Need more emphasis on diet

I was disappointed to read through the current age reversal protocol promoted here, and it seems to be focused on expensive "magic pills". There was some mention of calorie restriction, but no other talk of diet, which should be by far the primary emphasis. My wife I have been eating whole food plant-based (Fuhrman, McDougall, Greger, Esselstyn, ...) for fifteen years with excellent results for our general health.

13replies Oldest first
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Active threads
  • Popular
  • Some say secret to success: Aim High, Start Small, and Keep Going......Wright brothers are good examples...I guess

    Reply Like
  • General health is great. It's not age reversal. 

    Reply Like 1
  • Bruce, I tend to agree with you.

    You likely know this all but just pop into this review (it is from 2016 though) you migh like.

    Dato S, Bellizzi D, Rose G, Passarino G. The impact of nutrients on the aging rate: A complex interaction of demographic, environmental and genetic factors. Mech Ageing Dev. 2016;154:49-61.

    I also try to keep a thread on the Longecity Forum where you might find something interesting:

    Reply Like 1
  • Your approach sounds exactly like what we do in my household. Fuhrman diet primarily (whole food plant based) - no animal products, but occasional extras like a bit of sourdough bread. Yes the approach here is pill focused, which I view as an extension to WFPBD (whole foods plant based diet) to be used starting around 45 years. Bill F is certainly a proponent of this diet, calorie restriction/fasting etc, but the fact is most people won't do it so I think because of that he doesn't promote it. 

    I should mention, a major fault of Fuhrman/Goldhammer/McDougal is that they come from the Pritikan school of thought. They are firmly anti <anything but plant food>. I've spent some time with these folks, caught them making cognitive bias mistakes, and heard the proselytizing about "it's just the FOOD". Which I agree, until you get older, when you need stronger interventions. 

    Reply Like 2
  • Bah humbug to the sacred cow of diet and exercise! Know more at:

    Reply Like 1
  • agreed , the quality of the food and its energy it transfers to our cells are paramount to our good health. this is all about turning on our energy cells and turning off the inherited bad cells from ancestor's from 100 s of generations within us.

    Reply Like 1
  • I think more can be accomplished with diet than people think. I think optimizing diet gets you closer to the current max lifespan which suits me fine while I wait for reversal to come along, I am 57. I know zero older people who have what I think is a good diet or do any meaningful amount of exercise. IMO they are leaving 15 good years on the table.


    I was strictly whole foods plant based, low fat (Gregor/Esselstyn) for the last few years and exercise recovery and immune function were poor. I recently added some cooked oysters and scallops for the zinc, b12, selenium and taurine, plus a little cheese for the calcium and probiotics and it has made a world of difference. 


    Don't the Loma Linda pescatarians live the longest?

    Reply Like 2
  • I cofounded the CR Society a quarter of a century ago because I believed diet was the most powerful intervention we currently have. I still believe that (Bill Faloon does as well). The problem is that even that power is pretty limited compared to what might be within our reach soon if we keep supporting research. I think that's why so many people talk about things other than diet: we want these other treatments to be perfected (and new ones discovered).

    Reply Like 2
  • I completely agree with Brian - I experimented with every approach I could find (diet, exercise, supplements etc) to deal with poor bloodwork numbers in my 20's and found that diet had a profound effect while everything else was relatively minor.


    I'd put a caveat on that though that as we age evidence seems (to me at least) to show that diet becomes less and less effective to combat the effects of getting older. I view it as diet will get you to 50, and after that you need additional power of supplements and pharmaceuticals. For example, when I was younger supplements had little effect, but at 50 they had a much greater effect. Which is simple to understand, taking CoQ10 when younger is probably ineffectual since you make so much of it, but replacing it when older can have a much greater effect due to diminished production. In particular restorative supplements that fix underlying processes have a great effect (e.g. ALA/ALC) probably because they underly other processes, where replacement supplements/medications (phosphitydlcholine, hormones, ...) have the effect of just making you feel normal again. 


    So for me diet is the foundation of my health (along with sleep), exercise is the handmaiden, and suppls/medications are the upper stories, if you like. 

    Reply Like 2
  • Has anyone else here used the PhenoAge spreadsheet by JGC to measure the results of their dietary/lifestyle/supplement choices? 

    Reply Like
  • I'm in the camp of diet is a powerful anti-aging device.  However....I note this quote "nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution" and qualify my support of diet by saying that from birth most humans have been living in a way for which the eons of evolution did not design them.  That includes food, toxins, stressors, etc that have accelerated the rate of aging and done progressive damage.  We tend to notice at some point mid life and try to rectify it.  Just stopping chronic inflammation which lies at the root of much if not all of aging is a biggie.  Some can heal but perhaps big guns and magic pills are best viewed in light of 'when self-healing can't to it all."  Me I am big on CRP level at the bottom of the scale, and think that's my best chance.  The kind of diet is something of a can of worms--the controversies abound...I tend toward looking to evolution on that as well but allow all a lot of variety for tastes and flexibility.   If CRP is elevated, pretty good guess is that your diet needs work.  Fish eaters the world over tend to fare well.

    Reply Like
      • Danmoderator
      • skipping my funeral
      • dantheman
      • 3 days ago
      • Reported - view

      Ellie FWIW I think evolution can’t be used as argument either way. For example, just because we are living in different conditions than we evolved under does not imply they are bad for longevity. Certainly we know from lifespan data that modern life is actually better for longevity, stress and diet notwithstanding.


      Others like claim evolution as proof of all sorts of nutty diets but there’s no basis for that argument.

      Reply Like
Like2 Follow
  • 3 days agoLast active
  • 13Replies
  • 186Views
  • 10 Following