by Anai Rhoads

With America battling the bulge, we find ourselves drowning in various diets that simply do not work. The newest fad to surface is the Caloric Restriction Diet, or simple better known as "CR".

CR is based on research that suggests consuming fewer calories helps the individual live longer, avoid disease, and even claims to reverse a greying person to their natural hair colour. CR makes a good argument when it comes to weight loss, but at what price?

CR's History

In 1987, Dr Roy Walford led a study along with the National Institute on Aging where rhesus monkeys were used to experiment the results of caloric restriction. The NIA conducted a study of CR to determine how the diet would affect overall performance. After 12 years of research and application, it was concluded that CR showed promising data when it came down to life span, the aging processes and disease in general.

Populations in third-world countries which have limited food supply and consume fewer calories do not live longer due in large to inadequate nutrition. But it is proven that Okinawa is an example of low caloric intake with adequate nutrition, which researchers believe may be why Okinawans live so long. The Okinawa diet consists of at least 7 servings of vegetables and fruits daily, an equal number of grains, two daily servings of soy products, green tea every day, and fish rich in omega-3s, which is very similar to how the CR diet is set up.

The following are the negative aspects to this diet:

• It will in no doubt, become the next craze in America that may ultimately leave many in an anorexic state if not supervised properly.
• It is more of a crash diet - suggesting women eat only 1,000-1,200 calories per day, and men restricted to 1,500 to 1,700 calories per day.
• It has been noted that there is a significant reduction of iron in the CR diet, yet - "those taking iron supplements should consider that excess iron may promote disease such as cancer "[1]
• There is little data gathered about the hereditary factor. It would be considered neither safe nor effective in certain individuals with a background of disease and weakened immune systems.
• The NIA continues to experiment with the Caloric Restriction in order to further the connection between low calorie and optimum health. Although this study recognised that monkeys are nearly identical to humans genetically (over 90%), the researchers at NIA have yet to treat them with the same respect.

Speaking to several who praise CR, there is a clear distaste with Vegans among the community. A good percentage claim to have been Vegans in the past, but were struggling with their protein intake, so opted for the CR diet instead. When I listed foods that would adequately supply them with protein without using animal products, they appeared surprised and unknowing of the basic Vegan diet. My only conclusion was that they either were never really Vegans or were but lacked the information required to maintain the Vegan diet properly.

It makes one wonder how ex-Vegans can turn their back on the animals they once wished to protect and save in order to satisfy their own needs. It is worrying that this diet may spread quickly without the consideration for the rhesus monkeys that were experimented on while in search for the fountain of youth.

[1] Blanc JF, et al. (2000). Iron overload and cancer. Bulletin de l'Academie Nationale de Medecine, 184(2), pages 355

© Copyright 2002 Anai Rhoads. All Rights Reserved.