= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eliezer_Yudkowsky comments on Open Thread: October 2009 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (425)
I thought that mild "obesity" (BMI 25) was associated with lower lethality rates than being thin (due to thin people dying more easily when sick; apparently that body fat actually does do its required job sometimes). Normal weight is probably still better, but is that what CR gets you?
Actually, the lower death rates with moderate rather than lower BMI, was an early claim and was later shown to be the result of people being thinner as the result of previously undiagnosed illnesses. I don't remember the source, as I have read several books on the subject, I sort of think it was from Fumento's "The Fat of the Land", but it could have been several others (none of which supported the superiority of moderate over lower BMI, until you get down to starvation levels, ie BMI of less than 18).
Looking at mortality rates in the general population broken down by BMI gives a poor guide to the effects of dietary energy restriction - since many people get thin through being sick or malnourished.
A fairly typical study on the topic:
"How Much Should We Eat? The Association Between Energy Intake and Mortality in a 36-Year Follow-Up Study of Japanese-American Men"
You are probably right, hence the disclaimer that it's unchecked memory. There clearly must be some unknown point after which the diet starts to kill you, and this point may be very human-specific.
I don't know about CR, but I've done IF (intermittent fasting) for months at a time while maintaining my normal body weight.