Quote:
Chemical concoctions can smooth over wrinkles and hide those pesky grays, but what about the signs of aging that aren't so easy to fix, such as losing muscle mass? Cutting calories early could help, say University of Florida researchers.
|
The very concept of cutting calories to maintain muscle mass is absurd. Everywhere else we advise to increase calories especially protein to maintain muscle mass. How could eating less cause us to retain more muscle? It's impossible to reconcile the two hypotheses.
Quote:
Severely restricting calories leads to a longer life, scientists have proved. New research now has shown for the first time that such a diet also can maintain physical fitness into advanced age, slowing the seemingly inevitable progression to physical disability and loss of independence.
|
No. Scientists have proven that they don't know what, in the food they feed to monkeys, affects longevity and that the only solution they found was to reduce total calories and see what gives. The next logical step is to isolate the longevity factor. "Calories" doesn't cut it. However it is known that in at least one species C. elegans
glucose has a significant and dramatic effect on longevity. Taubes mentions this in GCBC.
"Calories" doesn't cut it because a calorie is a measure of the thermodynamic potential of food. How we measure this is by setting the food afire. Hardly representative of what happens in the human body unless you have an artificial heart that runs on petrol. On the other hand, we know what happens with glucose in the human body and it does nothing good in large quantity.
The alternative is that they know what affects longevity but they designed the study in such a way to show that it's not the agent i.e. glucose but the total calories that makes a difference. By cutting total calories, we invariably cut total glucose. Oh how devious.
Quote:
The study showed that the diet (which diet? administered to which animal?) reduces the amount of visceral fat (was this done on humans?), which expresses inflammatory factors (again which animal?) that in humans cause chronic disease (where's the beef?) and a decline in physical performance and vitality across the lifespan (Ah, now I get it. It's the monkey/longevity study).
|
We are not monkeys.
We are not monkeys.
We are not monkeys.
We are not adapted to a low fat, high carb, restricted diet diet.
We are adapted to the complete opposite:
A zero carb, high fat, abundant calorie diet.
Quote:
The stumbling block on this path to remaining forever young is that humans may not adhere to such a severe diet.
|
The stumbling block is that malnourished humans are inherently stupid. Before the scientists can make any progress in nutritional science, they'll have to eat properly themselves. How can they do this when they can't even see that the diet they eat is in fact poison that makes them too stupid too see this? Catch 22.
Quote:
Have we finally discovered the Fountain of Youth?
|
No. But we have discovered yet one more example of blatant moronic behavior. It's not their fault, they believe that carbohydrate is food to humans.