I started at 11.8 and was at a 5.6 within 4 1/2 months. Since that time, I'm in the range of 4.9 to 5.3 depending on the time of year and my activity level.

Just had to add this link and quote as well:
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=278716

I know one person's experience doesn't prove or disprove a theory, but for those that were saying they don't recall ever seeing really good cholesterol numbers from anyone obese, this is a cut & paste from my journal in Sept 2004, I was still about 195-200 lbs at the time, and per BMI, still obese.



I think those numbers are considered decent. I had them redone in Jan 2005, and while the cholesterol number went up slightly, it was because the HDL rose, my LDL on my last results was even lower, though I think my triglycerides rose to about to about 70 (US measure).

What gets me is that we put such a premium on these numbers and they don't always mean anything. People with low cholesterol get heart disease and people with high cholesterol don't always get heart disease. There is a correlation, yes, but not necessarily a cause & effect relationship between high cholesterol and developing heart disease. I'm not saying you shouldn't be more careful if your cholesterol numbers are poor, but having high cholesterol numbers is not a death sentence. Nor are good cholesterol numbers a get out of jail free card.

Val

I can do better than that. At 350 lbs my cholesterol numbers were 146!! my LDL was 42, HDL was 101 and I don't remember the rest. I do remember that my doctor called me up to say that those were the best numbers, in fact my whole panel, i.e. heart, liver, thyroid, insulin, had the best results that she'd ever seen in her practice and she had athletes in her practice.

So you can be healthy and obese, not that I'm advocating obesity.

I think the "healthy and obese" thing is only true if you can do the things a thin person can do. Here's an example: my husband, who is obese, usually has normal bloodwork, normal BP, normal cholesterol (not outstanding, probably, but within normal limits). However, he gets winded very easily, doesn't fit into my small car, would probably fit very tightly into a plane seat -- and annoy the person next to him -- and can't easily chase after kids without panting and sweating profusely. On paper, other than his weight, he's healthy. But you would never call him a healthy person overall. That's why, in my earlier post, I pointed out that the labwork is almost secondary to overall health and activities of daily life. I've been obese, I've been "moderately overweight" and I've been normal weight. Normal is, by far, the best in every possible way. I won't go into the "underweight" category, but for cosmetic reasons, I do plan to get down to my ideal body weight. Then I'll reassess. If, at that time, I truly feel that things were better at a higher BMI, I'll gain back some weight. But, frankly, I would be stunned if that were true.

I went jogging today for the first time in 4 or 5 months. The last time I ran, I was 30 pounds heavier than today. At that time, I was jogging 4 times a week, and was racing regularly. Even so, I got less winded today, simply because there was less of me to move around! For aerobic activities, thinner is definitely better. Put simply, I LOVE being thin, and I can't imagine willingly going back to a heavier weight. Life is just too damned great now!

Happy New Year, all!

Not true at all. Say you had 2 groups and the controls had just as good nutrition as the CR'd subjects, but consumed considerably more calories. While both groups would be getting excellent nutrition, you would only see MAXIMUM life extension in the CR'd subjects, the controls would only have slightly longer average life spans without breaking maximum.

So if we were to translate that over to humans it would be saying that Healthy eating, mostly vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meat etc.. would only increase the average life span of a population to 90 if they consumed a high amount of calories of around 2500. But feeding the same food to the CR'd subjects and only giving them 1500 calories, you would be getting an extension of maximum life span AND average life span, average being around 115 and maximum of say 130-140, theoretically (not that I believe this extension is possible even with CR)

You can see the survival curves here



Aslong as you give CR subjects good nutrition and they are not deficient, it's all about calories, and it's not even about ratios of C:F:P either, even a HIGH carb diet produces the same benifits aslong as the calories are kept low.

Do you have a link to this study? So far the only one you've posted involving humans compared the worst possible diet against CR.



Whoa, to fit the maximum lifespan curve you gave in the chart, that 2500 calorie diet would need to be cut by 65%, or to 1125 calories daily. You're also missing that in the studies with animals while they may have been getting 'optimal' vitamins and minerals, the delivery system (ie the food that contained them) was less than optimal; many animals are no more meant to eat a grain based diet than we are. The CR group simply got less of it.

I'd also like to pose Caveman's original question; assuming that it's possible, what benefit is it to humans as a species to live longer than we currently do through CR given that CR also tends to reduce fertility and has anyone thought through the socioeconomic impact of having humans living 30 years longer on average? I don't know about you, but the thought of actively working a full time job into my 80's or mid-90's, physically robust or not, doesn't really appeal to me.

I think the benifit for the species would not come from increasing the reproductive years. I think that the advantage for the species would come from having older folks to help around on the home front.

Back in "caveman days" or even a couple hundred years ago and still in some cultures today, the older generation lives with (or close by) their adult offspring. The advantege is not a genetic investment, but an added investment of time. With more time, the grandmothers could assist with child rearing while the youger generation are out gathering. Advanced age also ensures the ability to TEACH the future generation how to gather, what foods are safe, how to make various pottery baskets and goods. All that gathering and making goods does not leave much time to do these things plus raise kids.

