I love how, in the 21st century, we still argue about whether eating too much or too little is harmful.

Let me break it down for you: being a wide load is harmful. Not eating enough is harmful. Maintain a reasonable weight (for your height and build) and you'll probably be OK, excluding any adverse events like getting cancer or getting hit by a bus.

Do I have to do everything?

MBK: Name 5 ways a fat dumbass is better than a monkey?

1.) Fat dumb people don't shed as much

2.) Monkeys might bite you

3.) Fat dumb people don't throw their feces at you

4.) Fat dumb people can be mocked to raise one's self-perceived social standing. Making fun of monkeys might get feces flung at you and carries no social benefit, perceived or actual.

5.) A fat dumb person can be rendered into more candles and soap than a monkey. Unless the monkey is fatter.

That about covers it.

I'm curious why they chose these articles to grind their ax on. I challenge anyone to find a story on scientific research from any major media source that isn't at least as flawed - and most or these stories had pictures of monkeys (which is useful for people who don't know what a monkey looks like).

/monkeys
//look like people
///taste like chicken

TofuTheAlmighty wrote:

"Science magazine > ambiguously-credentialed random blogger

'Nuff said."

THIS

AmazingRuss: MBK: Name 5 ways a fat dumbass is better than a monkey?

1.) Fat dumb people don't shed as much

2.) Monkeys might bite you

3.) Fat dumb people don't throw their feces at you

4.) Fat dumb people can be mocked to raise one's self-perceived social standing. Making fun of monkeys might get feces flung at you and carries no social benefit, perceived or actual.

5.) A fat dumb person can be rendered into more candles and soap than a monkey. Unless the monkey is fatter.

That about covers it.

Not sure if it's monkeys or another species, but they cannot swim because they have very little, if any, body fat and don't float.

This is why that species of primates tend to have moats in their enclosures to make sure they don't get out.

CR is not the same as eating healthy. It is eating below normal nutritional needs - a less fancy term is slow starvation.

The blog post actually outlines a host of problems with CR research that are all valid concerns. the most notable are that lab animals have a lower requirement for activity and immune response than do those of us who live in the "the wild". Couple that with the bad things always being hungry does to your mind and it is a bad idea.

As the author points out chronically overeating and chronically undereating are both extremely difficult to sustain in a healthy way over a long period of time.

fizzix_is_fun: most death due to aging is caused by a weakened immune system allowing for many other ailments. The risk of overeating has nothing to do with old-age deaths, it has to do with heart disease, diabetes, hypertension and others. Why you would want to equate the two is mind-boggling when there are such clear other negative results of being obese.

It was not an experiment between obese and non-obese monkeys. It was a comparison between non-obese monkeys and calorie restricted monkeys. Big difference.

We know that rats live a good bit longer when their calories are restricted. The immune response is measurable. I'm guessing it was in monkeys as well. Unless you are prepared to argue that deaths do to the use of anesthesia are caused by calorie restriction, it makes sense to believe it helps you live longer.

Definitive? No. No single study ever is. But its very useful data.

The_one_with_that_guy: Not sure if it's monkeys or another species, but they cannot swim because they have very little, if any, body fat and don't float.

This is why that species of primates tend to have moats in their enclosures to make sure they don't get out.

It's Filipinos.

Reverend J: while trying to imply that there is a hidden pharmaceutical agenda in all of this she leaves out the fact that she works with the Competitive Enterprise Institute which has biases of its own.

Whoa, good catch! Here's a broader summary of her background and previous work:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Sandy_Szwarc (new window)

So, to summarize: Mercury's risks are overrated. Phthalates are no threat to health. Mad cow disease poses no threat to humans. But caloric restriction, which serves the interest of no large industries and may even harm the interests of food processors, will KILL US ALL!

bartink 2009-07-14 03:52:57 PM

We know that rats live a good bit longer when their calories are restricted. The immune response is measurable.

THIS

Listen, your body is just like a motor in a car, the more you drive your car and use its parts the quicker it is going to one day clunk out on you.
Your internal body parts like your immune system are the same way, the more McDonalds you cram into your fat pie hole the harder your body has to work to break it all down.

Sharch: fizzix_is_fun: this has got to be among the most useless and idiotic scientific experiments ever conducted. Both the experiment and the article are rife with wharrgarbl so strong, I'm ashamed to be a scientist.

