Starving Yourself for Eternity

by Katherine Stevens

I love New York magazine’s recent article on the Calorie Restriction diet. Makes me want to try Quorn, which if I understand correctly, is a slime mold that can taste like chicken. And who knew soy was linked with dementia? So glad I didn’t fall for the whole “tofu is good for you” ploy.

But the great thing about the article is that the author decided to try out the diet. He literally starves himself for his art and for us, his esteemed audience. The CR diet, which its followers seem to think will bring eternal life, involves eating just enough to avoid death by packing lots of nutrition into the least number of calories one can consume and not, well, die.

By following the CR diet, the author lost 20 pounds in two months. Way too much, according to the woman whose CR-structured meal is the pivot of the story. Losing weight too fast can be dangerous (remember that, Hollywood) and all that vanishing fat is accompanied by vanishing muscle and bone mass, including the heart muscle. While she feeds the author a second helping of the most unappetizing parfait I’ve ever heard of, the rest of the CR followers talk about what the diet means to their sex lives (ups women’s libidos and makes men monogamous, apparently) and to their lifestyles (includes them in the echelons of the righteous, long-lasting, healthier-than-thou few). As far as I can tell, none of these people have children, and they all are fairly well off. The conversation eventually veers towards immortality because this diet was originally started after an experiment that showed animals of all kinds live to the human equivalent of 160 years when they’re on the brink of starvation received a human trial among the 1991 Biosphere scientists. By accident, the scientists had just enough (nutritious) food to survive, and their post-Biosphere physicals seemed to verify the healthful aspects of eating so well, you barely have to eat at all.

This, of course, sounds a little creepy. First, there’s the euphoria that goes along with such a limited caloric intake, a chemical high described in the article that makes these painfully fit people sound positively giddy. Secondly, there’s the orange-hued skin of excess carotene consumption. Third, anyone who has ever experienced starvation in the way people who simply don’t have any food do would not cultivate that achy, frightened feeling for anything in the world because sixty extra years of life is still sixty extra years of that awful sensation. Finally, the sheer amount of attention to detail involved in CR indicates a hyper-obsession with control that may not be such a great thing
.
So is CR a good idea? Maybe. Our grandchildren will find out in eighty years when we’re dead and they’re still alive. Or not alive. Somebody pass the Quorn.

Comments

[Noah]

From the article,

"'Michael, could you hand Don the arugula?' April calls over her shoulder, looking up from the laptop that’s always near to hand as she cooks, loaded with an interactive diet-planning program that helps not only count calories but track the twenty other nutrients without which CR would just be a glorified form of anorexia. 'Don, I need you to put 24 grams on each plate, please.'"

Maybe these diners weigh their arugula because they want to consume a certain amount of fiber while getting the maximum amount of nutrients from arugula that they can. However, the usda.gov online nutrient database lists 24 grams of arugula as having only .384 grams of fiber, not a significant amount.

The program that April uses could apply linear programming algorithms to help April design recipes that stay within some set of guidelines for calories, sodium, carbs, protein, et cetera. April's choice of energy-balancing equation is dubious, but I doubt her software objects.

Kati, you note several parts of the CR story, including the following:

* the bland food that the CR people eat.

* the meticulous effort that CR dieters exert to meet their balancing equations.

* the CR attitude that staying hungry is a positive method to improve mood.

* the CR choice of a negative-energy balance.

* the claim that CR dieting improves quality of life.

* the claim that CR dieting improves longevity.

Your points are well taken. I particularly agree that starving yourself is an inappropriate method to change your mood. In a different way, overeating to change your mood is also inappropriate.

Kati, you wrote,

"First, there’s the euphoria that goes along with such a limited caloric intake, a chemical high described in the article that makes these painfully fit people sound positively giddy."

This high could mean that anorectics are addicted to their lack of a diet (along with everything else that goes into their dietary choices).

[April]

Hi Katherine,

First, let me say that I have enjoyed reading your work in the archives of the Rudd Center's blog. I especially liked your entry on so-called "healthy" school lunches. Right on!

