Biomolecular shifts occur in our 40s and 60s (2024)
med.stanford.edu
med.stanford.edu
I'd posit that another significant decline in moving occurs in the sixties when many go in rent.
Not sure if the biological clock is cause of abrupt changes or rather our scheduled lives. So, no significant changes from the sixties on? Then what's the genetic function of those programmations?
People who reach old age (100+) are mostly also comparatively healthy.
Also likely that people who never experienced the negative outcomes of a sedentary or unhealthy life style start doing so due to the biomolecular changes. Drinking more likely to hurt your liver, soda more likely to cause diabetes, smoking more likely to cause cavities despite having done all that for 20 years without visible problems.
Even with the most charitable steelman interpretation of "visible problems", 2 out of 3 things you've listed have strong evidence for being responsible for weight gain, and even smoking has some weaker evidence supporting it.
I'm in my mid 40s and in the best shape of my life, lots of energy, aches and pains from my late 30s have all disappeared, to get there it took diet and exercise changes that were surprisingly modest. For me it was mostly weights, a little bit of cardio, and cutting back on my worst episodes of caloric excess.
I have friends who didn't do any diet and exercise interventions, and are starting to look like hell and complain about the "inevitable" consequences of aging.
And then there are those jacked dudes in their 70s who are hitting the gym 5 times a week, I can only aspire to be as healthy as them at their age.
Use it (with proper care and feeding) or lose it.
to be able to afford a healthy life depends a lot on luck, much more than good DNA.
secondarily: modern western societies make it almost impossible for a large portion of the population to live such a lifestyle.
It's more probable than an African lives a healthy life style, even in poverty, than an American working 70 hours/week, with no paid holidays, trapped in stressful groundhog days in highly polluted cities.
That's why I never left my country, even though it costed me a lot monetarily wise.
I suspect ignorance is bliss here as your post seems to be mostly weird stereotypes. I hope you didn’t make major life decisions on these bases alone.
these are just your prejudices talking
you haven't even presented a point, besides your beliefs, based on nothing.
Several African countries - you clearly know nothing about it - have a similar life expectancy than the US of A. Life expectancy in Mississippi is shorter than Morocco, for example despite a huge difference in wealth.
But they usually live a better life, with better food, stronger sense of community, less work hours, less pollution and a vastly superior culture and historical heritage.
If it wasn't for the western bombs, regime changes and wars waged using fake intelligence, they would never leave their countries for, say, Detroit, Bakersfield, Jackson etc etc
Nobody in their right mind would.
Really, this "motivation trainer" rhetoric coming out of obesity-infested America is tiring.
You sound like there is only two extremes: Couch potatoes and people that run a marathon every weekend. There is actually a middle-ground. And a not-so-small group of people is actually comfortable in that middle-ground.
You can feel relatively healthy without running around like a wound-up monkey. Step on, don't eat too much. Then you don't have to burn calories to get rid of extra fat. It almost sounds like "uppers and downers"... Mind you, I am not arguing against sports in healthy doses. But whenever I read or talk to fitness fans, I feel like I am talking to a person following a cult.
Do you have any data/research to back up your claims that people who think they are in the middle are actually unhealthy or that they compare themselves to outliers?
“Research suggests that changes in the social perceptions of what constitutes overweight and obesity may contribute to the increased prevalence of obesity (Burke et al., 2010; Johnson et al., 2008; Johnson-Taylor et al., 2008). The growing prevalence of overweight and obesity could change the subjective threshold for what most people consider a “normal” weight level, thereby resulting in under-detection of overweight and obesity (Robinson, 2017). This explanation highlights the fact that social context affects weight perceptions (Hammond, 2010; Leahey et al., 2011b; Mueller et al., 2010; Robinson and Kirkham, 2014) because individuals adjust perceptions of their own weight based on the weight of those around them (Ali et al., 2011; Burke and Heiland, 2007; Maximova et al., 2008; Robinson, 2017)” https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6304710/
The comically fat guy on some old shows looks reasonably normal today. However being overweight with a high fat person simply isn’t healthy. The healthy person who doesn’t exercise much should be quite thin rather than simply replacing muscle with fat and keeping the same weight.
