Consumption of ‘Longevity’ Vitamins Could Prolong Healthy Aging, Scientist Says | Hacker News Reader

Consumption of ‘Longevity’ Vitamins Could Prolong Healthy Aging, Scientist Says

ucsf.edu

111 pointsvimota42 comments

Slightly off-topic, but related to a vitamin mentioned in here:

For Vitamin D, I read a post on Reddit a while back on a subreddit that was intended for older people. Someone asked a question along the lines of 'what is something you wish you were told earlier' and at least one person mentioned Vitamin D deficiency.

They said that for most of their life they were deficient and that it had a significant impact on their life-long depression, and their stress and focus if I recall correctly. Once they began taking Vitamin D supplements it drastically changed everything and completely changed their mood: it turned out that they had Vitamin D absorption issues and never picked up on it. They said they take 12,000 IU/day, now, and it has changed their life.

Most Vitamin D supplements seem to come (in Australia at least) at anywhere from 300 IU to 1000 IU. I looked into safe Vitamin D levels and it appears that you can take up to 50,000 IU a day before you start seeing adverse affects, and just being in direct sunlight for an hour or so is about 15,000 IU for my skin type.

With this in mind, I've began taking 7,000 IU a day (I get about an hour of direct sunlight a day at least on most days). I can't say for sure that it has an effect on my mood, but on the days where I feel a bit worse than usual it's usually because I haven't taken my supplement stack for a couple of days (i.e ran out and hadn't yet bought supplies).

On top of its potential benefits, it's also very inexpensive. One of the least expensive supplements you can take. The 360 count of 5000iu D3 that I take costs $11 (about $0.03 per day).

Please be aware that vitamin D being fat-soluble you can actually overdose on it (while with water-soluble vitamins you simply pee them away). Excessive dosage of vitamin D can have very nasty effect (e.g. severe kidney damage). Your skin stops synthesizing vitamin D when you have enough so you can't overdose by staying in the sun, but you can by taking supplements.

People hear of doctors prescribing 50k UI and don't understand that the liver is supposed to store surplus vitamin D for the winter.

If you're deficient it will mop up a great honking dose of it, but that's not the same as already having adequate reserves and then taking a megadose.

VitD will store in fat. It’s b12 that’s stored in liver.

I'm vitamin D deficient, and have been taking 50k UI a week in a single weekly dose.

It has done little to boost my levels, though, and I am overweight - so I wonder if that is why my Vitamin D levels are low. Since then I've lost 20 lbs, we'll see if my numbers change at my next blood test.

Best to have your doctor check vitamins D levels first. That said, over 60, many people have vitamins D deficiency -- well worth getting a simple test to measure it.

The test may be simple, but was costing the government about US$40 equivalents per test.

Because everyone was asking for it, they’ve stopped making it so easy to get free tests based on lack of cost-benefit.

If in doubt, or at risk, just supplement.

The test costed me less than 20€ in a private lab in Italy, I assume the price is similar in most western countries. Is it such a high price not to fuck your kidneys?

many people of all ages have Vitamin D deficiency, unless you live near the equator and work outdoors you probably have it

Under 60, too.

The fear of overdose is misfounded, IMHO. You have to try really hard. Deficiency, on the other hand, is endemic.

"Vitamin D deficiency is a major public health problem worldwide in all age groups, even in those residing in countries with low latitude, where it was generally assumed that UV radiation was adequate enough to prevent this deficiency, and in industrialized countries, where vitamin D fortification has been implemented now for years."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4018438/

Along with selenium. After reading on the internet that it may help prevent prostate cancer, an Australian man took 10g of sodium selenite which he mistakenly purchased at a very high purity, and died shortly thereafter.

[0] https://www.mja.com.au/journal/2006/185/7/accidental-death-a...

Vitamin D overdose is less problematic/likely when also taking magnesium and vitamin K (10 IU D3 : 2 mcg+ MK-4).

I'm always worried that the dose on the bottle is not the does I'm really getting, since supplements aren't well regulated. 1000 IU is only 25 micrograms, so it would be really easy for them put in 100,000 IU instead.

If you're not getting much direct sunlight, and you think you may be affected, it's a really good idea to get your Vit D levels tested.

Deficiency/Insufficiency is also a common reason for seasonal depression. Less sunlight = less vitamin D.

40-60 ng/mL is a commonly preferred range and is usually achieved with 50-100 IU/kg vitamin D3 (ie, 3500-7000 IU at 70 kg). Dose calculator (assume 0 ng/mL if current level unknown): http://vitamindservice.com/node/87.

The full list is not in the article, and the paper is behind a paywall, but most of the 'vitamins' seem to be listed in the supplemental materials which are still free:

http://www.pnas.org/highwire/filestream/831622/field_highwir...

Some things I thought would be there are missing, like carnosine.

In case anyone else is also going through the article for the list:

Vitamin K, Selenium, Vitamin D, Taurine, Ergothioneine, Pyrroloquinoline quinone, Queuine, Carotenoids, Lutein and Zeaxanthin, Lycopene, alpha and beta-Carotene, Astaxanthin

And some natural sources: https://twitter.com/foundmyfitness/status/105298166965596569...

