All Activity

The idea is - thinking about flux and seeing the liver as a production facility, with a quantitative angles regarding processing and storing capacities. There is surely a detection mechanism (perhaps many of them) that spins up all the complicated machinery to orchestrate the output. When detector will rise the "high watermark" (that could also be rised for prolonged period) then the cargo output part of the machinery will prepare and spill out cargoes as soon/often as possible, thus sometimes exporting an unoptimally packed ones - these famous small dense ldls. In other words - the effect is not to make all the cargoes smaller but to make more cargoes and there will be considerably bigger share of smalls amongst them. In non enginerring language the same idea is - do not allow the detector to "see" the abundance, but do it is a natural, not "hacking" way, e.g.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9025822/ Of all the things mentioned I personally think only the first two are really matters and have a long-term effect, starting from the word excercise is almost useless for the goal. The same for sat/unsat comparisons that brings some difference and so on, energy overdoing will diminish any tricks because it acts on all 37thrillion of body cells and there is neither exist nor will ever be engineered way to do something with it, switching off some part of machinery in one place will force the flux to dig the holes in another areas. Br, Igor

https://www.rapamycin.news/t/estradiol-as-a-cheaper-more-accessible-alternative-to-17-alpha-estradiol-in-the-meantime/9212/6 Estriol is the weakest feminimizing, and you can get it from unitedpharmacies the differences between female and male glycanage are very very real

What do you mean by "smaller particles"? LDL particles range from 18–25 nanometers in size, while HDL particles are only 5–12 nanometers sdLDL is determined by NMR as particles with sizes from 18.0 to 20.5 nm [34, 35]. VLDL is even larger than LDL Overnutrition increases flux of the larger particles - the triglyceride carriers like (VLDL/chylomicrons). VLDL will always form a tiny fraction of all total cholesterol, but overnutrition increases the larger LDL particles way more than the smaller HDL ones.

The New York Times has a new article today on CR. I think it does a pretty good job covering the results of the classic and more recent CR studies, concluding that it is uncertain as to whether CR will extend human lifespan. Here is the link. I've made it a "gift" article link so you should be able to read it even without a NYT subscription: Could Eating Less Help You Live Longer? https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/24/well/eat/calorie-restriction-fasting-longevity.html?unlocked_article_code=1.m00.2QK3.WribpYAu7QOf

Hi Ash and welcome to the CR Forum! 1900 kcal/day for someone who is 6'2" and moderately active is pretty serious CR. At 138lbs you were at a BMI of 17.7, which is getting into the territory where the body starts to object to a continuing deficit. Food cravings and binging are not unusual when someone gets to that point. Did you try backing off to an intermediate calorie level between 1900 and your current 2500-2900 kcal/day? Your weight might have stabilized around 140 on around 2200 kcal/day. Given some of doubt about the life extension efficacy of human CR triggered by the disappointing results of the primate CR experiments, some of us long-term CR practitioners have backed off our level of CR, targeting a BMI of 18-20, which isn't far from where you are now. If you are eating a health diet, exercising regularly and maintaining a BMI slightly under 20, I personally don't think you (or I) have much to gain in terms of healthspan or lifespan by dropping calories substantially further. As you've discovered, it makes life more pleasant too. This is a bit off topic, but given my pessimism about better life extension methods becoming available anytime soon (i.e. the next couple decades), and my doubts about the viability of the human enterprise during the latter half of the 21st century given our current trajectory, my enthusiasm for maximum my chance of reaching longevity "escape velocity" via hardcore CR has been tempered substantially. --Dean

Purple yams are not the lowest calorie source, but they are still lower calorie/g than beans or bread (372 calories/lb). Beans are 385-420 calories/lb [they're labeled as 15 oz, but 3.5*130g is 455g...) Ezekiel bread is 1205 calories/lb (THIS IS WHY YOU DON'T EAT BREAD [though limited amounts are ok) Mr Tortilla is 681 calories/lb. But fruit/vegetables are WAY lower, even apples are 237 calories/lb (though you can't blunt their spike wit acarbose)

