142 replies to this topic

[floret]

I started out at about 20 or 21 centimetres. That seems to be where I usually still am. But there are days when it is better. It is not the same day by day or even at different times of the same day. I'm not sure if this was always the case before or a new thing because I never used to measure the distance so much before.

[Colorow]

I am also trying the ALA drops.  I started a month ago and have been consistently using two drops in each eye twice daily.  They do sting badly for a few seconds.  I was never able to get a real handle on an objective evaluation of my vision but subjectively I feel I do not struggle as much as I did before and don't reach for my glasses as often.  I am cautiously optimistic.  I plan to continue and switch to pure R - ALA once this batch runs out (using Doctor's Best NA R ALA now).  I would like a more objective means of evaluating my vision but right now I think the focal point is too far for me to easily measure.

[hotbit]

I was never able to get a real handle on an objective evaluation of my vision but subjectively I feel I do not struggle as much as I did before and don't reach for my glasses as often.  I would like a more objective means of evaluating my vision but right now I think the focal point is too far for me to easily measure.

Indeed, it's difficult to measure the near point of vision when it's far away or if there are other conditions like astigmatism. You can try the following.
If you have glasses for reading with known power, measure the distance you see the best from. Use the equation I've put on WolframAlpha to calculate your near point of convergence:
https://www.wolframa...1/(D-d))-P)) =
 

D = 0.25, d =0.015, P=2.5, d+(1/((1/(D-d))-P)) =

Result: 0.58 (0.58m = 58cm)

In the above equation only change the values for D, d, and P in bold above before the last comma sign, and hit the 'enter' key.
d - For contact lenses d = 0, for glasses the distance between eyes and glasses is about 1.5cm i.e. 0.015m
D - is the distance to the object you are watching / reading; usually might be around 35 cm, but this is what you need to measure
P - P is the power of your lenses (in dioptres)
In the above example the nearest distance someone would see well in glasses is 25cm, his glasses are 2.5 dioptres and calculated real near point is 0.58m

You can also print:
https://www.tfpschemes.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/22/2019/08/Snellen-Eyesight-Chart.pdf

 

to check your eyes with Snellen chart from time to time.

 

 

I started out at about 20 or 21 centimetres. That seems to be where I usually still am. But there are days when it is better. It is not the same day by day or even at different times of the same day. I'm not sure if this was always the case before or a new thing because I never used to measure the distance so much before.

 

Maybe some variations are due to level of tiredness? Some vitamins and micro-nutrients levels? At ~21cm I wouldn't expect any huge short term changes. 1cm is a rather big 5% change in the vision distance convergence! So maybe 1-2cm per month is all you can expect, if the tratment works? Thinking loud
BTW On Internet 25 cm is often quoted as normal vision...
 

[Colorow]

Thanks!  Will work on this and try to get a better objective evaluation.  I am certainly happy subjectively!  Placebo can be a wonderful thing....

[hotbit]

 Placebo can be a wonderful thing....

 

Now on sale

https://theplacebolab.com/store

[hamishm00]

I am also trying the ALA drops.  I started a month ago and have been consistently using two drops in each eye twice daily.  They do sting badly for a few seconds.  I was never able to get a real handle on an objective evaluation of my vision but subjectively I feel I do not struggle as much as I did before and don't reach for my glasses as often.  I am cautiously optimistic.  I plan to continue and switch to pure R - ALA once this batch runs out (using Doctor's Best NA R ALA now).  I would like a more objective means of evaluating my vision but right now I think the focal point is too far for me to easily measure.

 

I would try and obtain a measuring device (i.e. carpenter / builder's measuring tape) and see what an object (like a supplement bottle, with black on white writing) looks like at 70cms. Keep checking on a weekly basis to see whether you can hit that distance. It's clear that these drops work, and it's possible that within a matter of weeks or months you will find you are within that range.

[StephCThomp]

I did manage to buy the ALA choline ester from Medkoo, at huge expense.  I guess that's the advantage of being older - can't see what I'm doing for [bleep], but can afford to pay for whatever it is   .

 

I mixed it in an NAC eye drop from a local compounding pharmacy at the rate used in Novartis studies or a fraction above.  I've clocked up a total treatment time of about 6 weeks, used twice per day (with occasional doses or days forgotten).  So far, I would say there are minor improvements only.  Slightly better menu reading perhaps, but not enough to make me change the glasses I choose for computer screens or staring into the fish tank to study small, cute critters.

