176 replies to this topic

[bosharpe]

I think if there was something that definitely worked a quick search or skimming of threads would reveal it as everyone would be taking it. I'm taking less supplements these days and just concentrating on the topical treatments as I have no idea (And not a lot of money) if anything works. I don't feel any different or see any difference when I take Curcumin, for example. 

[YOLF]

thats interesting. in general healthy fatty acids do not cause weight gain in what i have read and also in personal experiences. but i guess each one is different as the saying goes.

 

btw i was wondering to ask, what do you think about DHEA? it is said to be an anti-aging hormone and it seems reasonable to take it as you age as levels drop significantly.

IIRC, it increases DHT, that's the testosterone of the aged. If you're young, it'll make you look older, but if you're really old, it might make you look younger, but it'll be limited. True anti-aging or whatever you want to call it won't have these types of limits and will take you back to when you weren't producing much if any DHT. It also makes your hair fall out. 

[YOLF]

 

 

what do you mean about fish oil making you fat, did you consume mega grams or what? or do you mean its the saturated fat that coconut oil has too but from what ive seen people using fats in general, fish oil or coconut oil, actually lose weight

Nope, when I was burning 1000+ calories a day working out, I'd lose less weight when I was taking fish oil than when I wasn't and it was a very big difference. I was taking standard doses, a gram or two a day of the regular grade, and when I saw that I wasn't losing weight as fast when taking fish oil, I went with the high grade, high purity Omega 3 stuff and saw no difference. Plus, I didn't see any difference in my skin. A handful of other oils that were supposed to make me stronger or make me lose weight had negative impacts on my data too. I suggest people track their results on and off.

 

 

It's a big difference to say that your weight loss is slower when taking Omega 3 and what you said in your first statement, that it will make you fatter.
As we all know fat is your body's way to store excessive energy. If you burn more kcal than you put in your body you will lose weight.

 

1 cap of Omega 3 contains roughly 10 kcal so that's not much anyway, but yeah if you take a lot of them so that they contribute to make your total daily kcal intake to exceed what you burn, then yes you'll get fatter. Otherwise no, it won't and it will decrease the speed of your weight loss just slightly.

 

That's a semantic I don't really care about when it comes to weight loss. I know what you're saying, and you're right, but it doesn't matter if it's cutting out 2/3s of my average weekly weight loss. There are maybe 20 calories in a serving of fish oil as I was taking, if I'm burning 1000 calories and only seeing the benefit of losing 333, then fish oil really isn't just 20 calories, it's 667 as far as I'm concerned. I'm thinking, quite lightly, that 20 calories of fish oil in sedentary individuals won't be noticeable, but that there will be a meeting point where those with moderate physical activity are actually gaining more weight b/c they aren't breaching that threshold. 

 

So in short,  I don't think FO is a useful product for weight loss as anyone who wants to lose weight will probably work out. So if FO is making you weight loss resistant, why is it good?  Is it just good for those who are already very overweight b/c the extent to which their metabolism is starving for it allows for improvement? 

 

Further, if you're weight loss results are too slow or aren't making you look more attractive fast enough, you're going to get knocked down by how long it's going to take to get to your goal.

[normalizing]

yolf thats interesting. im 30 and i took DHEA few times and it made me feel like 18. im not sure what your sources are and how you understand it really works but from what i checked online, it does support evident of youthful being as hormone.

[YOLF]

yolf thats interesting. im 30 and i took DHEA few times and it made me feel like 18. im not sure what your sources are and how you understand it really works but from what i checked online, it does support evident of youthful being as hormone.

Don't get me wrong, I took DHEA for a while and I saw some benefits like very acute reflexes and an increase in sporting accuracy etc. But it didn't last long and dose adjustments didn't help either. My brand is top notch. It's also not what you feel, but what you look. If you're looking older and feeling younger, your benefits are going to be short lived and pro aging in the long run.