Hello, I practiced CR for approximately 2 years. I am mid 50's, 6'2 height, and currently weigh 155lbs, moderately active (3 - 4 x week) both cardio and calisthenics. I am also vegan for 9+ years. Initially, upon starting CRON, I went from 168 lbs to about 138 lbs eating 1900 Kcal/day (food measured w/scale, eating 633kCal x 3 meals/day). I used cronometer to ensure I was meeting nutrient numbers to avoid undernutrition. The first year was easy and where I lost the majority of weight, no adverse issues. Entering into the second quarter of the second year, I started having strange psychological food cravings and feeling the need to binge eat at odd times of the day, i.e., one example, probably a 3,000kCal meal of dates and pretzels (weird food combinations, I know). I attempted different techniques to combat the sensations of my brain telling me to eat something ridiculous hand over fist and failed, i.e., eating a small meal of cruciferous veggies to feel 'full' about an hour prior to the last meal of the day. I tried to maintain CR over the next two quarters of the second year and gradually couldn't maintain it. I abandoned CR at the end of the second year but maintained veganism easily, but probably started freely eating ~2500 to 2900 kCal per day (estimate) and have gained about 15 lbs of bodyweight, but am still 'fit' and lean. I finally felt 'happy', obviously eating to satiation with no amount or calorie constraints. I have researched CRON fairly extensively, and understand the (potential) benefits and would like to try to re-engage with it in earnest, but this time succeed. Any suggestions? Best regards to you, Ash.

As of today, there are two human cases that appear to have different transmission routes: H5N1 Bird Flu: Current Situation Summary · Total Reported Human Cases in the United States: 2 (since 2022) 1 following exposure to dairy cows (reported on 4/01/2024) | Full Report > 1 following exposure to poultry (reported on 4/28/2022) | Full Report > · States with Reported Case(s): 2

Earlier this month I saw several articles like this AI Finds Personality Shapes Genes Choice quote from their key findings: The study suggests that adopting a creative and self-transcendent perspective on life can positively impact gene expression, offering a new avenue for enhancing well-being and longevity. Of course, many aspects of personality appear to be controlled by our genes, but we do appear to have some latitude.

I've got quart bags and gallon bags. I have little need for bigger ones.

I agree, but lucky with what? I'd say genes. It's not like he carefully picked them, he chanced into them, pure luck. After all, luck in other contexts is not dispositive. Most folks fail to reach 110 not because they got killed by the routine meteor, or because of any other luck dependent accident. Accidental deaths are rather low on the "cause of death" list, so getting lucky on that score will not buy you much. The vast majority of people are "lucky" enough not to die due to any accident. The thing that exercises (heh!) me is the universal claim that your life/healthspan is in your own hands. All those stats saying that only 10-20-30% of your life/healthspan is gene-dependent. If that were true, you'd expect health nuts to be overrepresented among the oldest old, centenarian/supercentenarian crowd. Yet that is clearly not true. If anything it seems the opposite. So, I suspect that lifestyle, diet, exercise and other modifiable factors have a much more limited impact than commonly claimed. I think the reality is that each of us has a certain genetically determined health/lifespan potential, and *within* the parameters of that potential, you might have some limited control. If your potential is 80 years, at best with optimal practices you'll reach that 80, but never 81, or Calmet's 122; with poor practices, maybe 78, 76, or disastrous alcoholism 50. Conversally if Calmet were a health nut, maybe she'd hit 125? It's the genes.

https://www.cambridgema.gov/Water/wateroperationsdivision/waterchemistryinformationforplumbers/pfasinformation/pfastestresults

https://www.cambridgema.gov/Water/wateroperationsdivision/waterchemistryinformationforplumbers/pfasinformation/pfastestresults

Yeah but they're tiny

I use reusable silicone food storage bags. They come in many shapes and sizes. Plenty of places online carry them.

