234 replies to this topic

[resveratrol_guy]

So as you can see above I've finally posted my blood tests before and after jaw surgery. As you might expect, the surgery resulted in severe swelling, no doubt with a concommitant rise in inflammatory markers and, as you can see, platelet count. (But mean platelet volume has been steadily decreasing throughout the year, which is inconsistent with this and baffles me.) Fortunately, the pain level was minimal, which was striking considering the invasiveness of the procedure. The last blood test was done a month after my last pain medication dose.

Suffice to say that my 1400 cal/d juice diet was unexpectedly cut short by the opportunity to do surgery sooner than expected. Unfortunately, because I had to gain weight for the surgery and then struggle to keep it on after the fact despite a liquid diet, I basically ended up consuming a full-calorie diet of Amy's organic soup for the entire month of December. But as I said above, I didn't want to waste the opportunity to experiment. So I ended up eating one full bar of Endangered Species 88% dark everyday (by melting it in my mouth), plus as much olive oil as I could stand (submerged veggie burgers, etc.), in an attempt to see if immitating Jean Calment in these specific regards could compensate for my otherwise crap diet. (Sorry, high sodium organic vegan soup that comes in a can, loaded with omega-6 oils and sugar, is not healthy.)

As you can see, my HDL skyrocketed, which is a good thing, and no doubt one major reason for Calment's longevity despite lightly smoking and drinking for a century. But perhaps more significantly, my HDL is now well above my LDL, whereas LDL had always been less before, despite consuming dark chocolate and olive oil on and off for years. I ascribe this result to literally drowning my food in the latter, to the extent I could stand to do so. On the minus side, homocysteine is now a disaster. And RDW is still at high normal after a yearlong ascent. Wiki says it's consistent with defficiency in folate, B12, and iron, which would be consistent with the high homocysteine and low-normal hemoglobin. (I've started folate and B12 supplemention. I'm trying to chelate naturally, so at the moment I'm content to accept low normal low hemoglobin and bilirubin.) In fairness to Amy's, I can't necessarily blame it on the soup because I developed an antibiotic-resistant throat infection which persisted basically throughout the entire month. It survived amoxycillin, and only died after 10 full days of keflex, shortly prior to the last test. So perhaps that's what the inflammation means. My CRP, although half of its previous level, is still not back to zero, although it's well within the normal range.

But the most ominous outcome is my steady rise in fasting glucose. 86 is considered normal, but considering how hard I've worked to maintain a healthy diet prior to December, it should be considerably lower, say 70, at this point. While I'm tempted to say that calorie-restricted juice diets are just a bunch of BS that raise your blood sugar, I can't go there on account of the full-calorie soup diet. Indeed, my HbA1c didn't budge much, so perhaps this was just a bad day. Still, it demands more careful attention. Perhaps the HbA1c is low because of all the antioxidants in my diet, but insulin resistance is happening anyway due to persistently high dietary sugar intake.

One surprising result is that my eGFR (kidney filtration rate) actually went up. This is in stark contrast to my keto diet, which resulted in its rapid decline that I was lucky enough to reverse. Perhaps keto merely clogs the kidneys in a reversible way, as I've read research indicating that it's actually good for kidney disease patients despite the considerable kidney utilization in such a regimen; indeed, the reversal from 86 to my normal 102 was astounding to me. In any event, this juice diet must have reversed some much more persistent damage, pushing me from 102 to 106, so there's one vote in favor of such a regimen. I don't think it's noise in the measurement because the juice diet seemed to normalize the specific gravity of my urine. It was bright (basically neon) yellow, instead of its usual clear color, starting a while into the juice diet and ending only after a few weeks of soup. This would be consistent with excellent kidney function. If the color is any clue, then perhaps it actually peaked above 106. Or maybe the color is irrelevant. BUN is also quite low, reflecting my attempt to restrict protein intake in order to upregulate protein recovery via senile plaque disaggregation and autophagy. No doubt the kidneys are pleased.

Vitamin D3 is way up as you can see. Considering that all-cause mortality bottoms out around 35, a score of 51 is not necessarily good and is a result of excessive supplementation. (I have a theory that elevated D3 causes arterial plaque calcification and thus increased morbidity in the context of Western diet, thereby masking the putative benefits against Alzheimer's and cancer of higher levels. So I'm not sure which way I want to push it.)

So what to do? I've just a few days ago returned what I think is my favorite diet, that being intermittant fasting. Based on the notion that most of the benefits accrue with only modest reductions in caloric intake, I've decided to set my intake at 1500 per day (which means 3000 on alternating days), excluding whatever few calories happen to be in my supplement pills. So this is 100 higher than on the juice diet. While I'm not going to any great lengths to eat ketogenic foods, I am trying to keep the total intake of sugar and refined carbs in check. (I don't really care all that much for health reasons, as even at 1500 per day, caloric restriction largely overrides such hazards. It's more that I just don't fancy such foods, and I feel that my current fasting glucose and homocysteine deserve a concerted effort to reduce.) Still, I'm reminded of the Kame study and its impressive antidementia results associated with at least 3 juice servings per week. So I don't plan to eliminate them from my diet.

