In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’ • Hacker News Board

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#161

Post by magna7 » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 1:07 PM UTC

jostmey wrote: post #26

magna7 wrote: post #9

I'd wager that it's the metformin. Metformin inhibits pathways associated with mTOR (the growth signaling protein). When you inhibit this pathway, it tells the body to start the process of autophagy. It's the same process that occurs during fasting, and it's the same reason that the mTOR inhibitor Rapamycin has been shown to extend lifespan in mice and dogs. This is also why fasting has been shown to increase lifespa…

Biology is not that simple. There's not going to be a single magic compound. Slowing the aging process is massively complex and will probably require a cocktail of treatments

Studies with Rapamycin suggest otherwise. Mice live on the order of 20-30% longer, so for mice, simply inhibiting mTOR is enough to extend the biological age.

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#162

Post by throwaway_law » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 1:11 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #40

throwaway_law wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Biological immortality in plants and animals isn't unheard of. Take Jelly Fish, they are biologically immortal, been around 500 million years, not to bad. They were the first animals to evolve nervous systems, not sure the timeline of the biological immortality evolution, but they must have continued evolving because there are different species (some have evolved eyes and others not) and I believe all species are bio…

Are you saying there is a floating jelly fish in the ocean that is 500 million years old (‘years old’ in the common parlance of usage)?

The way it works, to our understanding, is these immortal Jellyfish his sexual maturity and have offspring, or another for of stress (starvation, temperature change, attack, etc...) and they revert from sexual maturity to a polyp stage and restart the life cycle, and unless they are killed they continue this cycle in perpetuity.

Unfortunately we can't age these Jelly fish or even confirm they have undergone the reversion transformation process (except under lab observation).

So while I am not saying yes, a single jelly fish has lived the entire 500 million years, its certainly possible and the idea behind biological immortality. Maybe one day we can figure out a way to age them and find some older than the dinosaurs.

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#163

Post by throwaway_law » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 1:15 PM UTC

djrogers wrote: post #47

mensetmanusman wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying there is a floating jelly fish in the ocean that is 500 million years old (‘years old’ in the common parlance of usage)?

Highly unlikely - statistically speaking, predation and disease would kill any individual specimen long before 500M year passed. That said, there are ‘immortal jellyfish’ that do not die of aging - don’t worry about an uprising though, they can be killed! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turritopsis_dohrnii

>predation and disease would kill any individual specimen long before 500M year passed.

Only via predators. The immortal Jellyfish not only don't die from aging, they don't generally die of disease, starvation, temperature changes or any other stresses...in fact it is those stresses that trigger their reversion from sexual maturity to biologically rewind to a polyp colony where they begin the start of their life cycle all over.

I tend to agree statistically speaking it seems highly unlikely, but its such a bizarre thought experiment, I can wind up concluding it is statistically highly unlikely there isn't Jellyfish in the wild that are older than the dinosaurs. Unfortunately, we can't age these Jellyfish.

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#164

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 1:47 PM UTC

yhoneycomb wrote: post #154

badestrand wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After doing intermittant fasting for half a year I think you shouldn't generalize too much from your own experience. Yes, it gets easier but it stays painful and requires a lot of willpower ime.

I’ve been doing it for about a year and a half, just skipping breakfast each day and lunch one or two workdays a week. At this point, most days it’s not even hard. When I’m hungry I just realize that the hunger is temporary, and it’s honestly unrelated to the degree to which I need food. And tbh nowadays I can tell when my body actually feels weak and needs food, and when it’s just whining. I think of it like getting…

> I’ve been doing it for about a year and a half, just skipping breakfast each day and lunch one or two workdays a week.

You call that a fast? As someone who's lost and kept off about half their body weight, I feel qualified to tell you that skipping a meal here and there is not fasting. In fact, if you're eating every day you're not fasting. Fuck, I mean, I only eat about 1.5 meals a day as a requirement of merely maintaining my current weight (and even that doesn't always work).

