Calorie-Restricted Diet Curbs Normal Human Cardiovascular Aging

[Ilsa]

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/521939
You may need to register with medscape to access this article. It came right up for me through my email account, account, though.

Calorie-Restricted Diet Curbs Normal Human Cardiovascular Aging

News Author: Megan Rauscher
CME Author: Charles Vega, MD, FAAFP

Jan. 20, 2006 —
SNIP

The cardiac-specific beneficial effects of caloric restriction appear to be mediated by reductions in blood pressure, systemic inflammation, and myocardial fibrosis, the study team reports in the January 17th issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

SNIP

The calorie-restricted diet consisted of roughly 1,671 kcal per day derived approximately 23% protein, 49% complex carbohydrates, and 28% fat (including 6% saturated fat). The Western diet consisted of roughly 2,445 kcal per day made up of about 17% protein, 52% carbohydrates, and 31% fat (11% saturated fat).

SNIP

Over the course of the study, the mean BMI of those on caloric restriction fell from 23.9 to 19.7, although their weight was stable for at least 6 months at the time of cardiac assessment. None of them performed more than 20 minutes of vigorous exercise twice weekly.

According to Dr. Fontana, "people who followed a severe calorie-restricted diet but with optimal nutrition had a younger heart in terms of diastolic function, which is a well-accepted marker of primary aging because, independently of disease, as you get older your diastolic function gets worse and worse."

SNIP

[Ilsa]

1. I'm going to kick my own post since yesterday was all about SOTU.

[redqueen]

2. Hmmmmmm...

So does this indicate that aerobic exercise is not as helpful as a severe calorie-restricted diet with optimal nutrition in terms of cardiovascular health? Or about the same? Interesting...

[Ilsa]

3. I think it is a subject worth examining very closely

by the CDC, etc. I also wonder because when I am exercising alot, my appetite increases and I have to fight the urge to eat more.

[Nikia]

4. So are my doctor and dietician lying to me?

I shouldn't read stuff like this.

[pitohui]

6. nikia the article looks like bullshit to me

i don't think there are many eating disordered women who would consider 1,670 kcal to be a calorie restricted diet, do you?

listen to yr doctor and yr dietician

[Nikia]

7. I don't considered it restricted nor do most anorexics

It is just that I tend to focus on the wrong words.
I also am eating around this calorie level now at this point in recovery. In a way, my support team is glad because I am eating healthy, maintaining my weight, and am healthier and stronger in general. On the otherhand, I have not gained weight in a while and still have weight to gain. As a result, they want me to eat more, which has been hard for me to do.
Whether this study is right or wrong for most people, I suppose that I just have to focus on what I need to do to get healthier.

[Left Is Write]

8. Don't worry about this article.

Anorexia is much worse for your heart than normal cardiovascular aging. Listen to your doctor and keep hanging in there.

[pitohui]

5. link don't work but yr quotes look iffy

1,670 calories is not a severely calorie restricted diet, it is not even sufficient for many or most adult women to lose weight

it's like studies we used to see touting low fat diets but you pulled up the diet and it was 30 percent fat, hardly low fat

[Left Is Write]

9. Hmm. Well. My typical diet is about 2000 calories, roughly 60/20/20

60% carb, 20% protein, 20% fat. That's what I strive for anyway; I don't always hit the mark, of course.

I do vigorous aerobic activity six days a week. My blood pressure is 110/60 and my resting pulse rate is 65.