[resveratrol_guy]

I just got back my abdominal MRI results. I had the same MRI in the same machine in 1/2014 (2 years ago), so the comparison was statistically tight. I have 3 liver spots which are suspected cysts and/or benign tumors, none of which have changed in size between scans. (Even benign tumors would be expected to grow or shrink with time depending on diet, so the radiologist is leaning toward all 3 being inert cysts.) Specifically mentioned in the report is the normality of the kidneys, pancreas, and spleen. Considering the multitude of semidangerous experiments in which I've engaged in the intervening time, I think this is a useful data point. For instance, I've taken up to 50 mL (about 40 mg) of c60oo in a matter of minutes, I've been exposed to MRI contrast agent multiple times, I've endured high radiation due to an abdominal CT back 2013, and I've consumed a lot of kale juice, all of which have a theoretical risk to the kidneys. Yet, eGFR has increased and the kidneys have no lesions.

 

 

Also, in November prior to jaw surgery, I asked my surgeon if there were any tumors in evidence on the CT which could be removed during the procedure. No tumors, benign or not, could be seen.

 

 

[resveratrol_guy]

For the first time in almost a year, I met Simon face-to-face yesterday. In a nutshell, I was shocked. His hands no longer tremble, his skin has a vegan "shine" to it, he's lost probably 10 kg, and is quite steady on his feet, although getting up out of the car still requires balancing against the door, and his falls still rarely occur. In our conversations during the past 4 months or so, it has become clear that his cognition has improved relative to the last time I saw him. For the most part, he remembers subtle details of discussions that we recently had. His memory of recently learned names is poor, but otherwise, cognitive deficits are not clearly in evidence.

 

Having said all that, while Neupogen is a prime suspect, as its downstream effects manifest over many months, it might be some other intervention. For one thing, he's been guzzling increasing amounts of extra virgin olive oil recently, as well as ashitaba stem powder and Curcubrain. The only thing I can say with confidence is that this is not due to c60oo, which he stopped a few months ago. He has never taken nicotinamide riboside.

 

I think he's a prime candidate for the nilotinib group buy, which I have mentioned to him.

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 27 January 2016 - 04:37 PM.

[resveratrol_guy]

I've just set up a thread for an ashitaba liquid chalcone group buy if anyone is interested.

[resveratrol_guy]

Blood test results are in. All numbers double-checked. I'll comment in the next post.

1. 1/2/2015 (before GCSF)
2. 1/9/2015 (before GCSF)
3. 1/15/2015 (immediately after collection)
4. 3/6/2015 (after a few weeks of keto diet)
5. 5/28/2015 (after about 3 months of keto diet, out of keto for a week)
6. 8/19/2015 (beginning of caloric restriction)
7. 11/18/2015 (before jaw surgery)
8. 12/31/2015 (after jaw surgery, throat infection, keflex antibiotic, lots of chocolate & olive oil)
9. 2/19/2016 (annual physical)
10. 3/15/2016 (2 hours after pigging out on complex carbs, butter, coconut oil, and a small granola bar)
11. 3/31/2016 (homocysteine recheck)

