Alex K Chen Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 (edited) Rapamycin logs: I ordered my first 100 1mg pills in March 2019, and then 400 1mg pills in November 2019. 400 1mg pills in June 2020. 845 1mg pills on May 2021 (with 1/4 of the pills for someone else). Then 400 1mg pills from Kachhela on October 2022. I ordered my first metformin in March 2018. And then my 2 giant stacks of 1000 pills each in March 2019 (which I have not exhausted in 2023). CGM Progress: https://www.rapamycin.news/t/alex-k-chen-metabolic-cgm-progress-my-everything-in-longevity-thread/466 Oral microbiome/periodontal exam: https://www.rapamycin.news/t/what-are-your-oral-microbiome-oral-health-periodontal-exam-scores-how-deep-are-your-gum-pockets/5790 It looks like I was freakishly metabolically healthy (with the basic physiology of a 12-year old) for much of 2020/2021 (I know I had a brief period of eating too much oatmeal/weight gain in Dec 2019). But that may be as young as I'll ever get... [also the -omics panels might be different but they were not possible to get] === March 20, 2024: Kidney Function Metabolic eGFR (mL/min/1.73m2) 135 Mar 2024 Range: >=60 Kidney Function Kidney function tests are common lab tests used to evaluate how well the kidneys are working. CYSTATIN C (mg/L) 0.59 Mar 2024 Range: 0.52-1.31 === NOTE BELOW: YOU MUST BE REGISTERED WITH CRSOCIETY TO DOWNLOAD ATTACHMENTS 74-118 Metabolomics Report V0.9 - Alex Chen.pdf (opencures) Lab Results - WellnessFX.pdf jinfiniti: dexafit: https://www.facebook.com/simfish/posts/3748943381824999 (I made this post public tho I know some of u hate clicking facebook links) Lab Results - WellnessFX.pdf (all taken october 2020) COMPREHENSIVE METABOLIC PANEL CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME GLUCOSE 69 Reference Range: 65-139 mg/dL Non-fasting reference interval UREA NITROGEN (BUN) 31 H Reference Range: 7-25 mg/dL CREATININE 0.89 Reference Range: 0.60-1.35 mg/dL eGFR NON-AFR. AMERICAN 114 Reference Range: > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2 eGFR AFRICAN AMERICAN 132 Reference Range: > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2 BUN/CREATININE RATIO 35 H Reference Range: 6-22 (calc) SODIUM 140 Reference Range: 135-146 mmol/L POTASSIUM 4.5 Reference Range: 3.5-5.3 mmol/L CHLORIDE 101 Reference Range: 98-110 mmol/L CARBON DIOXIDE 27 Reference Range: 20-32 mmol/L CALCIUM 10.0 Reference Range: 8.6-10.3 mg/dL PROTEIN, TOTAL 7.6 Reference Range: 6.1-8.1 g/dL ALBUMIN 4.9 Reference Range: 3.6-5.1 g/dL GLOBULIN 2.7 Reference Range: 1.9-3.7 g/dL (calc) ALBUMIN/GLOBULIN RATIO 1.8 Reference Range: 1.0-2.5 (calc) BILIRUBIN, TOTAL 0.8 Reference Range: 0.2-1.2 mg/dL ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE 68 Reference Range: 36-130 U/L AST 18 Reference Range: 10-40 U/L ALT 14 Reference Range: 9-46 U/L LIPOPROTEIN (a) CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME LIPOPROTEIN (a) 28 Reference Range: <75 nmol/L Risk Category Optimal < 75 nmol/L Moderate 75 - 125 nmol/L ... Show More LIPOPROTEIN FRACTIONATION ION MOBILITY CURRENT OVER TIME LDL PARTICLE NUMBER 986 nmol/L Risk: Optimal <1138; Moderate 1138-1409; High>1409 LDL SMALL 154 nmol/L Risk: Optimal <142; Moderate 142-219; High>219 LDL MEDIUM 159 nmol/L Risk: Optimal <215; Moderate 215-301; High>301 HDL LARGE 4939 nmol/L Risk: Optimal >6729; Moderate 6729-5353; High <5353 LDL PATTERN A Pattern Risk: Optimal Pattern A; High Pattern B LDL PEAK SIZE 228.0 Angstrom Risk: Optimal >222.9; Moderate 222.9-217.4; High <217.4 Adult cardiovascular event risk category cut points (optimal, moderate, high) are based on an adult U.S. reference population plus two large cohort study populations. Association between lipoprotein subfractions and cardiovascular events is based on Musunuru et al. ATVB. 2009;29:1975. ... Show More VITAMIN D,25-OH,TOTAL,IA CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME VITAMIN D,25-OH,TOTAL,IA 43 Reference Range: 30-100 ng/mL Vitamin D Status 25-OH Vitamin 😧 Deficiency: <20 ng/mL ... Show More COMMENT See Note 1 Note 1 ... Show More APOLIPOPROTEIN B CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME APOLIPOPROTEIN B 63 Reference Range: <90 mg/dL Reference Range: <90 Risk Category: ... Show More LIPID PANEL, STANDARD CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME CHOLESTEROL, TOTAL 142 Reference Range: <200 mg/dL HDL CHOLESTEROL 56 Reference Range: > OR = 40 mg/dL TRIGLYCERIDES 44 Reference Range: <150 mg/dL LDL-CHOLESTEROL 73 mg/dL (calc) Reference range: <100 Desirable range <100 mg/dL for primary prevention; ... Show More CHOL/HDLC RATIO 2.5 Reference Range: <5.0 (calc) NON HDL CHOLESTEROL 86 Reference Range: <130 mg/dL (calc) For patients with diabetes plus 1 major ASCVD risk factor, treating to a non-HDL-C goal of <100 mg/dL (LDL-C of <70 mg/dL) is considered a therapeutic ... Show More CBC (INCLUDES DIFF/PLT) CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME WHITE BLOOD CELL COUNT 7.2 Reference Range: 3.8-10.8 Thousand/uL RED