11–20 of 151 posts
Looks interesting, but how could I ever afford to buy ~12 designer drugs which I figure likely cost at least $1-2/day if they are effective? Cost per year is $4K- $8K? I'm guessing I'll wait 20 years until they are off patent?
something like "You gave $50 a month for 20 yrs to unlock the treatment, but now it costs $10000 and you cannot afford that? Too bad."
Looks interesting, but how could I ever afford to buy ~12 designer drugs which I figure likely cost at least $1-2/day if they are effective? Cost per year is $4K- $8K? I'm guessing I'll wait 20 years until they are off patent?
Not all of these are new drugs. NMN, for example, is a supplement that you can buy now. It's a bit expensive but the price is dropping as it becomes more popular. Others mentioned include HGH, which has been around for decades. Only problem there is that it's a controlled substance so getting a prescription for anti-aging purposes may be difficult.
Looks interesting, but how could I ever afford to buy ~12 designer drugs which I figure likely cost at least $1-2/day if they are effective? Cost per year is $4K- $8K? I'm guessing I'll wait 20 years until they are off patent?
Interesting but a bit confusing since most of these drugs are for other conditions, and are not seeking approval based on ability to slow/stop /reverse aging. Thus any approvals would require having a particular condition to get a prescription (or an unethical doctor), and this aren't immediately useful. Would be nice to be able to select only those drugs seeking broad spectrum approval based on specific aging biomar…
Re-use of existing drugs is one of the most parsimonious methods.
Interesting but a bit confusing since most of these drugs are for other conditions, and are not seeking approval based on ability to slow/stop /reverse aging. Thus any approvals would require having a particular condition to get a prescription (or an unethical doctor), and this aren't immediately useful. Would be nice to be able to select only those drugs seeking broad spectrum approval based on specific aging biomar…
> any approvals would require having a particular condition to get a prescription (or an unethical doctor) Wrong on both counts. Let me introduce you to indian online pharmacies, where you can get mostly anything already. I get my eyedrops from less than the US deductible, delivered at my door. I have a prescription, but they didn't even check. Even better: some molecules are on any restricted list, and thus legal to…
summary: there are extralegal, cheap, and convenient methods of collecting supplements/drugs that will be available to everyone with a credit card and the right risk tolerance, regardless of e.g. FDA approval.
They need to hurry up with this, I'm not getting any younger and I haven't saved enough for retirement :O
Looks interesting, but how could I ever afford to buy ~12 designer drugs which I figure likely cost at least $1-2/day if they are effective? Cost per year is $4K- $8K? I'm guessing I'll wait 20 years until they are off patent?
Not all of these are new drugs. NMN, for example, is a supplement that you can buy now. It's a bit expensive but the price is dropping as it becomes more popular. Others mentioned include HGH, which has been around for decades. Only problem there is that it's a controlled substance so getting a prescription for anti-aging purposes may be difficult.
And I second the NMN being expensive. I use about 800mg a day and it is by far the most expensive thing I take.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but if they extend your life won't you need even more for retirement?
If I'm healthy enough to keep working, retirement isn't really necessary. Also, given enough time, I ought to be able to amass a self-sustaining pile of wealth and then I can retire :)
Interesting but a bit confusing since most of these drugs are for other conditions, and are not seeking approval based on ability to slow/stop /reverse aging. Thus any approvals would require having a particular condition to get a prescription (or an unethical doctor), and this aren't immediately useful. Would be nice to be able to select only those drugs seeking broad spectrum approval based on specific aging biomar…
> Thus any approvals would require having a particular condition to get a prescription (or an unethical doctor), and this aren't immediately useful.
So if I sell a drug approved for blood pressure, I can never say it may improve longevity. If there are papers out there claiming good effects on longevity I as a vendor have to be very careful to never make a public claim about that.
However, if you as a physician have read the papers you can prescribe the drug for other uses based on your personal expertise. This is known as off-label (i.e. for a use not covered by the indications for use), and is very common. There are limits of course, but at the end of the day the limits are based on professional conduct/ malpractice - not the FDA. The FDA explicitly does not regulate the practice of medicine.
Note that this doesn't just apply to somewhat speculative uses. For example a significant amount of pediatric care is done off-label, because setting up the clinical trials for pediatric indications is a pain. This may only be a dose change, for example, but is very common.
You shouldn't look at doing anything else until you've at minimum mastered all of the listed items above. Nothing else will have as much outsized impact.