HEMATOLOGY

4. cholesterol total 304
8. cholesterol total 200
9. cholesterol total 221
4. cholesterol HDL 70
8. cholesterol HDL 110
9. cholesterol HDL 98
8. cholesterol LDL 78
9. cholesterol LDL 107
8. triglycerides 62
9. triglycerides 60
1. glucose (fasting) 67
4. glucose (fasting) 66
5. glucose (fasting) 75
6. glucose (fasting) 77
8. glucose (fasting) 86
9. glucose (fasting) 93
10. glucose (nonfasting) 63
1. HbA1c 5.3%
4. HbA1c 5.2%
6. HbA1c 5.0%
8. HbA1c 5.2%
9. HbA1c 5.4%
4. vitamin D 25-hydroxy by LC-MS/MS 25
5. vitamin D 25-hydroxy, method unreported 39
8. vitamin D 25-hydroxy by LC-MS/MS 51
9. vitamin D 25-hydroxy by LC-MS/MS 53.8
1. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 9
4. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 8
5. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 7
6. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 7
7. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 6
8. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 6
9. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 6
10. blood urea nitrogen (BUN) 9
1. creatinine 0.93
4. creatinine 1.07
5. creatinine 0.93
6. creatinine 0.93
8. creatinine 0.89
9. creatinine 0.93
10. creatinine 0.85
1. eGFR nonafrican CKD-EPI 102
4. eGFR nonafrican CKD-EPI 86
5. eGFR nonafrican CKD-EPI 102
6. eGFR nonafrican CKD-EPI 102
8. eGFR nonafrican CKD-EPI 106
9. eGFR nonafrican CKD-EPI 101
10. eGFR nonafrican CKD-EPI 108
7. eCrCl 116
1. sodium 135
4. sodium 139
5. sodium 139
6. sodium 140
7. sodium 142
8. sodium 141
9. sodium 143
10. sodium 141
1. potassium 4.2
4. potassium 4.2
5. potassium 3.9
6. potassium 4.2
7. potassium 4.3
8. potassium 4.1
9. potassium 4.9
10. potassium 3.8
1. chloride 101
4. chloride 98
5. chloride 102
6. chloride 105
8. chloride 105
9. chloride 103
10. chloride 105
1. carbon dioxide 21
4. carbon dioxide 24
5. carbon dioxide 21
6. carbon dioxide 25
8. carbon dioxide 24
9. carbon dioxide 23
10. carbon dioxide 24
1. calcium 9.1
4. calcium 9.4
5. calcium 9.4
6. calcium 9.1
8. calcium 9.1
9. calcium 9.6
10. calcium 8.9
1. protein, total 7.0
4. protein, total 6.9
8. protein, total 6.8
9. protein, total 7.2
10. protein, total 6.2
1. albumin 4.2
4. albumin 4.5
8. albumin 4.1
9. albumin 4.6
10. albumin 4.2
8. globulin 2.7
9. globulin 2.6
10. globulin 2.0
1. bilirubin, direct 0.2
1. bilirubin, total 1.1
4. bilirubin, total 0.7
8. bilirubin, total 0.4
9. bilirubin, total 0.4
10. bilirubin, total 0.5
1. ALP 56
4. ALP 64
8. ALP 87
9. ALP 69
10. ALP 70
1. AST 27
4. AST 21
8. AST 21
9. AST 22
10. AST 19
1. ALT 21
4. ALT 17
8. ALT 17
9. ALT 14
10. ALT 14
2. WBC 4.7
3. WBC 36.6
4. WBC 4.7
7. WBC 4.5
8. WBC 4.5
9. WBC 4.1
10. WBC 5.1
2. RBC 5.21
3. RBC 5.08
4. RBC 5.40
7. RBC 4.54
8. RBC 4.35
9. RBC 4.86
10. RBC 4.42
2. hemoglobin 16.3
3. hemoglobin 15.9
4. hemoglobin 16.4
7. hemoglobin 14.5
8. hemoglobin 13.3
9. hemoglobin 14.8
10. hemoglobin 13.6
2. hematocrit 46.6
3. hematocrit 47.4
4. hematocrit 47.7
7. hematocrit 42.8
8. hematocrit 41.3
9. hematocrit 42.5
10. hematocrit 39.8
2. MCV 89
3. MCV 93
4. MCV 88
7. MCV 94.2
8. MCV 95
9. MCV 87.4
10. MCV 89.9
2. MCH 31.3
3. MCH 31.3
4. MCH 30.4
7. MCH 31.9
8. MCH 30.6
9. MCH 30.5
10. MCH 30.8
2. MCHC 35.0
3. MCHC 33.5
4. MCHC 34.4
7. MCHC 33.9
8. MCHC 32.2
9. MCHC 34.8
10. MCHC 34.2
2. RDW 13.3
3. RDW 13.5
4. RDW 14.0
7. RDW 14.9
8. RDW 14.9
9. RDW 13.6
10. RDW 14.9
2. platelets 228
3. platelets 216
4. platelets 220
7. platelets 231
8. platelets 251
9. platelets 199
10. platelets 220
4. mean platelet volume 9.6
7. mean platelet volume 7.3
8. mean platelet volume 6.6
9. mean platelet volume 9.4
10. mean platelet volume 7.6
2. neutrophils 70
3. neutrophils 86
4. neutrophils 64
8. neutrophils 69.6
9. neutrophils 52.2
10. neutrophils 59.0
2. neutrophils, absolute 3.2
3. neutrophils, absolute 30.8
4. neutrophils, absolute 2.99
7. neutrophils, absolute 2.7
8. neutrophils, absolute 3.132
9. neutrophils, absolute 2.11
10. neutrophils, absolute 3.009
2. lymphs 23
3. lymphs 6
4. lymphs 26
7. lymphs 30.4
8. lymphs 22.2
9. lymphs 36.3
10. lymphs 32.1
2. lymphs, absolute 1.1
3. lymphs, absolute 2.4
4. lymphs, absolute 1.2
7. lymphs, absolute 1.4
8. lymphs, absolute 0.999
9. lymphs, absolute 1.47
10. lymphs, absolute 1.637
2. monocytes 7
3. monocytes 8
4. monocytes 8
7. monocytes 7.1
8. monocytes 5.7
9. monocytes 9.6
10. monocytes 7.0
2. monocytes, absolute 0.3
3. monocytes, absolute 3.1
4. monocytes, absolute 0.36
7. monocytes, absolute 0.3
8. monocytes, absolute 0.257
9. monocytes, absolute 0.39
10. monocytes, absolute 0.357
2. eosinophils 0
3. eosinophils 0
4. eosinophils 2
8. eosinophils 2.2
9. eosinophils 0.7
10. eosinophils 1.5
4. eosinophils, absolute 0.07
7. eosinophils, absolute 0.0
8. eosinophils, absolute 0.099
9. eosinophils, absolute 0.03
10. eosinophils, absolute 0.077
2. basophils 0
3. basophils 0
4. basophils 1
8. basophils 0.3
9. basophils 1.0
10. basophils 0.4
4. basophils, absolute 0.03
7. basophils, absolute 0.0
8. basophils, absolute 0.014
9. basophils, absolute 0.04
10. basophils, absolute 0.020
2. immature granulocytes 0
3. immature granulocytes 0
2. immature granulocytes, absolute 0
3. immature granulocytes, absolute 0
3. NRBC 0
4. TSH 1.15
8. TSH 1.33
9. TSH 1.100
4. myeloperoxidase by TIA 145
5. myeloperoxidase by TIA 190
9. myeloperoxidase by TIA 215
4. PSA 0.5
9. PSA 0.6
4. testosterone 885
9. testosterone 417
5. uric acid 8.8
5. C-reactive protein (CRP) "< 0.10"
6. C-reactive protein (CRP) 0.4
8. C-reactive protein (CRP) 0.2
6. homocysteine 14.3
8. homocysteine 22.6
11. homocysteine 8.7
5. apolipoprotein A1 169
5. apolipoprotein B 110
5. apolipoprotein B/A1 ratio 0.65

