Balancing Muscularity with Longevity

Diet and Nutrition
1

I have watched a really interesting documentary on the benefits of low calorie diets and fasting with regards to life expectancy. I really recommend people check it out.

It explores several different diets that all significantly decrease markers for many of the main so-called diseases of civilisation (eg cancers and heart disease).

2 of these diets, calorie restriction (ie 1900kcal per day) and 3-day fasts, are presumably totally incompatible with any sort of mass-building. Indeed the guys in the programme who followed these diets were unsurprisingly scrawny to say the least. But I was wondering whether it might be possible to at least maintain significant muscle-mass on the scheme advised at the end of the programme - a ratio of 5 days of normal eating to 2 days of 600kcal per day.

I wonder if it could be employed in a similar way to carb cycling - by cycling total calories with gym days and rest days.

Obviously none of these diets would work for a beginner or anyone with plans to compete or anything, I just wonder what people think about the potential for this as a basis for a diet plan for someone who has both the goals of developing a reasonably muscular physique and living for quite a long time.

And just in general I’d like to hear people’s views on the information in the programme.

2

It’s what Brad Pilon has been talking about for ages with ‘Eat, Stop, Eat’ etc isn’t it? Basically, eat well over maint. kcals on training days 5x a week and fast from dinner-dinner (24 hrs) on rest days.

I reckon it’d probably work for the average gym-rat or even someone wanting to just get to be in damn good shape - but as you say, not something that beginners or people looking to compete should worry about. Tbh it’s the first time I’ve ever heard of IGF-1 being a bad thing…

3

First off, I’ll admit that I didn’t watch the documentary, though I’m familiar with the concepts behind it.

The theory that calorie restriction increases longevity is an incredibly concept topic. Yes it has been shown that restriction turns on certain “longevity genes”, but there are other costs as well, namely as you mentioned muscle mass (and in my opinion, quality of life, because who really wants to be hungry all the time?).

It’s incredibly important to say that Tufts University performed a long-term study seeking to determine the main physiological characteristics that influence longevity. This has been outlined in a book called “BioMarkers”. What were the #1 and #2 factors that determined how long you’d live?

Strength and Muscle Mass (yes, even before “cardiovascular health”)

Clearly these two factors are incompatible with calorie restriction.

Furthermore, there has been a ton of research regarding insulin and longevity. The basic findings of these studies? The less insulin you release; the slower you age (in other words, insulin is the hormone of aging).

Finally, some have suggested that individuals can turn on these “longevity genes” (the same ones activated with calorie restriction) by performing a 1 day a week protein fast; ie. going vegan for 1 day a week. This however has yet to have been corroborated by any hard science.

As I said, it’s an incredibly complex topic that really has no real answers just yet.

But from a purely logical perspective - I personally don’t believe calorie restriction to be the answer. I mean, is a person who consumes 1600kcal/day going to live longer than someone who consumes 1900kcal/day? Where is the drop off point where restricting calories no longer increases lifespan (and may increase mortality)?

The final issue is food quality; which is never addressed in pure caloric content. Clearly a 2000kcal diet consisting of solely organic foods and wild meats will have a more positive effect on longevity than a 2000kcal diet consisting of fast food.

My two cents? Keep focusing on building muscle mass and strength, choose higher quality foods, and manage insulin properly. There also may be some benefit of going vegan 1 day a week - perhaps that’s something to experiment with (and there’s certain no issue with consuming more vegetables; so long as they’re high quality).

4

[quote]furo wrote:

I have watched a really interesting documentary on the benefits of low calorie diets and fasting with regards to life expectancy. I really recommend people check it out.[/quote]
That link says it’s only viewable in the UK, but I think I found it on Youtube.

I only watched a few minutes so far, but will check out the rest when I get time.

Like Tom said, strategic fasting is definitely an option for physique goals. Physical Culture pioneer Bernarr McFadden was writing about the health benefits of fasting back in the 1910s, and it’s definitely come back en vogue recently.

As I said, I haven’t watched the whole thing, but do they discuss the benefits of lean muscle and was he training appropriately to build muscle?

Yep, definitely an option if you plan it properly. Berardi had a great article about his thorough experiences with fasting protocols, and even discusses at least one client who gained significant size:
http://www.T-Nation.com/readArticle.do?id=4927546

You’d want to pay attention to proper nutrition (providing sufficient micro and macronutrients), proper training (to build lean muscle, manage bodyfat, improve cardiovascular health, and maintain mobility/joint health), and proper supplementation (to maximize the nutrition and training). I’d expect those three steps, all simple but not easy, would get you to your goals.

5

Some time ago, one of the authors here had responded in an article to a report about low-cal diets & related longevity.

I wish I could recall who it was, but basically he compared eating like that vs the way we all do in pursuit of muscle and strength.

His awesome conclusion was really a quality vs quantity issue.
In other words, you can eat like a bird and be small, weak, feel cold constantly (which all equal misery) for a long life, OR you can be big, strong, comfortable in your skin with a lust for life - albeit a shorter life.

I think we all know which direction we choose.

6

Pretty interesting documentary. I wouldn’t want to strike a balance per se. I want to get as strong as possible. BUT, if you can achieve that with some intermittent fasting every once in a while, that could be interesting if it would decrease your risk for illness. Like I said though, so long as it doesn’t impact strength, but that is probably asking too much.

7

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Some time ago, one of the authors here had responded in an article to a report about low-cal diets & related longevity.

I wish I could recall who it was, but basically he compared eating like that vs the way we all do in pursuit of muscle and strength.

His awesome conclusion was really a quality vs quantity issue.[/quote]
Dr. Jonny Bowden?

"… the research does show that calorie restriction is a pretty potent life-extender. Cutting back about 25 to 33 percent seems to do it. That’s not the strategy to follow if you’re trying to bulk up, but you don’t need to look like a vegan bean sprout to get the benefits.

Personally, my guess would be that as long as your calories are coming from really good sources, you’re not abusing your body (you know what I’m talking about), and you’re getting adequate rest, sun, sleep, and balance in your life, you’ll be fine.

And remember, goals change as we get older. When you’re pushing 60 it may not be as important to look like Dorian Yates. You’ll probably settle for low body fat, high energy, nice musculature, and all your sex organs in good working order. Being the biggest on the block may not be as important as being alive and well and still able to go all night."