Coffee linked to Longevity

#53

I see “certified filters” on Amazon that are cheap and get low ratings, making me wonder if they are actually certified or if they attached the certification image to their listing without actually going through the process.

Here’s a portion of what Berkey says about their tests:

The Black Berkey filters have been tested by several EPA-accredited laboratories including the Department of Toxicology and Environmental Science at Louisiana University, Spectrum Labs, and the University of Phoenix. This extensive testing confirmed that the Black Berkey Purification Elements far exceed EPA and ANSI/NSF (Std. 53) protocol.

The Black Berkey filters have been tested and confirmed to remove or greatly reduce the contaminants listed below.

Contaminants Removed

  • Viruses: Removed to >99.999% (Log 5)
  • MS2 Coliphage - FR Coliphage
  • *Exceeds purification standards (Log 4)
  • Pathogenic Bacteria (And Surrogates): Removed to >99.9999%
  • Raoultella terrigena (Pathogenic Bacteria Surrogate); Bacillus atrophaues (Anthrax Surrogate); Salmonella Enterica
  • *Exceeds purification standard (Log 6)
    • Trihalomethanes: Removed to >99.8%
    • Bromodichloromethane; Bromoform; Chloroform: Dibromochloromethane
    • *Below Lab Detectable Limits
    • Inorganic Minerals
    • Chloramines; Chlorine Residual (Total Residual Chlorine); & Free Chlorine >99.9%
    • Chloride >99.6%
    • *Removed to Below Lab Detectable Limits
    • Heavy Metals (High & Low pH Levels)
    • Aluminum (>99%); Antimony (>99.9%); Barium (>80%); Beryllium (>99.9%); Bismuth (>99.9%); Cadmium (>99.7%); Cobalt (>95%); Chromium (>99.9%); Chromium 6 (>99.85%); Copper (>99.9%); Iron (>99.9%); Lead (>99.9%); Mercury (>99.9%); Molybdenum (>90%); Nickel (>99.9%); Vanadium (>87.5%); Zinc (>99.9%)
    • Micro-Organisms: Removed to >99.9%
    • Including: Total Coliform, Fecal Coliform, e.Coli
    • Pharmaceutical Drug Contaminants: Removed to >99.9%
    • Acetaminophen; Caffeine; Carbamazepine; Ciprofloxacin HCl; Erythromycin USP; Sulfamethoxazole; Trimethoprim; Bisphenol A; Diclofenac Sodium; 4-para-Nonylphenol; 4-tert-Octylphenol; Primidone; Progestrone; Gemfibrozil; Ibuprofen; Naproxen Sodium; Triclosan.
    • Pesticides & Volatile Organic Compounds: Removed to Below Lab Detectable Limits
    • 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (TCA), 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2-Trichloroethane, 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane, 1,1-Dichloroethane (1,1-DCA), 1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-DCE), 1,1-Dichloropropene, 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,3-Trichloropropane, 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene, 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane (DBCP), 1,2-Dibromoethane, 1,2-Dichloro-1,1,2-trifluoroethane (CFC 123a), 1,2-Dichlorobenzene, 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4, 1,2-Dichloroethane, 1,2-Dichloropropane, 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene, 