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#165

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 1:49 PM UTC

mayankkaizen wrote: post #139

stickfigure wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your idea of 'fun' and my idea of 'fun' are wildly different.

There was a time I wouldn't wake up early. I enjoyed sleeping till late morning. At that time I was kind of unable to feel why people who wake up early insist that it is more enjoyable than sleeping till 9 AM. Then I develop this habit of waking up early. Initially I wasn't very comfortable but now I too can say it is more enjoyable. I guess you get the point.

When does that kick in? I've been waking up at 6:00am every morning for the past decade and still hate it.

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#166

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 1:51 PM UTC

rjf72 wrote: post #137

webmaven wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eating the same amount of food in a much shorter period is also a great way to train your stomach to accept (and unfortunately, expect) more food before feeling full.

The Hadza in Africa are an interesting people. Quite a lot has been written about these hunter/gatherers. [1] The have the physiques you'd expect of hunter/gatherers, but not the lifestyle. They work around 2 hours a day in mostly low energy tasks. And their leisure time isn't exactly spent running marathons - the most common past times being gambling and simply relaxing. Part of the reason they've been reluctant to…

> I now bike around 5k a day and that burns about 100 calories. That's 15 minutes of biking to burn the equivalent of about a third of a slice of pizza

That must be the worlds smallest slice of pizza. 100 calories is nothing, about 1 apple's worth.

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#167

Post by Wowfunhappy » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 2:10 PM UTC

AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #165

mayankkaizen wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a time I wouldn't wake up early. I enjoyed sleeping till late morning. At that time I was kind of unable to feel why people who wake up early insist that it is more enjoyable than sleeping till 9 AM. Then I develop this habit of waking up early. Initially I wasn't very comfortable but now I too can say it is more enjoyable. I guess you get the point.

When does that kick in? I've been waking up at 6:00am every morning for the past decade and still hate it.

You may not be able to force it.

For years, I slept as late as possible, and hated waking up early. Something changed this summer, wherein I suddenly began waking up super early of my own accord, and then going to bed early to compensate. And I enjoy waking up early now.

I'm still unsure if this will be the new normal, or if it's a phase that will go away as suddenly as it began...

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#168

Post by NickPlatt » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 5:19 PM UTC

mdorazio wrote: post #84

scottlocklin wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Berberine is OTC. Not sure what relative risk profiles are. But yes, it's absolutely not comparable to opioids.

It seems Berberine and Metformin have different activation paths (Berberine might not lead to AMPK activation) and don't necessarily have exactly the same effects. Is there any research on the two being comparable for longevity purposes (other than lowering tumor risk)?

https://lifespanbook.com/metformin-pill/

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#169

Post by nikolay » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

James_Henry wrote: post #156

nikolay wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The placebo itself is magical enough so it could be extended to pretty much anything and that's why quality studies are done certain way. If can understand the placebo, then and only then we can then explain what it could do and it can't do.

This is false. We can explain a lot without a placebo comparison. Also, the placebo isn't magic, we just haven't studied exactly what it is. It clearly does have limitations: look at all the studies where the placebo only does so much!

We have studied it and there are some hypotheses, but that's it.

Re: In a small trial, drugs seemed to rejuvenate the body’s ‘epigenetic clock’

#170

Post by dingdingdang » Fri, Sep 06, 2019, 6:15 PM UTC

What is the "third" drug in this combo, the article says: ".. growth hormone and two diabetes medications". So far only the DHEA and Metformin has been discussed and I have no access to the source article.. any takes?

edit-1: the answer is that the nature.com article got it wrong and other net sources parroted that article, https://www.leafscience.org/study-results-suggest-human-agin... is more accurate overview: there is no third drug involved.

edit-2: scratch edit-1, HGH was obviously the primary growth hormone given and for some reason DHEA was counted as an anti-diabetic rather than a hormone (it is both) together with Metformin. Now I would just like to know the dosages involved!