Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16   ^
Old Mon, Jan-12-04, 13:07
DebPenny's Avatar
DebPenny DebPenny is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,514
 
Plan: TSP/PPLP/low-cal/My own
Stats: 250/209/150 Female 63.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 41%
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default Check out this thread

animals with less active insulin receptors live longer

My money is on lower insulin's being proven the real longevity silver bullet. So whether you starve yourself or low-carb, you're increasing your lifespan by lowering your insulin. Myself, I'd rather enjoy life and live a low-carb lifestyle.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #17   ^
Old Mon, Jan-12-04, 13:08
gotbeer's Avatar
gotbeer gotbeer is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 2,889
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 280/203/200 Male 69 inches
BF:
Progress: 96%
Location: Dallas, TX, USA
Default

Some interesting counter-points in the following article suggest to me that there are serious holes in the low-fooders.

Think of the low-fooders as neophobes:

Fear and Loathing

A new study shows that being risk-averse may shorten your life.

By Christine Kenneally

Posted Monday, Jan. 12, 2004, at 11:01 AM PT


link to article

Despite old-fashioned wisdom about looking before you leap and fools rushing in, new research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science shows that caution can actually kill you. Sonia Cavigelli and Martha McClintock of the Department of Psychology and Institute for Mind and Biology at the University of Chicago found in a recent experiment that individuals who fear novelty—a condition scientists have named "neophobia"—are likelier to die at an earlier age than those who are unafraid of change. It is the first time, says Cavigelli, that a study has demonstrated that an emotional trait that shows up in infancy can shorten life span.

For this research, Cavigelli and McClintock followed the lives and fortunes of pairs of rat brothers for several years. The scientists chose their subjects by first establishing which of the rats were neophobic. To do this, they placed the young rats inside a bowl in a small room. Objects the rats hadn't seen before—a rock, a metal box, and a plastic tunnel—were placed in each corner of the room. The rats the scientists deemed neophobic either stayed hunkered down in the bowl or left it only hesitantly, with hunched backs, stilted walks, and bristling fur. The rats who left the bowl quickly to explore the room and the various unfamiliar objects were dubbed neophilic.

After their experience in the testing room, the neophobic rats were shown to have elevated levels of corticoid—a hormone typically secreted as part of the flight-or-fight response. Cavigelli and McClintock tested the rats repeatedly over the course of their lives and found that neophobic rats continued to have elevated corticoid levels not only in response to their frightening experience, but at other random moments throughout their lives.

A little hormonal surge can sometimes be a good thing. The flush of hormones—such as adrenaline and cortisol (the human equivalent of the rats' corticoid)—that accompany fear spur the heart to beat faster, cause breathing to increase, and generally put an organism on high alert so it can react swiftly to get out of danger. But these stress hormones also strain the body. Too much of them can lead to a compromised immune system, the loss of brain cells, and hardening of the arteries; they can also negatively affect other important body functions such as sleep.

In fact, this kind of excess stress is so unhealthy that rats with neophobia were found to be 60 percent more likely to die at any point during their lives than their more adventurous counterparts. The scared rats were as healthy as their curious siblings during their reproductive years, but, because of the cumulative effects of the extra stress they experienced, they died sooner overall, and before they died, they aged more quickly. (All of the rats—the neophobes and neophiles—died of tumors in the end; this particular strain of lab rat is prone to them. But the neophobic rats succumbed to their tumors much more quickly.)

All the neophobe/neophile rat pairs in the experiment were brothers. Because siblings are very similar genetically, Cavigelli and McClintock suggest that neophobic and neophilic tendencies are not genetically determined. The emotional traits may instead come from early experiences, such as the social roles rats play in their litter, and the different ways that their mothers groomed them.

But obviously no one really cares how the rats feel. The point of experimental psychology is not to help shy rats get along in the world or to increase rat longevity, it's to measure phenomena that may be applicable to humans. Is it possible that neophobia in humans can affect life span in the same way?

Cavigelli thinks so. A number of parallels exist between humans and their rat surrogates. Neophobia shows up in human infants as early as 14 months of age, and like the rats, fearful children have a faster and stronger hormonal response than children who are not afraid of new situations. It's also been shown that if you are neophobic at a young age, you tend to remain that way throughout childhood. Cavigelli suggests, however, that individuals may develop strategies to avoid the negative effects of neophobia. "If you are a neophobic-type person, you might avoid any novel situations thereby minimizing that stress," she says. Staying away from stressful situations could be a form of "self-medication."