 

Ultimately, I've found that other testosterone supplements will yield better benefits. Try powdered garlic and onion capsules, and a nice strong Cissus extract. Nothing beats it. For increased bloodflow to the eyes, I'd use bilberry or grapeseed extracts. To keep any testosterone supplement from making your hair fall out, take curcumin or turmeric extracts. Pharmaceutical preparations for this are shown to lead to cancer and have other side effects.

[normalizing]

yolf, the most recent article on DHEA and longevity i read is this; http://www.ergo-log....one-igf-1.html

which goes against all you have been saying here

Edited by hazy, 15 August 2017 - 02:50 AM.

[Nate-2004]

I don't think anyone's mentioned Rapamycin yet which I have known about but never really looked much into the full details till lately. It does extend lifespan in other mammals and only hypothetically may extend lifespan in humans with proper dosing. It targets both complexes of mTOR, which leads to some nasty side effects, targeting only mTORC1 may have better results. A pharmaceutical company is working on this. Novator I think. Meanwhile it may be safe to take Rapamycin in low doses once a week, 6mg max is what some are trying. It's expensive, I think a group buy would be useful.

Edited by Nate-2004, 15 August 2017 - 04:42 AM.

[normalizing]

actually im going to quit DHEA makes me jerk off too much and i already feel sick from masturbation it definitely ages you faster if you masturbate daily

[YOLF]

yolf, the most recent article on DHEA and longevity i read is this; http://www.ergo-log....one-igf-1.html

which goes against all you have been saying here

It doesn't look like they're using it as a monotherapy. They are also using testosterone and IGF1. If you're keeping you're T up, it will compete with DHT and therefore have lessened effects or more diffuse effects. In this case, it might be good, but I'm guessing that T levels were pinned to 1150-1350.

[YOLF]

 

Also rapamycin, FOXO4 D-retro-inverso peptide.

Rapamycin's benefits are tiny compared to what most people look for. A single digit lifespan increase isn't going to make you look or feel significantly younger while you're young. I'm not sure about the rest.

 

 

 

I don't think anyone's mentioned Rapamycin yet which I have known about but never really looked much into the full details till lately. It does extend lifespan in other mammals and only hypothetically may extend lifespan in humans with proper dosing. It targets both complexes of mTOR, which leads to some nasty side effects, targeting only mTORC1 may have better results. A pharmaceutical company is working on this. Novator I think. Meanwhile it may be safe to take Rapamycin in low doses once a week, 6mg max is what some are trying. It's expensive, I think a group buy would be useful.

[Rocket]

The op needs to define anti aging and then re-ask the question. Muscle is last with aging; anabolic steroids grow muscles coupled with adequate food and exercise. Are steroids anti aging? Growth hormone is lost with aging. Is hgh an anti aging supplement? Steroids also increase bone synthesis which is lost with aging. Hgh and dhea have been found to regrow the thymus. Are those anti aging supplements? GW50516 is found to aid in burning fat and to increase exercise intensity. Is that an anti aging supplement? What about hgh secretogogues?

Then there are things like methelyne blue, c60, and NR, which I don't know much about but people claim to get promising results.

Now there is dasatinib and apparently a new more effective peptides that eliminates senescent cells.

How about nootropics and cognitive improvements?

What exactly is the op looking for? There are more things available now then ever in history.

If you have the money, there are a great many things to slow and reverse aspects of aging.

25 years ago your only options were to eat healthy and get in some exercise.

As a side note, it is amazing how little doctors know about any 8f this stuff. Mention bpc157 and they look at you like you're speaking in tongues. I am friends with a doctor who has cancer and had surgery... My wife works in emergency medicine.... Bpc157? Huh? CJC1295? What's that? I had elevated liver enzymes from steroids. My doctor saw that and I told him I would start taking tudca. My susquent blood test showed my liver enzymes were perfect. The doctor looked at me like like a dog watching a wheel spinning... Huh?

When we can cure glycation and maintain stem cell activity... That will be huge. Its coming.

