41–50 of 89 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've lost about half my bodyweight, so I feel like my experience qualifies to me to offer my opinion that Keto's supposed anti-hunger effects are broscience crap. Ephedrine or amphetamines, those work.
Omega-3 fats are known to control hunger. That is probably where the claim that a high fat diet like keto can regulate appetite. https://www.livestrong.com/article/296534-omega-3-as-an-appe...
I'll offer a contrarian view: longevity research, as in the current scope, is about as accurate and useful as Ray Kurzweil's predictions from the 90s. Let's take caloric restriction, for instance, which is all the rage. Trouble is, all of the evidence we have is in mice or lesser animals, and the comparison is animals on caloric restriction against animals being force fed to the point of obesity . Let me repeat that:…
https://academic.oup.com/biomedgerontology/article/73/1/4/38...
"We obtained data from the National Institute on Aging CALERIE randomized trial through its public-access biobank (https://calerie.duke.edu/). The CALERIE trial randomized N = 220 nonobese adults to 25% caloric restriction (n = 145; 11.7% caloric restriction was achieved, on average) or to maintain current diet (n = 75) for 2 years. We analyzed biomarker data collected at baseline, 12-, and 24-month follow-up assessments. We applied published biomarker algorithms to these data to calculate two biological age measures, Klemera–Doubal Method Biological Age and homeostatic dysregulation. Intent-to-treat analysis using mixed-effects growth models of within-person change over time tested if caloric restriction slowed increase in measures of biological aging across follow-up. Analyses of both measures indicated caloric restriction slowed biological aging. Weight loss did not account for the observed effects. Results suggest future directions for testing of geroprotective therapies in humans."
That said, it is quite clear that research into provoking stress response isn't going to do much for longevity in humans, even while it may do useful things for long-term health in the same way as exercise and calorie restriction do. In addition to calorie restriction, growth hormone receptor knockout can be compared in mice and humans with Laron syndrome - the large gains in mouse life span don't occur in humans.
However, research into repairing the damage that causes aging is a whole different ball game. A completely different strategy, set of mechanisms, overall approach, and effect on the individual. A reversal of aging rather than a slight slowing of aging. We have no idea how results in mice will map to results in humans. So it is worth keeping an eye on the ongoing pilot trials and forthcoming larger trials of clearing senescent cells in human patients.
Much of the progress in society is possible only because previous generations eventually die off. What happens when that's no longer the case?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actionable things for humans at the moment appear to look like trying senolytic drug candidates in rational self-experimentation, with before/after tests of metrics linked to tissue stiffness, inflammation, kidney and heart function. Clearing senescent cells very clearly produces a degree of rejuvenation in mice, and can turn back progression of aging and specific age-related diseases via a sizable number of metrics.…
> trying senolytic drug candidates in rational self-experimentation > senolytic drug candidates, dasatinib plus quercetin if you're fine with short burst of chemotherapeutics, or FOXO4-DRI How does one go about self-experimentation? FOXO4-DRI is for sale on the internet, but one needs a doctor to read the mouse studies and formulate a treatment plan. The same goes for dasatinib plus quercetin. In the mouse models it…
https://www.fightaging.org/archives/2017/05/planning-a-singl...
You don't need a doctor to figure out a treatment plan, you just need to put in some time to get familiar with reading research papers, the terminology, how researchers describe things, and the methodology used to move from animal to human exploratory studies. And an understanding of the risk - as doctors are usually pretty bad at explaining that in any case. It really isn't rocket science, and it is all copiously documented in scientific and other literature.
Also D+Q isn't administered monthly, it is a one-off treatment that, assuming it works in humans in the same way it does in mice, certainly wouldn't need to be done more than once every few years. It removes the cells it can remove, and then isn't going to do any more until new senescent cells arise at their slow pace. The people out there taking it frequently as though it were a supplement are just not acting sensibly, and don't understand the research.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actionable things for humans at the moment appear to look like trying senolytic drug candidates in rational self-experimentation, with before/after tests of metrics linked to tissue stiffness, inflammation, kidney and heart function. Clearing senescent cells very clearly produces a degree of rejuvenation in mice, and can turn back progression of aging and specific age-related diseases via a sizable number of metrics.…
The problem with all potential senolytic drugs is cancer. Looking at all the animal models (and spontaneous human mutations) where senescence is reduced there is a corresponding increase in cancer. We really can't do much about ageing until we can cure or prevent cancer.
If instead for a short time killing some fraction of all currently existing senescent cells, the effect on cancer risk should be a reduction, due to decreased inflammatory signaling from those cells. The senescent cells that are hanging around at any given moment in time aren't helping you in any way; they're not reducing the risk of cancer. If there are enough of them, they are in fact increasing the risk of cancer due to messing with the surrounding environment. If those senescent cells ever actually helped, then that help was applied at the time the cell became senescent - and shortly thereafter it became a liability that should be destroyed.
There are emerging exceptions to that view, such as adaptive senescence in the immune system and possibly in support cells in the brain, but fortunately both of those should be largely moot points for the early senolytic therapies, and don't seem to be obstacles in old mice.
I'll offer a contrarian view: longevity research, as in the current scope, is about as accurate and useful as Ray Kurzweil's predictions from the 90s. Let's take caloric restriction, for instance, which is all the rage. Trouble is, all of the evidence we have is in mice or lesser animals, and the comparison is animals on caloric restriction against animals being force fed to the point of obesity . Let me repeat that:…
I'll offer a contrarian view: longevity research, as in the current scope, is about as accurate and useful as Ray Kurzweil's predictions from the 90s. Let's take caloric restriction, for instance, which is all the rage. Trouble is, all of the evidence we have is in mice or lesser animals, and the comparison is animals on caloric restriction against animals being force fed to the point of obesity . Let me repeat that:…
This is a pretty fantastic writeup, short and simple on each topic with loads of sources. For those looking for something actionable, you may want to head to the reddit board for intermittent fasting. It's a good way to lower your caloric intake and increase autophagy. People doing intermittent fasting often also eat a keto diet that is mentioned in the writing as well. https://www.reddit.com/r/intermittentfasting/ h…
I have made many attempts at fasting. I'm skinny as a rake and get very weak without some kind of constant caloric intake. I also get "hangry" and make bad decisions on an empty stomach. Is this just me? Or is this a thing that everyone has and just works through?
The discussion about carbs, keto, etc applies to some people, but for the truly skinny, that feeling of weakness is your body slowly starving.
I'll offer a contrarian view: longevity research, as in the current scope, is about as accurate and useful as Ray Kurzweil's predictions from the 90s. Let's take caloric restriction, for instance, which is all the rage. Trouble is, all of the evidence we have is in mice or lesser animals, and the comparison is animals on caloric restriction against animals being force fed to the point of obesity . Let me repeat that:…
Rejuvenation therapies and treatments that slow the progression of aging won't be tested in humans by waiting to see. They will be tested using quick before/after measures of biomarkers of aging. Those biomarkers are under development, and numerous types exist somewhere in the slow scientific process of standardization and debate. Here applied to calorie restriction, for example: https://academic.oup.com/biomedgeront…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've lost about half my bodyweight, so I feel like my experience qualifies to me to offer my opinion that Keto's supposed anti-hunger effects are broscience crap. Ephedrine or amphetamines, those work.
I’ve never actually talked about this online before, but now I’m going to. I used to weigh over 560lbs, and I’ve lost 190 of that, with more going every week. I spent a lot of time on this, tried a lot of diets, tried medication, and ultimately considered surgery. In the end a ferocious commitment to eating less, eating better, and moving around more was what worked, and continues to work. Years ago I went to a medic…