2523 replies to this topic

[Learner056]

Important:  Fusion exemplified in mitochondrial protocol is different from Fusion exemplified within SC renewal protocol. 

 

Curcumin, while I would view it as healthy within mitochondrial Fusion protocol, but I would view Curcumin as CONTRA-INDICATED within the SC renewal protocol fusion.  Curcumin opens UCP2 pores, while C60 is a UCP2 blocker (per Turnbuckle).  I am being very polite here.  

 

"curcumin, which has an antioxidant effect, can improve aging-related cerebrovascular dysfunction via UCP2 up-regulation" Dietary curcumin ameliorates aging-related cerebrovascular dysfunction through the AMPK/uncoupling protein 2 pathway - PubMed (nih.gov)

 

 

 

 

Curcumin: While protective as a whole, it suppresses Fission/Mitophagy.  So can be a good combination with Fusion.  

Mechanism: -Drp1, +Mfn2, -ROS, +MMP, -PINK1, -Apoptosis.  

“Pretreatment with curcumin effectively attenuated H₂O₂-induced mitochondrial fission, and inhibited the intracellular ROS generation, mitochondrial membrane potential disruption, PINK1 expression, apoptosis … knockdown of Mfn2 diminished curcumin-mediated protection … In conclusion, our results indicate that mitochondrial fusion plays a vital role in curcumin-mediated protection …” https://www.scienced...014483522003190

 

Edited by Learner056, 25 November 2022 - 12:29 AM.

[Empiricus]

Below I made a list of some of the more common things readers of this kind of forum do/take everyday that could either augment or screw up this Turnbuckle protocol.  Many of these questions have been discussed previously, but it's easy to lose track of what had been posted. Feel free to fill in any blanks with the appropriate code or correct any mistakes. If you disagree with the coding of an item, add your own code (opposite the item next to the previous code) and include a link to the post (#0000) where your code choice is explained (this could be your reply to the most recent amendment to this post). 

 

0  = Doesn't seem to matter

X  = Dangerous, risky, or ill-advised at any time during this protocol

1  = Supports fusion

2  = Supports fission

 

Common drugs

alcohol -

coffee - 0

green tea - 

black tea -

Nicotine - 

Cannabis - 

SSRIs -  1 #1803

Metformin - X 

 

Dietary

High protein diet (carnivore) - 

High saturated fat diet (keto) - 

high carb/sugar diet -  2

fasting -1

 

Spices

Curcumin - 1 #2198

Ginger - 2 #2197

Chili pepper - 

Oregano -

Salt - 

Pepper -

 

Supplements

B Complex (B Multi) - 

B1 (Thiamine) -

B2 (Riboflavin) -

B6 - 

B12 -

Vitamin A -

Vitamin C - 1

Vitamin E - 

Vitamin D - 0 #1553

Vitamin K -

Zinc -

Copper -

Selenium -

Magnesium -

Resveratrol - X

Fish oil - 

Dark chocolate - 1

 

Exercise 

Any kind of exercise -

Cardio -

Resistance training - 2

Edited by Empiricus, 25 November 2022 - 05:10 AM.

[Learner056]

Beautiful start, Empiricus. 

a) It is important to differentiate: Serotonergic vs Dopaminergic as the two are in many ways opposing duets (as is: Fission vs Fusion). So under your common drugs category: SSRI can be renamed Serotonergic, while importantly adding an entry 'Dopaminergic'. 

b) That said, Turnbuckle's comment to SSRIs (Serotonergic) within Fusion I have constructive doubts with. Indeed Serotonin is akin to Nicotinamide i.e. Fission, while Dopamine is what perhaps fits into Fusion?  This requires Turnbuckles input.

 

Below I made a list of some 

 

Edited by Learner056, 25 November 2022 - 12:31 PM.

[ambivalent]

This is true, and you are not the only one to see it. Many may see an improvement when they first use it, and they may even say as I did ten years ago, this is it! But the positive results will fade, and no amount of C60 will bring it back. In fact, taking more or taking it more often will result in ever worse results. SES (ignoring the 2 failures to replicate the original experiment) is telling people to take it every day, and thus it won't be long before their stem cells get worn out. It's borrowing from Peter (your future population of SCs) to pay Paul (for your present needs). They even make this comment on their FAQs: Some people in our office take as much as 15ml twice per day. This may well be, but I consider it irresponsible without some showing of benefit. 

