In real life a person often must choose between being right and being effective.
3 Likes
Can you share the most compelling information / data in this area? I’ve never heard anything about this before.
1 Like
Here’s a paper from Dr Dallam on nasal breathing during exercise. The nasal breathing benefit is the other side of the coin to overbreathing causes too much CO2 loss (with consequences including sympathetic activation and poor oxygen delivery to tissues)
I’ve done two interviews with Dr Dallam. Super smart academic and elite endurance athlete.
4 Likes
I have to say I was pretty skeptical when I read to Nestor’s Breath and Oxygen Method but the arguments and science were pretty compelling.
Evolutionary creating and maintaining a nose is very energy intensive and unless it provided a definite survival advantage we wouldn’t have it.
I tried mouth taping at night and focus on nasal breathing through the day, even during exercise - except for heavy weight lifting, I still have to Valsalva grunt thru my mouth.
I tried nasal breathing for intervals and can maintain nasal breathing for up to 90% maximal heart rate. I was pretty stoked.
Seem like my nose is clearer now and I am bit more calm.
3 Likes
@Dr.Bart Congratulations. You are ahead of me despite me working on nasal breathing for 3 years. I have learned to sleep nasal breathing without tape (I used tape for a long time). And I am aware of breathing through my nose almost all the time. I nasal breathe during weight lifting; which reveals a strange delay in my increased “air hunger” from effort …never during a set but always afterwards. But I just cannot nasal breathe at high heart rates during exercise. My nasal passages just betray me … I’ll keep at it.
I agree that noses are an evolutionary advantage. Expense to build but oh so useful: filtering dust and microorganisms, adding NO, adding moisture to protect the lungs, creasing a back-pressure to force using the diaphragm to pull air past turbinates. When using the diaphragm we breathe deeply and more slowly which results in less CO2 loss resulting in better oxygen exchange (delivery of O2 to tissues) and less sympathetic activation (stress, anxiety, etc). I believe higher co2 means we also have higher bicarbonate to combat acidification from anaerobic exercise (can tolerate higher lactate).
3 Likes
Guys, I do nose breathing too, and believe in some benefits, but I don’t believe that’s what the nose evolved for. Note, that nasal pasages appear in a huge variety of animals, mammals, birds, reptiles amphibians, fish and so on. The anatomy/morphology of these passages is quite different across the animal kingdom, which tells you that most of these “reasons” listed are unlikely to be the key drivers of evolution, as they don’t appear consistently in all these animals, while nasal passages do. The connection between lungs and nose is not at all the key here - after all, there are no “lungs” as such in fish, yet fish have nasal passages and the nose therefore functions quite differently in that connection. What appears consistently is something extremely obvious yet not mentioned: the sense of smell. I think that’s probably like 90% of the reason for the persistence of a nose through evolutionary history. A fish, like a shark, can detect the presence of blood in the water in extreme dilution at great distances. It’s the sense of smell, detecting airborne or waterborne molecules that are the fundamental reason for the existance of the nose and nasal passages. Things like moisture, filtration and temperture control are certainly factors, especially in mammals, but the sense of smell is going to be the real driver. A dog in the wild, a cat, an antelope and so on, all need their sense of smell for their very survival - all the other things mentioned, like the use of diaphragm, are far, far, far down the hierarchy of function, if they are even factors at all.
That said, to me the biggest factor in nose breathing is the restriction of airflow - in exercise, it likely has a very good training function for the cardio-pulmonary system and the use of oxygen, especially in hypoxia. Athletes sometimes even use devices to restrict their breathing, which intentionally put a strain on their lungs, diaphragm muscles etc. At night, you need to breathe through the nose so that you cut down on the danger of dry mouth, because dry mouth leads to a host of dental problems (methmouth is equal parts teeth grinding and dry mouth), when teeth and the gingiva are not bathed in saliva, nasty bacteria proliferate. So I’m there for all the advantages of nose breathing, but let’s not lose sight of the key reason for the nose: the sense of smell and moisture retention in the mouth (much more than moisture in the lungs). I have not read any books about nose breathing, but listened to a podcast (I think it may have been on Attia’s podcast?), and there does seem to be science behind it, so I was happy to adopt it. Regardless, it seems that many people experience benefits, and that’s all that matters!
2 Likes
These are good points that are certainly important. I have no idea how you come up with what’s more important than another thing that has also survived millions of years of natural selection. You are not deficient in confidence, so you have that going for you.
Watermelon is a good source of citrulline (and lycopene). That’s why I eat a cup of it every morning with breakfast. Citrulline is also frequently included in pre workout supplements.