 

I have about 10 days' worth left.  After that I will try Hamish's formula.

 

 

Edited by StephCThomp, 07 December 2020 - 02:03 AM.

[StephCThomp]

Hamish, is this what you used?  https://iherb.co/bqpNtaU (Link might not work?  It's the Doctor's Best  Stabilized R-Lipoic Acid with Bioenhanced Na-ALA that also contains Biotin.)

 

I can't see a pure R-ALA from Doctor's Best, at least not on iHerb.  I could use another brand, but given your success I'm inclined to do exactly as you did.  

 

(I actually have some pure R-ALA at home, but it's a stiff, gluey material, insoluble, very hard to work with.)

Edited by StephCThomp, 07 December 2020 - 02:46 AM.

[hamishm00]

Hamish, is this what you used?  https://iherb.co/bqpNtaU (Link might not work?  It's the Doctor's Best  Stabilized R-Lipoic Acid with Bioenhanced Na-ALA that also contains Biotin.)

 

I can't see a pure R-ALA from Doctor's Best, at least not on iHerb.  I could use another brand, but given your success I'm inclined to do exactly as you did.  

 

(I actually have some pure R-ALA at home, but it's a stiff, gluey material, insoluble, very hard to work with.)

 

Hi Steph, yes, that's what I am using.

[thomasanderson2]

@ hamishm00

 

Would the Doctor's Best formual with "Stabilized R-Lipoice Acie with Bioenhanced Na-ALA" be superior to simply using pure ALA?

What exactly is the difference?

I do see a relatively inexpensive and seemlingly high quality pure ALA powder here:

(NuSci Pure ALA RS- Alpha Lipoic Acid Powder)

https://www.amazon.c...PBND85PNM&psc=1

 

Also, is the NAC in the eyedrops important? 
Note that the current Life Extension "Brite Eyes" formulation contains no NAC, but rather only glycerin:

https://www.amazon.c...41BFBRZV7&psc=1

 

Yet, I do see an NAC eye forumla of another brand here:
(NAC Carnosine Eye Drops - Ethos Bright Eyes As Seen on UK National TV)

https://www.amazon.c...7EG9POOUF&psc=1

 

btw, easy to identify the pipette-sytle eyedropper you've suggested:

https://www.amazon.c...5F4IPT5A8&psc=1

 

@ StephCThomp

Congrats on being able to obtain and formulate the ALA choline ester from that site.Although not related to vision, I also was able to obtain an order of another "research" chemical from another lab (when others were having trouble) through my "medical research procurment contracting" business.

 

QUESTION:

Do we have any working theory as to why you were not realizing the benefits Novartis seems to be alluding to in its materials?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by thomasanderson2, 07 December 2020 - 04:48 AM.

[hotbit]

{...}

 

(I actually have some pure R-ALA at home, but it's a stiff, gluey material, insoluble, very hard to work with.)

 

I suspect your R-ALA has polymerized and now is not usable any more. This is why Na-R-ALA (and K-R-ALA) has been developed, to enhance stability (and bio-availability). R-ALA is barely soluble, anyway.

https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3588062/

 

@ hamishm00

 

Would the Doctor's Best formual with "Stabilized R-Lipoice Acie with Bioenhanced Na-ALA" be superior to simply using pure ALA?

What exactly is the difference?

I do see a relatively inexpensive and seemlingly high quality pure ALA powder here:

(NuSci Pure ALA RS- Alpha Lipoic Acid Powder)

https://www.amazon.c...PBND85PNM&psc=1

 

[...]

QUESTION:

Do we have any working theory as to why you were not realizing the benefits Novartis seems to be alluding to in its materials?

R isomer is naturally occurring one, during chemical synthesis you get both R and S (=D+L)versions of molecules at 50/50 ratio. Thus it's cheaper, but likely not as good as pure R and sometimes might have unwanted effects.

As for the other question, the eye is a very sophisticated biological mechanism and might be many reasons why it didn't work this time, assuming it works in general. Or maybe in some cases effects come faster and sometimes slower and simply more time is needed.

Edited by hotbit, 07 December 2020 - 05:59 AM.

[StephCThomp]

Thomas, the Brite Eyes does contain NAC, but for some reason it's listed on the 'Inactive ingredients' panel.

