Dr. Kaeberlein's Optispan Podcast Series - Rapamycin and More

#84

If I remember it correctly, he ranked creatine as one of the top things he took, yet he hasn’t had any for 6 months.

As a new adopter, I was curious why this would be because I have not heard it’s something to be cycled. Do you think life happened and he’s just lazy about it or any other thoughts?

#85

He mentioned creatine, omega 3 and vitamin D as supplements he highly endorses.

5 Likes
#86

Yes, I did watch it, thank you. I was trying to ask if you could tell why he felt it was a top supplement to take yet he stopped taking it 6 months ago. Perhaps I misheard him and should rewatch.

#87

It indeed sound like laziness. Something I can understand because I highly resistant to protocols that require daily dosing (excluding statins) .

Does anyone know how effective is 35f of creatine weekly vs 5g every day? From my reading, people don’t recommend high doses of creatine because of water retention issues. Is that the only concern?

3 Likes
#88

Been on Creatine close to 6 months daily 5 g in the morning coffee. With a double dose 10 g on workout day… I workout every other day 1.5 hours… muscle resistance.

Feel better overall… especially in gym… have gained weight… firmer muscles… chest, arm and butt… but weight is not fat… better water retention in my muscle cells. So seems good.

When I started on rapamycin after 4 months, I lost visceral fat about 20 pounds went from 198 pounds to 178 pounds . Stabilized at 183 pounds for past 4 years. Dexa body composition shows no fat.

That said, in the past 6 months on creatine up 8 pounds to 191 pounds. Clothes fitting tightly in chest, arms and butt… but waist same.

1 Like
#89

Yep, I’m well aware of the benefits of daily dosing. I’m trying to find out how effective once-weekly dosing is, if at all.

1 Like
#90

Great. Just confirming for me the water weight gain has been fine.

I agree the daily intake and remembering to dose it can be an issue. Why I keep creatine and taurine next to coffee pot. Spoonful of each goes in before the Keurig cup… every morning… lol.

2 Likes
#91

Got it, OK. Yes, and the delivery mechanism is not convenient either. It’s either several pills/chewables, or powder.

I figure that for muscles gains/maintainance I can either commit to take this for the rest of my life every day, or commit to 1 more day a week of strength training. I much prefer adding 1 more weekly training session for now.

1 Like
#92

I think a scoop of powder in the coffee is the way to go. I use it daily.

1 Like
#93

I was listening to this podcast yesterday while working out. I did not know there were any good longevity doctors in India, so it was nice to hear that Dr. Ranney in Mumbai has a practice and is prescribing (and using personally) rapamycin.

Perhaps if Westerners are traveling through Mumbai on work it may make sense to visit him, if you can’t get a good longevity doctor in your area.

Dr. Ranney’s linked in profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/docmranney/

2 Likes
#94

He says he’s going to get TPE done.

MK KW conference readout.pdf (172.3 KB)

2 Likes
#95

The arrival of these longevity clinics in India made me think about how cost effective they might be, given peoples experiences here with purchases of the medications from India. The exchange rate currently is about 84 rupees to the US$.

Full body MRIs:
Full body MRIs in India seem to be in the $250 to $500 range (US$).
The cost of a full body MRI scan in India generally ranges from ₹22,500 to ₹45,000. This price can vary depending on the city, hospital, and specific areas being scanned. For example, in Sonipat, the lowest price for a full body MRI scan is ₹22,500, while the market price can be as high as ₹45,000

Source: Google Gemini AI, and How Much MRI Scan Cost in India? | PoonaHospital

In the USA: A full-body MRI scan in the USA can cost anywhere from $1,495 to $4,499, depending on the clinic and the specific features included in the scan. Some companies, like Prenuvo, offer comprehensive scans that include additional tests like lab work and body composition analysis for around $2,500 to $4,499. Other providers, such as Ezra, offer a range of options, from a 30-minute scan for $1,495 to a 60-minute scan for $2,395.

