TL;DR: Calorie restriction (CR) — reducing caloric intake by roughly 15 to 40 percent below ad libitum levels while maintaining adequate nutrition — is the most consistently demonstrated dietary intervention for extending lifespan and slowing aging across species from yeast to primates. In animal models, CR preserves memory, protects neurons, increases BDNF, activates sirtuins and autophagy, and delays the onset of neurodegenerative disease. The CALERIE trial — the first controlled study of sustained CR in healthy humans — showed improvements in cardiometabolic markers and some biological aging measures, but direct cognitive outcomes were not its primary focus. A 2009 study by Witte and colleagues found that moderate caloric restriction improved verbal memory in older adults, providing some of the only direct human evidence. CR carries real risks including muscle loss, hormonal disruption, and nutrient deficiency, making it inappropriate for many populations. CR mimetics — compounds like resveratrol, metformin, and spermidine that activate some of the same pathways without reducing food intake — are an active area of research but remain unproven for brain outcomes.
Introduction
No intervention in the history of aging research has been replicated as consistently as calorie restriction. Since Clive McCay first demonstrated in 1935 at Cornell University that rats fed fewer calories lived significantly longer than their freely fed counterparts, the finding has been confirmed in yeast, nematode worms, fruit flies, mice, rats, dogs, and — with important caveats — nonhuman primates. The extension is not trivial. In some rodent strains, CR increases maximum lifespan by 30 to 50 percent, an effect that no pharmaceutical intervention has come close to matching.
But lifespan alone is not the question that matters most for readers of this site. The question is whether calorie restriction protects the brain — whether it preserves memory, delays cognitive decline, and reduces the risk of neurodegenerative disease. And if it does, whether the degree of restriction required is safe, sustainable, and realistic for humans who are not living in metabolic cages under laboratory supervision.
The answer, as is often the case in nutrition science, is layered. The animal evidence is genuinely impressive. The mechanisms are well characterized and biologically compelling. The human evidence is promising but thin. And the practical considerations — including the real risks of sustained caloric restriction — demand honest discussion.
Calorie Restriction in Animal Models
Rodent Studies: The Foundation
The rodent literature on CR and brain aging is extensive and remarkably consistent. Decades of research, spanning multiple laboratories and mouse and rat strains, have established that animals fed 20 to 40 percent fewer calories than ad libitum controls show a constellation of brain benefits.
CR rodents maintain hippocampal volume and neuronal density better than their freely fed counterparts as they age. They perform better on spatial learning tasks such as the Morris water maze and on object recognition memory tests in old age. They show reduced accumulation of oxidatively damaged proteins and lipids in brain tissue. They maintain higher levels of synaptic plasticity markers, including long-term potentiation in the hippocampus.
Halagappa and colleagues (2007), in a study published in Neurobiology of Disease, demonstrated that CR delayed the onset and slowed the progression of Alzheimer’s-like pathology in a transgenic mouse model (3xTgAD), reducing both amyloid plaque deposition and tau phosphorylation. Similar findings have been reported in other transgenic Alzheimer’s models and in models of Parkinson’s disease and Huntington’s disease. Patel and colleagues (2005), in Annals of Neurology, showed that CR protected against the dopaminergic neurodegeneration induced by MPTP, a toxin used to model Parkinson’s disease in mice.
The magnitude of these effects is notable. CR does not merely slow brain aging by a small margin — in many studies, the brains of old calorie-restricted animals resemble those of much younger ad libitum-fed animals on multiple molecular, structural, and functional measures.
Primate Studies: Closer to Humans
Two landmark primate CR studies have run for decades, and their results are both illuminating and somewhat discordant.
The Wisconsin National Primate Research Center study, initiated in 1989 and reported by Colman and colleagues in Science (2009, with updates through 2014), followed rhesus macaques on 30 percent CR versus ad libitum feeding. The CR monkeys showed significantly reduced incidence of age-related disease (diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer) and a trend toward increased survival. Brain imaging revealed that CR preserved gray matter volume in several regions, particularly the prefrontal cortex and hippocampus, compared to controls who showed age-typical atrophy.