Any I can buy online so I won't have to wrap veggies in plastic?? Ideally reusable I don't trust fibers because MORE gets into the vegetables https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01HHDK44Y/ref=sspa_mw_detail_6?ie=UTF8&psc=1&sp_csd=d2lkZ2V0TmFtZT1zcF9waG9uZV9kZXRhaWwp13NParams&th=1 It's nice that this uses cotton but it's unclear if they put problematic attitudes into the cotton.. cotton microfibers might shed more than MPs do...

Or are ovens bad because high heat creates advanced lipo peroxide byproducts And what about limited amount of time? Below shows nutrient destruction but this concerns me 1/100th as much as the AGE/ALE stuff https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2722699/#:~:text=In conclusion%2C the current study,the loss of total carotenoids.

Eg oat fiber? Useful deets/uses on a bunch of ingredients! (Oat fiber, erythritol, allulose, xanthan gum, etc.) At least a few times on this sub (and others) I've been asked what one of these ingredients is, what it does, etc. so I thought it'd be helpful to make a post like this, to have information in one place 🙂 I'll do my best to describe what an ingredient is, how it might be used in recipes, what purpose it'd have in recipes, etc.! So even if you'd just like ideas for ways to use some of these ingredients, this post might be helpful in that regard as well Worth noting I'm just speaking from experience with these, but I get asked enough that I imagine it'll be helpful for somebody Feel free to ask questions or add anything you want to this 🙂 # Oat fiber: Made from the discarded fibrous hulls of oats, it's basically pure fiber, as the name suggests. Being that it's fiber, it's also zero cal. You can use it to add volume to baked goods, and it works very similarly to oat flour. Often, you can replace at least a small percent of flour (here I'm referring to wheat flour) with oat fiber. And in my experience, it seems to work almost 1:1 with oat flour, probably because both are "flours" with similar properties, like no gluten to aid in structure. Speaking of structure, oat fiber seems to make stuff a little more dry/crumbly, so it could be nice in cornbread for example. Another thing I've noticed, baked goods with lots of oat fiber seem to take \*ages\* to bake. Where some chocolate chip cookies I've made with just oat flour might take 50 minutes to bake, oat fiber cookies might need double that or more. You could use oat fiber in baked oats, cookies, cakes, pizza crusts, and even to thicken oatmeal or "ice cream" made of frozen fruit and yogurt. I also sometimes use it alongside PB2 and a caramel syrup to make a caramel dip. However, oat fiber has a bit of a "chalky" taste which is definitely noticeable in baked goods. I kind of like the flavor, but it still isn't as tasty as oat flour. And another thing, since it's \*pure fiber\* it can lead to some gut discomfort if used prominently in a recipe. For example, where most people will probably feel physically fine after having 50 grams of oat flour (because it's regular oats) it might be a different story for 50 grams of oat fiber. So that's all to say, oat fiber is really useful, but it doesn't contribute much for flavor and probably shouldn't be the main ingredient since it's all fiber. Your mileage may vary, on that. My suggestion is to substitute only about 10-20% the volume of oat flour in a recipe. You'll want to use less oat fiber to substitute some other ingredients, because wheat flour for example will have gluten essential to rising, which the oat fiber (or oat flour you're substituting) wouldn't. Oh yeah, and you can make your own oat flour by blending oats in a blender. Oats are cheap and easily found, while oat fiber can be trickier to find and probably more expensive. So that's another thing to consider. If you feel the need to buy fancy low cal ingredients like some of us, I'd recommend ones that at least serve to make it more enjoyable, like a flavor syrup at least tastes pretty good. # Erythritol: Made by fermenting regular granulated sugar, it has basically the exact same purposes of regular sugar in recipes. After all, that's basically what it is, fermented sugar granules. But it's zero cal. So it can be useful to sweeten coffee/tea, thicken things/add volume, aid in browning, pretty much everything sugar can do. You should also be able to use it to prevent ice crystal formation in homemade ice cream or frozen yogurt (since regular sugar is added to those things for this exact purpose) Some things worth noting, erythritol as a granular sweetener by itself is 70% as sweet tasting as regular sugar, so even though you can use it 1:1 as a substitute, the result isn't as sweet. This is where additions like stevia and monkfruit come in. When you see some kind of granulated monkfruit or stevia sweetener, the "bulk" of the product is erythritol. Since erythritol is less sweet, and monkfruit/stevia are \*more\* sweet, they're often used in tandem to get the same amount of sweetness. So in short, to make it taste exactly as sweet as regular sugar. Also, there are different types of erythritol available, in the same way that there's different types of sugar. Confectioners erythritol is the fine powder, like powdered sugar. So it's exactly what you'd expect (and pro tip, it can make brownies have a more glossy surface) There's brown erythritol, which has the same taste and texture (sort of like kinetic sand's texture?) as brown sugar. Once again, that's basically a 1:1 substitute for brown sugar. Regular white granulated erythritol is of course just a substitute for regular white granulated sugar. Tastes the same, works the same. All of these forms of erythritol also have a "cooling effect" in the flavor. The opposite of a spicy aftertaste. It's definitely noticeable in baked goods, if you use enough erythritol. So let's say you made a frosting with confectioners erythritol, you will almost definitely taste the cooling