Caloric Restriction: Maybe Not So Crazy Afterall

September 2, 2009

Posted by Maggie Spilner

You have probably heard about caloric restriction “fanatics” who are trying to extend their lives by cutting back calories. Over the last ten years or so, a number of researchers have suggested that reduced-calorie diets can mean better health and a longer life. A recent study published in the Journal Of Science showed that monkeys on a calorie restricted diet for 20 years fared much better than their counterparts who were allowed to eat the same healthful food, but as much as they wanted.

The calorie restricted monkeys were eating about 30% fewer calories per day than the group had been eating on average before the study began. Not only did the monkeys on the calorie restricted diet have dramatically better survival rates, they also avoided brain atrophy and age-related diseases like cancer, diabetes and heart disease. And they looked younger. The researchers expect that these monkeys will live 10 – 20% longer.

I had always imagined that those people who are trying to extend their longevity, even though they were a healthy weight (rather than trying to lose weight), were eating starvation level amounts — but not so. On average, 30% fewer calories than what the average person in the U.S. consumes is just under the 2,000 calories range for men. And for women, who average about 1,877 calories a day, 30% less would be about 1,300 calories. For many women in the United States, 1,200 calorie a day diets have been the recommended goal for weight loss for decades. Though today calorie reduction for weight loss is more calibrated to fit the individual, not a one-size fits all number.

I was interested to learn that according to the Centers for Disease Control, women now eat 22% more calories a day than they did in the 1970s. Most of the added consumption is in carbohydrates. Were women starving in the 1970s? I don’t think so. I think it’s been a change of culture.

I would venture to guess that it’s the accessibility of food that is the culprit — it’s literally killling us. When I was a kid, we never had soda, sugary snacks or chips at home, and dessert was a rarity. We were’t poor or deprived. It was just the way it was. People didn’t think of stocking their pantry with lots of junk food. And you didn’t go snooping around in the kitchen much after dinner either. When you got hungry in school or at work, you had to wait for a meal or a packed lunch you brought with you. There were few if any snack machines handy. And if you wanted to eat out, you had to take the time to find a diner or restaurant, as there weren’t many drive-throughs then either. And frankly, eating out was a big treat, not a weekly occurrence. We played outside most of the time, and we walked to school. If we were anxious, we had to find ways to soothe ourselves, without stuffing our faces.

While restricting calories can result in malnutrition, there are many specific diet plans out there that can give you daily plans for eating that can help you get what you need from the food you do eat. And supplements can help fill any gaps that might occur from day to day. In addition, there are supplements that can help address some of the factors underlying overeating and weight gain. “Carb blockers” (such as Phase 2®), for example, can help cut your carbohydrate assimiliation by as much as 40%, when used regularly. And carbs are just the foods you’re probably eating too much of.

You don’t have to starve yourself to be healthy, or be excessively thin to live longer and preserve your brain function. But you do have to pay attention to what you are eating, cut excess fat, sugar and white flour out of your meals, and once in a while, you have to ignore hunger signals, just like you did as a kid. Eating home more often than away from home probably helps too because you have more control and fewer temptations.

There’s no specific magic number of calories you should eat. The best thing to do is to record what you eat for a week, and then start to cut back, cutting out the empty calories first. You could be eating 3,000 calories a day, something I found I was doing over the summer, while overindulging in ice cream! Cutting my calories by 30% would mean dropping down to a little over 2,000 calories a day, an ample amount of calories if you choose them wisely.

The Anti-Aging Bottom Line: Don’t think of caloric restriction as an extremist anti-aging tactic for hardcore longevity-seekers. It can simply mean restricting your intake to just what your body really needs to thrive. And you might be surprised at how much you still can eat when you cut empty calories out of your diet! Get a check up and some blood tests before you start a calorie restricted diet, then go back in a month or so and see how your numbers have changed. If they have improved, you are aging at a reduced rate! The fact is, controlling body weight, which means eating less and moving more, leads to better long-term health. There’s just no getting around it.