The National Institute on Aging (NIA) study, reported by Mattison and colleagues in Nature (2012), followed a similar protocol but found no significant difference in survival between CR and control groups. However, the NIA controls were not truly ad libitum — they were fed a controlled diet that prevented obesity, unlike the Wisconsin controls who were allowed to eat freely and many became overweight. When Mattison, Colman, and colleagues published a combined analysis in 2017 in Nature Communications, reconciling the two studies, the consensus was that CR does improve healthspan and reduce age-related disease in primates, but the magnitude of benefit depends partly on the baseline diet and metabolic status of the comparison group.
For brain-specific outcomes, the primate data is more limited. Willette and colleagues (2012), in Neurobiology of Aging, analyzed MRI data from the Wisconsin study and reported that CR attenuated age-related brain atrophy, particularly in regions involved in motor function and executive control. Behavioral cognitive testing in the CR primates has been less systematic, but the structural preservation findings align with the rodent data.
Mechanisms: Why Calorie Restriction Protects the Brain
The mechanistic case for CR and brain health rests on several interconnected biological pathways. Unlike many dietary interventions where the proposed mechanisms are speculative, the CR mechanisms have been mapped in substantial molecular detail.
SIRT1 and the Sirtuin Pathway
Sirtuins are a family of NAD+-dependent deacetylases that regulate gene expression, DNA repair, mitochondrial function, and cellular stress responses. SIRT1, the most studied member of this family, is activated during conditions of energy deficit — including calorie restriction.
In the brain, SIRT1 activation promotes neuronal survival, enhances synaptic plasticity, and suppresses neuroinflammation. Gao and colleagues (2010), in Cell Metabolism, demonstrated that SIRT1 overexpression in mouse brain reduced amyloid-beta production by activating alpha-secretase, shifting amyloid precursor protein processing away from the amyloidogenic pathway. Conversely, SIRT1 knockout mice show accelerated neurodegeneration and cognitive decline.
Leonard Guarente’s laboratory at MIT was instrumental in establishing the connection between CR and sirtuins. His work in yeast and later in mammalian systems showed that CR extends lifespan at least partly through sirtuin activation, and that this pathway is conserved across species. The relationship between CR and SIRT1 is now one of the best-characterized molecular links between diet and aging.
However, the sirtuin story is not without controversy. Some researchers have questioned whether SIRT1 is truly required for CR’s lifespan-extending effects, as studies in certain yeast and worm strains with sirtuin deletions have shown partial preservation of CR benefits. The current consensus is that sirtuins are important mediators of CR’s effects but likely not the only pathway involved.
mTOR Suppression
The mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) is a nutrient-sensing kinase that functions as a master regulator of cell growth, protein synthesis, and autophagy. When nutrients are abundant, mTOR is active, driving anabolic processes — cell growth, protein synthesis, proliferation. When nutrients are scarce, as during CR, mTOR is suppressed, shifting cellular resources from growth toward repair and maintenance.
This growth-to-maintenance shift is fundamental to CR’s anti-aging effects. Chronic mTOR hyperactivation — driven by the caloric excess and high protein intake characteristic of modern Western diets — is increasingly recognized as a driver of aging and age-related disease. Rapamycin, a direct mTOR inhibitor, extends lifespan in mice even when administered late in life, confirming that mTOR suppression is a genuine longevity pathway.
In the brain specifically, mTOR inhibition enhances autophagy of damaged proteins (including amyloid-beta and alpha-synuclein), promotes mitochondrial quality control, and reduces neuroinflammation. Caccamo and colleagues (2010), in Journal of Biological Chemistry, showed that rapamycin reduced amyloid and tau pathology and improved cognition in a triple-transgenic Alzheimer’s mouse model. CR likely achieves a milder version of these same effects through partial mTOR suppression.
Autophagy Enhancement
Autophagy — the cellular self-cleaning process by which damaged organelles, misfolded proteins, and other debris are degraded and recycled — declines with age. This decline is thought to contribute to the accumulation of toxic protein aggregates that characterize neurodegenerative diseases: amyloid-beta and tau tangles in Alzheimer’s, alpha-synuclein in Parkinson’s, huntingtin in Huntington’s.
CR is one of the most potent natural inducers of autophagy. By simultaneously activating AMPK (an energy-sensing kinase that detects low cellular ATP) and suppressing mTOR, calorie restriction shifts cells into a repair mode where autophagy is upregulated. Alirezaei and colleagues (2010), in a study published in Autophagy, demonstrated that short-term food restriction dramatically increased autophagy markers in the mouse brain, including in cortical and hippocampal neurons.
