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

Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

scienceblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 176 posts

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#131

Post by dur-randir »

the__alchemist wrote: post #64
Aurornis wrote: post #47

These articles really need a lot of context to parse as they paint some of the compounds as having potential upside without downsides. Metformin is amazing in people with diabetes, but among non-diabetics taking it for vague life extension claims it’s often discontinued due to side effects. Rapamycin has fallen out of favor among many in this space because they felt it was producing net negative effects as well as ca…

What side effects cause people taking Metformin to discontinue it? I'm taking, but haven't noticed any, but... you don't notice your baseline, I suppose!

Shitty shits. Literally. As for metabolic acidoses, rates are extremely low (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26773926/), so it's almost a non-concern.

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#132

Post by sigmoid10 »

fwip wrote: post #63
hgomersall wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is exercise really a maybe?

Even stuff like "don't be overweight" is a maybe. This meta-analysis famously found that being overweight actually has a moderate protective effect: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4855514/

This is a BMI-only study and should be treated carefully. They also found a protective effect for one of the obese categories, which seems extremely weird (unless you consider bodybuilders or strength athletes, in which case it would be reasonable). If you replace "don't be overweight/obese" with "don't have excess amounts of fat" (in particular vascular fat) it is certainly not a maybe.

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#133

Post by lokrian »

DennisP wrote: post #84
lumost wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we really manage to crack the code on aging, How certain are we that it's merely something to be delayed? Apparent age is at least somewhat reversible via lifestyle factors e.g. diet/exercise/sobriety.

In fact that's Aubrey de Grey's approach: rather than trying to figure out all the complicated processes involved in causing the damage in the first place, so you can slow them down, just directly fix the damage afterwards. There's been quite a bit of research on this.

A question - why hasn't Aubrey de Grey been more successful in getting some tech billionaire to fund his research agenda? He seems charismatic and smart, and had some promising ideas.

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#134

Post by oskarkk »

malfist wrote: post #82
alkyon wrote: post #57

Ascorbic is not a correct name of a compound. Should be 'ascorbic acid' or Vitamin C. Such sloppiness cast doubt on accuracy of the whole review.

I mean this guy is not a scientist. He's an enthusiasts aping scientific process. Look at how he talks about the "10-20% flexibility". Hypothesis assumed true, no supporting evidence. Same with his idea of being young longer. No evidence supports this, yet his comments proceed as if it's a gospel truth

First time I hear about him, but it looks like he is a scientist:

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Josh-Mitteldorf

> Look at how he talks about the "10-20% flexibility". Hypothesis assumed true, no supporting evidence.

He started that part with "Here’s my perspective:", so for me it sounded more like his personal opinion/hypothesis, not a scientific consensus (and that hypothesis wasn't the topic of the article, so it's not strange for me that he gave no evidence for it there).

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#135

Post by gavinray »

impure-aqua wrote: post #101
chasil wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taurine and Vitamin E are readily available and seem prudent. For melatonin, tryptophan plus niacin would maximize the serotonin pathway (note this is dangerous when used with SSRIs). How many of these are easily available? I had no idea that royal jelly is sold as a supplement.

Of the prescription options, estradiol is probably the most common and easily available, between hormonal birth control and HRT. It is also likely the most easy to study, as we have 60-70 years of usage that is not correlated with prevalence of other diseases that might skew life expectancy (like metformin etc.), and quite high-quality medical records by virtue of it being vended on a prescription basis. Despite this…

Birth control uses Ethinyl Estradiol which, despite the name, is not actually Estradiol and so does not undergo the same metabolic pathways and metabolites production

I know this because I recently had to source exogenous Estradiol for my wife after making this same mistaken assumption and being surprised at bloodwork and lack of improvement

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#136

Post by gavinray »

jijijijij wrote: post #126
impure-aqua wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of the prescription options, estradiol is probably the most common and easily available, between hormonal birth control and HRT. It is also likely the most easy to study, as we have 60-70 years of usage that is not correlated with prevalence of other diseases that might skew life expectancy (like metformin etc.), and quite high-quality medical records by virtue of it being vended on a prescription basis. Despite this…

Estradiol isn’t very well studied. It may be used for a few years in menopause, only in rare cases off-label, otherwise. Scientific and commercial interest seems pretty non existent. Probably because patentable synthetic derivatives historically fared worse risk-wise, than bioidentical estrogens, and the market outside of menopause issues is too small. Research on trans people, who would make interesting study subjec…

Estradiol is _extremely_ well studied, including non-HRT in AFAB/AMAB cisgender eugonadal populations

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#137

Post by iammjm »

catigula wrote: post #19

A lot of people in the comments are talking about the "problem" of death and approaches to take, but really, the only thing you can do is philosophically make your peace. Anything else at this point is yelling into infinity.

There is a difference between dying at 40 and dying at 80. Also, I see no reason why people couldn't live for, say, 200 years or even indefinitely. I think it is an engineering problem that can be solved and I wish we as humanity allocated more attention and resources into solving this particular problem. Especially as it concerns all of us. Solving suffering and then solving mortality sounds like a good project to me.

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#138

Post by metalman »

I am very certain that framing ageing as a disease that can be treated with a drug is a false oversimplication that can not yield meaningfull results. Personaly I love complexity and trying to parse all of the moving peices in a problem, but ageing involves an unknown total number of peieces, and what we do know is daunting, many of the biological processes operate within tollerances of parts per billion, and the large number of processes effect each other. The worst part of "anti ageing" is that it completly ignores the reality of lifestyle inputs demonstrably having accelerated ageing effects. cart, horse

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#139

Post by bluGill »

lurking_swe wrote: post #125
bluGill wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically you can maybe get another couple year from what I can tell. Is it worth it? I'd focus more on qulalitiy of your life. not everyone will die of something all these can help with, the obese person I used to know enjoyed eating - and we can now say in hindsight that diet changes would not have helped him live longer.

leading a healthy active lifestyle DOES improve the quality of your life. Getting diabetes and injecting yourself daily with insulin is not a quality life. Having trouble walking or playing with your grandkids because one is too fat and has ruined their joints is also not quality. Having a miserable last 10-20 years of life due to a stroke is also not quality. These things don’t mysteriously happen. :) Being able to…

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply do nothing. I meant to caution that your best efforts may be meaningless. I have know several people doing thing right who yet got dieabietes, had strokes, or died young. good diet and exercise is important but it isn't everything

Re: Review of Anti-Aging Drugs

#140

Post by oinfoalgo »

Aurornis wrote: post #44
starchild3001 wrote: post #39

This is a great discussion on longevity, though the main article focuses heavily on mouse studies. To add to that, I've been thinking about a framework that prioritizes the existing human evidence. My take, which I wrote about in the linked post, is to use a tiered approach: 1. Top Priority (Human RCTs): Start with what we know works in human randomized trials. This is our most solid ground and includes sustained wei…

> appropriate TRT for men with low T You lost me here since this doesn’t appear in the linked article at all. You seem to be speaking about your own link, not the linked article on Hacker News. Be especially careful with TRT advice on the internet or from local clinics that push TRT treatments. The definition of “low testosterone” used in the longevity studies is very different than the definition used by TRT clinics…

Taking TRT or not is a personal choice.

TRT is longevity to me. Feeling younger for as long as possible.

An "alarming study". You just have a puritanical mindset and can't stand someone else doesn't share your shitty sex life.

Post reply on HN