112 replies to this topic

[kakker]

I don't want to guess, but after "dabbling in" CR for a while, I've recently started to practice it more seriously. I plan on doing relatively mild CR. I am more interested in increasing my "health span" than anything else. If I live to 80 or 85 in very good health, it will be worth it. If it ends up resulting in much more than that in terms of increased years of life, I figure that will be a bonus.

[kismet]

While in light of the balance of evidence I generally consider much of the criticism that has been raised unjustified sort-of-bickering, now, there may be some more serious objections to CR. Should be interesting to follow up. Maybe the critics will be vindicated after all. (not that I am myself totally uncritical, as I'm indeed waiting for more definitive data like the conclusion of the primate experiments & do not consider CR worth the risk and trouble at my very young age)

(yes, I'm too lazy to open a new thread...)

Edited by kismet, 13 December 2009 - 11:16 PM.

[Brain_Ischemia]

As a CRON practitioner myself, I'd say that versus a non-CR individual who ALSO maintains meticulously healthy lifestyle habits and diet, the best case scenario is ~15+ years added with CR.

Versus the generally sickly, obese, sedentary, bad-carb, high-sugar, drug-using, unhygienic, carelessly pollution-exposed, carelessly carcinogen-exposed general population (at least in the USA) who live the last couple decades of their lives sickly and disease-ridden, I'd say it's an extra 20-30 solidly healthy years or so.

Edited by Xanthus, 02 January 2010 - 07:11 PM.

[atp]

my estimations:

cr -> 10 years
daily moderate exercise -> 5 years
supplementaion -> 5 years

20 years of extra life over median life expectancy should be possible.

median life expectancy within 40 years: at least 80+4*3 = 92 due to medical progress.

thus a human which is 40 years old today and follows a very disciplined lifestyle from now on, has a very good chance to become 110 years old.

Edited by atp, 09 January 2010 - 01:52 AM.

[Saintor]

I expect more to have an healthier last 5 years than additional years.

[s123]

If CR lengthens the lifespan by 15 years then it would definitely be worth to do it and I believe it will be more, so that's why I do CR. How much more is a difficult question. It depends of course on how early you start and the level of CR that you do. 20 to 30 years, like most people here think, seems to be a reasonable good prediction.

I expect more to have an healthier last 5 years than additional years.

Like Matt already said, even eating a healthy diet would add about ten years so CR will definitely do better.

do not consider CR worth the risk

What are the risks of CR? Not many, at least not many that are worth consideration. There was a paper [1] that listed the risks of CR but 90% or so of them where ridiculous like an increased risk of freezing or starving to death. Yes, CR is not recommended for polar or discovery travelers.

[1] Amie J. Dirksa and Christiaan Leeuwenburgh. Caloric restriction in humans: potential pitfalls and health concerns. Mechanisms of Ageing and Development, 2006, 127(1): 1-7.

Edited by s123, 09 January 2010 - 07:33 PM.

[warner]

You can judge yourself whether I looked younger than my chronological age at different points in my life by seeing my photos here http://www.matthewla...m/agingmatt.htm -- Click on them to enlarge

Hi Matt. Not sure I would put much stock in appearance.

Looking at your Blood Results, however, being on the low metabolic end of the scale puts you at greater risk of osteoporosis, glaucoma (from low BP), hormone deficiencies, etc.

To catch such stuff (i.e., don't assume you're smart enough about nutrition to prevent it), I would (eventually) get baseline measurements of your bone density (such as with a DEXA scan), soft tissue calcium deposition (such as with a heart scan to get a calcium score), testosterone level (be concerned with values on the low end of "normal" 95% range), and keep an eye out for visual field losses (at least create an expanded Amsler grid on your computer, and view it with one eye at a time to look for distortions in your visual field). You're probably fine now, but any of those could really nail you if problems are left undetected for many years. And don't let an MD tell you any of this stuff is so unlikely as to not be worth looking for (i.e., better to measure than guess). (And, of course, this stuff is in addition to everything else you're already looking out for. If your age, I'd also be getting a skin fluorescence measurement of AGEs every few years to check that my diet was actually keeping these lower than average as the years passed - much better than relying on "appearance".)