For the men, there would be a benifit to have grandpa(s) to stay close to home while the young warrior men were out hunting and fighting rival clans. They would have been the ones responsable for teaching the young boys how to hunt the close by small game and how to to "man things" such as make weapons and other man stuff. The older men would also be there to protect the females while the younger men were out. I also think the men would have been involved with passing on the history of the people, ever notice how elderly men love to tell stories??

There are lots advantages that living longer gould give to the species. Perhaps the greatest advantage of all would be their wisdom.....

Anyways, these are just my thoughts. I don't think that living longer would be an advantage in the reproductive years. I think that the advantage for the species would come from making the species more succesful as a whole. Ensuring future generations survival and passing down of skills is an asset for generations to come. Older folks are still useful for the species beyond their reproductive years.

Bandito, I can possibly see the benefit to having a larger number of elderly around in caveman days in that many hands make light work, but how does that apply today when families are often spread across the nation? Take my husband's family, for example; he has relatives from the Netherlands to Canada and at least 6 states. Your benefit presumes that family groups all stay in close proximity to one another which seems to be more the exception than the rule these days.
Also, how does adding another 30 years to the average lifespan today help us as a species? We're not talking about living long enough to help with the grandchildren because that already happens for the most part. It seems to me that as we as a culture have begun living longer, the extended family concept has gone right out the window with most grandmas these days taking the attitude of "I did my time raising children, raise your own yourself!" and instead of caring for our elderly in extended family settings, they're sent off to retirement villages and nursing homes to be cared for. Extended family is a great idea, don't get me wrong, but unless an awful lot of people change how they do and view things, I don't see it happening.
There's also the question of how to support yourself financially for an additional 30 years.

What I posted does not really apply to our current society in which we live. Some previous postings left me with the feeling that there is no advantage to living beyond the reproductive years. This may not have been what was intended, but it got me thinking about the advanteges for living longer. I realize that our society is drasticly different today than the times in which I referred to, I just wanted to illustrate why people of advanced age are benificial to the developement of our species. I don't know, maybe I misunderstood the context/meaning of what was origionally said.

As for today, I think the pecieved benifit is up to the induvidual. A longer life through CRON (if it is attainable) provided better health doesn't seem like somthing that would be too harmful to society. I would hope that if a person was planning on living this long that they would be thinking ahead as to how they will pay for their extra years financially. When they drop dead unexpectedly at a ripe old age of 85, the next generation could then benifit from their saved retirement. I believe that this could be the unforseen benifit to society of the CRON lifestyle

Personal benefit aside and from a genetic standpoint, there aren't many benefits once the young have been raised. Now that we have language, both spoken and written, and complex recording devices there is really no need for the 'village elders' to live long to pass on their knowledge to the next generation and tell them stories.
OTOH, from an emotional and relational standpoint, there are lots of advantages to grandparents.
Furthermore, since CRON seems to diminish reproductivity in nearly every animal species, it would seem more of a genetic detriment than benefit to participate in that particular eating style unless reduction of the human population were your goal.

You are quite right that there is no real genetic advantage to living past well beyond reproduction years and this is one of the key arguments against CRON having a significant impact in the longevity of humans who are on CR.

Preliminary data shows that people who do CR will look forward to a life span beyond the average because CR protects from various diseases that kill people later in life. CR protects the whole organism in several which seems to indicate that cronies will maintain good health if they were to stick to the diet. As with any disease, it progresses until it reaches a critical point and damages the organisms functionality and ability to survive even small infections for example. Cron seems to protect all organs from this deterioration, including the brain.

I don't believe in one theory but I see several things contributing to keeping an organism alive. Ageing is not just one thing going on but several which include DNA mutations, Mitochondrial mutations, Oxidative stress and more. Damaging is always occuring but not always at the same rate, that's why we can see some people running a marathon at 90 years old and another 90 year old critically ill with chronic diseases. Chronologically they are the same age but Biologically they are not. Calorie Restriction protects the organism from several types of damage and in the end you end up with less damage so your functionality is that of a much younger person which protects you from the simple things that might kill an old person.

There is a lot of research on PubMed that you can see and there is lots of new work on calorie restriction being published almost on a weekly basis.

We can see that people have managed to live to extreme ages and there do seem to be a genetic factor that contribute to their longevity. Calorie Restriction alters gene expression, 70% of genes that get expressed as an animal gets older either don't get expressed or their level of expression is markedly reduced. The same is probably true for humans.

The is some evidence of CR in Okinawans as I explained earlier, they generally live past 100, did anyone see that video I posted on here earlier? They are on CR diets, not as good nutrition as some people have here but theirs is fairly good.

I don't think anyone doubts that the average life expectancy of a person doing CRON will be a lot higher right? Whether it extends maximum life span (122* so far), It's going to be a long time before we find out, and even by then we will have probably disovered other ways to tweak metabolism to and extend life. So you could eat all you want but still gain the same benifits as if you were doing CRON

I'm going to go a little bit away from CRON...