Among the most useless and idiotic!? It doesn't sound like you're familiar with current research in biology. Caloric restriction is a valid and hotly researched topic because it DRASTICALLY extends lifespan in most organisms, and it's not particularly clear why. It needed to best tested in primates.

If you read the paper, they reported what they found, the good and the bad. If it had been all negative results, it still would had been a Science paper, it's that important of a question. As with any research, there are valid criticisms (and that blog touches on some). But when you do a 20-year longitudinal study (which is still ongoing), there are no do-overs.

Did the popular press oversell this research? Yes, just like they do with every big weekly science story. Your bone to pick is with them. Honestly, it doesn't seem like you read the paper. Hell, it doesn't even sound like you read the abstract. You read a blog and regurgitated it.

most death due to aging is caused by a weakened immune system allowing for many other ailments. The risk of overeating has nothing to do with old-age deaths, it has to do with heart disease, diabetes, hypertension and others.

Email the NIH, you solved aging! Now we can redirect the grants to whatever lame physics project you're working on. Seriously, where are you pulling this crap from? You really don't know what you're talking about.

So here's the major issue I have with the study. They claim that caloric reduction will delay the onset of certain pathologies that they associate with aging, but not others. They define some of them but it's not clear to me what criteria they used to determine what is 'death of old-age' and what isn't. Perhaps that's necessary since, like you said, it was started over 20 years ago, and that's why I think this experiment was not useful.

And my lame physics project has way too much funding than it deserves already.



I'm ashamed to be a scientist.

I'm ashamed that you think you're a scientist too.

Oh hush, just because I'm not an expert in your field doesn't mean I can't have beefs with the way your experiments were carried out.

theoriginalslash: I love how, in the 21st century, we still argue about whether eating too much or too little is harmful.

Let me break it down for you: being a wide load is harmful. Not eating enough is harmful. Maintain a reasonable weight (for your height and build) and you'll probably be OK, excluding any adverse events like getting cancer or getting hit by a bus.

Do I have to do everything?

This.

The_one_with_that_guy: Not sure if it's monkeys or another species, but they cannot swim because they have very little, if any, body fat and don't float.

Meh. I've put on a good 30 pounds of body fat since college, and I still sink if I exhale most of the air from my lungs.

/6'4", ~200 lb
//190cm, 90kg for the rest of you
///bony, apparently

BlorfMaster: Sorta funny because just not I was trying to find out if i could include white rice in my diet plan.

Why would you want to? Brown rice is a whole/complete food, and readily available.

jsobota: Somewhat relevant

jsobota, interesting cartoon. I think though that if a student or professor or researcher finds they have a PR department that often gets it wrong, than that is the fault and the responsibility of the professors, researchers, and even the (graduate) students at that university. I don't think university scientists are morally separated from the university's PR department, not when the PR department is known for predictably making these errors.

As a fat dumbass, I'm getting a kick out of these comments.

calculator13: Listen, your body is just like a motor in a car, the more you drive your car and use its parts the quicker it is going to one day clunk out on you.
Your internal body parts like your immune system are the same way, the more McDonalds you cram into your fat pie hole the harder your body has to work to break it all down.

Whahuh? So, exercise ("driving your body more") is bad, eating makes your immune system work harder, and easy-to-digest foods (sugar, white bread) are better for you than hard-to-digest foods like whole grain?

Your body is not just like a motor in a car. In fact, it's almost nothing like it.

ThurmanMerman: I've actually met the U of W guy who did this work. He came and gave a talk to a bunch of us psychiatrists and neuroscientists who are working on Alzheimer Disease. The guy was very obviously anorexic. We were all a bit concerned about him, in fact. Especially when he mentioned restricting calories for his kids. It led to a lively discussion among us whether anorexia by proxy was a form of Munchausen's, and whether we had a responsibility to call in a report.

That's creepy as fark.

theoriginalslash: I love how, in the 21st century, we still argue about whether eating too much or too little is harmful.

Let me break it down for you: being a wide load is harmful. Not eating enough is harmful. Maintain a reasonable weight (for your height and build) and you'll probably be OK, excluding any adverse events like getting cancer or getting hit by a bus.

Do I have to do everything?


I like the cut of your jib. You should get money to research that further.

