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

171–180 of 202 posts

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#171

Post by idopmstuff »

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…

> Why not mention things like that along with all the optimism?

He does mention things like that. For one, he posted a link to this article: https://twitter.com/bryan_johnson/status/1721578475759239658....

He's also made a number of posts, often as replies to people asking the same sort of question that you are, pointing out that 95% of longevity is the simple things we're aware of (diet, exercise, etc.) and that he's just testing out all the other stuff because he can/he's interested/it's a worthwhile investment of time and money for him to get that last 5%.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#172

Post by ryanklee »

mewpmewp2 wrote: post #121
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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?

Although even then it could be 1 thing out of 100 things he does to actually be helpful, e.g. exercise.

That's right. What matters most here is whether he might be just as healthy if he'd just exercise regularly and eat a decent diet.

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#174

Post by tpush »

yladiz wrote: post #169
CWIZO wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

40% of the population is B12 deficient: https://eatingourfuture.wordpress.com/science-studies-vegan-... So most people should supplement, not just vegans.

This directly contradicts the Wikipedia article on the subject [1], and in general the page you link looks more like pseudoscience than not. Do you have a better source, maybe from a published paper or the NIH? 1: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_B12_deficiency

Presumably referring to this sentence from the Wikipedia page you linked to, quote: "Marginal deficiency is much more common and may occur in up to 40% of Western populations.".

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#175

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#176

Post by itishappy »

apwell23 wrote: post #166
itishappy wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article is about trying to cure aging. That includes both Alzheimer's and wrinkly skin.

Article is about slowing the rate of aging not 'cure aging' .

Fair. "Treat aging" then, but I suspect the author of DON'T DIE has bigger plans. Skin and brain health are both areas of focus.

https://protocol.bryanjohnson.com/DONT-DIE-by-Zero

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#177

Post by Podgajski »

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.

And maybe omega-3? That’s underplaying the role of long chain PUFAs by a lot.

And when you say annual products, are you talking about all animal products, like seafood? Because there is a vast difference between oysters, muscles, and salmon, and industrial farm raised beef.

And animal products, again, are you excluding the organ meats, which are extremely high in many things that could possibly extend our lifespan? Like riboflavin, manganese, zinc,?

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#178

Post by paul7986 »

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

Was thinking like maybe he has cancer or something cause he doesn't look healthy ..maybe the truth is is that his diet really is about keeping him alive & trying to find a cure for what he has naturally.

This is only a thought and an opinion based on how I think he looks which looks not healthy to me, but again only an opinion. Time will tell!

Re: Blueprint health protocol

#179

Post by waihtis »

hgomersall wrote: post #168
waihtis wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My bet is this will be reversed at some point. I get that the metric dictating this is probably "avoid skin damage", but surely the health benefits of, say, 15 minutes of sun exposure dramatically overweighs the risk of skin cancer.

There's a suggestion that the senescent effects of skin aging have a systemic effect. Anti senescents or senescent modulators might counter such an effect and allow the positive benefits of sun with fewer negatives.

> There's a suggestion that the senescent effects of skin aging have a systemic effect

Interesting, will have a look at this, thanks

Post reply on HN