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

Photo
- - - - -

I am a final year medical student. Supplements I take. Feedback on my stack appreciated.

supplements stack regimen endogenous

  • Please log in to reply
36 replies to this topic

#1 Thingsvarious

  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 12 December 2020 - 10:29 AM



renderTimingPixel.png

Here is a list of the supplements I take.

  • EPA/DHA: 2g/d

  • Vitamin D: 20.000iu/w

  • Magnesium: 400mg/prebed

  • Melatonin: 0.25mg/prebed

  • NAC: 2x 500mg/d

  • ALA: 2x 250mg/d

  • CoQ10: 150mg/d

  • TMG: 2x 1g/d

  • b-Alanine: 2x 400mg/d

  • L-Citrulline: 1000mg/d

  • L-Carnitine: 2x 500mg/d

  • Prebiotics: 5g inulin/acacia fiber + 5–10g psyllium/d

  • SAMe: 400mg/d

  • Taurine: 1g/prebed

  • Niacin: 2x 500mg/d

I know there are many antioxidants in my stack. Although I think the dosages are low/reasonable, what do you guys think? I am open for any criticism, feedback, different opinions. Humanity is all about collective learning :)

 

I wrote an article about why exactly I chose these supplements. You can read about my reasoning and the benefits of these supplements in detail here. I also did a ranking of these and a cost-benefit analysis at the end.

 

How much does it cost me? I do take all of them at rather low dosages, which costs me about 400$ per year. I for myself have 35 pillboxes. Every 5 weeks it takes me about 1 hour to prepare all of my drugs&supps for the following 5 weeks. I then swallow all of them with a glass of water, two times per day. This takes no thought and time whatsoever. However, if I had to take all of my supplements individually, it would take forever and suck.

 

Personal opinion (feedback appreciated): All of these molecules are endogenous (i.e. naturally occurring in our bodies) and are required for our cells to function. Thus, by definition, I am supplementing and not “adding”. Almost all of these have real, clinical evidence backing up their usefulness. In fact, as long as money or swallowing pills is not a problem for you, you might as well take all of them. Worst case scenario, we flush some money down the toilet.

 

Is my reasoning incorrect when it comes to supplements? What do you guys think?

 

Usefulness: Some for sure, some maybe, for some it depends.Harm/Risk: None?

Some of them are very important and everyone should take them (magnesium, Omega-3´s, vitamin D), whereas some others might lead to a favorable change in equilibria in a variety of processes (i.e., have a slight benefit). And at the end of the day 1$ is 1$. Depending on our diet and endogenous synthesis, supplementing with some of these might in fact be useless and superfluous, but because they are naturally occurring in our bodies, adding them at reasonable dosages at least does no harm (e.g. screw up drug metabolism, hepatic and renal injury, off-target effects). Given that our dosage is reasonable and our manufacturer reliable.

 

Why I don´t take "non-endogenous" supplements (feedback appreciated): I personally am against non-endogenous ("unnatural") supplements (e.g. ashwagandha, bacopa, etc.). A well-researched supplement (rare) that has been proven by multiple independent research groups (rare) to provide benefits without major adverse effects (rare), given it comes from a reliable manufacturer ensuring dosage and purity and consistency and quality (very, very rare), might indeed have (some of) the benefits a pharmaceutical drug has. For example, ashwaghanda might be one of the few that fits that description given it is from a reliable manufacturer that can ensure dosage, purity, consistency, quality. (I bet over 90% of manufacturer can´t and don´t.)

 

Personally, though I do not like to play roulette when my health is at stake. When it comes to supplements, I try to avoid anything that is not non-endogenous, but rather I opt for stuff for which there is no guessing game as to all of these unknowns (safety, efficacy, off-target effects, drug metabolism, potency, purity, consistency, quality). 
 

 

 



#2 TranscendingSingularity

  • Guest
  • 26 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Sofia

Posted 10 January 2021 - 12:04 PM

Why SAMe and TMG? Isn't methylation bad for epigenetic age?



sponsored ad

  • Advert

#3 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 15 January 2021 - 12:14 PM

Why SAMe and TMG? Isn't methylation bad for epigenetic age?

Well, DNA methylation is. However, just because more methyl groups are provided does not mean at all that the rate of DNA methylation, which is mostly a byproduct of DNA-repair, increases.



