Live data from Hacker News

Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

age.mpg.de

111–120 of 228 posts

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#111
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nicotinamide Mononucleotide, an unregulated supplement. Note also: > We found that, when data from all organisms studied were combined for each compound, aspirin resulted in the highest percent increase in average lifespan (52.01%), followed by minocycline (27.30%), N-acetyl cysteine (17.93%), nordihydroguaiaretic acid (17.65%) and rapamycin (15.66%), in average. [0] Though I'd consider whether flies and worms are go…

Is NMD related to NAD+?

Yes, it is a precursor to NAD

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#112
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Benign tumors on my skin disappeared and I lost 80 pounds

What is your current height and weight? If I were to lose 80lbs I would become emaciated.

And if I lost 80lbs I would be on the low-side of "normal weight" by BMI.

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#113

Just putting this out there, I am a PharmD and this is totally real and the traditional medical establishment is really behind. It is positive effects are beyond doubt - the argument against it is usually "we don't know what the side effects if 100m+ went on it for 20+ years". (which is also 100% true, but that's where patient autonomy comes in). Also, there are some questions about how much are really the positive e…

What makes me scared about this is that it's immunosuppressive. The immune system is a very important part of the human body, and I worry that taking it could have terrible health impact after years of acting on your body lines of defense. What can you tell me about it?

Your concern is correct. Suppressing the immune system is a 2-edged sword - a little suppression in the right setting, is extremely beneficial, but go overboard and it is harmful. That's why in a perfect world, we would have large human trials with different dosages and iterate until we can get the maximum benefit and the least harm.

The problem is, no one wants to do those trials because rapamycin is cheap and generic. Why would Pharma spend money on something that they can't patent? Also, these kind of trials have to go on for 10+ years at a minimum - which is cost-prohibitive even if it is patentable (not to go in the weeds, but long trials count in the period of exclusivity given to pharma patents).

I believe the right approach is to use it off-label, be upfront about the potential risks, and collect lots of data so you can improve as you go. Practical anti-aging so to speak.

Another approach is through the NIH grant pathway, but that has a lot of road-blocks as well.

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#114

Anyone taking or have taken Rapamycin or things that change mTor? How did that go? Is there risk of infections? David Sinclair got me interested in this topic. Also people who fast for a long time: How do you do that? I get super hangry and find it really a struggle past a certain point of not eating.

> Also people who fast for a long time: How do you do that? I get super hangry and find it really a struggle past a certain point of not eating.

Different people have different responses to fasting.

It's always been very easy for me to fast by becoming "at peace" with the feeling of hunger for the first 2-3 days, and after that I don't even notice. But later in life something about my body changed and my response to fasting was much more severe and I was suddenly unable to fast for more than 1-2 days due to extremely strong urges to eat, irritability, etc. This happened for 2-3 attempted fasts around the age of 32. A year or two later, and fasting is suddenly "easy" for me again. To be clear, the first 2-3 days usually sucks regardless.

I suspect that I am generally very good at metabolizing fat. When I get blood tests while fasting, even if I haven't eaten anything at all in 7 days, my glucose is generally still well above the minimum of normal, even sometimes towards the high side. I suspect that if my blood sugar was low, I'd have much more difficulty. It does seem to take 2-3 days for my body to "switch" to metabolizing fat at a high enough rate to raise my blood sugar up.

I also suspect different people have very different reactions to low blood sugar.

Just as a note, for me one of the biggest determinants of a successful fast is control over my environment. If there are people in my home cooking great food every night at the same time, it's very hard. If I'm living alone and let my fridge get empty, it's much easier. I've also dealt with it by shifting my work hours to leave later and come home after my partner has finished dinner and cleaned up the kitchen. But this is orthogonal to the above issue.

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#115
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is Hackernews. The cure is fasting. Whatever disease you have, the cure is fasting.

And somehow the answer to "how did it make you healthier?" is almost always just weight loss or effects related to weight loss.

That is a very shallow perspective. Fasting causes large, measurable phase changes in cellular function (eg autophagy). You can question whether it actually works or not, but there's a very plausible mechanism for why it would work that isn't simply related to calories-in-calories-out weight loss.

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#116

Just putting this out there, I am a PharmD and this is totally real and the traditional medical establishment is really behind. It is positive effects are beyond doubt - the argument against it is usually "we don't know what the side effects if 100m+ went on it for 20+ years". (which is also 100% true, but that's where patient autonomy comes in). Also, there are some questions about how much are really the positive e…

What makes me scared about this is that it's immunosuppressive. The immune system is a very important part of the human body, and I worry that taking it could have terrible health impact after years of acting on your body lines of defense. What can you tell me about it?

Is the dose for immune suppression the same effective dose for longevity, i.e. how many mg/kg body weight are we looking at for each thing?

It seems pretty safe anyway from my understanding…

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#117

Just putting this out there, I am a PharmD and this is totally real and the traditional medical establishment is really behind. It is positive effects are beyond doubt - the argument against it is usually "we don't know what the side effects if 100m+ went on it for 20+ years". (which is also 100% true, but that's where patient autonomy comes in). Also, there are some questions about how much are really the positive e…

Do you have a personal comment on the long and scary list of side effects it causes?

As someone already said - rapamycin literature is mostly in cancer and transplant patients and with relatively high-doses. The risks are real, but my clinical judgement would lead me to believe that for at least some people the benefits would far outweigh the risks

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#118
post #22

The article states effectiveness requires taking the drug as a young adult, precisely the time most people are not thinking about mortality.

I’d beg to differ. In the modern social media age youths are getting a lot more vain. Teen boys are doing skincare routines. So historically, I’d agree, but now that everyone can be a minor celeb in their own circle I think the youth are more focused on aging.

> Teen boys are doing skincare routines.

Maybe, but I'd be careful about generalizing that kind of thing. Even stuff like consistently applying sunscreen is heavily dependent on class membership, i.e. it's "just what you do, obviously, any time you're going to be outside at all, of course we always have sunscreen on-hand and our kids have been taught to apply it as routinely and consistently as tooth-brushing—wait, why are you asking, doesn't everyone do that?" in some circles, while in other (larger) circles they only break it out for beach or lake days, if at all.

I expect the described behavior is similarly unevenly distributed.

Re: Rapamycin, drug used in cancer therapy, emerges as powerful anti-aging remedy

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And somehow the answer to "how did it make you healthier?" is almost always just weight loss or effects related to weight loss.

That is a very shallow perspective. Fasting causes large, measurable phase changes in cellular function (eg autophagy). You can question whether it actually works or not, but there's a very plausible mechanism for why it would work that isn't simply related to calories-in-calories-out weight loss.

I think it's fair to say that we don't have to do something just because there's a plausible mechanism for a benefit. If there are clear and obvious health benefits that are far beyond what you see with a regular calorically restricted diet, I haven't heard them well explained.
Post reply on HN