Yet the real cost of being a neophobe is more visible in the way it affects people's vulnerability to disease rather than the length of their life. The wear and tear of stress hormones can cause neophobes to get sick more quickly, suggests Cavigelli. So if you know you're a neophobe—and therefore more vulnerable to any bug going around—you might want to be seek medical intervention promptly in the case of illness.

Although it looks like the neophiles have an unfair advantage, they may not have it as good as it seems. In the experiment, Cavigelli and McClintock played God by controlling the environment of their subjects and essentially creating a safe universe where being brave didn't get you into trouble. But real life, with its car accidents, plane crashes, and human predators does not always reward the fearless. Human neophiles might also have longer lives if we were all just rats in a cage.

Why a seemingly negative trait like neophobia should exist at all seems, at first, to be mysterious. Surely traits that shorten life span are of no value to a species. In fact, the incongruity is an illusion. It stems from the fact that the goals of individual humans have diverged from the goal of evolution: We all personally want to live as long as possible, but survival of the species depends only on whether we live long enough to reproduce.

As far as the rats are concerned, then, Cavigelli and McClintock think it makes evolutionary sense for mothers to have "emotionally diverse litters," consisting of scared and brave rats. In a completely safe world, neophiles will live faster and die later. But in a world in which fear is sometimes smart, then at least some neophobes will survive to perpetuate the species.
Reply With Quote
  #18   ^
Old Mon, Jan-12-04, 14:36
komireds komireds is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 158
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 5'2
BF:
Progress: 43%
Location: New York, NY
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ItsTheWooo
So then are we supposed to mock the dead... to live better?! What a foolish conclusion! The most disturbing thing of all is the fact there are people actually doing this. I don't know about you, but I would rather live 70 years of running, laughing, playing, enjoying good food and drink than live 90 years of some pathetic, starved, inanimate, quasi corpse-like existence.

.



HAAAAAA!!!!!!! I love your post. I am laughing my a$$ off. "quasi corpse-like" really got me. Sounds like an indie band.
Reply With Quote
  #19   ^
Old Mon, Jan-12-04, 14:39
komireds komireds is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 158
 
Plan: Atkins
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 5'2
BF:
Progress: 43%
Location: New York, NY
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gotbeer
[B]Starve Your Way to Health


he started out at 1,400 calories a day, less than half of what the average American male consumes—


.


does the average american male really consume 2800 calories a day?!
Reply With Quote
  #20   ^
Old Sat, Jan-17-04, 10:20
CindySue48's Avatar
CindySue48 CindySue48 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,816
 
Plan: Atkins/Protein Power
Stats: 256/179/160 Female 68 inches
BF:38.9/27.2/24.3
Progress: 80%
Location: Triangle NC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odyssey
i wasn't aware it was called calorie restriction. i thought it was called anerexia.


I was talking to a friend about this and she just about turned green! Seems a very good friend of hers has been anorexic for years....has been starving herself for years. My friend was horrified that there are now groups who are touting starvation as a good thing! And the fact that the scientific community were actually looking at this as possibly a good thing???

Many years ago, when I was in nursing school, I had a patient with anorexia. At that time there was very little know about this and it was (then) considered a rarity. Today there are pro-anorexic web sites where members "help" each other cope with the hunger and lack of energy, how to deal with friends and family, etc.

Here's what happens as you starve yourself. Since the body needs energy, it will and does break down muscle to get the calories it needs (in some cases the muscles waste to the point they are not strong enough to hold the body upright). Also minerals such as calcium are pulled from the body tissues into the blood to keep the ratios there right. This results in bone loss, which can lead to bending or even breaking of the long bones. Eventually there aren't enough stored minerals and the person will then suffer the effects of this mineral loss, and inappropriate blood levels which can lead to irregularities in the heart (among other things). In an effort to conserve energy the body will grow thicker, longer, and darker hair on the body (arms, legs, face, etc). Also "nonessential" functions will slow down or stop completely. Fingernails and head hair will stop growing or grow very slowly. Menses will stop (2 reasons here, one to conserve energy and essential minerals and nutrients....and the second to prevent pregnancy.). Breasts will shrink and loose their ability to produce milk. Fatigue and sleepiness increases (sometimes dramatically) to prevent energy loss thru movement. The person will become more and more sedentary and fall asleep frequently. The bowels and kidneys also try to conserve and get as much as possible from intake, so output will slow resulting in build up of toxins in the blood and bowels. The heart and lungs will also try to cut loss, so heart and respiratory rates will slow. Also the brain will try to conserve energy also and steer what is can get towards essential functions like respiratory control, so thought process slow making it more difficult to concentrate and understand. The hunger impulses will also increase in an effort to force the body to find nourishment.