I am 40s but feel and look 30s. I take all kinds of these "wacky" things doctors know nothing about, and its their loss. The only thing I can't improve is my bad lumbar disc. But since weight training I have far fewer bad back episodes than ever before. Oh I suffer from insomnia and wish i could find a silver bullet for that.

Edited by Rocket, 16 August 2017 - 01:05 AM.

[ceridwen]

Actually masturbation lengthens the telomeres at least in women lol. I would definitely be up for a group buy in Rapamycin though. I thought life extension sells it but could not find it when I visited their site tonight.

[normalizing]

masturbation extends lifespan in women? well, women dont masturbate as often as men for one, but also they dont lose vital nutrients when they orgasm so thats that. as chronic masturbator i can guarantee you, i feel weaker and more tired than ever. its definitely not life extending

[YOLF]

When we can cure glycation and maintain stem cell activity... That will be huge. Its coming.
 

I think we can already do this pretty well and we may be able to do alot more of it than we think. Profit motive is just getting in the way, but we've reached a point where Pharma has thrown away so many good drugs for lack of good formulation that with a little bit of reading, thwarting aging shouldn't be too difficult or costly!

[normalizing]

im starting to get white hairs i wonder if it could be excessive iron or some oxidation. again, i blame party lifestyle with too much jerking off in between

[Rocket]

When we can cure glycation and maintain stem cell activity... That will be huge. Its coming.

I think we can already do this pretty well and we may be able to do alot more of it than we think. Profit motive is just getting in the way, but we've reached a point where Pharma has thrown away so many good drugs for lack of good formulation that with a little bit of reading, thwarting aging shouldn't be too difficult or costly!

How has glycation been solved?

[Nate-2004]

I can understand profit motive, but there's great profit in not f'king aging anymore. That's a huge return on investment, as intangible as it is. You'd think there would be tons of people willing to invest billions if they were even 75% sure the only return on investment they got from it was not aging anymore, and better yet reversing all the aging that's been done. You would think this would be motive enough. I mean most of us here invest tons of money into stuff that doesn't even work in hopes of just slowing aging. We don't get that money back in profit. This is just baffling to me that this line of research doesn't have more funding that it does.

[YOLF]

 

 

When we can cure glycation and maintain stem cell activity... That will be huge. Its coming.

I think we can already do this pretty well and we may be able to do alot more of it than we think. Profit motive is just getting in the way, but we've reached a point where Pharma has thrown away so many good drugs for lack of good formulation that with a little bit of reading, thwarting aging shouldn't be too difficult or costly!

How has glycation been solved?

 

Let me just add here at the top that you need to be VERY careful with EDTA, esp. if you're young, but they put small amounts of it in energy drinks and no one has singled it out as hazardous. 

 

Well, it hasn't been solved on paper, but there are orphan drugs and supplements that can be taken in combination which will, or in some cases, should work. Cocarboxylase (the new B1 derivative) should be able to break up glucosepane. Alagebrium and EDTA in small doses along with some p-synephrine or pine bark/grape seed extract should yield positive and accelerated results. I've got loads of ideas for combination therapies that would work. The holes in the studies saying some of this stuff doesn't work are huge and only there b/c investors didn't get immediate results and moved on to more profitable research oslt. But money would have easily solves the problems with these drugs and it shouldn't be hard to make these formulations at home.

 

It's well known that cellular turnover removes glucosepane, EDTA removes arterial plaques and makes tissue more permeable and there are other things that assist in remodelling the extracellular matrix (ECM), The synergy if you take small amounts of this stuff should be huge. Look at Strivectin as an example (iirc), it can increase HGH by 650%, but it's just a handful of low dose ingredients that on their own have very modest benefits in terms of HGH. The only side effect  that I'm aware of from Strivectin is wallet wasting syndrome, though they've priced me out, so I have no experience with it.

 

Other than that, I've seen half a dozen other studies which suggested to me, by what they achieved that their effects where due to factors which were influencing glycation removal. Can you completely cure type II diabetes in rats without addressing glycation? I don't think so! Yet it's been done and the effects should translate nicely to humans.

