Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Alice: where did you get this idea from? It's not correct. If you eat say 1800 cal ad lib and cut this to 1500 on CRON, you would be about 30% restricted. 65% restricted would be starvation and malnutrition as you would never be able to get enough nutrients. Walford recommends that nobody go below 1000 cal a day btw. on 8/9/2003 2:23 PM, Alice Liddell at louse_liddell@... wrote: > I get confused about the " eat 65% of what a person would eat > unrestricted " . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 9, 2003 Report Share Posted August 9, 2003 Ok. But where did you get the figure of eating 35% less??? Walford recommends starting much more conservatively. And so do we on this list. Start slow with about 10% restriction and see what happens. Just change to healthier foods and cut out the junk. Check our " CRON Made Easy " file and start there. Don't worry so much about the weight loss. It's not really about weight loss - the weight is just a side effect of CRON The weight will come off pretty naturally if you follow the guidelines of eating healthier. BTW it sounds like you won't be losing that much anyway - probably only about 10 pounds. If you're only 22, there's certainly no need to rush it. It will happen grdually (the best way) if you change your diet habits. on 8/9/2003 2:46 PM, Alice Liddell at louse_liddell@... wrote: > " eat 65% of what a person would eat unresticted " that would mean > eating 35% less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2003 Report Share Posted August 10, 2003 > If you eat say 1800 cal ad lib and cut this to 1500 on CRON, you would be > about 30% restricted. 65% restricted would be starvation and malnutrition Yes. This is right. CR should be applied slowly in order to work. Experiments in adult animals says that when CR65 is aplied from one day to the other, without an adaptation period, the animals don't live neither as long as the AL does !!!!!!! ... So ... be careful. Otherwise beyond being hungry you will short your life Consult your phisician > as you would never be able to get enough nutrients. Walford recommends that > nobody go below 1000 cal a day btw. This value (1000 kcal) is for a very small young lady (child lady) with a very small weight This is *not* the case of most men in this group. So we mans will not live up to 150 !! . I weight 124 and my BMR is 1440-1500. This tells to me that if I mantain myself in this range (CR50) I could reach 40% more life. Translating in real terms: 100 + 0.4*100 = 140 years (* IF* I'll be very lucky). A very small child woman could go below that and eat 1100 kcal day wich is CR65<CR50 and thus reach 50% more life reaching the incredible value 100 + 0.5*100 = 150. Assuming optimal nutrition of course (which is *impossible* to obtain only from 1100 kcal/day!!). ** ALL ** of this is theoritical. No such experiments were done with humans. I believe they never will because of ethical questions. But most of we are here to increase heath and life, not as a lab humans Excluding mylsef and haha... other excentrics -- Gandhi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.