#4 Turnbuckle

  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 15 January 2021 - 03:27 PM

Why SAMe and TMG? Isn't methylation bad for epigenetic age?

 

 

Epigenetic aging comes not from methylation per se, but from where those methyl groups are. It's like a sheet of music. The pattern is far more important than the number of notes.


  • Agree x 1

#5 TranscendingSingularity

  • Guest
  • 26 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Sofia

Posted 23 January 2021 - 11:43 AM

Epigenetic aging comes not from methylation per se, but from where those methyl groups are. It's like a sheet of music. The pattern is far more important than the number of notes.

 

Thanks for clarifying. So what is all the hype with epigenetic age about?



#6 Turnbuckle

  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 23 January 2021 - 01:42 PM

Thanks for clarifying. So what is all the hype with epigenetic age about?

 

The epigenetic code is what makes multicellular life possible. Humans have 200 cell types. All have the same DNA, but are distinguished by 200 different epigenetic codes that tell cells what unique mix of proteins to make. As the codes become scrambled with age, they start making the wrong mix and become increasingly dysfunctional. Restore the codes and you restore youth.


Edited by Turnbuckle, 23 January 2021 - 01:44 PM.


#7 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 04 February 2021 - 07:58 AM

The epigenetic code is what makes multicellular life possible. Humans have 200 cell types. All have the same DNA, but are distinguished by 200 different epigenetic codes that tell cells what unique mix of proteins to make. As the codes become scrambled with age, they start making the wrong mix and become increasingly dysfunctional. Restore the codes and you restore youth.

 

True, thanks for clarifying. However, it is unlikely that an increased supply of methyl groups would result in increased DNA-methylation



#8 Turnbuckle

  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 04 February 2021 - 10:32 AM

True, thanks for clarifying. However, it is unlikely that an increased supply of methyl groups would result in increased DNA-methylation

 

 

There is a new field called Nutriepigenomics in which this is being studied. Both hypermethylation and hypomethylation are possible, and aberrant methylation is a hallmark of aging and other diseases.

 

Aging and age-related diseases include defined changes in 5-methylcytosine content and are generally characterized by genome-wide hypomethylation and promoter-specific hypermethylation. These changes in the epigenetic landscape represent potential disease biomarkers and are thought to contribute to age-related pathologies, such as cancer, osteoarthritis, and neurodegeneration.

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3482848/

 

 

Mitochondrial DNA can also become methylated, and it's only a few years now that anyone realized this was possible. This will reduce ATP output, which can cause and exacerbate diseases.

 

Distribution and dynamics of mitochondrial DNA methylation in oocytes, embryos and granulosa cells

In a broader context, the major role of mitochondria is to provide ATP, and their functionality is therefore closely related to metabolism. With respect to reproductive biology, mtDNA sequences encoding RNR1, RNR2 and ND4 as well as the D-loop region have been found significantly hypermethylated in porcine oocytes in association with PCOS, indicating that abnormal activation of one-carbon metabolism and hypermethylation of mtDNA may contribute substantially to mitochondrial malfunction and decreased oocyte quality40.

https://www.nature.c...598-019-48422-8

 


Edited by Turnbuckle, 04 February 2021 - 11:11 AM.


#9 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 08 February 2021 - 11:10 AM

There is a new field called Nutriepigenomics in which this is being studied. Both hypermethylation and hypomethylation are possible, and aberrant methylation is a hallmark of aging and other diseases.

 

 

Mitochondrial DNA can also become methylated, and it's only a few years now that anyone realized this was possible. This will reduce ATP output, which can cause and exacerbate diseases.

Thanks for sharing! Very interesting.



#10 TranscendingSingularity

  • Guest
  • 26 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Sofia

Posted 27 February 2021 - 01:58 PM

There is a new field called Nutriepigenomics in which this is being studied. Both hypermethylation and hypomethylation are possible, and aberrant methylation is a hallmark of aging and other diseases.

 

 

Mitochondrial DNA can also become methylated, and it's only a few years now that anyone realized this was possible. This will reduce ATP output, which can cause and exacerbate diseases.

 

I now found the time to read about this in more detail, thanks. What are some biomarkers one could use to accurately test methylation? Any good way to quantify it?



#11 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 14 March 2021 - 04:15 AM

I now found the time to read about this in more detail, thanks. What are some biomarkers one could use to accurately test methylation? Any good way to quantify it?