 

 

As we have discussed I don't believe we have enough supporting evidence for this and we should try and do some analysis on this - it is a very deep shame there are so few of the early adopters on the forum.  It would be good if the site could try and contact some.

 

We do have one example of daily consumption over a a couple of years:

 

https://www.youtube....ason-rht/videos

 

He looked better after two years of pretty much daily consumption. A few years ago I took a few hundred ml in a month and have downed bottles but wouldn't say I'd noticed a big positive difference. I may try it one day on the back of several days of stearic acid.

 

As for pro aging we musn't discount the possibility that it is in our imagination at times (I know this happenns to me in both directions, when i am trying to obseve some effect) or indeed that the c60 was toxic - Kmoody said c60oo was very unstable and seemed to clearly demonstrate that light exposed c60 was toxic.

 

Bob Thomason, the guy in the link, probably consumed around 5 litres over 2 years. 

 

I may try and look around for some forums and testimonials on the net at some point, but we should really have collected a comprehensive set of data after all these years.

Edited by ambivalent, 25 November 2022 - 02:03 PM.

[ambivalent]

One aspect of aging which seldom seems reported on is hearing. Has anyone noticed any improvement in that regard? Mine hasn't, I would tentaively suggest it hasn't declined over the last couple of years. One person reported big hearing improvements on one of the protocols a couple of years back, possibly this and used this site:

 

https://onlinetonege...earingtest.html

 

I am somewhere between 10-11,000 - though I have tinnitus which might mask any improvement and likely have a genetic disposition to poor hearing.

 

I have noticed frequent fluctuations in vision and believe which I believe have been improved through a number a couple of mechanisms, perhaps recently too after large doses of senolytics and or raised NAD levels.

[Turnbuckle]

As we have discussed I don't believe we have enough supporting evidence for this and we should try and do some analysis on this - it is a very deep shame there are so few of the early adopters on the forum.  It would be good if the site could try and contact some.

 

 

We are not doing a government trial here, and if you want to wait for that, you may grow old and die first. What we do have is this: There have been two failures at reproducing the original rodent trial with C60, showing that the antioxidant hypothesis was wrong. They also show there must be an unknown variable at play (99% sure it is fusion), and we have several users here who have seen a drop in epigenetic age (measured with actual tests) while combining C60 with fusion. Thus one has reason to expect longer life by using C60, but only when using it correctly. (If you are planning to take "a few hundred ml in a month," "on the back of several days of stearic acid," then you won't be using it correctly.) There is nothing magic about this, and only one hypothesis as yet not proven. It is known, for instance, that fusion promotes self-renewal of stem cells, and it is known that UCP2 pores disappear from dividing stem cells. If one postulates that C60 serves as a UCP2 pore blocker, then it's easy to see how it provides a back door to banishing quiescence and promoting SC division. One then only needs to add fusion. With SC niches filled by repeated self-renewal, proper cellular maintenance will be restored and epigenetic age will fall.

[ambivalent]

We are not doing a government trial here, and if you want to wait for that, you may grow old and die first. What we do have is this: There have been two failures at reproducing the original rodent trial with C60, showing that the antioxidant hypothesis was wrong. They also show there must be an unknown variable at play (99% sure it is fusion), and we have several users here who have seen a drop in epigenetic age (measured with actual tests) while combining C60 with fusion. Thus one has reason to expect longer life by using C60, but only when using it correctly. (If you are planning to take "a few hundred ml in a month," "on the back of several days of stearic acid," then you won't be using it correctly.) There is nothing magic about this, and only one hypothesis as yet not proven. It is known, for instance, that fusion promotes self-renewal of stem cells, and it is known that UCP2 pores disappear from dividing stem cells. If one postulates that C60 serves as a UCP2 pore blocker, then it's easy to see how it provides a back door to banishing quiescence and promoting SC division. One then only needs to add fusion. With SC niches filled by repeated self-renewal, proper cellular maintenance will be restored and epigenetic age will fall.

 

 

Turnbuckle, there have been no trials reproducing the study with rats and rats aren't mice as have been discussed there is evidence they are metabolically different with fasting for example when recovering from injury. And in fact Kmoodys leukemia trial with mice showed similarities to Baati.

 

As for requiring a government trial, I don't see the deduction - i am saying we can pull in some useful anecdotal evidence. If we can find a handful of people in their 80s of been taking c60 daily for a decade who are aging well, then it is hard to know precisely which Paul is being robbed. 