URINALYSIS

4. color: yellow
5. color: yellow
6. color: yellow
9. color: yellow
6. appearance: clear
4. turbidity: clear
5. turbidity: clear
9. turbidity: clear
4. glucose: negative
5. glucose: negative
6. glucose: negative
9. glucose: negative
4. bilirubin: negative
5. bilirubin: negative
6. bilirubin: negative
9. bilirubin: negative
4. ketones: moderate
5. ketones: "3+"
6. ketones: "trace"
9. ketones: negative
4. specific gravity: 1.020
5. specific gravity: 1.011
6. specific gravity: 1.006
9. specific gravity: 1.019
4. hemoglobin: negative
9. hemoglobin: negative
5. occult blood: negative
6. occult blood: negative
4. pH 5.0
5. pH 5.5
6. pH 7.0
9. pH 6.0
4. protein: negative
6. protein: negative
9. protein: 20
4. urobilinogen: < 2.0
9. urobilinogen: < 2.0
4. nitrite: negative
5. nitrite: negative
6. nitrite: negative
9. nitrite: negative
4. leukocyte esterase: negative
5. leukocyte esterase: negative
6. leukocyte esterase: negative
9. leukocyte esterase: negative
4. WBC: 0-5
5. WBC: 0-5
6. WBC: 0-5
9. WBC: 0-5
4. RBC: 0-2
5. RBC: 0-2
6. RBC: 0-2
9. RBC: 0-2
4. squamous epithelial cells: none
5. squamous epithelial cells: none
6. squamous epithelial cells: none
9. squamous epithelial cells: none
4. hyaline casts: none
5. hyaline casts: none
6. hyaline casts: none
9. hyaline casts: none
4. calcium oxylate crystals: occasional
5. protein: negative
5. bacteria: none
6. bacteria: none
9. bacteria: none
10. partial thromboplastin time, activated: 28
10. prothrombin time INR: 1.0
10. prothrombin time PT: 10.5
 

[resveratrol_guy]

I think that's the last set of blood tests I'll post because I've covered more than a year post-stem-cell-therapy. Speaking of which, I plan to do more therapy. I'll comment on that in a few months, after it's done. For the moment, I think the blood tests suggest some interesting hypotheses:

 

1. First and foremost, white cell parameters are looking stable and healthy. I worried that somehow Neupogen would have permanently messed this up, as leukemia is a theoretical side effect, especially with prolonged use.

 

2. Hemoglobin has been on a steady downward trend. After dipping slightly into anemic territory, I've started increasing my iron intake via moringa powder. I wanted to force iron ion efflux from my brain by creating a temporary systemic deficit. I have no way to know whether this succeeded, apart from equilibrium theories which suggest that it should. You could blame this on Neupogen impacting red cell populations, but I don't think the data reflects this. It's more about restricting animal protein and iron in general.

 

3. Kidney function has been great. As you can see, it's been on a staggered uptrend since the stem cell therapy. This has no doubt been helped by fasting and juice dieting. (Keto seemed to cause some sort of reversible impairment to eGFR.)

 

4. Fasting glucose has exhibited a worrying uptrend. However, those values are deceptive on account of the binging aspect of alternate day fasting: it may take longer to reach baseline glucose after eating a huge meal in one go. HbA1c shows a more modest upward progression, but it confirms the problem nonetheless. It's relevatively clear from the data that full-calorie keto was superior to caloric restriction without carb restriction in this regard. Granted, I ate quite a lot of processed food such as sort-of-healthy TV dinners, because I wanted to obtain accurate calorie counts. Perhaps cutting those out, and instead going to ad-libidum-every-other-day fasting with lots of veggies would deliver superior HbA1c results.

