Comments on: If you want to live longer, do nothing

By: Allen Taylor

Allen Taylor — Tue, 28 May 2013 21:10:56 +0000

The 2012 study with rhesus monkeys that supposedly showed no benefit in calorie restriction was deeply flawed and showed no such thing, although the shallow-minded press trumpeted that message. Read the study and you will find that the CONTROL monkeys were restricted too, and there was no monitoring to see whether they ate all of their monkey chow every day. They could well have been just as restricted as the experimental monkeys, so it is not surprising that they are not showing symptoms of aging significantly sooner than the experimental monkeys.

By: John Thompson

John Thompson — Wed, 22 May 2013 19:54:13 +0000

I think that the Taleb quote has some validity.… The thing is, the complex body needs complex life-extension — if it’s a complex system right? So if you are going to do caloric restriction, whether the reduced calories are nutrient dense calories is the issue and probably effects the results of the study and how big and how long the cohort is matters too.… The complexity and parsing gets left out sadly. But people know. Toxic junk is bad, like cigs, or too much A. But DHA and EPA in balance, is good.

So you’re going live longer with certain behaviors. Same with vitamins. I disagree that vitamin supplements shortens your life. Where’s the study on this? If you have a deficiency, taking a supplement is common sense. Even vitamin averse doctors subscribe B-12 and E — amongst others … C, etc..

Another thing I’d add, is I want to try telomere lengthening. TA — 65. Sierra Sciences. Love to hear more about that.

And I think that cleaning the epithelial and Lyso SENS — also mito SENS sounds very promising also.

Gene therapies too — RNAi.

Plus there are new proteins being used to regenerate cells in the body like the PIM 1 modification with Cardiomyocytes — rejuvenates hearts. And the author did point out medical care. So he did elude to regen med.…

Eating nutrient dense foods gets left out — but not smoking or drinking too much too. So I agree with the author on that. But it’s complexity that is getting undermined by going a bit too simple — simple is great though!

Bottom line … the future of expensive things we can do is exciting if we have money, until they scales … and supplements get a bad rap here.

By: Ivan Lovric

Ivan Lovric — Wed, 22 May 2013 14:00:23 +0000

I agree with the do nothing but with some more accuracy. Let’s say Do Nothing REAL but go Virtual or even more Spiritual. The difficulty here is that going virtual in order to do nothing real may lead us to compete with virtual agents which is already the case in video games, and might getting worse with artificial sinularity, so I’m not so sure that our virtual lifespan may dramatically extend. The goal seems to improve our spiritual skills, and I suspect that going virtual may help us improving our spiritual capabilities

By: Marios Kyriazis

Marios Kyriazis — Wed, 22 May 2013 10:54:03 +0000

I agree with everything in this article, apart from the ‘Do Nothing’ bit. Current attempts at using pills, nutrients, injections etc against aging will have no effect in significantly extending lifespan. Biomedical or biotechnological interventions have (and will have) a disappointing effect on aging. However, if you ‘do nothing’ you go against your own philosophy (which was, as you said, to find ways in order to extend lifespan. There are other ways that may be useful in this respect, ways that are not based on biotechnology. See for example this: http://immortallife.info/articles/entry/environmental-enrich…-lifespans,

or perhaps you can join us at

http://www.elpisfil.org