Hacker News Reader

Comment by hourislate | Hacker News Reader

For a more thorough dive into this topic, Dr Brad Stanfield on Youtube. I haven't found anyone better in breaking down the latest scientific studies on Longevity.

https://www.youtube.com/c/DrBradStanfield

There is evidence that Metformin doesn't extend the life of healthy people but does extend the life of Type II diabetics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iByaqfmWfHQ

I would also caution HGH for men since it can enlarge the prostate gland.

David Sinclair had mentioned in a podcast that we use to be cold and hungry and now we're warm and fat all the time. Need to be cold and hungry more often.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwD5YYkbYmN2iFHON9FyDXg

Peter Attia has said that the number one thing he believes will extend healthspan/lifespan (if you did nothing else) is exercise. He wish he could prescribe as a medication.

https://www.youtube.com/c/PeterAttiaMD

View on HN

Michael Lustgarten Ph.D is another good source for biohacking and longevity matters. he takes a diifferent approach though since he's trying to reverse his epigenetic age specifically through diet.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCT1UMLpZ_CrQ_8I431K0b-g

[2] https://twitter.com/mike_lustgarten

But when being cold and hungry was the norm, life expectancy was much lower. Human life expectancy in the developed world is higher than at any time in human history.

And back then also a lot of other factors were less than ideal. (Including lack of medication and medical science altogether.) The idea behind cold and hungry is not being that cold for that long and that hungry. Definitely not starving to death.

What Sinclair hypothesizes that the reason behind the phenomena they see is that these adverse conditions trigger mechanisms in our body that are beneficial in the long term. And the very reason might be to try to make up for what causes the the lower life expectancy. Not knowing much about the topic and the mechanism, my other thought was that it tries to slow your ageing so that you can be fertile for longer in a bid to be able to reproduce when the rough times are over.

So the idea is to kick in the protective mechanisms but still cause no real damage. Similarly to how you're better off eating less than what the average person does in any obese society. Even though their life expectancy is still higher than what it was 500 years ago.

Let's be careful not to conflate life expectancy and life span. The former being dominated[1] by improvements in reducing infant mortality and mothers dying during child birth, while the latter has remained largely consistent[2],[3].

‘… life expectancy in the mid-Victorian period was not markedly different from what it is today. Once infant mortality is stripped out, life expectancy at 5 years was 75 for men and 73 for women.’[1]

[1]-https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2625386/

[2]-https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20181002-how-long-did-anc...

[3]-https://www.sapiens.org/biology/human-lifespan-history/

Edit - sources ordered incorrectly.

The most interesting thing I have heard from Sinclair is the studies on mice that eating once a day was what extended lifespan the most. Everything else was not that important diet wise.

It sounds like to me the method is eat once a day and get in the best physical condition possible from working out. Beyond that, I am just not going to stress about it. Surely, not going to take any reverse risk with HGH or experimental drugs.

So, exercise, fasting, and being cold?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com