1,3-Dichlorobenzene, 1,3-Dichloropropene, 1,4-Dichlorobenzene, 2,2-Dichloropropane, 2,4,5-T, 2,4,5-TP (Silvex), 2,4-D, 2,4-DB, 2-Butanone (MEK), 2-Chlorotoluene, 2-Hexanone, 2-Methyl-2-propanol, 3,5-Dichlorobenzoic Acid, 3-Hydroxycarbofuran, 4-Bromofluorobenzene, 4-Chlorotoluene, 4-Isopropyltoluene, 4-Methyl-2-pentanone, 4-Nitrophenol4,4b 2-DDD4,4b 2-DDE, 4,4b 3-DDT, 5-Hydroxydicamba, Acetone, Acenaphthylene, Acifluorfen, Alachlor, Aldicarb, Aldicarb Sulfone, Aldicarb Sulfoxide, Aldrin, alpha-Chlorodane, Ametryn, Anthracene, Aroclor (1016, 1221, 1232, 1242, 1248, 1254, 1260), Atraton, Atrazine, Baygon, Bentazon, Benzene, Bromacil, Bromoacetic Acid, Bromobenzene, Bromochloromethane, Bromodichloromethane, Bromomethane, Bromoform, Butachlor, Butylate, Butylbenzylphthalate, Carbaryl, Carbofuran, Carbon Tetrachloride, Carboxin, Chloramben, Chlordane, Chloroacetic Acid, Chlorobenzene, Chlorobenzilate, Chloroethane, Chloroform, Chloromethane, Chlorpropham, Chlorprophane, cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene, cis-1,3-Dichloropropene, cis-Nonachlor, Cycloate, Dacthal Acid, Dalapon, Diazinona, Dibromoacetic Acid, Dibromochloropropane (DBCP), Dibromomethane, Dicamba, Dichloroacetic Acid, Dichlorodifluoromethane (CFC 12), Dichloromethane, Dichlorvos, Diclorprop, DieldrinDiethylphthalate, Dinoseb, Diphenamid, Disulfoton, Disulfoton Sulfone, Disulfoton Sulfoxidea, Endrin, EPTC, Ethoprop, Ethylbenzene, Ethylene Dibromide (EDB), Fenamiphos, Fenarimol, Fluorobenzene, Fluridone, gamma-Chlorodane, Glyphosate, Halo acidic Acids (HAA5), Heptachlor, Heptachlor Epoxide, Hexachlorobenzene, Hexachlorobutadiene (CCC), Hexachlorocyclopentadiene, HexazinoneIsophorone, Isopropylbenzene (Cumene), Lindane (Gamma-BHC), Merphos, Methiocarb, Methomyl, Methoxychlor, Methylcyclohexane-methane, Methyl Paraoxon, Methyl tert-Butyl Ether (MTBE), Metolachlor, Metribuzin, Mevinphos, MGK 264, Molinate, Monochlorobenzene, m-Xylenes, Naphthalene, Napropamide, n-Butylbenzene, Norflurazon, n-Propylbenzene, Oxamyl, o-Xylene, Pebulate, Pentachlorophenol, Picloram. Prometon, Prometryn, Pronamidea, Propazine, p-Xylenes, sec-Butylbenzene, Simazine, Simetryn, Stirofos, Styrene, Tebuthiuron, Terbacil, Terbufos, Terbutryn, tert-Butylbenzene, Tetrachloroethylene (PCE), Tetrahydrofuran (THF), Thiobencarb, Toluene, Toxaphene, trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene, trans-1,3-Dichloropropene, trans-Nonachlor, Triademefon, Tribromoacetic Acid, Trichloroacetic Acid, Trichloroethene (TCE), Trichloroethylene, Trichlorofluoromethane (CFC 11), Tricyclazole, Trifluralin, Vernolate, Vinyl Chloride, and many more*
    • Also removes or reduces:
    • Arsenic (>99.9%); Escherichia coli (E. Coli) (>99.999%); Fluorene (>99.9%); Manganese (>99.9%); MBAS (>96.67%); Nitrites (>95%); PCB s (>99.9%); Petroleum Products (Gasoline, Diesel, Crude Oil, Kerosene, Mineral Spirits, Refined Oil- All >99.9%); Selenium (>99.9%); Thallium (>99.5%); Rust; Silt; Sediment; Turbidity; Foul Tastes and Odors.
#54