However, I found the above entry disappointing. I'll comment on a few points with which I take issue:

First, you write:

"The CR diet, which its followers seem to think will bring eternal life"

This is incorrect. No one thinks that CR will bring eternal life. We think, based on years of scientific evidence, that CR slows the biological aging process in mammals. By how much and what mechanism, we're not sure.

Biomedical approaches to the reversal of aging are a topic of interest for us, but that's quite different from CR.

Second, you write:

"Anyone who has ever experienced starvation in the way people who simply don’t have any food do would not cultivate that achy, frightened feeling for anything in the world because sixty extra years of life is still sixty extra years of that awful sensation."

No CR practitioner I know feels anything like this achy frightened feeling you describe. As we emphasize over and over again, most of us don't feel particularly hungry on a regular basis. We are hungry immediately before our meals, and most of us report enjoying our food more than we did pre-CR. But we certainly aren't suffering from hunger on a moment-to-moment basis. I credit the super high nutrition in our diets for this: when you give your body what it really needs, it doesn't crave the excess calories that fill up but don't nourish most Americans.

As you correctly pointed out, Julian Dibbell cut his calories too low (in spite of warnings to the contrary) leading to unsafe quick weight loss. If he had eaten a more appropriate number of calories, he probably wouldn't have experienced much hunger either.

You describe the dessert I served at the NY Mag dinner party as:

"the most unappetizing parfait I’ve ever heard of"

I find this a bit odd. The parfait consisted of organic strawberries, nonfat ricotta, flax oil, and hazelnuts. Perhaps strawberries aren't to your taste... no problem! I'll make you blueberries when you come to eat with us, because you are most warmly invited to dinner at our house next time you have occasion to visit Philadelphia! But on the blog of an organization dedidcated to healthy eating, it seems incongruous to dismiss a low calorie, high calcium, vitamin C packed dessert consisting of fresh, in season fruits, nonfat dairy, and an excellent source of essential fatty acids. Isn't this just how we should all be eating? I find that desserts don't have to be loaded with fat and sugar to taste great, and that using nonfat dairy for calcium and getting my fat from unsaturated fat sources like hazelnuts makes both for excellent food and lower cholesterol.

Third, you write:

"As far as I can tell, none of these people have children, and they all are fairly well off."

As a union organizer, I am very sensitive to the class implications of most everything. One of my favorite things about Food Fight by Rudd Center director Dr. Kelly Brownell is the immense attention he pays to the difficulties of poor and working class Americans. I find that my food budget is actually less now than it was before I started CR because while I still enjoy the occasional meal out at one of our fabulous Philly restaurants, I eat out much less, and I never grab fast food takeout. By packing my food for work (often both lunch and dinner, as I work a whole lot of 12 and 16 hour days) and enjoying homecooked meals with my partner, I save a whole lot of money. By favoring organic and local produce, I support organic farmers with the dollars I could have been wasting on fast food. Overall, my lifestyle leaves a smaller imprint on the planet than did my pre-CR eating habits. While learning about nutrition took an initial investment of time, I find that now I spend no more time cooking than any other, non-CR'd woman I know who cooks for herself and her family. In fact, I often put dinner for two on the table faster than I could have driven to a drive-thru!

As a union organizer, I definitely make a lot less money than most of our classmates (I see you were Yale 2005 - I graduated in 1996, and have been helping workers organize to improve their own working conditions and standard of living, and in the case of the nurses with whom I currently work, to improve patient safety, ever since.) Having my student loans finally paid off (which took ten years... I am not from a well-off family, and I went to Yale on a shoestring of financial aid, student loans, working many, many hours in the JE dining hall and as a computing assistant, and money that my parents, who believe in education more than anything, saved at great personal sacrifice to give me the wonderful opportunity of four years at Yale) sure does help, but I assure you, you will find our lifestyle much more modest than you seem to have originally assumed.