Given such considerations, I suspect that many youngish people on CR today will reach an age at which the risks outweigh the advantages, and have to revert to a more normal calorie intake. (Of course, that age might be 100. )

Edited by warner, 09 January 2010 - 07:32 PM.

[Matt]

Hey Warner. Check out my blog, I made some changes. http://www.matts-cr.blogspot.com :-)

[warner]

Hey Warner. Check out my blog, I made some changes. http://www.matts-cr.blogspot.com :-)

Hey Matt. Am busy reading your updated blog. Will comment later.

Of the things I mentioned above, I guess measuring your testosterone would be high on my list. I can explain more about that if you're interested. Not expecting a problem, but you may be able to project some things. Catch you later.

[Matt]

I want my testosterone to be lower... thats what CR does right?

[pmcglothin]

There are only claims of people doing it for decades, one guy named apparently started CR in his 50-60s and lived to 103-104 years (dont remember).

The guy to whom you refer is Ralph, our dear friend and mentor. We profiled him here: http://www.livingthe...meet-ralph.aspx.

He was a natural --wonderful to be around. When he died, the whole town mourned.

Paul

Edited by Michael, 23 October 2010 - 12:09 AM.
Clean up quote

[warner]

I want my testosterone to be lower... thats what CR does right?

Lower testosterone (T) generally results in reduced life expectancy.
Testosterone and ill-health in aging men
Might testosterone actually reduce mortality?

Perhaps you could explain first what makes you think more (or normal) T is bad (perhaps I've missed something known to the CR community) so I can deal with that as part of a broader discussion. This could be interesting, since sex hormones play such a large role in aging.

[Logan]

I want my testosterone to be lower... thats what CR does right?

Lower testosterone (T) generally results in reduced life expectancy.
Testosterone and ill-health in aging men
Might testosterone actually reduce mortality?

Perhaps you could explain first what makes you think more (or normal) T is bad (perhaps I've missed something known to the CR community) so I can deal with that as part of a broader discussion. This could be interesting, since sex hormones play such a large role in aging.

Any response to this??? Matt are you out there?

[MV004]

I want my testosterone to be lower...

Why?

Please advise.

[hypnotoad]

Yea lower T levels = muscle loss, depression, lethargy, lower sex drive, impotence, etc. All the bad things!

You want to restore test levels ( and GH) as you age, not reduce them!!

[pmcglothin]

[quote name='Shonghow' date='May 10 2008, 10:14 AM' post='238239']
I can find much information about Ralph and his cr practice on the page.


Thanks for your interest in this extraordinary calorie restrictor, Victor. I learned so much from him.

Quite a bit about Ralph including his views about CR and key questions about his CR approach is included under " Long Healthy Life" on the left Nav. This content is accessible to Longevity Level members. Membership supports human CR research. You can find out more about that by accessing the blog post: http://www.livingthe...rch_Update.aspx.

I wish you an extraordinary day.

Paul

[N.T.M.]

I'm gonna be starting CR soon. Do you believe that 21 is the ideal age to start? I'm 20 now.

Since i'm a chronic optimist i say that CR will add 20 to 30 years to human lifespan, if started earlier (at 20-40 y.o.) and done properly, with supplementation.

Supplementation becomes an even more pressing imperative with CR because you derive even less nutrition from food (not to reflect poorly on the food, but just volume restriction).

[unglued]

Just saw this topic and wanted to comment on this link:

Less than 5 years for CR?

I thought this was an interesting article

Healthy living 'can add 14 years'
http://news.bbc.co.u...lth/7174665.stm

Remember, there's a difference between "a 60-year-old person with a score of zero [having] the same risk of dying as a 74-year-old with the full four points" as the text of the article says, and an 99-year-old person with a score of four having the same risk of dying as an 85-year-old with zero points, which is how one might want to interpret the title of the article in the context of this topic. The topic asks how long humans can live, not how much they can reduce their changes of dying at 60.

