23 replies to this topic

[Nate-2004]

It's repeated time and again that it's difficult to test whether an anti-aging solution works on humans because of the time it takes for a human to age.  

 

I'm skeptical that there aren't easier, quicker ways to determine this, especially in older individuals.  Are there not specific biomarkers that can be looked at?

 

If there were a much faster way to determine whether a certain substance is working, we could bypass most of the rat testing and get right down to human testing.

 

There have been a couple of teenagers recently who discovered ways to test for things like cancer with a hair sample and other simple ways to test for things. Surely with all we know now about telomeres, NAD+, etc, there's something that can be measured to determine whether someone is actually getting older biologically or not, even in the space of a few months.

 

What do you guys think?

Edited by Nate-2004, 09 January 2017 - 04:27 PM.

[mrkosh1]

Although it may be challenging to find or produce one, a very potent glucosepane breaker should work in a manner that would be very easy to track.

 

My thinking about the aging process, as of right now, is that there are many aspects that we can reverse via diet, exercise, and intense supplementation. However, there are some aspects of aging such as glucosepane accumulation that continue onwards despite our efforts. I think these areas that we can now do NOTHING about are the ones we need to focus on.

[Diocletian]

Look at this it was published recently http://onlinelibrary...acel.12557/full

[Oakman]

IF longevity could be boiled down to simple 'bookmakers', things would certainly be a lot simpler Nate. Science is not so advanced, yet, to be able to unravel the magic of life and continued existence. All that is possible now is to chip away at knowledge of how minute bits and pieces function, and how these bits respond to stimuli or lack thereof. These bits are simply pieces of an immense puzzle, of which we haven't a clue how to assemble into an understandable whole... so far.

 

For example, think of the difficulty of humankind trying to understand the human brain and its function. It's merely a couple pounds of mostly lipids, is available to us by the millions (billions?) to study, yet we are barely able to comprehend barely anything about how it functions, why it does what it does, the signals in receives (input), and those it sends out (output). Forget about how it processes the information it does. Life is simply so elegantly complex as to make even describing its processes nearly or completely impossible.

 

Translate that lack of understanding to the life and longevity of a human over its varied course of 0 > 100 years... and you get to where we are today.... grasping at straws (supplements, gene therapy and manipulation, drugs, and psychotherapy to name a few). We are hardly able to reliably extend life even a few years (maybe) beyond what has been accomplished with sanitation, better quality food, prenatal care, and an absurd amount of money spent on so called "health care" over a lifetime...in our oh-so-advanced society.

 

Maybe we all here are some of the pioneers with our N=1 experiments? Only time will tell. 

[Nate-2004]

Someone posted this on this thread but the post appears to be missing somehow:

 

http://onlinelibrary...acel.12557/full

[Diocletian]

Someone posted this on this thread but the post appears to be missing somehow:

 

http://onlinelibrary...acel.12557/full

 

Yes I posted it, don't know why it was removed though, I saw it on this fight aging post.

[Nate-2004]

Thanks, looks like people are interested in figuring all this out. I think eventually someone will find some significant marker we can all use as a determining factor. It's ridiculous just how complex this aging thing is. Glucosepane is definitely an issue but so are senescent cells, lipofuscin, etc. The focus is on downstream when it comes to drugs/augmentives like NR right now but I think the roots are definitely centered around the accumulation of this sort of extracellular junk and cytotoxin producing crap.  

 

There's a comment on there about red blood cell width, that's interesting.

[sthira]

Someone posted this on this thread but the post appears to be missing somehow:

http://onlinelibrary...acel.12557/full

Yes I posted it, don't know why it was removed though, I saw it on this fight aging post.

From the linked study, this:

"List of the 19 biomarkers used to define signatures. The biomarkers are grouped by functions. Biomarkers with generally increasing values with older age are labeled with an arrow pointing up, while biomarkers that generally decrease with older age are labeled with an arrow pointing down.