 

5. HDL has gone through the roof, and the LDL/HDL ratio is hovering just above 1. I attribute this to excessive use of olive oil (drown those sweet potatoes!), and perhaps dark chocolate. Pterostilbene may also have played a role, according to well publicized research. But primarily, I think this is a lipid story. Thank you, Jean Calment!

 

6. Vitamin D is also very high, no doubt due to months at 1000 or 2000 IU/day. In fact, it's well above the level for minimum mortality, which is around 35. (Sorry I can't find the study at the moment, but you can dig it up. It involved thousands of participants.) I suspect that the U-shaped mortality curve is due to arterial calcification at the high end, resulting in catastrophic plaque rupturing. However, to the extent that 53.8 protects me from cancer and Alzheimer's, I'm content to remain where I am.

 

7. Despite the good news about HDL, myeloperoxidase continues to be a thorn in my side. The values, while still well within the normal range, suggest a rapid increase in arterial plaque oxidation. This might relate to my high vitamin D level. So much for antioxidant protection; even c60oo doesn't seem to be helping me here. The strangest thing is that the biggest rise seems to have occurred during my keto period, suggesting that something other than sugar is to blame here. I'm stumped.

 

8. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) has been flagged as low. (I don't see how one can possibly be considered "defficient" in nitrogenous waste products!) This is surely due to my efforts to restrict protein recently. I could have been even more aggressive, but nonetheless the results are pleasing and probably relate to the uptick in kidney function, despite all that kale juice (oxalic acid) I've been ingesting.

 

9. My biggest problem has actually been elevated homocysteine. After asking for a test for a year, I finally got one in 8/2015, showing unacceptable elevation at 14.3. Then by 12/2015, it had risen to 22.6, which is frankly hazardous. The secondary spike may have been due to the fact that I could only consume soft foods after my jaw surgery for several weeks, so I ended up eating a lot of Amy's Organic soups, which are actually loaded with omega-6 and carbs but offer few vegetables. My doctor recommened folate (not to be confused with folic acid) and B12 supplementation. But he lamented, which he repeated when I met him again this past Monday, that his track record at treating high homocysteine was poor. He said that the only thing he knew to recommend was those supplements. So I took Jarrow methyfolate (Quatrefolic) 400 ug every other day along with Now methyl B12 1000 ug (1 mg) every day. (The reason for alternating the methylfolate was so that I wouldn't need to take it on fasting days, as I'm frankly not comfortable with the idea of dumping a high concentration of this progrowth supplement directly onto the stomach lining.) However, I cannot argue with the results: while 8.7 isn't the best, it's way better than 22.6, and well into the normal range. I suspect that my doctor's frustration with supplementation therapy is because (1) his patients are probably not well enough informed to realize that they should be using the methylated versions (as opposed to folic acid and cyanocobalamin) and (2) they tend to be in poor metabolic health according to him. I've pointed out the difference, so hopefully it will help his patients in the future. I've read on the homocysteine reduction thread that niacin seems to be counterproductive, but I've been taking 500 mg every other day, which results in a rather hard flush, and continue to do so. I'm not willing to stop because 8.7 is acceptable, and I want to keep plenty of NAD+ available to my cells. Furthermore, in order to test the robustness of supplementation as a "cure" for high homocysteine, I've maintained a healthy-but-full-calorie diet for the past 2 or 3 weeks. For the record, here's my MTHFR status, which encodes for various peptides relating to homocysteine metabolism (via Genetic Genie and based on 23AndMe):

 

Good

 

rs769224 GG

rs3741049 GG

rs1801133 GG

rs2066470 GG

rs1805087 AA

rs10380 CC

rs162036 AA

rs2287780 CC

rs1802059 GG

rs567754 CC

rs617219 AA

rs234706 GG

rs2298758 GG

 

Neutral

 

rs4680 AG

rs4633 CT

rs1801131 GT

 

Bad

 

rs6323 T (not TT)

rs1801394 GG

 

10. Testosterone has been cut in half since last year. What do you expect when you restrict calories and thereby downregulate sex drive? Life could be worse!

 

[albedo]

...

6. Vitamin D is also very high, no doubt due to months at 1000 or 2000 IU/day. In fact, it's well above the level for minimum mortality, which is around 35. (Sorry I can't find the study at the moment, but you can dig it up. It involved thousands of participants.) I suspect that the U-shaped mortality curve is due to arterial calcification at the high end, resulting in catastrophic plaque rupturing. However, to the extent that 53.8 protects me from cancer and Alzheimer's, I'm content to remain where I am.

..

 

Very informative. I reached this thread via an homocysteine post showing your success. I will need to find the time to read it all !

 

I just wish to add a couple of Vit. D references, are these the ones you are mentioning? There was also a discussion on LC:

 

Vitamin D deficiency and mortality risk in the general population: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

http://ajcn.nutritio...nt/95/1/91.long

 

Vitamin D Excess Is Significantly Associated with Risk of Atrial Fibrillation

http://circ.ahajourn...bstracts/A14699

 

A LongeCity thread

http://www.longecity...ndpost&p=519487
 

Edited by albedo, 02 April 2016 - 11:21 AM.