 

I don't argue against your theories, but you seem unwilling to accept the possibility that people have been taken c60 each day or week for a decade and are fine because it conflicts with your repeated assertion they must be depleting their stem cells.

 

I would simply ask you this: if people are fine and well having taken c60oo daily for 10 years, how would you revise your theory?  You seem not to consider that this could be the case, when it quite possibly or I would say probably is the case.

 

That is basic scientific dialogue: if the effect of A is not Y as proposed, but X how might we revise our understanding of the mechanism of A? If that question cannot be asked then this is not a platform for scientific discussion. 

 

As for loading up on stearic acid for a week - nothing I have am aware that you propose suggests this would not increase the stem cells more than doing so for one day or so - that maintaining fusion over a period of a week would keep creating more stem cells. I appreciate that doing so intermittently means repleting those spent between fusion sessions but I am assuming we aren't maxing levels of stores on each cycle. And yes I do note, you have reported fusion to be an undesirable state to be maintained but it is also worth noting Sincalir has been on a gram a day probably for 7 or 8 years and does look remarkable and he also fasts 22 hours a day, so more fusion I assume. That at least deserves some consideration. 

 

As for the well, not hundreds, but maybe a hundred ml to start with, of c60 on the back end of a few days of stearic acid - it would just be an experiment, no more, without too much risk.  Sensei, was like you an outlier and while you achieved remarkable effects with c60 in the early days, you did so on very low doses, Sensei was the opposite.

 

It is still a curiosity that you had such remarkable effects where others didn't - might this have been some effect of the statins? Perhaps the c60 induced release from the stressed environment the statins inflicted on the mitochondria created those effects? 

 

You for example increased shoe size and regained height - no one else, as far as I know, reported this and I am not aware that you have ever attempted to explain this.

[Turnbuckle]

Turnbuckle, there have been no trials reproducing the study with rats and rats aren't mice as have been discussed there is evidence they are metabolically different with fasting for example when recovering from injury. And in fact Kmoodys leukemia trial with mice showed similarities to Baati.

 

The toxicity study has one explanation -- antioxidant properties, while the longevity study had another -- UCP2 blocking. They assumed C60 had only one function, and they were wrong. Your argument that the failed experiments were mice and not rats amounts to clutching at straws. So I ask you, are men more like mice, or more like rats? 

 

As for requiring a government trial, I don't see the deduction - i am saying we can pull in some useful anecdotal evidence. If we can find a handful of people in their 80s of been taking c60 daily for a decade who are aging well, then it is hard to know precisely which Paul is being robbed. 

 

You find them, then. Anecdotal evidence only interests me as an extension of real experimental evidence, like epigenetic tests. 

 

I don't argue against your theories, but you seem unwilling to accept the possibility that people have been taken c60 each day or week for a decade and are fine because it conflicts with your repeated assertion they must be depleting their stem cells.

 

I would simply ask you this: if people are fine and well having taken c60oo daily for 10 years, how would you revise your theory?  You seem not to consider that this could be the case, when it quite possibly or I would say probably is the case.

 

Again, you find them. I haven't seen any evidence of it. And if you find them, ask them about their diet.

 

 

That is basic scientific dialogue: if the effect of A is not Y as proposed, but X how might we revise our understanding of the mechanism of A? If that question cannot be asked then this is not a platform for scientific discussion. 

 

You are speaking in generalities with only imagined evidence. What if I found a white crow!

 

 

As for loading up on stearic acid for a week - nothing I have am aware that you propose suggests this would not increase the stem cells more than doing so for one day or so - that maintaining fusion over a period of a week would keep creating more stem cells. I appreciate that doing so intermittently means repleting those spent between fusion sessions but I am assuming we aren't maxing levels of stores on each cycle. And yes I do note, you have reported fusion to be an undesirable state to be maintained but it is also worth noting Sincalir has been on a gram a day probably for 7 or 8 years and does look remarkable and he also fasts 22 hours a day, so more fusion I assume. That at least deserves some consideration. 

 

A gram of what? Stearic acid? That isn't very much -- a fraction of the normal intake. In fact, Sinclair's list doesn't include it. 

 

As for the well, not hundreds, but maybe a hundred ml to start with, of c60 on the back end of a few days of stearic acid - it would just be an experiment, no more, without too much risk.  Sensei, was like you an outlier and while you achieved remarkable effects with c60 in the early days, you did so on very low doses, Sensei was the opposite.

