Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Beginner's guide to longevity research

ldeming.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–89 of 89 posts

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#81

Post by naasking »

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #50
QAPereo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I agree actually. You have to really want to change enough go through all the pain and suffering and to persist indefinitely. I have a lot of difficulty with hunger, to the point I couldn't fight it on will alone and would find myself compulsively eating and unable to stop myself. Rather than kill myself out of frustration over slowly undoing all that I had suffered for I kept trying different things until something…

Everyone responds differently to diet and exercise. For me, intense 30 min cardio makes me not hungry, which is probably counterintuitive for most people.

And for any nutrition plan,ensure you get all your macros in your feeding window too. I've totally found that hunger is suppressed by IF though, but only after a week or so of doing it. Even if you did everything right, maybe it's just not for your body.

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#82

Post by naasking »

phaus wrote: post #52
Jonovono wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, it takes less willpower to do IF than to not do it :p 1. Wake up 2. Make Breakfast 3. Go on with day vs 1. Wake up 2. Go on with day.

Less work doesn't necessarily mean less willpower. Maybe you don't get very hungry, but some people do and for them that's what makes it take more willpower to fast than not fast. Another thing to consider is that many people who don't feel like spending the effort to make breakfast will just buy something and eat it. Doesn't take much effort or willpower to stop at Dunkin Donuts or Starbucks on the way to work.

First there's the adaptation period. Even after you're adjusted you'll experience hunger sometimes, but once you start moving and have a coffee, tea or water, the hunger subsides. The only will power you'd need is just to have your morning drink before acknowledging you're hungry.

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#83

Post by silverdrake11 »

semi-extrinsic wrote: post #35

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:…

Caloric restriction makes you live longer, but apparently so does exercise. The problem is though that exercise costs calories so you will be consuming more. How to square this contradiction?

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#84

Post by jcmoscon »

raarts wrote: post #72
jcmoscon wrote: post #36

You guys should look at the "steak and eggs" diet. This is the best diet I did. You loose a lot of weight, feel amazing, no brain fog, you do not get crazy hungry. It's amazing!

That's because of the ketogenic aspect of it. Though I would get bored if I only ate Steak & eggs.

It's so easy you don't need to check how many carbs your food has because you only eat steaks and eggs. You can change how you cook your eggs or get different cuts of meat. And you can eat anything in the sixth day. It's the easiest and most efficient diet I tried so far.

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#85

Post by magic_beans »

naasking wrote: post #81
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree actually. You have to really want to change enough go through all the pain and suffering and to persist indefinitely. I have a lot of difficulty with hunger, to the point I couldn't fight it on will alone and would find myself compulsively eating and unable to stop myself. Rather than kill myself out of frustration over slowly undoing all that I had suffered for I kept trying different things until something…

Everyone responds differently to diet and exercise. For me, intense 30 min cardio makes me not hungry, which is probably counterintuitive for most people. And for any nutrition plan,ensure you get all your macros in your feeding window too. I've totally found that hunger is suppressed by IF though, but only after a week or so of doing it. Even if you did everything right, maybe it's just not for your body.

Exercise is an appetite suppressant (at least for the first hour or so afterwords).

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#86

Post by magic_beans »

JimboOmega wrote: post #23
Asdfbla wrote: post #4

Very interesting research, but trying to derive actionable recommendations for humans seems a bit laughable at this point. Still seems tough to become immortal these days. Harvesting young blood, a rigid diet, castration and starving yourself occasionally - lots of effort your self-absorbed wealthy investor with a desire to live forever has to go through. But then again, Sam Altman recently praised China for having f…

The reproduction angle is interesting, to me, anyway. The article only really talks about worms and then draws a vague link to Eunuchs - given social factors etc. neither is that meaningful. What's more interesting is how my health/lifespan is impacted as a transwoman... Fertility is pretty badly hit by hormone therapy for both trans men and women, and in a few decades you should start having enough people to see how…

Fertility being affected in trans men and trans women isn't a surprise. I'm curious though -- do you, as a trans woman, still intend to "father" a child? Do trans men still intend to become pregnant when it is the most female thing a person could do?

Why might a loss of fertility particularly matter to a trans person?