I don´t think we are anywhere near to fully understand methylation status. It is similar to the microbiome: lots of research but not much clear-cut actionable stuff we can do



#12 TranscendingSingularity

  • Guest
  • 26 posts
  • 3
  • Location:Sofia

Posted 30 March 2021 - 12:45 PM

I now found the time to read about this in more detail, thanks. What are some biomarkers one could use to accurately test methylation? Any good way to quantify it?

 

To note: I recently found out that in quite a lot of trials in rodents, methionine consistently reduces lifespan. It appears that there might be reasons to avoid increasing methylation in e.g. diet.



#13 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 13 April 2021 - 04:50 AM

To note: I recently found out that in quite a lot of trials in rodents, methionine consistently reduces lifespan. It appears that there might be reasons to avoid increasing methylation in e.g. diet.

The reason methionine reduces lifespan is because it is an activator of the mTOR-complex. This is the whole point behind BCAAs



#14 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 13 April 2021 - 01:14 PM

 

 

  • EPA/DHA: 2g/d

  • Vitamin D: 20.000iu/w

20,000 i vitamin D.  Oh just noticed, the w, so it's once a week.

 

I think collagen is a good supplement, as it is very rich in glycine which helps clear methionine from the body, mimicking a lower methionine diet.

 

As for resveratrol not only has it increased the lifespan of yeast, worms, flies, short lived fish, obese mice, mice with senescence accelerated mutations, mice with several mitochondrial defect mutations, but in some studies it has also increased the lifespan of normal mice too.

 

Resveratrol has also been shown to reverse near senescence from actual human cells, doubling telomere length and allowing the cells to look and behave as if they were young cells again.

 

 

 

Resveratrol In Red Wine Might Prevent Weakening of Astronauts’ Muscles https://www.medicald...-muscles-439205
Research published in the journal BMC Complementary & Alternative Medicine found that resveratrol is helpful in mitigating radiation-induced small intestine injuries, as it counteracts cell apoptosis and other forms of DNA damage. https://radiation.ne...astronauts.html
Resveratrol increases bone mineral density and bone alkaline phosphatase in obese men: a randomized placebo-controlled trial https://pubmed.ncbi....h.gov/25322274/
Scientists have thought for a while that resveratrol might be able to protect your brain from the effects of Alzheimer’s. A recent study showed that daily doses of resveratrol did slow down the progress of the disease. https://www.webmd.co...heimers-disease

 

Resveratrol, a phytoalexin found in grapes and other food products, was purified and shown to have cancer chemopreventive activity in assays representing three major stages of carcinogenesis. Resveratrol was found to act as an antioxidant and antimutagen and to induce phase II drug-metabolizing enzymes (anti-initiation activity); it mediated anti-inflammatory effects and inhibited cyclooxygenase and hydroperoxidase functions (antipromotion activity); and it induced human promyelocytic leukemia cell differentiation (antiprogression activity). https://pubmed.ncbi....ih.gov/8985016/
"Surprisingly, resveratrol opposed 947 (92%) of age-related changes in gene expression, and 522 of these represented highly significant differences in expression between the old control and old resveratrol groups (P≤0.01). Thus, resveratrol at doses that can be readily achieved through dietary supplementation in humans is as effective as CR in opposing the majority of age-related transcriptional alterations in the aging heart. Because the collection of such alterations in gene expression is a biomarker of aging, our results imply that similar to CR, middle-age onset resveratrol supplementation at low doses is likely a robust intervention in the retardation of cardiac aging." https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC2386967/
 
Some mice experiments failed to produce life extension, as have some experiments. But as Sinclair commented exposing resveratrol to light inactivates it, if the resveratrol was given in water exposed to light, the experiment would fail, as would improper dosing.

That said alot of resveratrol is from japanese knotweed which has significant emodin content, emodin is said to be detrimental to telomere integrity and also is a laxative, high purity seems a must in resveratrol supplements.

 

 

I think astaxanthin from algae is also a promising compound.    There are many well known brands with algae facilities, that would seem to actually produce the ingredient from algae and deliver it to you.     If you know about the connection between membrane lipid peroxidation and aging, and how resistance to peroxidation can explain differences in lifespan with similar metabolic rates, this compound looks very promising.   It has also been shown to activate several longevity genes, iirc.

 

Will add that while not 100% convinced of high dose vitamin c, the things I've read so far make it sound as another very promising supplement.