Cleerly Heart Scans
For example, here is the pricing of Cleerly heart scans compared to the USA pricing (below). The exchange rate right now is about 84 rupees to the US$, so Cleerly exams are in the range of $78 to $122 US.

The cost of a Cleerly heart scan in the USA, which includes the Coronary CTA (CT Angiography) and AI analysis, is typically around $1,500 to $2,200. The exact price can vary depending on the imaging center and whether the scan is covered by insurance.

And they seem to have many centers that do blood testing, etc. So perhaps medical tourism focused on Longevity may make sense for some people.

A “Cleerly heart scan,” which refers to a CT Coronary Angiogram (CCTA) with Cleerly analysis, can cost anywhere from ₹6,588 to ₹10,290 in India. The cost varies based on factors like hospital reputation, location, and the specific type of scan.

Factors Affecting Cost:

  • Hospital Reputation and Location:

Larger hospitals or cardiac centers generally have higher prices than smaller clinics or nursing homes.

  • Type of Scan:

CT Coronary Angiograms (CCTAs) with Cleerly analysis are typically more expensive than basic coronary calcium scans.

  • Geographical Location:

Prices can vary across different cities in India, according to Healthians.

  • Plaque Scoring:

Plaque analysis, a feature of Cleerly’s system, can add to the overall cost.

Example Prices:

  • Delhi: ₹6,588
  • Mumbai: ₹10,290
  • Lucknow: ₹7,200
  • Greater Noida: ₹9,450
1 Like
#96

I’m not finding any indication that Cleerly analysis is available outside the US. Cleerly is not selling heavily discounted access to its software in India, which is what the above seems to be trying to imply.

No doubt the CCTA is cheaper.

1 Like
#97

Ah… you are correct. At some point I’m sure they will expand there, but it appears not yet.

1 Like
#98

I found this microbiome discussion interesting. Fecal transplants from young to old may not be a good idea, actually. Also, Matt throws shade on Pendulum, and it turns out the guest has used Glucose Contol.

Grok made more errors than usual in attribution. I tried to fix them, no warranties.

# The Hidden Side of Health You’re (2)…pdf (432.6 KB)

1 Like
#99

I like Matt and respect him as a scientist, but I don’t think he’s a very good podcast host. And the bald doctor guy he has on regularly (Kevin?) is really bad at explaining things. I just find myself really frustrated listening to him talk really slowly, saying “you know” a lot of times, and Matt having to like fill in all the blanks.

So I will definitely watch the videos where Matt is talking about a research paper, particularly on Rapamycin, because that’s his expertise. He’s an experienced researcher and peer reviewer and he knows what’s going on. But this stuff like cardiovascular and gut microbiome is too far outside of his field.

GI issues. Back in the day, the protocol was to take 20g per day for a week to “load” your muscles with creatine. A good % of people will get horrible stomach cramps and you’ll be on the toilet for a while. 5g per day is effortless, works well, and likely won’t have any side effects.

2 Likes
#100

Introduction to Gene Therapy

  • The discussion begins with an introduction to the guests Ivan Morganov and Anna Vakuseva, who are involved with Unlimited Bio, a company focused on gene therapy.
  • The conversation explores the potential benefits and challenges of gene therapy, particularly in relation to aging and regulatory frameworks.
  • The extracellular matrix is highlighted as a significant yet often overlooked factor in aging, with implications for longevity science.
  • The regulatory landscape for gene therapies is also addressed, emphasizing the need for appropriate models to ensure safety and efficacy.

Personal Backgrounds of the Guests

  • Ivan shares his journey from Russia to Israel, revealing his search for purpose and his desire to combat aging as a significant life challenge.
  • He discusses his early interests in IT and business, leading to his eventual involvement in funding scientific research related to longevity.
  • Anna recounts her academic background in biology and bioengineering, detailing her transition from academia to industry, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • Both guests emphasize their commitment to advancing longevity science through innovative therapies.