 

The required dose is only what it takes to block UCP2 pores. More than that isn't necessary. That people take more than necessary (of anything) is generally because it has stopped working.

 

It is still a curiosity that you had such remarkable effects where others didn't - might this have been some effect of the statins? Perhaps the c60 induced release from the stressed environment the statins inflicted on the mitochondria created those effects? 

 

I haven't take statins in 15 years.

 

You for example increased shoe size and regained height - no one else, as far as I know, reported this and I am not aware that you have ever attempted to explain this.

 

I have explained it. These are the result of not using fusion. Stem cells are being delivered without receiving signals they are needed. I also saw hair regrowth (also seen in mice), but that disappeared after a year or so and has not returned -- evidence of total depletion in follicle SC niches. You can multiply SCs with this protocol, but you can't manufacture them out of nothing.

 

 

Edited by Turnbuckle, 25 November 2022 - 04:03 PM.

[ambivalent]

Turnbuckle, I have made this point on countless occasions of studies showing the fasting recovered movement in rats that underwent spinal chord injury and not mice. 

 

You haven't explained why when you initially ingested c60oo  you gained height, when no one else the nor has reported this. That's pretty interesting, and the question is what you were doing differently to everyone else then.

 

As for statins, at the time, the damage you asserted had been done to your mitochondria by statins, exaggerated the c60oo gap - i.e. provided a more dramatic response - well, maybe there was more to it than that, say, the statins had some effect on those mitochondria which were retained post statins and responded very differently to c60oo. I don't know, i am looking for causes.

 

Re Sinclair  - no my mistake - I was referring to NMN, which you believed could be harmful because of telomere extension, not because of fusion.

 

My post was simply appealing for better behaviour from Learner and more tolerance from you given the circumstances. 

 

It is up to you if you leave of course, that would be a shame - your efforts have been greatly appreciated and your research extremely valuable.

 

 

 

[Danniel]

You for example increased shoe size and regained height - no one else, as far as I know, reported this and I am not aware that you have ever attempted to explain this.

 

I got this side effect. The increase in shoe size is a mild inconvenience.

Edited by Danniel, 25 November 2022 - 06:24 PM.

[dlewis1453]

So we have at least 2 people who have experienced an increase in foot size by taking C60. I wonder if the growth plates in the foot bones are not entirely fused in some people. If these people were to stimulate the activity of skeletal stem cells with C60, then those cells could differentiate into new bone, expanding the size of the foot. There are reports of people who have had mini growth spurts after puberty, so it seems in some people the growth plates take a while to completely close. 

 

Scientists have recently discovered a population of skeletal stem cells that create new bone: 

https://med.stanford...-cartilage.html

Edited by dlewis1453, 25 November 2022 - 06:35 PM.

[ambivalent]

So we have at least 2 people who have experienced an increase in foot size by taking C60. I wonder if the growth plates in the foot bones are not entirely fused in some people. If these people were to stimulate the activity of skeletal stem cells with C60, then those cells could differentiate into new bone, expanding the size of the foot. There are reports of people who have had mini growth spurts after puberty, so it seems in some people the growth plates take a while to completely close. 

 

Scientists have recently discovered a population of skeletal stem cells that create new bone: 

https://med.stanford...-cartilage.html

 

 

James Nestor, author of Breath, used a homeobloc to increase cranial bone mass, through stimulating stem cells.

 

https://youtu.be/yEe7PrUlYSA?t=294

[ambivalent]

I got this side effect. The increase in shoe size is a mild inconvenience.

 

 

Was through the this protocol or prior on just c60? Other unusual effects? I assume no statins.

[QuestforLife]

You haven't explained why when you initially ingested c60oo you gained height, when no one else the nor has reported this. That's pretty interesting, and the question is what you were doing differently to everyone else then.

As for statins, at the time, the damage you asserted had been done to your mitochondria by statins, exaggerated the c60oo gap - i.e. provided a more dramatic response - well, maybe there was more to it than that, say, the statins had some effect on those mitochondria which were retained post statins and responded very differently to c60oo. I don't know, i am looking for causes.

Statins indirectly impede rho kinase, by depleting the isoprenoid tail used to secure it to the cell membrane (DOI: 10.1161/01.RES.0000168040.70096.2a). The result might reasonably be expected to cause a simplification of the cell structure- see my statin-sartan protocol. So taking statins might have built up TBs supply of progenitor like cells (even as it degraded his mitochondria), priming him for a powerful response when he first took C60.