 

From my perspective, all it would take to cure most of the big aging issues is a year of research lead by diligent and well funded experts who knew the ins and outs of doing studies and weren't over committed to making everything that comes out of their lab a pharmaceutical rather than a supplement. Supplement research is way faster, but their's tons of competition and people will always sell diluted products that do virtually nothing to make a quick buck and ruin the supps reputation... take resveratrol for example... On market type sites, there are a cacophony of diluted, useless products that will keep you from finding the good stuff that will be useful in beating aging. So I'm guessing that's why everyone wants to make a drug. 

 

Ideations of creating the next great monotherapy are also holding us back imo. Monotherapies are a nice start, but do we really have to research monotherapies? I think there is sufficient data to start skipping up to combination therapy research. 

[YOLF]

I can understand profit motive, but there's great profit in not f'king aging anymore. That's a huge return on investment, as intangible as it is. You'd think there would be tons of people willing to invest billions if they were even 75% sure the only return on investment they got from it was not aging anymore, and better yet reversing all the aging that's been done. You would think this would be motive enough. I mean most of us here invest tons of money into stuff that doesn't even work in hopes of just slowing aging. We don't get that money back in profit. This is just baffling to me that this line of research doesn't have more funding that it does.

Just don't give up. You live you learn, and if you're not planning on dieing, what you learn is forever in your favor and the steps to solving aging yourself.

 

But yeah, if we cured aging today, tomorrow there would be a cacophony of advertising and news coverage on less efficacious drugs that keep you getting old and dependent to make you forget about what you'd just learned or think that these were half as good. It's even more complicated beyond that. But investors can make or break a startup lab as the motion of the markets shift and then talent on tech is lost and the people picking it up don't know what to do with it or don't prioritize it enough.

[Nate-2004]

I just don't agree that glycation has been solved or that EDTA solves it in any significant way. Garlic is better for heavy metals anyway and removing transition metals or ROS from the equation doesn't help because glycation has other pathways it will simply take. ALT-711 does not address glucosepane either. If you wanna put your money into solving glycation, get with Spiegel labs or donate to SENS with a note to send it all to Spiegel at Yale.

 

Also, I don't know if cell turnover removes AGEs either. AGEs exist in the ECM, not sure it exists in the cell.

 

Simply not eating will stop glycation which may largely explain why it extends lifespan, but that's obviously not a solution long term and it's a sucky solution even in the short term for me since I can hardly go 50 hrs without going insane with cravings and being incapable of thinking clearly.

 

Again, rapamycin if you can afford it. There are different ways you could probably take it given its broad scope of mTOR inhibition, but unlike fasting/CR it doesn't address glycation, visceral fat, SIRT activity, NAD+ levels or other aging issues, just autophagy.

 

 

Edited by Nate-2004, 17 August 2017 - 01:58 PM.

[to age or not to age]

I am sold on rapamycin. I know scientists who have studied it for 10 years.  They are testing it in dogs. There was a brief trial in 65+ year old humans,

where in the immune system was improved. And, I believe it actually reverses elements of aging, specifically the gut  biome.  When they dosed aged mice intermittently, the effects were quite substantial, 60% longer survival in a few animals.  Taken in tandem with metformin appears to improve efficacy. What would be interesting is to conduct a trial in which animals were given rapamycin, NR, metformin and beta lapachone (another interesting 

molecule which affects the NAD/NADH ratio, a possibly more important marker than merely upping NAD via NR.)

 

[Lena Mill]

It does look like the anti-aging protocols for men and women have some differences. Both need to prevent glycation, maximize mitochondrial function, lengthen telomeres, etc. But then there are age-related  sex hormone changes that must be separately balanced in men and women. 

 

Are there differences in the effect of some anti-aging substances in men and women? As a woman, I know that cyclical hormone fluctuations cause recurring inflammation and oxidative stress. Yet on average women have a longer lifespan than men. I have read of various substances that are effective in women but not men. For example, one study found that drinking tea causes epigenetic changes in women. No analogous effect was observed in men.

