In last week’s post I pointed out some flaws in the arguments supporting both Intermittent Fasting (IF) and Calorie Restriction (CR). But now, in this second part, let’s tackle specifically CR. Fortunately, it’s not a very mainstream movement yet, but it’s worth talking about it to prevent those interested in health and aging from falling into their traps.
Calorie Restriction: an eating disorder?
The group that promotes it most is the Calorie Restriction Society. And I’m sorry, but I can’t be impartial towards them. They’re screwed up. They say they have nothing to do with anorexics, but they are just like them. Only that they believe they’re too intelligent to have an eating disorder. Their page outlining the differences between CR and anorexia is plainly outrageous (I was going to say hilarious, but then I’ve remembered this is a life/death question).
Perhaps my favorite is “anorexia: I am bad” vs “calorie restriction”: I am good”. They clearly don’t know what they’re talking about, the strong moral implications of anorexia. Although “obsessed with the scale on your bathroom floor” vs “obsessed with the scale on your kitchen counter” is a close second. Wtf. I believe the most lucid conclusion is this one by Kate Taylor:
“I’ve always thought that voluntary starvation has potential appeal for a lot of people. It just happens that in our society it’s mostly women who push dieting far enough to discover the possible benefits: the emotional solace, the outlet for anger, the spiritual elevation, or intellectual edge. But CR now offers an opportunity for hyperrational, slightly obsessive men—men who are uncomfortable with aspects of a conventional male identity—to discover the upside of starvation”.