Yeah, that sounds a lot healthier. Many of the oat milks I see have quite a bit of sugar and other questionable additives (unfortunate since I’m lactose intolerant and trying to find decent alternatives). I guess, like usual, this is one of those things that’s best to make yourself.

1 Like
#55

Yes, your hunch is correct. A lot of Amazon sellers have cheap Chinese filters which do not meet NSF/ANSI standards. The trick is that they can get certain parts of the filters certified (like a gasket ir faucet head, lmao) and then advertise the certification as if the whole unit is certified.

This is why it’s best to stick to US companies with that are more transparent about their certifications.

Best way is to check whatever you find on Amazon or elsewhere here:
https://info.nsf.org/certified/dwtu/

It’s a catalogue of all certified filter systems tested by the NSF. Notice here that Berkey does not show up on the NSF database, because they actively prevent the NSF from testing their systems.

Also, that source you state is from Berkey themselves, so it isn’t exactly unbiased. One of the most dishonest things they do with those reports is skew the baselines.

For instance, it removes 99.9% of contaminant X, but what was the initial load? There is a big difference between removing 99.9% of a 1000 ppm contaminant, as opposed to a 10 ppm contaminant, especially in regard to heavy metals.

Nowhere does Berkey clarify this. Nowhere do they actually link the source data or studies. Not even when contacting them directly, in which case they just parroted to me the same thing on their website.

Also, many of those contaminants removed are just particulate matter or microbes, which other carbon filters can remove just as easily. That’s all a Berkey filter is, really: carbon filters. That also gives it the same limitations as carbon filters, meaning that they struggle with small-molecule carcinogens like PFAS.

Note they make no claim about PFAS filtration anywhere in their claims, because they don’t filter PFAS. Only distillation or reverse osmosis can filter PFAS.

Sure, they have a long list of other things they filter, but again, most of it is redundant. What matters isn’t how many things are filtered, but rather what is filtered and the amounts that remain. Percent of contaminant removed is a dishonest skewing of statistics. You should look at ppm of contaminant in the output. % tells you nothing aside from being an easily marketable number.

3 Likes
#56

This is profoundly helpful! Thank you for taking the time to reply :slight_smile:

Since you clearly know your stuff on this subject, may I ask what brand or brands of water filters you would most highly recommend? Since I do have the Berkey system, I am considering replacing their filters with others that would fit the device and potentially work better.

2 Likes
#57

I have no particular brand loyalty, but some decent reverse osmosis (RO) brands are APEC, iSpring, and Waterdrop. I’m sure there are more out there, but they will perform about the same provided that they pass the NSF/ANSI tests.

Personally I use an under-sink RO system, which happens to be APEC since they use standard filters. A lot of brands use proprietary ones that force you to use their own filters, which I dislike.

I am not familiar with any alternative filters for Berkeys since I don’t own one, but I think ProPur/ProOne makes some that will fit. They have a NSF certification, being one of the few gravity filters to have one.

However, none of this matters unless you test your own water. Verify, don’t trust. Whatever route you end up going, it’s always good to test the output water in order to see how well the filtration is working.

Depending on your water, you may be fine continuing to use Berkey. I personally use RO because it is the best you can get in regard to purifying anything and everything from water, particularly PFAS which is everywhere now, even in the damn rain. Gravity carbon filtration cannot achieve this alone, so you would need to add a pressurized RO system after your Berkey water if you want that, at which point you might as well just get a dedicated RO system.

It sucks that we live in such a polluted world. TBH I think longevity nowadays is becoming more about what you can avoid, as opposed to what you can take.

5 Likes
#58

I hope you don’t mind that I keep replying, but I’m very interested in the topic of clean water as I live in an industrial area with a long history of spills and disregard.

I see that some under-the-sink reverse osmosis systems use 3-stage filtering, others 4 or 5. A few look like 6-stage and I think I saw an 8-stage system although I may have imagined that.

  1. Do you have any thoughts about how many steps are ideal in an RO system that will use 100% municipal water?

Also, I like your suggestion that people should test their own water. I tried to find help on how to do this, but the quantity of available information is overwhelming. Test strips, electronic devices, free kits from your water system, hardware store kits…

  1. Do you have suggestions on the best way to thoroughly test your water?

Many thanks!

3 Likes
#59

Yikes, living near industrial waste is quite hairy. I hope you’re not referring to the recent Ohio vinyl chloride spill. That whole watershed area might be compromised for years!

If you want the TL;DR: 6 stage, with a catalytic carbon filter in the 3rd stage if water has chloramine and an optional remineralizing 6th stage for taste and/or tolerance.

Keep in mind that, while this will be very detailed, there are still more details that I haven’t gone over because they are rather technical and, IMO, not really that important. If you want to deep-dive into this, you can check out r/WaterTreatment.

1. In regard to the filter stages: 6 is about the max I’d go (and what I have). Using more than that is very situational. To explain the differences, generally the order of the stages goes like this:

  • 1st Stage: Sediment Filter

    • Removes solid/fine particulates. This is important to preserve the life of the downstream filters, because otherwise the pores would get clogged quite quickly and reduce flow/efficiency.

    • Service life 6-12 months

  • 2nd Stage: Carbon Block

    • This is just like your Berkey’s filters. This stage reduces the amount of volatiles, heavy metals, etc. Anything that your current filters remove. Also reduces the load for downstream filters.

    • Service life 6-12 months

  • 3rd Stage: Another Carbon Block (or catalytic carbon)

    • Usually another carbon block is added to further purify the water before the RO filter. These three stages so far are really to protect the RO membrane, since it’s the most imoportant step. Otherwise your membrane would be spent very quickly.