 

I don't have much of a theory for why I'm getting minimal results.  Maybe I should add some biotin     .  I do wonder how much might be neurological - a kind of habituation or dependency on glasses.  If I didn't have to function - as in read - every day, I would try going without glasses for an extended period + eye drops.

 

Either way, I'm going to try Hamish's recipe shortly and will report back.

[hotbit]

 

I don't have much of a theory for why I'm getting minimal results. 

 

Do you do any eyes exercises? I have the same hunch as @hamishm00 posted somewhere above about ciliary muscle. Like any muscle or organ it can perform at lower level than required. I've started to exercise my eyes a few months ago even before I have found this thread (which was about a month ago). I've noticed some small improvements due to exercises.

The following hypothesis might hold:

1) Ciliary muscle is weak and cannot relax or contract properly resulting in a too little change in the  shape of the lens.

2) ALA breaks sulphur bonds, but some molecules in the lens are 'stuck' and ciliary muscle has to loosen those molecules through squeezing the lens.

 

I do the following exercises:
1) Looking to a side, up or down changing direction every 2-3 s to work out extra ocular muscles and for better blood circulation in the eyes.

2) Change focus between close and far objects to work out ciliary muscle and lenses.
Maybe exercises would be most effective within 5-10 min after applying eye drops, this maybe could help ALA to spread better in the lens and in the ciliary muscle.

[zorba990]

I suspect your R-ALA has polymerized and now is not usable any more. This is why Na-R-ALA (and K-R-ALA) has been developed, to enhance stability (and bio-availability). R-ALA is barely soluble, anyway.
https://www.ncbi.nlm...les/PMC3588062/

R isomer is naturally occurring one, during chemical synthesis you get both R and S (=D+L)versions of molecules at 50/50 ratio. Thus it's cheaper, but likely not as good as pure R and sometimes might have unwanted effects.

As for the other question, the eye is a very sophisticated biological mechanism and might be many reasons why it didn't work this time, assuming it works in general. Or maybe in some cases effects come faster and sometimes slower and simply more time is needed.

So something like this is better pH balanced and water soluble ? https://nootropicsde...LRoCrisQAvD_BwE

[hotbit]

So something like this is better pH balanced and water soluble ? https://nootropicsde...LRoCrisQAvD_BwE

 

I've stumbled upon this product just yesterday

 

Looks like they offer pure Na-R-ALA, which could be the best option currently available (as per ALA type and no additives) and solubility would be great enough for our use case. ALA solution pH is, according to what I found, ~4.7, but Na-R-ALA solution I expect should be slightly alkaline (I couldn't find experimental value online). This is another advantage, as we want the eye drops to be around 7.2
EDIT. But Na-R-ALA solution (depending on concentration) might be 8 or 9 which is not great, either. Thus buffering required plus better to avoid high concentrations.

Edited by hotbit, 07 December 2020 - 06:34 PM.

[hamishm00]

@ hamishm00

 

Would the Doctor's Best formual with "Stabilized R-Lipoice Acie with Bioenhanced Na-ALA" be superior to simply using pure ALA?

What exactly is the difference?

I do see a relatively inexpensive and seemlingly high quality pure ALA powder here:

(NuSci Pure ALA RS- Alpha Lipoic Acid Powder)

https://www.amazon.c...PBND85PNM&psc=1

 

 

My working assumption is that the R-ALA enantiomer is potentially better, but I could be wrong, I doubt there is any way to know for sure. Pure ALA powder should be fine to use and I suspect it will be effective. What we need here is dihydrolipoic acid as I suspect both enantiomers, S and R, form this at the end of the day.

 

Also, is the NAC in the eyedrops important? 
Note that the current Life Extension "Brite Eyes" formulation contains no NAC, but rather only glycerin:

https://www.amazon.c...41BFBRZV7&psc=1

 

Yet, I do see an NAC eye forumla of another brand here:
(NAC Carnosine Eye Drops - Ethos Bright Eyes As Seen on UK National TV)

https://www.amazon.c...7EG9POOUF&psc=1

 

I used the NAC formula from LEF as i suspect it has been formulated to penetrate the cornea and through to the lens. I doubt the NAC will help with presbyopia, but may help with cataracts.
 

 

btw, easy to identify the pipette-sytle eyedropper you've suggested:

https://www.amazon.c...5F4IPT5A8&psc=1

 

 

That should work for sure, I've actually got a slightly shorter, hockey stick at the end, style pipette.

Edited by hamishm00, 11 December 2020 - 05:56 PM.