You go on to say,

"the sheer amount of attention to detail involved in CR indicates a hyper-obsession with control that may not be such a great thing"

This is simply not the case. In the food environment in which we live where most of what is marketed as "food" is actually packaged sugar and saturated fat in a fancy box, it is difficult enough to get the nutrition one needs while consuming a large number of calories. If you want to lower your calories to levels that have a chance of slowing the aging process while maintaining optimal or even adequate nutrition, you must carefully monitor your nutrients. To fail to do so would be irresponsible and dangerous.

CR is not about control, it's about slowing our biological aging process with the only intervention that has ever done that successfully in mammals. We use tools such as nutritional software (free in many places, including http://www.nutritiondata.com or the best program ever, CRON-O-Meter, available at http://spaz.ca/cronometer/) to make sure we're giving our bodies what we need. This is no more of an obession with control than is a professional baker's insistence on properly measured flour, sugar and baking soda to make sure that her cake doesn't fall in the oven. No one calls it pathological when a cook measures out her ingredients to get a recipe right... why do you assume there's something wrong with us because we measure our ingredients to make sure we're getting proper nutrition?

Anyone, regardless of interest in CR, could benefit from a quick nutritional analysis of his or her diet. Most people are missing a few key nutrients on a regular basis, and women especially tend to get too little calcium. Nutritional software is a useful tool, and if you check out my blog, you'll find that it can be even more fun than a video game! :)

You also write that our CR'd lifestyle:

"includes them in the echelons of the righteous, long-lasting, healthier-than-thou few"

I find this both incorrect and counterproductive.

We choose a way of eating that we believe, based on years of scientific evidence, has a good chance of slowing our biological aging process, and that we know, based both on current research (see the work of Dr. Luigi Fontana at Washington University St. Louis) and our own blood tests (which we monitor on a regular basis) improves our health and lowers our risk of disease in the immediate and long term. This is not about being good, righteous, holier-than-thou, or in any way unpleasant to those who make different choices. To be sure, we are healthier than most people, but to characterize that as "healthier-than-thou" (which sounds, I am sure not by accident, exactly like "holier-than-thou")adds a level of moral judgement that I find unproductive.

I have blogged extensively about how I find it unhelpful to think of food in moral terms. I don't think that people are morally deficient because they're overweight (I was overweight myself before I started CR, and I can promise you, I was no more morally deficient then than I am now!) and I don't think that people are morally righteous because they've figured out a way to make healthier food choices. In our obesogenic food environment, it takes lots of information, support, and the proper tools to beat the food industry marketing and get or stay healthy. It's hard, to be sure, and that's why I'm targeting my activism at improving the food environment (can you tell I'm a recent reader of Food Fight?) In the meantime, I'm making the choices that I believe, based on my own research, are right for my own health and my long term goals.

In just the same way that it is unhelpful to describe overweight or obese people as unworthy, lazy, stupid, or morally deficient, I believe that it is equally counterproductive to characterize those who make healthy food choices as self-righteous or holier-than-thou. Aren't we trying to encourage everyone to eat better? I certainly don't try to pressure anyone into trying CR... it's an unusual lifestyle, for people with unusual priorities and goals. Much like a gymnast training for the Olympics or a runner training for the Boston marathon, we make choices that others would find unappealing. That's okay! I don't want to run a marathon, so I don't spend hours training for one. I can't imagine wanting to run all the time... heck, I refuse to run unless a large animal is chasing me! But I don't assume that marathon runners think they're better than I am or are self-righteous because they make different choices from mine.

Please do not make assumptions about our character based on our food choices. I trust that you wouldn't do that about an obese person, and I hope you would apply the same reasoning to us, even if you don't share our choices or our goals. When you come to see us (which you really must, we'd have so much to talk about between food issues and Yale memories!) you'll find that we're nice, fun people who love our lives, our food, our work, our two cats, and each other. I'm sure that as soon as we meet you, we'll love you too!