[resveratrol_guy]

Very informative. I reached this thread via an homocysteine post showing your success. I will need to find the time to read it all !

 

I just wish to add a couple of Vit. D references, are these the ones you are mentioning? There was also a discussion on LC:

 

Vitamin D deficiency and mortality risk in the general population: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

http://ajcn.nutritio...nt/95/1/91.long

 

Vitamin D Excess Is Significantly Associated with Risk of Atrial Fibrillation

http://circ.ahajourn...bstracts/A14699

 

A LongeCity thread

http://www.longecity...ndpost&p=519487
 

 

Thanks for the links! Yes, that's the Longecity thread I had forgotten about. It's well worth a read. I'm mostly convinced that the higher mortality above 31 ng/mL (watch the units, which are sometimes nmol/L) is due to increased CVD and arrythmia. I also see some unsupported suggestions that some cancers actually progress faster with higher vitamin D, while others are thwarted. (I suppose this comes down to calcification, so perhaps moderating dietary calcium and magnesium intake could help.) Having reviewed the thread, however, I'm even less certain what the optimum really is, even assuming that one uses vitamin K2 and fish oil to forestall the cardiovascular hazards, as I do.

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 02 April 2016 - 04:11 PM.

[aribadabar]

5. HDL has gone through the roof, and the LDL/HDL ratio is hovering just above 1. I attribute this to excessive use of olive oil (drown those sweet potatoes!), and perhaps dark chocolate. Pterostilbene may also have played a role, according to well publicized research. But primarily, I think this is a lipid story. Thank you, Jean Calment!

 

 

Jeanne, Jean is a masculine form in French 

I have to ask you what is your ApoE status as it must not be 3/4 or 4/4 as their carriers tend to do not too well on a high-fat diet and usually result in a worsened lipid profile, not to mention the elevated AD risk.

 

Edited by aribadabar, 04 April 2016 - 03:41 AM.

[aribadabar]

3. Kidney function has been great. As you can see, it's been on a staggered uptrend since the stem cell therapy. This has no doubt been helped by fasting and juice dieting. (Keto seemed to cause some sort of reversible impairment to eGFR.)

 

Great eGFR readings indeed!

Do you ascribe any weight on some of the supplementation that you are practicing wrt the improved kidney health?

 

Btw, I haven't noticed your mentioning what is your age?

Edited by aribadabar, 04 April 2016 - 03:46 AM.

[resveratrol_guy]

Yep, Jeanne. Thanks for catching that before people Google the wrong person.

 

Unfortunately 23andMe doesn't have my APoE3/4 data, and I can't upgrade due to their pending approval process. Thank you, FDA, for protecting my virgin eyes from real data!

 

I've heard of the lipid problems with these genes. Based on my history of low LDL (bad, neurologically speaking) and high HDL (good), I suspect I'm heterozygous. I wish I could test it. I actually tried to get a blood test a while back, but that went into the insurance black hole.

 

The improved kidney health is tough to pin down, although the timing coincides with a mix of juice dieting and fasting. It's sort of remarkable, in light of (1) my history of high uric acid, to the point where my doctor warned me about it and (2) my massive exposure to oxalic acid and/or oxalate via cruciferous veggies and kale juice. It's a well known fact in chronic kidney disease (CKD) circles that carbosis staves off disease progression. If this sounds weird, remember that juice diets seem to improve fasting sugar and a wide variety of health parameters, despite being like 90% calories from sugar. Ketosis, in my case, did some sort of reversible damage. It doesn't seem to have hurt, though. If there are supplements helping the situation, my prime suspect would be vitamin K2. After all, the kidneys are basically just blobs of capillaries.

 

I'm 41.

 

[aribadabar]

 

Unfortunately 23andMe doesn't have my APoE3/4 data

 

 

You don't need the "health reports" - you can look up it manually by the SNPs in the linked article above (Table 2).

That's how I found out my ApoE profile: http://goo.gl/RkjI1T

[resveratrol_guy]

 

 

Unfortunately 23andMe doesn't have my APoE3/4 data

 

 

You don't need the "health reports" - you can look up it manually by the SNPs in the linked article above (Table 2).

That's how I found out my ApoE profile: http://goo.gl/RkjI1T

 

 

I just tried that. It doesn't work because I have version 1 of 23andMe, which did not test for these SNPs.
 

[aribadabar]

 

 

 

Unfortunately 23andMe doesn't have my APoE3/4 data

 

 

You don't need the "health reports" - you can look up it manually by the SNPs in the linked article above (Table 2).

That's how I found out my ApoE profile: http://goo.gl/RkjI1T

 

 

I just tried that. It doesn't work because I have version 1 of 23andMe, which did not test for these SNPs.
 

 

Ah, I see. I don't have the latest (v4) either which is actually good news as the number of reported SNPs has been severely curtailed compared v3, which is what I have.

 

You may try imputing these missing SNPs via uploading your v1 23andMe file on the DNA.land website.

See more details in the other thread where albedo pointed me to this approach.

[Heisok]

Hi, so is it even worth getting the current testing, or is there simply too much which is not even in the raw data?