The therapeutic implications are straightforward in principle: if the aging brain accumulates toxic proteins partly because autophagy slows down, then interventions that restore autophagic activity might slow neurodegeneration. CR achieves this in animal models. Whether human CR at tolerable levels achieves sufficient autophagic upregulation in the brain to be clinically meaningful remains an open question.
BDNF Upregulation
Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) is a growth factor critical for synaptic plasticity, neuronal survival, and the formation and consolidation of memories. BDNF levels decline with age and are reduced in Alzheimer’s disease, depression, and other neurological conditions. Dietary strategies for increasing BDNF are explored in our article on foods that increase BDNF.
CR reliably increases BDNF expression in the rodent hippocampus. Duan and colleagues (2001), in work from Mark Mattson’s laboratory published in Journal of Neurochemistry, showed that dietary restriction increased BDNF mRNA and protein levels in the hippocampus and cortex of rats, and that this increase was associated with enhanced neuronal resistance to excitotoxic and oxidative injury. The BDNF upregulation pathway likely overlaps with the sirtuin and CREB (cAMP response element-binding protein) signaling cascades that are activated during energy deficit.
In humans, peripheral BDNF levels can be measured in blood, but as with intermittent fasting research, the relationship between serum BDNF and brain BDNF remains uncertain. Some human CR studies have reported increases in circulating BDNF, but these findings are inconsistent.
Human Evidence: What We Actually Know
The CALERIE Trial
The Comprehensive Assessment of Long-term Effects of Reducing Intake of Energy (CALERIE) trial is the gold standard for human CR research. It is the only large, randomized, controlled study of sustained calorie restriction in healthy, non-obese humans.
CALERIE Phase 2, published by Ravussin and colleagues (2015) in JAMA Internal Medicine, randomized 218 healthy adults (aged 21 to 50, BMI 22 to 28) to either 25 percent calorie restriction or ad libitum eating for two years. In practice, participants achieved approximately 12 percent sustained CR over the study period — less than the target, but still a meaningful and sustained reduction.
The results were significant for cardiometabolic health. CR participants showed reductions in body weight, body fat, blood pressure, cholesterol, C-reactive protein, insulin resistance, and metabolic syndrome markers. They also showed improvements in a composite measure of biological aging, suggesting that CR was genuinely slowing some aspects of the aging process.
However, CALERIE did not include comprehensive cognitive testing as a primary outcome. Some mood and quality-of-life measures were assessed, and the CR group reported improved sleep quality and sexual function without negative effects on mood. But whether 12 percent CR over two years improved memory, executive function, or processing speed in these healthy young-to-middle-aged adults was not systematically measured. This is a significant gap in the literature.
Belsky and colleagues (2017), analyzing CALERIE data published in The Journals of Gerontology, applied the Pace of Aging metric and found that CR participants showed a slower rate of biological aging compared to controls. While this does not directly measure brain aging, it suggests that the systemic anti-aging effects of CR observed in animal models have at least partial correlates in humans.
Witte 2009: Direct Cognitive Evidence
The most frequently cited human study directly linking CR to cognitive improvement is the 2009 trial by Witte and colleagues, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. This study randomized 50 healthy elderly subjects (mean age approximately 60, mean BMI approximately 28) to one of three groups: 30 percent calorie restriction, increased unsaturated fatty acid intake, or a control group maintaining their usual diet. The intervention lasted three months.
The CR group showed a statistically significant improvement in verbal memory scores, with a mean increase of approximately 20 percent on the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test. This improvement correlated with decreases in fasting insulin and C-reactive protein levels, suggesting that the cognitive benefit was mediated at least partly through improvements in insulin sensitivity and reduction of inflammation.
This is a notable finding, but important caveats apply. The study was small. Three months is short. The participants were overweight on average, so the benefits may partly reflect improvements from weight loss and metabolic normalization rather than CR per se. And the study has not been replicated at the same scale with the same design.
