2352 replies to this topic

[lost69]

I have never tried the SES product.  

 

I suppose one could try SES as well as my new source of C60 gelcaps and compare if there are any differences.

 

I take 6 gelcaps for 4.0 mgs of C60, although it would probably be fine to use 5 gelcaps for roughly 3.2 mgs of C60.

 

i used many of the most reputable c60 reputable products, i found best results from  SES 99,95% purity,  carbon60oliveoil.com/ 99.99% purity and greska c60 oliv oil and i didn t feel any difference among these products. greska might be the most safe as they declare an extraction method without chemicals, nano sized so best absorption and 3rd party tested

Edited by lost69, 06 January 2026 - 04:45 PM.

[mitomutant]

Open question

 

Can this whole protocol be replaced by just urolithin A (very expensive as of today though) ? AFAIK the whole idea of the protocol was to induce mitophagy via the PINK1/Parkin pathway, and it seems that urolithin A does it

 

generated from scholar AI; edited for clarity

The last paragraph only applies to my specific condition (mtDNA common deletion)

 

urolithin A has been shown to restore mitophagy signaling even in contexts where mutant or dysfunctional mitochondria fail to initiate degradation, making it a strong therapeutic candidate for mitochondrial myopathies and mtDNA mutation-associated dysfunctions.

 

Mechanistically, urolithin A (UA) acts upstream of PINK1/Parkin, enhancing mitochondrial turnover and reactivating suppressed mitophagic signaling cascades. In C. elegans and mammalian muscle models of mitochondrial dysfunction, UA treatment restored defective mitophagy and improved mitochondrial quality by activating AMPK and inhibiting mTOR, which collectively promote autophagosome formation and lysosomal fusion (Andreux et al. 2019; Luan et al. 2021).

 

Recent human studies support its translational potential: UA supplementation in older adults increased the mitophagy transcriptional signature (PINK1, BNIP3, LC3-II) and improved endurance and mitochondrial respiration (Liu et al. 2022). A 2024 mechanistic review notes that UA enhances mitochondrial quality control by promoting selective removal of defective organelles, even when canonical PINK1/Parkin signaling is insufficient (Jolly et al. 2024).

 

However, direct studies on mtDNA-mutant mitochondria specifically are still limited. While UA restores general mitophagic flux and improves bioenergetic performance, whether it preferentially targets mutant over wild-type mitochondria remains unproven. Some computational models predict that improving mitophagy kinetics—regardless of selectivity—could slow mtDNA clonal expansion, aligning with this compound’s effects (Ghosh & Kumar 2024 ).

 

Andreux et al. 2019

https://www.nature.c...2255-019-0073-4

 

Luan et al. 2021

https://www.science....anslmed.abb0319

 

Liu et al., 2022

https://jamanetwork....bstract/2788244

 

Jolly et al., 2024

https://www.gethealt...a-and-mitophagy

 

Ghosh & Kumar, 2024

https://www.mdpi.com/2571-6980/5/4/26

 

 

 

[bullGenteel]

I never followed IGF11 on Quest's long thread because as I said I am not to keen in trusting myself with chemistry and dosing and needles. I remember reading that at too high of a microdose it can somehow degrade or enhance IGF 8 instead of IGF11 to be pro aging.

I wouldn't know about any risks or any of the details as I said. I thought he reported that reaction speeds could be improved through its use. I assumed the same reaction test that was used for basis of a disgenics theory using comparisons of reaction speeds today to thpse recorded by a cousin of Charles Darwin to estimate intelligence. I strongly expect that if reaction speeds are improved that would bring one's own reaction speed back to a younger baseline not to a levels recorded in Victorian times. I heard working memory peaks at 16, if that is correlated with reaction times of such a test.

I plan to update my results of doing questforlife's progentor proliferation protocol. I am on the tail end and I have noticed some impressive results this time around. My progress had plateaued after 4 to 6 intense c60 protocol attempts. I would say my continued progress seems to be on par with what I experienced with each of my stem cell protocol attempts.

I'd expect continued improvement for a few more rounds of this new protocol and then I have some ideas based mostly of Quest's proposals and some of my observations from when I haphazardly experimented with senyiotics.

[bullGenteel]

I assume that Turnbuckle is working on improving this protocol and his other protocols.