Does the paper also talk about proper dosages if one wants to supplement with these vitamins? I know it says 4000 UI for vitamin D but don't see any mention for dosages of vitamin K.

10 IU D3 : 2 mcg+ MK-4. Vitamin K2 MK-4 becomes active at 1.5 milligrams, with some taking 5-9 mg daily: https://examine.com/supplements/vitamin-k/.

AOR Ortho-Core has many of these and is especially great when combined with Life Extension D + K and Doctor's Best High Absorption Magnesium.

So does the vegetable section of the grocery store fwiw.

Getting as much as possible from real food tends to be preferred.

I have only one question: How did they validated this? For grand claims like this you need to run controlled experiment for many years. The reason I say this is because typically these studies are funded by commercial interests with the goal to cite these studies in their marketing material.

It’s nutrition. You almost can’t run long term randomised experiments patient compliance is so low. Take it as interesting at best like the rest of the field that told us salt was bad for us, that dietary cholesterol effected serum cholesterol and trans fats were healthier than polyunsaturated (margarine vs butter).

Also how do you control for diversity of bacteria in our guts and variation of metabolism on an individual basis?

It's more of a hypothesis paper by a retired scientist. Bruce Ames, the author used to do experiments on vitamin and mineral deficiencies in animals 20+ years ago. What he found was things like increased DNA strand breaks. Nothing positive was found in terms of longevity or healthspan when supplementing excess anti-oxidants. It's possible to search Ames B[author] on pubmed to see his old publications.

  "Maybe some these things would extend healthspan if people have a less than optimal diet."

...or that maybe some novel and expensive things might have small health impacts. Not that they do otherwise, or that there is rigorous experiments demonstrating so.

I think some people are eagerly clamoring to supplement based on this list, which is just fueling the 30bn dollar a year supplement industry.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/style/wellness-industrial...

Why not fund basic research into age related disease instead?

i.e. [ https://www.lifespan.io/the-rejuvenation-roadmap/, http://dogagingproject.com, http://sens.org ]

Bruce Ames is a renowned scientist, but he also has an anti-aging nutritional supplement company on the side named Juvenon.

DNA damage and declining DHEA levels are said to be excessive due to chronic magnesium insufficiency/deficiency. Also, as the body releases magnesium when ready to unroll inflammation, deficiency can result in impaired clearance.

Even acne is often prevented by sufficient vitamin D + magnesium.

Be careful, especially with dosage; meta studies[1] have linked increased consumption of vitamins to a shorter life.

[1]https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/vitamins-and-cancer-risk/

Increased consumption of vitamin pills.

Consuming more plants, and more of specific plants, is the appropriate way to increase the presence of these micronutrients in one's diet.

The linked cover article has no talk of proportions, timing and cycles.. which are fundamental to real life. The text reads, intentionally or not, as if some pill containing everything, all at once, would be the route to longevity.

A closer reading says roughly.. that some crucial nutrients are not on an ordinary "daily requirements" list because their effects have not been sufficiently observed over long time scales, and conversely that the contents of an ordinary "daily requirements" list are there because their absence makes a person ill relatively quickly. The note at the end says that the medical author has more than four decades of research experience, and is well-respected.

Meanwhile apparently 80% of diet and weightloss supplements are tainted [1] so as sound as the science no doubt is I'm currently leaning towards the "let's not take pills if we don't have to" mindset.

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/9ocr6y/80_of_diet_...

Seems that nearly every other comment in that thread is talking about how it's a misleading title.

So get these micronutrients from food rather than pills.

That study looked at the weight loss "supplements" they sell in gas stations and delis... not at vitamins that probably the vast vast majority of readers here buy. It's really not applicable here at all.

A good source for info on this sort of thing is [Labdoor](https://labdoor.com), they're not funded by any vitamin company and they perform rigorous testing on samples taken from consumer outlets.

The main thing seems to be ensuring nutrient/hormone sufficiency. For example, keeping everything on a NutrEval + hormone + thyroid panel in range. Diet alone can maintain, but supplements are usually required to achieve sufficiency. A vitamin D (and magnesium) supplement is often needed either way.

Aging (rather than longevity) usually refers to vitality and skin quality. Wrinkling/Sagging isn't normal at any stage of development (up to menopause), though it is common. Sagging is usually due to poor lymph movement and muscle tone. Wrinkles are usually due to poor hydration. Both can be made worse by declining collagen/progesterone.

Maintaining nutrient sufficiency, following iodine protocol, and applying MSM lotion does a lot to slow "aging."

What is an iodine protocol?

Higher amounts of iodine and companion nutrients. It's better to look it up, as it can be dangerous if not done/followed properly.

is fasting really not enough?

Fasting is very relevant here because it puts the body deeper into repair and maintenance mode. My guess is is periodic fasting plus a modest regimen of longterm repair supplements would be the optimum strategy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com