 

I wonder if women and men need to consider different pathways to achieve the same anti-aging results. If there are differences, what are the best anti-aging substances for women?

[Mind]

I think if there was something that definitely worked a quick search or skimming of threads would reveal it as everyone would be taking it. I'm taking less supplements these days and just concentrating on the topical treatments as I have no idea (And not a lot of money) if anything works. I don't feel any different or see any difference when I take Curcumin, for example. 

 

Best reply so far.

 

If there was something obvious that reversed aggregate aspects of aging, EVERYONE would be taking it.

 

Yolf has contributed some realistic content here as well about hormones. For obviously biological reasons, many hormones will "give you a boost", but they don't reverse overall aging.

 

For all the other supplements, there are a lot of good ones that seem to have some data behind them indicating they will slow the rate of aging (metformin, resveratrol, rapamycin, NR/NAD, various peptides, even aspirin). This is awesome, but don't kid yourself, there is no solid data that any of them stall or reverse aging or rejuvenate.

 

Remember that a lot of mouse and human studies have been done with non-standard subjects. Force an inactive and obese human to exercise and eat less and the transformation of their aging bio-markers will be incredible. But they will not be getting any "younger".

 

If you are in the first half of your average human lifespan, just eat well and exercise. Don't waste too much money on supplements. Save your money and donate to SENS, Methuselah, and LongeCity so that REAL rejuvenation treatments can be developed.

 

If you are in the second half of an average human lifespan, then perhaps try some of the more speculative supplements and treatments to slow aging. I would love to see you around on this earth a lot longer!

Edited by Mind, 17 August 2017 - 07:43 PM.

[shadowhawk]

 

I think if there was something that definitely worked a quick search or skimming of threads would reveal it as everyone would be taking it. I'm taking less supplements these days and just concentrating on the topical treatments as I have no idea (And not a lot of money) if anything works. I don't feel any different or see any difference when I take Curcumin, for example. 

 

Best reply so far.

 

If the was something obvious that reversed aggregate aspects of aging, EVERYONE would be taking it.

 

Yolf has contributed some realistic content here as well about hormones. For obviously biological reasons, many hormones will "give you a boost", but they don't reverse overall aging.

 

For all the other supplements, there are a lot of good ones that seem to have some data behind them indicating they will slow the rate of aging (metformin, resveratrol, rapamycin, NR/NAD, various peptides, even aspirin). This is awesome, but don't kid yourself, there is no solid data that any of them stall or reverse aging or rejuvenate.

 

Remember that a lot of mouse and human studies have been done with non-standard subjects. Force an inactive and obese human to exercise and eat less and the transformation of their aging bio-markers will be incredible. But they will not be getting any "younger".

 

If you are in the first half of your average human lifespan, just eat well and exercise. Don't waste too much money on supplements. Save your money and donate to SENS, Methuselah, and LongeCity so that REAL rejuvenation treatments can be developed.

 

If you are in the second half of an average human lifespan, then perhaps try some of the more speculative supplements and treatments to slow aging. I would love to see you around on this earth a lot longer!

 

Right on.  Great post.

[normalizing]

nate you go 50 hours without eating?? wow im impressed actually, how is this bad? isnt the not eating thing good enough for 24 hours?

 

about rapamycin, thats given to all organ transplant patients, does everyone NOT have a data of all organ transplant people who are taking rapamycin for life and how long they live?? its the easiest simple way to see if this thing works in humans without doing any expensive clinical trials simply because, transplant organ patients are taking it for the rest of their lives and its real easy to keep track of them.

 

edit: im not well informed about rapamycin's effects so i checked on it, so immunosuppression is actually good? so basically mushrooms or anything that stimulates the immune system is actually bad? can someone translate this to me. i thought mushrooms stimulating the immune system actually help people live longer and it prevents cancer. now i am confused....

