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

101–110 of 202 posts

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#101

Post by fasterik »

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.

There are dozens of essential nutrients. You only need about 15% of your calories to come from protein. Protein = health is laughably simplistic and incomplete. Also, the only reason we know what protein is is because we did the scientific research in the first place.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#103

Post by ImHereToVote »

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.

This is why extraterrestrials haven't contacted us. They are afraid that our death cult would spread among them.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#104

Post by ImHereToVote »

davnn wrote: post #63
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.

> To me it seems like it should be a top priority. Maybe most people are content with children, the current state of the art against aging communities?

You are an individual. You matter.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#105

Post by bawolff »

ecmascript wrote: post #69
bawolff wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems a lot more extreme then that (e.g. he doesn't just tell people to sleep better he also tells people to buy special bed sheets with silver in them to ensure your bed is electrically grounded), and it seems likely he gets kickbacks from some of these products.

Can you link me to a statement where he actually tells people to buy sheets with silver in them? Honestly, I've followed him for quite a while and pretty much all of his content is wholesome and while a bit culty, it's not like he is forcing anyone to do anything. For the stuff that actually makes him money, he is a lot less sales-pushy than the overwhelming majority of youtubers. You can get his protocol for free an…

In the section "Blueprint Protocol Starter Guide" he lists it under stuff he uses ("grounding sheets").

He doesn't explicitly say to buy it (and in fine print says its not an endorsement) but clearly the links are there to encourage people to buy these products.

I dont know if he's getting a cut but half the products getting promoted have discount codes which is suggestive.

> it's not like he is forcing anyone to do anything

Snake-oil salesmen generally don't.

> he is a lot less sales-pushy than the overwhelming majority of youtubers.

Generally it is counter productive to be super pushy. It raises people's guard and makes them less likely to buy.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#106

Post by bawolff »

Galichev wrote: post #20
paul7986 wrote: post #5

In this Abc News interview he doesn't look healthy to me ..his skin looks weird even with tons of lighting their using. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw2H_j81_50&t=75s

Do we have evidence that looking healthy and being healthy are correlated?

Depends how you define those terms, but i think the answer is an obvious yes.

Many looking healthy things are literally just your body functioning correctly.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#107

Post by Cthulhu_ »

kubami wrote: post #49
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…

Maybe if he was not doing anything, his score would be 1.1? Also, I don't think the point is doing fancy things. The people that beat him might just be doing "common sense" healthy things. Something which most people don't do. See SAD (Standard American Diet).

"Maybe" isn't exactly scientific; what he should've done was keep his existing lifestyle, have the same measurements taken, but not actually look at them because they would influence the measurements.

Without a baseline, the numbers are meaningless. What if most people are under 1 but there's a few outliers that skew the numbers?

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#108

Post by Cthulhu_ »

hgomersall wrote: post #93
jjallen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s thin and stays out of the sun to reduce damage to the skin. Makes sense that he looks different than most people because of these two things alone. He does say he’s hungry all of the time. Not sure if I would get used to that.

He stays out of the sun? Interesting to learn what the long term consequences of that will be.

It's counterintuitive; people need sunlight to generate vitamin D, but it also causes cancer. People in both the middle-east and the north are often vit-D deficient because of a lack of sunlight exposure, in the north because there not being a lot of sunlight, in the warm/dry climates because they dress and live for the weather which means not a lot of skin is exposed.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#109

Post by Cthulhu_ »

kubami wrote: post #56
maeln wrote: post #39

I kind of fail to see how would this be useful for anyone but him. The fact that he has a team working with him to make him the most healthy human possible is cool and all, but there is absolutely 0 guarantee that what works for him would work for any one else. Our bodies can be surprisingly different, this is why it can be surprisingly hard to draw any conclusion from research involving a few hundreds tests subject.…

I think it makes sense. He's doing the most extreme things to find things that work. And then be able to say, "This subset of intervention worked very well, let's try to reproduce it in a larger population."

More likely he'll publish a book (like Tim Ferris mentioned elsewhere) aand... that's it.

Min/maxing your lifestyle is a privilege and wealth thing - mainly having to do with time and mental leftover energy.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#110

Post by bawolff »

drcross wrote: post #89
seagullriffic wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I want reduced aging for humanitarian reasons, but i don't buy your reasoning

> 30 years of education before they have the wisdom to do anything halfway useful

If scidnce advances obe funeral at a time, this probably means science will advance a lot less.

> How about government policies that operate with a decades long view instead of just one election term

Seems unlikely to change. Election terms are 5 years and people already live a lot longer than that.

More importantly, i'd worry about an increase in concentrated power.

Post reply on HN