People talk about being a couch potato because there’s a massive difference between activities that involve passively sitting and things like gardening that require occasional movement that adds up over time.
1) Feeling like shit: I found out that when I felt like shit it was a sign that I was going too hard. After falling off the wagon a few times because my workouts were so unpleasant, I decided that instead of quitting, this time I would keep going to the gym but just exercise like a pussy. Turns out light to moderate exercise is dramatically better than no exercise. Exercising like a pussy has eliminated all the aches and pains I used to have, fixed a wrist that was developing carpal tunnel, fixed a bad knee, lowered my blood pressure by 12 points, etc.
2) For me cardio is mind numbing, but weight training isn't bad. I mean weight training is basically doing a set, then sitting around for a few minutes messing with your phone or listening to a podcast or reading a book or whatever, then repeating. This is why most of my exercise is weight training, and my cardio sessions are 20min max. It works just fine, you get a ton of cardio from doing compound lifts. Also my gym has a jacuzzi where I can zone out after my workout and listen to podcasts, this turns the gym into the highlight of my day tbh.
As fascia stabilizes joints it explains your joints getting better. Focus on soft, bouncing movements if you want to regain, enhance or simply conserve fascia tissue.
Also, with time, it enables you to do with heavier weights and plainly brings back joy to moving. All the best.
Then one day I pretty much hit a brick wall and went from 0 to 100% eye strain in about 2-3 days. Now I need constant eye drops, a humidifier, breaks every 20 minutes, time spent doing other things etc. to just be able to do what I did before.
The best tech tool I've ever bought was a pair of dedicated computer glasses (focal length ~3ft) --for every computer I work at.
Sorry to hear that, but to my understanding at least this kind of malady is usually very treatable via surgery if it's large enough to justify it.
go to an ophthamologist and after testing you'll be told that you still have perfect vision! (the need for reading glasses after a certain age is considered normal, not a defect)
Those dudes are almost certainly on some kind of testosterone. It obviously works for some. Arnold Schwarzenegger, for example, has almost certainly been "supplementing" for close to 60 years now. The trouble is we don't know for sure what these individuals have been doing, nor do we know the effects of such "cocktails" on the population at large.
My FIL, in his 70's is on a cocktail of pain killers, blood pressure medication and a hundred other things and has a hard time even getting out of a pool. I'll take being an old jacked dude over that any day
He's admitted it and advised younger bodybuilders not to.
Having access to the best sports medicine doctors in the world means you too can look great at nearly 80.
I'm 55 and found - much to my surprise - that 12 months of carefully progressively and intense running training has improved me from a slow plodder (jogging 5km a couple of times a week) to on track for a 3 hour marathon later this year. Along the way, I'm back to the weight I had in my early 20s, but now also am a lot faster and with way more endurance.
Of course, at 55, I now need to be more careful now about not getting injured. Which means being disciplined about stretching, strength training and recovery. Things I never needed to worry about when I was younger.
So absolutely:
> Use it (with proper care and feeding) or lose it.
The joint stuff you have to think about, where it was barely a consideration when I was younger.
* Cooking all meals from scratch (I try and reduce UPFs as much as possible).
* No bread or pasta ever. Fresh non-supermarket bread and pasta is probably OK for you...
* Less alcohol (only on special occasions). Modern no-alcohol beer is actually very enjoyable.
* Lift weights 3x a week. I built a home gym in my garage, with a TV mounted on a wall. It's a great time to unwind, watch YouTube and get fit. It's alone time I look forward to.
* Walk every lunchtime for 20 minutes, rather than browsing the Internet
The key thing about exercise, is that if you don't enjoy it then you won't do it. For me, the alone time watching Youtube or listening to a podcast is the pull-factor. For others it'll be a sport playing in a team.