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#87

Post by JimboOmega »

magic_beans wrote: post #86
JimboOmega wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reproduction angle is interesting, to me, anyway. The article only really talks about worms and then draws a vague link to Eunuchs - given social factors etc. neither is that meaningful. What's more interesting is how my health/lifespan is impacted as a transwoman... Fertility is pretty badly hit by hormone therapy for both trans men and women, and in a few decades you should start having enough people to see how…

Fertility being affected in trans men and trans women isn't a surprise. I'm curious though -- do you, as a trans woman, still intend to "father" a child? Do trans men still intend to become pregnant when it is the most female thing a person could do? Why might a loss of fertility particularly matter to a trans person?

I was interested in the context of longevity - of it being a "happy side effect" of dropping fertility. Trans men and women take hormones that make them infertile, does that enhance longevity?

Trans people often do desire to have biological children. I wish I had ovaries and a uterus and all of that, but I can't with the current state of medicine, so biologically, I'm limited to playing the male role. Hormones do nuke fertility, but I froze sperm beforehand.

I don't think the desire to have biological children is any different in trans people than it is in cis ones. I find the idea of being a mother much more appealing but that's not the hand I got dealt.

Trans men do become pregnant (look up the man who got pregnant, it was a bit of a news sensation)

Everyone experiences gender in their own way - "the most female thing a person could do" is not a fair way to describe it. Although I desire it, as a trans woman, I don't think of it as the holy grail of femininity. Perhaps biologically it is; but as a social creature how I am received socially matters more.

I also can nurse, it turns out, and if I ever did have children with my cis partner, that duty would probably fall to me.

Plenty of trans people, like cis people, have no interest in having children; still others are not invested in them being biological. It's a personal thing that varies with each individual.

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#88

Post by dragonwriter »

magic_beans wrote: post #86
JimboOmega wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reproduction angle is interesting, to me, anyway. The article only really talks about worms and then draws a vague link to Eunuchs - given social factors etc. neither is that meaningful. What's more interesting is how my health/lifespan is impacted as a transwoman... Fertility is pretty badly hit by hormone therapy for both trans men and women, and in a few decades you should start having enough people to see how…

Fertility being affected in trans men and trans women isn't a surprise. I'm curious though -- do you, as a trans woman, still intend to "father" a child? Do trans men still intend to become pregnant when it is the most female thing a person could do? Why might a loss of fertility particularly matter to a trans person?

> Do trans men still intend to become pregnant when it is the most female thing a person could do?

The things that the broad society considers most central to gender stereotypes are not necessarily most central to (or even compatible with) individual gender identity. That’s true for cisgender individuals, and its also (perhaps even moreso) true for transgender individuals.

Re: Beginner's guide to longevity research

#89

Post by Jemmeh »

projektir wrote: post #57
Jonovono wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm like you pretty skinny. I started IF and also going to the gym to try and put on weight. I never liked eating breakfast but did it because I thought it was something I had to do. It took me maybe a week or two of not eating breakfast until it felt normal - but now I could never go back. I feel much more in control. Before if I missed breakfast i'd be a mess and my stomach would be making all kinds of noises in me…

I might try this, not because I believe in IF, but just because breakfast is annoying. Does coffee count as breakfast here, though?

Black is fine. But protein (creamer) or sweetener(sugar/artificial) both spike your insulin which lessens autophagy. As the OP Article points out, autophagy leads to longevity in mice and lessens your chance of neurological disease.

In 2016 a Nobel prize was given to Yoshinori Ohsumi for his work on autophagy. "After infection, autophagy can eliminate invading intracellular bacteria and viruses. Autophagy contributes to embryo development and cell differentiation. Cells also use autophagy to eliminate damaged proteins and organelles, a quality control mechanism that is critical for counteracting the negative consequences of aging. Disrupted autophagy has been linked to Parkinson's disease, type 2 diabetes and other disorders that appear in the elderly. Mutations in autophagy genes can cause genetic disease. Disturbances in the autophagic machinery have also been linked to cancer. Intense research is now ongoing to develop drugs that can target autophagy in various diseases." [1]

That said, Dr. Jason Fung says black is better but he allows creamer if needed so that people stick with their fasts.

[1]https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/2...

Post reply on HN