Concerns About Unregulated Therapies

  • The discussion transitions to concerns regarding unregulated gene therapies, particularly in light of recent conferences and public discourse on the subject.
  • Ivan expresses his belief that overregulation may hinder scientific progress in the field of longevity and gene therapy.
  • The importance of finding a balance between regulation and innovation is emphasized, as well as the need for transparent and effective regulatory models.
  • Anna reflects on the challenges faced in developing therapies and navigating regulatory environments, especially in different countries.

The Role of Extracellular Matrix in Aging

  • Ivan highlights the extracellular matrix as a critical component in aging, suggesting that it has been historically underestimated in longevity research.
  • He argues that the environment surrounding cells is just as important as the cells themselves in determining health outcomes.
  • The conversation touches on the idea that restoring or enhancing the extracellular matrix could be a key strategy in combating age-related decline.
  • Anna adds that understanding the extracellular matrix could lead to breakthroughs in therapies aimed at improving longevity and healthspan.

Unlimited Bio and Its Mission

  • Unlimited Bio was founded with the vision of exploring underappreciated areas of longevity science, particularly focusing on the extracellular matrix.
  • The company aims to develop therapies that address the root causes of aging and improve health outcomes for individuals.
  • Ivan and Anna discuss their goals of creating therapies that are both effective and accessible, emphasizing the importance of scientific validation.
  • They express a commitment to navigating the complexities of regulatory frameworks to bring innovative therapies to market.

Regulatory Challenges and Opportunities

  • The conversation shifts to the regulatory challenges faced by Unlimited Bio, particularly in the context of developing gene therapies.
  • Ivan discusses the bureaucratic hurdles that can impede the progress of promising therapies, highlighting the need for a more streamlined regulatory process.
  • Anna shares insights into how regulatory models can evolve to better support innovation while ensuring patient safety.
  • The importance of international collaboration and knowledge sharing among regulatory bodies is emphasized as a way to improve the landscape for gene therapies.

Current and Future Therapies

  • The discussion delves into the specific therapies being developed by Unlimited Bio, including their VEGF gene therapy for peripheral artery disease.
  • Anna explains the mechanism of action of VEGF, emphasizing its role in promoting new blood vessel formation and improving circulation.
  • The potential applications of VEGF therapy extend beyond peripheral artery disease to include muscle vascularization and hair follicle health.
  • The guests express optimism about the future of gene therapy in the context of aging and longevity, advocating for continued research and development.

Ethical Considerations and Patient Safety

  • The ethical implications of gene therapy, particularly in relation to patient safety and informed consent, are discussed.
  • Ivan stresses the importance of allowing individuals the freedom to choose their therapies while ensuring they are adequately informed of the risks and benefits.
  • The role of insurance companies in regulating access to gene therapies is also highlighted, with an emphasis on the need for transparency and accountability.
  • Both guests agree that as the field of gene therapy evolves, ongoing discussions about ethics and safety will be crucial to its success.

Conclusion and Future Directions

  • The conversation concludes with reflections on the future of gene therapy and its potential to transform the field of longevity science.
  • Ivan and Anna express their commitment to advancing research that addresses the root causes of aging and improves health outcomes for individuals.
  • They emphasize the importance of collaboration between scientists, regulators, and industry to create a sustainable and ethical framework for gene therapies.
  • The guests invite further exploration and dialogue on the promise of gene therapy as a tool for enhancing longevity and healthspan.
2 Likes
#101

Debunking 10 Longevity Myths You Still Believe

AI Summary:

Introduction to Longevity Myths

  • The podcast episode begins with the hosts discussing a series of longevity myths that have been circulating in popular media and scientific literature.
  • The hosts mention that they have compiled a collection of longevity myths, indicating that this is not a definitive top 10 list but rather a selection of myths that they find important to address.
  • They express confidence that there are many more longevity myths to explore in future episodes, suggesting that this will be an ongoing series.