Edited by Castiel, 13 April 2021 - 01:23 PM.


#15 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 01 May 2021 - 09:25 AM

20,000 i vitamin D.  Oh just noticed, the w, so it's once a week.

 

I think collagen is a good supplement, as it is very rich in glycine which helps clear methionine from the body, mimicking a lower methionine diet.

 

As for resveratrol not only has it increased the lifespan of yeast, worms, flies, short lived fish, obese mice, mice with senescence accelerated mutations, mice with several mitochondrial defect mutations, but in some studies it has also increased the lifespan of normal mice too.

 

Resveratrol has also been shown to reverse near senescence from actual human cells, doubling telomere length and allowing the cells to look and behave as if they were young cells again.

 

 

That said alot of resveratrol is from japanese knotweed which has significant emodin content, emodin is said to be detrimental to telomere integrity and also is a laxative, high purity seems a must in resveratrol supplements.

 

 

I think astaxanthin from algae is also a promising compound.    There are many well known brands with algae facilities, that would seem to actually produce the ingredient from algae and deliver it to you.     If you know about the connection between membrane lipid peroxidation and aging, and how resistance to peroxidation can explain differences in lifespan with similar metabolic rates, this compound looks very promising.   It has also been shown to activate several longevity genes, iirc.

 

Will add that while not 100% convinced of high dose vitamin c, the things I've read so far make it sound as another very promising supplement.

 

The glycine from collagen is worth a lot as most diets are deficient in glycine.

 

With resveratrol, I believe most of the research is mainly about revenue generation. When they tested the effects of resveratrol independently on longevity, they found absolutely no benefits in normally fed mice. I explain my thoughts in more detail in the article linked above



#16 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 12:17 PM

The glycine from collagen is worth a lot as most diets are deficient in glycine.

 

With resveratrol, I believe most of the research is mainly about revenue generation. When they tested the effects of resveratrol independently on longevity, they found absolutely no benefits in normally fed mice. I explain my thoughts in more detail in the article linked above

Yes there are some tests where resveratrol did not lengthen normal mice lifespan.

 

Could be dosing?  Could be light oxidation, if it is put on water or any clear surface exposure to light can damage and inactivate it.   It also needs fats for proper absorption.   Not sure if all tests that failed had proper dosing fat present and lack of exposure to light.   Think the need for fat wasn't known when some of these tests were carried out.

 

Also resveratrol is NAD+ dependent for function, as it works mainly through sirtuins that need NAD+, and NAD+ declines with age.   Resveratrol alone is not the same as Resveratrol + NAD+ boosters like apigenin or nicotinic acid.   In some rodent experiments resveratrol had extreme activation of telomerase in young rodents, but the activation of telomerase decreased with age.   The reason for this is not fully known, but could very well be due to NAD+ declines with aging.

 

Also there have also been later experiments where resveratrol did lengthen the lifespan of normal mice on normal diet.



#17 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,837 posts
  • 720
  • Location:Austria

Posted 01 May 2021 - 04:17 PM

Why I don´t take "non-endogenous" supplements (feedback appreciated):[/size] I personally am against non-endogenous ("unnatural") supplements (e.g. ashwagandha, bacopa, etc.). A well-researched supplement (rare) that has been proven by multiple independent research groups (rare) to provide benefits without major adverse effects (rare), given it comes from a reliable manufacturer ensuring dosage and purity and consistency and quality (very, very rare), might indeed have (some of) the benefits a pharmaceutical drug has. For example, ashwaghanda might be one of the few that fits that description given it is from a reliable manufacturer that can ensure dosage, purity, consistency, quality. (I bet over 90% of manufacturer can´t and don´t.)
 
Personally, though I do not like to play roulette when my health is at stake. When it comes to supplements, I try to avoid anything that is not non-endogenous, but rather I opt for stuff for which there is no guessing game as to all of these unknowns (safety, efficacy, off-target effects, drug metabolism, potency, purity, consistency, quality).

 
To me that is a very distorted perspective about supplements. Supplements are in most cases just concentrated food-compounds, with naturally huge variation in dose, purity or quality. With which its possible to get an extra edge otherwise only possible with over-eating. But on such a roulette and huge variation the human health has actually evolved with. Along with the mircrobiome, which depends on 'impruities' and diversity.
 
On the other hand you completely distort the risks of taking natural supplements to the really high risks of taking pharmaceuticals, the human body never encountered before to metabolize in their pathented synthesized forms.
 