BLOOD CELL COUNT 4.58 Reference Range: 4.20-5.80 Million/uL HEMOGLOBIN 14.8 Reference Range: 13.2-17.1 g/dL HEMATOCRIT 43.0 Reference Range: 38.5-50.0 % MCV 93.9 Reference Range: 80.0-100.0 fL MCH 32.3 Reference Range: 27.0-33.0 pg MCHC 34.4 Reference Range: 32.0-36.0 g/dL RDW 11.7 Reference Range: 11.0-15.0 % PLATELET COUNT 318 Reference Range: 140-400 Thousand/uL MPV 9.8 Reference Range: 7.5-12.5 fL ABSOLUTE NEUTROPHILS 5314 Reference Range: 1500-7800 cells/uL ABSOLUTE LYMPHOCYTES 1303 Reference Range: 850-3900 cells/uL ABSOLUTE MONOCYTES 547 Reference Range: 200-950 cells/uL ABSOLUTE EOSINOPHILS 29 Reference Range: 15-500 cells/uL ABSOLUTE BASOPHILS 7 Reference Range: 0-200 cells/uL NEUTROPHILS 73.8 Reference Range: 38-80 % LYMPHOCYTES 18.1 Reference Range: 15-49 % MONOCYTES 7.6 Reference Range: 0-13 % EOSINOPHILS 0.4 Reference Range: 0-8 % BASOPHILS 0.1 Reference Range: 0-2 % HS CRP CURRENT OVER TIME HS CRP <0.3 mg/L Reference Range Optimal <1.0 Jellinger PS et al. Endocr Pract.2017;23(Suppl 2):1-87. ... Show More HOMOCYSTEINE CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME HOMOCYSTEINE 8.5 Reference Range: <11.4 umol/L Homocysteine is increased by functional deficiency of folate or vitamin B12. Testing for methylmalonic acid differentiates between these deficiencies. Other causes ... Show More TSH CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME TSH 0.75 Reference Range: 0.40-4.50 mIU/L HEMOGLOBIN A1c CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME HEMOGLOBIN A1c 4.8 Reference Range: <5.7 % of total Hgb For the purpose of screening for the presence of diabetes: ... Show More Feb 2020 when I was visiting home in WA: Edited March 22 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Allen Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 I doubt the super low NAD+ is desirable. Nor the low bone density and muscle mass and the asymmetry of muscle mass and posture. Might consider doing more strength training and increasing protein and foods high in B3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted March 5, 2021 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2021 (edited) Intracellular NAD: 32.1 μM in 2021 after taking a bunch of NAD. hmm. What is the difference between Circulating NAD (89) and intracellular NAD? AChen VO2 raw data.xlsxIn Feb 2021, VO2Max of 38.5 and max heartrate of 205 below is from Sept 2019 (in LA). Idk how reliable phase angle is Serum Ferritin of 89, normal range is 30-400. is this worrisome? thyroid Edited April 29, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Put Posted March 17, 2021 Report Share Posted March 17, 2021 On 3/4/2021 at 9:55 PM, InquilineKea said: Serum Ferritin of 89, normal range is 30-400. is this worrisome? You should ask your primary care physician if worried for some reason, but it appears within range. For women, the upper range is lower, about 150-200. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted March 21, 2021 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2021 preston estep says it's a bit higher than optimal, i'll take turmeric to try to lower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Put Posted March 21, 2021 Report Share Posted March 21, 2021 11 minutes ago, InquilineKea said: preston estep says it's a bit higher than optimal, i'll take turmeric to try to lower I, based on the way your question was phrased, I thought you were worried that it's too low.... My understanding is that it's better to be within the lower range of normal, and you seem to be in the middle, for women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted July 20, 2021 Author Report Share Posted July 20, 2021 OpenOme_Open_Ome_20210707_20210707b_74-276-6P.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted June 4, 2022 Author Report Share Posted June 4, 2022 Wow I just realized my hsCRP went down from 0.2 to 0.03 in a year... Also iron levels are moderate-low (NOT TOTALLY CORRELATED WITH FERRITIN) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted January 1, 2023 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2023 (edited) this was from 2016: (bacteroidetes aren't good though... more in older people). But I've heard opposing reports.. The most noticeable feature in the microbiota of elderly individuals is an alteration in the relative proportions of the Firmicutes and the Bacteroidetes, with the elderly having a higher proportion of Bacteroidetes while young adults have higher proportions of Firmicutes (Mariat et al., 2009). Significant decreases in Bifidobacteria, Bacteriodes, and Clostridium cluster IV have also been reported (Zwielehner et al., 2009). Stratifications into enterotypes showed that individuals with a Bacteroides enterotype (B-type) had significantly lower stool energy density, shorter intestinal transit times, and lower alpha-diversity compared to individuals with a Ruminococcaceae enterotype (R-type). The Prevotella (P-type) individuals appeared in between the B- and