THIS is healthy? I think a few recovering anorexics and their friends and family would heartily disagree!
Reply With Quote
  #21   ^
Old Sat, Jan-17-04, 17:14
Nancy LC's Avatar
Nancy LC Nancy LC is offline
Experimenter
Posts: 25,934
 
Plan: DDF
Stats: 202/185.4/179 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 72%
Location: San Diego, CA
Default

I think there's a big difference between limiting your calorie intake purposefully for longevity and anorexia. In anorexia those people are denying themselves just about all nutrition. They often have very distorted ideas about how fat they are. They can look at themselves in the mirror, be barely more than a skeleton and think they look fat. I think anorexics have some very serious psychological problems that make them that way.

And dieters are usually restricting their calorie intake as well. The difference is they do it for a specific goal and look forward to the day when they can stop doing it, anorexics won't stop doing it on their own and starve themselves above and beyond what these folks are doing.

Maybe we'll find out it isn't the calorie restriction but the lack of constant insulin that makes these folks live longer!

Last edited by Nancy LC : Sat, Jan-17-04 at 17:16.
Reply With Quote
  #22   ^
Old Sun, Jan-18-04, 00:03
DebPenny's Avatar
DebPenny DebPenny is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,514
 
Plan: TSP/PPLP/low-cal/My own
Stats: 250/209/150 Female 63.5 inches
BF:
Progress: 41%
Location: Sacramento, CA
Default

I'm sorry, but no one knows if these people will live longer. It's all based on what happened to some rats or other lab animals. No humans have been studied. I find this whole calorie restiction thing abhorent and sooooo sad. I keep remembering the man profiled on TV who at 35 already had osteoporosis from his starvation WOE.

And I do think these people have as much of a problem as an anorexic. They may not be starving themselves because of a skewed body image, but it's just as much of an obsession to try to make your life longer at any cost.

And yes, while we're discussing it, are we calling the kettle black? I hope not. I don't think I'm obsessive about my body image, and I'm certainly not obsessive about my longevity -- I believe in quality, not quantity. But I am obsessed with being as healthy and happy as I can be during the remaining time I live. And the way I'm trying to achieve it is to low-carb and exercise moderately -- being happy is my main goal, and being healthy contributes greatly to that goal.

Quote:
Maybe we'll find out it isn't the calorie restriction but the lack of constant insulin that makes these folks live longer!
I do agree with you, Nancy, in that I also think it's going to prove out that lowering insulin is the real key. And I think that our way -- low-carbing -- is the way to go to achieve that goal. If you think about it, our paleolithic ancestors cannot have had chronically high insulin levels eating meat and vegetables. And it's been proven anthropologically that when man started cultivating grains, not only did our health suffer, but our lifespans shortened.

Last edited by DebPenny : Sun, Jan-18-04 at 00:04.
Reply With Quote
  #23   ^
Old Sun, Jan-18-04, 01:01
CindySue48's Avatar
CindySue48 CindySue48 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,816
 
Plan: Atkins/Protein Power
Stats: 256/179/160 Female 68 inches
BF:38.9/27.2/24.3
Progress: 80%
Location: Triangle NC
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy LC
I think there's a big difference between limiting your calorie intake purposefully for longevity and anorexia.


I agree Nancy....my concern is more that some anorexics are going to use this as proof they are doing the right thing by starving themselves. There are websites that promote anorexia as a way of life. The people that run the sites and visit them are anorexics that are unwilling to admit that what they are doing is wrong or dangerous.

There are many who suffer from anorexia but are able to "control" their impulses enough to maintain an "acceptable" weight. They don't all spiral out of control and die or almost die. Many control their weight at dramatically low levels, barely within guidelines, for many years. They find nothing wrong with their eating habits and even promote it as a "healthy" way of life. These are the people that my friend was concerned about.

examples:
http://dmoz.org/Society/Issues/Heal...e/Pro-Anorexia/
http://www.skinnyvideos.com/
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dave Barry: "Beware: Carbohydrates will ruin your health" gotbeer LC Research/Media 12 Wed, Mar-31-04 08:48
"Peanuts for weight loss plus heart health" gotbeer LC Research/Media 0 Wed, Feb-11-04 06:44
"Atkins Diet May Be Hazardous To Health" gotbeer LC Research/Media 16 Sun, Feb-08-04 21:19
"Doctoring up the food for better health" gotbeer LC Research/Media 0 Thu, Aug-07-03 17:01


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:37.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.