Just as an example, aspirin alone in the US might cause 60 deaths a year. Something all vitamins, minerals and phytonutrient supplements couldn't accomplish in decades the US poisoning monitoring is in place.
 
EU_Bubbles_Graph_2012_9_July_01.jpg
 
UK_Relative_Risks_2D_2012_9_July_01.jpg


Edited by pamojja, 01 May 2021 - 04:37 PM.

  • Informative x 1

#18 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 10 May 2021 - 07:07 PM

 
To me that is a very distorted perspective about supplements. Supplements are in most cases just concentrated food-compounds, with naturally huge variation in dose, purity or quality. With which its possible to get an extra edge otherwise only possible with over-eating. But on such a roulette and huge variation the human health has actually evolved with. Along with the mircrobiome, which depends on 'impruities' and diversity.
 
On the other hand you completely distort the risks of taking natural supplements to the really high risks of taking pharmaceuticals, the human body never encountered before to metabolize in their pathented synthesized forms.
 
Just as an example, aspirin alone in the US might cause 60 deaths a year. Something all vitamins, minerals and phytonutrient supplements couldn't accomplish in decades the US poisoning monitoring is in place.
 

 

Very informative. Food for thought, I certainly agree. Do you have any specific recommendations on my protocol and/or thoughts what you think may be harmful (e.g. too many antioxidants)?

Best wishes



#19 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,837 posts
  • 720
  • Location:Austria

Posted 10 May 2021 - 08:49 PM

Do you have any specific recommendations on my protocol and/or thoughts what you think may be harmful (e.g. too many antioxidants)?
Best wishes


Actually think for your age you've got a very balanced and not at all excessive intake of really essential nutrients. Wished would have been that intelligent when young myself. Could have avoided me a lot of trouble (and money) later on.

It of course always depends on preconditions. Personally now I experiment and try to adjust my intakes to feed-back from repeated lab-testing. In the case of antioxidants for example with oxidized LDL (oxLDL), to see if it isn't overdone. 25(OH)D for vitamin D, serum retinol, or omega-3 index for fish-oil.

I'm sure you have your reasons, but probably you don't need that much NAC, ALA or SAMe yet?

On the other hand you might benefit from some essential minerals, like zinc or selenium (can also be tested for). Balancing the relatively high niacin with a B-complex, a little K2 with the D3. And in our toxic world at least some vitamin C.

As already said, always depending on risk-factors, symptoms and lab-results.
  • Informative x 1

#20 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 14 May 2021 - 01:24 PM

Actually think for your age you've got a very balanced and not at all excessive intake of really essential nutrients. Wished would have been that intelligent when young myself. Could have avoided me a lot of trouble (and money) later on.

It of course always depends on preconditions. Personally now I experiment and try to adjust my intakes to feed-back from repeated lab-testing. In the case of antioxidants for example with oxidized LDL (oxLDL), to see if it isn't overdone. 25(OH)D for vitamin D, serum retinol, or omega-3 index for fish-oil.

I'm sure you have your reasons, but probably you don't need that much NAC, ALA or SAMe yet?

On the other hand you might benefit from some essential minerals, like zinc or selenium (can also be tested for). Balancing the relatively high niacin with a B-complex, a little K2 with the D3. And in our toxic world at least some vitamin C.

As already said, always depending on risk-factors, symptoms and lab-results.

 

Thank you for your feedback.

 

I will get my oxLDL checked out, never have before, thank you!

 

I decreased dosages of NAC (now 600mg), ALA (250mg) and SAMe (200mg).

I do already take zinc (15mg) and selenium (100mcg), a b-complex, and vit C (500mg). Mentioned in the article at the bottom. 



#21 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 15 May 2021 - 09:06 PM

Thank you for your feedback.

 

I will get my oxLDL checked out, never have before, thank you!

 

I decreased dosages of NAC (now 600mg), ALA (250mg) and SAMe (200mg).

I do already take zinc (15mg) and selenium (100mcg), a b-complex, and vit C (500mg). Mentioned in the article at the bottom. 

 

I would also suggest investigating AMLA, the indian gooseberry.   The stuff seems quite powerful.   Can apparently reduce Total Cholesterol, and LDL, while increasing HDL.   Can lower CReactive protein.   Some say can help with blood pressure. Can also lower blood sugar levels to normal range.


  • Needs references x 1

#22 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 18 May 2021 - 11:32 AM

I would also suggest investigating AMLA, the indian gooseberry.   The stuff seems quite powerful.   Can apparently reduce Total Cholesterol, and LDL, while increasing HDL.   Can lower CReactive protein.   Some say can help with blood pressure. Can also lower blood sugar levels to normal range.

Thanks for your feedback.

In general I do not like herbal supplements.

I explain my line of thought here: Why you should choose drugs instead of supplements.



#23 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 18 May 2021 - 12:49 PM

Thanks for your feedback.

In general I do not like herbal supplements.

I explain my line of thought here: Why you should choose drugs instead of supplements.

well you don't have to take the extract.   You can take the powdered amla, which I believe is just the powdered fruit but I could be mistaken.   Or you could take whole indian gooseberry fruits, they are sold in indian groceries for very cheap.  This is no different than eating blueberries or strawberries.

 

I don't like taking green tea extracts because there have been some issues, and the extract making process varies from company to company and can vary from time to time in the same company.   But that does not mean I don't take tea or matcha.   In moderation those have proven safe and effective and I wouldn't consider such herbal supplements.

 

Studies have shown that chamomile tea drinking women have significantly lower mortality.    And people are taking action to lower their epigenetic age and their age on various clocks like aging.ai which have strong correlation with all cause mortality, iirc.    Trying to alter dozens of parameters massively with large multidrug combos will lead to severe side effects in the best case, a dietary approach with a few high grade supplement can achieve this while keeping all parameters including liver and kidney function info within not just reasonable ranges but at more youthful ranges.   Medicine teaches that worsening blood parameters, within those expected with aging, and physiological changes expected with aging is normal and shouldn't be treated, despite this increasing chances of disease, lower quality of life, and increasing chances of dying.

 

Like parsley flakes, those are pieces of plant leaves, but they are a seasoning not a herbal extract.

 

edit:

Will read your article.

 

But note that if a fruit can lower blood sugar, can lower cholesterol, can lower blood pressure, can lower creactive protein, etc.  With no known side effects vs a collection of drugs for blood pressure, for cholesterol, for inflammation, for blood sugar, with known potential for serious side effects, and even mild side effects in many cases.   Things from brain and muscle damage, to digestive issues and cardiac problems.   Well the choice is quite clear.

 

EDIT:

Read article as for dirty unselective effect of natural compounds, you have to recall that even plants are like 50~% genetically similar to us, they share many of the same metabolic pathways, energy production mechanisms, and cellular mechanisms.  Often they produce molecules that might harm say insect, but in many cases these also help the plants cells at a molecular level altering dozens or hundreds of pathways, often these same beneficial effects also happen in animals.   Also some have said that plants produce indicators of environmental stress and incoming famine, animals are hypothesized to have evolved to sense these signals and ramp up body defenses in expectation of incoming famine similar to calorie restriction.   There are many substances that are called calorie restriction mimetics.   It is seen that a diet high in vegetables and fruits is highly beneficial and increases healthspan while lowering mortality, and this is despite being filled with carcinogenic and hormone altering synthetic pesticides,   organic has even higher nutrient with lower contaminants.

 

I will say that the supplement industry does need improvement in quality and regulation.   There are labs like consumerlabs testing and showing decent brands with good potency having the right ingredients and nothing else at the right dose.   But we need reputable independent agencies testing regularly and making this data publicly known for free.    That alone if highly publicized would be nearly as effective as regulation.  If I was a billionaire I'd provide such service for free for the betterment of humanity, through a foundation dedicated to such with a decent investment fund to back it up and donation drives.  If someone is very charismatic alternatively even with small net worth and has good connections with reputable supplement makers they could get together and get this going perhaps with donation drives.  Or alternatively given a large number of americans take these and many are beneficial, the government could step up and establish an agency to do frequent testing of all supplements on market, that would be a bit expensive but far better than regulation.

 

The problem with regulation is that there have been cases of simple vitamins or supplements far surpassing the benefits of multiple drugs without side effects, and this has resulted in FDA raids of reputable supplement makers and an attempt to legislate regulation into a point that their doses are made ineffective or the supplement industry is simply regulated out of existence for competing with big pharma.  On the other side there are some sleazy companies that want little regulation to throw garbage out.   It is a balancing act, some more regulation could be used, but big pharma shouldn't lobby to outlaw doses or supplements that simply outcompete them in all regards from safety to effectiveness.

 

EDIT2:  Note that this is not medical advice, just an opinion and observation


Edited by Castiel, 18 May 2021 - 01:31 PM.


#24 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 18 May 2021 - 06:32 PM

A nice video discussing amla vs statins head by head

 

 

the above also shows how some insects receive significant improvements and extension of lifespan from its intake.

 

A second video talking of the cheap superfood amla.

 

The Best Food For High Cholesterol - YouTube

 

 

 

As for other superfoods, other than indian gooseberries, like dark chocolate, in the other thread we were discussing evidence for caffeine and possibly theobromine being telomerase activators.   The oldest woman on record is said to have ate like 2 pounds of chocolate a week, iirc.   Maybe it had no effect but given the importance of telomeres to aging, and the fact she's the record holder by a significant margin, it  seems plausible to suggest her high cacao intake might have benefited her rather than harmed her.

 

EDIT:

Unlike Aubrey, who seems to believe the longer lived an animal the more interventions are needed, I have a very controversial contrarian position.   I say the longer lived an animal is the closer it is to negligible senescence, aka biological immortality, the smaller the number of genetic changes needed to accomplish this.    It may not be possible but it is conceivable that even an intervention with several drugs or nutraceuticals could nudge gene expression just enough to move humans into that state, given our already exceptional longevity.   We already know mice neurons can live twice as long as mice themselves do, and neurons are hypothesized to potentially be biologically immortal in the right host and environment. As early as the evolution of rodents at least it seemed nature had to figure out the cellular immortality cheatcode in animals.  Even the decaying environment in humans doesn't stop a majority of neurons from reaching 120+ years far in excess of the average lifespan.   So we do have the genes for cellular immortality, they're just inactive or more likely just less active than optimal throughout the body(practically all cells share the neuron's genes, as practically all have the whole genome inside, with few exceptions, and those exceptions are disposable cells easily replaced, iirc.).

 

That said given we lack robust regeneration, any animal even if they appear negligible senescent, will eventually suffer from cell depletion somewhere especially from accidents, etc.    Activating cellular immortality throughout the body, may allow for lifespan of centuries, hypothetically speaking.   But eventually more interventions will be needed to achieve truly indefinite lifespans.


Edited by Castiel, 18 May 2021 - 07:09 PM.


#25 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 18 May 2021 - 09:41 PM

 

 

When Jeanne Calment died in 1997 at age 122, Guinness World Records –certified, reporters recounted her secret to longevity: a diet that included more than two pounds of chocolate a week, as well as the occasional glass of Port wine, and lots of olive oil. -thecut

Though some question her record, I'm not entirely settled on whether her record is bogus or legit.

 

REFERENCE to prior claim

 

An interesting quote.

 

 

 

She used to ate two lbs. of chocolate per week until her doctor persuaded her to give up sweets at the age of 119.

The Oldest Woman (ucdavis.edu)

 

 


Edited by Castiel, 18 May 2021 - 09:50 PM.


#26 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 19 May 2021 - 09:55 AM

Regards plant rich diets, I found this from the other thread curious

 

 

One thing shocking I heard in the first video of this article (https://microbiomepr...or-healthy-gut/) is, that western guts usually contain about 1000 strains of bacteria, Hadza Hunter/Gatherer 3000, and formerly uncontacted Yanomani even 4000. What an extinction event right in each of us!-pamojja

 

 

Diet. The number of plant types in a person’s diet plays a role in the diversity of his or her gut microbiome—the number of different types of bacteria living there. No matter the diet they prescribed to (vegetarian, vegan, etc.), participants who ate more than 30 different plant types per week (41 people) had gut microbiomes that were more diverse than those who ate 10 or fewer types of plants per week (44 people). The gut samples of these two groups also differed in the types of molecules present...The participants who ate more than 30 plants per week also had fewer antibiotic resistance genes in their gut microbiomes than people who ate 10 or fewer plants  http://ucsdnews.ucsd...ats-in-your-gut

 

 

That suggests that the ancient hunter gatherers, if we extrapolate, might have eaten dozens of types of plants, if we hypothesize the hunter gatherers and the Yanomani are indicative of past human gut flora with their diverse intestinal bacteria and also the more plant more diversity findings can be combined.


Edited by Castiel, 19 May 2021 - 09:56 AM.


#27 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 26 May 2021 - 08:29 AM

 

TyrRS's activation of PARP-1 led, in turn, to the activation of a host of protective genes including the tumor-suppressor gene p53 and the longevity genes FOXO3A and SIRT6...The team's experiments showed, however, that the TyrRS-PARP-1 pathway can be measurably activated by much lower doses of resveratrol -- as much as 1,000 times lower -- than were used in some of the more celebrated prior studies, including those focused on SIRT1. "Based on these results, it is conceivable that moderate consumption of a couple glasses of red wine (rich in resveratrol) would give a person enough resveratrol to evoke a protective effect via this pathway," Sajish said.

Why would resveratrol, a protein produced in plants, be so potent and specific in activating a major stress response pathway in human cells? Probably because it does much the same in plant cells, and probably again via TyrRS -- a protein so fundamental to life, due to its linkage to an amino acid, that it hasn't changed much in the hundreds of millions of years since plants and animals went their separate evolutionary ways. "We believe that TyrRS has evolved to act as a top-level switch or activator of a fundamental cell-protecting mechanism that works in virtually all forms of life," said Sajish.-https://www.scienced...41222111940.htm

 

Another example of the benefits of some plant compounds even at low doses obtainable from food like from red wine.

 

 



#28 Thingsvarious

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 92 posts
  • 20
  • Location:Munich

Posted 05 June 2021 - 05:25 AM

Another example of the benefits of some plant compounds even at low doses obtainable from food like from red wine.

Well, you would have to eat/drink these foods in ungodly aamounts (e.g. 2000l of wine for a biologically active dose of resveratrol)



#29 Castiel

  • Guest
  • 374 posts
  • 86
  • Location:USA

Posted 05 June 2021 - 10:38 PM

Well, you would have to eat/drink these foods in ungodly aamounts (e.g. 2000l of wine for a biologically active dose of resveratrol)

For some of the actions of resveratrol yes but not for all the benefits

 

 

however, that the TyrRS-PARP-1 pathway can be measurably activated by much lower doses of resveratrol -- as much as 1,000 times lower -- than were used in some of the more celebrated prior studies, including those focused on SIRT1. "Based on these results, it is conceivable that moderate consumption of a couple glasses of red wine (rich in resveratrol) would give a person enough resveratrol to evoke a protective effect via this pathway," Sajish said.


sponsored ad

  • Advert

#30 thompson92

  • Registrant
  • 61 posts
  • 18
  • Location:USA

Posted 06 June 2021 - 03:31 PM

Why I don´t take "non-endogenous" supplements (feedback appreciated): I personally am against non-endogenous ("unnatural") supplements (e.g. ashwagandha, bacopa, etc.). A well-researched supplement (rare) that has been proven by multiple independent research groups (rare) to provide benefits without major adverse effects (rare), given it comes from a reliable manufacturer ensuring dosage and purity and consistency and quality (very, very rare), might indeed have (some of) the benefits a pharmaceutical drug has. For example, ashwaghanda might be one of the few that fits that description given it is from a reliable manufacturer that can ensure dosage, purity, consistency, quality. (I bet over 90% of manufacturer can´t and don´t.)

 

 

 
1.  I don't understand why you regularly take melatonin.  How old are you that you think your own endogenous melatonin production is so diminished that you need to replace it with supplementation?  I can understand if you were a shift worker or dealing with jet lag intermittently.
 
2.  I don't understand your concept of 'non-endogenous' supplements.  Humans do not make Vitamin C.  Is that non-endogenous under your definition?  Sulforaphane is a highly researched hormetic phytochemical that probably has enormous benefits in upregulating endogenous antioxidant pathways.  It has been validated in the lab and there are supplements produced from reliable manufacturers that adhere to dosage and quality levels.  Personally, I'd rather take a broccoli-supplement assuming I had sufficient mineral and vitamin amounts through diet or a multivitamin.  I don't have time to write a dissertation on sulforaphane.  But why wouldn't this be a fairly good risk/reward approach or how is this lack of endogenous even relevant? 
 
See:  Xenohormesis by Howitz, et al.
 
Howitz, K., & Sinclair, D. (2008). Xenohormesis: Sensing the Chemical Cues of Other Species. Cell133(3), 387-391. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.04.019

 


  • Informative x 1
  • Agree x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: supplements, stack, regimen, endogenous

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users