« Re-Post of Entry Re: Why I Do Media Appearances | Main | Reckless and Irresponsible »
April 26, 2007
How Low Is Too Low?
Cyn raises a question that often comes up:
Hi April! I have a question in regards to calories--how do you know how "low" is safe? I've been reading up on CRON and I am unclear on the dangers of starvation mode. Does CRON avoid that by making sure all nutrients are obtained, or is starvation mode not a danger since of the research showing slowed cell aging as a result of a calorie restricted diet? Is it safe to assume that as long as you are not hungry, you have enough calories? Most studies like that to cite the not under 1,200 calories if you are a woman, but I can't find the study, and the context of where that study came from. Any input you could give me would be appreciated, or perhaps you could point me as to where to read? Thanks!
Here are some guidelines:
When you in the weight loss phase, you shouldn't lose more than 1 pound a month if you're starting lean, no more than 2 pounds a week if you're starting overweight.
I don't think hunger is the best judge, because many people, especially those who are overweight, will tell you that they are not hungry when in weight loss, but they are eating so few calories that they are losing weight too fast. When the CR'd animals lose weight too fast, they lose the health-extending benefits of CR, so we want to make sure to make an extremely gradual transition. When people first discover the filling deliciousness of low calorie, high nutrient veggies, they sometimes eat too few calories yet still feel full. At this point I urge them to add more calorie dense foods, like nuts and some olive oil, to their diets to slow weight loss.
As to where you end up (because obviously, you don't lose weight forever -- you find a point where you're comfortable and then you stay there): there are many different answers, and I think it's a very individual decision. First, you must absolutely must work with your doctor to monitor your blood work and your general health to make sure that all your health indicators are improving. You also must make sure that you're getting adequate nutrition, which means you have to use some nutritional software (free online!) to crunch your diet. This won't work if you don't get the nutrition you need, and people who think they're eating a healthy diet are usually low in some essential vitamins and minerals. Calcium is often a concern for women. It takes some work to get the vitamins and minerals you need, and most folks who eat ad lib are somewhat malnourished, so when you talk about decreasing your calories, you have to work even harder to get appropriate nutrition. That's why we weigh and measure stuff... so we actually know what we're eating. You don't know how much calcium you've had if you have only a vague idea how much yogurt you ate. You don't know how much vitamin A you had if you had a random amount of kale. If you've got a diet worked out where between breakfast and lunch and your megamuffin snack you get all the RDAs, then on a day when you have dinner out you can worry a lot less, since you know you've already got all your nutrients in the bag.
In many of the animal experiments, the animals were far more CR'd than a human would likely tolerate. I know that I hit the limit of my social and work life far before I really find hunger to be an issue. Between going out for work and social events and still getting the nutrients I need in my quotidian diet, I have never gotten much below 1300 calories a day, and these days with exercise I'm more in the neighborhood of 1500. On days when I take Pilates I eat an extra 300 calories, on days when I don't I hit 1300 ish pretty consistently, though lately with all my travel and going out, I've been going lower on quotidian days so that I can ease up a bit when I'm on the road with my good food eating fine wine swilling buddies. It's a tragedy to turn down a second glass of a really good Malbec, so I make compromises.
MR keeps his calories very consistent because that's what makes him feel the best. If he gets below 115 pounds, he raises his calories a bit. His exercise is also very consistent: he runs five days a week, resistance trains three days a week, and carries me around as requested. Since he can easily lift and carry a girl who weighs only ten to fifteen pounds less than he does, I don't worry too much about his physical strength. Back when he was 145 eating ad lib, he planted trees all over Canada and was incredibly strong. He's just a lean person, naturally. My college boyfriend was 5' 8" and 118 pounds... eating all the grilled toasted buttered fried blueberry muffins at the Yankee Doodle Diner he could. Along with a three egg sausage home fries breakfast. And that dude was skinny. I like skinny guys, what can I say?
MR chooses 115 as a somewhat arbitrary marker, but it does seem to be the weight at which he's very comfortable, maintains physical strength, and yet keeps his calories as low as he can while maintaining the things in life that are important to him. He doesn't feel much hunger, though right before meals he's definitely ready to eat. When he finishes a meal, he's satisfied.