[Cameron]

I want my testosterone to be lower... thats what CR does right?

Lower testosterone (T) generally results in reduced life expectancy.
Testosterone and ill-health in aging men
Might testosterone actually reduce mortality?

Perhaps you could explain first what makes you think more (or normal) T is bad (perhaps I've missed something known to the CR community) so I can deal with that as part of a broader discussion. This could be interesting, since sex hormones play such a large role in aging.

I'd heard one of the benefits of eunuchs was increased lifespan.(some say even up to 15 years...)I've not looked more into it, but either the claims are questionable or there's something to it.

Edited by Cameron, 16 June 2010 - 10:52 PM.

[Cameron]

I thought the Okinawans settled this for us.

80 (west)
110 (okinawan)

20-30 extra years

okinawans are small, so their cr is mild cr.

As for me, I believe about 30-40 year over the average so it should take you to 120. There are supplements and drugs that can reverse bone loss and lead to increased bone density. Assuming no other serious long term side effects occur, it could be very good in the end. An interesting point is the suggestion that super-centenarians are immortal, in the sense that mortality no longer increases, IIRC it was about 50% probability of death per year. One'd have to wonder just what the mortality rate of a cr-practitioner would be at that age, and if it remains constant(there are likely old individuals with mutations bestowing cr upon them, is their per year mortality lower like say 25%?), we'll find out soon in the coming decades as a substantial population of supercentenarians comes into being and is studied.

Another interesting possibility, is that it might bring the final immortal per year mortality down to 5-10%. While obviously unacceptable, it would be far better than 50%(I've gone up to 20 cycles in a row gambling for a 5% win without luck from time to time.). We've to remember that it is said that there are negligible senescence species with closely related aging species, so the changes necessary for virtual biological immortality may not be that big. Humans have already had a substantial amount of changes towards extended lifespan, the question is how big is the remaining gap? And how much would CR go across the gap, if it goes across at all, is it enough to bridge the gap and provide low-enough non-increasing per year mortality? IOW, if it is true that per year mortality remains constant at extreme ages, can CR have any effect in this final figure, this final rate of mortality?

Personally, CR-mimetics seem like a surer road. And there are likely compounds or combinations of compounds that might alter gene expression in such a way as to push things in a favorable direction. Maybe enough to reduce the gap or cross the gap from the aging to the ageless(seeing as stated, I've heard there are closely related species where one ages and the other does not.).

[The Immortalist]

This study below showed that CR Monkeys gained 7 years of extra life which is equivalent to humans gaining 21 years of extra life.

Mortality and Morbidity in Laboratory-maintained Rhesus Monkeys and Effects of Long-term Dietary Restriction
Noni L. Bodkin1, Theresa M. Alexander1, Heidi K. Ortmeyer1, Elizabeth Johnson2 and Barbara C. Hansen1

And that's just for the average person. Think how much more life a person who is able to live to 115 without CR is able to have if that same person started CR when he/she was 20. Would Jeanne Calment have been able to live to over 150 if she started severe CR when she was a child?

Edited by Michael, 23 October 2010 - 12:02 AM.
Trim quotes

[shadowhawk]

Max about 120 years. I wonder how many super centarians were CR

[Nootropic Cat]

In the book THE CR WAY, the authors indicate that supplements, which contain nicotinamide, inhibit SIRT1.

Does this apply to all niacin-type compounds? Is taking picamilon problematic?

[Michael]

In the book THE CR WAY, the authors indicate that supplements, which contain nicotinamide, inhibit SIRT1.

I wouldn't worry about taking nicotinamide (niacinamide) on CR.

As a rule, I avoid supplements. I get more than enough vitamins and minerals from what I eat.

As a rule, entirely sensible, provided you're using nutritional software to actually know that such is the case.

