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

Blueprint health protocol

protocol.bryanjohnson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 202 posts

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#81

Post by seagullriffic »

Shekelphile wrote: post #31
thatguysaguy wrote: post #4

I have no idea whether his stuff will work but I'm glad people are trying wacky stuff to find out.

There is a very weird lack of interest in slowing down or reversing aging in the scientific/medical community in general. To me it seems like it should be a top priority. Life is extremely short and extending our lives shouldn't be a terribly hard feat given there are plenty of biologically immortal and long lived organisms all over our planet.

Oof. If we defeat aging, we'll have to contend with:

* unbounded population increase * wealth and power directly proportional to age * dictators and other bad people not dying

Not insurmountable but all of those big problems would require massive sociological shifts.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#82

Post by Danjoe4 »

fasterik wrote: post #75
oldtownroad wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have so much lower hanging fruit to tackle first that doesn’t even require research: what’s the point in extending your miserable life a couple more miserable years? Adding a decade on to your life of extreme privilege is worthwhile, but for the majority of people on earth, simply getting them on to a nutritious diet would do far more for their quality of life and their lifespan than slowing down aging ever could.…

There is no sharp line between "slowing down aging" and common-sense things like diet, sleep, exercise, etc. It all exists on the same spectrum. >simply getting them on to a nutritious diet would do far more for their quality of life and their lifespan than slowing down aging ever could. That in itself is a scientific claim that needs to be supported by evidence. How are we going to get that evidence if we aren't doi…

It doesn't need evidence because it's common knowledge. Protein = health.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#83

Post by JetSpiegel »

fasterik wrote: post #55
atemerev wrote: post #8

I don’t understand this pervasive fear of death in the tech community. Yes, one day we are all going to die. Yes, one day the human civilization itself is going to die. The entire universe will die too. So what? We all knew this from the age of five or so.

We all agree it would be bad to die at 40 if you could have lived to 60. By that logic, isn't it bad to die at 80 when you could have lived to 100? If you could do something to increase that probability, wouldn't that be a good thing? Good health also increases quality of life, independent of whether it extends lifespan. To put it another way, pre-civilization life expectancy was somewhere around 30 years. Would it h…

> To put it another way, pre-civilization life expectancy was somewhere around 30 years.

You probably mean life expectancy at birth. The birth and childhood were pretty tough, but if you lived to adulthood, life expectancy was just a bit smaller.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#84

Post by GaryNumanVevo »

ecmascript wrote: post #73
GaryNumanVevo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How can you be against that? Personally, I'm against using my children as blood banks

> Personally, I'm against using my children as blood banks C'mon dude. Stop the hate and grow up. If my father called me today and asked for my blood in order to live longer I would gladly help him. I want my father to be healthy and live as long as possible. Besides giving blood is not bad for you, it can even have positive health effects that several studies have shown. You also have to assume that the blood giving…

There's a massive gulf between "life saving blood donations" and "my father wants my blood for a vanity health project"

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#86

Post by headhasthoughts »

Danjoe4 wrote: post #82
fasterik wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no sharp line between "slowing down aging" and common-sense things like diet, sleep, exercise, etc. It all exists on the same spectrum. >simply getting them on to a nutritious diet would do far more for their quality of life and their lifespan than slowing down aging ever could. That in itself is a scientific claim that needs to be supported by evidence. How are we going to get that evidence if we aren't doi…

It doesn't need evidence because it's common knowledge. Protein = health.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6562018/

> Lifespan and metabolic health are influenced by dietary nutrients. Recent studies show that a reduced protein intake or low-protein/high-carbohydrate diet plays a critical role in longevity/metabolic health. Additionally, specific amino acids (AAs), including methionine or branched-chain AAs (BCAAs), are associated with the regulation of lifespan/ageing and metabolism through multiple mechanisms. Therefore, methionine or BCAAs restriction may lead to the benefits on longevity/metabolic health. Moreover, epidemiological studies show that a high intake of animal protein, particularly red meat, which contains high levels of methionine and BCAAs, may be related to the promotion of age-related diseases.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#87

Post by RanTig »

bmikaili wrote: post #45
RanTig wrote: post #40

I really wish he did his research without being restricted to a vegan diet. He mentioned in one of his videos that his choice for a vegan diet isn't motivated by health, so I can't help but think that part of these recommendations are just there to mitigate the effects of that specific diet. For example, an omnivorous diet might not need certain supplements.

Why so? A vegan diet when supplemented is an easy way to avoid potential bad consequences of animal products, such as heart disease, cancer, obesity or diabetes. The only real thing that meat-eaters do not have to supplement that vegans do is b12 (because livestock are supplemented with it) and maybe omega 3.

If the vegan diet was one of the outcomes from his experiments (where the goal is to optimize for anti-aging), I'd be fine with it. But it's a restriction he put on himself based on a ethical/philosophical motivation.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#88

Post by drcross »

kkoncevicius wrote: post #34

I love what the guy is doing. It is a one-man experiment that would be very very hard to reproduce, or even get ethics approval and funding for, by a research lab. But on the other hand, I get a sense that the public side of his results are overblown. For example, my field is epigenetics, so I had a look at his "epigenetic clock" results. He uses "DunedinPACE" to track the rate of aging and his result is supposedly 0…

>However, what is not mentioned, is that this result, while impressive, is not so extraordinary.

The lesson here is that not all phenotypes age at the same rate. Bryan doesn't have a choice in that, like none of us have. He mentions that his hair started falling out in his 30's while I have a full head of hair in my 40's. He's promoting a lifestyle and being an experiment, he doesn't need to caveat his work in any way.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#89

Post by drcross »

seagullriffic wrote: post #81
Shekelphile wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a very weird lack of interest in slowing down or reversing aging in the scientific/medical community in general. To me it seems like it should be a top priority. Life is extremely short and extending our lives shouldn't be a terribly hard feat given there are plenty of biologically immortal and long lived organisms all over our planet.

Oof. If we defeat aging, we'll have to contend with: * unbounded population increase * wealth and power directly proportional to age * dictators and other bad people not dying Not insurmountable but all of those big problems would require massive sociological shifts.

You're choosing to pick the negatives but the potential upsides (even excluding personal desires) are monumentally massive.

How about not having 25% of the population walking around with an underdeveloped pre-frontal cortex at any one time, that need 30 years of education before they have the wisdom to do anything halfway useful. How about government policies that operate with a decades long view instead of just one election term. Global ID's would rise massively and decisions would have a far more balanced outlook.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#90

Post by eemil »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #9

Looking at his brain health https://protocol.bryanjohnson.com/#brain-health It appears he has some brain markers such as white matter hyper intensities and ventricular volume that are older than his age of 46. The Blueprint health protocol may end up giving people with healthy bodies but an aging brain, so they will be able to live many years with dementia (because the body is otherwise healthy). Whether having a hea…

To be fair, Bryan started Blueprint just a couple years ago as an overworked, overweight 40-something. Damage done.

What remains to be seen, is how his brain markers develop 5-10 years down the road. I'm not sure he can reverse aging in many areas. But slow it down noticeably? Sure.

Post reply on HN