Other Human Findings
Several smaller studies and observational analyses add to the picture without resolving it:
Prehn and colleagues (2017), in Cerebral Cortex, reported that calorie restriction in overweight older women was associated with improved memory performance and increased hippocampal functional connectivity, with changes correlating to weight loss and metabolic improvements.
Epidemiological data from Okinawa, where the traditional diet is approximately 10 to 15 percent lower in calories than the Japanese average, has been cited as circumstantial evidence for CR and longevity. Okinawans have historically had lower rates of dementia and age-related cognitive decline compared to mainland Japanese populations. However, separating the caloric component from the high vegetable intake, fish consumption, social connectivity, and physical activity that characterize the traditional Okinawan lifestyle is impossible in observational data.
Fontana and colleagues (2004), studying members of the Calorie Restriction Society — individuals who voluntarily practice long-term CR — reported improvements in cardiometabolic markers including lower blood pressure, lower cholesterol, and lower inflammatory markers compared to age-matched controls eating Western diets. Cognitive outcomes were not formally assessed in these studies, but the cardiometabolic improvements are themselves relevant to long-term brain health, given the well-established links between cardiovascular risk factors and dementia.
Risks and Downsides of Calorie Restriction
The enthusiasm for CR’s anti-aging effects must be weighed against its real and significant risks. Laboratory animals are fed nutritionally complete diets under controlled conditions. Humans making their own food choices while eating fewer calories face different challenges.
Muscle Loss and Sarcopenia
CR inevitably leads to some loss of lean body mass alongside fat loss, particularly if protein intake is not carefully managed and resistance exercise is not maintained. The CALERIE trial found that participants lost approximately two-thirds fat mass and one-third lean mass. For young and middle-aged adults, this may be recoverable. For older adults, who are already losing muscle mass at a rate of approximately 1 to 2 percent per year after age 50, CR-induced muscle loss can accelerate the trajectory toward sarcopenia — a condition associated with falls, disability, and cognitive decline.
The brain-body connection here is important. Sarcopenia and cognitive decline share common risk factors and often co-occur. Skeletal muscle is a significant source of myokines, including BDNF and irisin, that support brain health. Losing muscle mass may undermine some of the very pathways that CR is supposed to activate.
Hormonal Disruption
Sustained calorie restriction affects the hypothalamic-pituitary axis, leading to reductions in thyroid hormone (T3), reproductive hormones (estrogen, testosterone, progesterone), and growth factors including IGF-1. While reduced IGF-1 is considered one of the beneficial mechanisms of CR in aging research, suppression of thyroid and reproductive hormones has consequences.
In the CALERIE trial, men showed reductions in testosterone levels, and women in the CR group reported increased menstrual irregularity. In the broader CR community, amenorrhea (loss of menstrual periods) is a commonly reported side effect. These hormonal changes are the body’s adaptive response to energy deficit — they are not pathological in the immediate sense, but their long-term consequences for bone density, mood, cognitive function, and reproductive health deserve serious consideration.
Nutrient Deficiency Risk
Eating less food means fewer opportunities to obtain essential micronutrients. Without careful dietary planning, CR increases the risk of deficiencies in iron, calcium, zinc, vitamin B12, and other nutrients critical for brain function. This is a particular concern because many of the populations most interested in CR for brain health — middle-aged and older adults — are already at elevated risk for certain nutrient deficiencies due to age-related changes in absorption and metabolism.
Psychological and Social Costs
Sustained CR requires constant attention to food intake in a way that can become psychologically burdensome. For some individuals, the meticulous tracking of calories crosses into disordered eating territory. The social costs — difficulty eating with family and friends, preoccupation with food, rigidity around meals — should not be dismissed. Psychological well-being and social connection are themselves powerful predictors of cognitive health in aging.
CR Mimetics: Activating the Pathways Without the Restriction
Given the challenges of sustained CR, researchers have pursued compounds that activate the same molecular pathways — SIRT1, AMPK, mTOR suppression, autophagy — without requiring reduced food intake. These are called calorie restriction mimetics.
Resveratrol
Resveratrol, a polyphenol found in red wine, grapes, and berries, was catapulted into the spotlight by David Sinclair’s 2003 paper in Nature showing that it activated SIRT1 and extended the lifespan of yeast. Subsequent studies showed lifespan extension in nematode worms and fruit flies, and improved metabolic health in obese mice on high-fat diets.