R-type. https://microbiomejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s40168-022-01418-5 the lower stool energy density and higher body weight of the B-type could suggest a more efficient energy extraction compared with the R- and P-types. The lower stool energy density of the B-type is consistent with a previous study showing that the B-type has higher metabolic capacity for both saccharolytic and proteolytic metabolism compared with the other enterotypes [14]. Indeed, previous studies have suggested that B-type individuals are less likely to lose body weight on fibre/wholegrain-rich diets relative to the P-type [29, 30]. The B-type has repeatedly been associated with a Western lifestyle low in microbiota-accessible carbohydrates, while the P-type has been associated with a fibre diet rich in MACs [31]. However, we did not observe any differences in habitual diet between the enterotypes, which may suggest that enterotypes are established earlier in life as previously suggested [32]. Instead, we found higher alpha-diversity and higher levels of microbiota-derived proteolytic metabolites in faeces and urine among the R-type individuals compared to the B and P type, suggesting a more complex microbial ecosystem with increased colonic proteolysis in the R-type individuals Quote Additionally, vegans and vegetarians have significantly higher counts of certain Bacteroidetes-related operational taxonomic units compared to omnivores. Fibers (that is, non-digestible carbohydrates, found exclusively in plants) most consistently increase lactic acid bacteria, such as Ruminococcus, E. rectale, and Roseburia, and reduce Clostridium and Enterococcus species. Polyphenols, also abundant in plant foods, increase Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus, which provide anti-pathogenic and anti-inflammatory effects and cardiovascular protection Edited January 1, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted January 1, 2023 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2023 (edited) OakVar report (though the PRS report and LongevityGenes report show way different results). I still have not gained a huge amount of insight from genetic reports (I don't have anything "interesting" by the standard screens).. AlexKChenReport.html I supposedly have PRS of 92% for CRP but my CRP is 0.03. Also my cardiovascular disease risk is definitely not that high, given that no one in my family has had a history of it or had any issues with it (other than an uncle who unexpectedly/suddenly died of a heart attack). My grandparents tend to die of “weird things” (one was smoking-related to that says nothing, one was autoimmune disease related) They used a PRS of centenarian variants from a 2020 paper that only had a sample size of 354 and IDK how arbitrary it is out of every other centenarian/long-lived protein GWAS/PRS For a longevity PRS of 9%, I have WAY more "green" than "red"... (though it is possible that most people have more "green" in higher-impact modules). The PRS scores aren't believable and they plan to update their algos in the future (they haven't backtested this on the large populations that others have) Edited July 11, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted February 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2023 (edited) After a month of high-fat/low-carb... (where I often had ultra-low glucose levels for the past month).. my hemoglobin a1c still doesn't go below what it ALWAYS is... I took a lot of NMN-C over the past month too.. (fuck, my RDW went up. but my RBC count also went down). I did 20mg rapamycin on feb1 - 9 days prior to taking the test My B12 levels are high enough to increase risk of mortality by 3x - THAT is the weirdest finding. HEMOGLOBIN A1C 4.8 % <5.7 % Non-Diabetic Reference Range <5.7% Pre-Diabetic Reference Range 5.7% - 6.4% Diabetic Reference Range >6.4% ESTIMATED AVERAGE GLUCOSE 91 mg/dL mg/dL Estimated Average Glucose Component Your Value Standard Range Flag VITAMIN D,25-OH,TOTAL 58 ng/mL 30 - 100 ng/mL Interpretation Deficient <20 Insufficient 20 - 29 Adequate 30 - 99 Toxic >99 Component Your Value Standard Range Flag VITAMIN B12 1,117 pg/mL 181 - 914 pg/mL H Normal: 181-914 pg/mL Indeterminate: 145-180 pg/mL Deficient: < 145 pg/mL Component Your Value Standard Range Flag GLUCOSE 66 mg/dL 60 - 99 mg/dL SODIUM 141 mmol/L 134 - 146 mmol/L POTASSIUM 3.9 mmol/L 3.3 - 5.3 mmol/L CHLORIDE 104 mmol/L 98 - 110 mmol/L CARBON DIOXIDE 25 mmol/L 21 - 33 mmol/L CREATININE 0.77 mg/dL 0.50 - 1.40 mg/dL BUN 9 mg/dL 7 - 25 mg/dL CALCIUM 9.1 mg/dL 8.8 - 10.6 mg/dL ALBUMIN 4.8 g/dL 3.7 - 5.1 g/dL ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE 39 U/L 38 - 125 U/L SGOT (AST) 19 U/L 2 - 50 U/L SGPT (ALT) 10 U/L 2 - 60 U/L BILIRUBIN TOTAL 0.7 mg/dL 0.1 - 1.3 mg/dL TOTAL PROTEIN 6.8 g/dL 6.0 - 8.9 g/dL eGFR >60 >60 Component Your Value Standard Range Flag NEUTROPHILS % 46.5 % 45.0-73.0 % % LYMPHOCYTES % 45.3 % 25.0-50.0 % % MONOCYTES % 6.0 % 1.0-10.0 % % EOSINOPHILS % 1.4 % 1.0-3.0 % % BASOPHILS % 0.8 % 