YixilTesiphon: ThurmanMerman: I've actually met the U of W guy who did this work. He came and gave a talk to a bunch of us psychiatrists and neuroscientists who are working on Alzheimer Disease. The guy was very obviously anorexic. We were all a bit concerned about him, in fact. Especially when he mentioned restricting calories for his kids. It led to a lively discussion among us whether anorexia by proxy was a form of Munchausen's, and whether we had a responsibility to call in a report.

That's creepy as fark.

Yup, I know this guy. He actually calorie restricts himself, and is probably causing a bigger problem. The thing is that I do believe the science that shows that calorie restriction leads to improved longevity IN THE CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO CALORIE RESTRICTION TO BEGIN WITH. Even in normal weight people. This has been shown numerous times in mice and cannot be discounted in primates no matter what the popular press says.

This seems to be the general opinion of the greater scientific community (for which I consider myself THE mouthpiece, of course).

But, jesus people, this just makes sense when you think about it. Stop feeding your farking face, fattys.

jfarkinB Whahuh? So, exercise ("driving your body more") is bad, eating makes your immune system work harder, and easy-to-digest foods (sugar, white bread) are better for you than hard-to-digest foods like whole grain?

JUMPING MIS-POSTS!
When did I say any of that?

Now stay with me here jfarkinb, your digestive system processes food. Shiaty food makes your system work harder to digest and it gets less nutrients in turn for its hard work. All the things your internal organs and digestive system work on to break down food and move nutrients through out the body wear out over time just like a motor in a car. especially when you over eat constantly.

Your immune system among other things, is directly influenced by what you eat.

So, put down that 8th slice of meat lovers pizza, grab an apple to eat every once in awhile.

I've had it with these monkey fighting monkey diets.

MBK: You know, I'm tired of experiments on monkeys.

There are enough fat dumbasses in this country that will sign up for medical experiments. And don't give me this ethical crap. Name 5 ways a fat dumbass is better than a monkey? You can't. So why is it ethical to put monkeys through death experiments and not fat dumbasses?

Are you volunteering?

F'it, I intend on having a good time. Eat, drink and be merry

fizzix_is_fun: this has got to be among the most useless and idiotic scientific experiments ever conducted. Both the experiment and the article are rife with wharrgarbl so strong, I'm ashamed to be a scientist.

They defined mortality as "age-associated deaths" and eliminated any cause of death they didn't believe was associated with aging.

most death due to aging is caused by a weakened immune system allowing for many other ailments. The risk of overeating has nothing to do with old-age deaths, it has to do with heart disease, diabetes, hypertension and others. Why you would want to equate the two is mind-boggling when there are such clear other negative results of being obese.


and the counter argument:

"Today there are a lot of very healthy people who look like skeletons because they bought into this," said Raj Sohal

yes, that's clearly the problem in America and Western Europe, people are just too skinny!


You should have been ashamed to be a scientist for the last hundred years.

Every field of it is, "numbers from my ass for grant money."

So, on a calorie restricted diet, will skinny chicks give the best head?

RE Szech 2009-07-14 04:27:46 PM
"I like the cut of your jib. You should get money to research that further."

I'm thinking of writing a book. I will title it "Put Down the Bacon Double Cheeseburger and Large Fries, Fatass!"

Way to go science, do dishonesty there. Might as well go home and pray to live longer.

If you got bit by a monkey, what kind of shot would they give you?

I never got a chance to look at that data, but something looked fishy about it.

Atomic Spunk: They didn't even mention the biggest, most debilitating effect of a calorie restricted diet - hunger. I tried a well-designed calorie restricted diet for 2 weeks and on some days, it was excruciating. Especially when you're in the vicinity of other people who are enjoying some really delicious food. I'm not overweight - 5'11, 150lbs. - but I thought I'd try the diet just to see if I could do it. It's very difficult to sustain.

Obviously, the problem is people. I enjoy a calorie restricted diet by cutting off all social contact from my life. It works wonders since I never see OMG BACON EXPLOSION!

/OM NOM NOM NOM!

Atomic Spunk: They didn't even mention the biggest, most debilitating effect of a calorie restricted diet - hunger. I tried a well-designed calorie restricted diet for 2 weeks and on some days, it was excruciating. Especially when you're in the vicinity of other people who are enjoying some really delicious food. I'm not overweight - 5'11, 150lbs. - but I thought I'd try the diet just to see if I could do it. It's very difficult to sustain.

My mother-in-law is an adherent to calorie restriction. I think it helps that she has absolutely no sense of taste, but she also has to psyche herself into thinking that every food in existence upsets her stomach or gives her a headache or whatever.

Needless to say, she's an absolute nightmare to cook for or go to a restaurant with (though, to her credit, she looks great for her age).

Ignoring all this worthless "science"...

I just made the greatest sandwich I've ever eaten.

1 entire loaf of french bread, cut in half to make a massive roll
1.5 pounds of sirloin steak tips
.5 pounds of cheddar and monteray jack
half a bag of shredded lettuce
8 strips of bacon


It was glorious.

Thank you and good night.

Emposter: Ignoring all this worthless "science"...

I just made the greatest sandwich I've ever eaten.

1 entire loaf of french bread, cut in half to make a massive roll
1.5 pounds of sirloin steak tips
.5 pounds of cheddar and monteray jack
half a bag of shredded lettuce
8 strips of bacon


It was glorious.

You sound full.

calculator13: jfarkinB Whahuh? So, exercise ("driving your body more") is bad, eating makes your immune system work harder, and easy-to-digest foods (sugar, white bread) are better for you than hard-to-digest foods like whole grain?

JUMPING MIS-POSTS!
When did I say any of that?

When you picked your entry for Worst Analogy Evar.

Now stay with me here jfarkinb, your digestive system processes food.

Ayup.

Shiaty food makes your system work harder to digest and it gets less nutrients in turn for its hard work.

And, BAM! We're off the rails.

Tell me about this "hard work" my digestive system has to do. Is it working harder if it's processing whole foods, with lots of indigestible bulk and fiber, or if it's processing white bread and sugar water, both of which are 100% "digestible"?

All the things your internal organs and digestive system work on to break down food and move nutrients through out the body wear out over time just like a motor in a car.

Yeah? Skeletal muscle famously gets stronger with frequent, challenging exercise. Heart and lung capacity also improve with consistent exercise. So why does the digestive system require gentle treatment?

Here's a hint: bad food is the stuff that's easiest to digest and turn directly into energy (or fat deposits).

Even if there's no difference in the number of deaths, the average age at death can still be different, and that would be huge. In fact, at the end of the study, the number of deaths should be exactly the same, as in, y'know, all of them. It would be great to know average age, but of course the article instead focuses on nothing but reasons why every other news source is bad and this blog has the real story. As someone who has read none of these other articles and just this one, and also after being told that "Only by reading critically can we begin to decipher the wordsmithing, the art of marketing", I'm really not impressed.

But then again, when someone tells me that they came to their opinion by thinking critically and questioning, and then proceeds to tell me what I should think, I usually end up thinking they're full of it regardless.

So the trick is to eat a low cal diet and smoke pot to avoid stress.... oh crap, the pot will give you the munchies.

Over all roughly equal numbers of monkeys died in both reduced calorie and control groups. Fewer monkeys died of 'old age' related illnesses in the restricted calorie group. ...... So what killed more monkeys in the restricted calorie group than in the control group? I'm assuming both were treated the same, as else you don't have the variable under study isolated.

Tried restricting my calorie intake once (aka diet) - didn't lose any weight, just got tired, crabby and stupid.

TofuTheAlmighty: Science magazine > ambiguously-credentialed random blogger

'Nuff said.

Logic is logic regardless of source.

NotARocketScientist: So what killed more monkeys in the restricted calorie group than in the control group?

That, to me, was the point of the article. There may be some as-yet-undetermined negative aspect of CR life that made the monkeys more susceptible to other vectors of death, and the researchers' decision to discard these deaths was bad science.

If the research facility were broken into a by a ravenous tiger who ate five monkeys, well that's clearly unrelated. But if five monkeys died of heart attacks because CR lead to increased arteriosclerosis, or two monkeys had cerebral hemorrhages because CR lead to low levels of blood clotting factors, then that's valuable information.


NotARocketScientist: Tried restricting my calorie intake once (aka diet) - didn't lose any weight, just got tired, crabby and stupid.

Yeah, dieting sucks. Just exercise aerobically, do moderate anerobic weightlifting, avoid sugars and white bread/rice/flour where possible, and don't chronically overeat. Exercise is the single best and biggest improvement most people (incl. me) need in their fat, sedentary lives.