However, resveratrol’s story has become considerably more complicated. It has poor bioavailability in humans — most of an oral dose is rapidly metabolized before reaching systemic circulation. A large randomized trial of resveratrol in Alzheimer’s disease (Turner et al., 2015, in Neurology) found that resveratrol was safe and crossed the blood-brain barrier, but showed no significant cognitive benefit over 12 months, though it did reduce CSF amyloid-beta levels slightly. Whether longer treatment, higher doses, or better-absorbed formulations would produce cognitive benefits remains unknown.
Metformin
Metformin, a widely prescribed type 2 diabetes drug, activates AMPK and suppresses mTOR — two key CR pathways. Observational studies have suggested that diabetic patients taking metformin have lower rates of dementia than both untreated diabetics and, in some analyses, even non-diabetic controls. This surprising finding has generated enormous interest.
The TAME (Targeting Aging with Metformin) trial, launched in 2019, is designed to test whether metformin slows aging-related disease progression in healthy older adults. It includes cognitive outcomes. Until TAME results are available, the evidence for metformin as a brain-protective CR mimetic remains indirect and observational.
Spermidine
Spermidine, a naturally occurring polyamine found in aged cheese, mushrooms, soy products, and wheat germ, has emerged as a particularly interesting CR mimetic. It induces autophagy through a mechanism independent of mTOR, and animal studies have shown that spermidine supplementation extends lifespan and improves cognitive function in aging mice.
Schwarz and colleagues (2018), in Cortex, conducted a randomized controlled trial of spermidine supplementation in older adults with subjective cognitive decline and reported modest improvements in memory performance. A larger trial (SmartAge) has been conducted but its full cognitive results are still being analyzed. Spermidine is arguably the CR mimetic with the most promising early human cognitive data, but the evidence remains preliminary.
Rapamycin
Rapamycin, a direct mTOR inhibitor, extends lifespan in mice more reliably than almost any other intervention. However, its immunosuppressive properties at conventional doses make it problematic for use as a longevity intervention in healthy humans. Low-dose rapamycin protocols are being explored in aging research, but human cognitive outcome data does not yet exist.
A Practical Moderate Approach
Given the state of the evidence — strong animal data, plausible mechanisms, limited human cognitive evidence, and real risks — an extreme CR protocol is not justified for most people seeking to protect their brain health. However, the principles underlying CR can be applied in a moderate, sustainable way.
Mild calorie restriction in the range of 10 to 15 percent below typical intake — essentially eating slightly less than you normally would while maintaining nutritional quality — is more sustainable than the 25 to 40 percent restriction used in animal studies and carries fewer risks. The CALERIE trial achieved approximately 12 percent CR with acceptable side effects in healthy adults, and participants maintained the protocol for two years.
Combining mild CR with high dietary quality amplifies the benefit. Restricting calories while eating a Mediterranean-style or MIND diet pattern ensures that the reduced food intake is rich in the nutrients most consistently linked to brain health: omega-3 fatty acids, polyphenols, B vitamins, and antioxidants. Restricting calories while eating a nutrient-poor diet is a recipe for deficiency, not longevity.
Resistance exercise during CR is not optional — it is essential. Without it, too large a proportion of weight loss comes from lean mass. Exercise also independently activates many of the same pathways as CR (AMPK, BDNF, autophagy) and has a stronger direct evidence base for cognitive benefits in humans than CR alone.
Periodic rather than continuous restriction may offer a middle path. Approaches such as the 5:2 diet or periodic fasting-mimicking diet cycles (as developed by Valter Longo) may capture some of CR’s benefits while allowing normal eating on most days, improving adherence and reducing the risks of sustained deficit.
Practical Takeaway
Calorie restriction is the most replicated anti-aging intervention in biology. Its effects on lifespan and brain health in animal models are robust, consistent, and mechanistically well understood.
The core mechanisms — SIRT1, mTOR suppression, autophagy, BDNF — are genuine longevity pathways. They are not speculative. The question is whether the degree of CR achievable in free-living humans activates them sufficiently.
Human evidence for direct cognitive benefits is limited but encouraging. The Witte 2009 study showing memory improvement with CR is notable, and the CALERIE trial demonstrates that moderate CR is feasible and metabolically beneficial in healthy humans. But no large, long-term trial has demonstrated that CR prevents cognitive decline or dementia in humans.