 

I am not as worried about 23andMe's reporting, it is just that I can wait if the raw data is never accessible.

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately 23andMe doesn't have my APoE3/4 data

 

 

You don't need the "health reports" - you can look up it manually by the SNPs in the linked article above (Table 2).

That's how I found out my ApoE profile: http://goo.gl/RkjI1T

 

 

I just tried that. It doesn't work because I have version 1 of 23andMe, which did not test for these SNPs.
 

 

Ah, I see. I don't have the latest (v4) either which is actually good news as the number of reported SNPs has been severely curtailed compared v3, which is what I have.

 

You may try imputing these missing SNPs via uploading your v1 23andMe file on the DNA.land website.

See more details in the other thread where albedo pointed me to this approach.

 

 

[resveratrol_guy]

DNA.land says "DNA is inherited in chunks, which allows us to infer sites that occur on the same chunk even though they have not actually been sequenced" I know from their own literature that 23andMe is 99.9% accurate. (This is the main reason the FDA shut them down. It wasn't considered reliable. WTF?) But I see no estimate of error rate on DNA.land, which is especially important because they are using statistics, and not measurements, to deduce the states of missing nucleotides. In the absence of reliability data, I wouldn't know what to make of something as serious as their guestimate of Alzheimer's gene status. Still, it looks like a promising resource if I find the time to address this question with their staff.

 

@heisoktoday: I'm not sure what they currently offer. My understanding as of their announcement a few months ago was that they only have approval to test one single gene at the moment. In other words, save your money and check with their website frequently.

 

[Heisok]

DNA.land says "DNA is inherited in chunks, which allows us to infer sites that occur on the same chunk even though they have not actually been sequenced" I know from their own literature that 23andMe is 99.9% accurate. (This is the main reason the FDA shut them down. It wasn't considered reliable. WTF?) But I see no estimate of error rate on DNA.land, which is especially important because they are using statistics, and not measurements, to deduce the states of missing nucleotides. In the absence of reliability data, I wouldn't know what to make of something as serious as their guestimate of Alzheimer's gene status. Still, it looks like a promising resource if I find the time to address this question with their staff.

 

@heisoktoday: I'm not sure what they currently offer. My understanding as of their announcement a few months ago was that they only have approval to test one single gene at the moment. In other words, save your money and check with their website frequently.

 

Thanks.

[Autumn Knight]

Wow! Very cool thread. I read through the whole thing tonight and it's neat that you're still responding since the first post.

You're all over the place with supplements and such. It seems like it's hard to keep track of what's doing what, so you might be inhibiting your success there.

The most disappointing thing is it doesn't seem like the stem cells did much overall by reading your posts.

 

[resveratrol_guy]

Wow! Very cool thread. I read through the whole thing tonight and it's neat that you're still responding since the first post.

You're all over the place with supplements and such. It seems like it's hard to keep track of what's doing what, so you might be inhibiting your success there.

The most disappointing thing is it doesn't seem like the stem cells did much overall by reading your posts.

 

Yes, I'm all over the place with supplements and diets. I basically realized that there are too many interventions to try, and too little time. So while I've tried to isolate multifaceted changes, such as ketogenic vs. juice diets, I haven't put much effort into isolating the effects of any particular substance. At least, I do have some confidence with respect to lists of individual interventions which seem to work, even though I have little knowledge of which of them is producing the most benefits.

 

The worst problem, apart from N=1 obviously, is that neurological rejuvenation can span months and sometimes years. And of course some aspects of cognition improve, while others worsen.

 

The stem cells did have a short term perceptible effect on HPA axis function, as flex pointed out in relation to my experience. But it's not at all clear that they did anything in the longterm; I've done too much else to make such a narrow conclusion. I'm basically taking it on faith that, like this rat, it's a good idea to administer them periodically throughout life. At some point, I intend to multiply the ones I have in the freezer using some duplication techniques which already exist but are not yet cost effective.

 

It's also quite clear to me that stem cells are more effective in more senescent individuals because, frankly, they have more damage and thus tend to exhibit more obvious benefits.

 

I still believe in freezing stem cells at some optimal point which is a compromise between financial fortitude and youthfulness. Believe me, having gone through this massive jaw surgery, I'm very happy to have little repair robots sitting in a freezer which, moreover, were harvested before I had too many xrays.

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 12 April 2016 - 02:06 AM.

[Autumn Knight]

So the stem cells haven't improved your cognitive problems associated with ageing much?

It's odd that you'd think they would have an effect on those with increased age-related cognitive issues.

I am looking for a fix myself, not optimization. That's part of why I found your thread so cool.

[resveratrol_guy]

Well, I wouldn't say that the stem cells were not cognitively useful. Indeed, GCSF has been tied to better cognitive health in cancer patients receiving it for that purpose. It's just that, especially in my case, the effects are impossible to isolate.