High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) ↑
Interleukin 6 (IL-6) ↑
N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) ↑
Absolute monocyte count (Abs.M) ↑
White blood cell counts (WBC) ↑

Inflammation biomarkers

Red blood cell distribution width (RDW) ↑
Transferrin receptor (Transf.R) ↑
Mean corpuscular volume (MCV) ↑
Hemoglobin (Hgb) ↑

Hematological biomarkers

Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ↑
Soluble receptor for advanced glycation end product (sRAGE) ↑
Adiponectin (Adip) ↑
Insulin-like growth factor (IGF1) ↓

Diabetes associated biomarkers

Total cholesterol (T.Chol) ↑ ↓
Lipid biomarker
Sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) ↑
Dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEA) ↓

Endocrine biomarkers

Albumin (Album) ↓
Creatinine ↑
Cystatin C ↑"

[Nate-2004]

With all those indicators one would think it'd be pretty simple to go by those to determine whether some sort of anti-aging solution is working. Then again the FDA won't let anybody develop anything specifically for anti-aging so that always stands in the way as they stand in the way of everything else including affordable healthcare.

[sthira]

With all those indicators one would think it'd be pretty simple to go by those to determine whether some sort of anti-aging solution is working. Then again the FDA won't let anybody develop anything specifically for anti-aging so that always stands in the way as they stand in the way of everything else including affordable healthcare.

Yes, of course I agree. FDA may be getting an upgrade soon, obviously though this is completely unpredictable in this peculiar moment in history.

The biomarkers listed are generally covered under a basic physical by your PCP (if you still have one) or you can just get these done on your own with direct-to-consumer outfits like LEF.

I feel like a broken record playing ad nauseam in the gusts, but fasting -- even short fasts -- tend to improve the biomarkers listed above. And for now, as far as I can see, fasting and CR are still the only choices on the block. But it looks like clearing senescent cells might be the first realistic anti-aging strategy to hit the market. Until then, pay a shit ton of money for a whole lotta speculation.

Edited by sthira, 13 January 2017 - 05:42 PM.

[Oakman]

With all those indicators one would think it'd be pretty simple to go by those to determine whether some sort of anti-aging solution is working. Then again the FDA won't let anybody develop anything specifically for anti-aging so that always stands in the way as they stand in the way of everything else including affordable healthcare.

 

Why is that? Why can't we say aging is a disease? If obesity can be termed a 'disease', and that's pretty much self inflicted, why not the degeneration aging causes that we have such a hard time controlling? Would seem a whole new universe of (money making) drugs could be pushed.. err...marketed to people by big pharma aka the FDA.

[Nate-2004]

 

With all those indicators one would think it'd be pretty simple to go by those to determine whether some sort of anti-aging solution is working. Then again the FDA won't let anybody develop anything specifically for anti-aging so that always stands in the way as they stand in the way of everything else including affordable healthcare.

 

Why is that? Why can't we say aging is a disease? If obesity can be termed a 'disease', and that's pretty much self inflicted, why not the degeneration aging causes that we have such a hard time controlling? Would seem a whole new universe of (money making) drugs could be pushed.. err...marketed to people by big pharma aka the FDA.

 

 

I agree, the FDA is such a rigid organization and protection racket in the guise of security theater that I don't think they'll ever come around to this way of thinking. It takes years to change their out dated, outmoded "policies", which means it's not a good system at all. Bad policies should change instantaneously once realized, but there's no incentive for that when it comes to monopolies of force.

[Nate-2004]

 

With all those indicators one would think it'd be pretty simple to go by those to determine whether some sort of anti-aging solution is working. Then again the FDA won't let anybody develop anything specifically for anti-aging so that always stands in the way as they stand in the way of everything else including affordable healthcare.

Yes, of course I agree. FDA may be getting an upgrade soon, obviously though this is completely unpredictable in this peculiar moment in history.

The biomarkers listed are generally covered under a basic physical by your PCP (if you still have one) or you can just get these done on your own with direct-to-consumer outfits like LEF.

I feel like a broken record playing ad nauseam in the gusts, but fasting -- even short fasts -- tend to improve the biomarkers listed above. And for now, as far as I can see, fasting and CR are still the only choices on the block. But it looks like clearing senescent cells might be the first realistic anti-aging strategy to hit the market. Until then, pay a shit ton of money for a whole lotta speculation.

