VeggieBoards banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,204 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
If you have an ED or are battling disordered eating, please turn your bootie around, and do not read this thread. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/smiley.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title=":)"><br><br><br><br>
I am curious what your opinion is on this. I use it often as a reason to eat the bare minimum I can get by on pretty often, so I wanted some opinions on it. Here is the except, taken from page 137, Chapter 9 of "Spontaneous Healing".<br><br><br><br>
"An unexpected research finding that may have great practical significance is that experiemental animals live longer with much lower rates of disease when they consume less than the recommended daily allowance of calories. The health and longevity benefits of "undernutrition" are clearly established for laboratory rats and mice, but remain unproved for humans, although there is every reason to believe they apply. The finding is unexpected because we associate less-than-optimal nutrition with poor growth and health, and common sense tells us that we do better if we are well nourished. In fact, most of us may be overnourished, and too much of a good thing may be doing us harm."<br><br><br><br>
He doesn't specify what "overnourished" means or is exactly- in terms of calories- or by how much you should cut off your recommended intake. Nonetheless, this is one factor in the combination of things that make me feel I should eat under the recommended amount for my size, age, and activity level. What do you think?<br><br>
lovenlight,<br><br>
linz
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
811 Posts
I've read this in many articles, including in National Geographic. They interviewed the scientist associated with this study, and it does appear to be a fact. However, keep in mind that these mice are really hungry all of the time. Even the scientist admits this.<br><br><br><br>
Sorry - I'll take a few less years - being hungry all of the time just isn't my thing.<br><br><br><br>
Additionally, this scientist is living this way himself. He is very, very thin (I seem to remember that he is nearly 6 ft tall and 135) and eats very little. When I hear of this, I always think of people like Adkins, who then dies from slipping on a piece of ice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
569 Posts
I don't think I would like to go around feeling hungry all the time, but I have to say, I know of someone who eats very little and is in optimal health. She is an elderly lady (in her 60's) and she can run circles around me. She drinks coffee in the morning, eats a piece of fruit for lunch and then has a small dinner. She spends her days as one of Jehovah's Witnesses either going from door to door (lots of walking) or holding bible studies with people. All I can say is that this woman has an incredible pair of legs! She never gets sick and is always happy. Maybe there is something to be said about eating minimally or perhaps in her case, it's a combination of all her activities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
I've seen Dr. Weil on television (he is on PBS sometimes) and I've seen pictures of him. I've never seen him in person although I might see him on the street some day because he lives in my town and teaches at the University here.<br><br><br><br>
I want to make it clear that he isn't the thin scientist that EquiPro was referring to. He is around average weight or even slightly on the heavy side. I've read one of his books and have to say that what he says about nutrition is quite good. He is basically vegetarian <i>except</i> he does eat fish. He doesn't claim to be vegetarian though so he isn't a fake vegetarian.<br><br><br><br>
I've heard about this idea before (that low calorie diets tend to increase longevity) and don't doubt it. It's not really a new idea. I don't doubt that it's healthy or healthier to be thin within reason of course.<br><br><br><br>
Being extremely thin causes health problems and eventually leads to heart failure. This is what the nutritional text books say and I know that it is true because I know someone that died this way. Before my friend died he suffered many health problems including: bad teeth, difficulty walking (he had to use a cane for short distances and a handicap vehical for long distances), pain in his legs, painful swallowing, memory lapses and I'm sure it affected his ability to reason also. Some of these things could have been caused by other deficiencies though. For one thing my friend was on that diet for 12 years and had no source of vitamin B-12.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
Rainbowmoon<br><br><br><br>
I think was Dr. Weil is talking is about is what our mothers used to tell us if we wanted to lose a little weight..........to always leave something on your plate.<br><br><br><br>
I don't think Dr. Weil is talking about starving yourself or walking around hungry all the time. i think he means that we should eat until we are content - not to gluttony. I think everyone knows how that "uncomfortable feeling" you get right after a Thanksgiving meal.......when you are in a food coma? Dr. Weil means to stop that feeling. I don't think he means all of us to starve ourselves.<br><br><br><br>
And......by the way, I know my mother barely eats any food and is quite thin..........but years of eating that way have taken a toll on her. Remember guys.....you must eat enough to feed your muscles and organs.......your heart being the biggest muscle to worry about. If you do not eat enough food and feed your body, you begin to have muscle wasting after a while.......and the heart is one large muscle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
0 Posts
I also do not believe Dr. Weil wants everyone going around hungry. This is a man who suggests having a small handful of nuts and an apple in the mid afternoon as a snack. He does not want us starving all the time.<br><br><br><br>
And considering that you, Linz, have disordered eating, I'd like to know what makes you so special that you can kick all the others out, but start the thread yourself? <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/smiley.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title=":)"><br><br><br><br>
You need to feed yourself. Simple as that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
I don't like the use of the word "undernutrition" to describe thin people; this is why. Right now I weigh about 180 lbs which is a healthful weight for my size (6'2") according to my BMI chart. Before I got married (about 20 years ago) I used to weigh 160 lbs. I was on the thin side but I was also very healthy then. According to my BMI chart I would still be within the healthy range even if I weighed only 145 lbs but that would be the lower limit.<br><br><br><br>