If we are to conquer the obesity epidemic that is robbing the majority of our citizens of their health, we need to develop attitudes towards food that don't involve moral judgement. People have enough trouble when trying to make healthy choices in our distinctly unhealthful food environment without worrying that those around them will accuse them of being self-righteous and holier-than-thou. If we want to encourage healthy eating, we need to cultivate an attitude of support. Our choices may be different from yours, and our long term health goals may be different, but I believe we want the same thing: a healthier food environment in which all Americans, rich, poor and in between, have access to food choices that allow them to be just as healthy and happy as they want to be.

Sincerely yours,

April Smith

PS I see that you're working on a Masters in Fine Arts in New York... good luck! And have a very happy new year!

[Noah]

Ms. Stevens wrote:
"Somebody pass the Quorn."

April. Ms. Steven's portrayal of CR suggests an intuition. If you sacrifice food palatability for the sake of better health, you will probably deny the lack of palatability of your new food choices. That is creepy if the denial becomes easier by tricking your brain into feeling giddy because you are constantly hungry.

It is hubris to pursue life pleasures based on how long those pleasures let you live to enjoy them. Such an approach does not recognize the value of pleasures that exact a cost, usually by distorting their cost (for example, alcohol consumption).

A risky approach to calorie counting is to exercise pure calorie counting, and allow yourself restaurant meals and alcohol along with your CR-perfect meals, and decide how much of each by calorie and nutrient averages. That strategy encourages a double standard for assessing the palatability of your meals, a standard that is similar to what the modern American dieter applies during (but not after) their diet.

[April]

Hi Noah,

Your comment confuses me. Are you suggesting that I don't really like my food, I only think I do? It seems that if I think I enjoy my food, then by definition, I do.

What's wrong with eating and enjoying healthy food? Wouldn't the world be a better place if more people found they liked nutritious, low calorie food? It certainly wouldn't make the world a better place if I were to eat more unhealthy food.

I enjoy many pleasures in life: the healthy, delicious, nutrient packed food I eat; a very satisfying job; a wonderful relationship with the man I love; a collection of very cheesy pop music. I make choices to balance the many pleasures in life in ways that match my short and long term goals: I enjoy eating out occasionally, but I balance that out with homecooked meals on most days that are low cal, nutrient dense and cheaper than restaurant fare. I enjoy reading the Rudd Center blog, and I could probably do it all day. But since I have other priorities in life as well, like going to work, spending time with my partner, and leaving my desk, I limit my Rudd Sound Bites consumption. Sure, it was hard at first to tear myself away. But I'm learning to read just a few entries at a time and save the rest for later.

I'm not trying to get you, or anyone else, to do CR. You have your own priorities and must make your own choices. Don't assume that because our priorities and choices are different that I'm not happy. I know I'm happier now that I was pre-CR, and that this lifestyle works for me. You decide what works for you, based on your priorities, goals and the info available to you. I hope that you enjoy your life as much as I do!

And I do hope you keep up your comments here and your own blog. Your thoughts are always very thought-provoking!

april

[Noah]

"Don't assume that because our priorities and choices are different that I'm not happy. "

Priorities and choices and lifestyle "decisions"....

April, you characterize a state of affairs whose prior causes are more than your free will. Food and alcohol create their own demands, set their own standards, and move you without much of your free will necessarily involved.

So when you avoid high-entertainment-value food and drink, by acts of fate, or by your lifestyle choices, feel relieved. Not bored. The rest of your life has better things to offer you anyway, right?

[april]

You might be interested in my entry: "A Few Thoughts On The Nature of Compulsion" re: the topic you raise.

It's here:

http://www.mprize.org/blogs/archives/2006/11/a_few_thoughts.html

a

[michael jones]

I read that article. I think that healthy eating is the most important thing for our good condition. I like your post and i completely agree with you.

[exercise to burn belly fat]

I agree with Michael. Healthy eating is important.

[burn the fat feed the muscle]

we have to enjoy life, and enjoy the pleasures of food (in moderation)...we have to live life with common sense!

Balanced diet (without starving yourself) and regular exercise is the best option.

