So you're saying they either did caloric restriction portion control within a 10 hour window or another group within the study , eight sub maintenance calories . So , caloric restriction cr as we're calling it the acronym cr but restricted that to an eight hour feeding window and they didn't see any difference in terms of weight loss . But , but it's not all that surprising , right ?
But still he did not see change in longevity even within those two . So that means um when you do caloric restriction and then at least per miles and you are within 12 hours window , um , that's , that is giving the mice the best benefit the optimum benefit and um 23 or five or 12 per mi doesn't matter , at least for longevity .
And then this caloric restrictor mice that never got into super fasting but kind of eating snacking throughout day and night that also lived 10% extra 10% longer . So that means caloric restriction , extended lifespan by 10% . I've wondered about this because recently , you know , there's been , there were a bunch of news headlines about intermittent fasting and , and frankly , I was frustrated .
So there is a famous experiment that was published last year by J Takahi Islam and it came out in science and that relates to caloric restriction . And we kind of started with this idea .
So they are already eating for 10 hours and fasting for uh 14 hours . All participants had to reduce their calorie intake and they reduced by almost 25% . The cr group continued with 10 hours eating window and the cr plus time restricted group had to eat the same number of calories within eight hours .
