Another Blagosklonny comment to think about

#1
4 Likes
#3

If you feel he is incorrect and or you have a different opinion, contact him and discuss. He is not difficult to contact.

#4

A lot depends upon what the terms mean.

1 Like
#5

What does “boosted” even mean? Expanding the pool of naive T cells, vs differentiating more of them? Increasing IL8 or IL6? What of increasing the ratio of lymphocytes to neutrophils?

2 Likes
#6

Boosting immunity does not mean increasing the dysfunctional inflammatory component of it. Its two different things. Some things even do one while supressing the other.

I already know hes incorrect on many things, nothing to discuss about.

2 Likes
#7

I feel like his comment makes quite a bit of sense.

All of us here that have taken rapamycin have made it through the “it’s an immune suppressant” commentary. The reality is the immune system isn’t the sort of thing where just cranking up the activity is good. What you want is a responsive system, able to lay low by default, but be able to activate specifically when and where it is needed. Chronically boosted immune systems create inflammation and autoimmune conditions while losing some of their effectiveness in actually battling disease and cancer.

The hyperfunction theory of aging says that as systems in the body degrade, their baseline activation gets cranked up, causing even more damage.

6 Likes
#10

I think a lot of subtleties can get lost on twitter. Short text limits push people to be brief and a lot of times you end up with strokes that a too broad.

4 Likes
#11

Yes - you have to be careful about over-interpreting a single tweet.

I mean this entire (ResTORBio) company’s bet was that improving immune function was a good thing and could get them FDA approval, and a bunch of smart pharma people invested something like $50 million on this bet, and were initially successful:

So, I’m really not sure what blagosklonny means by his twitter statement, but obviously there is a range in which immune function modulation can be a good thing, and ranges (above and below) where it may be unhelpful.

6 Likes
#12

I think he’s talking about the very common idea that gets thrown around that you can make your immune system ‘stronger’ and that it will mean you’ll be impervious to any insult thrown at it. While immune modulation or restoring youthful immune function is actually what we should be striving for. I believe it’s a matter of semantics, but maybe I’m misinterpreting it.

4 Likes
#13

Why do you not ask?

Mikhail V. Blagosklonny

Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA

Correspondence to:

Mikhail V. Blagosklonny, email: mikhail.blagosklonny@roswellpark.org

email: blagosklonny@rapalogs.com

Twitter
Mikhail V. Blagosklonny
@Blagosklonny

1 Like
#15

I love Blagosklonny, but I agree and think he wanders outside of the area of his expertise.

1 Like
#16

Then ask?

And you will receive a reply.

Mikhail V. Blagosklonny

Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, NY, USA

Correspondence to:

Mikhail V. Blagosklonny, email: mikhail.blagosklonny@roswellpark.org

email: blagosklonny@rapalogs.com

Twitter
Mikhail V. Blagosklonny
@Blagosklonny

#18

I sense this is what you mean.

Mikhail does not always know what he is talking about. He advocates high-protein/meat + rapamycin, but this is far from ideal (acarbose + beans is more likely to be ideal).

1 Like
#19

I must object. Blagosklonny knows exactly what he is talking about. Have you read his papers? His knowledge is vast. I realize he doesn’t always communicate exceptionally well in English, when speaking, as it is not his native language.

We most likely would not be here now if it were not for Blagosklonny and knowledge about potential longevity effects of rapamycin would likely be 10 or 15 years behind where it is now.

Just because his ideas don’t agree with yours does not mean he is wrong. Two of the most respected people in the field, Attia and Kaeberlein, believe meat has a place in a longevity seeking diet and would find fault with your “beans and acarbose” approach.

6 Likes
#20

Yes I have read Mikhail’s papers, but Mikhail’s papers are not dense on detail. They do have a lot of insight (and especially early/pioneering/“first mover” insight), but those who are “first” are not always “the most detailed” (and the thinking patterns involved are often opposite). Inna Vishik’s PhD adviser once said “be first or be best”. Mikhail is not a dietician or nutritionist.

The average glucose level of someone on keto is not THAT much lower from the average glucose level of someone taking beans + acarbose. Even on keto, average blood glucose levels are not that low.

Where did Kaeberlein say meat has a place in a longevity diet? He LIKES meat, but that does not mean that he thinks that some meat is optimal (in fact, he was the first person who I learned of the “low protein = longevity” approach from). Kaeberlein is not a dietician - diet is not something he pays that much attention to.

2 Likes
#21

I agree with this, as someone who was keto for over a year, but insulin levels are probably lower over time. Getting sugar and insulin as low as possible probably isn’t that brilliant since your body just makes more anyway. What is beneficial is avoiding the oversupply of glucose such that it is sloshing around your system. Only eat what you can burn that day.

I love acarbose and beans, but I put it with deer meat. It’s harder than you think to get 150 grams of protein per day.

#22

I have a slightly different view in that I think it may be better to have days of surplus calories and days of deficit calories. That way the body’s storage systems get used to things going into storage and coming out of storage and hopefully the metabolism still runs with a high energy usage rather than slowing down and requiring a reduction in inputs to maintain weight.

2 Likes
#24

In simple words you do not have the nerve to contact him and ask questions to his comment

#26

Guys, please keep the disagreements focused on the science, and avoid any personal attacks. In the future I’ll give a two week cooling off / temporary ban for any persona attacks, name calling, etc.

Thanks - we want to keep this a civil and positive environment focus on discussions around the science of longevity and specifically rapamycin.

12 Likes
#27

That does not make any sense at all, beans come with a little bit of good (low quality protein) combined with bad (carbs and fiber). Why combine beans with a pharmaceutical (with potential side effects) to mitigate some of the bad that comes with the bean when you can just eat the good without the bad, ie high quality protein without carbs nor fiber?

There are 3 macronutrients, 2 of which are essential and the 3rd literally makes your teeth rot. And humans need fiber for digestion like a shower drain needs hair for proper drainage. Fiber does reduce the glucose spike after eating carbs but if you don’t eat the macronutrients which rots your teeth in the first place you don’t need to worry about glucose spikes and don’t need to consume pharmaceuticals nor gut wrecking irritants

And another thing unlike quadripedal lab animals that live in a protected environment bipedal humans live in a world with dangers physical and microbial. Of you are old and frail and trip you die or encounter a pathogen without a proper immune system you die. Protein but more so meat because meat is so much more than protein keeps your muscles strong

3 Likes