31–40 of 63 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Metformin damages the liver as a side effect.
Can you provide your source? This one says otherwise, I'm really interested in your source as someone taking M daily: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20452916
> A number of treatments, from low-calorie diets to taking the drug metformin, are currently being investigated. Everything I read about metformin is exciting: cheap, simple structure, causes weight loss, reduced all-cause mortality in diabetics (ie: they studied it long enough to make sure it works, not just to ensure it reduces blood sugar), reduces blood sugar without hypoglycemia and might prevent cancer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I want to find a doc to prescribe me this and also understands the negatives. Why aren't there more docs doing this kind of stuff? Maybe bc it is not so simple?
Preventative pharmaceutical treatments are, culturally, a hard sell unless you have some documented risk factor better than "life". But if you can find a provider that specializes in "anti-aging", it might be the first thing they reach for. Just don't buy into too much of what they say :) I would say anti-cholesterol medications were vastly marketed/sold and prescribed to those likely to only benefit a bit. The "Numb…
> A number of treatments, from low-calorie diets to taking the drug metformin, are currently being investigated. Everything I read about metformin is exciting: cheap, simple structure, causes weight loss, reduced all-cause mortality in diabetics (ie: they studied it long enough to make sure it works, not just to ensure it reduces blood sugar), reduces blood sugar without hypoglycemia and might prevent cancer.
To be fair, I'm sure there's a research paper for anything, that suggests it might prevent cancer.
A lot of studies don’t go that far, which makes you wonder if the intervention is providing overall benefit.
Quite a bit of evidence, particularly for lower BMI and lower blood glucose decreasing cancer rates.
Study link: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle... The study was done in NZ in Dunedin. I wonder how much difference/coorelation there is between locales. I've found that Wellingtonians walk very fast in general - I thought I was a fast walker always passing people in San Francisco, but when I moved to Wellington everybody was passing me.
I always thought fast walking was related to city size. In average towns I'm a fast walker, when I go to medium cities I'm an average walker, and in London I'm a slow walker.
I wonder if it's another correlated factor? Usage of public transport?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, I'm sure there's a research paper for anything, that suggests it might prevent cancer.
That’s why I liked that they followed patients on it long enough to demonstrate reductions in all-cause mortality. A lot of studies don’t go that far, which makes you wonder if the intervention is providing overall benefit. Quite a bit of evidence, particularly for lower BMI and lower blood glucose decreasing cancer rates.
Isnt that a very low bar? If I'm understanding you correctly that's only ruling out things like saying smoking reduces prostate cancer.
”Even at the age of 45, there was a wide variation in walking speeds with the fastest moving at 4m/s at top speed (without running).” 4m/s? That’s 14,4 km/hour. They must have met a racewalker ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_maste... says the world record for 45 year old for 5k is 20:28:28. That’s almost exactly that speed) I can surely imagine those walking at those speeds to be healthier th…
”Even at the age of 45, there was a wide variation in walking speeds with the fastest moving at 4m/s at top speed (without running).” 4m/s? That’s 14,4 km/hour. They must have met a racewalker ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_maste... says the world record for 45 year old for 5k is 20:28:28. That’s almost exactly that speed) I can surely imagine those walking at those speeds to be healthier th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And to g, that statistical construct that's most commonly associated with IQ but also correlates heavily with general health and economic outcomes.
Tell me more about g . Google is unsurprisingly being unhelpful.
This shit will not replicate. Classic p-value hacking, if not total fiction, dreamt up to pad chum buckets. It is junk science to the core. I'd bet one thousand dollars that another researcher could wrangle contradictory data with a diametrically opposed result. This trash infotainment has been selected because it is inconsequential to the point of being astrology. No individual can take this "discovery" and apply it…