I know I’m going to get downvoted for going against the crowd, but as a biochemist my impression here is that there’s at least as much pseudoscience as there is science.
Also, if you know more than others, that's great, but in that case it would be better to share some of what you know, so the rest of us can learn. Simply posting a putdown doesn't do that.
I have no idea whether his stuff will work but I'm glad people are trying wacky stuff to find out.
Yeah I'm not really sure what to think about him. He gives off serious grifter vibes and at least some of his claims are probably overblown. On the other hand, who is he hurting? He's "experimenting" on himself and making the results available for everyone. He'll sell you some of the stuff he does but the details of his entire regimen are also freely given away for anyone who wants to do it themselves. He's an unusual person for sure.
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.
The thing is that what "looks" healthy is culture-dependent; nowadays in the caucasian west, looking lean and tanned is considered a healthy / attractive look, but in other places, times and subcultures having more weight or pale skin is considered healthy (or attractive).
That doesn't prevent it from correlate. If obesity is the bigger threat than looking skinny is correlated with being healthy. If food scarcity is a bigger threat than the opposite.
However a lot of more subtle things like soft, shiny hair or good skin are correlated with nutrition.
I know I’m going to get downvoted for going against the crowd, but as a biochemist my impression here is that there’s at least as much pseudoscience as there is science.
Please make your substantive points without the downvote complaint. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . Also, if you know more than others, that's great, but in that case it would be better to share some of what you know, so the rest of us can learn. Simply posting a putdown doesn't do that.
Sometimes it takes an enormous amount of effort to put years and years of expertise down in writing. I’m sorry but here it’s just not feasible, it would require pages and I don’t think it would do much to persuade anyone here.
Please make your substantive points without the downvote complaint. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html . Also, if you know more than others, that's great, but in that case it would be better to share some of what you know, so the rest of us can learn. Simply posting a putdown doesn't do that.
Sometimes it takes an enormous amount of effort to put years and years of expertise down in writing. I’m sorry but here it’s just not feasible, it would require pages and I don’t think it would do much to persuade anyone here.
Ok, but in that case it's best to sigh at how wrong the internet is and not post.
Sometimes it takes an enormous amount of effort to put years and years of expertise down in writing. I’m sorry but here it’s just not feasible, it would require pages and I don’t think it would do much to persuade anyone here.
Ok, but in that case it's best to sigh at how wrong the internet is and not post.
Is it? I don’t agree with you here.
My contribution was weak, but I do believe scientists have an ethical duty to say something, even if it’s not in the form of a complete lecture.
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…
There are no reliable, scientifically validated biomarkers for the rate of aging. People who use such metrics are just fooling themselves.
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…
So you think we should extend humans life so they can spend more hours on the couch eating junk food? 30% of the worlds population is currently 'severly food insecure' (starving) [1]. Dont you think the priority first should be sorting out enough food for the existing population? When 100% of the world is fed properly and well, and we have surplus food, then maybe extending life should be come a scientific priority.…
I'm not sure why you would infer from my post that I'm not in favor of solving world hunger or that I'm encouraging people to have unhealthy diets. My point is that figuring out how to solve food scarcity is a scientific problem, as is figuring out how to improve people's diets. Eating a healthier diet slows down the aging process and increases lifespan. There isn't a sharp distinction between the two problems, and we can make progress in both. The idea that we shouldn't be doing scientific research on one area until all problems are solved in another, especially when the areas are related, is deeply mistaken.
Ok, but in that case it's best to sigh at how wrong the internet is and not post.
Is it? I don’t agree with you here. My contribution was weak, but I do believe scientists have an ethical duty to say something, even if it’s not in the form of a complete lecture.
If you're going to say something on HN, please make it substantive. If don't have time or don't want to do that, please don't post.
This applies to scientists the same as any other commenters.
Is it? I don’t agree with you here. My contribution was weak, but I do believe scientists have an ethical duty to say something, even if it’s not in the form of a complete lecture.
If you're going to say something on HN, please make it substantive. If don't have time or don't want to do that, please don't post. This applies to scientists the same as any other commenters.