I sympathise with TB having to field responses to every old question. Just do his protocol or a variant of it, and report back with your epigenetic age results.

[ambivalent]

Statins indirectly impede rho kinase, by depleting the isoprenoid tail used to secure it to the cell membrane (DOI: 10.1161/01.RES.0000168040.70096.2a). The result might reasonably be expected to cause a simplification of the cell structure- see my statin-sartan protocol. So taking statins might have built up TBs supply of progenitor like cells (even as it degraded his mitochondria), priming him for a powerful response when he first took C60.

I sympathise with TB having to field responses to every old question. Just do his protocol or a variant of it, and report back with your epigenetic age results.

 

 

 

That's interesting quest, thanks.

 

As for the latter point, that isn't his complaint and I'd not agree that people should act as you suggest - people have a right to ask questions, they are trying to take an educated risk with their health and they wish to be as informed as possible and it isn't reasonable to expect the entire thread to be read. 

 

Turnbuckle posted because he wanted to learn more of others experience, and I am sure his protocol has been aided by others on the thread. If you're putting this out for people to experiment with then there is a duty of care - which he has acknowledged and largely fulfilled.

[Female Scientist]

Please remind me, why is Metformin contraindicated during this protocol? I take it daily. I don't recall seeing here why it would be bad for the protocol?

 

 

Below I made a list of some of the more common things readers of this kind of forum do/take everyday that could either augment or screw up this Turnbuckle protocol.  Many of these questions have been discussed previously, but it's easy to lose track of what had been posted. Feel free to fill in any blanks with the appropriate code or correct any mistakes. If you disagree with the coding of an item, add your own code (opposite the item next to the previous code) and include a link to the post (#0000) where your code choice is explained (this could be your reply to the most recent amendment to this post). 

 

0  = Doesn't seem to matter

X  = Dangerous, risky, or ill-advised at any time during this protocol

1  = Supports fusion

2  = Supports fission

 

Common drugs

alcohol -

coffee - 0

green tea - 

black tea -

Nicotine - 

Cannabis - 

SSRIs -  1 #1803

Metformin - X 

 

Dietary

High protein diet (carnivore) - 

High saturated fat diet (keto) - 

high carb/sugar diet -  2

fasting -1

 

Spices

Curcumin - 1 #2198

Ginger - 2 #2197

Chili pepper - 

Oregano -

Salt - 

Pepper -

 

Supplements

B Complex (B Multi) - 

B1 (Thiamine) -

B2 (Riboflavin) -

B6 - 

B12 -

Vitamin A -

Vitamin C - 1

Vitamin E - 

Vitamin D - 0 #1553

Vitamin K -

Zinc -

Copper -

Selenium -

Magnesium -

Resveratrol - X

Fish oil - 

Dark chocolate - 1

 

Exercise 

Any kind of exercise -

Cardio -

Resistance training - 2

 

[mhillgizmo]

TB, I am roughly your age, 70, and have been using your protocols for the past year to outstanding results, as have many others here. Thank you for your innovations and postings. If you would continue to post updates It would really appreciated.

[njurkovi]

I second this. I am getting ready to start the protocol as I am 62 and there is no point in waiting any more. I very much appreciate your efforts to make the protocol available/understandable to those who are not the experts in the field. I am pretty sure there are many lurking members who feel the same. I would be saddened to see you go because a loud, manner-less minority has unreasonable expectations from you.

 

 

TB, I am roughly your age, 70, and have been using your protocols for the past year to outstanding results, as have many others here. Thank you for your innovations and postings. If you would continue to post updates It would really appreciated.

 

 

[johnhemming]

I am also 62.  I think turnbuckle has come up with some interesting thoughts.  However, I have a number of other things to test before I get onto testing aspects of his suggestions,.  I am quite pleased with the outcomes from the various things I have been trying such as a lowest HbA1c of 4.18%, a lowest creatinine of 62 and many functional improvements including a slight reversal of balding. However, I do think turnbuckle's protocol warrants a look at.

 

In the end macroscopic function depends upon microscopic function.  There are many aspects to that.

 

It would be nice if people could disagree with each other without being disrespectful, but the reality of life is that is a challenge for some.

[Danniel]

Was through the this protocol or prior on just c60? Other unusual effects? I assume no statins.

 

I only took C60 through this protocol. Half a year ago I was doing it once per week.