0.0-2.0 % % ABSOLUTE NEUTROPHILS 1.40 x10*3 /uL 1.80 - 8.00 x10*3 /uL L ABSOLUTE LYMPHOCYTES 1.40 x10*3/uL 1.00 - 4.80 x10*3/uL ABSOLUTE MONOCYTES 0.20 x10*3/uL 0.22 - 0.66 x10*3/uL L ABSOLUTE EOSINOPHILS 0.00 x10*3/uL 0.00 - 0.60 x10*3/uL ABSOLUTE BASOPHILS 0.00 x10*3/uL 0.00 - 0.30 x10*3/uL Component Your Value Standard Range Flag WBC 3.0 x10*3 /uL 4.5 - 11.0 x10*3 /uL L RBC 4.31 x10*6 /uL 4.60 - 6.20 x10*6 /uL L HGB 14.1 g/dL 14.0 - 18.0 g/dL HCT 41.8 % 39.0 - 51.0 % MCV 96.8 fL 80.0 - 100.0 fL MCH 32.6 pg 27.0 - 31.0 pg H MCHC 33.7 g/dL 32.0 - 37.0 g/dL RDW 13.2 % 11.5 - 14.5 % PLATELETS 251 x10*3 /uL 150 - 400 x10*3 /uL MPV 7.4 fL 6.3 - 10.3 fL Component Your Value Standard Range Flag Ventrical Rate 80 BPM BPM P-R interval (msec) 136 ms ms QRS - interval (msec) 86 ms ms QT - interval (msec) 356 ms ms QT - corrected (msec) 410 ms ms P-wave axis (deg) 38 degrees degrees QRS-axis (deg) 80 degrees degrees T-wave axis (deg) 69 degrees degrees Edited February 14, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted February 10, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2023 (edited) Component Your Value Standard Range Flag CHOLESTEROL 174 mg/dL <=199 mg/dL HDL 54 mg/dL >=41 mg/dL CHOL/HDL RATIO 3.2 <=4.9 LDL 99.2 mg/dL <=130 mg/dL TRIGLYCERIDES 104 mg/dL <=149 mg/dL FASTING STATUS Fasting HOMOCYSTEINE 9.2 umol/L <11.4 umol/L Homocysteine is increased by functional deficiency of folate or vitamin B12. Testing for methylmalonic acid differentiates between these deficiencies. Other causes of increased homocysteine include renal failure, folate antagonists such as methotrexate and phenytoin, and exposure to nitrous oxide. Selhub J, et al., Ann Intern Med. 1999;131(5):331-9. on homocysteine:https://www.optimaldx.com/blog/homocysteine-optimal-range (9 is also EXACTLY the lower threshold for increased risk...) Ugh and I have lots of B12.. no noticeable lipid shift when I shifted to high fat, which is good news. But my LDL suddenly went up from the 60s/70s up to 99 in late 2020 and never ever went back down. It's not the most worrisome thing b/c LDL alone doesn't increase aging (and there is an easy counter), but it is a change from when I had child/baby-like values of most of my biomarkers. For overall mortality risk, these cholesterol levels are ideal, but there are confounding factors that happen with people who have lower cholesterol levels that affect this... TG/HDL ratio should be less than 2, and mine is roughly 2. Again, not worrisome in itself, but I slightly worry that my bionumbers may be starting to slightly shift from its prior child-like values... Also TG should have gone down with high-fat, but isn't..\ Sodium also should be below 142. I had an increase, but not an overly worrisome one (yet) I did eat multiple eggs per day for many days during the 2 weeks before the test (tho not the day immediately before it). Normally I barely eat eggs. Lustig says ALT should be below 25 (reference range is too high b/c Americans haev gotten unheathier). VLDL => small dense LDL particles that can get into artery walls (whereas larger floaty LDL isn't necessarily toxic) and that fasting TG is a way to measure VLDL (god I remember when I had VLDL of 10, now I wonder if it's higher)... Also he says much of HDL is genetic. I have no family history of heart disease and eat WAY healthier than them so I shouldn't be too concerned with most of this except how much any of this affects basal rate of aging (ALL which is unclear). Lustig also says fasting insulin < 6 and that he's super-critical of american diabetic association for recommending AGAINST testing insulin y'know, I was more carefree in 2020 than I am now (and my blood tests in 2020 were beyond perfect). Like, I was still ultra-healthy and categorically avoided certain foods, but didn't go so heavy into rapamycin/metformin/CGMs (or cancelled even more classes of foods) back in 2020.. .Rapamycin can increase BOTH TG and LDL, so if this is the reason, I'm okay and the only thing I *should* be worried about is the homocysteine increase (rapa should decrease that..) decrease in raw #/% neutrophils is good but not as interesting as other metrics (neutrophil % values go EVERYWHERE). alkaline phosphotase also decreased which is good but also not as interesting as other metrics./ ==== all that recent metformin and rapamycin use certainly hasn't dented my B12 levels.. in fact both B12 and D are "too high".. I only took 5 Vitamin D pills yesterday and didn't take vitamin D pills for A LONG TIME for much of last year.. I was freakishly metabolically healthy for most of 2021 but I'm scared that some of the panels are now different than before Quote The upper limit of a normal QTc is somewhat debatable, but a cutoff of 0.45 second (450 msec) in men and 0.46 second (460 msec) in women is generally used Quote The electrocardiographic QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc) is approximately normally distributed in the general population.4,30–34 Normal values for QTc range