[Della Franklin]

Healthy Pizza Tips

The pizza has been voted America's favorite food for countless years, and is consumed by most Americans each year. Actually, the pizza could have been invented by the Greeks, the Phoenicians, the Romans or anyone who had the foresight to mix flour and water together and heat the mixture on a hot stone.

It has been around in one of its many forms and has been a basic part of the Italian diet since the Stone Age.

The pizza in its first generation as a food in Rome was a healthy tomato filled food that was not only great tasting, but actually good for your body. It was a crude bread that was baked beneath the stones of a fire. After cooking, it was seasoned with various toppings and used instead of plates and utensils to sop up broth or gravies.

It has been written that the idea of using bread as a plate came from the Greeks who ate flat round bread baked with all manner of toppings. It was eaten by the working man and his family because it was more economical and more convenient.

In "The Aeneid" written by Virgil (70-19 B.C.), it describes the legendary origin of the Roman nation, describing cakes or circles of bread:

"Beneath a shady tree, the hero sprad his table on the turf, with cakes of bread; And, with his chiefs, on forest fruits he fed. They sate; and (not without the god's command). Their homely far dispatch'd, the hungry band invade their trenchers next, and soon devour to mend the scenty meal, their cakes of flour...See, we devour the plates on which we fed."

In the ashes after Mount Versuvius erupted and covered Pompeii on August 24, 79 A.D., evidence was found of a flat flour cake that was baked and widely eaten at that time in Pompeii and nearby Neopolis, the Greek colony that became Naples and from a great cookery book by Marcus Gavius Apicius who was proported to be a culinary expert. This book contains recipes which involve putting a variety of ingredients on a base of bread (in his case, a hollowed-out loaf.)

This recipe called for chicken, pine nuts, cheese, garlic, mint, pepper and olive oil (all ingredients found in our pizzas today.)

Tomatoes were first added to pizzas in the early 1500s. First thought to be poisonous, the poorer people of Nales began adding tomatoes to yeast dough they used to make their pizzas. These new pizzas with the tomatoes were proclaimed to be the best pizzas in all of Italy.

Pizza migrated to America with the influx of Italians in the latter half of the 19th century. For many people, expecially the Italian-American population, the first American pizzas were know as Tomato Pie. It is said that Gennaro Lombardi, who came from Naples, opened the first Pizzeria in the United States in New York City at 53 1/2 Spring Street.

There are two distinct forms of pizza in America. The thin almost cracker crust form popularized by the Italian-Americans in New York and what's known as Chicago-style deep-dish pizza. This last form was created by Ike Sewell at his bar and grill called Pizzeria Uno in Chicago. This form is baked in an inch deep pan and contains layers of meat, cheese, and other ingredients in a flaky crust.

Most pizza nowadays are the fat loaded kitchen sink style pizza. Everything from bacon, Italian and other types of sausage, to cheddar cheese top pizzas around the world every day. To make matters worse delivery chains have started to use inexpensive processed food products to help make the pizza as cheaply as humanly possible. As with most things in life, you get what you pay for. That pizza the chain company delivers to your door with a smile, could land you in the doctor's office with a frown in no time.

The first step in eating a healthy pizza is making it yourself. There are any number of restaurants that will boast healthy pizzas on their menus, but to be sure it truly is a healthy pizza, it's better to play it safe and make it yourself. There are some places that will truly make a healthy pizza, but in order to understand what is most healthy for you to eat it's easier to cook it.

Once you've come to the realization that you will be cooking this culinary masterpiece, it's time to decide on ingredients. The healthiest pizzas include fresh tomatoes, garlic, and small amounts of fresh mozzarella cheese. The pizza can be topped with spinach, broccoli, or any number of fresh vegetables.

Bake the pizza for 20 minutes at 400 degrees, and dab off the grease from the cheese as it starts to settle on top of your pizza. After you have finished cooking the pizza, let it cool, and enjoy. The pizza should taste better than ever knowing that it's one full of healthy ingredients and there is nothing like the satisfaction you have in knowing that you made it yourself.