effect. This could be used to advantage however, such as in mint ice creams, as mint also has a cooling effect. Anyway, if you don't like the "cooling effect" when it's present, you could mix and match sweeteners, use some erythritol and then some stevia drops, flavor syrups, etc. Oh and also, erythritol is a sugar alcohol which means it can lead to some gut discomfort in large quantities, although that depends on the person, once again your mileage may vary. Can't say I've had any major issues, although a lot does tend to irritate my mouth and throat a little. # Allulose: This is very much the same story as erythritol above, so I won't repeat myself, but I'll go over the key and notable differences I've found. One, it works way better as a true sugar substitute. Prevents ice crystal formation better where energy balls freeze softer (less rock hard), seems to caramelize in baking better. Two, no aftertaste or cooling sensation I can notice, unlike erythritol. Tastes mostly like confectioners sugar to me. Slightly less sweet, but that's how standard erythritol is, too. Three, it clumps way more. The bag I have has chunks the size of my thumb in there. You should probably use a fine mesh siv unless you intend to blend whatever you make, otherwise it won't mix in very evenly. Lastly, it also does seem to cause more gut issues (for me) than erythritol. So I'd use maybe 1/3 as much in a given day. Again, do what you want though. # Xanthan gum: Commonly used to thicken, emulsify, and to partially mimic the elasticity of gluten in gluten free recipes. Examples of the first use, xanthan gum is commonly added to sauces, dressings, and even pudding mix (known in some countries as instant custard I believe) to thicken them. I'll often add a dash of it to my aforementioned PB2 caramel dip. For emulsification, it helps prevent ice crystal formation in homemade ice creams, and to prevent separation. For example, normally when you blend Greek yogurt with something acidic like juice (especially lemon), you'll see it separate. Or when you make a smoothie and have to keep stirring it, that's also separation. Xanthan gum works to keep the texture smooth and homogeneous. Adding it to a smoothie can give it a texture similar to soft serve ice cream. Also, xanthan gum is especially good when blending several ice cubes, so it's often added to homemade frappuccinos. In baked goods, a little bit of xanthan gum makes the dough more stretchy and less likely to fall apart. When it bakes (or fries on a pan in case of pancakes) and rises, the dough will stretch/expand more rather than just breaking apart. But it doesn't perfectly replicate what gluten does in a recipe, and a lot of xanthan gum seems to also make things take longer to cook (especially in the center). They might not even bake completely altogether. So a lot of xanthan gum makes things, well, gummy. A little goes a long way, so just a dash is recommended. But it lasts a long time, you probably won't ever need to buy another bag. Now for some things worth noting about xanthan gum, it can be tough to clean, often getting into the crevices of blenders, and it's sort of "slimy" to wash off, similar to oil. Mixing xanthan gum with other dry ingredients FIRST will probably help, but it'll still most likely be more effort to wash the dish than it could've been otherwise. Some people also experience some gut discomfort with xanthan gum, so once again, it'd be a good idea to start small when a little goes a long way. Perhaps a quarter tsp per serving of something. So for example, a muffin recipe of 4 muffins could use 1 tsp. But that's just an example, a whole teaspoon is overkill for muffins. Many of the uses of xanthan gum for thickening, emulsifying, etc. also apply to protein powder and pudding mix, since as previously mentioned those things often contain xanthan gum. So, consider trying a spoonful of pudding mix in your smoothie, if that sounds preferable. They're not the same though of course, protein powder and sugar free pudding mix have other things in them besides gums, so don't expect anything with some xanthan gum added to become pudding (not great pudding, anyway) Also, xanthan gum seems to make things take longer to bake, as well, just like oat fiber. Banana bread where I used too much xanthan gum in, the center just never cooked at all, even after hours. Oh yeah lastly, there's a misconception that xanthan gum adds volume to stuff, and it doesn't. At least, not really. Since it thickens stuff, it can allow you to add more wet ingredients to something (like more water to a smoothie) but it's not really that significant, and it doesn't add much physical volume since if you used enough to actually raise the water level in that smoothie (how high it fills up the glass) it'd probably be way too much. Whereas a cup of frozen strawberries for example, actually takes up space when blended. Just worth noting. This applies to all gums, I think. # Guar gum: Basically the same stuff as xanthan gum, but it's about half as strong, which also means you'd need to add more for the same effect, like if you're substituting xanthan gum for guar gum. It's also a bit easier to wash off of dishes # Banana/applesauce/pumpkin puree: These and any other form of fruit puree (or even blended beans, that's how black bean brownies work, I think) are sometimes used for taste in recipes. However, all of these mentioned above can also partially substitute eggs or oils in baking! For example, where some mug cakes call for an egg, you could use 2 ounces or 1/4th cup of applesauce, pumpkin puree, or about half a mashed banana, to achieve the same effect. I don't have much else to say about this, just thought it worth mentioning since many recipes feature these things. Emphasis on partially substituting, you can definitely use a little banana in place of an egg for some brownies, but with french toast or an omelette for example, you probably wouldn't have much success.