I probably need to research more, not sure if that will result in any substantial improvement on my part. I am sure I don't have things particular straight in my understanding. I do have some concerns with myself in experimenting with lactic acid and even glycerol and lactate. Turnbuckle already mentioned in an update that they can promote glycosis and pyruvate in the Krebs cycle.

I was considering for the future how it was suggested that turnbuckle might combine the c60 and mitochondira protocols. I just thought I would leave a consideration. It is clear that uplatching and even fusion and fission can occur within minutes to hours. But I was also researching that certain forms of angiogensis can manifest in minutes to hours. It sounds like angiogenesis can be healing or otherwise based on context. Lactic acid and other agents could promote angiogensis. I pressume if the doses are proportionate to be used up in the krebbs cycle than excess agents may not end up be used for something unintentional. The fumaric acid atleast doesn't enhance glycosis. In some cases it could cause apostosis to colon cancer cells but cancer is complex.

I imagine if someone combined c60 and enhanced mitogensis/mitofusion that colon cancer could be susceptible due to wayward stem cell promotion. I did read that fasting can make the colon somehow highly sensitive to carcinogens and potential unhealthy growth in the presence of stem cells, perhaps because of high turnover of cells there.

I wonder if sodium acetate might be useful in downlatching and uplatching. Just picking one that might have some anti-tumor effects. I may recall turnbuckle mentioned most sodium salt derivatives could be used in place of lactate or glycerol. I am just guessing in a layman's term that downlatching causes a bottleneck or something by addition of fuel to Krebs cycle. Niacinimide I believe adds fuel thru Nad+ but in high doses it leads to down regulation and fission.

To keep it simple for my own understanding and just some considerations since I don't have a science or medical background. But sodium acetate I read can be useful to also to treat colorectal cancer in high enough doses which might be useful for this protocol. Perhaps a keto diet with some way to increase butyrate to offset some of the risk around potential angiogensis and unhealthy growth could be something to consider. I don't know but I think I would feel more comfortable using fumaric acid and perhaps sodium acetate but atleast fumaric perhaps on its own.

[kurt9]

Turbuckle is indeed working on improved protocols. He has two waiting in the wings. The first is a variant of this one that he says reverses sarcopenia, and its a true reversal because it does not require you to be on it permanently. The second is something that reverses skin aging by boosting satellite cells. He has filed patents on this one and will publish once those go through (about two years). So yeah, we're looking at serious age reversal in the next few years.

[DJSwarm]

Interesting work breaking ... LinkGevity has developed LINK-001 as an anti-necrotic, supposedly it consists of "two FDA compounds which have other uses" which together prevent the necrotic damage done to cells from aging and space. More at https://www.uclscien....com/articleb57 of course since it is just two already approved drugs they are hiding the names as hard as they can but I did dig up some possibilities.

 

AI research warning! None of this is suggested. It just speculation for discussion, I'll seriously frown at anyone stupid enough to just start popping pills.

 

Its known they used AI to screen possible Ca++ blocker (what causes the cell to explode) and had been also working with Necrostatin-1s (Nec-1s) for inhibiting RIPK1/3 (a key driver of necroptosis), but that is not approved for human use ... but there are other RIPK1 inhibitors used in cancer. So it has to be a different approved drug that has been discovered to have "off-target" or secondary anti-necrotic/kinase-inhibiting properties (potentially certain anti-inflammatory or oncology drugs), rather than Necrostatin-1s itself.

 

 

So pretty good bet its a Ca++ blocker +  RIPK1 inhibitor.

 

Doing my on AI candidate search some possibilities surfaced...

 

Calcium (Ca²⁺) Channel Modulation

 

Mechanism: In necrotic cell death, stressed cell membranes become permeable, allowing an "uncontrolled" influx of calcium from the extracellular space into the cytoplasm. This calcium surge triggers destructive enzymes that lead to "tissue rot".

 

Probable Drug Class: One component is likely a calcium antagonist (calcium channel blocker). Clinical studies have long suggested that certain calcium antagonists (like amlodipine or verapamil) can prevent calcium-flux-induced necrosis by inhibiting ion entry into mitochondria.