Myth 1: Measuring Biological Age

  • The first myth discussed is the belief that biological age can be accurately measured, which the hosts clarify is not currently possible.
  • They explain that while chronological age can be measured, biological age remains elusive due to a lack of understanding at the cellular and molecular levels.
  • Instead of measuring biological age directly, scientists use tools to estimate it based on correlations with chronological age and other health metrics.
  • The hosts highlight that tools marketed as biological age clocks, such as epigenetic age clocks, only measure specific DNA methylation changes and not biological age itself.
  • They emphasize that while these tools may provide useful estimates, they do not directly measure biological age, and misrepresentations can lead to misconceptions in the public.
  • The hosts suggest that people should focus on more actionable metrics, such as fitness age or specific health markers, rather than relying solely on biological age estimations.

Myth 2: Supplements as Core Components of Health

  • The second myth tackled is the idea that supplements are essential for improving health and longevity.
  • The hosts clarify that while some supplements can be beneficial, particularly when used to correct deficiencies, they are not a core part of a longevity strategy.
  • They mention specific supplements, such as vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids, that can be useful when deficiencies are identified through testing.
  • The hosts argue that lifestyle factors, including diet, exercise, sleep, and social relationships, are far more critical for health and longevity than supplements.
  • They conclude that one can have an effective longevity protocol without taking any supplements, emphasizing the importance of lifestyle changes.

Myth 3: Age and Longevity

  • The discussion moves to the myth that one is too old to start worrying about longevity or improving health.
  • The hosts assert that chronological age should not deter anyone from making positive health changes, as everyone can benefit from improved health practices.
  • They reference scientific findings that show interventions to slow biological aging can be effective even when started later in life.
  • The hosts highlight examples from animal studies demonstrating that older subjects can experience improvements in health and function after interventions.
  • They emphasize the idea that it is never too late to take steps toward better health and longevity.

Myth 4: FDA Approval and Aging

  • The next myth is the belief that the FDA will not approve drugs aimed at slowing aging because aging is not classified as a disease.
  • The hosts clarify that the FDA’s focus is on whether a drug improves quality or quantity of life, rather than its classification as a disease.
  • They explain that if a drug can demonstrate safety and efficacy, it can be approved regardless of whether aging is recognized as a disease.
  • The hosts also discuss the potential implications of classifying aging as a disease, particularly regarding insurance reimbursement for aging-targeted therapies.
  • They conclude that the focus should remain on the efficacy of treatments rather than the classification of aging itself.

Myth 5: Resveratrol as a Longevity Molecule

  • The hosts address the myth that resveratrol is a potent longevity molecule, stating that it has been widely debunked in scientific literature.
  • They reference meta-analyses showing that resveratrol does not have a significant positive impact on lifespan, with studies indicating potential negative effects.
  • While acknowledging that some individuals may feel benefits from resveratrol, they stress that it should not be considered a longevity drug.
  • The hosts express surprise at the persistence of this myth, particularly among high-profile influencers who continue to promote resveratrol.

Myth 6: Funding for Aging Research

  • The sixth myth discussed is the notion that aging research is well-funded, which the hosts counter by presenting statistics showing significant underfunding.
  • They highlight that many of the leading causes of death are linked to biological aging yet receive minimal funding from organizations like the NIH.
  • The hosts mention high-profile private funding initiatives but emphasize that these efforts are dwarfed by the overall NIH budget.
  • They argue that a greater allocation of resources toward aging research could lead to significant advancements in health and longevity.
  • The hosts express concern that the current funding landscape does not adequately reflect the potential impact of aging research on public health.

Myth 7: Genetics and Longevity

  • The discussion shifts to the myth that longevity is predominantly determined by genetics, which the hosts clarify is not entirely accurate.
  • They explain that while genetics play a role, environmental factors and lifestyle choices have a more substantial impact on longevity.
  • The hosts note that estimates of the genetic contribution to longevity vary but generally suggest it is less than half.
  • They encourage listeners to focus on their lifestyle choices rather than relying solely on family history when considering their longevity.
  • The hosts conclude that individuals have significant control over their health and longevity trajectory through their daily actions.