[Daniel Cooper]

You guys may have discussed this, but be careful using ALA supplements in capsules. They may contain fillers and flow agents like magnesium stearate and rice bran.  Check the labels.  

 

 

 

 

Edited by Daniel Cooper, 11 December 2020 - 06:57 PM.

[hamishm00]

You guys may have discussed this, but be careful using ALA supplements in capsules. They may contain fillers and flow agents like magnesium stearate and rice bran.  Check the labels.  

 

Yes, a downside. Most fillers seem to be insoluble in the mix I am using and I extract them before use. On my next batch, I'm switching to pure ALA powder which I would recommend to all. Pure Na-Rala powder might be superior, but hard and expensive to acquire, and potentially no additional benefit, who knows.

[hamishm00]

Ok, I tried pure ALA powder into a commercial eye drop solution that contained PEG-400, which could possible dissolve ALA - the outcome was very poor solubility. This will not work at all. ALA is not viable to use in eye drops, I don't see a way around this.

 

As Aconita has pointed out to me, the Na-Rala I am using is highly soluble in the types of eye drop solutions we are using (and will dissolve in water as well), and this is probably our best bet as the key ingredient to these eye drops. Preferable to obtain pure na-rala powder, which is what I will be looking to do in due course.

 

 

[floret]

I've been using a bottle of the stuff that says NaRala too. It might be my imagination but I think I'm seeing a lot more floaters lately.

[Colorow]

I experienced the same thing with 450 mg R ALA powder into 30 ml Artificial Tears.  I did warm the solution up ever so slightly and it did go into solution (mostly) and I am using the mixture.  It stings WORSE than NA R ALA.

 

I used the NA R ALA for a month twice daily and have subjective improvements.  I tried the great suggestions from other members to get a more objective evaluation but kinda failed (my own short falling, not the suggestions).

 

I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has purchased the LACE product if it stings less?  It does look like any improvements will be made with long-haul treatment and not many people will put up with the sting.  I am pretty determined :-) 

 

 

[StephCThomp]

Oh good looordy Hamish00 ... this stuff STINGS!     Could never be commercialised.  Getting a second drop in, past the tears and while my sinuses swelled in sympathy, was almost impossible! 

 

It's the eye rim that stings, rather than the eye ball.  Anyway, I will persist 

 

Colorow, the LACE sting is mild by comparison.  Quite manageable.  My formula, however, didn't work very well.  Now having bought the Brite Eyes to make Hamish00's NA-ALA recipe, I do wonder whether using that as a base for the LACE might have been more effective than the simple NAC eye drops that I used.  

 

 

 

[hamishm00]

Oh good looordy Hamish00 ... this stuff STINGS!     Could never be commercialised.  Getting a second drop in, past the tears and while my sinuses swelled in sympathy, was almost impossible! 

 

It's the eye rim that stings, rather than the eye ball.  Anyway, I will persist 

 

Colorow, the LACE sting is mild by comparison.  Quite manageable.  My formula, however, didn't work very well.  Now having bought the Brite Eyes to make Hamish00's NA-ALA recipe, I do wonder whether using that as a base for the LACE might have been more effective than the simple NAC eye drops that I used.  

 

 

Thanks for the feedback - I agree, the sting is a little strong, taking it outside of what the commercial mainstream would accept, but it's not that bad - I would suggest adding/titrating using water to a concentration level that you can bear. I suspect it will still be effective over time.

Interesting comments on the LACE, thanks for that.

[YOLF]

@ hamishm00

 

Would the Doctor's Best formual with "Stabilized R-Lipoice Acie with Bioenhanced Na-ALA" be superior to simply using pure ALA?

What exactly is the difference?

I do see a relatively inexpensive and seemlingly high quality pure ALA powder here:

(NuSci Pure ALA RS- Alpha Lipoic Acid Powder)

https://www.amazon.c...PBND85PNM&psc=1

 

Also, is the NAC in the eyedrops important? 
Note that the current Life Extension "Brite Eyes" formulation contains no NAC, but rather only glycerin:

https://www.amazon.c...41BFBRZV7&psc=1

 

Yet, I do see an NAC eye forumla of another brand here:
(NAC Carnosine Eye Drops - Ethos Bright Eyes As Seen on UK National TV)

https://www.amazon.c...7EG9POOUF&psc=1

 

btw, easy to identify the pipette-sytle eyedropper you've suggested:

https://www.amazon.c...5F4IPT5A8&psc=1

 

@ StephCThomp

Congrats on being able to obtain and formulate the ALA choline ester from that site.Although not related to vision, I also was able to obtain an order of another "research" chemical from another lab (when others were having trouble) through my "medical research procurment contracting" business.