 

Necroptosis/Necrosis Inhibition

 

Mechanism: This component prevents the formation of "pores" in the cell membrane that would otherwise lead to total cell rupture. It blocks the RIPK1/RIPK3/MLKL pathway, which is responsible for forming the "necrosome"—a complex that punches holes in the cell membrane from the inside out.

 

Possible Repurposed Kinase Inhibitors: Some FDA-approved cancer or anti-inflammatory drugs, such as certain Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors or specialized tyrosine kinase inhibitors (e.g., Sunitinib derivatives), have shown off-target RIPK1 inhibitory activity and are candidates for repurposing. 

 

Most Likely Candidate: Phensuximide

 

Phensuximide is an FDA-approved anticonvulsant that was recently identified (2025) as a potent and specific inhibitor of RIPK1 kinase activity. 

 

 

 

Similarity to Nec-1: Computational screening of over 10,000 drug-like molecules found that Phensuximide is structurally similar to Necrostatin-1 and binds to the same key functional domains on the RIPK1 protein.

 

Mechanism: It stabilizes RIPK1 in its inactive conformation, preventing the autophosphorylation required to trigger necroptosis.

 

Clinical Potential: In animal models, it has demonstrated "robust and consistent protection" against systemic inflammation and tissue damage (like that seen in kidney injury).

 

Several cancer drugs are well-known to inhibit RIPK1 or RIPK3 as an off-target effect. These are frequently used in research as the "clinical versions" of necrostatins:

 

Pazopanib (Votrient): An FDA-approved drug for renal cell carcinoma that has been identified as a potent inhibitor of RIPK1.

Ponatinib (Iclusig): Approved for leukemia, this drug is a "dual inhibitor" that targets both RIPK1 and RIPK3, making it even more potent than Nec-1s in some cell models.

Sorafenib (Nexavar): Another multi-target TKI that blocks both RIPK1 and RIPK3. It has shown protective effects in models of kidney ischemia-reperfusion injury, similar to the goals of LinkGevity's program

 

Other Noteworthy Repurposing Candidates

 

Vemurafenib (Zelboraf): A BRAF inhibitor used for melanoma that was found (2023) to be an effective RIPK1 antagonist, binding to a distinct hydrophobic pocket to stabilize the protein in an inactive state.

Quizartinib (Vanflyta): Recently identified as a highly effective inhibitor of RIPK1 at low concentrations, showing protective effects against systemic inflammatory responses in mice.

Phenytoin: A common anti-epileptic medication that, like Phensuximide, belongs to the hydantoin class (the same class as Nec-1) and has been shown to inhibit RIPK1 and protect against ischemia-reperfusion-induced kidney injury.

 

Any biochem wiz want to comment?

 

Anyway it looks so promising there was scuttle-butt that Britain plans to add it as soon as possible to the NHS

[bullGenteel]

I did check Google AI and it saved that lactic acid reacts to release a hydroxyl atom. That will induce a high level of mitochondria fission. I do experience a lot more benefits when I used lactic acid. Funny that I suggested sodium acetate as a fission agents to replace lactic acid because it may be anti colon cancer. I guess if you mix lactic acid and baking soda you get sodium acetate. Lactic acid and baking soda are like 10 bucks, so I just saved myself time and money if it would pair well with lactate.

Ill probably try it tomorrow since I need to always keep up on optimization of my mitochondria for brain injury recovery Now I wish I hadn't skipped chemistry class in high school to raise my Dark alchemists Yu gi oh rankings. Technically, alchemy is the forerunner to chemistry anyways.

I wouldn't reccomend lactic acid since it can induce cancer. I plan to do some serious anti-cancer protocols and hope for the best. I know just enough to be dangerous, I guess I shouldn't have skipped biology classes either. I also read that glycerol can be anti-cancer in some contexts, if I remember. It is used after colon pollops removal as an ointment/prophylactic or what have you. Lactate is is a base atleast, which is better than an acid which may counter tumorgenisis acidic nature. Not a medical proffesional as I always try to emphasize.

Edited by bullGenteel, 19 January 2026 - 04:25 AM.

[Advocatus Diaboli]

AI says:

 

Lactic Acid and Cancer, Scientific Perspective:

 

The claim that lactic acid induces cancer is not accurate based on current scientific understanding. However, lactic acid plays a significant role in existing cancer progression.

