• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Existential "Health" Crises: Early Passing of Health Authority

lifestyle diet supplements exercise

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 thomasanderson2

  • Guest
  • 49 posts
  • 3
  • Location:New Jersey
  • NO

Posted 07 July 2014 - 01:37 AM


How to make sense out of a health figure - someone who did all the "right" things - dying prematurely?
How do we (as Longecity members) reconcile this early death with belief systems and lifestyles that reflect a similar approach towards promoting health and longevity?
Does all our attention to lifestyle, diet and nutrition, esoteric supplements and drugs, exercise, etc. really matter?
Is it possible that we've gone past diminishing returns...or even entered areas of negative returns somehow?
 
This hit me last Thursday:
I was perusing the purchase of some new supplements, when I discovered that one the brightest, most progressive, most highly-respected, and very likable health gurus had passed away - at the very premature age of 59. 
Here are the links noticing the passing of Byron Richards:
Note that the only thing substantive mentioned about cause of death was that he collapsed while jogging.
 
This makes no sense at all.
I personally knew Byron Richards. An integrative medicine doctor introduced me to him about twenty years ago - and I saw him for many nutritional consultations over the years. He was as much a genuine health authority as anyone I've ever known... he counseled people on nutrition, he authored several excellent books on leptin and diet, and he formulated a terrific catalog of very advanced dietary supplements.
For him to pass away so young just doesn't make sense.
I've been entertaining various speculation about what might have occurred...
Some unaccounted for genetic factor?
Or perhaps, given his propensity for cutting edge nutritional supplements, he may have been experimenting with something risky. Again, this is all my speculation with no evidentiary basis at all.
Or perhaps, he met with a careless accident, and his family would rather not reveal details.
Again, all speculation on my part.
 
But taking the reported cause of death at face value, it would seem that his extreme attention to nutrition, dietary supplements and exercise did not secure his health.
In contrast, there are folks with atrocious health habits - I'm sure all of us know people like this - that are living well into their 70's, 80's and beyond.
What does that say about what we are all doing? 
 
Note.
I would DEFINITELY distinguish Bryon Richards from other health figures like, Robert Atkins and Stuart Berger - both of whom adopted lifestyle habits that many of us immediately recognize as unsound.
( Robert Atkins followed a very high-meat diet - see here:
and Stuart Berger was grossly overweight and abused cocaine - see here:
 
I would also share a comment that Jack LaLanne - one of the pioneers of American fitness and nutrition - actually lived to 96.
(Quite ironically, a friend of mine who used to be a big believer in health and nutrition, felt discouraged that Jack LaLanne *only* lived to the age of 96).
 
 
*Very eager to hear other's thoughts on this topic*
 

Edited by thomasanderson2, 07 July 2014 - 01:40 AM.

  • Informative x 1

#2 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 07 July 2014 - 01:50 AM

I'm sorry to hear that a person you knew died at such an early age.

 

Byron Richards might have done the right things and still died young because he had bad genetics.  Or maybe he wasn't really doing the right things.  Maybe the things he was doing were right for some, or even most people, but he wasn't one of those people.  Until we have a firm grasp on all the important genetic variations, then the best we can do is adopt behaviors that are 'statistically' correct, instead of what is really best for our particular genome.


  • Agree x 2

#3 thomasanderson2

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 49 posts
  • 3
  • Location:New Jersey
  • NO

Posted 07 July 2014 - 04:25 AM

I didn't know Byron very well personally - but he really possessed a tremendous understanding of human physiology and he really was a very decent guy.

I hear you about genetics - but this is all still a bit unsettling.

One of the purported benefits (some might say "promises") of following a healthy lifestyle is that we can avoid diseases and ailments (or substantially mitigate them) despite genetic pre-dispositions.

I'm also unsettled by this because I enjoy running... and always felt it enhanced my health and well-being.

And this has me wondering if running (even modest amounts of running - like 10 to 15 miles per week) is actually healthy.

 

  • Good Point x 1
  • Agree x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 1kgcoffee

  • Guest
  • 737 posts
  • 254

Posted 07 July 2014 - 04:54 AM

I don't know anything about Byron but long distance running is bad for your heart:

 


  • like x 1

#5 Darryl

  • Guest
  • 650 posts
  • 657
  • Location:New Orleans
  • NO

Posted 07 July 2014 - 05:43 AM

If the material at Wellness Resources represents Mr. Richards views, he seems to have been in the very-high-protein/relatively-high-fat/low-carb camp. 