 

QUESTION:

Do we have any working theory as to why you were not realizing the benefits Novartis seems to be alluding to in its materials?

 

The LEF "Brite Eyes" formula lists it in under other ingredients. So it's less than 2%, but not standardized.
 

[floret]

Mine doesn't sting so bad at all. I'm using the NA R ALA version, it stung bad the first few times but seemed to get better after that.

 

I've actually put it on hold for the time being due to realising that presbyopia is one of the outward biomarkers of aging that I can easily observe. Therefore, as long as it is not getting any worse with any meaningful speed, I want to set this treatment to the side for now and use the presbyopia (along with grey hair/wrinkles/other visible aging hallmarks) as a way to measure the effectiveness of the whole-body rejuvenation methods (various supplements) I'm trying out. I told myself I'd mess with all this stuff for a year and then at the end of that 12 months evaluate whether or not I'm any younger. :P

 

But these eye drops do work, if not dramatically for someone like me whose presbyopia is still mild. So I'll be going back to this if my other experiments do not work for it. Meanwhile I'll be watching this thread!

[hamishm00]

Mine doesn't sting so bad at all. I'm using the NA R ALA version, it stung bad the first few times but seemed to get better after that.

 

I've actually put it on hold for the time being due to realising that presbyopia is one of the outward biomarkers of aging that I can easily observe. Therefore, as long as it is not getting any worse with any meaningful speed, I want to set this treatment to the side for now and use the presbyopia (along with grey hair/wrinkles/other visible aging hallmarks) as a way to measure the effectiveness of the whole-body rejuvenation methods (various supplements) I'm trying out. I told myself I'd mess with all this stuff for a year and then at the end of that 12 months evaluate whether or not I'm any younger. :P

 

But these eye drops do work, if not dramatically for someone like me whose presbyopia is still mild. So I'll be going back to this if my other experiments do not work for it. Meanwhile I'll be watching this thread!

 

I doubt reversing the biomarkers of aging through whatever regimen you put in place will, even if successful, reverse the pace of presbyopia which is likely to march on regardless of anything you try to achieve longevity-wise. The formation of di-sulphide bonds in the lens seems to be linked to time in a way that can't be reversed other than by the method we've discovered here. 

[lrdmelchett]

I doubt reversing the biomarkers of aging through whatever regimen you put in place will, even if successful, reverse the pace of presbyopia which is likely to march on regardless of anything you try to achieve longevity-wise. The formation of di-sulphide bonds in the lens seems to be linked to time in a way that can't be reversed other than by the method we've discovered here.

That's an interesting point about using advancement of condition of presbyopia as a marker of how well anti aging regimes are working.

Are any of the anti aging substances shown to halt or reduce the production of advanced glycation products? I had thought that presbyopia has some involvement with these glycation products.

[zorba990]

Got the R-ALA stabilized powder yesterday. Put 1/8 tsp along with 1/8 tsp of n-acetyl-carnosine pure power from pure bulk in 4oz water spray bottle.
Zero stinging. Not sure if I am under dosing but thought I would try a weak spray first. Easier than eye drops though a bit messier as some of the spray goes on the skin.
I am using plain purified water but may switch to saline at some point. I am not sure what LEF puts into their drops but when I tried them the sting was brutal...

[hotbit]

Put 1/8 tsp along with 1/8 tsp of n-acetyl-carnosine pure power from pure bulk in 4oz water spray bottle.
Zero stinging. Not sure if I am under dosing

 

From what I found. ALA density is ~1.3g/ml (I expect Na-R-ALA is not far away from that, likely a bit higher), difficult to estimate the weight of 1/8 tsp, but I think it might be ~0.5g, not more than 1g. As 4oz is 113.6ml, you get concentration of around 0.4% maybe up to 1%.

 

You can buy a jewelry/home/"lab" scale for around $15 (with advertised 0.001g accuracy) to make more accurate solution concentration.
 

Edited by hotbit, 27 December 2020 - 10:16 PM.

[hotbit]

Still since last year waiting for my Na-R-ALA, I hope it's not lost in the sea... Thus no updates from me...