Edited by hazy, 17 August 2017 - 08:31 PM.

[Nate-2004]

nate you go 50 hours without eating?? wow im impressed actually, how is this bad? isnt the not eating thing good enough for 24 hours?

 

about rapamycin, thats given to all organ transplant patients, does everyone NOT have a data of all organ transplant people who are taking rapamycin for life and how long they live?? its the easiest simple way to see if this thing works in humans without doing any expensive clinical trials simply because, transplant organ patients are taking it for the rest of their lives and its real easy to keep track of them.

 

edit: im not well informed about rapamycin's effects so i checked on it, so immunosuppression is actually good? so basically mushrooms or anything that stimulates the immune system is actually bad? can someone translate this to me. i thought mushrooms stimulating the immune system actually help people live longer and it prevents cancer. now i am confused....

 

I don't know if 24 hours is long enough. There is no research on humans and fasting, especially where effects on mTOR and autophagy is concerned. Nobody has any idea how to fast or how long to fast for anti-aging benefits. They're all just guessing based on mouse studies and mice have much faster metabolisms. A day for them is like 7 days for us. I can't go 7 days without food. I'd be useless. I have a life. I need boundless energy and honestly, ketones are just not doing it for me.

 

I don't know the mechanism of action for rapamycin on the immune system. It may be autophagy related though since lymphocytes are recycled. Organ transplant recipients have other problems that may affect lifespan, including the side effects of continuous rapamycin use.

Edited by Nate-2004, 17 August 2017 - 09:34 PM.

[normalizing]

so ketones dont help you, but carbs do? im not sure what do you expect from ketones and how long would the effect kick in if your body is used to burning carbs. several people on the forum reported difficulty adjusting for several days at time, but also it could be specific for the individual since we have different make ups and metabolisms. like rats or mice, some people do have faster metabolism compared to others, so they would probably not need up to 7 days as you specify, i believe so.

but back to rapamycin, im still trying to figure out if its main mechanism is through that very well known type of immunosuppression. but i still do not, or anyone else here yet understand if thats the main mechanism or its really something else. how can people not notice benefits and longevity from immunosuppression drugs versus immunomodulatory or immuno stimulating ones still to this day? it baffles me!

Edited by hazy, 18 August 2017 - 02:49 AM.

[Evan Yang]

 

 

about rapamycin, thats given to all organ transplant patients, does everyone NOT have a data of all organ transplant people who are taking rapamycin for life and how long they live?? its the easiest simple way to see if this thing works in humans without doing any expensive clinical trials simply because, transplant organ patients are taking it for the rest of their lives and its real easy to keep track of them.

 

edit: im not well informed about rapamycin's effects so i checked on it, so immunosuppression is actually good? so basically mushrooms or anything that stimulates the immune system is actually bad? can someone translate this to me. i thought mushrooms stimulating the immune system actually help people live longer and it prevents cancer. now i am confused....

 

Rapamycin has been widely used and there is no evidence that it reverses aging or slow down aging in humans. 

[Nate-2004]

 

 

 

about rapamycin, thats given to all organ transplant patients, does everyone NOT have a data of all organ transplant people who are taking rapamycin for life and how long they live?? its the easiest simple way to see if this thing works in humans without doing any expensive clinical trials simply because, transplant organ patients are taking it for the rest of their lives and its real easy to keep track of them.

 

edit: im not well informed about rapamycin's effects so i checked on it, so immunosuppression is actually good? so basically mushrooms or anything that stimulates the immune system is actually bad? can someone translate this to me. i thought mushrooms stimulating the immune system actually help people live longer and it prevents cancer. now i am confused....

 

Rapamycin has been widely used and there is no evidence that it reverses aging or slow down aging in humans. 

 

 

No research doesn't mean no evidence, it means nobody knows yet. Also, again, taking it continuously is not a good test because of its effects on C2. The dose makes the poison. So transplant patients are NOT good candidates. 