Cancer cells often produce large amounts of lactic acid through a process called aerobic glycolysis (the Warburg effect). This lactic acid:

• Acidifies the tumor microenvironment, which helps cancer cells evade the immune system and promotes metastasis.

• Suppresses immune cell function, particularly T-cells, allowing tumors to grow unchecked.

• Serves as an energy source for some cancer cells and supports tumor resistance to therapy.

Importantly, lactic acid is a byproduct of cancer metabolism, not a cause of cancer initiation. There is no evidence that external lactic acid (e.g., from exercise or skincare) induces cancer.

Edited by Advocatus Diaboli, 19 January 2026 - 08:18 AM.

[Mind]

AI says:

 

Lactic Acid and Cancer, Scientific Perspective:

 

The claim that lactic acid induces cancer is not accurate based on current scientific understanding. However, lactic acid plays a significant role in existing cancer progression.

Cancer cells often produce large amounts of lactic acid through a process called aerobic glycolysis (the Warburg effect). This lactic acid:

• Acidifies the tumor microenvironment, which helps cancer cells evade the immune system and promotes metastasis.

• Suppresses immune cell function, particularly T-cells, allowing tumors to grow unchecked.

• Serves as an energy source for some cancer cells and supports tumor resistance to therapy.

Importantly, lactic acid is a byproduct of cancer metabolism, not a cause of cancer initiation. There is no evidence that external lactic acid (e.g., from exercise or skincare) induces cancer.

 

This is an important point that occurs in many discussions about anti-aging and/or rejuvenation treatments. Anything that promotes metabolism or helps cells grow/stay healthy, is also going to "help" cancer cells. This does NOT mean that the intervention/treatment is bad, just that if you have cancer or have a high risk of developing cancer (hereditary) it is something to consider.

[bullGenteel]

I believe I used that prompt to say lactic acid doesn't cause cancer. I know cancer can be way to complex to say anything for certain. I'm still worried about having taken lactic acid, but I almost talked myself into trying again.

Lactic acid may promote angiogensis and it seems subtle in the distinctions of analysis in whether it does not directly cause cancer or not, but it favors an acidic and immune suppressing environment that could generate tumors.

Even sodium acetate can be said to promote cancer in high doses. That may be in the context of food preservatives. Is that only in the combination of preserved meats? In small doses, produced by bacteria, it has anti tumor properties. Would high doses of pure sodium acetate on it's own be safe or risky?

I think other more informed users admit all bets can be off if one has cancer. I guess sodium acetate in the body breaks down into acetic acid and hydrogen atoms. Some studies say these substances can lead to apostosis of cancer cells. Hydrogen water may be even better but not in context of mitochondria fission.

I read that high doses of hydrogen ions can cause mitochondria fission or distress which can be anti cancer or anti-tumor in nature. I can see hydrogen ions may make the mitochondira inner membrane more permeable like turnbuckle states. Perhaps in some cases excessive fragmentation or fission can disrupt cancer. Unlike what Kelvin suggested in a previous post; I don't think I would take chances lightly.

I did use carnitine and agmatine to try reduce glycosis. Apparently acetic acid can disrupt cancer metabolic status, and is complemented by a glycolsis inhibitor 3-(bromopyruvate).

[bullGenteel]

I decided to postpone an experiment with sodium acetate today. It seems easy to mix 1--2 teaspoons of baking soda with 1-2 teaspoons of lactic acid. I still don't know if I trust lactic acid and I'm not sure if sodium acetate on it's own would be better choice.

I know lactic acid did seem to be a strong fission activator which seemed to bring greater results for mitochondria. I think sodium acetate might be as effective.
Even the much stronger PH of lactic acid compared to acetic acid by-product produced by sodium acetate, the later would cause much less irritation to the colon walls. Irritation and inflammation isn't healthy in the long run.

Too be honest I did notice some bright red blood off and on in my stool. But that has happened sporadically, even before taking the lactic acid. It has only occured in connection with my probiotic yougart. I take about 2 to 4 different strains of homemade yougart. When I noticed the side effect the most was only when I really screwed up 2 batches. I did continue to take it even though it obviously failed. I have made bad batches on and off and would partake anyways on a short term basis.

I don't always make best decisions. But this side effect would go away when I fixed the new batches and took prebiotics. I could be screwing up my gut from multiple causes. I also feel quite better with cottage cheese + flax seed with prebiotics.