A lot of women keep their calories above the point where they would have amenorrhea. Of course for the post-menopausal that's not an option. I haven't hit amenorrhea, so that's not a marker for me.
If one is carefully monitoring one's health (we do our blood tests every six months or so) and getting adequate nutrition, then it's all about what you consider quality of life. I have a CR'd friend who has to eat enough to spend about three hours a day surfing. For me, surfing is not a concern, but for him, life would not be worth living without the sport.
Some people find that they take their calories quite low, then increase them. This could be based on any number of factors, from social situations changing to wanting to take part in more exercise or sport. I increased my calories when I started exercising more seriously, because I feel that the health benefits and psychological stress reduction benefits of my exercise routine are worth the extra calories. Yet I'm not an athelete by any means: I take Pilates twice a week, do some weight lifting, and do 20 - 40 minutes treadmill at between 4 - 5 mph. Nothing crazy, but enough to burn some calories and make some muscle. I just love the way I feel when I'm exercising regularly and well, especially in combination with consistent low calories and high nutrition.
So to sum up: if your bloodtests and your vital signs are all excellent, and your nutrition is optimal (as monitored on software, not based on your estimation of what is "healthy") and you're getting enough exercise to maintain cardio health and bone health, then how low you take your calories is based on a set of factors that only you can determine. What are your priorities?
CR folks take an unusual amount of responsibility for our own health. We decide what our priorities are, then live accordingly. MR and I have different priorities a lot of the time. I value going out with friends to restaurants... that's something he never really did in the first place. I value a full glass of cabernet... he's rather eat more broccoli. I value petting kitty cats... he'd rather not have pets, but loves me so puts up with the felines. I love the sleek look and feel I get from doing Pilates, so I'm willing to drive to the gym and put in an hour for class twice a week... he prefers his exercise to be harder but more efficient. Life extension is more of a priority for him than it is for me, but as time goes on I get more and more serious, which means some careful negotiations with the rest of my extremely full and demanding life.
Because we are not rodents in a cage, we can't control every aspect of our lives. We have many choices, and we have to take responsibility for the choices we make. I encourage all to do their own research and decide what works for them, always in consultation with their doctor. If you'd like some articles that you can provide to your doctor about CR, I can send them to you. There is no magic number of calories, and there is no one size fits all.
As I've said many times, you eats your veggies, you takes your chances. I believe in living life to the fullest every day, for as many days as I possibly can.
I also believe it's time for a staff meeting.
Posted by april at April 26, 2007 8:35 AM
Comments
April,
The Kate Taylor Slate article has been picked up on Lew Rockwell today.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/
Wanna bet Drudge runs it soon? You sound intelligent and reasoned, but these people who are saying they are doing CR not just to add some years to their life, but to hold out until someone finds a way to live forever, come off as real wackos. If Taylor's CR attack does get picked up by Drudge and the MSM, that'll be their angle - the nutso fringe of the movement.
Love your blog - you're a great spokesperson for the benefits of a reduced-calorie lifestyle. But please, try to distance yourself from the nutso wing of CR that is linking CR to live-forever fantasys. They are discrediting the movement!
All the best!
Posted by: Karen at April 26, 2007 3:43 PM
Who are these "nutsos" who are linking CR to "live-forever" fantasies? I haven't seen anyone suggesting such a thing yet.
Posted by: Chris at April 26, 2007 4:11 PM
Thanks so much!!! Your tips help a lot, and thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. It'd be great if you could send those articles to me. I was also wondering about using supplements--I know that getting your vitamins via supplements (pills) is not as "effective" but I don't see how that is different from using a supplement (e.g. brewer's yeast) in addition to a food.
Posted by: Cyn at April 26, 2007 10:27 PM
Thanks for your insights April. This post helped to clear up a few things for me.
I like your approach. Flexibility within discipline is what works for me as well.
I am new to your blog but have really enjoyed reading your posts. I hope you keep writing.
Posted by: Mizzi at April 27, 2007 8:17 PM
