Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook      Sign In   
  • Create Account       

Photo

Energy efficiency as a unifying principle for human, environmental, and global health


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 AIL

AIL
  • Member
  • 33 posts

Posted 21 November 2017 - 06:00 AM

https://f1000researc...ticles/2-101/v1

 

This paper was a great read. It is quite a bit more wholesome than just talking about the health- and longevity-benefits of CR but it clearly mentions them and contains a great graph about the correlation of BMI to health-care cost, that you cannot really find anywhere else as most studies don't even include people below a BMI of 20.

 

This one does! It starts at a BMI of 13 and we can finally see what the real healthy BMI-range is:

It is 17-20 with the sweet-spot being at 18!



#2 Sibiriak

Sibiriak
  • Member
  • 368 posts

Posted 21 November 2017 - 09:35 AM

we can finally see what the real healthy BMI-range is:  It is 17-20 with the sweet-spot being at 18!

 

 

18 on that chart is the sweet spot for average annual per capita health care cost  [based on a sample (unpublished data) of 423,682 Italian adults aged 18–95 in 2008–2010.]

 

The best BMI for low medical expenditures (in one particular system) certainly may not be the best BMI for longevity.


Edited by Sibiriak, 21 November 2017 - 09:38 AM.


#3 AIL

AIL
  • Member
  • 33 posts

Posted 22 November 2017 - 06:45 AM

18 on that chart is the sweet spot for average annual per capita health care cost  [based on a sample (unpublished data) of 423,682 Italian adults aged 18–95 in 2008–2010.]

 

The best BMI for low medical expenditures (in one particular system) certainly may not be the best BMI for longevity.

I am aware that health-care-costs is not the same thing as life-expectancy, but I see no good reason to believe that a strong correlation between the two does not exists.

 

What better data do we have on that, though?

 

I'm not saying that this kind of data is the end-it-all to determine which BMI is ideal for longevity. I'm just expressing that it is much better than anything I've seen before, where charts didn't even look at BMIs below 20 and thus made it impossible to make good conclusions about the results of CR in that regard.



#4 Sibiriak

Sibiriak
  • Member
  • 368 posts

Posted 22 November 2017 - 09:51 AM

I am aware that health-care-costs is not the same thing as life-expectancy, but I see no good reason to believe that a strong correlation between the two does not exists.

 

There could be a number of reasons why a very long life might entail higher  health-care costs.
 

I'm not saying that this kind of data is the end-it-all to determine which BMI is ideal for longevity. I'm just expressing that it is much better than anything I've seen before, where charts didn't even look at BMIs below 20

 

 

Cf.   BMI and all cause mortality: systematic review and non-linear dose-response meta-analysis of 230 cohort studies with 3.74 million deaths among 30.3 million participants

http://www.bmj.com/c...t/353/bmj.i2156

 

Body-mass index and all-cause mortality

https://www.crsociet...ity/#entry17604

 

Optimal Late-Life BMI for Longevity

https://www.crsociet...-for-longevity/


Edited by Sibiriak, 22 November 2017 - 10:00 AM.