    • Important note: Carbon block is different from catalytic carbon. It’s a bit confusing - activated carbon isn’t the same as catalytic, which is more reactive and can filter out more difficult organic molecules that traditional carbon cannot. If your water has chloramine in it, you need a catalytic filter in your 3rd stage (right before the RO membrane). Municipalities have been switching from adding chlorine to chloramine in tap water because it lasts longer. However, it is an irritant to some people, and just tastes plain foul if they overdo it. Most importantly, chloramine will eat away your RO membrane, so if your water test comes back with a relatively high level of chloramine, catalytic carbon will be a must.

    • Service life 6-12 months

  • 4th Stage: RO membrane

    • This, as the name implies, purifies water via reverse osmosis. Water after this stage should be near-pure. However, keep in mind that this will produce waste water. A portion of the water (gray water) is sent to your drain, containing all of the rejected contaminants. This water is mostly unusable for anything aside from flushing your toilet, so don’t use it to water plants (they will die).

    • Generally, in most models the wastewater:pure ratio is 3:1 (variable depending on your water pressure/quality), or 3 gallons waste to 1 gallon pure. However, the industry has been making it more efficient recently, and now you can see 2:1 or even 1:1 ratios. The newer all-in-one filters (which supposedly have all stages contained in a single filter) claim ratios of 1:2 or even 1:3, but the significant downside is that you’re locked into their proprietary filter system, which can get pricey. They also are powered units, so yet another electrical appliance that might crap out in a couple years. Personally, this is why I stick to traditional models that operate on water pressure, since I can repair and maintain them myself.

    • Service life 2-4 years for the average US tap water, but can last even longer with soft water

  • 5th Stage: Carbon Coconut Shell Filter

    • This stage is mainly for refining the water that comes out of the RO membrane or the storage tank, which can have an off-taste. This is why the all-in-one filters I mentioned before are being marketed, as they eliminate the need for this stage. Due to the purity of RO water, it can and will leach from its containers/pipings. Water after the RO step goes to a storage tank, where it usually sits for a while and accumulates this taste, thus the need to “polish” off this water before drinking it. When you turn on your faucet, the RO water passes immediately through this filter to ensure that it is back to being pure.

    • You’re probably wondering, why coconut? Well, it’s because coconut shells can achieve porosity even finer than a regular carbon block, which means more surface area to capture and bind stuff. Plus points for being renewable, I guess.

    • Service life 1 year, or just replace it whenever your replace your RO membrane

  • 6th Stage: Remineralizing Cartridge

    • This stage is an optional one, but still one that I recommend. Humans are not meant to drink pure water, as it can cause some people to have an upset stomach. Like I mentioned before, pure water can and will leach from its container, and when you drink it… well… you become the container. This may cause some of your own minerals to be lost to the RO water, but if you have a normal diet you shouldn’t experience a mineral deficiency.

    • What could happen, though, is a lot of stomach trouble. You see, pure water is not pH balanced (usually acidic), and it’s also hypotonic for obvious reasons. This usually gives people upset stomachs if they drink RO without any added salt or minerals, thus why you might want one.

    • Service life 1 year, or whenever the water starts tasting different

Any more stages than this are just pure marketing. There is, however, a case for a 7th stage if you draw your water from a well. There would then be concern for microbial contamination, in which case a UV 7th stage would be needed. However, you get your water from municipal sources, so this is completely redundant unless your city really F’s it up.

In a similar vein, make sure to follow the manufacturer’s guidance regarding sanitation. Biofouling is a concern once you get to a year and onward of service. A once-a-year cleaning with hydrogen peroxide should be sufficient beyond that.

2. In regard to testing your water: unfortunately, detailed lab tests are not affordable to most. Usually the lab tests start at around $150 for just the basic stuff. I was fortunate enough to be in a city that provided free testing and kits for certain contaminants. You should check if there are any programs/colleges/labs around your area like that. Just don’t get the free testing from vendors or stores, as they will almost always try to find something at fault to sell you their own products.

However, as a basic test, you should look up our zip code on EWG’s database to get an idea of what you’re starting with. Then, get some pH strips and a cheap TDS meter from Amazon (no need for accuracy, just screening) so you can compare your input tap to your output RO water. This will let you see if your RO water has an alkaline pH and sufficiently lowered TDS level, at which point you can assume your system works.