So what benifits would we have if humans lived longer? Well first of all people could work untill a much later age which would put less strain on social security. People wouldn't develop chronic diseases which costs thousands per person to treat each year, which drains money out the system.

One way to get out of this is to do more research into ageing or develops something that mimmics calorie restriction! Make the population more healthier, decrease morbidity.

In the western world right now we have a low birth rate, which is mainly the problem... not enough young people to pay for the retired. Older people are going to become a "burden on society" and unless something is done about ageing, there will be a bigger crises than what is predicted. So economically it is sensible to look into way which we can increase longevity and keep older people in much better health to make good contributions to society.

Why I don't mind if CR doesn't extend maximum Life span

I believe that we will be able to reverse ageing at some point in the future, probably before 2030 and certainly before 2050. The technologies that are in developement right now will help increase average life expectancy way beyond what politicians are predicting. The reason I am personally doing Calorie Restriction is to get to a time where these therapies are around so that I can live even further than 120, I want to live possibly thousands of years or longer (assuming my life is good). I want to explore the universe, see how we evolve using enhancing technologies and much more. I think giving up pizza and other bad foods is worth it.

People might say well aint you always hungry? but I'm really not, I don't feel deprived at all, I eat more foods now than I ever did before and they taste so much better. I want Quality of life aswell as Quantity, and I do have quality right now while doing CR. So even if CR doesn't extend maximum life span, I want to be in the best possible health for the time when Real anti aging therapies have been developed using the latest Biotechnology, Nanotechnology, robotics and whatever else...

Mr Bush thinks that social security will be in trouble by 2050, I think it wont even exist! People instead will save up for their retirement and go on periodic retirements for say 10 years... then maybe retrain and work as something else and so on.

Matt

Just thought I'd share this with you,

http://www.immortalism.com/elixxir.jpg

That guy is 50 years old and has been pracitising calorie restriciton for over 20 years.

Well...yup, he looks younger than his age...but I've seen plenty of people who look younger than they are who dont follow CRON and this guy seems so below board that I have to wonder if CRON is what got him where he is or if he just decided to capitalize on his youthful appearance.

Now I'm not saying that his program (or CRON) doesnt work...not at all...but with regards to Elixxer, personally...he hardly seems like anyone who should be pointed to as someone to use as a role model or to be even remotely impressed by. Based on his website, he seems personally dispicable to me. I'm actually pretty sure that CRON does work...but this particular guy just gets under my skin and I need to vent about it a bit. Here' Goes...

If you believe you have the key to something that is truly important to the well being of the general population (which he claims he has)...then I believe you're obligated to share it in some way that makes it accessible. That doesnt mean you cant make money...but it ought to be marketed in a way that a large number of the population can benefit. Atkins provided his conceptual diet which is available and completely do-able with just a book (and that can be gotten at the library). There are many other plans that are similar in their availability.

Now I know that this guy's concept is both physiological and spiritual but he's selling a product that starts at $1500. What do you get for your money?...well...it allows you to spend a meal with a program Master Coach...but that doesnt include the cost of travel (and you have to go wherever the Master Coach is) and it doesnt include the cost of the meal! One day with a master coach costs $5000 and the "day" starts... and I quote here... A weekend is $9,900 and does not include travel expenses, meals, or accomodations. Wanna go for the gusto and get an 8 week course?...$70,000 please. A Year with the Master Coach?...here's what he says: ...that'll be a cool million please and thank you.

His book is conceptual and not an active guide to how to do his program without incurring these fees. There is nothing that anyone can say that will make me believe that this guy cares one whit about the world at large or its health. It's all just too ridiculous.

I'm sorry...but I cant respect anyone who supposedly has answers that the world needs and then organizes his business in such a way as to eliminate 99% of the population from accessing those answers. He sounds like a huge scam artists who utilizes his youthful looks to make a ton of money from those who can afford it.

In Addition...he has the following in his website:



If you have confidence in your own program...you shouldnt need to blatantly bash others programs this way.
Whew...OK...done...I feel better now.

Whoa...I know your post was just about what CRON can accomplish for the individual ...and none of my post was directed at you or CRON...honestly....I believe it can and does work for many people.

Edited to add:
You have belief and enthusiasm for your WOE...and I have a great deal of respect for that. I feel the same way about Atkins. I believe that all of the WOE's discussed in this forum work for some people. It's why we all come in here...to share our knowledge and enthusiasm.. Anyway... I hope your not offended. My rant truly wasnt directed at you or your WOE...I just visited this guys site and it got under my skin. (well...obviously)

I don't really know him personally so I am not really offended about what you thinka bout him. I only recently found this guy on the net over at imminst.org (discussion about him and his blog).

You really don't see people aged 50 that gets mistaken for looking like a 20 year old. This guy says he been doing Calorie restriciton for around 25 years... It doesnt seem too hard to believe because he does look extremely young.

I dont know... just thought i'd share to see what you think