I have the additonal concern with using so much c60 oil over the past year. A study was shared in the c60 thread about photo sensitivity of c60 to potentially convert tpa carcigen in some way, if I recall.

***edit: I feel quite a bit slowed down today. I forgot to take agmatine as a cog itinerary booster to compensate for effects from a brain injury****

***edit 2: I doubt I could figure out this problem satisfactorily enough to put my mind at ease with this experimental protocol***

Edited by bullGenteel, 19 January 2026 - 11:16 PM.

[bullGenteel]

I believe the last 2 replies may be mostly right. I think I took too high of dose of lactic acid anyways. It might cause some irritation, over time I suppose. I did try a smaller dose of 1 teaspoon compared to 2.5, I took previously. I didn't experience any real discomfort. I chased it with water and rinsed my mouth with baking soda.

I did experience the enhanced fission feeling compared to just taking glycerol. But I recall experiencing slightly more intense fission feeling at the higher dose. I imagine you could take 1 teaspoon and wait an hour or two and take another. The feeling mostly dissapated after about 2 hours.

If I wrap my head around it an acidic environment around the cells, that or an acidic PH extracellular around tumor cells may actually result in an alkaline intracellular or extracelluar that is anti-tumor. Doing heavy mitchondira fission may disrupt tumors mitochondria. Combined Blocked glycosis can also enhance that. I took agmatine and carnitines before I. The fusion phase, but I don't know that it is as powerful of an glycolisis inhibitor as a pyruvate substrate mentioned in research. Maybe I had a sorta half formed good observation.

I wonder if this enhanced fission could be done a few times a week at night to be anti-cancer. I havent tried it but it definitely makes me sleepy and I can suffer from insomnia at times. But for it to be more effective anti-cancer it would need to combine a glycolis inhibitor that can be used for fission. I don't know, but might hazard a guess that glycosis inhibitors promote fusion. Since I believe keto is a glucosis inhibitor, sp they may all be pro fusion in nature.

Also the lactic acid and baking soda doesn't result in sodium acetate. So that's not reccomeneded. I'd have to buy it, if I decide to experiment with that one. Baking soda and lemon makes sodium Citrate, which has some research for anti cancer but may cause fusion in mitochondria.

Edited by bullGenteel, Today, 05:24 AM.

[bullGenteel]

So cancer is really complex and too complex for me to figure out. I read low level fission can promote metastasis and tumor growth. Fusion may slow growth of tumors.

Excessive fission could be anti-tumor still. Perhaps an excessive overnight fission protocol could be anti-cancer, but I am not one with expertise to suggest changes to protocols. I guess fission can cause cells to upregulate glycosis, and fusion may promote glycosis.

But some glycosis inhibitors promote fusion and some promote fission. Bromopyruvate used with acetic acid for fission or some other mechanism of action has some promise to fight cancer. It was paired with acetic acid to promote apostosis of cancer cells.

I remember olive leaf extract was used on fission days in Turnbuckle's original alzhimer's protocol becuase it reduces aggregates but does not promote fusion. That's why I used it sometimes when I would use the sauna when fasting. I think I also believed 500mg of taurine would help and not hinder fission too much, since fasting promotes fission.

I know if I was doing some protocol or fasting, limiting what supplements I could take; I would feel a hit to cogntion after the sauna. I have had a milder moderate brain injury. So sauna may mobilize brain aggregate plaques. Heat shock proteins may offer a little protection but not enough in my experience. But the ill effects ate mild anyways from sauna use. Last night I also experimented taking low doses of plaque binders before sauna with the full alzhiners protocol before the sauna. It did feel synergistic and I didn't have any cognitive slowing downs. I slept.well last night, which does seem to happen more if my mitochondria are optimized. I did do this slightly modified uplatching protocol maintenance yesterday morning.

Egcg is a glycolis inhibitor as well. But olive leaf extract is listed as a glycolsis inhibitor that could perhaps be taken with a short overnight ultra fission protocol. Then next morning couldtake fusion agents with curcumin, carntine, and agamatine as glycolis inhibitors as well. I am thinking of an anti-cancer protocol tweak to be taken a few days a week.

I don't have the expertise to endorse any of my suggestions. Just putting some ideas out there.