[YOLF]

I just don't agree that glycation has been solved or that EDTA solves it in any significant way. Garlic is better for heavy metals anyway and removing transition metals or ROS from the equation doesn't help because glycation has other pathways it will simply take. ALT-711 does not address glucosepane either. If you wanna put your money into solving glycation, get with Spiegel labs or donate to SENS with a note to send it all to Spiegel at Yale.

 

Also, I don't know if cell turnover removes AGEs either. AGEs exist in the ECM, not sure it exists in the cell.

 

Simply not eating will stop glycation which may largely explain why it extends lifespan, but that's obviously not a solution long term and it's a sucky solution even in the short term for me since I can hardly go 50 hrs without going insane with cravings and being incapable of thinking clearly.

 

Again, rapamycin if you can afford it. There are different ways you could probably take it given its broad scope of mTOR inhibition, but unlike fasting/CR it doesn't address glycation, visceral fat, SIRT activity, NAD+ levels or other aging issues, just autophagy.

You're being an information hijacker. You're missing the mechanism of action. EDTA works by enhancing permeability such that at extreme doses, it causes internal bleeding. The problem with ALT-711/alagebrium was that it wasn't getting into tissue fast enough and wasn't getting the opportunity to remove glucosepane afaiaa and old cells which metabolize slowly just don't have the uptake on their own to be effected all that quickly. I think it was you who I had explained the futility of monotherapies to. My approach is all about thinking outside the box and using our tools/knowledge more efficiently. I had a sign on the wall as kid that read:

We the willing,

lead by the unknowing,

have done so much,

for so long, with so little,

we are now qualified to do

anything with nothing.

 

That's the attitude you have to have or you will be dependent on the speed and bureaucracy of others to save you, and history has shown that we've failed to cure aging for thousands of years. Just having more technology doesn't mean we'll succeed. You have to stop restricting your thought style, if all of your science idols fail you, you'll have to do it yourself. You'll have to improvise, buy time with time, and invest wisely in how you think and what you accept. A study paper means only as much as the writers, if even that. They are a tiny percent of the knowledge and skill base and the impact that their judgements have on you shouldn't be as strong as they are. Every judgement you accept from others is like a chain and the more you accept it, the heavier it gets.

 

I suppose I could state that better... 

 

A study paper conveys a series of conditions in which something is found to be true or accurate to the extent which the study attempts to observe. It means that and only that. Nothing more. It doesn't mean x does or doesn't work, it just means it works or doesn't according to the conditions of the study. Drawing any absolutes from any scientific paper which is not likewise limited is meaningless except that it disadvantages any competition who might compromise your funding source. You've fallen prey to scientific bullies. The pot is killing your neuroplasticity. Try some of those new dementia experimentals and see if you can get it back, we don't need brain damaged scientists ruining it for the rest of us.

 

So the question remains, why keep researching new materials when you can get results and approvals for things which are already half approved and well delineated by reformulating it or packaging it as part of a complexed therapy? My current stack includes EDTA and and an alagebrium alternative, plus a handful of stuff for knocking out the glycation and other pro aging end products, stuff that assists the body's built in mechanisms for disposal including ECM turnover, fuel for stem cell proliferation, and fuel for targeted organs, and telomere maintenance. I take around 60 pills a day and I don't see that changing until I get lots of age reversal gene therapies... 

 

When I got started with my anti aging research, I thought TA65 would be this awesome supplement and make me teenager again. But it's not that simple, and I doubt it ever will be. The value of any given supplement for the purpose of curing aging is near zero. Supplement worship will lead to the death of many. The expensive ones are for the people who can afford to take them along with 50 other things, not for the person who can hardly afford it. They'd be better served by a tactical approach leveraging alot of cheap stuff. Young people don't need the super expensive stuff, and there's time for the more expensive stuff to come down in price, or you can find a more cost efficient strategy, like taking a higher dose of TA65 for a shorter time period.

Edited by YOLF, 18 August 2017 - 09:28 PM.