This supercentenarian did not talk about his genes or the exceptional longevity of family. Rather he claims to have been very lucky. If you get hit by a meteor great genes don't matter.

The so-called long covid effect. There might also be some sensitizing effect that does not include the persistence of infection, I'm just wildly hypothesizing, but my experience is that after exhibiting the signs of infection (and testing positive) in August 2022, I started having too frequent problems in the upper respiratory ways, especially a running nose, which I very seldom had previously. Mere association or true causation?

For those who are interested into the aspect of human immunity and rapamycin, in this episode of his podcast MAtt Kabelrlein and his guest venture at a point (after the first part on senscent cells) into the effects of Rapa on NK cells and T cells. It is as usual a very complex system with cells having a mTOR pathway which seems to be optimized differently than other cells in the body. Their final answer, I guess, is that presently there is no answer and clinical trials should be carried out.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07VB4ZQMC?psc=1&smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&ref_=chk_typ_quicklook_seeDetailsToDp

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/man-110-still-drives-car-234745761.html Still lives independently and has no problem with daily living tasks, drves his car. Doesn't exercise, never did, though is "active". No special diet, eats whatever he wants. Drinks Ovaltine daily. Smoked for 20 years until 70. Drank a lot of milk as a young man. It's all about the genes, folks. A male supercentenarian is very rare. And here we have one with indifferent diet, former 20-year smoker, who never exercised. Would you pick him as a candidate for a supercentenarian? The man is in excellent health, never any health problems. Yet folks like Peter Attia go to extravagant lengths to implement "science based" (he's an MD!) heathy lifestyles and exercises maniacly... yet has had multiple surgeries already and he's not even 60. You wanna bet Attia - or any of the other prominent health nuts - will last anywhere near 110? Like I always say, it's all about your genes. No matter what you do, you have very little control over your health and longevity, regardless of what the health gurus claim. OK, now I have to go exercise - which I hate and only do, because of the alleged health benefits. I hope I can live in relatively good health until my 80's before I croak.

https://twitter.com/moreisdifferent/status/1781822579877032370?t=0GTXGdjyDfjNtQzTaitWTg&s=19