from 350 to 450 ms for adult men, and 360 to 460 ms for adult women.4,30,32,35–36 but up to 10–20% of otherwise healthy persons may have QTc values outside of this range Quote The multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios comparing participants at or above the 95th percentile of age-, sex-, race-, and R-R interval–corrected QT interval (≥439 milliseconds) with participants in the middle quintile (401 to <410 milliseconds) were 2.03 (95% confidence interval, 1.46-2.81) for total mortality, 2.55 (1.59-4.09) for mortality due to cardiovascular disease (CVD), 1.63 (0.96-2.75) for mortality due to coronary heart disease, and 1.65 (1.16-2.35) for non-CVD mortality. The corresponding hazard ratios comparing participants with a corrected QT interval below the fifth percentile (<377 milliseconds) with those in the middle quintile were 1.39 (95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.88) for total mortality, 1.35 (0.77-2.36) for CVD mortality, 1.02 (0.44-2.38) for coronary heart disease mortality, and 1.42 (0.97-2.08) for non-CVD mortality Quote Results The correlation of HbA1c and blood sugar levels with RBC parameter indicates positive correlation with RBC count and negative correlation with MCV and MCH Edited February 14, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted February 11, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2023 (edited) My potassium is lower this time, and my BP increased to 109/60. I know my BP has historically ALWAYS been 100/60 no matter what, so this increase is mildly concerning (though I know I had a big worrisome increase [to borderline high-BP levels] last year when I went really high on the MUFAs) My B12 levels might be very high because I did have periods of time when I ate entire B12 supplement packages all at once (b/c they tasted so good). Like, I ate an entire pack of https://www.amazon.com/Bronson-Vitamin-2500mcg-Release-Sublingual/dp/B004MMOG20/ref=sxts_rp_s_a_2_0?content-id=amzn1.sym.eff26b9b-e255-411b-a40d-eccb21f93fe4%3Aamzn1.sym.eff26b9b-e255-411b-a40d-eccb21f93fe4&crid=2WVUODW9N883Q&cv_ct_cx=b12&keywords=b12&pd_rd_i=B004MMOG20&pd_rd_r=ece84ce5-b147-45b5-a7e5-9c1cd58d790a&pd_rd_w=cgdoq&pd_rd_wg=fiB4V&pf_rd_p=eff26b9b-e255-411b-a40d-eccb21f93fe4&pf_rd_r=S0Z14GRWY1M9FFC0KSPW&qid=1677293298&sprefix=b12%2Caps%2C434&sr=1-1-5985efba-8948-4f09-9122-d605505c9d1e in one day.. If that's the cause, then the levels aren't surprising (and the elevations aren't horrible). but i better be careful next time (not buy something so tasty) I have early repolarization too (though this was known prior to my last adderall Rx and didn't cause issues) Edited February 27, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorF Posted February 11, 2023 Report Share Posted February 11, 2023 Hm, I see a concern about QT interval, so 2 cents from own experience. There are several genetically predisposed reasons for something called long QT. The first 3 are better studied and in many cases the only known to doctors. Since they are risky the topic is surrounded with some unpleasant to read texts and in my particular case doctors told that I have "a kind of weak heart" and they recommended to have "mild sports" in a childhood. Few years ago when the first EKG after a long time was done by me, it was interpreted by doctor as "heart needs magnesium". I was curious and started to dig the topic deeper to a degree possible for non-professional. I did 23andme report and fed it into Prometease, found one genetically predisposed LQTS-related SNP but it was not so horrific like the historically first 3, so I just noticed that my heart is not as good with potassium-regulated things and that an old generic advice to do only "mild sports" is a wise thing. Few more EKGs, both 10-lead and a simple Kardia tool showed the same 400+ms for QT. My childhood EKG also had it the same. So I thought that SNP is forming it. After a year of being completely good with magnesium and potassium/sodium ratios I suddenly discovered that my QT is no longer L, it is in a normal range and it was a weird discovery. I did 24h urine test for many things and pairing the results with cronometer data and observations I can assume I am running with very high potassium/sodium ratio as well as abundance of magnesium now. Resuming the LQTS topic - I recommend: - to be very careful with reading about LQTS, if no own data for SNPs causing it is known, there are scary things and there are almost harmless ones and there is no easy way to distinguish them. Intuitively the scariest are more rare than the mild ones. - a good magnesium status is mandatory and it is not easy to be assessed - the bloodwork can show normal values but I have a feeling that this is not an indicator, the only way to be good with it - to have a lot of it on a long run (keeping in mind the competition with calcium) - a good (e.g. 2.5:1 ?) potassium/sodium ratio is mandatory, unless an annoying 24h urine test is ok to be done I think the best indicator is blood