MushroomNovaCat t1_j7w9959 wrote
Reply to comment by radischen2 in Effect of long-term caloric restriction on DNA methylation measures of biological aging in healthy adults from the CALERIE trial (Feb 2023) by basmwklz
Because the diets of the participants were not analyzed, only a caloric deficit was tracked, and the results therefore can't be used to claim that sustained caloric restriction itself is a necessary predictor of better health outcomes. Someone eating an appropriate amount of calories from a good diet might have the same or better health than someone eating an unhealthy calorie restricted Western diet. In other words, it's not necessary to eat less calories than recommended to be healthy, calorie restriction is not practiced in areas known for health and longevity. There are various factors that go into good health and a long life that have been identified in blue zones but calorie restriction is not one of them.
radischen2 t1_j7wefor wrote
What does healthy or unhealthy mean in this regard? The researchers made sure that the participants were a randomized group of people in a CR and with all of their nutrients met. So that points to a really strong association between CR and this slowing in aging. Thats all this study was saying really. Of course there are various factors that go into good health and now we have potentially found an additional factor, which is why I'm suprised by your opposition to it.
MushroomNovaCat t1_j7x4cjp wrote
A healthy diet is one which contains a low amount of animal products and highly processed foods along with a good amount of fiber. In recent years we have become aware of the effects of highly processed foods in our gut microbiome and how chronic diseases are linked to inflammation caused by poor diets.
Calories being equal, a serving of plainly cooked farro is healthier than a serving of white bread in the same manner that a serving of grapes is healthier than a serving of wine, etc. because of the inflammatory effects and associated chronic diseases linked to highly processed foods.
We have known for a while that calorie restriction works, we don't know why it works, there are various competing theories. People do not like to be hungry, it affects their mood and their cognitive abilities. The point of my comment was to stress that it may not be necessary to restrict calories in order to promote health, that link has not been definitively established because the cause for improved health and longevity through caloric restriction has not been determined.
dreamlike_poo t1_j7wd5qf wrote
The scientific community has known for decades that calorie restriction increases longevity in mammals, but the exact mechanisms weren't well understood. It seems like we might be narrowing down the way it works.
MushroomNovaCat t1_j7x2276 wrote
Yes, we know caloric restriction works, my point wasn't to point out that it doesn't work, my point was to point out that we don't know that it leads to better health because of the lower caloric intake or because of other associated factors as was profusely discussed in the study you linked.
Your second link discussed research suggesting that when we eat is important as well, which we have also known for a while, but this has nothing to do with determining the reason why caloric restriction leads to better health and longevity. We still don't know if it's the associated factors that are responsible rather than the lower intake of calories itself.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments