LONGECITY

 

I also wonder if this is normal, every time when I try the senolytic part of the protocol, which I take 2g Niacinamide + 2g D-Ribose + 2g TMG + 1g Curcumin, I feel weak, heart palpitation and headache for the rest of the day, sometimes through out the next morning. My blood pressure is always on the low side (<90/60 most of the time), heart rate is also on the low 50s.

 

That is not normal, and I suggest you cut back on the dosage. This is a geriatric protocol, and at your age of 51 you, have less need for senolytics.

That is not normal, and I suggest you cut back on the dosage. This is a geriatric protocol, and at your age of 51 you, have less need for senolytics.

I'm 63 yo. Does that qualify as geriatric? Just wondering as I was considering trying this protocol. I have been taking a diy homemade nad+ protocol plus rhodiola Rosea, Jiaogulan and glutamine.

I'm 63 yo. Does that qualify as geriatric? Just wondering as I was considering trying this protocol. I have been taking a diy homemade nad+ protocol plus rhodiola Rosea, Jiaogulan and glutamine.

 

I say it's a geriatric protocol because of the unknown long term effects of stimulating stem cells -- a do no harm issue. I began using C60 eight years ago at about your age. It was just a few weeks after the rat paper came out, and I noted significant positive effects that suggested stem cell activity. But with months and years there was a falling off, and even a reversal, thus I stopped for a time.  I suspected that I was depleting stem cells, and eventually realized I could restore them by manipulating SC mito morphology before activation with C60. It's a powerful method, but the number of people who have tried this is small, and my own experience with this in vivo SC proliferation goes back just a few years. I'd hate for young people to try this and end up depleting SCs that they'll need later, while gaining very little (as excess SCs will be destroyed by homeostatic mechanisms). But older people already have depleted SCs, so have little to lose. When you're going rapidly downhill, you can't wait for scientists to do proper animal studies. So I'm doing a self-experiment, and after 3 years I'm still quite pleased with it.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 28 August 2020 - 11:28 PM.

I say it's a geriatric protocol because of the unknown long term effects of stimulating stem cells -- a do no harm issue. I began using C60 eight years ago at about your age. It was just a few weeks after the rat paper came out, and I noted significant positive effects that suggested stem cell activity. But with months and years there was a falling off, and even a reversal, thus I stopped for a time.  I suspected that I was depleting stem cells, and eventually realized I could restore them by manipulating SC mito morphology before activation with C60. It's a powerful method, but the number of people who have tried this is small, and my own experience with this in vivo SC proliferation goes back just a few years. I'd hate for young people to try this and end up depleting SCs that they'll need later, while gaining very little (as excess SCs will be destroyed by homeostatic mechanisms). But older people already have depleted SCs, so have little to lose. When you're going rapidly downhill, you can't wait for scientists to do proper animal studies. So I'm doing a self-experiment, and after 3 years I'm still quite pleased with it.

 

This makes perfect sense. This is why, at 57, I have not done this protocol and have no plan to do so in the foreseeable future. I just don't need it at this time. It is comforting to know that this is available if and when I need it.

 

I have done the mito fission/fusion one and have done chelation with ALA, both of which have worked well for me.

I say it's a geriatric protocol because of the unknown long term effects of stimulating stem cells -- a do no harm issue. I began using C60 eight years ago at about your age. It was just a few weeks after the rat paper came out, and I noted significant positive effects that suggested stem cell activity. But with months and years there was a falling off, and even a reversal, thus I stopped for a time. I suspected that I was depleting stem cells, and eventually realized I could restore them by manipulating SC mito morphology before activation with C60. It's a powerful method, but the number of people who have tried this is small, and my own experience with this in vivo SC proliferation goes back just a few years. I'd hate for young people to try this and end up depleting SCs that they'll need later, while gaining very little (as excess SCs will be destroyed by homeostatic mechanisms). But older people already have depleted SCs, so have little to lose. When you're going rapidly downhill, you can't wait for scientists to do proper animal studies. So I'm doing a self-experiment, and after 3 years I'm still quite pleased with it.

I had a similar experience with c60 a couple of years ago. For the first few months I felt fantastic - even euphoric at times. However it gradually levelled of to nothing. So I quit taking it and started investigating alternatives.

I had a similar experience with c60 a couple of years ago. For the first few months I felt fantastic - even euphoric at times. However it gradually levelled of to nothing. So I quit taking it and started investigating alternatives.

 

Same here. I foolishly consumed several bottles of C60oo years ago and felt nothing. God only knows if I've done damage in the long term.

If VSELs are truly embryonic, then telomerase should be sufficient to avert telomere shortening. This telomere expression will be lost upon differentiation of course, due to epigenetic repression. So perhaps too many VSELs divide into two differentiating cells? Or some are lost through copying errors?

Symmetrical VSEL division (of the remainder) into 2 VSELs should be a solution to this.

As would be telomerase activation, though for the reason Turnbuckle gives, we'd ideally want only to activate telomerase in the VSELs. Interestingly there may be a way to do this, using TERC upregulation. This would only benefit cells that already have telomerase active.

For my part, I did some serious telomerase activation over the last year. I expect my VSELs benefited; this would be of a like benefit to increasing their numbers,only with a time delay, as with longer telomeres they will be able to expand to greater numbers. But because telomerase can (and was) activated in all downstream cells, epigenetic aging can result due to the expanded numbers of cells with various degrees of deranged methylation. And indeed this is what I experienced, age reversal as measured by telomere length, but an equal amount of extra epigenetic aging.

It's an open question whether this matters in the long run. So long as telomerase activation is ceased for long enough, the downstream cells will eventually be cleared, leaving the VSELs to benefit from a longer lease of life, if indeed they needed it.

Additionally, my experiment with telomerase activation did not seem to do me any harm: my workouts improved, and, if anything, I looked younger. But this was probably due to greater capacity for cell division. The cells themselves were not younger intrinsically (actually they were older).

I plan on seeing if I can reverse my epigenetic age, and then whether a balance can be found with telomerase activation. But I agree with Turnbuckle. For now I'd activate telomerase only once or twice a year until TERC activators become available as a better alternative.

On the protocol, as a relatively young person (41) I don't think senolytics would benefit me - I'd get the side effects without clearing many (if any) cells. But I like the idea of activating mTOR as a way of increasing cell turnover to get the expanded VSEL numbers to differentiate into the body. I have found branched chain amino acids (BCAAs) to be helpful for workouts and they boost my energy levels, which have been falling as I've used AKG and Turnbuckle's protocol.

What do you think, Turnbuckle?

Endoluten is a telomerase activator. And it must be taken 2 times a year. Additionally, it greatly enhances immunity.

"Vesugen" is a stimulator of symmetric stem cell division.

Perhaps the same role is played by royal jelly.

I do not understand why it is necessary to act with chemicals that are foreign to cells. It is quite possible to enhance the effect with synthetic peptides.The cell knows how to use peptides.
Edited by Kentavr, 30 August 2020 - 01:59 PM.

Here is a guy who has consumed c60 pretty much daily for 2.25 years, he seems to have dropped off  the grid since covid. If I recall he takes around 10ml a day and broke from it every now and then.

 

He does little else save a few vitamins and it is quite clear that he looks and sounds much healthier at a time of life when of course he would be like everyone else expecting decline:

 

His last: https://www.youtube....Plv_Q-MnoQ&t=0s

 

His first: https://www.youtube....5-aAuvttr4&t=0s

 

By now he should have worker his way through a few litres.

Here is a guy who has consumed c60 pretty much daily for 2.25 years, he seems to have dropped off  the grid since covid. If I recall he takes around 10ml a day and broke from it every now and then.

 

 

 

When people start taking a lot of something, it's often because it isn't working like it did before. And while C60 stimulates stem cells by (hypothetically) blocking UCP2 pores, somatic cells also have UCP2 pores, though not nearly so many. C60 will thus give the user an energy boost, regardless of their stem cell status. This boost, of course, is temporary.

When people start taking a lot of something, it's often because it isn't working like it did before. And while C60 stimulates stem cells by (hypothetically) blocking UCP2 pores, somatic cells also have UCP2 pores, though not nearly so many. C60 will thus give the user an energy boost, regardless of their stem cell status. This boost, of course, is temporary.

 

He is quite a steady character and as far as I know taken the same dose over the two and a quarter years. Naturally I've not seen all of his videos but diving in at various junctures the improvement is quite clear. He does represent an important account of c60 usage, he has dosed regularly, consistently and certainly appears the better for it. And while there are people on this forum who probably have used daily we certainly don't have access to reliable data. 

 

If when this started out 7-8 years ago we had that human data in hand, a vlog of Bob, we'd have been pretty excited. He is clearly more youthful in behaviour and appearance, this might in part have transitioned because of his engagement in the vlog. But his lines look less deep and bags less pronounced and he has taken a considerable amount - I am guessing you've taken no more than a litre in that time. I may have taken 3. I suspect Mikey has taken 30.

 

I do believe we should be trying to pool in accounts of those taking it for 7-8 years and perhaps raise some funds to do testing. If we can measure stem cell depletion on c60 users, then I would happily contribute financially. 

 

If there are individuals over 70 who've taken this regularly over many years doing extremely well then we should demonstrate some caution in our caution. It is such a shame the forum and interest in c60 died off - I'd be surprised if many of the early adopters aren't still taking in intermittently but we're all a rather disconnected group now. 

 

I do believe we should be trying to pool in accounts of those taking it for 7-8 years and perhaps raise some funds to do testing. If we can measure stem cell depletion on c60 users, then I would happily contribute financially. 

 

 

 

Why would you be interested in spending money on measuring stem cell depletion via C60? The thrust of this thread and this protocol is using C60 without depletion. There is still an unknown element, of course, but measuring those not using this method seems like a waste of time and effort.

 

Measuring stem cell depletion would be quite expensive, but indirectly measuring it with epigenetic age is relatively cheap--around a hundred dollars a test. 

Edited by Turnbuckle, 30 August 2020 - 06:32 PM.

Why would you be interested in spending money on measuring stem cell depletion via C60? The thrust of this thread and this protocol is using C60 without depletion.

 

Because the overwhelming majority of c60 users aren't using this protocol. If they are to be persuaded that c60 is harmful to long term health through the depletion of stem cells then this needs to be demonstrated rather than theorised.  Then we move on from conjecture, to either practicing abstinence or undertaking the kind of compensating protocol you have successfully adopted. And of course, I'm not precluding spending money demonstrating stem cell repletion either.

 

We could fairly easily secure a dozen long terms users from longecity and obtain  quite convincing data from that sample. 

Because the overwhelming majority of c60 users aren't using this protocol. If they are to be persuaded that c60 is harmful to long term health through the depletion of stem cells then this needs to be demonstrated rather than theorised.  Then we move on from conjecture, to either practicing abstinence or undertaking the kind of compensating protocol you have successfully adopted. And of course, I'm not precluding spending money demonstrating stem cell repletion either.

 

We could fairly easily secure a dozen long terms users from longecity and obtain  quite convincing data from that sample. 

 

 

Epigenetic age testing is the fastest and cheapest way to measure this. As long as you don't screw around with telomeres or methyltransferase, then the increased replacement rate of old cells by expanded stem cell pools will decrease epigenetic age. LongeCity already has a program for reimbursing members for epigenetic tests, in the forum AgingBiomarkers.

Edited by Turnbuckle, 30 August 2020 - 06:45 PM.

If long term c60 users came back with epigenetic ages that were not bad I doubt you would consider this as evidence that stem cell depletion hasn't occurred. There would be too many confounding factors in such a small sample to elicit confidence - they might eat a lot of dark chocolate, say. We need stem cell numbers. 

 

However, if long term c60 users like Bob did have poor epigenetic numbers then it at least would provide strong evidence of harm. I made a suggestion that I thought it would be good to contact and  test the guy in the video, Bob, as he is a very well controlled subject unlike most of us here. 

However, if long term c60 users like Bob did have poor epigenetic numbers then it at least would provide strong evidence of harm. I made a suggestion that I thought it would be good to contact and  test the guy in the video, Bob, as he is a very well controlled subject unlike most of us here. 

 

 

That doesn't work unless you take a baseline test. However, if anyone is interested, they could contact Bob and ask if he's seen any drop off.

That doesn't work unless you take a baseline test.

 

That's true but we might be able to reduce some uncertainty without a baseline test - such as if the numbers were really bad or pretty good, that would at least inform on c60/epigenetic age effects in a limited way. Also, too, of course he would make a great control for this protocol and if his epigenetic age is wanting then it might serve as encouragement to address it here.

Unfortunately, most C60 brands are guilty of misinforming users as their marketing presents C60 as the fountain of youth you’ve been missing out on. It was quite concerning to read the users feedback on Amazon with vast majority confirming daily long term consumption. 

 

Few month ago, I came across a C60 product From bioactivec60.com that was claiming 20x the bioavailability of C60 in EVOO. Their product is prepared in thin film mouth freshener form that quickly dissolves in the mouth. They claim the patent pending increased bioavailability means their 85mg per film dose is equivalent to the standard does of the EVOO C60 products. The portability and convenience claims are all true from my experience. If their bioavailability claims are true, then this is far more convenient than the EVOO concoctions.

 

I am 56 yo and after few cycles of fission/fusion, I now perform each of fission/fusion and Stem cell protocols once per month. Have not started the Alzheimer protocol yet but will do so in a year or two as I do have one APoE4.

 

Last but not least, a big thank you to TB and all those who have contributed to this thread.

Has anybody using the stem cell protocol or fission/fusion protocol noticed a reversal of age related issues. In my case its hair loss, needing reading glasses, and benign prostatic hyperplasia.

 

 

Few month ago, I came across a C60 product From bioactivec60.com that was claiming 20x the bioavailability of C60 in EVOO. Their product is prepared in thin film mouth freshener form that quickly dissolves in the mouth. They claim the patent pending increased bioavailability means their 85mg per film dose is equivalent to the standard does of the EVOO C60 products. The portability and convenience claims are all true from my experience. If their bioavailability claims are true, then this is far more convenient than the EVOO concoctions.

 

 

I went to the site but was unable to find any relevant info as to this 85mg per dose. Clearly it cannot be 85 mg of C60 per dose as they are selling 30 doses for $40. So that would be more than 2.5 grams, while SES is now selling C60 powder for $160/gram. As for bioavailability, the rat study showed that C60 dissolved in EVOO is highly available.

 

The site owner has received a warning letter from the FDA for marketing their product as a treatment for Covid19. They claim to have a special solvent that fully dissolves C60, and to prove it, they show a picture of a liquid with tiny particles (at 1000x there should be no visible particles) vs dry C60 powder, which is meaningless. It may be dispersed as the caption says, but it is evidently not dissolved.

 

So I don't believe any of it. While this is not the appropriate place to discuss vendors, more legitimate-seeming vendors of C60 have been discussed on various other threads. Here's one started by simthx -- https://www.longecit...supplier/page-1

Edited by Turnbuckle, 31 August 2020 - 04:44 PM.

Wouldn't lecithin cause a problem of TMAO?

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3086762/

 

 

Wouldn't there be another way to absorb stearic acid? I was thinking just warming it to render it liquid and mixing it with olive oil.

 

 

 

Wouldn't there be another way to absorb stearic acid? I was thinking just warming it to render it liquid and mixing it with olive oil.

 

Give mango butter a shot. It's a triglyceride that is mostly stearic and oleic acids. That compares favorably with food grade stearic acid, which is mostly stearic and palmitic acids. From Wikipedia:

 

Edited by Turnbuckle, 04 September 2020 - 10:24 AM.

 

Give mango butter a shot. It's a triglyceride that is mostly stearic and oleic acids. That compares favorably with food grade stearic acid, which is mostly stearic and palmitic acids. From Wikipedia:

 

 

Fatty acid Percent for Mango butter

Palmitic acid, C16:0 ... 5.5%

Stearic acid, C18:0 .... 40-45

Oleic Acid, C18:1 ....... 40-46

Linoleic Acid, C18:2 ... 3-4

Arachidic acid, C20:0.. 2-2.5

 

With its low melting point, you can eat it by the spoonful or add it to hot chocolate.

 

 

The problem with Mango butter is Oleic acid is monounsaturated. Because this is much more easily oxidised and broken down in the body than the long chain saturated FAs like Stearic and Palmitic acid, I doubt it would have the same effect on mitochondria as a SA/PA mix. 

 

I could be wrong, but this experiment is hard enough without changing too many variables. I'm as guilty as anyone in doing this. 

The problem with Mango butter is Oleic acid is monounsaturated. Because this is much more easily oxidised and broken down in the body than the long chain saturated FAs like Stearic and Palmitic acid, I doubt it would have the same effect on mitochondria as a SA/PA mix. 

 

I could be wrong, but this experiment is hard enough without changing too many variables. I'm as guilty as anyone in doing this. 

 

 

Food grade stearic acid comprises 40-60% stearic acid, with the balance palmitic acid, so it is only slightly better or equal in stearic acid content compared to mango butter, which has 40-45%. The main difference between food grade stearic acid and mango butter is the oleic vs palmitic acid content, and oleic is far healthier than palmitic. Furthermore, palmitates enhance mitochondrial fission, though more weakly than stearic acid promotes fusion.

 

These results implicate a possibility that a palmitate-mediated reduction in mitochondrial mass originates from an increase in mitochondrial fission, not a decrease in mitochondrial biogenesis...The major findings of the study are that oleate prevents the negative effects of palmitate on myotube atrophy and reduced mitochondrial ROS by oleate is at least a significant contributor to the prevention of palmitate-induced atrophy. https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC5602654/..

 

Edited by Turnbuckle, 04 September 2020 - 01:53 PM.

 

Give mango butter a shot. It's a triglyceride that is mostly stearic and oleic acids. That compares favorably with food grade stearic acid, which is mostly stearic and palmitic acids. From Wikipedia:

 

 

Fatty acid Percent for Mango butter

Palmitic acid, C16:0 ... 5.5%

Stearic acid, C18:0 .... 40-45

Oleic Acid, C18:1 ....... 40-46

Linoleic Acid, C18:2 ... 3-4

Arachidic acid, C20:0.. 2-2.5

 

With its low melting point, you can eat it by the spoonful or add it to hot chocolate.

 

 

It sounds like a good idea, I'll try it. The cocoa should be able to reduce the lipid peroxidation. Plus I'll add curcumin.

 

I saw this study where they told people to take 24g of stearic acid in a banana milk shake:

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC6081440/

 

 

 

Preparation of the banana shakes

For the C18:0 drink, 24 g of C18:0 intended for human consumption (stearic acid, Sigma-Aldrich W303518) were mixed with 100 ml of low-fat milk. This amount of C18:0 was selected by calculating the C18:0 content of a high fat meal19. The mixture was microwaved to emulsify the fatty acid. One small banana was added and the whole mixture was homogenized with a hand blender. The volume was completed to 250 ml with more low-fat milk. The mock drink was prepared the same way without fatty acids. For the C16:0 drink, 21.56 g (an equal molar amount to 24 g of C18:0) of C16:0 intended for human consumption (palmitic acid, Sigma-Aldrich W283207) was added instead. Milkshakes were prepared approximately 90 min before consumption.

 

In this study they used 24g, so I was wondering if the 10g of your protocol couldn't be increased. Also, they put the participants on a low fat vegan diet for 2 days at the beginning and after just those 2 days the mitochondria were significantly more fragmented. So that makes me wonder if your frequency of once a week couldn't be increased. Perhaps after 2-3 days the mitochondria return to the way they were before. 

The problem with Mango butter is Oleic acid is monounsaturated. Because this is much more easily oxidised and broken down in the body than the long chain saturated FAs like Stearic and Palmitic acid, I doubt it would have the same effect on mitochondria as a SA/PA mix. 

 

I could be wrong, but this experiment is hard enough without changing too many variables. I'm as guilty as anyone in doing this. 

 

10g of lecithin contain about 2g of PC.

 

The molar mass of choline is 104 and that of PC is 768:

https://pubchem.ncbi...ompound/Choline

https://www.sigmaald.../1/p3556pis.pdf

 

So unless I am mistaken ( which is very possible since I don't know squat about chemistry ), about 1/7.5 of the mass of PC is choline, so 2g of PC would have 250mg of choline.  Since the protocol is once a week I am probably worrying too much for nothing.

I'm still so grateful for this thread. Probably one of the best thread on the whole internet  (despite the fact my understanding is limited). 

 

Questions about the mango butter: is it why commercial health websites always say that it is so healthy ?

 

Is the stearic acid what makes the protocol a geriatric protocol, or is it the combination with the C60 ? In other words, is it recommended for people to consume stearic acid / mango butter in their daily diets ?

 

Thank you!

Edited by mister_blue, 04 September 2020 - 03:37 PM.

Food grade stearic acid comprises 40-60% stearic acid, with the balance palmitic acid, so it is only slightly better or equal in stearic acid content compared to mango butter, which has 40-45%. The main difference between food grade stearic acid and mango butter is the oleic vs palmitic acid content, and oleic is far healthier than palmitic. Furthermore, palmitates enhance mitochondrial fission, though more weakly than stearic acid promotes fusion.

My point is we don't know, so why change? I've only ever used pure (98%) stearic acid, and I don't seem to have benefited out of proportion to the majority using a SA/PA mix. So I doubt palmitic acid is as bad as they say. This is backed up by the fact palmitic acid is the fatty acid the body makes (from carbs) in the fatty acid synthesis pathway.

We have to be careful with interpretations of healthy and unhealthy as most commentators are clueless and government advice changes regularly.

My point is we don't know, so why change?

 

 

You are not required to change. You can do what you want. The question was asked about alternative ways to consume stearic acid, and I pointed out one.

https://forum.age-re...senescent-cells

 

On this site, a lowering of several years in age is being reported by using fisetin (mostly).   A degree of confirmation, thereby.

Came upon this thread after reading Mito Fission/Fusion thread by Turnbuckle. I think this might be more promising for my particular condition (Post Finasteride Syndrome/Post Accutane Syndrome induced epigenetic changes, especially in SRDa1, SRDa2 genes). But I have the same question I had when I read the Mito Fission/Fusion thread -

 

 

What am I allowed to eat during this protocol? I don't want to eat anything that could potentially interfere with fission/fusion so easiest thing to do would be to simply fast. Which is OK with me for this protocol. But for mito fission/fusion protocol that's a 5 day long protocol and there are reports that fasting actually interferes with fission so I'm still confused as to what I can eat/not eat. I don't need a long list of foods, just give me a few and I'll make sure to eat only those during fission/fusion. 

 

Is it OK to eat eggs on fission/fusion days? Given eggs are highly nutritious, I don't mind living on egg + bread + sunlight + mineral water for 5 days. 

 

Also, another question: it seems like Mango Butter is a suitable replacement for Steraic acid. I don't mind eating as much as needed. But can you please confirm Mango Butter (and how much quantity) can be eaten in both Stem Cell protocol and in Mito Fission/Fusion protocol?

Edited by userCK, 10 September 2020 - 06:22 PM.