Myth 8: Caloric Restriction and Cancer

  • The eighth myth tackled is the claim that caloric restriction works solely because it prevents cancer.
  • The hosts argue that caloric restriction is a well-supported intervention for increasing lifespan across various species and does more than just reduce cancer risk.
  • They explain that caloric restriction has been shown to slow aging processes in multiple tissues, not just in relation to cancer.
  • The hosts reference literature that details the various mechanisms through which caloric restriction promotes longevity.
  • They encourage listeners to recognize caloric restriction as a multifaceted approach to health rather than attributing its benefits solely to cancer prevention.

Myth 9: Rapamycin as a Core Component of Longevity

  • The ninth myth is the belief that rapamycin is a core component of improving health and longevity.
  • The hosts clarify that while rapamycin shows promise in animal studies, its effects on human aging are not yet well-established.
  • They caution against assuming that rapamycin should be a foundational aspect of health strategies without clear evidence of its efficacy in humans.
  • The hosts emphasize that lifestyle factors should remain the primary focus for improving health and longevity.
  • They acknowledge that some individuals may benefit from rapamycin, but it should not replace established health practices.

Myth 10: Peptides as Natural and Safe

  • The final myth addressed is the notion that peptides are inherently natural and safe, which the hosts challenge by discussing the complexity of peptide therapies.
  • They explain that while peptides are derived from amino acids, many used in wellness and longevity contexts are not naturally occurring in the body.
  • The hosts caution that the safety and efficacy of many peptides have not been rigorously tested, leading to potential risks.
  • They emphasize the importance of understanding that peptides can have side effects and should be treated with the same caution as pharmaceutical drugs.
  • The hosts advocate for more rigorous testing and regulation of peptide therapies to ensure safety for consumers.

Conclusion and Future Discussions

  • The podcast concludes with an invitation for listeners to submit their suggestions for additional longevity myths to discuss in future episodes.
  • The hosts encourage feedback on the episode and express their hope that the information shared has been educational and engaging.
  • They remind listeners to subscribe to the podcast for future content related to longevity and health.
#102

A master of the straw man argument.

#103

I listened to his recent podcast on fighting cognitive decline and thought it was pretty interesting, so I thought I’d link the summary @Jonas posted here.

He and his two guests are starting a brain health program. I’m not so sure I’d be wanting to pay what is probably a lot of money for the two guests to help me, but Matt is obviously very appealing. (Having said that, I’m already doing most of what they listed, so I don’t think I need any of them because I have all of you!).

It was encouraging to see that many of the people here are already doing everything on his list. I’ll mention things that stood out to me.

I was surprised they talked about NAD precursors only because most have seemed dismissive of those of late, but this makes them interesting to me again.

Also, it seems they think low doses of Cialis type drugs might be good for women’s longevity, too. I’ve never heard this mentioned and it never occurred to me, but I guess it makes sense that it would work for both sexes. I know a lot of you do this, so now I might deep dive into the pros and cons for me. I once heard these drugs can increase your risk for a heart attack, but that was when they first came out and I have not read about them again and nor do I know if that was even true.

I didn’t realize rapa might help with brain volume in humans, so this was great news to me. I did the brain MRI and it looked good except for that one area. It was unknown if mine is shrinking or if it’s just where I started.

They mentioned TMG but I was once told only take that if your homocysteine levels need improvement.

They mentioned magnesium theonate, but it seems most people don’t bother with that one. I stopped taking it a while ago.

They made plasma exchange sound really appealing, but alas, it’s very expensive and too rich for my blood (pun intended) to do for a nothing more than a ‘maybe’ for prevention. If it became a sure thing, that would be a different story.

6 Likes