 

Which frankly requires quite a bit of susceptiblilty to confirmation bias, selective recall, and biased evaluation to justify. I was there 5 years ago, before recognizing how much cherry-picking was going on in the Paleo camp.

 

No long-lived population consume a 30% protein/40% fat diet. My personal dietary ideal, traditional Okinawans, consume 9% protein/6% fat.

 

Jogging is a healthy activity, up to about 20 miles a week. Above that and negative effects start overwhelming the positive.

 

Most importantly, you can't outrun a bad diet. Exercise has a limited capacity to mitigate the effects of excess methionine and the atherosclerotic fats. 


Edited by Darryl, 07 July 2014 - 06:31 AM.

  • WellResearched x 3
  • like x 1

#6 mustardseed41

  • Guest
  • 928 posts
  • 38
  • Location:Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 07 July 2014 - 05:48 AM

20 miles jogging a week is 20 miles too much IMO.


  • Needs references x 2
  • Disagree x 2

#7 thomasanderson2

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 49 posts
  • 3
  • Location:New Jersey
  • NO

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:32 PM

Hi 1kgcoffee
 
The video has excellent information... and it does a good job addressing how much running is beneficial and how much may be detrimental.
I don't think it explains what might have happened with Mr. Richard's though (which I understand was probably not your intention).
I don't think Mr. Richards was an extreme endurance athlete or marathon runner.
(and I'm not of that persuasion myself).
 
The video indicates that the benefits of moderate to vigorous exercise increase... at durations and frequencies of 
30 to 45 minutes a day and 2 to 5 days per week. 
And elsewhere he specifically mentioned weekly mileage of around 20 miles.
 
(Screenshots from video attached)
 
This video is much better than most of the popular news articles that over-simplify and sensationalize.
I suspect that part of this is human nature - people who don't do a good job taking care of themselves jumping on studies to justify their own lack of discipline. Here is another article that raises some great points as well.
To get the main point, you need to read carefully.
It suggests that at least one study (comparing runners to non-runners) had skewed results because of the statistical adjustments used to compare runners with non-runners. In other words, they compared runners and non-runners with equivalent BMI, blood pressure, cholesterol, etc.  But doing so entirely misses the fact that running alters these profiles (and that runners generally had much healthier physiological profiles overall).  So by selectively comparing only those runners and non-runners with like physiological profiles, they were not properly considering the effects of running.
 
Thanks for everyone's input

 

Attached Files


  • Good Point x 1

#8 Razor444

  • Guest
  • 240 posts
  • 65
  • Location:-

Posted 07 July 2014 - 02:59 PM

Jim Fixx died at 52.

 

To quote Wikipedia:

 

"James Fuller "Jim" Fixx (April 23, 1932 – July 20, 1984) was the author of the 1977 best-selling book, The Complete Book of Running. He is credited with helping start America's fitness revolution, popularizing the sport of running and demonstrating the health benefits of regular jogging."

 

I don't, and won't jog. But do chronic low-level exercise -- like walking. I also want to start using a standing desk.

 

Sprinting -- even on something like a bike -- is meant to be beneficial at the epigenetic level. Something I want to look in to more, and start.

 

Then there's antioxidants being touted as the "right thing" for many years. Quoting one of reason's posts, from the Bioscience forum:

 

"It is a myth that dietary antioxidant supplementation can reliably extend life or even reliably do good things for general health. The weight of evidence strongly suggests that the results are either negligible or harmful. Oxidant molecules have many beneficial roles in addition to being damaging in large volumes, and most likely being involved in the progression of aging. They are used as signals in our tissue to spur maintenance processes essential in generating the benefits derived from exercise, for example.

It is possible to reliably extend life with antioxidants, but they have to be carefully designed molecules that target themselves to the mitochondria in our cells, where the most damaging and least necessary oxidants are generated."

 

MitoQ and C60 are mitochondrial antioxidants. I take MitoQ, and it's been fantastic so far:  reversal of an autoimmune disease which I've had for years.


  • WellResearched x 2

#9 thomasanderson2

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 49 posts
  • 3
  • Location:New Jersey
  • NO

Posted 07 July 2014 - 03:10 PM

Razor444

 

Jim Fixx is an example of an extreme as described in the video.

Going to the other extreme, and not jogging at all, isn't supported by the evidence.

 

Here's another data point that would seem to be confounding as well:

 

Endurance sports correlated with longevity?

"The team observed that in the older age group, the endurance athletes had significantly longer telomeres.  Further, in the overall cohort, telomere length was positively associated with VO2max, with the relationship strongest among the endurance athletes."

"Researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (Norway) report that endurance training may protect against the effects of aging in older individuals."

 

http://www.worldheal...rance-exercise/

 

This stuff just goes on an on...

 


  • Good Point x 1

#10 Razor444

  • Guest
  • 240 posts
  • 65
  • Location:-

Posted 07 July 2014 - 04:07 PM

Razor444

 

Jim Fixx is an example of an extreme as described in the video.

Going to the other extreme, and not jogging at all, isn't supported by the evidence.

 

Here's another data point that would seem to be confounding as well:

 

Endurance sports correlated with longevity?

"The team observed that in the older age group, the endurance athletes had significantly longer telomeres.  Further, in the overall cohort, telomere length was positively associated with VO2max, with the relationship strongest among the endurance athletes."

"Researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (Norway) report that endurance training may protect against the effects of aging in older individuals."

 

http://www.worldheal...rance-exercise/

 

This stuff just goes on an on...

 

 

Specifically, I'm sure there isn't any evidence that not jogging is advantageous to longevity.

 

The Harvard Alumni Health Study, which was a prospective study from circa 1962 to 1988 had the following conclusion:

 

"These data demonstrate a graded inverse relationship between total physical activity and mortality. Furthermore, vigorous activities but not nonvigorous activities were associated with longevity. These findings pertain only to all-cause mortality; nonvigorous exercise has been shown to benefit other aspects of health."

 

I do vigorous activity and nonvigorous activity. I just don't jog.


  • Good Point x 2

#11 HaloTeK

  • Guest
  • 254 posts
  • 7
  • Location:chicago

Posted 08 July 2014 - 02:16 AM

Both Byron and Seth Roberts were recommending a large amount of omega 3's and fat for intake (Seth at 3-4 TBSP a day of ala and Byron at 2+ grams of DHA a day).  While a lot of Bryon's info on leptin was decent, I still think he probably ate too much fat as in his leptin diet.  Also, he sold some questionable supplements on his site in my opinion (shark liver oil etc).  Both of their deaths go to show we need better diagnostics and that diet alone is just not enough to stop people from dying. We are on this site to think about those alternative methods to keep us alive.  



#12 blood

  • Guest
  • 926 posts
  • 254
  • Location:...

Posted 09 July 2014 - 10:16 AM

Sad to hear that Byron William's has passed on. :(
 
Here is his running regimen (from 2012) - doesn't seem terribly excessive for a 60 year old:
 

Byron's running tips
 
During my 30s and 40s I used to run 20 to 25 miles a week.  Now, Im simply happy to be out running.  I do a five mile run three times a week, and go slower than I used to.  However, I get just as good a metabolic response to running as I used to...

 
He had a habit of taking a cocktail of antioxidants, flavonoids & minerals just prior to exercise - which in hindsight seems a bit odd. Here is the list of things he took prior to going for a jog.

Edited by blood, 09 July 2014 - 10:29 AM.

  • Informative x 1

#13 Skypp

  • Guest
  • 90 posts
  • 7
  • Location:Santa Monica, CA

Posted 10 July 2014 - 06:51 PM

I absolutely adore this site, I often read every word of very long posts. What truly amazes me, astounds me, is the Western fixation on what you eat and supplements over any other understanding. (By the way I love supplements and take a lot of them including some of the more radically new discussed on this site). Though many people in the USA and Europe are very intellectually smart, as well as scientifically knowledgable they are CLUELESS about the the other layers of human existance and how those layers affect helath and well-being. If you are basically angry, full of resentment, or any other chronic negative emotion either consciously or unconsciously, you will die younger than someone who is actively cleasing themselves and looking deeper. In India, many yogis sit for hours and hours in meditation. They do not move around much, which would be considered lethal here, yet they consistantly live into their eighties and noneties with all their faculties intact (and often their hair, too). A human being is multi-leveled. If you ONLY consider the gross physical body, you will miss what truly makes a person happy and healthy. Balance. But here in the West, "balance" often does not include a real relationship with the more esoteric and ethereal realm. Yes, I can hear you all groaning out there, but it is the truth. MAYBE Jim Fixx and Byron Richards were simply TOO fixated on the physical. Their karma, their relationships to something bigger than themselves (and call that whatever the hell you want to call it) left them severely imbalanced. In Eastern medicine, all ailments begin on the etheric energy level long before they manifest on the physical level. I have witnessed this to be true. If you forget the bigger picture, your health will suffer.



