Do we actually know whether these effects are triggered by calorie restriction in general, as opposed to restriction of some specific nutrient that's happening incidentally to the calorie restriction protocol? I seem to remember some reports from ~10 years ago that protein restriction, and possibly even restriction of specific amino acids, has shown similar effects.
New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
11–20 of 102 posts
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#12Somewhat tangential. I often see people treating different diet restrictions that make you healthier as if they were competitors. Low carb/high fat, versus low calories, versus intermittent fasting. They imagine the different orientations as startups in a winner-takes-all market and pump their preferred one against the others. I think a better way to frame a healthy diet is that you should aim to follow all three and…
I agree, there's different strategies for different scenarios. However your 3 scenarios don't take into account highly active people who are in shape. When losing fat, I ate less carbs, and did intermittent fasting. But once I had built muscle and kept exercising I need those carbs as short-term energy.
Carbs are fuel, if you're not exercising you don't need much fuel, and can probably run on your fat reserves. I'm on a high carb, high protein, low fat diet now, which wouldn't be viable if I stop exercising.
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#13“This gives us targets that we may eventually be able to act on with drugs to treat aging in humans.”
Oy. Why do we do this nonsense? Why can't it just be research that helps us better understand how to eat healthy?
/pet peeve
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have any formal education on this topic, but I did lose a bunch of weight and keep it off, partly thru intermittent fasting, so I can offer anecdotal evidence. For me, simply, it's easier to eat less calories if I intermittent fast. For some reason, if I don't eat breakfast or lunch, I find my hunger is actually sometimes lower , and I don't need to eat a bigger dinner to make up for it. Certainly eating low-…
Eat less & eat often - doctor recommended me once. And its works fine. He also said fasting and "don't eat breakfast or lunch" are destructive, regular feeding matters.
That's seems like outdated info.
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#15[deleted]
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have any formal education on this topic, but I did lose a bunch of weight and keep it off, partly thru intermittent fasting, so I can offer anecdotal evidence. For me, simply, it's easier to eat less calories if I intermittent fast. For some reason, if I don't eat breakfast or lunch, I find my hunger is actually sometimes lower , and I don't need to eat a bigger dinner to make up for it. Certainly eating low-…
Eat less & eat often - doctor recommended me once. And its works fine. He also said fasting and "don't eat breakfast or lunch" are destructive, regular feeding matters.
I think a lot things have changed since that recommendation. And maybe your doctor has not kept themselves up to date with the new research. I am particularly referring to "don't eat breakfast is destructive".
IMO, nutrition is such a complex topic and I feel like we have only begun to start peeling the layers.
As an aside, did you know that the saying "Breakfast is the most important meal of the day" was invented by the founders of the Kellogs cereal?
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#17I've done strict calorie tracking for restriction, keto as well as IF.
The best I've ever felt was keto, the easiest for me to adhere to was calorie tracking. It's marginally harder if you eat out a lot, but if you cook for yourself and can throw everything on a food scale for a week or so until you get an idea of what's servings of your most commonly-eaten foods looks like, tracking calories made losing weight for me and reducing my daily eating almost comically easy. There's a switch in my brain somewhere that works really well when I have to enter the calories of everything that goes in my mouth into an app....suddenly that cookie or those chips that were so hard to resist aren't a thing for me at all....my brain manages to yell "200 calories for THAT?? Nope." I found myself eating more at the end of the day just to hit my total calories and macros.
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#18Somewhat tangential. I often see people treating different diet restrictions that make you healthier as if they were competitors. Low carb/high fat, versus low calories, versus intermittent fasting. They imagine the different orientations as startups in a winner-takes-all market and pump their preferred one against the others. I think a better way to frame a healthy diet is that you should aim to follow all three and…
As with methods for sharpening knives, the best diet is the one you actually do
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#19“This gives us targets that we may eventually be able to act on with drugs to treat aging in humans.” Oy. Why do we do this nonsense? Why can't it just be research that helps us better understand how to eat healthy? /pet peeve
Why would you do something hard if we could make it easy?
Re: New report on the cellular effects of a calorie-restricted diet in rats
#20“This gives us targets that we may eventually be able to act on with drugs to treat aging in humans.” Oy. Why do we do this nonsense? Why can't it just be research that helps us better understand how to eat healthy? /pet peeve
Why would you do something hard if we could make it easy?
I don't think the motive is to make it easy. I think the motive is to make it highly profitable for someone.