Food is the major factor in your general health, and we really have fallen into a trap in the Western world with our food habits. Fortunately we have a choice in this regard.
We in this industry live in quite a bubble in many ways. One of them is we get to chose when we go outside and exercise (mostly), but if you're a builder or a farmer or whatever you are usaully out there doing things, rain or shine.
The truth is, both things happen. People slow down — not just because they stop moving, but because life changes. They feel more tired, take on more responsibilities, and have less time and energy for themselves. And yes, sometimes the body begins to decline — gradually or even suddenly. It’s normal, and it happens to many.
how, of all the reasons, is _that_ the cause of reduced physical activity?
What even is fascia degradation?
Or what happens when we stop them? Perpetual adolescence seems mainstream now. But it would be nice to know if some of these changes should be brought up as well as pushed back.
Are his therapies are over the top and lacking a bit of experimental rigor? Probably. Does he look healthy af? Definitely.
And to me he doesn't look healthy af. His skin is good, sure.
Check this thing out, just launched a couple days ago https://virtualcellchallenge.org/
I've been exploring the current status of atom-level simulation of biological systems and it seems to be an even greater challenge than I expected. Apparently even MD is not as useful as I assumed because it doesn't model some important mechanisms such as bond formation and breaking.
There are populations that consistently outlive and the only other thing I would add is stress removal in the form of relatively simple life styles.
And I mean here both sacrifice the things you hold dear directly, or indirectly - which for us here is predominantly our careers and places of living.
Exaggerating a little bit to underscore the point: I could likely add years to my QALY lifespan if I moved to countryside, picked up more manual labor that required me to move my whole body, and went hiking in between going to the gym -- but, the things I value are found in cities, the work I like is white-collar, I hate hiking, and I also have people I love to support and lifespan-friendly labor generally doesn't pay enough.
To live a life that's even remotely healthy we have to dedicate a significant amount of the precious spare time we have just to undo some of that damage.
I do not believe we are predisposed to adopt sedentary lifestyles. As kids most of us are very active, but we are taught to be sedentary. Both academically and professionally we are most rewarded for sedentary activities: doing extra coursework, building your resume. Is it any surprise we develop a sedentary lifestyle when such a lifestyle is most rewarded?
> If you want to live forever don't do any of the things that would make it worthwhile.
(Oh, and walking covered in sunscreen all the time - except not, because that's technology and chemicals; though surely there's some perfectly natural, organic, non-GMO ointment known from ancient times that works even better...)
That's how the other extreme looks like - but unlike the "bad habits" extreme, this one is actually what's needed to make a noticeable improvement your QALY lifespan. It's also a kind of life I wouldn't personally find rewarding - hence the question, what's the point of living longer if you have to live like this[0]?
Between this and the fact that approximately no one can afford living like that today, I say the whole idea of living longer by "just" living healthier is a lie.
--
[0] - This lifestyle is basically the Edo people[1] from the infamous Star Trek: TNG episode "Justice"[2]. Chilling out in a paradise, keeping fit bodies, and basically running around all day in between of making art and having sex with others, sure sounds like an alluring lifestyle to us (and to the protagonists on the show). Still, this episode lets the viewer ask themselves - would they rather be with the Edo, or on the Enterprise? I'd take the latter, thank you - pretty sure I'd go bored shitless after a year in that place. And while United Federation of Planets isn't an available option, even the regular life in the real world seems much more interesting and rewarding to me, if you look past the immediate appeal[3].
[1] - https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Edo
[2] - https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Justice_(episode)
[3] - See also: heaven in Christianity, which if you think more about it, is basically a place of infinite boredom - but it does look alluring to sustenance farmers of the middle ages, as it offered reprieve from the endless toil and oppressive lords.
You can very well argue that a typical 40h work week leaves too little time to do enough of the good things. But most people would still most likely keep kicking back and using their time inefficiently even if we had to work much less than now.
