Okinawa Data

[Ltldogg]

Hi Jeff,

I was doing some mathematical analysis of the breakdown you posted in this thread and there are several things that do not add up:

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=6117

[*]The fiber is way to low; even if the sweet potatoes were eaten without skin and the rice and other grains were processed and with little fiber, the total fiber would still be well above the 23 number.
[*]The total percent of calories for items do not match the total grams; for example, sweet potatoes (even the Okinawan type) would have to have a higher number of grams to be 69% of the total 1785 calories.

Do you have feedback on this? Just curious.

Thank you,
Scott

[JeffN]

Do you have feedback on this? Just curious.

From the study....

aData derived from analysis of U.S. National Archives, archived food records, 1949 and based on survey of 2279 persons.

bJapan National Nutrition Survey, 1950.

cTotal daily caloric intake was originally reported as 1785kcal/day in 1949. This was estimated to be 17% less than government-recommended daily intake. Differences in assumptions regarding particular foods, cooking methods, and choice of nutritional analysis programs result in a range of 1605 to 2012 kcal/day.

dPapaya and tomatoes were classified as vegetables.

The study does not list which software was used to analyze the data but different software would give some variance in the results. USDA Databases is updated every few years and there are often changes in some of the numbers and values and, our analysis is based on our local food supply which can sometimes be much different than their varieties of the same food.

http://www.nutribase.com/rqintro.html

"In many cases, the wild form of a plant or animal has a very different nutrient profile than its domesticated counterpart (e.g., berries, fish)."

So, as with any observational study, we get an "idea" of what was going on without the exact details being perfect.

They discuss other limitations within the paper also.

In Health
Jeff

[Ltldogg]

Jeff,

Thanks for the response. Have a great weekend.

Cheers,
Scott

[Ltldogg]

Speaking of the Okinawa Data, have you seen Dr. Gregor's NutritionalFacts.org video of the day?

http://nutritionfacts.org/video/caloric ... striction/

[JeffN]

Yes.

There is much more to CR then just protein restriction and the issues has been covered here several times and I try to keep it up to date. There have been several recent discussions on it.

Also, protein restriction, which involves the "moderation" of the intake of certain amino acids, especially a few found in higher amounts in animal protein, does not equal veganism nor does veganism alone confer the benfits of CR.

Here are some recent discussions on the topic from the CR list itself

http://arc.crsociety.org/read.php?2,205 ... msg-205045

http://arc.crsociety.org/read.php?2,218 ... msg-218570

http://arc.crsociety.org/read.php?2,213 ... msg-213736

What is most interesting, is that the recommended level of protein by the scientists who are doing the research on CR is .8 gm/kg, which surprisingly, is also the RDA. Maybe people just eat to much protein, especially animal protein, to begin with.

In Health
Jeff

[Ltldogg]

Yes, I can see why. For myself, I follow your guidelines for this WOE strictly; using Cronometer and ensuring I get enough calories every day, I still EASILY hit the RDA for protein.

*EDIT - not to confuse anyone, I don't use Cronometer every day or track calories and nutrients generally. I am familiar with it enough from practice to use it efficiently and know the numbers of the foods I eat over and over.

[JeffN]

I don't use Cronometer every day or track calories and nutrients generally. I am familiar with it enough from practice to use it efficiently and know the numbers of the foods I eat over and over.

Exactly as it should be!

In Health
Jeff