 

 

I haven't heard of LEF but I'll have to look into that.

 

People have been fasting for centuries, for religious purposes and otherwise, and it hasn't extended their lifespans or youthspans to any considerable degree that would make the news. I don't see any value in CR and in fact, it just increases my misery and inability to think. Even intermittent fasting of the type that's only 16 hrs is incredibly difficult to achieve without destroying work performance and creativity and leaving me miserable till the time in which I get to eat and fuel my brain. The only thing on my mind when I'm fasting is food.

 

This thread is getting off topic here but I think the question has been answered. This is good.

Edited by Nate-2004, 13 January 2017 - 05:57 PM.

[sthira]

With all those indicators one would think it'd be pretty simple to go by those to determine whether some sort of anti-aging solution is working. Then again the FDA won't let anybody develop anything specifically for anti-aging so that always stands in the way as they stand in the way of everything else including affordable healthcare.

Why is that? Why can't we say aging is a disease? If obesity can be termed a 'disease', and that's pretty much self inflicted, why not the degeneration aging causes that we have such a hard time controlling? Would seem a whole new universe of (money making) drugs could be pushed.. err...marketed to people by big pharma aka the FDA.

Hopefully, Nir Barzilai's TAME study (remember that?) may move the needle to convince FDA that aging is indeed a disease. TAME is recruiting elderly subjects for a double-blind, placebo-control study to will test if metformin can delay the onset of multi-morbidities including cancer, CVD, T2DM, cognitive decline, and mortality. It's primary purpose, according to Barzilai, is "to convince the Food and Drug Administration to approve aging as an indication, and thus a target for future and even better medications."

Until then...

http://www.afar.org/natgeo/

[Oakman]

Of course the real reason it is virtually impossible to determine human longevity effects is that people live too long already, practically speaking, for studies to be conducted. Mice, fruit flies, rats, and worms have known lifespan ranges that are short and repeatable. People do not. Worse, some of our longest lived people boast of 'unhealthy' lifestyle choices as the reason they have lived so long.

 

Biomarkers are currently merely guideposts on the way to death, not stop signs. If they were, we would have answers, not questions, concerning longevity.

[sthira]

Of course the real reason it is virtually impossible to determine human longevity effects is that people live too long already, practically speaking, for studies to be conducted. Mice, fruit flies, rats, and worms have known lifespan ranges that are short and repeatable. People do not. Worse, some of our longest lived people boast of 'unhealthy' lifestyle choices as the reason they have lived so long.

Biomarkers are currently merely guideposts on the way to death, not stop signs. If they were, we would have answers, not questions, concerning longevity.

Yes, blood biomarkers are certainly guideposts only, and expensive and incomplete at best.

One of the beauties of the SENS approach to fighting aging is that it's attempting to figure out how to repair damage already done. Instead of running around in circles agonizing how to describe and alter our unimaginably complex human metabolism, just fix the damned damage.

[Nate-2004]

If SENS would focus more and more on crowdfunding all their projects I'd definitely be investing my money there rather than on speculative pills that may or may not do anything. I don't know why they've yet to find an enzyme that consumes lipofuscin or anything that breaks AGE crosslinks but if their problem is funding these efforts then they need to quantify how much it will cost to run a project and crowdfund the project.

[sthira]

If SENS would focus more and more on crowdfunding all their projects I'd definitely be investing my money there rather than on speculative pills that may or may not do anything. I don't know why they've yet to find an enzyme that consumes lipofuscin or anything that breaks AGE crosslinks but if their problem is funding these efforts then they need to quantify how much it will cost to run a project and crowdfund the project.

Researchers haven't found liposfuscin and AGE crosslink breakers worthy of publicity yet because it's hard to find them. Even with adequate funding it'd still be hard to find them. And we don't know what Calico is working on now; but Calico seems to be pursuing a course more in line with the topic of this thread: phind-uh-pharrma.

[Nate-2004]

 phind-uh-pharrma.

 

Huh?

 

One would think rich fat cat pharmacy CEO's would want to live longer.