Was following my own regimen integrating: fasting for 2-4 days, this protocol (with microdosing psilocybin), and the one for mitochondria (with a twist for treating my NAFLD).

 

I don't know when my shoe size changed, just that when was shopping for new running shoes, the size I was wearing for the past 25 years was unbelievable tight and had to resign into buying a bigger size.

 

Other effects, I cured my NAFLD (posted a thread about it), slowed down the (perceived) mental decline and dramatically improved my mental resilience. Suffered all my life of various degrees of depression. In the past few moths, life delivered a few hard blows under the belt that would have made me suicidal a while back. Now, I just returned from a run and working on a book. My deepest gratitude to @Turnbuckle. His research and generosity changed my life.

Edited by Danniel, 26 November 2022 - 04:23 PM.

[Heisok]

 

 

We do have one example of daily consumption over a a couple of years:

 

https://www.youtube....ason-rht/videos

 

 

Hi, his video says only 5 days a week not daily. It is also not a large dose. He was taking 5 mL in coconut oil twice a day. As of the video date, instead, he was taking capsules of C60 in black seed oil. According to SES "

• Fact: Coconut oil derived MCT holds considerably less ESS60 than olive oil; about ~.35 mg/ml instead of ~.8 mg/ml
• If you want to consume the same amount of ESS60 (C60) then you need to take 60% more or our MCT product than of our Olive Oil product"

https://www.sesres.c...ct-coconut-oil/

[ambivalent]

Hi, his video says only 5 days a week not daily. It is also not a large dose. He was taking 5 mL in coconut oil twice a day. As of the video date, instead, he was taking capsules of C60 in black seed oil. According to SES "

• Fact: Coconut oil derived MCT holds considerably less ESS60 than olive oil; about ~.35 mg/ml instead of ~.8 mg/ml
• If you want to consume the same amount of ESS60 (C60) then you need to take 60% more or our MCT product than of our Olive Oil product"

https://www.sesres.c...ct-coconut-oil/

 

 

Yes, still he looked fine three years on and was consuming quite a lot.

 

I didn't know Sinclair had taken c60 

 

 

He seems to be taking "oleic acid fused to C60", according to the comments he is referring to Ian Mitchells at Wizard Sciences - anyone know which paper he is referring to or when this was recorded? He suggests the mechanism is mitohormesis.

Edited by ambivalent, 26 November 2022 - 09:31 PM.

[Empiricus]

Please remind me, why is Metformin contraindicated during this protocol? I take it daily. I don't recall seeing here why it would be bad for the protocol?

 

See post #1856 of the Mito Protocol.

Edited by Empiricus, 27 November 2022 - 03:56 PM.

[Empiricus]

It is still a curiosity that you had such remarkable effects where others didn't - might this have been some effect of the statins? Perhaps the c60 induced release from the stressed environment the statins inflicted on the mitochondria created those effects? 

 

I haven't take statins in 15 years.

 

You for example increased shoe size and regained height - no one else, as far as I know, reported this and I am not aware that you have ever attempted to explain this.

 

I have explained it. These are the result of not using fusion. Stem cells are being delivered without receiving signals they are needed. I also saw hair regrowth (also seen in mice), but that disappeared after a year or so and has not returned -- evidence of total depletion in follicle SC niches. You can multiply SCs with this protocol, but you can't manufacture them out of nothing.

 

 

As for the question of why more people haven't reported gains in height, I believe few thought to check.  For example, even to this day, I haven't bothered to check if c60 increased my own height. I just never got around to checking. Why would others who took c60 have behaved differently from me? 

 

We were all taught that height doesn't increase after adolescence, so not many of us would think to continue measuring it into adulthood. 

 

Furthermore, in our society most people aren't particularly observant, even when it comes to matters concerning their own bodies. 

Edited by Empiricus, 27 November 2022 - 03:40 PM.

[ambivalent]

As for the question of why more people haven't reported gains in height, I believe few thought to check.  For example, even to this day, I haven't bothered to check if c60 increased my own height. I just never got around to checking. Why would others who took c60 have behaved differently from me? 

 

We were all taught that height doesn't increase after adolescence, so not many of us would think to continue measuring it into adulthood. 

 

Furthermore, in our society most people aren't particularly observant, even when it comes to matters concerning their own bodies. 

 

Most would notice an inch or more and they sure would notice a shoe size gain. There were other observations which were very unusual, but deleted from his profile many years back. But again there should be the question, why I am getting these effects and not others when there was a very lively community of c60 adopters.