2 Likes
LOL, good snark, JL, keeps me on my toes! But in this particular case, the explanation is remarkably simple. That which is more important is the thing that appeared first in evolution, and has been preserved in each and every single case of a nasal passage occurance. Pretty obvious really. In each and every instance of nasal passages, we have a sense of smell. From the earliest examples. That is not true for many of the other functions, such as connected to lungs, since nasal passages exist even when there are no lungs present - such as in fish. Which I already highlighted, thus showing my work. That said, you are absolutely right, in different animals, the different functions of nasal passages are emphasized, possibly even surpassing the sense of smell(?). Thus in human beings, maybe other functions are more important than the sense of smell - I don’t know, though the sense of smell seems key even here, as the paper below states. But that wasn’t my point. My point was strictly focused on evolution - the claim that the nose evolution preserved those other functions preferetially - that obviously is not the case, as the most important function evolutionarily has been the sense of smell, as I showed above (being first, and present always).
Here is an interesting paper looking at the interplay of these very issues, and the olfactory aspect even in the human nose looks pretty robust, so my confidence in this is boosted (not that I have a deficit of self-confidence, as you note, lol):
Quote:
" If nose shape is under positive selection, then, barring the hypothesis of Dr Pangloss that the human nose evolved to hold up spectacles (Gould and Lewontin, 1979), we must consider the hypothesis that it could function in olfaction. Subtle changes in nasal anatomy can be associated with significant differences in olfactory function (Zhao, 2004). For example, the shape of the tissue immediately past the nostrils (i.e. nasal vestibule) can have a significant effect on the flow of air to the olfactory epithelium (Zhao and Jiang, 2014). There are large individual differences in this area, with some individuals showing a distinctive notch (Ramprasad and Frank-Ito, 2016). Because the perception of intensity for soluble odorants increases when airflow is lower (Sobel et al., 1999), Li et al. (2018) hypothesized that the notch would produce a vortex that would increase sensitivity to more soluble odors, which their results confirmed. Moreover, narrower noses had larger notches, more intense vortices and higher sensitivity to soluble odorants (Li et al., 2018). Thus, there may be local turbulence in specific regions in the nasal chamber that can influence olfactory as well as respiratory function (Zhao and Jiang, 2014).
An olfactory hypothesis
If structure influences sensory function, then this structure may be adapted to a specific use. In humans, the shape of the external ear can be predicted from the statistics of the auditory landscape (Parise et al., 2014). The relative size of the eye in birds and mammals scales with the speed of movement (Heard-Booth and Kirk, 2012). If human nose shape has an olfactory function, it may have been similarly shaped by its olfactory landscape.
One reason why there should be a relationship between olfaction, nose morphology and climate is that the conditions supporting olfaction are also climactic. Odorants may become easier to detect with increased absolute humidity because water molecules compete with odorant molecules for substrate positions (Igue et al., 1972; Vander Wall, 2003), although the exact relationship between humidity and the behavior of molecules can vary in complex ways (Emanuelsson et al., 2013). Laboratory studies of olfactory threshold in humans confirm that odors are easier to detect in conditions of higher humidity and temperature and lower barometric pressure (Kuehn et al., 2008). Thus, one might predict that using olfaction would be favored in hot, humid climates but not in climates that are cold, dry or found at high altitude. In fact, there is a positive association between nasal breadth and absolute humidity (Zaidi et al., 2017; Maddux et al., 2016).
The observation that nasal breadth associates with a climate conducive to olfaction may be a clue to an olfactory function for the human external nose: the use of odors in spatial orientation. The reason is that the use of olfaction in orientation makes specific demands on the external morphology of the olfactory sensors. This is because olfactory navigation is enhanced by using stereo olfaction, where paired olfactory sensors (antennae, nares) that can compare independent samples increase the accuracy of orientation to an odor source, as I will review below. Perhaps the evolution of the external pyramid in Homo is an adaptation for spatial olfaction and hence is another contribution to the integrated suite of adaptations for efficient long-distance travel that has been characteristic of the genus since Homo erectus."
1 Like
There is no doubt sense of smell is important. The decline in brain function with age accelerates with a loss of smell sense, and can be recovered somewhat with the use of scents to exercise the brain. Scent is tied into memory like music. I find music is the easiest way to time travel…but scent is like that also. Grandma’s perfume, a pine scented Christmas tree (from a can for the artificial tree people), the smell of lit birthday candles, baby breath, a new car smell, the alcohol wipe before the needle, the expensive whiskey.
Time to play my favorite hits of the 70’s on Spotify….to be a teenager again.