So, what I'm trying to say is there is a wide range of healthfull weights and being thin doesn't mean that you are undernourished. A person can be thin and still get enough of all the necessary: vitamins, minerals, protein, fat, etc. In fact, they are even getting enough calories if their weight is stable and within the healthy range.<br><br><br><br>
But as I said above being emaciated (extremely thin) is a different story. Emaciated people are undernourished because over the long term they aren't getting enough calories in their diet.<br><br><br><br>
I've read Dr. Weils works and he is a sensible man that gives good nutritional advice. There is no way he would advocate people starving themselves. I'm sure he must have meant being a healthful thin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,204 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Reguardless of what Dr. Weil MEANT, I believe what he says leaves some room for mis-interpretation. Phrases like "undernutrition"- which he directly uses- indicate starvation, don't you think?!<br><br>
Nontheless, I don't believe that IS what Dr. Weil meant. His nutritional advice is indeed generally sensible, although he is a little freaked out about toxins. He even says that white bread and sugar are ok, when included in a healthful diet.<br><br>
Krista- I guess I don't think of myself as eating disordered, even if it is fitting. I didn't mean of course that people COULDN'T read the thread, but I didn't want to post it in Eat to Live to encourage bad behavior, nor did I want anyone who it might harm to blindly stumble upon it. I have no right to tell someone what they can and can't read!!! I hope it didn't read like that- I just meant it as a fair warning. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/images/smilies/smiley.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title=":)"><br><br>
lovenlight,<br><br>
linz
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
I've also read that very low-cal diets increase a person's life span. There's a lot of research that's been done on that. I don't think they mean undernourished...........you can still eat very low cal but eat a lot of fruits and veggies and such, which have a lot of nutrition.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,914 Posts
*sigh*.<br><br><br><br>
You are totally missing the point linz.<br><br><br><br>
Dr Weil is not the kind of man at ALL who would want to help you continue to hold your body hostage.<br><br><br><br>
B
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,830 Posts
I checked out some sites on the matter , it's (I suppose it's much the same thing) actually called the CRAN diet ; Caloric Restriction with Adequate Nutrition , and I read a testimony from a guy that had been practicing this diet for years, believing that it would slow down the aging process.<br><br><br><br>
What scares me is the way he describes how he eats , what he eats, and how he sticks to his ways of eating : the way he describes how he has "learned to accept hunger" , how he has learned to not keep high calorie foods in his kitchen (they lead to binges), how he refuses to eat any food that he has not beforehand weighted or measured and calculated to calorie content of , how the only fruit he allows himself to eat is strawberries becuse they're low cal, how he fills himself up with fibre etc..<br><br>
I think he also mentioned that is bmi was around 17, severly underweight, that is.<br><br>
While he points out that this lifestyle sets him apart from an anorexic's way of life, is that this diet focuses on adequate nutrition, meaning that while he is not getting "enough" calories, he still focuses on, and apparently manages to cover his nutrition needs, mainly through supplements.<br><br><br><br>
Still, what a way to live... and man does that remind me of anorexia, regardless of wether he's getting his vitamins or not, and honestly, what does it matter if one lives to the age of 120 if those are miserable years...?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
rainbowmoon said<br><br><div class="quote-container"><span>Quote:</span>
<div class="quote-block">Reguardless of what Dr. Weil MEANT, I believe what he says leaves some room for mis-interpretation. Phrases like "undernutrition"- which he directly uses- indicate starvation, don't you think?!</div>
</div>
<br><br><br>
I totally agree with that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
tell you what, many poor Asians do seem to be able to drag pretty darn long, but they start to age VERY early too. I remember looking at many people around me when I was little and thinking "Ehhh.....being old from 30 to 98 ?! what a damn life".<br><br><br><br>
my two cents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,604 Posts
Kyo, do you live in Tucson? I will be moving there next week. Yay! I'm thinking about stalking Dr. Weil... But seriously, I agree with those of you who have already said that he probably didn't mean we should starve ourselves. After all, from pictures I've seen of him he looks as if he has a "healthy" appetite. I think he means we probably don't necessarily need the full RDA of every nutrient on a daily basis, and that maybe that can lead to overkill. He generally seems to recommend a varied, moderate diet of unprocessed foods, plant-based with occasional fish.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
811 Posts
I wanted to point something out. The CRAN diet is the the one to which I was referring above. Dr. Weil is NOT part of that study or diet (he is, actually, rather portly) - he is just reporting the findings.<br><br><br><br>
I would never choose to live my life that way. Horrors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
507 Posts
It's funny, I've been posting about this in the raw&living foods thread... what a coincidence, LOL.<br><br><br><br>
What I say is that it's all about life quality versus life quantity (as I already said in the other thread). Those people don't care to be hungry and (maybe) miserable, because they want to live to see where the world has gotten in 150 years. I don't know if I care to see that if I spend all my time making the present half as pleasurable as it could be.<br><br><br><br>
And I read the evolutionary theory on this, and it seems very logical to me. It says that we can live longer on less food because that way we could potentially out-wait the period of food scarcity and that way our race wouldn't diet out, it's like building a longer bridge if the river is too wide. It's a way to "jump" across the aera of less food, so we don't die halfway through and then the race is extinct.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,008 Posts
makes sence... don't eat enough, slow the metabolism, hence aging slows. But I don't know anyone who wants to live like that guy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,008 Posts
heh...<br><br><br><br><a href="http://www.cron-web.org/KH_img1.htm" target="_blank">http://www.cron-web.org/KH_img1.htm</a>
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top