Moderate CR (10 to 15 percent reduction) is more practical and safer than aggressive restriction. This level avoids the worst risks of muscle loss, hormonal disruption, and nutrient deficiency while potentially capturing some of the metabolic and anti-inflammatory benefits.
Dietary quality matters more than caloric quantity for brain health. Restricting calories while eating poorly is counterproductive. CR should be combined with a nutrient-dense dietary pattern such as the Mediterranean or MIND diet.
CR mimetics are promising but unproven for cognition. Spermidine, metformin, and resveratrol each have interesting preliminary data, but none has demonstrated clear cognitive benefits in large human trials.
Resistance exercise is a non-negotiable companion to any CR approach. It preserves muscle mass, independently activates neuroprotective pathways, and has stronger direct evidence for cognitive benefits than calorie restriction alone.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much calorie restriction is needed to see brain benefits?
In animal studies, the typical range is 20 to 40 percent below ad libitum intake, with 30 percent being the most common protocol. In the only controlled human CR trial (CALERIE), participants achieved approximately 12 percent sustained reduction over two years. In the Witte 2009 study that found memory improvement, the target was 30 percent. The honest answer is that we do not know the minimum effective dose for brain-specific benefits in humans. Based on the available evidence, 10 to 15 percent reduction — roughly equivalent to eliminating unnecessary snacking and modest portion reduction — is a reasonable starting point that avoids the worst risks.
Is calorie restriction the same as intermittent fasting?
No, though they share overlapping mechanisms. Calorie restriction refers to a sustained reduction in total caloric intake regardless of meal timing. Intermittent fasting refers to cycling between eating and fasting windows, which may or may not involve overall caloric reduction. Many IF protocols do lead to spontaneous caloric reduction because people eat less when their eating window is compressed, but the defining feature of IF is the timing, not the total calories. Some researchers argue that intermittent fasting achieves many of CR’s benefits through overlapping pathways (AMPK activation, mTOR suppression, autophagy) without requiring chronic energy deficit.
Who should NOT restrict calories?
Several populations should avoid calorie restriction or pursue it only under close medical supervision. These include: underweight individuals (BMI below 18.5); older adults at risk of sarcopenia or frailty; pregnant or breastfeeding women; children and adolescents whose brains and bodies are still developing; individuals with a history of eating disorders; people with type 1 diabetes or on medications that require consistent food intake; and individuals with active cancer undergoing treatment, unless specifically directed by an oncologist. If you are over 65, any caloric restriction should be accompanied by increased protein intake (at least 1.0 to 1.2 grams per kilogram of body weight per day) and regular resistance exercise to protect muscle mass.
Can I get the benefits of CR without actually eating less?
This is the promise of CR mimetics — compounds that activate the same molecular pathways without caloric deficit. Exercise is arguably the best “CR mimetic” available: it activates AMPK, upregulates BDNF, stimulates autophagy, and improves insulin sensitivity. Among pharmacological candidates, metformin and spermidine have the most interesting preliminary data, but neither has been proven to deliver CR-like brain benefits in large human trials. The practical approach is to combine mild caloric moderation, high dietary quality, regular exercise, and potentially dietary sources of spermidine (aged cheese, mushrooms, legumes) rather than relying on any single strategy.
Does CR work better if started earlier in life?
In animal models, CR initiated in young adulthood generally produces larger lifespan and healthspan effects than CR initiated in middle age or later, though even late-onset CR shows some benefits. However, starting aggressive CR too early in life in humans raises concerns about bone density, hormonal development, and lean mass accretion. For practical purposes, mild-to-moderate caloric moderation — avoiding caloric excess rather than imposing significant deficit — is reasonable throughout adulthood, with more careful attention to maintaining adequate nutrition and muscle mass as you age past 50.
Sources
McCay, C. M., Crowell, M. F., & Maynard, L. A. (1935). The effect of retarded growth upon the length of life span and upon the ultimate body size. The Journal of Nutrition, 10(1), 63–79.
Colman, R. J., Anderson, R. M., Johnson, S. C., Kastman, E. K., Kosmatka, K. J., Beasley, T. M., … & Weindruch, R. (2009). Caloric restriction delays disease onset and mortality in rhesus monkeys. Science, 325(5937), 201–204.