[sthira]

It's repeated time and again that it's difficult to test whether an anti-aging solution works on humans because of the time it takes for a human to age.

I'm skeptical that there aren't easier, quicker ways to determine this, especially in older individuals. Are there not specific biomarkers that can be looked at?

If there were a much faster way to determine whether a certain substance is working, we could bypass most of the rat testing and get right down to human testing.

There have been a couple of teenagers recently who discovered ways to test for things like cancer with a hair sample and other simple ways to test for things. Surely with all we know now about telomeres, NAD+, etc, there's something that can be measured to determine whether someone is actually getting older biologically or not, even in the space of a few months.

What do you guys think?

My speculation only, obviously, but if we think about what Calico may be about (Google, AI, aging, basic biology) it's not a stretch that anti-aging drugs may be uncovered and developed by AI. Creating computer models similar to other science models, and with with the additional help of AI like Watson seems like the future. And who knows what's already been developed and tested in humans under their cloak.

[sthira]

phind-uh-pharrma.

Huh?

One would think rich fat cat pharmacy CEO's would want to live longer.

That's goofy wordplay.

And I'm sure many rich cat pharmacy CEO's indeed seek to live longer. Undoubtably they, their friends and family will receive the first therapies, either in the Japan, Europe or the US, or elsewhere. The fact that they'll be first isn't all bad news, though. They'll be guinea pigs, sorta, as we already see with CRISPR experimentation amongst the wealthy. Reportedly "many" are tinkering around with their genes, and eventually the sun will rise on their dark mystery searches, hopefully, and we'll all benefit. Dreaming, anyway, and trying to stay positive in a very frustrating spot.

[Oakman]

This is a GREAT START to the type of data I'd like to have on myself for reaping conclusions from my own n=1 efforts. Combine with a smartphone app, some graphing and detection alert system.. .

 

And really, my enthusiasm comes from having full instrumentation in my race car, and being able to "replay my race" in software (video, performance metrics) to help my track performance. It really does help.

 

Plus, when I'm cycling... my fitness app and HR monitor track/record geographic and biometric data to "replay my ride", again with the goal of maximizing performance and health. It's invaluable.

 

So with more extensive data from body biometrics, supplements, and exercise together, in suitable software, as in the article... "replay my health" would be available. And using AI, that data may just give the insight needed here. 

 

 

Edited by Oakman, 13 January 2017 - 09:54 PM.

[Nate-2004]

This is a GREAT START to the type of data I'd like to have on myself for reaping conclusions from my own n=1 efforts. Combine with a smartphone app, some graphing and detection alert system.. .

 

And really, my enthusiasm comes from having full instrumentation in my race car, and being able to "replay my race" in software (video, performance metrics) to help my track performance. It really does help.

 

Plus, when I'm cycling... my fitness app and HR monitor track/record geographic and biometric data to "replay my ride", again with the goal of maximizing performance and health. It's invaluable.

 

So with more extensive data from body biometrics, supplements, and exercise together, in suitable software, as in the article... "replay my health" would be available. And using AI, that data may just give the insight needed here. 

 

I would love to see more biometrics available in wearables especially the kind that are more accurate. I have an Apple Watch but it's not especially accurate with the heart rate, especially when working out and sweating. I could go for some kind of chip implant that communicates with my phone or watch. If anybody knows of one with all the afforementioned biometrics Sthira posted earlier that'd be awesome to have, including accurate heart rate, sleep quality, oxygen and other details.

[Valijon]

Oxygen saturation during hours of sleep would be great to install in a wearable device. Think of the millions who suffer with sleep apnea. Theyd benefit greatly from this information.

I'd love to see the FDA qualify aging as a disease. Can Crispr repair big time cellular damage or does this look to be science fiction for now? We are standing on the brink of real discoveries to slow aging. In a few years we should know what will work and what's a flawed idea. For now, I'll continue to chase substances that'll clear senescent cells and reduce inflammation at a cellular level while avoiding toxins and sugars.

Metformin, Dasatanib, and Rapamycin seem to carry the most promise for increasing healthspan and lifespan.