Alison Abbott in her article “Reduced-calorie diet shows
signs of slowing ageing in people” (Abbott, A.) describes a part of a trial
called the Comprehensive Assessment of Long term Effects of Reducing Intake of
Energy (CALERIE). The 53 participants in the study were not obese, and they were split into
a group that ate 15% less calories than normal, and a control group that ate a
normal number of calories. The study lasted for two years. They measured the
oxygen intake, carbon dioxide exhaled, and the nitrogen content of urine to
come to their conclusions. The calorie restricting group could better use
calories then the control group when they were asleep. Abbott talks about how mitochondria
is important in the life span of things like worms and flies. We learned in our
biology class that the mitochondria is an organelle in a cell that is responsible
for the production of atp that provides the energy necessary to power the cell,
and my guess is that lowering calorie intake will somehow change how the mitochondria
operates. Abbott also talks about how there is a study where calorie restricted
mice live %65 longer than normal mice.
I think the CALERIE study is interesting because it at least shows that there are differences in humans that are calorie restricting compared to normal people, but it doesn’t show that calorie restriction increases life span in the same way that we have been able to show in mice. To show that calorie restriction increases life span in humans, we would need a much longer study then 2 years and/or many more people in order to compensate for human’s long lifespan. This is probably why Abbott named the article “Reduced-calorie diet shows signs of slowing ageing in people” instead of “Reduced-calorie diet slows ageing in people”.
I think the CALERIE study is interesting because it at least shows that there are differences in humans that are calorie restricting compared to normal people, but it doesn’t show that calorie restriction increases life span in the same way that we have been able to show in mice. To show that calorie restriction increases life span in humans, we would need a much longer study then 2 years and/or many more people in order to compensate for human’s long lifespan. This is probably why Abbott named the article “Reduced-calorie diet shows signs of slowing ageing in people” instead of “Reduced-calorie diet slows ageing in people”.
Abbott, A. (2018, March 22). Reduced-calorie diet shows
signs of slowing ageing in people.
Retrieved
March 27, 2018, from https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-03431-x
My question is, is having a low calorie diet going to be the ideal lifestyle for everyone? Yes we know that reducing calorie intake is important for those trying to lose weight and eat healthy, but what about those people that live a very active lifestyle? We have learned that the more active you are the more calories you need for sustained energy so people who are constantly increases the resistance in their workouts are also constantly increasing their calories. Is this increased calorie diet going to have negative affects on their health in the long run? Maybe this question has already been researched but as for me, I don't know the answer.
ReplyDelete-DA
Calories are a funny thing that have been labeled as something they are not. Right now most of society thinks about calories as all being the same and also being the sole culprit for weight loss or gain and ultimately the reason you are healthy or not. This couldn't be further from the truth according to the Harvard Medical School which published an article talking about how calories are completely different from each other depending on the food and how the real component of food you need to watch is the carbohydrates. Carbohydrates are measured using the glycemic index which measures how they affect glucose levels in the blood. If the carbohydrate has a low glycemic index then it raises your glucose levels slowly thus increasing your insulin levels slowly which allows your body to deal with it instead of being shocked by it and eventually developing diabetes. So to answer your question: the idea of counting calories is a bad way to gauge health. Therefore, I don't think a low calorie diet is ideal for everyone but instead a diet heavy with low glycemic foods is. IR
Deletehttps://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/theres-no-sugar-coating-it-all-calories-are-not-created-equal-2016110410602
Tne answer to your question is yes. A low calorie intake has many benefits that are not limited to losing weight and living longer. A study done by Molecular Aspects of Medicine in June 2011 showed that there were many benifits that included "Longer lives, Higher levels of physical activity, Lower rates of cancer, Less age-related degeneration of the brain and Improved reproductive performance." Keep in mind that there were moderations in their diet, so they were not always restricted to a low calorie diet but going on one every once in awhile showed these benifits. The reason we increase our calories is because we do need that extra production of ATP. If you are exercising properly and you have a balanced diet there is no need to have "consequences" per say because your body will be using that extra energy while you are exercising more.
