That's Fit

I distinctly remember speaking with an unknown elderly couple many years ago while seated next to them at a restaurant. I don't recall what started the conversation, but I do know that it had something to do with food. At any rate, the elderly couple -- who both looked rather healthy, despite the fact that they were both in their late 80s -- proudly stated that the key to their longevity was not eating. "Huh," I muttered through a mouthfull of pasta primavera, only to be told once again by these fine people -- who dined only small bowls of soup -- that they attributed their long lives to eating very, very little food.

Fast forward several years and millions of calories later, and I found myself thumbing through a copy of Men's Health magazine at Border's while I chomped on a protein bar. Amazingly, I came across a small article on how many people in Okinawa, Japan consume 700 calories less per day than the average Westerner. Apparently, this low-calorie diet is based on the eating principle known as hara hachi bu -- only eating until eight-tenths full. Researchers posit that this may be part of the reason why Okinawans have among the lowest rate of heart disease, osteoporosis, and hormone-dependent cancers.

And then, just when I thought I couldn't possibly find any more information to support the claims made years prior by the elderly couple I met, I came across a study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. Said study validated their assertion, showing that eating fewer calories extended the average lifespan.

And THEN, about a week ago while I was warming up on the elliptical at the gym, I saw a Barbara Walters interview with people who associated their good health to what would seem like a dangerously low amount of daily calories. No, they weren't starving themselves, they were simply following the old adage of eating like a king at breakfast, a prince at lunch, and a pauper at dinner. But, in doing so, they were eating far less total calories than the average person does.

Needless to say, I was a bit shocked to learn that the quaint and pleasant elderly couple I encountered years ago may have actually been onto something. I suppose I should have realized this at the time, for their sunny disposition and easily observed good health was evidence that at least some credence should be lent to their claim. It's not to say that eating less calories to be healthy is a new concept; rather, it is the idea of eating even less than what is considered to be eating less that struck me as somewhat surprising, if entirely confounding. How could we possibly be nourished if we are constantly malnourished? Unless -- and this is when the old folk's advice, the article in Men's Health, the peer-reviewed journal article, and the Barbara Walters interview suddenly culminated into a novel thought --our Western standards for proper nourishment are overinflated. Would we do just fine -- if not better -- if we consumed, as many Okinawans do, 700 calories less per day?

I'd be very interested to hear any of your opinions on this matter, particularly those of you from the medical community. I wish I could somehow track down that elderly couple and ask them if they could elucidate further on their theory on how to live a long healthy life, but I never did get their names, let alone any contact information. That's a shame, really, since I'd be willing to bet that they're both still very much alive and continuing to enjoy pleasant dinner conversation with strangers.