[AgeVivo]

Max about 120 years. I wonder how many super centarians were CR

top long lived persons drank, smoke, skipped salads and veggies to go directly to desserts... See http://www.demogr.mp...drm/007/3-4.pdf , rather astonishing

[captainbeefheart]

I am quite amazed by the amount of people that believe it will add 15-30 years, well are convinced at this stage it will, never know it might but doesn't seem worth the sacrice when it probably only actually translates to a couple of extra years for a shit load of work. I understand why people want to believe it, a form of controling ones destiny a little. But I'm of the mind it won't matter that much what I do (though I certainly do need to improve my lifestyle and reduce my stress levels a bit!) without lovely science helping us! People that have reached super centarian ages have done so because there built like brick shit houses and can pretty much do as they please, i.e. very lucky! Not that I don't believe excerise, eating sensiably and reducing ones stress won't add a few years to your life I just don't think CR is a silver bullet...

[steampoweredgod]

I am quite amazed by the amount of people that believe it will add 15-30 years, well are convinced at this stage it will, never know it might but doesn't seem worth the sacrice when it probably only actually translates to a couple of extra years for a shit load of work. I understand why people want to believe it, a form of controling ones destiny a little. But I'm of the mind it won't matter that much what I do (though I certainly do need to improve my lifestyle and reduce my stress levels a bit!) without lovely science helping us! People that have reached super centarian ages have done so because there built like brick shit houses and can pretty much do as they please, i.e. very lucky! Not that I don't believe excerise, eating sensiably and reducing ones stress won't add a few years to your life I just don't think CR is a silver bullet...

seventh day adventists men get about 10 years added lifespan merely by living sensibly. Merely adding nuts to the diet gains nearly 3 years.

Calorie Restriction being an extremely powerful intervention with benefits across a wide variety of species should at the least be expected to offer similar benefits... but there is reason to expect more FAR MORE

A study of children whose parents lived 100 years or more is helping researchers understand contributors to longevity as well as separate environmental from genetic factors. And it has already produced an important finding: The kids have a strikingly lower incidence of heart disease, but not of many others...-link



Surprisingly there were some areas normally related to aging were the children did not fare any better than the children of people who died in their 70's. There were no significant differences between the children and the controls in the study in the in the prevalence of:

• Cancer
• Stroke
• Osteoporosis
• Cataracts
• Glaucoma
• Macular degeneration
• Depression
• Parkinson's disease
• Thyroid disease

-link

Calorie Restriction improves blood parameters related to cardiovascular risk towards peak human, iirc, so it should at the least be quite similar to the benefit conferred by genetics to centenarian relatives.

With newer things like modulation of protein intake which should reduce igf1 and cancer risk, there will be further benefits.

I've heard the following

There are few guarantees in life, but having a blood cholesterol level of less than 150 is probably the closest you can get to a guarantee that you will not be troubled with heart disease. One of the more interesting findings from the Framingham Heart Study is that no one in the history of the study has ever had a heart attack whose blood cholesterol was less than 150.

This number is attainable via CR, mean CR society member Total cholesterol was 157 ± 38 in a study.

[steampoweredgod]

BTW, anyone know if CR affects the late-term mortality plateau observed across species? I know it reverses several age related gene expression changes, so it might influence this late-term plateau. What's been observed in animal studies?

Human late-term immortal phase is said to be at 50% risk of death per year. If CR can affect the immortal phase in animals it might also do so in humans as well.

[scottknl]

Just from looking at the mortality curves in animal studies, the lines look parallel and the same shape, just moved out to the right towards older age. So I think the answer to your question will likely be no change observed in the late-term mortality plateau.

I guess that means that the tail end of the mortality curve would be around 110 - 120 for human CR followers that start pretty early like Matt or Johann. Since the wisdom needed to start CR generally arrives later in mid-life, you can expect that to be 100-110 instead. Likely we will never see this play out anyway since stem cell technologies and signaling mechanism research will eventually render CRON, paleo diet and all the rest obsolete.

[Luminosity]

Since the modern diet is from depleted soils, travels a long way, may be irradiated, pasteurized, etc. and includes refined foods, someone who tried to restrict calories might very well be deficient in nutrients.