 

While I'm afraid that there is no outright fix for cognitive problems, there are many things one can do, depending on the nature of the impairment, to address them. If the problem is mostly vascular, then an approach based on bone marrow is likely to be useful. If it's a neurotranmitter issue, then nootropic supplements would probably be more appropriate. If it's neurodegeneration, then betaNGF spray or ketogenic diet might be best.

 

It's important to remember that the only significantly successful antidementia intervention study inolved no less than 36 separate strategies, involving diet, lifestyle, sleep, exercise, and supplements. I doubt we'll ever see a monotherapy that's a complete solution, except maybe for TERT gene therapy, which in any event will remain prohibitively expensive for many years.

[Autumn Knight]

Mhm.. thanks.

I guess my problem would be considered a neurotransmitter one?

Anyway, it's hard to tell if you've had much improvement at all whether from something you could isolate or not.

[resveratrol_guy]

Mhm.. thanks.

I guess my problem would be considered a neurotransmitter one?

Anyway, it's hard to tell if you've had much improvement at all whether from something you could isolate or not.

 

Well, perhaps it's a neurotransmitter problem. I would suggest posting a question about your situation in the Mental Health section. That seems to the place for discussing undiagnosed cases. I would certainly need to know more about your symtoms and situation before I could offer an opinion. And to be sure, there are much smarter people than I am around here who would offer much more value.

 

On another matter, while I've bumped the thread, I just want to mention heisoktoday. This user had an extra supply of a particular supplement which he no longer wanted. He offered it to me, for free, including postage. Because I had no need for it, I instead asked him to send it to a friend of mine. I just today found out that it had arrived, much to the delight of the recipient. I wish I could publish his name here just so that there's some record on Google of how magnanimous this person is in his consideration of a total stranger (me). I often wonder how many millions (billions?) of other people are out there, just like him, whose generosity will be lost to the dustbin of history, while a quick glance at the news these days will assure us that the slimeballs in this world are doing just fine. Mental health is more than a mere matter of memory performance. It's a matter of effort and deeds.

[resveratrol_guy]

Mind. Blowing.

 

http://www.longecity...-20#entry771702

[resveratrol_guy]

Hi folks, I'm pressed for time but just wanted to share something with you. As I documented photographically in previous posts, liquid ashitaba chalcone seems to have caused one of caused one of my age spots to shrivel up and fall off.

For his part, Simon has been taking about a tablespoon a day of ashitaba stem powder from the same farm for several months now. I visited him this week, and he discussed his history of various skin lesions, some of which had been cancerous and were removed over a year ago. He asked me to have a look at his spots and see what I thought of them. Mind you, I'm no dermatologist, although I do have an understanding of what common forms of skin cancer look like. While he has probably a thousand age spots all over the place, I was surprised to find the ones in the attached photo. These are located on his back, where it's unlikely that he was able to interfere with them, as he was unaware of them and probably could not have reached them anyway.

If you look closely at the one in the lower left in the attached photo, which is maybe 6 mm in diameter, you can see much the same thing as in my own age spot photos, namely, a brown layer drying up, turning white, and flaking off. The one in the upper right looks like it's getting ready to do the same. These are the only ones I found in this state.

If this is due to ashitaba, it might seem somewhat ironic, since the xanthotoxin it contains can temporarily increase the chances of getting sunburns because it somehow reduces UV protection. It's my understanding that this effect is temporary, lasting only a few hours until the liver can neutralize it. (That's why dosing after dinner is probably a better idea than with breakfast.) I suspect that it's the xanthoangelol, not the xanthotoxin, which is responsible for this age spot effect.

Now that N=2, I'm intrigued. One question I have is why the flaking effect only occurs in so few spots, instead of broadly involving all of them. It occurred to me that the chalcone is probably pushing apoptosis much harder than normal. If this were the case, then we would expect the most mutated age spots to experience flaking, but not necessarily the less mutated ones. Mutation, like epigenetic expression, is a very localized phenomenon (which is why, for one thing, I don't believe in the utility of the standard xray exposure metrics that refer to total dose over a period of time). The one thing that I do recall about my age spot which died is that it had initially been growing at a rather rapid clip relative to other spots. I remember dismissing that as just "one of those things" that's inevitable with age. It didn't look like a melanoma, so I wasn't concerned. However, now that I think about it, the accelerated growth would have been indicative of greater mutation as compared with my other, rather inert, age spots.

I don't know if this has happened before with Simon. It's certainly possible, because my own effect occurred much sooner (weeks vs months). But there's no way to know at this point, because the spots would be long gone.

On a related note, as I mentioned elsewhere, another friend of mine has been taking the same powder for a couple months now, dissolved in pomagranite juice. For the first time in years, his blood pressure is in the 120-130 range instead of 140-150. This was confirmed at his doctors office as well as with his home device, across multiple measurements. Supposedly it's the 4-hydroxyderrecin that's responsible for this, although I haven't looked into the research. He says he hasn't really changed his diet, drugs, or exercise regimen during the dosing period.

So take these as anecdotes. By in my opinion, it's worth further research.
 

Attached Files

•  spot.jpg   68.86KB   3 downloads

Edited by resveratrol_guy, 12 May 2016 - 04:10 PM.