Mattison, J. A., Colman, R. J., Beasley, T. M., Allison, D. B., Kemnitz, J. W., Roth, G. S., … & Anderson, R. M. (2017). Caloric restriction improves health and survival of rhesus monkeys. Nature Communications, 8, 14063.
Ravussin, E., Redman, L. M., Rochon, J., Das, S. K., Fontana, L., Kraus, W. E., … & Roberts, S. B. (2015). A 2-year randomized controlled trial of human caloric restriction: feasibility and effects on predictors of health span and longevity. JAMA Internal Medicine, 175(6), 928–935.
Witte, A. V., Fobker, M., Gellner, R., Knecht, S., & Floel, A. (2009). Caloric restriction improves memory in elderly humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(4), 1255–1260.
Belsky, D. W., Huffman, K. M., Pieper, C. F., Shalev, I., Kraus, W. E., & Anderson, R. (2017). Change in the rate of biological aging in response to caloric restriction: CALERIE biobank analysis. The Journals of Gerontology: Series A, 73(1), 4–10.
Halagappa, V. K., Guo, Z., Pearson, M., Matsuoka, Y., Cutler, R. G., LaFerla, F. M., & Mattson, M. P. (2007). Intermittent fasting and caloric restriction ameliorate age-related behavioral deficits in the triple-transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurobiology of Disease, 26(1), 212–220.
Gao, J., Wang, W. Y., Mao, Y. W., Graff, J., Guan, J. S., Pan, L., … & Bhatt, D. (2010). A novel pathway regulates memory and plasticity via SIRT1 and miR-134. Nature, 466(7310), 1105–1109.
Caccamo, A., Majumder, S., Richardson, A., Strong, R., & Bhatt, D. (2010). Molecular interplay between mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), amyloid-beta, and Tau: effects on cognitive impairments. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 285(17), 13107–13120.
Alirezaei, M., Kemball, C. C., Flynn, C. T., Wood, M. R., Whitton, J. L., & Kiosses, W. B. (2010). Short-term fasting induces profound neuronal autophagy. Autophagy, 6(6), 702–710.
Duan, W., Lee, J., Guo, Z., & Mattson, M. P. (2001). Dietary restriction stimulates BDNF production in the brain and thereby protects neurons against excitotoxic injury. Journal of Molecular Neuroscience, 16(1), 1–12.
Fontana, L., Meyer, T. E., Klein, S., & Holloszy, J. O. (2004). Long-term calorie restriction is highly effective in reducing the risk for atherosclerosis in humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 101(17), 6659–6663.
Prehn, K., Jumpertz von Schwartzenberg, R., Mai, K., Zeez, U., Witte, A. V., Hampel, D., … & Floel, A. (2017). Caloric restriction in older adults — differential effects of weight loss and reduced weight on brain structure and function. Cerebral Cortex, 27(3), 1765–1778.
Turner, R. S., Thomas, R. G., Craft, S., van Dyck, C. H., Mintzer, J., Reynolds, B. A., … & Aisen, P. S. (2015). A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of resveratrol for Alzheimer disease. Neurology, 85(16), 1383–1391.
Schwarz, C., Stekovic, S., Wirth, M., Benson, G., Roez, P., Piber, D., … & Floel, A. (2018). Safety and tolerability of spermidine supplementation in mice and older adults with subjective cognitive decline. Aging, 10(1), 19–33.
Willette, A. A., Bendlin, B. B., Colman, R. J., Kastman, E. K., Field, A. S., Alexander, A. L., … & Johnson, S. C. (2012). Calorie restriction reduces the influence of glucoregulatory dysfunction on regional brain volume in aged rhesus monkeys. Neurobiology of Aging, 33(11), 2629–2642.
Patel, N. V., Gordon, M. N., Connor, K. E., Good, R. A., Engelman, R. W., Mason, J., … & Bhatt, D. (2005). Caloric restriction attenuates amyloid-beta deposition in Alzheimer transgenic models. Neurobiology of Aging, 26(7), 995–1000.
Sinclair, D. A., & Guarente, L. (2006). Ten years after: a longevity topic revisited. Cell Metabolism, 3(2), 99–103.