Great question. At this stage I'm open to anything.
Well, the answer is YES. But it's not easy.
The benefit is a 10-15% reduced mortality risk.
The Trial.
The study was called the CALERIE trial. Links included below.
For the experiment, a portion of the 220 healthy men and women who participated ate normally, and the rest were put on a 25% calorie-restricted diet for two years.
Biological aging was determined by blood samples during, before and after the experiment. Scientists analysed “methylation biomarkers” in the participants DNA, which reflects the pace of aging. This was considered a more practical way to facilitate a shorter period of which time over which the trial could be conducted.
The Findings.
The findings were that biological aging was 2% - 3% slower in the calorie-restricted group, which the scientists said represented a 10% to 15% reduction in their mortality risk.
Good news and bad news: The good news is, now you know how you can live longer. The bad news is you have to restrict your calorie intake by 25% to do it.
Consider this.
As a 90KG male adult, your base metabolic rate may allow 2,000 calories, as an example to maintain your weight on a daily basis. Now you need to drop 500 calories in accordance with the above trial to live longer.
Still not worried. Think about your daily consumption, some examples below:
- Flat white coffee is about 150 calories. Maybe you have 2 a day. 300 calories, thanks for coming.
- Muffin with your first coffee. 400 calories.
- Classic BLT for lunch, 400 calories
- Snack bar for afternoon tea, 200 calories
- Glass of wine with dinner, 125 calories
- Dinner, say 700-1,000 calories.
- No desert or beers.
Bang, total for the day is over 2,000 calories and you would need to be around the 1500 mark ongoing. It all adds up quickly doesn't it.
Links.
The research trial can be on viewed on Pubmed here and on Nature.com here.
Podcast
Or just listen to the Old Bull Health podcast on the CALERIE Trial here.