#14 thomasanderson2

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 49 posts
  • 3
  • Location:New Jersey
  • NO

Posted 10 July 2014 - 07:10 PM

Thanks for the input Skypp.  I don't think anyone disputes that the spiritual / emotional dimensions affect our health.  Yet, I would submit that I've seen folks (as we all have, I'm sure) that aren't particularly spiritual, or well-adjusted or balanced (some quite unbalanced) that are living into very advanced years.  And conversely, although Mr. Richards was clearly at the cutting edge of dietary supplements - and this was definitely his passion, nothing about Mr. Richards suggested to me that he wasn't happy, content and also living an emotionally balanced life in other domains. He actually seemed to have a very intact family and extended family - and as a genuinely great guy, lots of friends - at least from what I recall.  But again, for any us to suggest that the spiritual dimension was or was not relevant here, is speculative because we don't really know.



#15 Skypp

  • Guest
  • 90 posts
  • 7
  • Location:Santa Monica, CA

Posted 10 July 2014 - 08:32 PM

Yes, Mr. Anderson, all that is correct. I was in part supposing that we do not know Mr. Richards's overall fine-tuning, including the emotional/spiritual elements of the equation. Yes, many apparently unhealthy people live long lives. My own father drank gin martinis every day (several). Loved to discuss philosophy and politics and often went on conversing right through dinner until it was over, whereupon he woofed down whatever meat might have been on the plate and ittle else. He also smoked a pipe for 40 years. He lived to be 87 without a single missing brain cell and still very physically active. His mind, conjectures and thoughts clear as a bell until his demise from emphyzema. He also ran, swam, and walked every day. Without the smoking, he would have lived many more years. Jim Fixx I am imagining, ran too much with a strained heart. I must confess, it wasn't lost on me that Richards was VERY vocal against hospitals and conventional medicine. How did he manage to contract another illness while in the hospital? Hmmmmmmm.



#16 Skypp

  • Guest
  • 90 posts
  • 7
  • Location:Santa Monica, CA

Posted 10 July 2014 - 08:47 PM

Both Byron and Seth Roberts were recommending a large amount of omega 3's and fat for intake (Seth at 3-4 TBSP a day of ala and Byron at 2+ grams of DHA a day).  While a lot of Bryon's info on leptin was decent, I still think he probably ate too much fat as in his leptin diet.  Also, he sold some questionable supplements on his site in my opinion (shark liver oil etc).  Both of their deaths go to show we need better diagnostics and that diet alone is just not enough to stop people from dying. We are on this site to think about those alternative methods to keep us alive.  

 

From what I understand, he died of pneumonia, once in the hospital, he supposedly contracted a second illness from which he died. The high fat would not have caused this.



#17 thomasanderson2

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 49 posts
  • 3
  • Location:New Jersey
  • NO

Posted 10 July 2014 - 08:58 PM

"From what I understand, he died of pneumonia, once in the hospital, he supposedly contracted a second illness from which he died. The high fat would not have caused this."

 

Actually, *Bernie Mac* - and not Byron Richards - is the guy that died from a pneumonia (and secondary illness from the hospital)

http://www.newswithv...rds/byron61.htm

 

That article that you are reading was written by Byron Richards - one of of many of his editorials on the state of healthcare in the U.S.

 



#18 Skypp

  • Guest
  • 90 posts
  • 7
  • Location:Santa Monica, CA

Posted 10 July 2014 - 09:14 PM

"From what I understand, he died of pneumonia, once in the hospital, he supposedly contracted a second illness from which he died. The high fat would not have caused this."

 

Actually, *Bernie Mac* - and not Byron Richards - is the guy that died from a pneumonia (and secondary illness from the hospital)

http://www.newswithv...rds/byron61.htm

 

That article that you are reading was written by Byron Richards - one of of many of his editorials on the state of healthcare in the U.S.

 

 



#19 Skypp

  • Guest
  • 90 posts
  • 7
  • Location:Santa Monica, CA

Posted 10 July 2014 - 09:17 PM

You are correct, so much for hasty research! Anyway, it seems he died jogging although it is not confirmed. FYI I do not think the "Bulletproof" fat-saturated coffee, et al is very good for you either. Must listen to our bodies, not what our intellects say is "healthy".



#20 Shea_Kennisher

  • Guest
  • 2 posts
  • 2
  • Location:Louisiana

Posted 04 September 2017 - 09:26 PM

Anyone ever find out more about Byron J. Richards' cause of death? Is it just presumed to have been a heart issue triggered by running?







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: lifestyle, diet, supplements, exercise

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users