1 Like
Yeah, loss of sense of smell is scary, often presaging dementia AD and all sorts of morbidities. I didn’t know you could exercise the sense of smell though, that’s wild! It’s interesting how the loss or impairments of the senses are tied to neurological pathologies. Loss of hearing and impairments of vision are also correlated with dementia. Understandable, as the brain areas that correspond to the various senses deteriorate and are a canary in the coal mine. In general, the senses dull with age, like famously, people tend to oversalt their food as they grow old, because they need stronger taste signals, the sense of taste deteriorates. Balance, coordination, you could go down the list. The brain just keeps trying to adjust, compensating, shifting areas, but at some point, there is just no more spare capacity left. This is one reason why maintaining brain health is so important, preserving spare capacity. Blood flow to the brain is super important, and exercise greatly enhances that. Nutrients need to reach, waste needs to be removed. There are so many metabolites in the brain tissue that are poorly characterized, avoiding neurotoxins - with age it gets harder as the blood brain barrier weakens. And the brain is all you have, totally irreplaceable, you can swap organs, and if your body is in poor shape, you can still keep on going, but once your brain deteriorates, it’s game over. Take care of your senses - I have many posts here about vision protection, nutrition, lutein etc. - as when these go downhill, so does your brain. That’s my holiday message😁.
3 Likes
I would love to try BPC 157 but do not know where to get it.
I’ve looked through the forums and found a lot of discussion around improving nitric oxide production via various supplements like citrulline, beetroot, to name a couple. Has anyone tried prescription medications? Ie Nitroglycerin (short/fast-acting) or Isosorbide Mononitrate/Isosorbide Dinitrate (long acting). Given this forum’s general propensity for trying prescription medications, I’m surprised to see much more discussion around unregulated and largely untested OTC supplements compared to well understood medications for increasing NO.
2 Likes
PDE5’s like Cialis and Viagra
5 Likes
Hahaha… was my exact thinking too.
1 Like
These guys seem to have it. I’ve been going to try some also…a little hesitant to start jabbing myself. I wonder how much worse the nasal spray is. If it could help my elbows I’d probably go for it.
1 Like
I’ve become hugely bullish about Sauna after the VEGF mice study.
Heat therapy promotes the expression of angiogenic regulators in human skeletal muscle
4 Likes
The researchers compared the lifespans of mice living at normal atmospheric oxygen levels (about 21%) to the lifespans of mice that, at 4 weeks of age, had been moved to a living environment with a lower proportion of oxygen (11%—similar to that experienced at an altitude of 5000 meters).
They found that the mice in the oxygen-restricted environment lived about 50% longer than the mice in normal oxygen levels, with a median lifespan of 23.6 weeks compared to 15.7 weeks. The oxygen-restricted mice also had delayed onset of aging-associated neurological deficits.
Reduced Oxygen Intake Linked to Extended Lifespan - Neuroscience News
(Higher altitude living mice presumably upregulated VEGF, EPO etc)
5 Likes
This might relate a tiny bit to people permanently living high above sea level.
The oxygen content in the air remains constant at approximately 21% regardless of altitude above sea level. What changes with altitude is the air pressure, which affects the amount of oxygen reaching the lungs per breath. I have listed the relative oxygen content in the air for cities located on a very high high altitude above sea level. if they were living dramatically longer than the average person in the same country, we should have known it by now.
La Rinconada, Peru (5,100 m): About 50% of the oxygen content at sea level
El Alto, Bolivia (4,000 m): About 60-65% of the oxygen content at sea level
Potosí, Bolivia (3,700 m): About 65-70% of the oxygen content at sea level
La Paz, Bolivia (3,600 m): About 68% of the oxygen content at sea level
Shigatse, China (3,800 m): About 65% of the oxygen content at sea level
Lhasa, China (3,650 m): About 67% of the oxygen content at sea level
Juliaca, Peru (3,825 m): About 65% of the oxygen content at sea level
Oruro, Bolivia (3,700 m): About 65-70% of the oxygen content at sea level
Cusco, Peru (3,400 m): About 70% of the oxygen content at sea level
It is important to note that these percentages represent the relative amount of oxygen available for the body to absorb, not the actual percentage of oxygen in the air.
"There’s also data to suggest a 20% lower mortality for people who can exercise to a certain metabolic equivalent (MET). Dr. Shapiro explained, “An activity that has a value of 4 METs means you’re exerting four times the energy than you would if you were sitting still. Living at higher elevation may promote a relatively high fitness level since 5-7 METs are required even for slow uphill walking.”
“The point being,” he said, “is that even just walking for exercise can be enough when you when you live in this area to really improve your risk of mortality.”
On the other hand, while higher altitude may be protective against development of some diseases, it could increase mortality as a disease progresses. There is higher mortality from, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or emphysema, lower respiratory illnesses.
4 Likes
Wow! Thanks for the study. I just want to point out that those mice were aging way faster than normal. The effect will surely be there in normal mice but maybe the “50% lifespan” increase will be lower.