pressure, for healthy people it should be lower that 120/80 for the whole life (according to Staffan Lindeberg's studies of trobrian natives and few other similar studies of the last non-westernized humans) and with a good ratio it will oscilate around 100/60 Br, Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted February 14, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2023 (edited) Oral microbiome attached Periodontal exams here:https://www.crsociety.org/profile/5068-inquilinekea/?status=27&type=status Bristle-14-Feb-2023-Kit-BHJB4768.pdf Edited February 21, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Put Posted February 15, 2023 Report Share Posted February 15, 2023 On 2/11/2023 at 7:39 AM, InquilineKea said: After a month of high-fat/low-carb... (where I often had ultra-low glucose levels for the past month).. my hemoglobin a1c still doesn't go below what it ALWAYS is... I took a lot of NMN-C over the past month too.. (fuck, my RDW went up. but my RBC count also went down). I did 20mg rapamycin on feb1 - 9 days prior to taking the test My B12 levels are high enough to increase risk of mortality by 3x - THAT is the weirdest finding. First, high fat/low carb will likely level your glucose but it will eventually increase your insulin resistance. I didn't see your insulin measurement, without which fasting glucose is far less meaningful. It's why all the CGM-pushing companies promote high fat/low carb, since all they measure is glucose and flatlining it keeps the subscriptions going. Your A1C will likely take longer to move, if it does much. You lipid numbers are kind of up there, consistent with the high fat diet. How much B-12 are you taking? No, you are not going to die just because your number is 1,117 pg/mL, but maybe ease of on the dose you are supplementing with. Try adding a little glycine to help a bit with homocysteine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccoy Posted February 15, 2023 Report Share Posted February 15, 2023 Ron, intramyocellular fats are a putative but I believe non certain, mechanism for insulin resistance. What governs more the plasma concentration of insulin, the fats or the quantity of glucose, in peaks and in the baseline? My personal opinion is that it depends from the individual setup. I'm going to attach my labs, but I remember my fasting insulin was ridiculously low in a period where I kept eating EVOO and other saturated fats (not as much as I do now). I've never eaten low fat, as a matter of fact. So, in your case you may be sensitive to IMLs (intramyocellular lipids) more than to glucose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IgorF Posted February 15, 2023 Report Share Posted February 15, 2023 IMHO, fasting insulin value when it is low is not a confirmation of absense of the resistance. The resistance as GERALD I. SHULMAN describes in the podcast with Attia and in tens of his articles in almost every known journal starts in muscles and is dynamically changing after the food ingestion, the most visibility observable with current tooling will be in the portal vein and will be distinguished as I understand as a special shape of graph where its form and magnitude of values should be compared between the different cases to confirm resistance. So no chances for non-scientists to assess it somehow. When we can see the increased fasting insulin it is perhaps already at least a prediabetic situation, so should not happen with people on CR/weight control regimens. I also remember that HOMA-IR and other similar/related models were criticised from the same perspective - they can not really predict things, they rather describe already disregulated states. Regarding fat diet to hack the values - if a person fights already prediabetic/early diabetic states then it is perhaps a reasonable approach and if doctors have no objections it should be considered ok. But if a healthy person tries to go with fats to have artificially decreased values - it is risky from resistance perspective and also it changes the game rules - all these values considered normal were studied within the carbs diet contexts, what should be considered normal on fat diet is a big question, it could be the case that some normals should be shifted to different diapasons and studied within modified models and so on. This will perhaps never happen on the same scale we already have data with carbs diet - just not much sense and hard to recruit so many people to actually do it. This is just IMHO, based on generalizations.. Br, Igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted February 27, 2023 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2023 (edited) This all several days later. RDW is now much lower. Folate is above 24. Hm. "The normal range is 2.7 to 17.0 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) or 6.12 to 38.52 nanomoles per liter (nmol/L)." CBC (INCLUDES DIFF/PLT) CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME WHITE BLOOD CELL COUNT 3.6 L Reference