The only unknown is whatever leaches into your water between your city’s water facility and your house. There is a lot of aging pipe infrastructure, so there’s really no way to tell unless you do a lab test. Personally, I would just test for things that you are most concerned with, be it lead, chlorine, PFAS. Or in Ohio’s case, dioxane tests because of the polyvinyl chloride. Also a test for chloramine if the EWG report doesn’t show it, but you can also just call your municipality’s water provider to see if they add chloramine (mine does), and then you’ll know to get a catalytic carbon filter.

6 Likes
#61

Some more good news for coffee drinkers:

6 Likes
#62

Dr. Brad weighs in on longevity benefits of caffeine and coffee.

U-shaped curve for coffee intake

Screenshot_20230915-171901
Screenshot_20230915-1719012280×1080 122 KB

4 Likes
#63

LOTS OF Trigonelline - Wikipedia (cf mike lustgarten)

#64

Only just come across. I was using glycine in my coffee but what a brilliant idea :bulb: about hydrolyzed collagen peptides instead of milk/cream.

3 Likes
#65

Yes, Chris’ super coffee :coffee: has been an inspiration. I currently use collagen, trehalose and cocoa powder in my coffee. Will slowly expand the formulation as I get time and enthusiasm…

4 Likes
#66

Trehalose:

Metabolic shift from glycogen to trehalose promotes lifespan and healthspan in Caenorhabditis elegans

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1714178115

3 Likes
#67

Yes, and Fighting Alzheimer’s with Increased Autophagy via Rapamycin + Trehalose

2 Likes
#68

For convenience and to save expense, don’t bother with glycine capsules and opening them up. Just buy pure glycine powder and add a level teaspoon (about 4-5 g).

5 Likes
#69

I am a long term coffee drinker 2 cups a day for decades. I put my Taurine, Collagen, AKG and Glycine in it. Easiest way to take these supplements.

Now muscle protection and prevention of sarcopenia.

Molecule in Coffee… Trigonelline helps aging muscles link:

Nice.

7 Likes
#70

A little weekend rant:
Why has nature gifted me with a taste for things that are not good for me?
Why do I like candy, cake, ice cream, pie, etc.? Is it just the sugar?
Now, I really don’t eat much of these things, but I would love to do so.

I really appreciate that Dr. Fraser is a forum member and provides many health insights.

I visited Dr. Fraser’s website today and read his blog on coffee.
Now I have learned once again what my taste buds prefer is not as good for me.
Of course, I like the coffee that has the least benefits, Arabica dark roasts, while the lighter roasted Robusta coffee has the most benefits.

“Moreover, it has been demonstrated that caffeoylquinic acid
derivatives also exert neuroprotective effects (Hur et al., 2001;
Soh et al., 2003). In detail, it is reported that 3,5-diCQA exhibited
neuroprotective properties against neuronal cell death; this can
be useful for brain protection, as well as in the treatment of
neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease,
Parkinson’s disease and ischemia (Kim et al., 2005)”

“The contents of caffeine did not vary, but trigonelline decreased with burning up intensity. Chlorogenic acids also decreased with increasing roasting time. The 5-O-caffeoylquinic acid prevailed in Arabica and Robusta beverages, but the isomers of dicaffeoylquinic and feruolilquínic acids remained higher in Robusta”

https://sci-hub.se/10.3109/09637486.2011.588594

3 Likes
#71

Yeah - I recently realized the “good stuff” is found in greater quantities in the lesser roasts. So I am mixing my dark roast beans with medium roast beans before grinding. I’ll see how low I can go roast wise.

And definitely agree with your shout-out to @DrFraser The insights and rationales he gives when treating his patients are invaluable. I hope he is celebrating the holiday with loved ones and Dimmies!

2 Likes
#72

I understand the lighter roasts have more caffeine too. That’s enough reason for me.

4 Likes
#73

@desertshores @RapAdmin
Thank you so much!
I do my best to positively contribute. I’m really grateful to RapAdmin for making this possible.
I’ve learned a lot more than I’ve contributed. It is an amazing group of people on this board, and has led me to investigate things I would not have otherwise.
Learning from patients is among the most valuable lessons - and the group here is like a group of super smart patients who poke and prod at everything - and challenge everything.
Again - a great group, and just a huge benefit to me! Maybe a year from now I’ll be at a level where I can contribute more than I learn.

12 Likes