Delete-Alexis Acosta
https://www.everydayhealth.com/columns/jared-bunch-rhythm-of-life/reducing-daily-calories-is-a-great-way-to-improve-your-quality-of-life/
DA asked a valid question regarding calorie restriction that I think is important to address. One of the weaknesses of pushing for calorie-restriction diets is that it reinforces the internal rhetoric of eating disorder issues. One of the classes I've had to take at UVU had us read a book called Total Fitness and Wellness by Scott K. Powers from Pearson. In the book, it states, "...[I]f you try to lose weight too quickly by overly restricting calories, your body perceives this as starvation and your metabolism will slow to conserve energy (the opposite of the effect you want.)" It also states that the number of calories you consume is in a balance in conjunction with the number of calories that you expend. It has been proven time and time again that a regular exercise program with an appropriate level of calories to accommodate it not only leads to healthy bodies, but significantly dams back the aging process, to the point where 70 and 80 year olds who lead an active physical lifestyle are similar in strength and energy to sedentary 40 year olds, something also heavily covered in the book. Increased calories in a direct balance to accommodate a more physical lifestyle has been proven to actually improve health, not negatively affect it. - JP
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteYes, to an extent. We have to remeber that calories may seem like a specific measurement but in reality they are all relative. A food may have high calories but not necessarily have the nutrients and macromolecules needed for your body. It is important to note that in studies with primates their calorie intake is adjusted week to week based on whether they put on weight or lost weight the week before. "The rapid rate at which an athlete burns calories is not associated with either an increase or decrease in life span. There is, in fact, a theory that animals have only a fixed number of calories to burn during their life, but it is pure speculation, intended to explain why calorie-restricted rodents live longer."
DeleteIf a diet of caloric restriction can extend the life span of laboratory rats, then does the lifestyle of an athlete, who burns calories at a rapid rate, hasten the aging process?. Scientific American. Retrieved From: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/if-a-diet-of-caloricrestr/
-Brooke Legeman
This is interesting. My question is how can we use this on a larger scale? Can we start making foods that have less calories in them but still give us that consumer interest? What are some small factors that also might have played a role in this correlation? Do you feel that this was a accurate correlation? What do you think was wrong with this study? What do you think they did well in their methods? I feel that this study needs to be done in a larger scale to be able to change the rule and consumers more; another research to help establish a better diet in our society.
ReplyDelete-Janet Taufa
DA asked "is having a low calorie diet going to be the ideal lifestyle for everyone?". Eating less can be very beneficial, but I love eating food, and can only seem to find the motivation to eat less food when my bank account gets low. IR suggested eating low glycemic index foods instead of less calories, and left a link to a Harvard article by Celia Smoak Spell. In my first read through of the article, I was rather skeptical because the author suggested eating whole foods, and at the same time suggested eating olive oil, which to me seams more like a processed food, then a whole food. I decided to see if there was any evidence for the low glycemic index, and was surprised when I found a study by Scott A Nankervis et al on the NCBI government website. The researchers had two groups with 8 mice each. They fed one of the groups a low glycemic index diet, and they lived on average 106.7 weeks, and the control group lived 95 weeks. This is a 12% longer lifespan, and a P value of 0.00003 (much less then 0.05). I don't want to agree with the Harvard article, but I can't help but concede that there is something to eating low glycemic index foods (assuming it will have similar effects in humans).
ReplyDelete-CS
Spell, C. S. (2016, November 04). There's no sugar-coating it: All calories are not created equal. Retrieved from https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/theres-no-sugar-coating-it-all-calories-are-not-created-equal-2016110410602
Nankervis, S. A., Mitchell, J. M., Charchar, F. J., McGlynn, M. A., & Lewandowski, P. A. (2013). Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3922916
I found this post to be very interesting. I think calorie intake is something pretty important that everyone should pay attention to. I feel like our society in America eats way too much. I think we all need to eat more wholesome foods and a better well balanced diet to start. Next is that portion control should be another thing we all implement. We don't need to eat as much as we do. If everyone ate the right portion amount of food and ate the right amount of calories I think we would see a huge improvement in the length of life.
ReplyDeleteTyrel Barney
This is an interesting concept, the ability to slow down aging through limiting calorie consumption. You said in the article that Abbott found that from his two groups (the control, and the calorie limited experimental group) that the test group showed signs of slowed aging. My question for you is while this experiment supported Abbott's hypothesis do you know of any contradicting studies or experiments that showed other individuals/groups where an increase in calorie consumption actually slowed or had no effect on aging? I have this question because I know we are all the same species but I also know that each of us have individual traits and characteristics that might not be represented in this study. - T.D.N.
ReplyDeleteI did a few internet searches and all I could find were more articles, news clips, and tabloid fluff pieces about how cutting calories could slow aging. It doesn't seem like there's any evidence to support the idea of eating more calories to slow aging. But it also seems like there haven't been too many studies into that topic. It'd be interesting to see run our own study about giving a test group of mice more calories than necessary. I think another thing to think about though could be how a diet filled with unnecessary calories could potentially cause other health issues, like for example it might be possible a high calorie diet slows aging, but then causes more health issues and ends up having mice or patients die earlier anyways. Either way it's definitely something that'd be very fun to look into!!
DeleteC H ^^
Delete