Range: 3.8-10.8 Thousand/uL RED BLOOD CELL COUNT 4.05 L Reference Range: 4.20-5.80 Million/uL HEMOGLOBIN 13.3 Reference Range: 13.2-17.1 g/dL HEMATOCRIT 38.8 Reference Range: 38.5-50.0 % MCV 95.8 Reference Range: 80.0-100.0 fL MCH 32.8 Reference Range: 27.0-33.0 pg MCHC 34.3 Reference Range: 32.0-36.0 g/dL RDW 11.6 Reference Range: 11.0-15.0 % PLATELET COUNT 206 Reference Range: 140-400 Thousand/uL MPV 9.9 Reference Range: 7.5-12.5 fL ABSOLUTE NEUTROPHILS 1980 Reference Range: 1500-7800 cells/uL ABSOLUTE LYMPHOCYTES 1328 Reference Range: 850-3900 cells/uL ABSOLUTE MONOCYTES 241 Reference Range: 200-950 cells/uL ABSOLUTE EOSINOPHILS 29 Reference Range: 15-500 cells/uL ABSOLUTE BASOPHILS 22 Reference Range: 0-200 cells/uL NEUTROPHILS 55 % LYMPHOCYTES 36.9 % MONOCYTES 6.7 % EOSINOPHILS 0.8 % BASOPHILS 0.6 % VITAMIN B12/FOLATE, SERUM PANEL CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME VITAMIN B12 1393 H Reference Range: 200-1100 pg/mL FOLATE, SERUM >24.0 ng/mL Reference Range Low: <3.4 Borderline: 3.4-5.4 Normal: >5.4 Show Less DRUG MONITORING, PANEL 8 WITH CONFIRMATION, URINE CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME Alcohol Metabolites NEGATIVE Reference Range: <500 ng/mL Amphetamines NEGATIVE Reference Range: <500 ng/mL Benzodiazepines NEGATIVE Reference Range: <100 ng/mL Buprenorphine NEGATIVE Reference Range: <5 ng/mL Cocaine Metabolite NEGATIVE Reference Range: <150 ng/mL 6 Acetylmorphine NEGATIVE Reference Range: <10 ng/mL Marijuana Metabolite NEGATIVE Reference Range: <20 ng/mL MDMA NEGATIVE Reference Range: <500 ng/mL Opiates NEGATIVE Reference Range: <100 ng/mL Oxycodone NEGATIVE Reference Range: <100 ng/mL Creatinine 16.3 L Reference Range: > or = 20.0 mg/dL Verified by repeat analysis. Specific Gravity 1.008 Reference Range: > or = 1.003 pH 6.0 Reference Range: 4.5-9.0 Oxidant NEGATIVE Reference Range: <200 mcg/mL DRUG MONITORING TEMPLATE CURRENT Notes and Comments This drug testing is for medical treatment only. Analysis was performed as non-forensic testing and these results should be used only by healthcare ... Show More COMPREHENSIVE METABOLIC PANEL CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME GLUCOSE 72 Reference Range: 65-139 mg/dL Non-fasting reference interval UREA NITROGEN (BUN) 9 Reference Range: 7-25 mg/dL CREATININE 0.74 Reference Range: 0.60-1.26 mg/dL EGFR 123 Reference Range: > OR = 60 mL/min/1.73m2 The eGFR is based on the CKD-EPI 2021 equation. To calculate the new eGFR from a previous Creatinine or Cystatin C result, go to https://www.kidney.org/professionals/ ... Show More BUN/CREATININE RATIO NOT APPLICABLE Reference Range: 6-22 (calc) SODIUM 136 Reference Range: 135-146 mmol/L POTASSIUM 4.2 Reference Range: 3.5-5.3 mmol/L CHLORIDE 104 Reference Range: 98-110 mmol/L CARBON DIOXIDE 24 Reference Range: 20-32 mmol/L CALCIUM 9.2 Reference Range: 8.6-10.3 mg/dL PROTEIN, TOTAL 6.9 Reference Range: 6.1-8.1 g/dL ALBUMIN 4.8 Reference Range: 3.6-5.1 g/dL GLOBULIN 2.1 Reference Range: 1.9-3.7 g/dL (calc) ALBUMIN/GLOBULIN RATIO 2.3 Reference Range: 1.0-2.5 (calc) BILIRUBIN, TOTAL 0.6 Reference Range: 0.2-1.2 mg/dL ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE 44 Reference Range: 36-130 U/L AST 22 Reference Range: 10-40 U/L ALT 12 Reference Range: 9-46 U/L VITAMIN D,25-OH,TOTAL,IA CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME VITAMIN D,25-OH,TOTAL,IA 69 Reference Range: 30-100 ng/mL Vitamin D Status 25-OH Vitamin 😧 Deficiency: <20 ng/mL ... Show More COMMENT See Note 1 Edited February 27, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted March 8, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2023 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted March 11, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2023 (edited) for ref, I ate almost all of this a few days after ordering. So my B12 levels could have been *far* higher for a period of time shortly after. Ordered on October 5, 2022 (1 item) Vitamin B12 2500mcg Shot of Energy Fast Dissolve Chewable Tablets - Quick Release Cherry Flavored Sublingual B12 Vitamin - Supports Nervous System, He ==== Brought it down, maybe w/help of heavy doses of metformin VITAMIN B12/FOLATE, SERUM PANEL CURRENT RANGE OVER TIME VITAMIN B12 701 Reference Range: 200-1100 pg/mL FOLATE, SERUM 18.6 ng/mL Reference Range Low: <3.4 Borderline: 3.4-5.4 Normal: >5.4 Show Less Edited March 11, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted March 13, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2023 (edited) Fuck, I'm really starting to realize that 94-95 is low, but I don't have earlier data so it's hard to know if this low value is simply due to birth/myopia or due to other reasons. Edited March 13, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asa t Posted March 17, 2023 Report Share Posted March 17, 2023 On 2/10/2023 at 6:39 PM, InquilineKea said: After a month of high-fat/low-carb... (where I often had ultra-low glucose levels for the past month).. my hemoglobin a1c still doesn't go below what