Remaining too much time sitting in static positions is bad, sure. But people doing physical work are also exposed to massive health risks as usually the load is repetitive and uneven. Both populations need corrective action, but for the physical worker it is more tricky to add a workout routine because their bodies are already overtaxed.
Healthy food being bland and bad tasting is simply a sign of not being able to cook well. Learn stir frying and add some herbs, spices, and sauces. (Yes, sauces often contain sugar, but IMHO it's well worth giving up candy for better tasting real food!)
I hope you are aware that many societies displayed in Star Trek (and similar SF) are for storytelling purposes almost necessarily either oversimplified, have weird traits, or are caricatures reflecting something out-of-universe? For most of them we know very little about how daily life is actually like for a civilian. Of course it doesn't seem compelling to be part of any of these societies. And it is unconvincing to argue that a healthy lifestyle is necessarily one where we won't be able to have fun.
Anyway the point of that episode was to highlight the extreme cost of maintaining such a society, not the lifestyle itself. And of course it would be quite appealing to explore the universe in the comfort of a five star hotel, which living and working on the Enterprise-D surely must feel like.
These things are quite literally the leading causes of death and impairments in the west...
We don't - people inevitably age and die. All you can hope to do is postpone these shifts, and I suspect a large component in the timing is genetic, so there isn't a magical solution that will work for everybody just because it works for the guy posting about the one guaranteed solution for preventing ageing, because it's worked so far for him.
Sometimes I can't believe how low discussions on HN can fall. Did really nobody in this thread bother to check this? Are we fine disparaging research solely based on the fact that they used a method that gives bad results with bad inputs (which doesn't?) and their incentives could be misaligned (whose aren't?)?
If there are well justified concerns about the method or data then by all means let's talk about it, but please let's all try to keep low effort anti intellectual conspiracy theories away from here.
They didn't test the theory that rapid aging occurs at those two specific time points in an independent hold out set.
Most importantly even if these peaks exist this paper does not prove they are biological. They could correspond to common socially driven changes in behavior
That's good, now I'm wondering about the others in the thread.
> 'Omics papers get away with a lot of hand waving
Making assumptions and interpreting results is part of any type of analysis, especially for unsupervised learning approaches like clustering. Or maybe I am missing something: how do you not-handwave the results of a clustering analysis if you don't have any supervision signal?
In any case, I agree that omics in particular take many more liberties than usual with their interpretations. And yet, sometimes they come up with useful and important finding. Yes, a broken clock...2x a day, but maybe after working in the same field for many years one can gain some insights and intuitions.
> but you are going to find peaks in a random walk
I would hope so since a random walk has pretty obvious peaks, and it's not hard to test if the peak is significantly beyond the level expected due to chance.
Do you have actual concerns about the data and the peaks they found, or are we back at wondering about all the fallacies that they may or may have not committed?
> They didn't test the theory that rapid aging occurs at those two specific time points in an independent hold out set.
This is a glaring omission, I agree.
> this paper does not prove they are biological. They could correspond to common socially driven changes in behavior.
True, but it dot make this paper worth any less. If anything, it's a great question for follow-up work.
Anecdotally I feel I noticed a very fast ageing speed between 38 and 40. Suddenly got white hairs, feel more tired, more wrinkles, way harder to keep VO2max up (I run a lot), muscle sores after training suddenly lasting up to 3 days instead of 1, face looks older, etc.
I feel like that all happened real fast around this age.
It's like there's two versions of me now, the one who was somehow moderately fit by biochemical decree, with a healthy amount of flesh to his face, voluminous dark blonde hair and a pleasant complexion...
... And the grey haired, weathered, lined, dessicated mummy I see in the mirror. I love my kids dearly but the constant caring really takes something out of you. That and the whole getting older thing in TFA.
I keep telling myself I'll get a gym membership soon to reclaim some of my dignity.
Go for it!
And try not to be in the majority group of gym goers who pay the membership without attending ;)
The nearest gym is truly the best gym for 90% of people, as everyone seems to look for excuses not to go. So just go, people there will not bite you or shame you.
