 calories per day, though I do not> remember your height.> > > > Micky.

[Guest guest]

> The reason I gave you " stats " was because I wanted to g

ive context to your claim about extremists. And the conte

xt is that your are on the other end of the CR spectrum f

rom those extremists, IMO. I did not try to make any judg

ment; just give context.

>

An excelent analisis. The *real* experiment was not

done with humans. To determine the real ad-libitum

put humans in a cage and give they

fruits, vegetables and whatever they want,

count calories and calculte the mean.

Create a control group of humans eating 10% to

15% less. Was this experiments done with humans? NO!

So we

*** DON'T KNOW THE CALORIC VALUE OF

MAXIMUM LIFESPAN IN HUMANS ****.

What is extremism then is almost impossible to define.

I think that eating less then the MR is bad because you

will loose vital tissue and *short* your life.

Cheers

Gandhi.

>

>

> Micky.

>

>

>

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

> From: Francesca Skelton [mailto:fskelton@...]

> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 11:12 AM

>

> Subject: Re: [ ] obsessive/extreme CRON

>

>

>

>

> Micky: my ad lib was about 2000 cal a day . I've gone

from a high of about

> 138 lbs to 110 and my blood work etc are all indicitive

of being on CR.

> True that i'm on moderate CR but I'm no spring chicken

and any more

> restriction might be unhealthy.

>

> on 11/13/2002 1:54 PM, Micky Snir at mickys@...

rosoft.com wrote:

>

> > Right, there are all frequencies of the spectrum. Som

e people indeed seem to

> > go over the edge, while others are not even on calori

e-restriction; in fact,

> > on calorie enhancement.

> >

> > For example, using the 2nd hit in google searching fo

r ³recommended calorie

> > height², I got http://www.sugarfree-

india.com/healthy_life.asp (other sites

> > seem to range between 1100 to 1500 Kcal/Day), which s

ays that for females of

> > height 5¹0² the ³ideal² daily calorie intake is 1300,

and for 5¹3² it¹s 1400.

> > And that¹s ad-lib.

> >

> > If I recall correctly, you consume 1500-

1700 calories per day, though I do not

> > remember your height.

> >

> >

> >

> > Micky.

>

>

>

__________________________________________________________________________

Encontre sempre uma linha desocupada com o Discador BOL!

http://sac.bol.com.br/discador.html

Ainda não tem AcessoBOL? Assine já! http://sac.bol.com.br

[Guest guest]

at maturity rather than earlier). Some of the cr socie

ty members are suggesting quite the reverse idea. Their

approach is, essentially " no pain, no gain. " Or, if you

're not restricting calories to an extreme degree, it doe

sn't work. I believe this is completely wrong. I beli

eve that Walford's original thesis was correct, that is,

proceed slowly and minimize discomfort, as well as the

resulting stress adapting mechanisms that harm the body w

hen continued for long perioeds.. There is, of course,

no proof that either approach is correct at this time.

IMO, you can go fast in the begining but after esgotate

*all fat* in you body you should increase your caloric

intake. The same is true if you BMI falls below 17.5.

My guess is:

If you are *SO MUCH* OVERWEIGHTED go fast and

take multivitamin tablets. After loosing weight go

slow (increase Caloric intake) otherwise you will

SHOCK your body...

Cheers

GAndhi.

__________________________________________________________________________

Encontre sempre uma linha desocupada com o Discador BOL!

http://sac.bol.com.br/discador.html

Ainda não tem AcessoBOL? Assine já! http://sac.bol.com.br

[Guest guest]

CR-rats loose (lose?) “vital”

tissue and live longer healthier than the more “vital” rats. I really

don’t see your point.

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

From: ronaldo.luiz.alonso

[mailto:ronaldo.luiz.alonso@...]

Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002

11:04 AM

Subject: RE: [ ]

obsessive/extreme CRON

> The reason I gave you " stats " was

because I wanted to g

ive context to your claim about extremists. And

the conte

xt is that your are on the other end of the CR

spectrum f

rom those extremists, IMO. I did not try to make

any judg

ment; just give context.

>

An excelent analisis. The *real*

experiment was not

done with humans. To determine the real

ad-libitum

put humans in a cage and give they

fruits, vegetables and whatever they want,

count calories and calculte the mean.

Create a control group of humans eating 10%

to

15% less. Was this experiments done with

humans? NO!

So we

*** DON'T KNOW THE CALORIC VALUE OF

MAXIMUM LIFESPAN IN

HUMANS ****.

What is extremism then is almost impossible

to define.

I think that eating less then the MR is bad

because you

will loose vital tissue and *short* your life.

Cheers

Gandhi.

>

>

> Micky.

>

>

>

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

> From: Francesca Skelton

[mailto:fskelton@...]

> Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 11:12 AM

>

> Subject: Re: [ ]

obsessive/extreme CRON

>

>

>

>

> Micky: my ad lib was about 2000 cal a

day . I've gone

from a high of about

> 138 lbs to 110 and my blood work etc are all

indicitive

of being on CR.

> True that i'm on moderate CR but I'm no

spring chicken

and any more

> restriction might be unhealthy.

>

> on 11/13/2002 1:54 PM, Micky Snir at

mickys@...

rosoft.com wrote:

>

> > Right, there are all frequencies of the

spectrum. Som

e people indeed seem to

> > go over the edge, while others are not

even on calori

e-restriction; in fact,

> > on calorie enhancement.

> >

> > For example, using the 2nd hit in google

searching fo

r ³recommended calorie

> > height², I got http://www.sugarfree-

india.com/healthy_life.asp (other sites

> > seem to range between 1100 to 1500

Kcal/Day), which s

ays that for females of

> > height 5¹0² the ³ideal² daily calorie

intake is 1300,

and for 5¹3² it¹s 1400.

> > And that¹s ad-lib.

> >

> > If I recall correctly, you consume 1500-

1700 calories per day, though I do not

> > remember your height.

> >

> >

> >

> > Micky.

>

>

>

__________________________________________________________________________

Encontre sempre uma linha desocupada com o

Discador BOL!

http://sac.bol.com.br/discador.html

Ainda não tem AcessoBOL? Assine já! http://sac.bol.com.br

To

unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

-unsubscribeegroups

Your use of

is subject to the

Terms of Service.

[Guest guest]

Indeed it is very hard to determine a good calorie level that will

give one some but not too much restriction. 1200 calories is usually

considered by most as a weight loss diet and many females can go on

such diets to lose weight. However I'm not losing any more weight on

it (nor am I gaining). Rather frustrating :|. Probably I should cut

calories more.

I'm 5'3' or so and 100 pounds.

>

> The reason I gave you " stats " was because I wanted to give context

to your claim about extremists. And the context is that your are on

the other end of the CR spectrum from those extremists, IMO. I did

not try to make any judgment; just give context.

>