Brief comments on: Calorie_Reduction article in paper

[Guest guest]

Title of article:

 

Can a diet of a quarter fewer calories than a body needs lead Boomers to

that ever elusive fountain of youth?

 

Issue: People are eating far too many calories, in the mainstream. So yes,

reducing caloric intake is a wonderful idea. But the idea that any machine

can run less energy than it runs on is preposterous, of course.

 

It is well known that reducing calories, for awhile, can lead the body to

increase its reliance on body fat and result in considerable cleansing of

the system, aka " improved health " . The " ultimate " form of this practice is

called " fasting " . But unless one learns to live from exogenous nutrient

sources (sunlight, for example), one must, over time, consume or produce

energy equal to the amount of energy one expends. Pretty basic physics.

 

So yes, these people are probably improving their health considerably by

reducing calories ... AND by changing the sources of at least a portion of

their calories (improving their diets). But this does not mean, in any way

at all, that they can live healthfully, in the long run, consuming less

energy (fewer calories) than they burn. It DOES mean they were eating too

many calories all along.

 

Best,

Elchanan

_____

 

rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of

Bill-Schoolcraft

Sunday, September 02, 2007 10:41 PM

rawfood

[Raw Food] " Calorie_Reduction " article in paper

 

 

Hmm, I thought this was an interesting read...

 

http://www.sfgate.

<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/02/CM0CRASBE.DTL & t

ype=printable>

com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/09/02/CM0CRASBE.DTL & type=printable