 

It is much safer to assume others were not experiencing this effect, than to assume they were and hadn't noticed. 

Edited by ambivalent, 27 November 2022 - 04:44 PM.

[Female Scientist]

Thanks very much. I went back and read that part of the thread, thanks to your help. I take short acting Metofrmin, so my protocol has been to NOT take it the morning of fission (taking the fission stack early in the morning), then since TB says the fission supplements are all short-acting, to resume my Metoformin (and other coincidentally fusion-supporting supplements) that I require for other maladies several hours later that day. Hoping the short acting few hours of fission is helpful enough to make it worth continuing. 

 

See post #1856 of the Mito Protocol.

 

[Empiricus]

Thanks very much. I went back and read that part of the thread, thanks to your help. I take short acting Metofrmin, so my protocol has been to NOT take it the morning of fission (taking the fission stack early in the morning), then since TB says the fission supplements are all short-acting, to resume my Metoformin (and other coincidentally fusion-supporting supplements) that I require for other maladies several hours later that day. Hoping the short acting few hours of fission is helpful enough to make it worth continuing. 

 

Just thought I'd point out that above you refer to Metformin as "fusion-promoting," whereas Turnbuckle says it's the opposite:  

 

I don't recall saying that, but I do agree that the protocol should be kept to a bare minimum, and not add in other components with varied and poorly understood functions. Metformin is in that category. It is reported to increase fission and mitophagy while simultaneously enhancing respiration via AMPK. Perhaps it pushed mitophagy too far. Another poster said he had doubled up on most everything and then didn't feel too good during fission. Cells are only capable of eliminating so many mitochondria per cycle, and not like the cell doesn't have other stuff to recycle. So there's no reason to kill yourself with the protocol. Taking it slow is best.

 

[bladedmind]

Mr. Turnbuckle, please return to providing your valuable information on this thread.  If you decide not to return, and are able to find some other arrangement to continue sharing your work, please let us know.  

 

Different people have different styles.  You like to stick to the topic, and you don’t like to spend much time on confused ideas.  But you ignore without fuss minor deviations from that policy.  That Longevity provides a red emoticon for off-topic means that your expectations are entirely legitimate.  

 

Because of its subject matter, Longevity inevitably attracts more people with obscure health issues and more neurodivergent people than a site about birdwatching.   Expectations of conduct vary across Longevity OPs and threads, tending towards the lenient.  You though are free to offer likely valuable information or not to do so, in exchange for the decorum you prefer.   

 

Others in your threads you have asked to stick to the topic have done so.  You repeatedly asked Learner056 to start her own thread.  A decent person would have respected that request.   Myself, I found her remarks increasingly ill-mannered and disruptive.  It seems to me that ambivalent’s interventions muddied the waters instead of clearing them.  The emoticons show everyone objecting to the disruptions, and a disrupter tossing out lone red flags. 

 

I wish I could offer a solution. 

 

[FWP]

I also hope you, Turnbuckle, will return to lead this thread. Intuitively I have great trust in this idea and also diving more into the matter with reason I also see that this protocol is very promising. Some personal stuff so far by using the protocol: Increase in shoe size, some complete new hair growth on temples which were bald before. Not filled but more and more hairs are coming back. Better posture, somehow more straight and better mobility. Still not lucky with undoing grey hair, but haven't used fisetin, only Quercetin and curcuma.
Anyhow thank you so far and hopefully we can try to continue contributing all together in a peaceful and caring way.

[Female Scientist]

Empiricus, thanks for this clarification. On your prompt, I went back and re-read and found this spot on the thread as well. Actually it is reassuring to me, as I take several other fusion-promoting supplements that help me keep a chronic migraine condition at bay. I need to take them daily, lest I suffer the consequences. So in general, I have worried that -- What if the Metformin is also pushing the fusion? Since I want to ensure I can sneak some fission in there, as well. The research I can parse on it seems to show Metformin has various impacts on mito QC, but I rely on TB and others who can synthesize the findings better than I. Overall, I have been improving tremendously, so I take that also as a good sign I am on the right track. For now I will continue with my efforts to do short acting fission "half day" treatments, and will endeavor on C60 fusion days (which I only do once per month) to decrease/delay metformin (I take the short acting type). Thanks again for responding.

Just thought I'd point out that above you refer to Metformin as "fusion-promoting," whereas Turnbuckle says it's the opposite: