Dog Brothers Public Forum

HOME | PUBLIC FORUM | MEMBERS FORUM | INSTRUCTORS FORUM | TRIBE FORUM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 27, 2016, 11:45:42 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
96120 Posts in 2315 Topics by 1082 Members
Latest Member: Concerned Citizen
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: [1]
1  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Health Thread (nutrition, medical, longevity, etc) on: November 03, 2006, 03:14:28 PM
Marc,

page 3 is missing, page 2 double.

"Even the current epidemiological data, they note, do not consistently show that those who are thinnest live longest. After analyzing decades of national mortality statistics, federal researchers reported last year that exceptional thinness, a logical consequence of calorie restriction, was associated with an increased risk of death."

I would like to the point that the thinnest might have no muscles, low basal metabolic rate, no exercise. So - why should they live longer? Low calories? - What is low?

I think that low body fat should be the goal - sometimes calories are necessary to keep your muscles well and alive. "On weekends, he occasionally fasts" - which will make him loose muscle mass, as he has no body fat. Even if he had, muscle energy gets lost first.

Calorie restriction alone will not do it. You have to know when and where.
Pages: [1]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!