>I put in 6'0", 120lb male, age 30 and just looking for basal metabolic rate gives 1500cals. Sedentary gives 1850cals. I've spent a bit of time researching CR

>I put in 6'0", 120lb male, age 30 and just looking for basal metabolic rate gives 1500cals. Sedentary gives 1850cals. I've spent a bit of time researching CR and I can tell you those numbers are way too low. As an anecdote, one of the most dedicated and extreme practitioners in the world is at about 6 foot 120 pounds and his diet: >Tonight’s calculations are based on Michael’s caloric requirements, and those requirements are as strict as they come. Unlike April’s daily average of about 1,300 calories, which really is an average (she likes to go out drinking and dining with friends on weekends, and doesn’t mind enduring a few 1,000-calorie weekdays to save up for the splurge), Michael’s regimen of 1,913 calories a day is exactly that: 1,913 calories every single day http://nymag.com/news/features/23169/index1.html http://nymag.com/news/features/23169/index1.html >There is emerging evidence that while CR is effective, an alternate approach that is less extreme could also be just as effective: intermittent fasting[1]. There are a lot of controversial things in CR research (high protein vs low protein for example) but one thing that has been pretty much conclusively established is that IF only gives CR benefits to the degree that it ends up lowering calories. Many people do find that IF makes it easier to stay on a restricted diet, but ultimately, it comes down to calories.