Spotted an 18 year old the other day that hit a PR at 315lbs on bench. I bench 405lbs and at that exact moment I decided I have to hit 495lbs. 405 had been my goal for decades. I went from I've hit the most I will ever need to "the journey continues".
"people there will not bite you or shame you" I have found the gym to be filled with the most grim looking people that transform into the kindest, happiest people as soon as you say hello. No one is there to judge anyone. You are 100% right
The kids still need lots of care (they are 5–9 years old), so finding time and motivation is still a challenge. For me the trick is to do training I really like. That helps so much with motivation. So, find something you like!
What I happen to like is bouldering and hiking. I have a fixed day of the week for bouldering, just after work, and I never miss it, because I know if I start skipping I might fall off my training habit.
Then the rest of the training is motivated by getting better at what I love. I do pull ups to better my climbing etc…
I will fight hard to keep at it through my 40s, because it is such a quality of life improvement. I also attribute the fact that I haven’t been really sick the last few years to my exercise.
The oldest go to bed later and later & I also like to hang out with my wife for a few hours each week... finding the energy and motivation for "me time" has been tough indeed. I should just do something I like, and stick with that on a regular schedule. It's as simple as what you write.
But! There's no shame in napping mid-day, even more than once. Even in the office :)
Looking back at pictures from really not that long ago (less than 5 years) to before kids or the first year of the first kid and one of the overriding comments both me and wife have are "We look so young!". We have two aged 3-to-5, and its been hard but not that hard, especially now that there are no nappies/diapers and they sleep 10-11 hours straight overnight and we pay for gardeners, cleaners etc and pretty much do our usual 9-5 as we did before kids.
FWIW though, I would say that you don't need a gym membership. I try to run/jog/saunter a couple of times a week - its free and easy to do. Getting started is as easy as putting some shoes on and stepping out your door - no set up, no memberships, no travel to get to the place to do the running etc. You don't need to go buy special shoes or anything - just something vaguely appropriate will be fine to get started with for short distances and steady pace.
Its what your body has evolved to do, and I think there is a good mental-health aspect to just going out on your own and running and letting the mind wander. I personally don't especially "enjoy" running, and it is sometimes hard to persuade myself to actually go do it, but once I have started and I am 5-10 minutes in, it's quite nice.
Good luck
Now that they are older I have more free time. Once they get to the point where they can stay home alone things become much easier. For me that was around when they hit 10. I'm 46 now and in the best shape of my life. Keep pushing through, there is light at the end of the tunnel
It's not just my perception either, other people assume I'm early 20s.
I can't really relate to the physical stuff though because muscle sores after training was always 3 days for me and it was always difficult to keep VO2max up, even in my early teens. So I guess I just started out in middle age.
All young people think they are special and age is just a number. The rest of the population knows that isn't true. Spare me your weight lifting 80 year old, or "my grandpa worked the farm til he was 90" stuff, we all know those are extreme outliers.
People also often tell me I look and seem younger than my age.
But I also prioritize sleeping 8 hours a night. Eating low carb. Regular exercise. Plus I have no kids. :-)
Ringo Starr even sang the song, "Life Begins at 40".
So here we have it, 40s and 60s, no science required.
The best explanation again seems that all the modern nutrition is nonsense fed by some double agent to the allies in WW2, (iron, and the toxicity of heavy metals) based supposedly on some secret concentration camp experiments, and nobody is allowed to question it in order to "not let their sacrifice go in vain" or some such bullshit.
I don't remember noticing that the last time this study came around, but then again, I am in my mid 40s. :)
Men emerge from it with their fertility intact.
> It's possible some of these changes could be tied to lifestyle or behavioral factors that cluster at these age groups, rather than being driven by biological factors, Snyder said.
Changes in women metabolism due to menopause are pretty known and proved, and men don't experience it. I'm a mid-40s male as well.