it ALWAYS is... I took a lot of NMN-C over the past month too.. (fuck, my RDW went up. but my RBC count also went down). I did 20mg rapamycin on feb1 - 9 days prior to taking the test My B12 levels are high enough to increase risk of mortality by 3x - THAT is the weirdest finding. HEMOGLOBIN A1C 4.8 % <5.7 % Non-Diabetic Reference Range <5.7% Pre-Diabetic Reference Range 5.7% - 6.4% Diabetic Reference Range >6.4% ESTIMATED AVERAGE GLUCOSE 91 mg/dL mg/dL Estimated Average Glucose Component Your Value Standard Range Flag VITAMIN D,25-OH,TOTAL 58 ng/mL 30 - 100 ng/mL Interpretation Deficient <20 Insufficient 20 - 29 Adequate 30 - 99 Toxic >99 Component Your Value Standard Range Flag VITAMIN B12 1,117 pg/mL 181 - 914 pg/mL H Normal: 181-914 pg/mL Indeterminate: 145-180 pg/mL Deficient: < 145 pg/mL Component Your Value Standard Range Flag GLUCOSE 66 mg/dL 60 - 99 mg/dL SODIUM 141 mmol/L 134 - 146 mmol/L POTASSIUM 3.9 mmol/L 3.3 - 5.3 mmol/L CHLORIDE 104 mmol/L 98 - 110 mmol/L CARBON DIOXIDE 25 mmol/L 21 - 33 mmol/L CREATININE 0.77 mg/dL 0.50 - 1.40 mg/dL BUN 9 mg/dL 7 - 25 mg/dL CALCIUM 9.1 mg/dL 8.8 - 10.6 mg/dL ALBUMIN 4.8 g/dL 3.7 - 5.1 g/dL ALKALINE PHOSPHATASE 39 U/L 38 - 125 U/L SGOT (AST) 19 U/L 2 - 50 U/L SGPT (ALT) 10 U/L 2 - 60 U/L BILIRUBIN TOTAL 0.7 mg/dL 0.1 - 1.3 mg/dL TOTAL PROTEIN 6.8 g/dL 6.0 - 8.9 g/dL eGFR >60 >60 Component Your Value Standard Range Flag NEUTROPHILS % 46.5 % 45.0-73.0 % % LYMPHOCYTES % 45.3 % 25.0-50.0 % % MONOCYTES % 6.0 % 1.0-10.0 % % EOSINOPHILS % 1.4 % 1.0-3.0 % % BASOPHILS % 0.8 % 0.0-2.0 % % ABSOLUTE NEUTROPHILS 1.40 x10*3 /uL 1.80 - 8.00 x10*3 /uL L ABSOLUTE LYMPHOCYTES 1.40 x10*3/uL 1.00 - 4.80 x10*3/uL ABSOLUTE MONOCYTES 0.20 x10*3/uL 0.22 - 0.66 x10*3/uL L ABSOLUTE EOSINOPHILS 0.00 x10*3/uL 0.00 - 0.60 x10*3/uL ABSOLUTE BASOPHILS 0.00 x10*3/uL 0.00 - 0.30 x10*3/uL Component Your Value Standard Range Flag WBC 3.0 x10*3 /uL 4.5 - 11.0 x10*3 /uL L RBC 4.31 x10*6 /uL 4.60 - 6.20 x10*6 /uL L HGB 14.1 g/dL 14.0 - 18.0 g/dL HCT 41.8 % 39.0 - 51.0 % MCV 96.8 fL 80.0 - 100.0 fL MCH 32.6 pg 27.0 - 31.0 pg H MCHC 33.7 g/dL 32.0 - 37.0 g/dL RDW 13.2 % 11.5 - 14.5 % PLATELETS 251 x10*3 /uL 150 - 400 x10*3 /uL MPV 7.4 fL 6.3 - 10.3 fL Component Your Value Standard Range Flag Ventrical Rate 80 BPM BPM P-R interval (msec) 136 ms ms QRS - interval (msec) 86 ms ms QT - interval (msec) 356 ms ms QT - corrected (msec) 410 ms ms P-wave axis (deg) 38 degrees degrees QRS-axis (deg) 80 degrees degrees T-wave axis (deg) 69 degrees degrees Your alk phos st 39 is very low. Not good. I had that problem too. It was zinc deficiency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex K Chen Posted March 17, 2023 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2023 (edited) Why is low alk phos bad? === damnit, I don't have that high SHBG. I always thought I had unusually high levels. Results Component Your Value Standard Range Flag TSH 1.63 mlU/L 0.28 - 4.10 mlU/L Results Component Your Value Standard Range Flag PARATHYROID INTACT 30 pg/mL 12 - 88 pg/mL Component Your Value Standard Range Flag PHOSPHORUS 3.1 mg/dL 2.5 - 4.5 mg/dL Results Component Your Value Standard Range Flag SEX HORMONE BINDING GLOBULIN 39.4 nmol/L nmol/L FEMALE Premenopause 21-60 Years 10.8 - >180 nmol/L Postmenopause 45-89 Years 23.2 - 159.1 nmol/L MALE 21-<50 Years 14.6 - 94.6 nmol/L >/= 50 Years 21.6 - 113.1 nmol/L Test performed by the ADVIA Centaur XP using standardized SHBG immunoassay traceable to the World Health Organization (WHO) 2nd international standard NIBSC code 08/266. The SHBG result cannot be used interchangeably with other methods. TESTOSTERONE TOTAL 651.8 ng/dL ng/dL FEMALE Premenopause 21-60 years 9-48 ng/dL Postmenopause 45-89 years <7-46 ng/dL MALE 20-49 years 123-814 ng/dL >/=50 years 100-780 ng/dL Total testosterone (TSTII) assay is traceable to the LCMSMS method aligned with the CDC, hormone Standardization Program (HoSt) Testosterone Reference Measurement Procedure. Test performed by the Siemens ADVIA centaur instrument using chemiluminescent immunoassay. TESTOSTERONE, BIOAVAILABLE 325.2 ng/dL ng/dL Results for Testosterone Bioavailable are calculated according to the Vermeulen Formula. TESTOSTERONE FREE 117.7 pg/mL pg/mL FEMALE 20-49 years 0.7-7.3 pg/mL =/>50 years 0.5-6.3 pg/mL MALE 20-150 years 47.0-244.0 pg/mL Results for Testosterone Free are calculated according to the Vermeulen Formula. ALBUMIN 5.1 g/dL 3.7 - 5.1 g/dL Edited March 17, 2023 by InquilineKea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Allen Posted March 19, 2023 Report Share Posted March 19, 2023 (edited) On 3/17/2023 at 5:01 PM, InquilineKea said: Why is low alk phos bad? The number by itself it is somewhat meaningless, whether low, high or even normal it depends on how it gets there. You can get a fractionated test giving isoenzymes typically for liver, bone and intestinal. Moderately low liver and bone are good but lowish intestinal is probably bad. Edited March 19, 2023 by Todd Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.